George D Bell wrote: "I remain skeptical that Pali is any different
from Latin, Sanskrit or Classical Chinese in matters of (language)
life or death."

IMHO How the Latin, Sanskrit, or Classical Chinese languages were used
to communicate between different cultures seems to differ, whether
substantially or not is an interesting question one might investigate
and hypothesize about." (Persian I might add was another lingua franca
language used in this fashion, as addressed by Sanjay Subramanian's
online papers at UCLA)

It seems like **letters or correspondence in Pali** has been been used
as a form of communication between strict prose and speech, in which
questions are asked and answers given, though perhaps in a much more
ritualized fashion than speech.

On Burma's northern borders with Yunnan, the Ming employed Burmese
translators in their translation bureau months away in Beijing and
even went so far as to compile a small dictionary of Burmese . They
probably had Tai translators too because they received communications
in written Tai. The translation bureau got so big they had to let some
people go around 1430.(note: citations available upon request)

I wonder to what extent Pali was used as a medium of written
communication on Burma's other borders, with Sri Lanka to be sure, but
also with Chiang Mai and Sukhothai. There is solid inscriptional
evidence that such communications existed, such as: Luce, Gordon
Hannington and Ba Shin (1961). "A Chieng Mai Mahathera visits Pagan
(1393 AD)," Artibus Asiae, XXIV, 3 / 4. Or (sorry to mention warfare)
between two warring sides with a monks as intermediary which is
mentioned fairly frequently in chronicles.

von Hinuber's Pali handbook has a whole chapter devoted to Pali
letters and there is one work referenced there that includes Pali
letters written in Thailand and Anne Blackburn's papers and books
contain some interesting references to studies in Sri Lanka.

For instance, there is a study of the correspondence between Sri
Lankan and Ayutthayan sangha authorities over the localization of
paritta (protective) texts when the Siyam Nikaya was being set up in
Sri Lanka during the 18th century, (written in Sri Lankan though):
Vijayavardhana and Migaskumbura, Siyam-Sri Lankam Agamika sambhandana,
Colombo, 1993.

Cited in: Blackburn, Anne M. "Localizing Lineage: Importing Higher
Ordination in Theravadin South and Southeast Asia, in Constituting
Communities: Theravada Buddhism and the Religious Cultures of South
and Southeast Asia. Edited by Clifford Holt John, N. Kinnard Jacob,
and S. Walters Jonathan. Albany: State University of New York Press,
2003, pp. 136, 146, also cited in her Buddhist Learning and Textual
Practice in Eighteenth Century Monastic Culture, 2001, Princeton
University Press. Great books that like many other works on Theravadan
Buddhist by John Strong and Steven Collins, for instance, are hardly
available in Thailand, which led me to ask several posts ago whether
these works are considered in some sense controversial. There is, no
doubt, certain notions of what topics or works it is appropriate for
lay people to study and write about, not exactly "censorship" but
perhaps a subtle form of enhancing social order. In some ways it seems
sad that, for instance, Burmese and Thai intellectuals are not more
deeply involved in Pali intellectual traditions. I happily noticed
that Piya Tan's site has a lot about Buddhist missionary activity.
IMHO to attract intelligent and well-meaning intellectuals interested
in making the world a better place, maybe Buddhism has to connect with
the rest of the humanities, the way Steven Collin's "Nirvana and other
Buddhist felicities" does, perhaps. I walk 10 minutes from my
apartment and all there are bars and massage parlours. There's one
cafe, that could be full of Buddhist intellectuals in deep discussions
imagining better worlds. Providing people an opportunity for more and
more samsara would seem to be an important part of Buddhist missionary
work, but by lay people, I guess. (Sorry for detour, thanks for
stimulating contribution George Bell).

