English
in the sense of "wishes to take", the suffix 'sa'. 535. 'Gī' for 'hara' when 'sa' follows. For the entire root 'hara', 'gī' occurs when the suffix 'sa' follows. By separating the rule "gī se", 'ji' also occurs. And because the substitute is also treated as a root by convention, reduplication occurs. He wishes to beg, they wish to beg. 'Su' in the sense of hearing, he wishes to hear, he listens, they listen, lengthening by "some roots", etc. Pā from *pā*, to drink, when one wishes to drink, by the substitution of *i* for the short *a* in *pā* and the doubling of the consonant, with a supporting reason, and by the rule "then *vā* for *māna* in *pā* and the rest," it becomes *pivāsati*, *pivāsanti*, etc. Ji from *ji*, to conquer, when one wishes to conquer, it becomes *vijigīsati*, etc. When the Sangha acts like a mountain, or acts as if it were a mountain – 536. *Āya* from a noun, from the agent-simile, in the sense of acting. The suffix *āya* occurs from a noun which is a simile for the agent in the sense of acting. That by which one is compared is a simile. A simile for the agent is an agent-simile. By "non-use of what is already expressed," the word *iva* is omitted. Since it ends in a root-suffix, by the rule "their case endings are dropped," the case ending is dropped by the inclusion of "their." By "and its natural state for a vowel," it returns to its natural state, and the vowel is dropped, etc. By "case endings from roots and suffixes," the case ending is produced. The Sangha acts like a mountain (*pabbatāyati*). Similarly, one acts like the ocean (*samuddāyati*), one acts like a crackling sound (*cicciṭāyati saddo*). Similarly, it smokes (*dhūmāyati*). "From a noun, in the sense of acting" also continues. 537. And *īya* from a simile. The suffix *īya* occurs from a noun which is a simile, in the sense of acting. The repetition of "simile" is to prevent the inclusion of "agent." Thereby, it also applies to the object. The rest is the same. One without an umbrella acts like an umbrella (*chattīyati*). A teacher acts like a son to a sonless student (*puttīyati sissamācariyo*). Why "from a simile"? One acts according to the Dhamma. Why "in the sense of acting"? One protects one without an umbrella as if it were an umbrella. "*Īya*" continues. 538. From a noun, in the sense of wishing for oneself. The suffix *īya* occurs from a noun in the sense of wishing for oneself. One wishes for one's own bowl (*pattīyati*). Similarly, one wishes for one's own robe (*vatthīyati*), one's own requisites (*parikkhārīyati*), one's own outer robe (*cīvarīyati*), one's own mat (*paṭīyati*), one's own wealth (*dhanīyati*), one's own son (*puttīyati*). Why "in the sense of wishing for oneself"? One wishes for another's bowl. In the sense of "makes effort firm" – The inclusion of the causative continues. 539. And *ṇaya* from a noun in the form of a root. When a root-form is to be produced, or when "one makes it, one surpasses by it," etc., is to be used, the suffix *ṇaya* occurs from a noun, and it has the causative designation. *Ṇa* is dropped. ...etc. when the case endings are dropped and the roots are simplified, the case endings reappear. Energy is strengthened. Thus one estimates. One mixes. Similarly, one goes beyond with an elephant, one over-elephants. One sings along with a lute, one up-lutes. The night is pure, it purifies. One asks about skill, one skills, and so on. 540. From roots, ṇe, ṇaya, ṇāpe, ṇāpaya are causatives in the sense of cause. From all roots, when the sense of cause is to be expressed, the suffixes ṇe, ṇaya, ṇāpe, ṇāpaya occur after them. They are also called causatives. The meaning itself is the cause, the causal sense. And this is the agent who causes, who is called the cause. The agent's activity, such as commanding or requesting, is here called the cause. And here: ṇe and ṇaya, when describing, the last two from 'ā' become; from the rest, four or two, following the word 'vā'. Intransitive roots become transitive in the causative; transitive roots become ditransitive, and ditransitive roots become tritransitive. Therefore, in the agent and object, the causative verb form arises; not in the impersonal, and in the causative, it is called the object. The principal for 'nī' and others, and the non-principal for 'duh' and others; in the causative, the object is the domain of the verb. There, whoever exists, another says to him, "Be! Be!" or causes one who is capable of being to be, or causes one to be. In this sense, by these suffixes ṇe and ṇaya, and by the causative designation, the non-use of the phrase "what is already said is not used," and the dropping of ṇ by "dropping of ṇ for causatives," and the lengthening of 'ū' to 'o' by "lengthening of the non-conjunct ending in the causative." "O, e" also continues, and the root designation. 