English
Regarding the words “katara” and “katama”: the word “katara” is used when referring to one, two, three, or a few more out of a small number. The word “katama” is used when referring to one, two, three, or many out of a large number. “Katara” has a limited scope, “katama” has a broad scope. Here are some examples: “By which path should one go? Which is this ocean? Which contact arises at that time? Which phenomena are wholesome? There are four main directions, four intermediate directions, above and below, ten directions; in which direction does the Nāga king stand?” Such are the usages. Both. Both. Both. By both. The rest is like “sabba” in the masculine gender. Both people stand. He sees both people. Just as “both sons.” “Both sons.” For the word “ubhayō” is known to be plural, like the word “ubhō,” and not singular. By its infinite nature. Herein, indeed – Both in one night, You and Dhanusekha; They delight only in food, Both gods and humans. "Both your father and brothers" – These are to be understood as illustrative words That establish that meaning. But when, Venerables, You see "ubhayo" as a singular form, Then pay close attention. Who indeed is capable Of seeing and showing the method completely, In the Buddha's teaching, the Tipiṭaka with its commentaries, Adorned with infinite methods, Except for one endowed with learning and realization, Whose analytical knowledge has burst forth? And this should be noted here – The word "añña", the word "pubba", "Dakkhiṇa" and "uttara", "para"; Are taken as pronouns, And also as non-pronouns. Indeed, their inclusion among pronouns Has already been explained. Now their inclusion among non-pronouns is stated – There, the word "añña" first, When it denotes a fool, Then it is not a pronoun. And because it is not a pronoun, In all ways it should be construed According to the "purisa" (man), "kaññā" (maiden), and "citta" (mind) patterns. Thus indeed, "He who does not know" is "añño", a foolish man. "She who does not know" is "aññā", a foolish woman. "That which does not know" is "aññaṃ", a foolish family – This is the meaning of the word. Knowing thus, In the masculine gender, With "añño, aññā. Aññaṃ, aññe" and so on, The noun declension series should be construed According to the "purisa" pattern. In the feminine gender, With "aññā, aññā, aññāyo" and so on, According to the "kaññā" pattern. In the neuter gender, With "aññaṃ, aññānī" and so on, According to the "citta" pattern. Indeed, in this specific meaning, If one wishing to speak of foolish people Says "aññe janā" instead of "aññā janā", That statement of his does not achieve the intended meaning, Because the meaning would be taken otherwise. Similarly, if "aññesaṃ janānaṃ" or "aññesānaṃ janānaṃ" Is said instead of "aññānaṃ janānaṃ", That statement of his does not achieve the intended meaning. Similarly, if "aññāsaṃ itthīnaṃ" is said Instead of "aññānaṃ itthīnaṃ", And if "aññesaṃ kulānaṃ" or "aññesānaṃ kulānaṃ" is said Instead of "aññānaṃ kulānaṃ". But according to the pronominal usage, Having attained... In the desire for speech, it should be said "aññe janā" (other people), not "aññā janā" (other people). For indeed, a word spoken as "aññā janā" does not achieve the intended meaning, because the meaning would be taken otherwise. Thus, where the word "aññā janā" is appropriate, the word "aññe janā" is not appropriate. And where the word "aññe janā" is appropriate, the word "aññā janā" is not appropriate. The discerning wisdom in this particular meaning, this is the path of right conduct, being the cause in discerning right and wrong. For in the world, the discernment of right and wrong is called right conduct. And that is not accomplished without wisdom. Thus, the word "añña" (other) can also be a non-pronoun. Among the words pubba (east/former), dakkhiṇa (south/right), uttara (north/later), para (other/next), where the word pubba denotes priority, and where, in phrases like "semhaṃ pubbo" (phlegm and pus), it denotes pus, there it is a non-pronoun. In the first meaning, it has three genders; in the second, one gender. But the word uttara (north/later) and the word para (other/next), denoting the best meaning, are non-pronouns and always of three genders. Similarly, the word dakkhiṇa (south/right), denoting the meaning of skilled or clever, as in "dakkhiṇassā vahantimaṃ" (carrying to the right). But in phrases like "petānaṃ dakkhiṇaṃ dajjā" (one should give a gift to the departed), the word dakkhiṇā (gift) denotes a gift, and is necessarily feminine and a non-pronoun. Thus, the words añña, pubba, dakkhiṇa, uttara, para can also be non-pronouns. Therefore, their inclusion among both pronouns and non-pronouns should be understood. Now, the compound formation of katarasadda and others with a subsequent word is shown: "kataragāmavāsī" (resident of which village), "katamagāmavāsī" (resident of which village). "Ubhayagāmavāsino" (residents of both villages), "itaragāmavāsī" (resident of the other