English
Therefore, I have made the replacement of "dinna" with "datta"; But poets have said, "dattaṃ sirappadānaṃ" (the giving of the head). Such a usage is not in Pāli, therefore that method is not superior; "Datta" as a name for Bhūridatta, has become a designation. "Brahmadatta, Buddhadatta, Datta," indeed in the teaching; In designation, the word "datta", both non-compound and compound. "Paradattabhojanaṃ" (food given by others), in such Pāli texts; In compounds, this word "datta" is established as secondary. "A gift was given by me mentally, a gift given," and so on; The word "dinna" is secondary, seen in non-compound forms. "Dinnādāyī, Dhammadinnā," and so on; In compounds, it appears in the sense of expressing qualities. But some learned grammarian made this verbal composition: By whose sprouts, like clouds, lotuses, and water-born things, moved by the wind, fallen, listen to them. By which the inner robe of Brahmadatta shone, I venerate that noble Bodhi tree with trembling leaves. Here, "Brahmadatta" is said, taking the method from the Sanskrit language, not from Pāli. Following the Pāli method, it should be in the form of "Brahmadattiya" or "Brahmadinna" or "Devadattiya" or "Devadinna". Thus, the commentary passage "The Bodhisatta and Maddī, rejoicing, dwelt in the Sakkadattiya hermitage" is seen, which conforms to the Pāli method. Therefore, we say this: In the place of the word "datta", the sound "dattiya" has gone; And the bowl of Devadattiya, and the hermitage of Sakkadattiya. This rule should be well kept in mind. Here, the conjugation occurs appropriately, sometimes complete, sometimes incomplete. He gives, they give. You give, you (pl.) give. I give, we give. Let him give, let them give. Give (sg.), give (pl.). I give, we give, we give (reflexive/middle). He might give, he might give, he might give. A good person should give a gift. They might give, they might give. May your father and mother give to you. You might give, you might give, you give. You should give me safety. For what fault, mother, would you give to the water-guard? To the virtuous, Maddī, you give gifts appropriately. You (pl.) might give, you (pl.) might give. I might give, I might give, we might give, we might give. You (pl.) give, they give. You (pl.) give, you (pl.) might give, you (pl.) might give. I might give, I might give. I would not give the great medicine. We might give, we might give. This is our preference. But the preference of the teachers is otherwise. Thus: The teachers, however, by the method beginning "dajjati, dajjanti", speak of the conjugation according to all eight cases. Having examined the Pāli, if it is suitable, accept it; For not in every way do the Pāḷi forms appear to us. There, by our preference, " "May give" and so on, are formed as word-forms in the seventh case, with the 'yya' sound. For example, in "A good person may give a gift," this "may give" is formed by establishing the word-form "dadeyya," then dropping the vowel before 'yya,' then combining the three consonants, then dropping one of the two identical consonants in the three combined consonants, and then changing the 'dya' combination to 'jja,' and then making it long without a specific cause, because it is to be pronounced with a long sound. Thus, the euphonic combination of sounds is in accordance with the teaching. Indeed, there are two kinds of euphonic combination: word-combination and sound-combination. Among these, where a word-break is found, that is a word-combination. For example? "Therein this." But where it is not found, that is a sound-combination. For example? "Born of him." And like "Sugata," and like "paths." Thus, among these two kinds of combinations, this "dajjā" is indeed a sound-combination. Another way of formation occurs by means of the 'tvā' suffix: "This is that Indaka yakka, who gave a small gift; He shines brighter than us, like the moon among the stars." As seen. Here, "dajjā" means "having given." This is formed by establishing the word-form "dadiyya," which has the same meaning as the word "datvā," then dropping the vowel before 'yya,' then dropping the identical consonant in the combination, and then changing the 'dya' combination to 'jja,' and making it long. Then another way of formation occurs by means of the 'ya' suffix in the passive voice. Thus, "May give a gift to the departed" and "A gift is to be given" are seen as two readings. In the latter, "dajjā" means "is to be given," by means of the 'ya' suffix in the passive voice. Here, by adding the 'ya' suffix to the root 'dā,' and doubling the root, and shortening the first part, and then dropping the vowel before 'ya,' and forming the combination, and changing it to 'jja,' and adding the 'ā' suffix because it is feminine, "dajjā" is formed. Thus, "dajjā" meaning "dadeyya," and "dajjā" meaning "dadiyya, having given," and "dajjā" meaning "dātabbā, is to be given," these are each