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

Re: Saddaniiti XXV: 869 (pa.thamapuriso)

Expand Messages
  • ashinpan
    Dear Jim ... I would like to suggest a working principle to be used in the meantime. It is what is understood by this term in the Burmese tradition. In the
    Message 1 of 15 , Nov 30, 2009
    • 0 Attachment
      Dear Jim

      You wrote:

      > As for finding the right meaning for 'tulyaadhikara.ne' in Sd 869, I
      > think that will have to wait for another time and we'll just have to
      > leave it at 'having the same substratum' for now. Although there are
      > many commentaries on the same sutta in Kaccaayana, they all have their particular way of explaining the sutta and it would take a
      > considereable amount of time to go over them all, corroborate, and
      > uuderstamd as a harmonious whole. These comentaries range from the 7th > to the 20th century.

      I would like to suggest a working principle to be used in the meantime. It is what is understood by this term in the Burmese tradition.

      In the sentence "puriso bhatta.m pacati", "puriso" refers to a particular man so that man is the substratum of "puriso". The verb "pacati" refers to the action of that man, so he is also the substratum of "pacati". Then "puriso" and "pacati" have the same substratum.

      On the contrary, in the sentence "purisena bhatta.m paciiyate", the verb "paciiyate" refers to the effects that rice undergoes while being cooked. So "paciiyate" has the same substratum as "bhatta.m" (rice), not "purisena" (man).

      Then there is also another option possible. In the sentence "purisena gaama.m gacchiiyate", the verb "gacchiiyate" indicates the action in itself, so its substratum is neither that of "purisena" (man) nor that of "gaama.m" (village). Such sentences are called Absolute Voice ("bhaava") and rarely found in Pali texts.

      with metta

      Ven. Pandita
    • Nina van Gorkom
      Venerable Pandita, ... N: I do not understand the word substratum very well. Is it foundation? ... N: Looking at the locative paciiyate and gacchiiyate, is
      Message 2 of 15 , Dec 1, 2009
      • 0 Attachment
        Venerable Pandita,
        Op 1-dec-2009, om 5:50 heeft ashinpan het volgende geschreven:

        > In the sentence "puriso bhatta.m pacati", "puriso" refers to a
        > particular man so that man is the substratum of "puriso". The verb
        > "pacati" refers to the action of that man, so he is also the
        > substratum of "pacati". Then "puriso" and "pacati" have the same
        > substratum.
        ------
        N: I do not understand the word substratum very well. Is it foundation?
        -------
        >
        > On the contrary, in the sentence "purisena bhatta.m paciiyate", the
        > verb "paciiyate" refers to the effects that rice undergoes while
        > being cooked. So "paciiyate" has the same substratum as
        > "bhatta.m" (rice), not "purisena" (man).
        >
        > Then there is also another option possible. In the sentence
        > "purisena gaama.m gacchiiyate", the verb "gacchiiyate" indicates
        > the action in itself, so its substratum is neither that of
        > "purisena" (man) nor that of "gaama.m" (village). Such sentences
        > are called Absolute Voice ("bhaava") and rarely found in Pali texts.
        -------
        N: Looking at the locative paciiyate and gacchiiyate, is this a
        absolute locative , like in Latin an absolute ablative? It usually is
        in the genetive. But does the extra i not denote a passive?
        When (or because) the man cookes the rice, when (or because) the man
        goes to the village?
        With respect,
        Nina.



        [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      • ashinpan
        Nina ... In classical Pali grammars, content is treated as the locus (location) of the language that refers to it. So havin the same substratum means that
        Message 3 of 15 , Dec 1, 2009
        • 0 Attachment
          Nina

          You wrote:
          >
          > Venerable Pandita,
          > Op 1-dec-2009, om 5:50 heeft ashinpan het volgende geschreven:
          >
          > > In the sentence "puriso bhatta.m pacati", "puriso" refers to a
          > > particular man so that man is the substratum of "puriso". The verb
          > > "pacati" refers to the action of that man, so he is also the
          > > substratum of "pacati". Then "puriso" and "pacati" have the same
          > > substratum.
          > ------
          > N: I do not understand the word substratum very well. Is it foundation?

          In classical Pali grammars, content is treated as the locus (location) of the language that refers to it. So "havin the same substratum" means that both "puriso" and "pacati" have the same location, i.e., the same referent.

          > N: Looking at the locative paciiyate and gacchiiyate, is this a
          > absolute locative , like in Latin an absolute ablative? It usually is
          > in the genetive. But does the extra i not denote a passive?
          > When (or because) the man cookes the rice, when (or because) the man
          > goes to the village?

          Both these words are not nouns but only conjugated passive verbs with 3rd pers. sing. attanopada endings.

          with metta

          Ven. Pandita
        • Nina van Gorkom
          Venerable Pandita, Thank you very much, it is clear now. Warder lesson 28 deals with the reflexive or middle conjugation, attanopada. With respect, Nina. ...
          Message 4 of 15 , Dec 2, 2009
          • 0 Attachment
            Venerable Pandita,
            Thank you very much, it is clear now. Warder lesson 28 deals with the
            reflexive or middle conjugation, attanopada.

            With respect,
            Nina.
            Op 2-dec-2009, om 7:43 heeft ashinpan het volgende geschreven:

            > In classical Pali grammars, content is treated as the locus
            > (location) of the language that refers to it. So "havin the same
            > substratum" means that both "puriso" and "pacati" have the same
            > location, i.e., the same referent.
            >
            > > N: Looking at the locative paciiyate and gacchiiyate, is this a
            > > absolute locative , like in Latin an absolute ablative? It
            > usually is
            > > in the genetive. But does the extra i not denote a passive?
            > > When (or because) the man cookes the rice, when (or because) the man
            > > goes to the village?
            >
            > Both these words are not nouns but only conjugated passive verbs
            > with 3rd pers. sing. attanopada endings.



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