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

Re: [Pali] di.t.thapubba etc. in Pali Day by Day 5/18/2005

Expand Messages
  • Nina van Gorkom
    Venerable Bhante Pandita, Thank you very much for your interesting explanation. I still have a question. When looking at the two kinds of translations: one
    Message 1 of 3 , Jun 2, 2005
    • 0 Attachment
      Venerable Bhante Pandita,
      Thank you very much for your interesting explanation.
      I still have a question. When looking at the two kinds of translations: one
      active, one passive, is there a difference in meaning?
      1. I have never before seen saints or heard the doctrine of the teacher.
      2. Saints have never been seen, nor the doctrine of the Teacher heard,
      by me.
      Is it a matter of emphasis?

      Another matter: I read through your recent post on verbal stems, but I do
      not know how to put it to good use. I would need more examples. Perhaps with
      the help of the dictionary which gives the stems? Please could you give tips
      how to use it?

      Please do not hurry, I understand the troubles with wire connections.
      With many thanks and respect,
      Nina.
      P.S. Yong Peng, you did not miss posts. I simply send this one to Ven.
      Pandita's personal address. I saw the Q. in your Pali series and I thought
      that Bhante would give an explanation.

      op 29-05-2005 14:15 schreef Ven. Pandita op ashinpan@...:
      >>
      >>> di.t.thapubba = di.t.tha + pubba [???]
      >>> sutapubba = suta + pubba [???]
      >>>
      >> John: I admit I don't know the answer to what type of compounds these are. I
      >> only know they mean "seen before"and "heard before". I've been waiting for
      >> one of the Pali experts to jump in and enlighten us.
      > These are of a particular type of Tappurisa compounds. Their difference
      > from an ordinary Tappurisa is can be explained using some examples:
      > ara~n~avaasa (= living in the forest) In this example, "living" is the
      > primary sense of the whole compound; "In the forest" is only a
      > qualifier. Note that "vaasa" meaning "living" is the second member.
      > pacchaaratta (= the time after night) In this example, "the time after"
      > is the primary sense while "night" is only a qualifier. But "pacchaa"
      > meaning "the time after" is the first member.
      >
      > Now "di.t.thapubba" and "sutapubba" belong to the latter type, and
      > should be literally translated as "(being) seen before" and "(being)
      > heard before" The first members of them, "di.t.tha" and "suta",
      > respectively carry the primary sense of each compound while the second
      > member "pubba" is only a qualifier.
      >
      >> 13. Aha.m khii.naasave vaa na di.t.thapubbo, satthudhamma.m vaa na sutapubbo.
      >>
      >> I / saints or / not seen before / teacher's doctrine or /not heard before
      >>
      >> I have never before seen saints or heard the doctrine of the teacher.
      >>
      >>
      > I think I don't agree with the format of this sentence itself. Why? Both
      > "di.t.thapubbo" and "sutapubbo" are main verbs, of which the primary
      > senses are denoted by their first members "di.t.tha" and "suta". Both of
      > them are Past Participle Passives denoting Passive voice. Accordingly,
      > the whole compounds must be viewed as passive verbs. The correct
      > sentence should be in passive voice as follows:
      >
      > mayaa khii.naasavaa vaa na di.t.thapubbaa, satthudhammo vaa na sutapubbo.
      > (= Saints have never been seen, nor the doctrine of the Teacher heard,
      > by me)
    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.