English
By virtue of the "ādi" inclusion here; The form "vāyodhātu" Would not have an "o"-middle. Just as the form of the word "āyu" Is seen with an augment; "With life, an only son," Like the word "manasā" and others. Not so is the form of the word "vāyu" Seen with an augment; Therefore, in the mano-group, There is no place for it. Thus, "it blows, therefore it is wind," So the teachers said; The meaning of the word "Vāyodhātu" here and there. Where earth and water, Fire and wind do not penetrate; Here, the three words beginning with "āpa" Are in the mano-group and so on. This is also a characteristic of the mano-group. Here, the mano-group is divided into two: those beginning with "bila" and those beginning with "āpa." Thus, the characteristic of the mano-group has been clearly, unentangled, and unconfusedly stated. Now we will explain the characteristic of the non-mano-group: Those that are not in the "so" case, And those that are in the "smā" case; Such words Are designated as the non-mano-group. Which are they? The words "attha" (meaning), "byañjana" (letter), "akkhara" (syllable), etc., and the words "dīgha" (long) and "orasa" (short). For these, in the place of the "na" case, forms like "atthaso, byañjanaso, akkharaso, suttaso, upāyaso, sabbaso, ṭhānaso" are found. For the words "dīgha" and "orasa," in the place of the "smā" case, forms like "dīghaso, oraso" are found. This is the characteristic of the non-mano-group. There is another: Those that are entirely free From the nature of "sa," "so," "syanta," etc.; Such words also Are designated as the non-mano-group. Which are they? " A man, a maiden, a mind, etc. This too is a characteristic of the non-mind group. Thus, the characteristic of the non-mind group has been clearly explained, without confusion, without entanglement, without knots. Regarding the characteristics of the mind group, etc., thus shown, should someone say: “That which you have stated as the characteristic of the mind group, etc., with phrases like ‘those which are in the nature of compounds, are only in the middle position,’ would then mean that words like ‘go’ and ‘para’ in ‘a hundred cows, cow dung, a herd of cows’ would also become part of the mind group, etc.?” No, they would not. Why? Because – Here, the internal flow of the mind group, etc., is understood; The phrase “in the middle position” is stated, not based on tradition, etc. In “a hundred cows, cow dung,” etc., the non-mind group; The preceding word is lost due to its coming and going, and its impermanence. Therefore, they do not become so. Thus, in every way, the characteristic of the non-mind group has been fully explained. In this way, in the elucidation of the mind group, three divisions are to be understood: the mind group, the mind group, etc., and the non-mind group. Among these, the words included in the mind group, when forming compounds, take on different forms according to the three genders, as in “a man with an unagitated mind,” “a family with a firm mind,” “a female devotee with trustworthy speech,” etc. Here, some say: “When the word ‘mano’ does not function in its own sense, but in another sense, as in ‘one whose mind is unagitated is unagitated-minded,’ ‘one whose mind is not clinging is not-clinging-minded,’ then the nominal word series is taken according to the masculine gender, not according to the mind group rule.” That should not be accepted, because both are appropriately found. For example, in the Visuddhimagga, with reference to individuals, the mind group rule is seen in: “having a mind adorned with qualities like patience, gentleness, and loving-kindness. Having accepted the request.” And in the commentary, the mind group rule is seen in: “requested by the elder Dāṭhānāga, who had a firm mind.” Therefore, their statement should not be accepted. Those who say this, thinking with confused minds that words like ‘abyaggamana’ should be established in their original form ending in ‘a’ (e.g., ‘abyaggamanasa’), in all ways... They think it should be conjugated according to the masculine gender in two cases and in two numbers. And if this were so, forms like "of a mind adorned with virtues" and "by a firm mind" would not be genitive, dative, or instrumental forms, but other undesirable forms would arise. Because they would arise, therefore, without taking it thus, this distinction should be understood. Indeed, where the word "mana" and words like "ceta" in compounds do not refer to their own meaning but to another meaning, there the nominal declension of words with the 's' augment is obtained appropriately according to the masculine gender and according to the "mana" group's "mana" rule. But for those without the 's' augment, it is obtained only according to the masculine gender. However, where words like "mana" refer to their own meaning only within the scope of a compound, there the nominal declension of words without the 's' augment is obtained according to the masculine