English
All these should be understood in terms of the seven cases, and in compounds, the words "kati" and "katipaya" should always be used in the plural. For example, in phrases like "a bhikkhu who has gone beyond some attachments is called one who has crossed the flood," and "made by some people," the compound "katisaṅgā" (some attachments) should always be seen as a plural compound, meaning "how many, how many attachments." Now, the nominal paradigm of conventional terms is stated—here, conventional terms are words like "yevāpanaka," etc. Yevāpanako, yevāpanakā. Yevāpanakaṃ. Yevāpano, yevāpanā. Yevāpanaṃ. Yaṃvāpanakaṃ, yaṃvāpanakāni. The rest should be elaborated everywhere. There, "yevāpanako" is a term for what is stated by the word "yevāpanā," as in "whatever else there may be at that time, other unformed phenomena arisen dependently," without stating their nature directly, like "there is contact, there is feeling," etc. Similarly for "yevāpano." Likewise, "yaṃvāpanakaṃ" is what is stated by the word "yaṃvāpanā," as in "whatever other matter there may be." This method should be applied appropriately to "yassakaṃ," "yatthakaṃ," etc. Here, one might ask: "Is not the particle 'pana' an indeclinable, and its indeclinable nature is established because it does not change in the three genders, all cases, and numbers? Why then does 'yevāpano' end in 'o'?" It is true that "pana" is a particle, and it is a particle in phrases like "whatever else there may be at that time," or "whatever other," or "brahmins, however," and so on. But in phrases like "yevāpanako" or "yevāpano," it is not a particle. This is merely an imitation. Therefore, in such instances, usages containing the word "pana" should be understood as conventional terms. If that is the case, why is it exemplified? For the sake of clarifying the meaning. The Tayodhamma Jātaka. The Tayodhamma Jātaka. By the Tayodhamma Jātaka. Of the Tayodhamma Jātaka. From the Tayodhamma Jātaka, the Tayodhamma Jātaka. Why? The rest should be elaborated. Three formations. Three formations. By three formations. Of three formations. The rest should be elaborated. The Sangha, four pairs of persons. The Sangha, four pairs of persons. By the Sangha, four pairs of persons. Of the Sangha, four pairs of persons. The rest should be elaborated. A mindful actor, two mindful actors, mindful actors. A mindful actor, two mindful actors, mindful actors. By a mindful actor, by mindful actors. Of a mindful actor. The rest should be elaborated. Here, "satokārī" means "sato" because one remembers; "satokārī" means one whose nature is to act, having become mindful. Also, the nominal declension series of other conventional words is stated, together with an explanation of their meaning. Anga. Anga. By Anga. To Anga. From Anga. Of Anga. In Anga. O Anga. Anga country. Anga country. By Anga country. Of Anga country. From Anga country. To Anga country. In Anga country. O Anga country. Thus, it should be applied to Magadha, Kosala, and others. In the feminine gender: Kasi, Kasi (plural). Kasi, Kasi (plural). By Kasi. To Kasi. From Kasi. Of Kasi. In Kasi. O Kasi. Here is the explanation of meaning: Kasi country, Kasi (plural) country. Kasi country, Kasi (plural) country. By Kasi country. Of Kasi country. From Kasi country. To Kasi country. In Kasi country. O Kasi country. Thus, these words like Avanti, Ceti, Vajji should also be applied. Therefore, the commentators said, "in the Kuru country." Thus, even though Anga and others are singular in meaning, being names of countries, they are conventionally always plural. For example, in various places, plural Pāli forms are seen, such as "he dwells in Anga. Wandering in Magadha," and "of Angas, Magadhas, Kasis, Kosalas." Thus, these are the nominal declension series of conventional words. Now, other word distinctions, even more specific than these, We shall explain the nominal word-garlands, which cause the destruction of delusion and bring about extremely subtle knowledge, for the purpose of enabling listeners to attain supreme skill in grasping meaning and expression. These are based on Pāli usages such as: "You claim to be enlightened. You claim to be a farmer. You claim to be a lay follower. For you who claim to be a Perfectly Enlightened One, these doctrines are not fully understood." Here, in "sambuddho paṭijānāsi," the meaning is to be taken as "You claim, 'I am a Perfectly Enlightened One,'" by way of the ellipsis of the word "iti." This method applies also to "kassako paṭijānāsi," and so on. However, in "sammāsambuddhassa te paṭijānato," by applying the ellipsis of "iti" in the sense of "for you who claim 'I am a Perfectly Enlightened One,'" there is a different arrangement of words and thus a different understanding of the meaning. The same method applies to "khīṇāsavassa te paṭijānatoti," and so on. In the commentary, however, the meaning stated for "sammāsambuddhassa te paṭijānatoti" as "for you who claim 'I am a Perfectly