English
"For speech," in the sense of "for the sake of", due to the usage of "viramaṇa" (cessation). "For the group," in the sense of "with", due to the usage of the word "bhattā" (lord); The word "dhanañcayāya" (for the accumulator of wealth) indicates "with" in the agentive sense. "Asakkatā" (not honored), due to the usage of the word, thus one should specify; Another inversion also, should be sought by the discerning one. "For direct knowledge, for full enlightenment, for Nibbāna," these, however, due to the nature of the three genders, one should specify in the sense of "for the sake of that". Thus, following the text, the origin of "āya" has been explained; But this is a subtle point, to be contemplated again and again. By means of the o-ending, adorned with various methods, the word-garland of the Great Sage has been illuminated for the sake of the teaching. If the good people, making this exceedingly sweet and beautiful, would listen to the grammar, varied with diverse methods; These words of the Supreme Buddha, would indeed cut off the doubt born from sound, like the moon-lotus by the night, very well here. Thus in the nine-membered text with commentaries For the wise, who have traversed the three Pitakas and their ways, in the Saddanīti treatise, made for the sake of skill, the determined analysis of the basic forms of masculine nouns ending in -o, named "Division of Nominal Word Series," is the Fifth Chapter. Masculine nouns ending in -o, whose base form ends in -a or -o, are concluded. 6. Nominal Word Series of Masculine Nouns Ending in -ā. Now, making the opinion of the former teachers a guide, we will explain the nominal word series for masculine nouns ending in -ā, desiring mastery of their basic forms: teacher, teacher, teachers. Teacher, teachers. By the teacher, by the teachers, by the teachers. Of the teacher, of the teacher, of the teacher, of the teachers, of the teachers. From the teacher, from the teachers, from the teachers. For the teacher, for the teacher, for the teacher, for the teachers, for the teachers. In the teacher, in the teachers. O teacher, O teacher, O respected teachers. This method comes from the Cūḷanirutti, made by the Elder Yamaka. And here, in the Niruttipiṭaka and in Kaccāyana, even though the word "satthunā" does not appear, it should be taken, as seen in "by the Dhamma-king, the teacher." And the order "satthārā, satthunā, satthārehi, satthārebhi" should be understood. And here, even without a special meaning, due to a special consonant, or even without a special consonant, due to a difference in meaning, the presentation of different words is the grammatical method. Thus, the word "satthā" is stated twice, once for singular and once for plural, it should be understood. However, in the Niruttipiṭaka and others, "satthā" as a nominative plural does not appear. Although it does not appear, nevertheless, seeing "avitakkitā" as a nominative plural in the Pāli text "the unreflecting enter death," the nominative plural form of the word "satthā" must necessarily be desired. Similarly, for vattā, dhātā, gantā, etc., because they follow the same pattern. Also, in the Niruttipiṭaka, the accusative plural "satthāre" and the dative/genitive singular "satthussa" and dative/genitive plural "satthāna" appear, but they do not appear in the Cūḷanirutti. There, in "He supports his mother and father. He surpasses his brothers," the form "satthāre" (accusative plural) seems inappropriate. In Kaccāyana and others, two vocative singular forms are mentioned: "bho sattha" and "bho satthā," with short and long vowels respectively. In the Niruttipiṭaka, after stating the vocative singular "bho sattha" with a short vowel, the vocative plural "bhavanto satthāro" is mentioned, with the substitution of 'āra'. In the Cūḷanirutti, after stating the vocative singular "bho sattha" with a short vowel, the vocative plural "bho satthā" is spoken, with a long vowel. All this should be examined in the Āgamas and accepted in such a way that it does not conflict. Now, we will show another form of the word "satthu" that we have seen. For example, in the Pāli text: "O Mahānāma, is there one conclusion for these three teachers, or separate conclusions?" the word "satthūnaṃ" is seen. Therefore, this sequence should also be understood: "satthu, satthussa, satthuno, satthānaṃ, satthārānaṃ, satthūnaṃ." Overcomer, overcomer, overcomers. Overcomer, overcomers. Overcomer, overcomer, overcomers, overcomers. Overcomer, overcomer, overcomer, overcomers, overcomers, overcomers. Overcomer, overcomers, overcomers. Overcomer, overcomer, overcomer, overcomers, overcomers. In the overcomer, in the overcomers. O overcomer, O overcomer, O overcomers. Just as here the nominal paradigm of the base form "abhibhavitu" is applied according to the "satthu" pattern, so too should the nominal paradigms of "paribhavitu" and others, and other similar words, be applied according to the "satthu" pattern. Other similar words here are the base forms "vattu," "dhātu," etc., of the words "vattā," "dhātā," etc. Speaker, bearer, goer, leader, Giver, doer, thinker, father; Cut- Having struck, having broken, having killed, having measured, Having conquered, having awakened, having known, having heard. Having roared, having rained, having eaten, having fainted, having been repelled; Having spoken, having asked, having endured, having risen and gone forth, having been stretched. Having been danced, having been played, having been told, having been joined, having been served; A leader, a trainer, and so on, are used in the sense of acting. One who causes to arise, one who causes to know, one who causes to show, one who causes to grow; One who causes to awaken, and other such words, should be understood in the sense of cause. A doer, a charioteer, a leader, a master, a father, a brother, and so on; Some of these differ in the Sutta, I will explain that distinction. Some words like "teacher," by usage, with the master; Always occur together, while some do not. There, words like "doer" differ somewhat from the word "teacher" in their form. Thus, in "Rise, doer, quickly, go and tell Vessantara," here "katte" is the vocative singular form, for "bho kattā" is indeed a different form. In "Then, charioteer, go to where the Brahmins and householders of Campeyya are," here "khatte" is also the vocative singular form. This too is a different form from "bho khattā." In "When the leader's path is straight," here "nette" is the locative singular form, and this too is a different form from "nettarī." In "He pleases the king, he receives honor from the masters," here "bhattūsū" is the locative plural form. It is a different form from "bhattāresū," and here, just as "bhattūsū" is used, and "pitūsū" is used in "wise among mothers and fathers," so too the pattern of "vattūsu, dhātūsu, gantūsu, netūsu, dātūsu, kattūsū" and so on should be understood. This pattern seems to us to be desirable even for the word "teacher." Father, father, fathers. Father, fathers. By father, by father, by father, by fathers, by fathers, by fathers, by fathers. Of father, of father, of father, of fathers, of fathers, of fathers. From father, from father, from fathers, from fathers, from fathers, from fathers. In father, in father, in father. one, of the father, of the fathers, of the fathers. In the father, in the fathers, in the fathers. O father, O father, O sirs, fathers. Here, however, excluding these two forms, “petyā, pitūnaṃ,” the paradigm of the word “bhātu” (brother) should be applied. There, in phrases like “well done by mother and father,” “you are permitted by mother and father,” “after the passing of mother and father,” the variations of the word “pitu” are “petyā, pitūhi, pitūbhi. Pitūnaṃ,” and the shortness in “pitaro” etc. is a distinction from the word “satthu” (teacher). And there, “petyā” should be understood as an inexplicable masculine form, like the words “jantuyo, hetuyo, hetuyā, adhipatiyā.” A question and a clarification arise here: You say that words like “satthā, pitā” etc. are A-ending because they are fully formed, and U-ending based on their root form. But in phrases like “hetu satthāradassanaṃ” (reason for seeing the teacher), “amātāpitarasaṃvaḍḍho” (not grown by mother and father), “kattāraniddeso” (designation of the doer), how do you explain “satthāra” etc.? We say that these too are U-ending, based on their root form. But aren't these A-ending, sirs? No, they are U-ending. But, sirs, aren't they A-ending because the subsequent words like “aṃ, nā” etc. are not seen, by which the U at the end of U-ending words would become “ār”? No, because in such a context, the subsequent words like “aṃ, nā” etc. have no place. Indeed, this is the domain of compounds. And in the domain of compounds, even inexplicable forms are seen. Even so, sirs, just as in the usage “gāmato nikkhamati” (he goes out from the village) in a non-compound context, since we see the canonical passage “satthārato satthāraṃ gacchati” (he goes from the teacher to the teacher), shouldn't we consider “satthāra” etc. in “hetu satthāradassanaṃ” etc. to be A-ending? They should not be considered so, because even in “satthārato satthāraṃ gacchati,” it is U-ending. Here, even in a non-compound state, the U of the word “satthu” receives the “ār” substitution due to the suffix “to.” And those which you consider to be the causes for the “ār” substitution of U, If you wish for words like 'aṃnā', these are not authorities for the wise in such a place. What then are they? The 'to' suffix in non-compound contexts, and the latter words in compound contexts, and the 'syā' etc. endings in the absence of latter words, these alone are absolutely the authorities in such a place. Thus, in the Dhammapada Commentary, regarding the Pāli passage: "Just for misfortune, knowledge arises for the fool," in the explanation of its meaning,