Dmytro,

Thanks for sharing this argument with me. If I understand Geiger
correctly, he thinks:

1)that the Buddha taught in an artificial language that had been
developed as a lingua-franca for the Indian subcontinent. This
lingua-franca would have had slight regional variations. The Buddha
taught in a Magadhi variety of this lingua-franca.

2)After the Buddha's parinibbana, this language changed over time
(oral tradition, moving to other regions, etc) and Pali is what this
language looked like when it was written down in Sri Lanka.

This is an interesting argument and I'd like to look into it more. I
checked the university library and they have 3 copies of Geiger's
book. They are all checked out (no joke!), but one is due back on the
31st. I'm going to grab it ;)

Geiger does admit that there is still debate over the origins of Pali
though (something that I too must admit now). Do you know if Geiger
is up-to-date? Maybe more work has been done on this topic since his
death.

Thanks!
Adios,
Thomas

--- In Pali@yahoogroups.com, "Dmytro O. Ivakhnenko" <aavuso@...> wrote:
>
> Hello Thomas,
>
> Let me answer you with the words of the known Pali scholar Wilhelm
Geiger:
>
<snip><snip><snip><snip><snip><snip><snip>
> Best wishes,
> Dmytro
>