English
But when "nāthati suppaṭipatti" is said with connection to another word, then for the verb "nāthati" the meaning "begs" is understood. When "nāthati sabbakilese" is said, the meaning "torments" is understood. When "nāthati sakacitte" is said, the meaning "exercises sovereignty" is understood. When "nāthati lokassa hitaṃ" is said, "wishes..." "ī" this meaning is understood. Thus, when "the god roars" is said, the word "god" is understood as "cloud." When "the god, clear, cloudless" is said, "god" is understood as "sky." When "let the god drink water" is said, "god" is understood as "king." When "the god falls from the divine realm, his life span ended" is said, "god" is understood as "deity." When "the god of gods, marked by a hundred merits" is said, "god" is understood as "pure god." In this manner, other common words should be understood. Knowing all this, how the meaning does not contradict the word, and the word does not contradict the meaning, so should words and meanings be considered. Here is merely an example of how to think: When "you are skilled in meaning" or "you have duties" is said, this "you" (bhavante) is a verb with the same meaning as "they are." Thus, both meaning and word should be considered. When "I see you" or "I wish for you" is said, "you" (bhavante) is a noun in the accusative case. Thus, both meaning and word should be considered. When "he praises you people" or "he desires you people" is said, "you" and "people" are two nouns in the accusative case. Thus, both meaning and word should be considered. When "thieves are defeated" is said, this "are defeated" (parābhavante) is a verb with the same meaning as "they are defeated." Thus, both meaning and word should be considered. When "people wish for the defeated of enemies" is said, these "defeated" (parābhavante) are two nouns in the accusative case. Thus, both meaning and word should be considered. When "this one might be defeated" is said, this "might be defeated" (parābhave) is a verb with the same meaning as "he might be defeated." Thus, both meaning and word should be considered. When "these defeats in the world, the wise one should observe" is said, this "defeats" (parābhave) is a plural noun in the accusative case. Thus, both meaning and word should be considered. When "when there is defeat" is said, it is a singular noun in the locative case, indicating state. If "May you arise for me through favor" is said, then "sambhave" here is a verb meaning the same as "sambhavathā" (may you arise). Thus, the meaning and the word should be considered. If "Come, you Sambhavavhe" is said, then "sambhavavhe" here is a feminine noun, referring to a woman named Sambhavā, in the vocative case. Thus, the meaning and the word should be considered. If "Come, you Sambhavavhe-established" is said, then it refers to a man named Sambhava, in the masculine gender, locative case. Thus, the meaning and the word should be considered. Varuṇa and Brahmadeva, were chief disciples; Sambhava was an attendant, of the great sage Revata. — This is the Pāli. If "Dhammas appear" is said, then "pātubhavante" here is a verb with a particle, meaning the same as "pātubhavantī" (they appear). Thus, the meaning and the word should be considered. If "May the lord appear to these people" is said, then these are verbs, participles, and pronouns conveying the meaning "May the lord protect those people." Thus, the meaning and the word should be considered. If "You appear with qualities" is said, then "pātubhavase" here is a verb meaning the same as "pātubhavasī" (you appear). Thus, the meaning and the word should be considered. If "You who appear with qualities" is said, then these are verbs and nouns combined with particles conveying the meaning "May you appear because of your own qualities." Thus, the meaning and the word should be considered. If "I appear with my own qualities" is said, then "pātubhave" here is a verb with a particle, meaning the same as "pātubhavāmī" (I appear). Thus, the meaning and the word should be considered. If "May this meritorious deed protect me" is said, then these are verbs and nouns conveying the meaning "May this meritorious deed protect me in transmigration." Thus, the meaning and the word should be considered. In this manner, everywhere, the meanings and words should be considered appropriately. There, for some words that sound alike, "they do not put them in the granary. They do not... go in between. I will teach you, O Licchavis, the seven conditions of non-decline. These are your seven enemies, O deva, and you are the best being." In such cases of similar-sounding words, a special pronunciation is desired. For when there is a special pronunciation, the words are distinct; when the words are distinct, the meaning is distinct; and for those grasping the meaning, the comprehension of the meaning is not difficult, like seeing a reflection in a very clean mirror. And this is known only to one who has previously