Attention:
Stefan, Nina
 
I started with the PTSD. The Foreword of the Dictionary has a lot of
information about the origins of Pali. I am sure you have access to the
dictionary (printed). The online version also has the Foreword (See
under Front Matter). I will give you my opinion on some of the
statements therein later.
 
Here I will give you some points from the PTSD entry
on Paali.
 
1. a line, row
This is really the original meaning of 'paali'. Not a
language. paali is a word coined by the commentators.
 2. a line, norm, thus the canon
of Buddhist writings; the text of the Pāli Canon, i. e. the original
text (opp. to the Commentary; thus "pāliyaŋ" is opposed to "aṭṭhakathāyaŋ"
at Vism 107, 450, etc).
This is the view of Buddhaghosa (reference) and Rhys Davids following
him. The Abhidhamma
pi.taka has never been considered as Buddha-word. Many books in the
Khuddhaka is of late origin. Last book of the Vinaya had been written
in Sri Lanka. So where we find the Buddha-word is the five-nikaayas,
subject to my comment above on the Khuddhaka.
For me Paali is the Buddha-word. I believe on the
basis of internal evidence that Buddha-word is  what is attributed to
the Buddha in the
suttas. And those words in the Paali suttas are the actual words of the
Buddha (historical Buddha).  
3. It is the literary language of the early Buddhists,
closely related to Māgadhī.
This statement is not acceptable. There is no such
thing as 'the literary language of the early Buddhists. Maagadhii means
the speech of the people of Maghadha.
4. The word is only found in Commentaries, not in the
Piṭaka. 

D. G. D. C. Wijeratna

---
On Sat, 1/30/10, Stefan Karpik <stefankarpik@...>
wrote:

D. G. D. C. Wijeratna


P.S. This is a copy of an e-m I sent around the 30th. For some reason it seems to have not been received as there is no response.
















[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]