Re: Paali

The problem with discussions of the language the Buddha spoke is that
people do not define their terms.[L.S. Cousins]

I certainly agree with this remark. It was taught to me in my GCE, OL science classes. Later it was a fundamental guideline for writing as an electrical engineer.

In accordance with that I propose that Pali be defined as follows:

Pali corpus: the texts published by the Pali Text Society.

Pali Lexicon: the vocabulary given in the PTS Dictionary by Rhys Davids and William Stede.

Remark: Pali is a word coined by PTSD. There is a headword there, Pāli (Pāḷi), which says

"It is the literary language of the early Buddhists, closely related to Māgadhī."

From the above it follows that the language the Buddha spoke has nothing to do with Pali. [Pali is a creation of Rhys Davids and William Stede.].

D.C.

On Fri, Nov 14, 2014 at 12:24 AM, 'L.S. Cousins' selwyn@... [palistudy] <palistudy@yahoogroups.com> wrote:

The problem with discussions of the language the Buddha spoke is that
people do not define their terms.

It is perfectly possible that the native language of the Buddha was a
non-IndoEuropean language, but, if he preached in Kosala and Magadha, he
certainly gave his teachings in either Sanskrit or an early Prakrit. The
former would only be plausible if we date the Buddha very early.
Otherwise it is clear that he taught in an early Prakrit and his
teachings were preserved in one or more Prakrit dialects.

We can then speculate that there were eventually multiple dialects in
which the teachings were preserved. If that is the case, then it is
important to understand that these were probably not languages as we
usually understand them. Rather they were dialects which would have been
mutually comprehensible.

At some point the texts were written down, some probably already in the
reign of Asoka. But the oral collections as a whole were put into
writing somewhat later. At this point we are talking about a written
language, which is an entirely different matter. At present we know of
only one such language — the 'standard Epigraphic Prakrit' used for
almost all inscriptions in the second century B.C. until the first
century A.D. and continuing in use in some areas for a number of
centuries. Pali is a somewhat developed and slightly Sanskritized form
of that. There were other such descendants, but they were probably not
that different. I would not call them distinct languages. Rather they
too are dialects.

Whether Buddhist scriptures were ever put into the later developed
Prakrit languages such as Mahārāṣṭrī is unknown. I exclude Gāndhārī from
consideration here as that was far from the homelands of Buddhism and
writing there may go back to the time of Persian rule.

Lance Cousins.

------------------------------------
Posted by: "L.S. Cousins" <selwyn@...>

------------------------------------

------------------------------------

Yahoo Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/palistudy/

<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/palistudy/join
(Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
palistudy-digest@yahoogroups.com
palistudy-fullfeatured@yahoogroups.com

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
palistudy-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

<*> Your use of Yahoo Groups is subject to:
https://info.yahoo.com/legal/us/yahoo/utos/terms/

Metta is being friendly to everybody