Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

14385Re: [Pali] Stefan Karpik article

Expand Messages
  • DC Wijeratna
    Jan 31, 2010
    • 0 Attachment
      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]
    • Show all 17 messages in this topic