village), "aññataragāmavāsī" (resident of one or another village), "pubbadisā" (eastern direction), "parajano" (other person), "dakkhiṇadisā" (southern direction), "uttaradisā" (northern direction), "adharapatto" (lower leaf). There, the dissolution of the compound is appropriate as follows: "kataro gāmo" (which village) becomes "kataragāmo", "katamo gāmo" (which village) becomes "katamagāmo", "ubhayo gāmā" (both villages) becomes "ubhayagāmā". But the teachers desire a compound of katarasadda with katamasadda, and the forms are twofold: "kataro ca katamo ca" (which one and which one) becomes "katarakatame" or "katarakatamā". Therefore, (these are) pronouns... The declension of the words "katara" and "katama" should be formed according to the pronominal method in pure pronominals and the masculine noun pattern in the masculine gender. Therefore, in the dative and genitive plural positions, there would be three forms: "katarakatamesaṃ, katarakatamesānaṃ, katarakatamānaṃ". But in a compound formed in the feminine gender, such as "katarā ca katamā ca katarakatamā" (which one and which one, these two), it should be formed according to the general pronominal method, and in pure pronominals, according to the "kaññā" (girl) pattern. And in a compound formed in the neuter gender, such as "katarañca katamañca katarakatamāni" (which one and which one, these two), it should be formed according to the general pronominal method, and in pure pronominals, according to the "citta" (mind) pattern. Herein, this special point should also be understood: words like "pubbāparā" (former and latter), when they undergo the rules of dvandasamāsa (copulative compound) and so on, do not take their usual forms. How is that? "Pubbāparā" (former and latter), "adharuttarā" (lower and upper), "māsapubbā purisā" (men who were formerly monks), "diṭṭhapubbā purisā" (men seen before), "tathāgataṃ diṭṭhapubbā sāvakā" (disciples who had seen the Tathāgata) – these are nominative plural forms in the masculine gender. Here, the substitute "e" is not seen. "Pubbāparānaṃ" (of the former and latter), "adharuttarānaṃ" (of the lower and upper), "māsapubbānaṃ purisānaṃ" (of men who were formerly monks) – these are dative and genitive plural forms in the masculine gender. Here, the substitutes "saṃ" and "sānaṃ" are not seen. "Tathāgataṃ diṭṭhapubbānaṃ sāvakānaṃ" (of disciples who had seen the Tathāgata), "tathāgataṃ diṭṭhapubbānaṃ sāvikānaṃ" (of female disciples who had seen the Tathāgata), or "kulānaṃ" (of families) – these are dative and genitive plural forms in all three genders. Here too, the substitutes "saṃ" and "sānaṃ" are not seen. "Māsapubbāyaṃ" or "māsapubbāya" (in/to/of a woman who was formerly a monk), "piyapubbāyaṃ" or "piyapubbāya" (in/to/of a woman who was formerly dear) – these are locative, dative, and genitive singular forms in the feminine gender. Here, the substitutes "saṃ" and "sā" are not seen. "Māsapubbānaṃ itthīnaṃ" (of women who were formerly monks), "piyapubbānaṃ itthīnaṃ" (of women who were formerly dear) – these are dative and genitive plural forms in the feminine gender. Here, however, the substitute "saṃ" is not seen. Other forms should also be constructed as appropriate. We will explain the analysis of compounds like "pubbāparā" in the section on compounds. Now, the declension of the word "yaṃ" is stated: Yo, ye. Yaṃ, ye. Yena, yehi, yebhi. Yassa, yesaṃ, yesānaṃ. Yasmā, yamh Oh, by which, by which. To whom, of whom, of whom. In whom, in whom, in whom. This is masculine gender. Which, which ones. Which, which ones. By which. The rest is like the masculine. Or else: which, which ones, which ones. Which, which ones, which ones. By which. The rest is like the masculine. Indeed, in some places, the 'n' is dropped. Or else, the 'n' can be replaced by 'ā' or 'e' in verses. "Those signs that appeared before, When Bodhisattas sat on the noble seat; Those appear today." And, "What jewels does the young man have, That a gambler, conquering him, would take them?" This is a Pāli example here. This is neuter gender. Which, which, which ones. Which, which, which ones. By which, by which, by which. To which, of which, of which. From which, from which, from which. Of which, of which, of which. In which, in which, in which. Feminine gender. Thus, the word 'yaṃ' has declensions according to the three genders. Here, vocative forms are not found. Similarly for the word 'taṃ' and others, in their declensions. Here, the meaning of the word 'yaṃ' is explained – The word 'yaṃ' is seen in the sense of 'direct object' in phrases like: "That which, venerable sir, I heard directly from the Tāvatiṃsa gods, received directly, that, venerable sir, I report to the Blessed One." In the sense of 'purpose/use' in phrases like: "That which we asked, he did not tell us; we ask you another, so please tell it now." In the sense of 'instrument/cause' in phrases like: "Monks, this is impossible, there is no opportunity, that in one world-system..."