Hello friends, this question is about a paragraph in SN 46.29 that reads:
“katame ca, bhikkhave, saṃyojanīyā dhammā? cakkhu, bhikkhave, saṃyojanīyo dhammo. etthete uppajjanti saṃyojanavinibandhā ajjhosānā … pe … jivhā saṃyojanīyā dhammā. etthete uppajjanti saṃyojanavinibandhā ajjhosānā … pe … mano saṃyojanīyo dhammo. etthete uppajjanti saṃyojanavinibandhā ajjhosānā. ime vuccanti, bhikkhave, saṃyojanīyā dhammā”ti.
My question is which grammar rule makes dhammā seemingly agree with jivhā? Why is it not
jivhā saṃyojanīyo dhammo
Thank you in advance
That is a nominal sentence, with the copula (hoti) silent.
saṃyojanīyā dhammā is the predicative nominal to the “subject” jivhā. Based on what I see of other nominal sentences in Pali, the form of the predicative nominal is the same as the sentence’s subject. See eg the listing of things in SN 56.11 where the predicative nominal is dukkha under the First Noble Reality. Despite dukkha being a neuter noun, it takes on the nominative case in the gender of whatever subject it is predicating.
Thank you! That is what I suspected as it is the only explanation that makes sense, but is there an explicit grammar rule about this?
As in a rule set out by a grammarian? See Warder p.14 where he lays down the treatment in the last 3 lines of para 3.
Do you mean “as far as possible in Pali words referring to the same thing agree in case, number, gender, and person”?