Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: AN2.1.5 Upa~n~naata Sutta (1/1)

Expand Messages
  • Yuttadhammo
    ... Really I may be wrong, but here goes: pa.tivaana means hindrance, no? Comes from Skt /v.r, probably nivaara.ne (in regards to hindering), which then
    Message 1 of 12 , Nov 25, 2007
    • 0 Attachment
      > > > Appa.tivaanii sudaaha.m, bhikkhave, padahaami -
      > > > non-hindrance / even I / monks / strive
      > > > O monks, even I strive (for) non-hindrance -
      > > >
      > > > * appa.tivaanii [PED has appa.tivaa.nii] (f) non-hindrance,
      > > > non-restriction, free action.
      > >
      > > I can't see how the two can be the same; this one is lacking the
      > bhaava suffix... here it seems to me that appa.tivaanii is a modifier
      > of aha.m. I would rather translate this as:
      > >
      > > "Verily, o monks, I strove on free from hindrance"
      > >
      > > but I may be wrong :)
      >
      > bhante, thanks for highlighting the bhaava-tadhita formation as the
      > difference between appa.tivaanitaa and appa.tivaanii. However, I
      > really can't see how appa.tivaanii can be a modifier/qualifier (ie. an
      > adjective) of aha.m. Would you kindly clarify with the following
      > simplified sentence:
      >
      > Appa.tivaanii aha.m padahaami.

      Really I may be wrong, but here goes:

      pa.tivaana means hindrance, no? Comes from Skt /v.r, probably "nivaara.ne" (in regards to hindering), which then takes a suffix, maybe "yu", which becomes "ana". Probably something like pa.ti + vaa (for v.r) + a.na. Anyway, we get pa.tivaa.na or pa.tivaana, which seems to mean the state of hindrance - a bhaavasaadhana kitakanaama.

      I'm proposing they add a .nii suffix to make a kattusaadhana kitakanaama formation like se.t.thii or dhammacaarii:

      pa.tivaana.m siilamassaati pa.tivaanii

      A state of hindrance is the norm for him, therefore he is called "one who has a state of hindrance as a norm".

      > na ta.m apaapu.nitvaa viiriyassa sa.n.thaana.m bhavissati
      >
      > PTS has "viiriyassa sa.n.thaana.m bhavissati" simplified as "hold
      > out". Nina mentions "be steadfast in endeavour". The Comy. has
      > "sa.n.thaananti .thapanaa appavattanaa osakkanaa, pa.tippassaddhiiti
      > attho".
      >
      > Considering all inputs, I propose:
      > having not attained that, (one) will apply the characteristics of vigour

      I can't accept that bhavissati is referring to an indefinite agent taking sa.n.thaana.m as an object, but you could prove me wrong... here the Lord Buddha is speaking of himself. To put (one) in seems unlikely. If anything, I would suggest bhavissati to mean "will come to be" ie, the "characteristics of vigour" will come to be. But here, according to the commentary you have quoted, sa.n.thaana seems to mean "settling" in the sense of staying (.thapana), not going on (appavattana), drawing back (osakkana), settling down (pa.tippassaddhi).

      If that be the case, I would propose:

      viiriyassa sa.n.thaana.m bhavissati

      There will be the settling for effort.

      But I was thinking of taking sa.n.thaana as referring to the physical appearance of one who has lost flesh and blood... this makes most sense to me. In that case:

      viiriyassa sa.n.thaana.m bhavissati
      (this physical appearance of one without flesh and blood) will be the physical appearance of one who has vigour (viiriya could be a tadassatthi taddhita formation: viriya.m assa atthi viiriyo)

      > ya.m purisathaamena purisaviiriyena purisaparakkamena pattabba.m ta.m
      >
      > PTS has "what may be won by human strength, by human energy, by human
      > striving". I propose "whichever that is attained with/through human
      > strength, vigour and energy".

      tabba gives the meaning of "should/may".

      Thank you for your work.

      Best wishes,

      Yuttadhammo
    • Nina van Gorkom
      Dear Yong Peng, Bhante, ... N:Could it be that appa.tivaanii has the suffix -in and then it means: having no restriction? Then it would modify the padahaami,
      Message 2 of 12 , Nov 28, 2007
      • 0 Attachment
        Dear Yong Peng, Bhante,

        Op 25-nov-2007, om 4:45 heeft Ong Yong Peng het volgende geschreven:

        > bhante, thanks for highlighting the bhaava-tadhita formation as the
        > difference between appa.tivaanitaa and appa.tivaanii. However, I
        > really can't see how appa.tivaanii can be a modifier/qualifier (ie. an
        > adjective) of aha.m. Would you kindly clarify with the following
        > simplified sentence:
        >
        > Appa.tivaanii aha.m padahaami.
        -------
        N:Could it be that appa.tivaanii has the suffix -in and then it
        means: having no restriction? Then it would modify the padahaami, the
        striving. This is different from PED. I think PED is not correct here.
        Nina.



        [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.