grasped the convention, regarding the connection of meaning or other aspects, not otherwise. For it has been said by the ancients: "Words, not having entered their proper sphere, Do not convey meaning. Not from the word alone, the meaning— They, unknown, do not reveal." What was said by us here, "a special pronunciation is desired"—here is a verse illustrating this special pronunciation, in the manner of a verse revealing by one's own hand: "They do not store in the granary," in this reading, the wise person, Having separated the word as "na te," should indeed read "saṃ koṭṭhe." "They, the bhikkhus, do not store in the granary"—thus should one declare the meaning. And in other such readings, this is the method. Now, what was also said here, "in some cases," for what purpose? To show that in cases like "gacchati patiṭṭhitaṃ" (goes established), "gacchati tisso" (goes three), "bhavante passāmi" (I see the venerable ones), "atthakusalā bhavante" (the venerable ones skilled in meaning), "vadantaṃ ekapokkharā" (speaking, one lotus), "vadantaṃ paṭivadatī" (speaking, replies), a special pronunciation for similar-sounding words is not obtained. Therefore, this should be noted here: where a special pronunciation for similar-sounding words is obtained, and a distinction in the meaning of words, whether by separation or non-separation, there in usage, some similar-sounding word should be pronounced with a break. For example: "The root is a condition by way of root-condition for root-associated phenomena and for forms arisen from them." "He speaks with him; he is carried by the current." "He praises the venerable people; I see the venerable ones." Such are the usages. Here, having slightly separated "hetu," one should pronounce "hetusampayuttāna." Differently. Similarly, having split "so", one should pronounce "tena saddhi". Having split "bhava", one should pronounce "te jane". But the rest, which is homophonous, should not be pronounced after splitting. For indeed, in a place that should not be split, the meaning of what is recited, if split, becomes corrupted. Thus, the special way of pronouncing the meaning of homophonous words, by means of splitting and not splitting words, should be understood. For here, in cases like "so tena", taking the meaning of two words is splitting, and taking the meaning of one word is not splitting, so it is intended. And here, the conceptualization of a homophonous nature, by making separately established non-homophonous words into one, is for conveying a different meaning and for showing a special pronunciation. For these are not homophonous in one and the same meaning, like in "sappo sappo" and similar cases. Even though this is so, having taken the trace of homophony obtained by making them one, they are called "homophonous" for conveying a different meaning and for showing a special pronunciation. This method applies also elsewhere in such places. This should be noted here: Where a special meaning of homophonous words is obtained in any one of eighteen ways, but in pronouncing after splitting there is no elegance of sound, or the meaning becomes corrupted, in such usages, homophonous words should not be pronounced after splitting. And by which way does the obtaining of a special meaning occur there? By means of splitting words, or by means of not splitting, or by means of proximity of letters, or by means of proximity of words, or by means of proximity of words and letters, or by means of ellipsis, or by means of a preposition, or by means of repeated words spoken when fear, anger, etc., arise, or by means of the reduplication of an adjective, or by means of the reduplication of a verb, or by means of splitting a compound word, or by means of indicating a lack of respect, or by means of indicating continuous meaning, or by means of indicating non-continuous meaning, or by means of indicating the meaning "again and again", or by means of the word "iva" in a simile. Or by relying on the word "thus," or by way of explaining the meaning expressed by the word-meaning, or by way of explaining the mind that thus arose— in these eighteen modes, but in detail, in twenty-six modes or more than that, by any mode whatsoever, a special meaning is obtained. Here, in obtaining a special meaning for words that sound alike, either by division or by non-division, there are usages such as: "That union protects him, their progress is known. O deva, do not kill us, pride does not exist for me." But in obtaining a special meaning by proximity of letters, there are usages such as: "He is honored by the good, beneficial. Released from attachments, the conqueror of battles, him I call a brahmin. The tusked one attacked the tusked ones, thinking as before. I bow with my head, with my head, to the all-conqueror. Having arisen from the earth, it runs up to the Brahma-world. A flame in the world of the fiery one, when burning with power." In obtaining a special meaning by proximity of words,