English
The two "babhūvittha" there, know the form as perfect; Said for both plural and singular, middle and first person. The two "abhavattha" are to be known, as from the imperfect conjugation; Said for both plural and singular, middle and first person too; "Abhavittha" – this form, is from the aorist conjugation. And that, indeed, in the plural, should be joined with "you (pl.)"; Declared in the perfect, imperfect, and aorist. The three "aṃ" there, at the beginning, the form "babhūvaṃ" is stated; Of the two, "abha". This form, with the word "I", should be joined. In the Aorist and Imperfect, the "mha" ending, with "we"; "Babhūvimha" and "Abhavimha", these two forms respectively. In the Aorist, Imperfect, and Present inflections; The "iṃ" ending, that form, "Babhūvi" from the Aorist; "Abhavi" for the others, all joined with the word "I". In the Imperfect and Present, the "ā" ending is considered here; "Abhavā", thus in the singular, is the first person form. In the Imperfect and Present, the "o" ending is said here; "Abhavo", thus in the singular, is the second person form. In the Future and Conditional, it is said in these two; In the plural and singular, joined with "sa", the "ssatha" ending. "Tumhe bhavissatha", this is considered from the Future; "Abhavissatha tumhe" and "Abhavissatha so"; These two expressions are said from the Conditional. In the Future and Conditional, it is declared; In the second person place, joined with "sa", the "ssase" pair. "Bhavissase tvaṃ", this, and "Tvaṃ abhavissase"; These usages, the wise should declare there. The "ssavhe" pair joined with "se", and the "ssaṃ" pair, fourfold; This too is said in these two, in the aforementioned inflections. "Bhavissavhe", thus in the plural, is Future second person; In the plural, "Abhavissavhe", is Conditional second person. "Bhavissaṃ", thus in the singular, is Future first person; "Abhavissaṃ", thus in the singular, is Conditional first person. Thus said, by the said expressions, there is similarity; By some, all that stands in forty-one ways. The remaining fifty-five are dissimilar in every way; Having taken this method, one should speak everywhere as possible. This here is a collection of expressions in terms of similarity and dissimilarity. In terms of the characteristic of augmentation, in the collection of inflections and expressions, thus should be observed – In the Future, Aorist, Present, and Conditional; Always, sometimes, and sometimes not always, the "i" augmentation may occur. That "i" augmentation indeed, in the Aorist inflection. In the plural, middle voice, in the plural, also the best voice; referring to the active voice, this statement is made. And the singular of the best voice, is not in the middle voice; it should be understood to be entirely in the future tense. However, in the past imperfect, the aorist, and the conditional tenses; the prefix 'a' occurs, it should be noted in all cases. In the aorist, in the plural, in the middle and the best voices likewise; in the plural, with 'a', the prefix 'i' may occur. The prefix 'i' always occurs in the conditional tense; the prefix 'a' there, is said to be not always certain. The prefix 'a' alone appears in the past imperfect; in the perfect and the future, only 'i' is seen. Both the prefix 'a' and the prefix 'i' are seen in the aorist and the conditional tenses. In the three remaining inflections, the three 'a's are not mentioned; in the present, the imperative, and the locative, in all cases. Accompanied only by 'i', there are two inflections; seven and twelve are here, the forms, it should be noted. Accompanied only by 'a', there is only one inflection; twelve forms are here, it should be noted. Accompanied by 'a' and 'i', there are only two inflections; four and twelve forms are here. Free from the three 'a's, there are only three inflections; thirty-six forms are here, it should be explained. In the perfect and the aorist, five and eight respectively; forms free from 'i' are found. Thus, in this way, the ninety-six kinds of inflections; the collection of forms, should be understood by the discerning. This is the collection of inflections and forms based on the characteristic of prefixes. However, regarding the collection of inflections and forms based on tense, there are two kinds of collections: the collection based on the three tenses, and the collection based on the tense cycle. Among these, the present, imperative, and locative inflections are present tense; words ending in present, imperative, and locative inflections are present tense forms. The perfect, past imperfect, and aorist inflections are past tense; words ending in perfect, past imperfect, and aorist inflections these words are past tense. The future tense ending is future time, words ending with it are future tense. The conditional tense ending, however, is sometimes past time, sometimes future time, therefore, words ending with it are both past tense and