gender and according to the "mana" group's "mana" rule. Now, in order to clarify this meaning, and to produce skill in grammar for the wise, we will show the declension of the aforementioned words, made threefold – for this word, which refers entirely to a person, as in "he whose mind is entangled, that person is 'one with an entangled mind'" – A man with an entangled mind, men with entangled minds. A man with an entangled mind (acc.), men with entangled minds (acc.). By a man with an entangled mind, by a man with an entangled mind, by men with entangled minds, by men with entangled minds. To a man with an entangled mind, to a man with an entangled mind, to men with entangled minds. From a man with an entangled mind, from a man with an entangled mind, from a man with an entangled mind, from men with entangled minds, from men with entangled minds. Of a man with an entangled mind, of a man with an entangled mind, of men with entangled minds. In a man with an entangled mind, in a man with an entangled mind, in a man with an entangled mind, in a man with an entangled mind, in men with entangled minds. O man with an entangled mind, O sirs, men with entangled minds – thus is the nominal declension. Thus, the presence and absence of the 's' augment should be determined. Indeed, here, in the singular and plural places of the first and second cases, and the singular of the third, fourth, sixth, and seventh cases and in the appropriate place, the insertion occurs due to the following vowel of the substitute, and the following vowel of the case ending. And this method is subtle, it should be carefully considered. Another method: "He whose mind is distracted, he is a distracted-minded person" thus for this word referring to a person, "a distracted-minded man, distracted-minded men. A distracted-minded man" and so on, the nominal declension occurs in the masculine gender. Here, however, there is no insertion at all. Yet another method: "That which is distracted, and that is mind, thus distracted-mind" thus for this word referring to the mind, "distracted-mind (nom. sg.), distracted-minds (nom. pl.). Distracted-mind (acc. sg.), distracted-minds (acc. pl.). By a distracted-mind (inst. sg.), by distracted-minds (inst. pl.)" and so on, the nominal declension occurs in the manner of the mind-group, in the manner of 'mano'. Here, however, the insertion occurs only in the singular places of the third, fourth, sixth, and seventh cases, due to the following vowel of the substitute. And just as here, so in "a man with an unattached mind" and so on, this threefold method should be understood. When speaking in the neuter gender, "a family with a distracted mind, families with distracted minds. A family with a distracted mind, families with distracted minds. By a family with a distracted mind" and so on, the nominal declension should be formed. Here, however, the insertion occurs in the singular places of the first, second, third, fourth, sixth, and seventh cases, as appropriate, due to the following vowel of the substitute, and the following vowel of the case ending. This method too is subtle, it should be carefully considered. When speaking in the feminine gender, "a woman with a distracted mind" thus, having stated the insertion in the first singular place, then "distracted-minded women, distracted-minded women. A distracted-minded woman" should be formed in the manner of 'kaññā'. "Thus a laywoman with trustworthy words, laywomen with trustworthy words. A laywoman with trustworthy words" and so on. However, "a family with a distracted mind, a woman with a distracted mind" and so on, should be formed in the manner of 'citta' and 'kaññā'. Here, however, there is no insertion at all. To generate different kinds of knowledge for the listeners, other nominal declensions will be shown. We shall explain together: mind is indeed *mānasa*, one whose *mānasa* is stirred up is *samussāhitamānaso*. "Samussāhitamānaso, Samussāhitamānasā. Samussāhitamānasaṃ, Samussāhitamānase. Samussāhitamānasenā" These should be conjugated according to the masculine gender. One who has beautiful wisdom is *sumedhaso*. "Sumedhaso, Sumedhasā. Sumedhasaṃ, Sumedhase. Sumedhasenā" These are according to the masculine gender, and similarly for "bhūrimedhaso" and so on. Here are the usages: "Whom they call *sumedha*, The greatly wise *sumedha*; Why indeed do you depart from him, Even for a moment, Piṅgiya? From Gotama, of great wisdom, From Gotama, of great insight. I do not depart from him, Even for a moment, brahmin; From Gotama, of great wisdom, From Gotama, of great insight." When speaking in the feminine gender, the forms are "samussāhitamānasā sumedhasā"; when speaking in the neuter gender, the forms are "samussāhitamānasaṃ sumedhasaṃ". The word-series for these should be constructed according to the *kaññā citta* method. The determination of feminine and other genders in place of the masculine *o*-ending is made to illustrate the method.