Enlightened One, all doctrines have been fully understood by me,'" is also the meaning as shown. Having understood this, a wise and noble son should establish this word-garland with active verbs for the meaning "You claim, 'I am a Perfectly Enlightened One,'" as we are about to state: You stand claiming to be a Perfectly Enlightened One. One sees you claiming to be a Perfectly Enlightened One. By you, claiming to be a Perfectly Enlightened One, the Dhamma is taught. To you, claiming to be a Perfectly Enlightened One, it is given. From you, claiming to be a Perfectly Enlightened One, it departs. The Dhamma of you, claiming to be a Perfectly Enlightened One. It is established in you, claiming to be a Perfectly Enlightened One. Similarly, it should be expanded with "You claim to be one whose defilements are destroyed," and so on. In this sense, that "a monk with psychic power, being one, becomes many, and being many, becomes one," and "monks with psychic power, being one, become many, and being many, become one," this word-garland with active verbs should also be established: Being one, he becomes many; being many, he becomes one — a monk stands. Being one, they become many; being many, they become one — monks stand. He sees a monk, being one, becoming many; being many, becoming one. He sees monks, being one, becoming many; being many, becoming one. By a monk, being one, becoming many; being many, becoming one — the Dhamma is taught. By monks, being one, becoming many; being many, becoming one — the Dhamma is taught. To a monk, being one, becoming many; being many, becoming one — it is given. The rest should be elaborated. Oh monk, being one, becoming many; being many, becoming one — you teach the Dhamma. Oh monks, being one, becoming many; being many, becoming one — you teach the Dhamma. In this context, the Kevatta Sutta is supportive. "Here, Kevatta, a monk experiences various kinds of psychic power. Being one, he becomes many; being many, he becomes one; he becomes visible... (and so on)... ...and some faithful, confident person sees that monk experiencing various kinds of psychic power, being one, becoming many; being many, becoming one." This is the Kevatta Sutta. A monk, sitting alone with a woman, speaks thus: Monks, sitting alone with a woman, speak thus: He sees a monk sitting alone with a woman. He sees monks sitting alone with a woman. All should be elaborated. Here, the Pāli phrase "one should not converse with a woman alone" and so on, is supportive. Here, "ekoekāya" should be taken as an idiomatic phrase similar to an indeclinable, and its becoming a single word, like "aññamañña" (each other), should be understood. A monk, by himself, without a second (person) In the meaning of "a monk with one woman," the word "ekoekāyā" should be understood as not a conventional compound. Even so, the word "eko" is not in apposition with the word "bhikkhu." If it were in apposition, phrases like "while making a sitting" would not be said. Nor is the word "ekāyā" in apposition with the implied word "itthiyā." If it were in apposition, "mātugāmena" would not be said, due to lack of distinction and becoming a repetition. Furthermore, since "mātugāmena" is stated, "ekena" should be said. However, the word "ekoekāyā" absolutely refers to the meaning of a man and a woman, not an appositional word. Therefore, just as in "two spouses converse with each other," the word "aññamaññaṃ" is a single word, so too "ekoekāyā" is a single word and an adjective of the monk making a sitting; this should be known. Or, in that sitting action, the monk is one, and the woman is one. That action is conventionally called "ekoekāyā." In such an "ekoekāyā" sitting action, the meaning "a monk with a woman" should be taken. In this way, the nominal word-series of other conventional words should be combined according to usage, in singular and plural forms. Thus, the nominal word-series of meaning, referent, gender, etc., has been explained in various ways. This grammar, most sweet-sounding, Most skillful, well-taught, excellent; Like the sun, dispelling the darkness of the unwise, Like the moon, awakening wisdom's lotuses. For the growth of the teaching, and solace of the wise, May this guide be well understood, and thoroughly comprehended by wisdom. Thus, in the Saddanīti treatise, made for the skill of the wise in the paths of expression of the three Pitakas with their commentaries, the section on nominal word-series, explaining meaning, referent, gender, etc., is the eleventh chapter. Thus far, of those made of earth-elements, masculine, feminine, neuter genders And the series of pronominal words is shown in various ways, with appropriate changes in gender, form, and meaning. Indeed, apart from pronouns by rule, no other names are left untaken. 12. Series of Pronominal Words for "All," "That," "Like," and "Name" Henceforth I shall declare, the pronoun and its like; And the name joined, especially with various names.