... Hi, It should read: Let us not take the goods _of others_ . Or: Let us not take other people s goods. Para and bha.n.da don t need to agree in caseMessage 1 of 1247 , Feb 3, 2005View Source
>In 19, I think "paresa.m" would be dat./gen. pl. - so "to/for", but
>I also think it should agree in case with "bha.ndaani", which is in
>acc. pl., so I would expect something like "pare" or "paraani".
>Anyone have any clues?
It should read: "Let us not take the goods _of others_". Or: "Let us
not take other people's goods."
Para and bha.n.da don't need to agree in case because they have
>--- In Pali@yahoogroups.com, "Ong Yong Peng" <ypong001@y...> wrote:
>> An Elementary Pali Course
>> Exercise 13-A: Translate into English.
>> 19. Paresa.m bha.n.daani maya.m na ga.nhaama.
>> from different / goods / we / do not take!
> > Let us not take from different goods.
Hello Jayarava and friends, In Norman s translation of the Dhammapada, in his note for v.259, he directs the reader s attention to verses 8, 128, 168, 172 andMessage 1247 of 1247 , Jul 4, 2011View SourceHello Jayarava and friends,
In Norman's translation of the Dhammapada, in his note for v.259, he directs the reader's attention to verses 8, 128, 168, 172 and 177, where there is the same consonant doubling of p before na as in v.259 (pamajjati to nappamajjati) after what he calls the 'proclitic' use of na. So the formation seems to be a regular phonological feature in Pali.
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]