English
I gave an elephant to the brahmins. You gave to us. They gave me space. I gave to the brahmins then. "He will give, they will give," etc., all is to be understood. "He gave not, he gave, they gave not, they gave, they gave," etc., all is to be understood. Similarly, he takes, they take. You take, you (pl.) take. I take, we take. According to Kaccāyana's view, "ādatte" is said to be middle voice. Thus, "ādadātu, ādadeyya," etc., all is to be understood. "Ādetu, ādeyya," etc., should be combined appropriately. And similarly, "dāpeti, ādāpeti," etc., should also be combined appropriately. Dā in the sense of going contemptibly. He goes. Suddāti. Suddo, suddī. There, suddo means he who goes contemptibly, he who goes quickly, quickly and contemptibly by the ignoble actions of beating others, etc., or by the ignoble actions of carpentry, etc. Thus, su is a particle in the sense of speed, dā is a root in the sense of blame, because it denotes contemptible movement. The wife of a sudda is a suddī. Du in the sense of going. It goes. A tree. Here, it goes, it reaches growth, development, fullness with roots, trunk, branches, twigs, leaves, shoots, flowers, fruits, that is a tree. De in the sense of purifying. Purification, cleansing. He purifies. Purifying. Like gāyati, gāyanaṃ. To purify, having purified, the 'e' of the root syllable becomes 'āyā'. Forms like "dātuṃ, datvā" are not found. There, dā to purify. Giving means purifying, this meaning should be taken. For example, in ‘‘a fool, an unskilled person, not capable, when questioned, to give a question,’’ here the meaning of to give is to purify. Some say the meaning is ‘‘for giving,’’ that is not suitable. For one who is questioned by others does not give a question. Therefore, in phrases like ‘‘having given a question to the teacher, he returned to Bārāṇasī,’’ the meaning of having given a question should be taken as having purified a question. For in this passage, the ancient teachers have clarified this very meaning as ‘‘for the purpose of causing a question to be given.’’ How? For the purpose of causing a question to be given means to cause a question to be purified. For one who roars a lion’s roar, capable of crushing, purifies a question in essence, and one who questions him causes it to be purified. This too was said by them. To give means to purify. Some say the meaning is ‘‘for giving,’’ that is not suitable. For one who roars a lion’s roar does not give a question there. In the commentary on the Samantapaṭṭhāna Mahāpakaraṇa, the ancient teachers also stated the meaning of purification as ‘‘having given a gift means having purified that volition.’’ This principle is rare and should be carefully kept in mind. De in protection. It is protected. Gift, summary, to protect, having protected. Here, gift means that which protects from misfortune, thus gift, the volition of giving. Summary means that which protects the meaning of what has been said or what is to be said from being lost due to its scattered nature, by not allowing it to be lost, thus protection, summary, meaning a collection of words. Or summary means a summary like a concluding summary. Khāda in eating. He eats. Eating, consumption, mutual eating. Eating of former fruits, food, edible, aggregates. Here, food means cake. Edible means cakes, fruits, etc. Since ‘‘edible or consumable’’ explicitly mentions consumable, eating means the consumption of food or edible things. Moreover, harm is also called ‘‘eating.’’ Eaten by birth, old age, sickness, suffering, etc. are the aggregates: form, feeling, perception, mental formations, consciousness. The word “khajjanti” (are eaten) is in the passive voice, as in “Robes are destroyed, are burned, are eaten by rats.” Regarding Badatheriye. Steadfastness is theriyaṃ, like skill. Badati. Badarī, badaraṃ. Here it is said – Kakkandhu, badarī, kolī, kolaṃ, kulavamiccapi; Tenilaṃ, badarañcāti, are names for the tree called koliyā. Khada means to hold, to harm. The particle “ca” is for theriyāpekkhāya. Khadati. Khadiro. Gada means to speak clearly. Gadati. Āgadanaṃ, and from that, one who has come is tathāgato. One who speaks well is sugado. Rada means to scratch. Radati. Radano, rado, dāṭhārado. Here, radano means tooth. Nada means an indistinct sound. A lion roars, thunders. Nādo, nadī. A river is called nadī because it makes a sound in mountains and forests. However, some say the derivation is from the two roots nada and i, meaning “they sound, they go, hence nadī.” Some here might ask, “Is the root ‘nada’ that you mentioned, ‘nada indistinct sound,’ always used for indistinct sounds, or does it sometimes apply to distinct speech?” It is always used for indistinct sounds. If that is the case, then in phrases like “the lion roars,” the word “nada” refers to an indistinct sound because it is the sound of an animal and its meaning is not distinctly understood. But in phrases like “this man roars like a lion,” would human speech