Page 1 of 1

jhānaṃ why not jhāne

Posted: Tue Oct 24, 2017 12:56 am
by diligence
gahapati jhānaṃ viharati.

gahe viharāmi.

buddho bhagavā rājagahe viharati gijjhakūṭe pabbate.


Could you please tell me why here use jhānaṃ(acc.) not jhāne(loc.)?

Re: jhānaṃ why not jhāne

Posted: Tue Oct 24, 2017 2:48 am
by Dhammanando
diligence wrote:
Tue Oct 24, 2017 12:56 am
gahapati jhānaṃ viharati.
Where did you find this? The normal expression is [paṭhamaṃ ... dutiyaṃ, etc.] jhānaṃ upasampajja viharati — "Having entered [the first second, etc.] absorption, he abides [in it]."

Re: jhānaṃ why not jhāne

Posted: Tue Oct 24, 2017 5:22 am
by diligence
Dhammanando wrote:
Tue Oct 24, 2017 2:48 am
diligence wrote:
Tue Oct 24, 2017 12:56 am
gahapati jhānaṃ viharati.
Where did you find this? The normal expression is [paṭhamaṃ ... dutiyaṃ, etc.] jhānaṃ upasampajja viharati — "Having entered [the first second, etc.] absorption, he abides [in it]."
Thank you, bhante. :anjali:
I found that in a document from an āvuso.

Re: jhānaṃ why not jhāne

Posted: Tue Oct 24, 2017 9:05 am
by Dhammanando
diligence wrote:
Tue Oct 24, 2017 5:22 am
I found that in a document from an āvuso.
I don't think it makes any sense. Abiding in jhāna, with jhāna in the accusative, is normally expressed in the way I described in my earlier post.

The locative jhāne is most commonly used when one wants to describe the mental factors that are present in jhāna. I've never seen it used with viharati.

Re: jhānaṃ why not jhāne

Posted: Tue Oct 24, 2017 10:58 am
by ToVincent
Might be the special case of a dative of "advantage"; meaning "among".
"Among" the (group of) jhanas (plural).

Like in the SN 48.3 embarrassing translation by Bodhi:
Yato kho, bhikkhave, ariyasāvako imesaṃ pañcannaṃ indriyānaṃ samudayañca atthaṅgamañca assādañca ādīnavañca nissaraṇañca yathābhūtaṃ pajānāti — ayaṃ vuccati, bhikkhave, ariyasāvako sotāpanno
When, bhikkhus, a noble disciple understands as they really are the origin and the passing away, the gratification, the danger, and the escape in the case of these five faculties, then he is called a noble disciple who is a stream-enterer.

When it should be:
When, bhikkhus, a noble disciple understands as they have come to be, the origin and the passing away, the gratification, the danger, and the escape, among these five faculties, then he is called a noble disciple who is a stream-enterer.
(meaning that, you can find how phenomena can be gratifying, dangerous, and how to escape them -either with the help of one, or more of these faculties).

But our pundits of the Pali grammar might know better.

Re: jhānaṃ why not jhāne

Posted: Tue Oct 24, 2017 11:21 am
by Dhammanando
ToVincent wrote:
Tue Oct 24, 2017 10:58 am
Might be the special case of a dative of "advantage"; meaning "among".
"Among" the (group of) jhanas (plural).
The word was jhānaṃ, which can only be nominative or accusative singular. The dative plural would be jhānānaṃ.

Re: jhānaṃ why not jhāne

Posted: Tue Oct 24, 2017 11:54 am
by ToVincent
Dhammanando wrote:
Tue Oct 24, 2017 11:21 am
The word was jhānaṃ, which can only be nominative or accusative singular. The dative plural would be jhānānaṃ.
True!
How could I miss that one.
That's my idiot-syncratic ways, I suppose.

I was so eager to show what I had just found yesterday, on Bodhi's awkward translation of SN 48.3; that I concluded a bit too responsively on that one.

Well play Dhammanando!

At least, people will have the right meaning of the 48.3 pericope.
I mean: not seeing danger, in the five "spiritual" faculties.
Never know!

------

Well!; while we're at it, I am still waiting though, on that good old "trashing" on ekaggata:
You did wipe away (a bit quickly to my liking,) about the possibility of a new noun (not existing in Sanskrit or Pali,) made out from eka and the pp. of √ gam.

But you haven't yet answered about the construct of the extract in SN 48.9, which would encompass a genitive absolute; with nouns (samādhiṃ & citassa,) and a participle (ekaggataṃ), both inflected in the genitive.
Idha, bhikkhave, ariyasāvako vossaggārammaṇaṃ karitvā labhati samādhiṃ, labhati cittassa ekaggataṃ—idaṃ vuccati, bhikkhave, samādhindriyaṃ.
In which case, the usual translation:
Here, bhikkhus, the noble disciple gains concentration, gains one-pointedness of mind, having made release the object. This is called the faculty of concentration.
would become:
Here, bhikkhus, the noble disciple, having undertaken the relinquishing of the support, gains concentration and gains a citta, caused to become one. This is called the faculty of concentration.

The result - the meaning at stake - is so crucial; that your view on that one, would be utterly enlightening.

:)

Re: jhānaṃ why not jhāne

Posted: Tue Oct 24, 2017 12:09 pm
by diligence
Dhammanando wrote:
Tue Oct 24, 2017 9:05 am
diligence wrote:
Tue Oct 24, 2017 5:22 am
I found that in a document from an āvuso.
I don't think it makes any sense. Abiding in jhāna, with jhāna in the accusative, is normally expressed in the way I described in my earlier post.

The locative jhāne is most commonly used when one wants to describe the mental factors that are present in jhāna. I've never seen it used with viharati.
OK, I'll remember what you have taught. Thank you very much, bhante :anjali: