Hi Bryan,
No doubt, the passage has Vedic implications. Buddhaghosa explains that the
context involves the use of Sanskrit. For instance, Suttanipaata 568
mentions Saavittii (cf. Saavitrii of Rgv. III 62,10) as chandaso mukha.m.
Thus the Vedic context seems certain, and the narrative itself clearly
supports this interpretation. Norman´s suggestion assumes that nirutti =
Vedic-Sanskrit niruka/ta/ti ("etymology", transformed into "gloss" by
Norman), which in my view is a mistake because the occurrences of nirutti in
the Paali canon are found in the context of synonyms like naama and
adhivacana (see CPD s.v.). Thus Buddhist Sanskrit nirukti is a backformation
from Paali nirutti entailing the semantics of the Paali usage. You find ,
for instance nirutti at D II 68 in the context of synonyms like adhivacana,
and pa.n.natti. It is easy to enlarge the list with naama, naamadheya,
abhilaapa, and so on. I hope this clarifies the issue.
Regards,
Ole
----- Original Message -----
From: "Bryan Levman" <bryan.levman@...>
To: <palistudy@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Monday, October 26, 2009 11:15 AM
Subject: Re: [palistudy] Paali question
Hi Ole,
I agree that guoyin translates nirukti in the sense of Prakrit. My
suggestion was the chandas might have to do with a style of recitation in
the manner of the Vedas. Apparently Collins has recently suggested this
(mentioned in Pollock's book, the language of the Gods, in a footnote on
page 54). Certainly Levi suggests it in his original article. Norman (1980)
takes nirukti as meaning "gloss" or "explanation" ("I authorize my own
explanations - not someone else's) as does Morton Smith in 1992.
I agree that sakaaya must refer to the Buddha.
I didn't quite understand what you mean by "either terms denotes any given
word , name or designation of, for instance, the Buddhist dharma. nirutti
is, for instance, presented as a synonym of
naama in the Paali canon, our oldest source". Could you please explain?
Tks, Bryan.
Norman, K. R. (1990B). The dialects in which the Buddha preached. Collected
Papers II, . Oxford, , Pali Text Society.Reprint of a 1980 article.
Smith, R. M. (1992). "What Was One's Own Language." Contacts between
Cultures: South Asia 2, Selected Papers from the 33rd International Congress
of Asian & North Aftrican Studies Lewiston, 1992.
________________________________
From: Ole Holten Pind <ohpind@...>
To: palistudy@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Mon, October 26, 2009 5:19:38 AM
Subject: Re: [palistudy] Paali question
Hi Bryan, 國音 translates janapadanirukti = Paali janapadanirutti i.e. the
speech of the janapada. nirukti or nirutti has nothing to do with
pronunciation. There is sufficient textual evidence that indicates that
either terms denotes any given word , name or designation of, for instance,
the Buddhist dharma. nirutti is, for instance, presented as a synonym of
naama in the Paali canon, our oldest source.
Regards,
Ole Pind
----- Original Message -----
From: "Bryan Levman" <bryan.levman@ yahoo.com>
To: <palistudy@... ps.com>
Sent: Thursday, October 22, 2009 11:03 PM
Subject: Re: [palistudy] Paali question
Hi Stephen,
Yes the Chinese seem to take it more in the sense of chandas as chanting or
reciting according to rule, as you will see. But when Buddha talks about
guóyīn (in the Mahii"saasaka Vinaya 國音) he seems to be referring to the
local Prakrit. Lamotte translates as "in keeping with the dialectal
pronunciation" (prade"sa-svara) and Levi as "Je permets qu'on recite comme
on parle dans chaque royaume." Let me know if you come up with any other
versions. I've been looking for a BHS and Tibetan version but haven't found
one yet,- does the MahasaMghika Vinaya exist in BHS or just in Chinese?
Best wishes, Bryan
____________ _________ _________ __
From: Stephen Hodge <s.hodge@... g.plus.com>
To: palistudy@... ps.com
Sent: Thu, October 22, 2009 4:00:06 PM
Subject: Re: [palistudy] Paali question
Dear Bryan,
Thank you for the Taisho references. I'll have a look at the passages with
interest, but the presence of the incident / quotation in these Vinayas is
not so surprising given the derivational relationship of those schools. As
Lamotte has not given anything for the Mahasanghika Vinaya, I assume that
there is no such ruling found there, which suggests that it was interpolated
after the big schism, but before the other schools went their seperate ways.
I wonder if this ruling was perhaps created contra the Mahasanghikas,
although their early material was also in a Prakrit so that would probably
be unlikely. On the other hand, not everybody reads the key term in this
ruling as equivalent "Sanskrit".
Best wishes,
Stephen Hodge
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
------------ --------- --------- ------
Yahoo! Groups Links
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
------------------------------------
Yahoo! Groups Links