541. They become āva and āya in the causative. Those 'o' and 'e' at the end of roots receive the substitutions āva and āya when a causative suffix follows. By the division of the rule "They become āva and āya," they also occur in non-causatives for 'jhe' and others. The substitution of 'o' for 'āva', and the dropping of vowels, etc. "Case endings from roots and suffixes" and so on. He develops concentration, he causes to develop, they develop, they cause to develop. You developed, you cause to develop, ... You all develop, you all cultivate. I develop, I cultivate, we develop, we cultivate. He develops, they develop. In the passive voice, due to the addition of 'ī' to the middle voice suffix, and vowel elision and so on, thereby concentration is developed, they are developed. It is developed, they are developed. Likewise, let him develop, let him cultivate, let them develop, let them cultivate. Develop (you singular), cultivate (you singular), cultivate (you singular), you all develop, you all cultivate. I develop, I cultivate, we develop, we cultivate. Let him develop, let them develop. In the passive voice, let it be developed, let it be cultivated, let them be cultivated. He might develop, he might cultivate, he might cultivate, they might develop, they might cultivate. You might develop, you might cultivate, you all might develop, you all might cultivate. I might develop, I might cultivate, we might develop, we might cultivate. You all might develop, you all might cultivate, they might develop, they might cultivate. In the passive voice, it might be developed, they might be developed. In the aorist tense, by the rule "in the seventh aorist," through a division of rules, even from the causative, there is an addition of 's' after a long vowel. He developed, he developed, he cultivated, he cultivated, they developed, they developed, they cultivated, they cultivated, they cultivated, they cultivated. You developed, you cultivated, you all developed, you all cultivated. I developed, I developed, I cultivated, I cultivated, we developed, we cultivated. In the passive voice, you all were developed, it was developed. He will develop, he will cultivate, they will develop, they will cultivate. You will develop, you will cultivate, you all will develop, you all will cultivate. I will develop, I will cultivate, we will develop, we will cultivate. In the passive voice, it will be developed, they will be developed. It will be developed, they will be developed. He would have developed, he would have cultivated, they would have developed, they would have cultivated. In the passive voice, you all would have been developed, it would have been developed, and so on. Likewise, whoever cooks, another says to him, "cook, cook!" or causes the one cooking to cook, or causes him to cook, in this sense, by the method stated, the causative suffixes 'ṇe' and 'ṇaya' and so on, the short 'a' becomes a long 'ā' (vowel lengthening), the rest is to be understood. He causes Devadatta to cook rice, they cause to cook. He caused to cook, you all cause to cook. I cause to cook, we cause to cook. He causes to cook, they cause to cook. You cause to cook, you all cause to cook. Causes to cook. He cooks, they cook. He causes that man to cook rice, they cause him to cook. He causes to cook, they cause to cook. The rice is cooked by him, it is caused to be cooked, it is caused to be cooked, it is caused to be cooked. So let him cook, let him cook, let him cause to cook, let him cause to cook. Let it be cooked, let it be cooked, let it be caused to be cooked, let it be caused to be cooked, let it be caused to be cooked, let it be caused to be cooked, let it be caused to be cooked, let it be caused to be cooked. He should cook, he should cause to cook, he should cause to cook, he should cause to cook. It should be cooked, they should be cooked. He cooked, he caused to cook, he caused to cook, he caused to cook. He will cook, he will cause to cook, he will cause to cook, he will cause to cook. He would have cooked, he would have caused to cook, he would have caused to cook, he would have caused to cook, and so on. When one causes to go, or to go, in the sense of 'to cause', the suffixes ṇe and ṇayādayo apply, and when lengthening is due— "Lengthening of the final vowel of a non-conjunct syllable in the causative" is stated. 542. Or of Ghaṭādi verbs. Of Ghaṭādi verbs, whose final syllable is not conjunct, there is lengthening, or not, in the causative. The word "or" here means that lengthening does not always occur; this "or" implies a regulated option. He causes that man to go to the village, he causes him to go, he causes him to go, he causes him to go. The village is caused to be gone to by him, it is caused to be gone to, it is caused to be gone to, it is caused to be gone to, and so on. It should be applied everywhere. And so above. Ghaṭa in the sense of striving, he causes to strive, he strives, or there is no lengthening of Ghaṭādi, he causes to strive, he causes to strive, he causes to strive. "In the causative" is stated. 543.