future tense. This is the collection of tense endings and tenses according to the three times. This, however, is the collection of tense endings and tenses according to the time cycles – The Aorist, Imperfect, and Perfect endings are past time, words ending with them are past tense. The future tense ending is future time, words ending with it are future tense. The present tense ending is present time, words ending with it are present tense. The fifth ending is command time, words ending with it are imperative tense. The seventh ending is conditional time, words ending with it are optative tense. Here, however, "imperative tense" and "optative tense" are merely headings, as the fifth and seventh endings are seen in requests, permissions, etc. The conditional tense ending is conditional time, words ending with it are conditional tense. Thus, the collection of tense endings and tenses according to the time cycles should be understood. In the collection of times, there are three kinds of time collections: the collection of three times, the collection of four times, and the collection of six times. In the present, the present, the fifth and seventh are these; In the past are aorist and others, with the conditional. In the future is the future, or also the conditional. Thus, the three times should be known, the verb reveals them. Is it not that in Kaccāyana's text, time is said to be fourfold? Present, not-present time, past, and future, it is said. Truly, "not-present time" is said, and "present" is desired; "Time spoken of as near" it is, due to the possibility of meaning. For thus, "that which is three times," is said even by the teachers; Not free from time, any verb is seen. Is it not that? And "unspoken time," the meaning there is fitting. Indeed, thus, six kinds of time are declared in grammar. Past, future, present, and imperative, and conditional time, and optative – thus sixfold. Two inflections there, imperative and conditional, even without referring to time, are spoken by grammarians. When words like "let him go," "he might go" are spoken, the action is not completed, it is not future, nor past. Words of optative time, in past and future too, are, as stated, by experts in grammar. The fifth and seventh, imperative and conditional, that they occur in the present, is not stated there thus. Therefore, in Kaccāyana's text, the word "nuttakāle," its meaning is "avuttakāle," this is understood of it. Even though this is truly so, imperative and conditional, should be seen in the present too, by a wise person who knows the method. If "why?" (is asked), command and condition truly, because their meanings in the present, are seen to be accomplished. The word "anuttakāle," illuminates this meaning; or, "in nearby spoken time," is the explanation of the meaning. The accomplishment of meanings like going, is not seen; "Let him go," "he might go," etc., because in spoken time, therefore, they are indicated in unspoken time, those illuminating inflections. Or, "time" as "spoken time," is thus taken here; in the Dakkhiṇāsuddhi text, this third (explanation) is made; their illumination of time, thus it fits, not otherwise. To make clear the two meanings, in the text named Kaccāyana, the Elder Kaccāyana, spoke the word "nutta-kāle." Thus, in three or even four ways, the collection of times is stated; now, in six ways, the collection of times, is indeed explained. The inflections parokkhā and, hiyyattanī, and ajjatanī – these three are declared in the past. In the future, bhavissantī, and bhavatī are declared; in the present, vattamānā, in three times, made fivefold. The fifth and seventh, imperative and conditional, being collected... they come, a collection in the present. Because for the fifth (case), from the position of the present, the fifth is similar, therefore it is considered the fifth. But the seventh, although similar to those sevenths, because it is said from that, our opinion is that it is the seventh. By "kālātipatti" and so on, which is thus present (tense), the sixth might be a past conditional expression. The fifth, by that sixth, is it not similar in position? By those seven cases, the seventh would be the eighth. If someone should say this, one should refute it, saying "that is not so," because "kālātipatti" can occur in the past and future. Indeed, it is thus stated separately in the Cūḷanirutti: "Kālātipatti" indicates the past and future. "Kriyātipanna" is past, why is it said in Kaccāyana? If one should say this, one should declare "mostly." Indeed, mostly in the world, it occurs in the past; the usage connected with "kālātipatti" should be understood thus. Here is a past expression of "kālātipatti": "Monks, if this king his righteous father, the king of righteousness, had not deprived of life, right on this very seat, a dustless, stainless eye of Dhamma would have arisen for him." "See, Ānanda, this son of a great wealthy merchant, in this very city,