[Buddha-l] MMK 25.09 (was: as Swami goes...)

[Jim Anderson]

Richard,

Thanks for the comments.

> This translation is based on taking "ājavaṃjavībhāva" as two words
> "ājavaṃ javībhāva" with "ājavaṃ" as the accusative object of the two
> absolutives on the first line.

Richard wrote:
You can't use the accusative as the direct object of a verbal noun.

Jim:
Your use of "verbal noun" doesn't make sense here. Did you mean to say
"gerund"? The absolutive is another name for the same thing and is an
indeclinable not a noun. Gerunds can take objects in the accusative
but it seems that all the translations of the verse take the gerunds
without an explicitly stated object. I have since noticed that
"ājavaṃjavībhāva" has its own entry in BHSD and can accept that it is
all just one not two words. I think this compound is the most
difficult part in the verse to understand. I found the cvi affix at
Pāṇ V 4.50.

> If "ājavaṃjavībhāva" is really just one word, then all four
> absolutives would have "nirvāṇam" as their object.

Richard:
That is also impossible, since the gerunds are in different clauses. A
word in the main clause cannot be the direct object of a gerund in the
subordinate clause.

Jim:
Okay. I'm still trying to sort out exactly what the clauses are and
what is the subject of "upadiśyate" (a passive verb) : "so" or
"nirvāṇam"?  A translation that goes like "is taught to be nirvāṇa"
doesn't seem to agree with the Sanskrit, in my opinion.

Jim Anderson