Thanks! I agree with you on both of your objections. I also found a
'naamavibhattiihi' in the 6th pariccheda and the obvious meaning of 'noun
endings' there would also have to apply to a conjectured naama-vihbatt'- in
the 2nd pariccheda which, by the way, has something to say about the noun
endings or the absence thereof (see avibhattikaniddeso). In the case of your
objection regarding 'naama' and the cases of words that can precede it, I
was unsure about this to start with. Thanks for quoting the examples with
the accusative and genitive cases and thereby clearing up the matter for me.
> Dear Jim, George and others,
> With reference to Jim's exegesis, I see two possible objections:
> (1) Compounding naama with vibhattyaadiini will give the sense "I will
> explain the noun endings etc." (naama being a technical term in Pali
> grammar for noun) . This will not fit this chapter since it deals with
> kriyaavibhatti etc.
> (2) It is not mandatory that the referent of naama should be in the
> nominative case. Compare the following: (a) so gaama-vaasiihi saddhi.m
> agga-sassa-daana.m naama adaasi. (b) aha.m gotama-buddhassa naama
> saasane agga-savaka-.t.thaana.m patthesi.m. In these instances the
> referent is in the accusative and genetive cases. The examples are
> from The Aggasaavaka-vatthu of the Dhammapada commentary.