Sincerely,
Jon Fernquest

--- In Pali@yahoogroups.com, "gdbedell" <gdbedell@...> wrote:
>
> Piya, Jon and others,
>
> I have been a subscriber (eavesdropper) to this group for more than
a year and a half, but I
> have not often contributed, mostly because I have no expertise in
the Buddhist questions
> discussed, or in helping people learn Pali. I am certainly not a
Pali lecturer of any sort, but
> rather a learner. I taught linguistics in California for over 20
years and in Japan for over
> 13 years. Now I am retired and living in Chiang Mai, Thailand. My
interest in Pali is fairly
> narrow: primarily in how to best describe the grammar of the
language, and secondarily in
> the influence of Pali on mainland Southeast Asian languages (Burmese
and Thai). As Piya
> notes, I did read a paper on Pali morphology at the World conference
in 2006 and I wrote
> another one for the National Buddhist Studies Conference in Sri
Lanka last year, but did
> not read it there. These papers investigate similarities and
differences between modern
> ways to describe Pali and the descriptions found in the Pali
grammatical tradition. They
> are not intended to help people learn Pali, but if anyone is
interested I can send a pdf
> version of either or both. Better to ask me offline, I think.
>
> I looked for Buddhadatta's Pali conversation book in Colombo in July
when I was there and
> did not find it. Many of his other books, including all three
volumes of the New Pali
> Course, a Pali reader, and his dictionary, are readily available in
bookstores there. I think
> the conversation book has not been reprinted recently. Perhaps if
he can get hold of a
> copy, Yong Peng would be interested in going through it as he has
done (is doing) with
> the New Course, but I don't know whether it contains suitable
exercise material. I am
> impressed with the enthusiasm of several people who want to learn
how to speak Pali in
> their daily lives, but I don't think we can expect to see Pali
textbooks using the 'aural-oral'
> or 'communicative' approachs so popular with modern languages.
There is no one who
> could write such texts or use them properly to teach the language.
That is because Pali is
> a dead language without native speakers.
>
> I remain skeptical that Pali is any different from Latin, Sanskrit
or Classical Chinese in
> matters of (language) life or death. The things Piya lists (coinage
of new words, writing
> verses (or grammatical treatises, for that matter), changing grammar
or terminology, use
> as a liturgical language) are all possible for a dead language. We
find them all for Latin,
> Sanskrit or Classical Chinese. What we don't find are native
speakers who know how to
> use these languages to say anything they want to say in the manner
we do with our native
> languages. Or how to teach Pali in the ways we teach French, Hindi
or Mandarin. The
> historical question Jon raises is an interesting one. He or others
may know more about
> this than I do, but I see no evidence that Pali was ever a living
language anywhere in
> mainland SE Asia. It was brought in as a textual canon and learned
to a level which no
> doubt differed widely from one individual to another by second
language learners who
> remained native speakers of Burmese, Thai, etc, just as it is today.
The case of Sri Lanka is
> more difficult, but the usual story that the commentaries were
originally written in old
> Sinhala and translated into Pali by Buddhaghosa and others (North
Indians) suggests that
> Pali was never a living language in Sri Lanka either. It must have
been a living language in
> North India, in spite of textual variations that we see in the
canon, from the time of the
> Buddha. When it became extinct there is the really interesting
question; sometime before
> Buddhism itself died out.
>
> with metta,
>
> George B
>
> --- In Pali@yahoogroups.com, "Jon Fernquest" <bayinnaung@> wrote:
> >
> > Dear List Members;
> >
> > Thank you for the information about Buddhadhatta's conversation book.
> >
> > They probably have that book at Mahachulalongkorn Buddhist University
> > in Bangkok, but their catalog is not online so I'll have to check
online.
> >
> > How far back communication in Pali between monks in different
> > countries goes back raises an interesting question.
> >
> > There was a lot of communication between Sri Lanka and the Mon coastal
> > region and central Burma and whole libraries transported from Sri
> > Lanka to Burma. The Mahavihara lineage made its way to Toungoo around
> > 1500. The Siam Nikaya was founded in Sri Lanka in the 18th century. I
> > wonder whether they spoke Pali and how the early Pali education
was done?
> >
> > Thanks Again.
> >
> > Jon
> >
>