synonyms. "Dajjā" Um. "Dajjāsi, dajjātha, Dajjāmi, dajjāma, Dajjāvho, dajja" — these forms are produced by establishing underlying word-forms like "dadeyyuṃ, dadeyyāsi," etc., and then performing vowel elision before 'y', elision of similar letters in conjuncts, and doubling 'j' for the 'dy' conjunct. Among these, the form "dajjāsi," by changing the 'ā' of its constituent part to 'e', also becomes another form, "dajjesī," which should be understood. This method should be applied elsewhere as appropriate. Indeed, the Pāli grammar of the Perfectly Enlightened One, whose power is inconceivable, is itself inconceivable, profound, and difficult to fathom. It should not be explained by just any rule, but by rules established according to the tradition. Thus, in words like "khattiyā," "titthiyā," "cetiyānī," etc., vowel elision occurs before 'y'. Therefore, usages like: "Then there were a hundred Khatyā." "Thus also the Titthyā speak variously." "Shrines of groves and trees." — are seen. Similarly, in "sākacchati taccha," by establishing the underlying word-forms as "saha kathayati" or "saṃ kathayati" and "tathya," and then performing elision of 'h' in "saha," and elision of the niggahīta in "saṃ," and lengthening the vowel of the 's' syllable, and then performing vowel elision before 'y', and then changing the 'thy' conjunct to 'cch' (where in dissimilar conjuncts one becomes similar to the other), the forms "sākacchati taccha" are produced. Thus, various usages like: "They conversed with each other." "Discussion of Dhamma in due time." "The truth is real." "Having known the Dhamma as it truly is, he should wander rightly in the world." — are seen. Even in "najjā," etc., by establishing underlying word-forms like "nadiyā," etc., the rule of elision before 'y' is indeed obtained through phonetic sandhi. Indeed, there are various methods of word formation in accordance with the teaching, and further on, for their explanation, rules like "vowel elision before y, m, n, r, etc." will be given. Therein — "Dajjā, dajju," and so forth, Are by the optative forms, for me; For the Yogi-King, for the teaching of the Great Seer. Here it should be said: although the commentators have explained the word "dajjā" in "mātaraṃ tena dosena, dajjāhaṃ dakarakkhino" (I would give my mother, for that fault, to the water-guardian) as "dammī" (I give) in the present tense, it is still a potential mood usage. The teachers, knowing it was a potential mood usage, made this explanation out of concern that "perhaps others might take it as a conditional sense." Similarly, although they explained the word "na dajjaṃ" in "anāparādhakammantaṃ, na dajjaṃ dakarakkhino" (I would not give the blameless worker to the water-guardian) as "nāhaṃ dakarakkhassa dassāmī" (I will not give to the water-guardian) in the future tense, it is still a potential mood usage; however, this explanation was made because it refers to something to be said regarding the future. But in "neva dajjaṃ mahosadha" (I would certainly not give, O Mahosadha), the explanation was made in the potential mood sense as "na tveva dadeyya" (he would certainly not give). Thus, the determination of the word "dajjaṃ" should be understood. Now, the conjugation in the perfect tense and so on is explained. "Dada, dadū. Dadū" is similar to the word "vidū" in "nārado iti nāmena, kassapo iti maṃ vidū" (by the name Nārada, they knew me as Kassapa) and so on. Dade, dadittha, dadaṃ, dadimha. Dadittha, dadire. Dadittho, dadivho. Here, "dadittho" is similar to "sañjagghittho" and so on in "sañjagghittho mayā saha. Mā kisittho mayā vinā. Mā naṃ kalale akkamittho" (you laughed with me. Do not pine without me. Do not step on it in the mud) and so on. In this way, similarity should be examined everywhere as it is found. Dadaṃ, dadimhe. These are the perfect tense forms. Adadā, adadū. Adade, adadattha. Adadaṃ, adadamha. Adadattha, adadatthuṃ. Adadase, adadavhaṃ. Adadiṃ adadamhase. Thus, forms with an initial 'a' should also be taken, as seen in "yesaṃ no na dadamhase" (to whom we do not give). These are the yesterday's past tense forms. Adadi, adaduṃ, adadiṃsu. Adado, adadittha. Adadiṃ, adadimhā. Adadā, adadū. Adadase, adadivhaṃ. Adadaṃ, adadimhe. These are the today's past tense forms. "Dadissati, dadissanti" and so on... is to be understood. Forms with the future tense. "He gave not, he gave, they gave not, they gave," etc., all is to be understood. Forms with the aorist tense. Other forms also exist with the present tense, etc. He gives, they give. You give, you (pl.) give. I give, we give. Let him give, let them give. Give, you (pl.) give. Let me give, let us give. The middle voice forms are not well-known. The optative mood and the perfect mood are also not well-known. However, the imperfect mood and the aorist mood are somewhat well-known, having appeared in Pāli, and it is possible to combine them with "adā, adū, ado, ada," etc. Thus, the usage is seen: Purindada gave a gift. May you, Sakka, give me a boon.