also be an indistinct sound? No, even distinct human speech is referred to by the word “nada” when it is compared to a lion, as in “like a lion,” focusing on the meaning of “lion,” not on the man. Just as in the Pāli text, “How is a person a thunderer and a rainer?” even though thundering and raining are not found in a person, they are said to be so because the act of speaking is understood as similar to the thundering and raining of a cloud. Similarly, because speech issues forth fearlessly, like the roar of a lion, it is said “he roars like a lion,” even if the meaning is not indistinct. By that roaring sound, even human speech is to be designated. And here, examples like the mango fruit should be brought forth and shown. For ripeness and unripeness, etc., are not found in persons, but indeed are found only in mango fruits, etc. Even so, by the Blessed One, to illustrate similarity in another way, examples like the mango fruit were spoken. Just so, the roaring sound, though by its nature of being an indistinct sound, is only to be spoken of in sounds of animals, etc., yet to illustrate a different meaning, in phrases like "he roars like a lion," it is conventionally used even for human speech, not by its inherent nature. For indeed, by its inherent nature, human speech should not be designated by the roaring sound, nor by sounds like "vassita." If so – Easy to understand is the cry of jackals and the chirping of birds. But the cry of humans, O king, is harder to understand than that. Here, why is human speech designated by the word "vassita"? Indeed, human speech is seen to be designated by the word "vassita." Even so, thinking that it is fitting to designate it accordingly, as in "the cry of jackals, the chirping of birds," it is designated as similar to the word "vassita." For separate usages like "a human cries" are not seen. But usages like "a bird chirps, sings" are seen. Therefore, just as in "having entered the battle, Kusa roared a lion's roar," etc., the meaning should be taken appropriately. Thus, the root "nad" (to roar) is by its nature only for indistinct sounds, not for clear speech, this should be understood. Adda: in going and in begging. Addati (he goes/begs). Nadda, gadda: in sound. Naddati (he sounds/roars). Gaddati (he sounds/roars). Tadda: in harming. Taddati (he harms). Kadda: in despicable sound. Kaddati (he makes a despicable sound). Kaddamo (mud). Khadda: in biting. Biting here is designated as the action of cutting with teeth, like a saw. By the nature of the root, it is connected with the means and the usage. Khaddati (he bites). Adi: in binding. Andati (he binds). Andu (fetter). And the word "andu" here should be taken as feminine, as its feminine usage is seen in Pāli. A river, Ravati, full, brimming with water, drinkable by crows. Then a man might come, seeking the other shore, desiring the other shore, going to the other shore, wishing to cross to the other shore. He, on the near bank, bound by a strong rope, his arms tied behind his back, firmly bound. Here, "andū" means any kind of bond. For it is said, "As a man in a prison." Or a specific kind of bond, for it is said, "Having cut the bonds of a prison and so forth, they fled." Moreover, "andū" is so called because it binds, because it ties, it is "andu," the five sense pleasures. For this was said by the Blessed One: "These five sense pleasures, Vasettha, in the discipline of the noble ones, are called 'andu' and 'bandhana' (bond)." This root is stated with the addition of a nasal sound. But sometimes it occurs without the addition of a nasal sound, how is that? "Ignorance, monks, is the forerunner for the arising of unwholesome states, followed by shamelessness," is the Pāli text. Here, "anuandati" means "anubandhati" (follows). "Anvadi eva anvadeva" is to be understood as a word-split and a sandhi-split. For in the commentary it is said, "anvadevāti anubandhamānameva" (following along). The meaning is that ignorance follows along with shamelessness. Here, "indati" means to rule with supreme power. Ruling, "indo." Here, "indo" means anyone who is a lord. For he rules, he attains power over others, therefore he is called "indo." Moreover, "indo" is Sakka. For Sakka has many names— Sakka, giver of cities, Indra, Vatrabhu, Pākasāsana; Thousand-eyed, Maghavā, King of gods, husband of Sujā. Thousand-eyed, ten-hundred-eyed, wielder of the thunderbolt; Lord of offerings, Mahinda, Kosiya, elephant of the gods. Lord of devas, protector of devas, Vāsava, ruler of the three heavens; Jambāri, wielder of the thunderbolt, subduer of asuras; King of gandhabbas, king of devas, king of devas, subduer of asuras. Thus, many names. Even one meaning has many names due to being the cause for the application of many words. Therefore the Blessed One said— Sakka, Mahāli, king of the devas, formerly, when a human, was a young man named Magha, therefore he is called "Maghavā." How is it, Mahāli, that Sakka, lord of devas,