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

RE: [Pali] asatthikaa caravan or armed?

Expand Messages
  • Rosa Grau
    Dear sister Dipa, the reason for not being sure what the word means is because of homonymy. asatthika is made up of three parts: a - privative particle,
    Message 1 of 14 , Nov 29, 2011
    • 0 Attachment
      Dear sister Dipa, the reason for not being sure what the word means is
      because of homonymy.

      asatthika is made up of three parts:

      a - privative particle, meaning "not", compare in English un- or in-
      (unable, impossible)
      sattha - meaning either caravan or weapon, knife (could be even something
      else, see PED); this word has evolved from various etymologies and coalesced
      phonetically in Pali, compare English mean (v. signify), mean (n. average),
      mean (a. not generous)
      -ika - meaning that the word is an adjective, just as the English -ic
      (classic, fanatic, automatic)

      Having said that, DOP (A Dictionary of Pali) makes it a derivate of sattha,
      caravan: "asatthika, not travelling with a company or caravan", and gives
      the example you are probably referring to from Vin IV 295,15.

      In any case, just to confirm Buddhist theories, words do not have meaning by
      themselves, but only in dependence of other words, pragmatic considerations
      and so on.

      Hope this helps.
      Rosa

      _____

      From: Pali@yahoogroups.com [mailto:Pali@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Sister
      Dipa
      Sent: dimarts, 29 / novembre / 2011 16:09
      To: Pali@yahoogroups.com
      Subject: [Pali] asatthikaa caravan or armed?




      In I.B.Horner's Book of Discipline Vol. 3 page 317 she has translated
      asatthikaa as weapon, with a footnote saying that "translators differ as to
      whether this means "without a weapon" or not (having joined) a caravan."

      I assume that there has been some progress made amongst translators since
      this was written. I would like to find definitive proof that this word means
      caravan and not weapon.

      I have not been able to find the definition in the Chattha Sangayana.
      In DPR the word is divided up with (as) and then (atthikaa). In the result I
      don't see any definition but "good" "bad" which doesn't help.

      Can anyone point me in a direction which will help me to resolve the meaning
      of this word and why it is so hard to find the meaning?

      with friendliness,
      Sister Dipa






      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
    • DC Wijeratna
      Attention: Sister Dipa   You may refer Dictionary of Pali Idioms, Kakkepalliye Anuruddha Thera, The Chin Lin Nunnery, Hong Kong, 2004. The expression
      Message 2 of 14 , Nov 29, 2011
      • 0 Attachment
        Attention: Sister Dipa
         
        You may refer Dictionary of Pali Idioms, Kakkepalliye Anuruddha Thera, The Chin Lin Nunnery, Hong Kong, 2004.
        The expression (asatthikaa caarika.m caranti) is given in page 142.
        It is a compound: a + sattha + ika.
        The full expression is treated as an idiom and its meaning is given as: Go on a tour without having a caravan.
         
        According to PED satthika is: Satthika (adj.) [fr. sattha3] belonging to a caravan D ii.344. 
        Caravan implies a group of people travelling together (not a vehicle).
         
        May I add that the context also supports the above interpretation. And the spirit of bhikkhunii vinaya requires that sattha is not a weapon. The first precept has the words 'nihita dan.do nihita sattho'; Here sattho is a weapon.  
        Hope the above would be of assistance

        Mettaa to all,

        D. G. D. C. Wijeratna
         
        Mettaa is being friendly to everybody including oneself.


        ________________________________
        From: Sister Dipa <dipaeightprecepter@...>
        To: Pali@yahoogroups.com
        Sent: Tuesday, November 29, 2011 8:39 PM
        Subject: [Pali] asatthikaa caravan or armed?



         

        In I.B.Horner's Book of Discipline Vol. 3 page 317 she has translated asatthikaa as weapon, with a footnote saying that "translators differ as to whether this means "without a weapon" or not (having joined) a caravan."

        I assume that there has been some progress made amongst translators since this was written. I would like to find definitive proof that this word means caravan and not weapon.

        I have not been able to find the definition in the Chattha Sangayana.
        In DPR the word is divided up with (as) and then (atthikaa). In the result I don't see any definition but "good" "bad" which doesn't help.

        Can anyone point me in a direction which will help me to resolve the meaning of this word and why it is so hard to find the meaning?

        with friendliness,
        Sister Dipa




        [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      • Nina van Gorkom
        Dear Bryan and Sister Dipa, thank you. The life of a bhikkhu and bhikkhuni is a life with non- violence. Think of the Parable of the Saw: even if robbers would
        Message 3 of 14 , Dec 1, 2011
        • 0 Attachment
          Dear Bryan and Sister Dipa,
          thank you. The life of a bhikkhu and bhikkhuni is a life with non-
          violence. Think of the Parable of the Saw: even if robbers would saw
          off your limbs, you still should have mettaa. It is not in the spirit
          of the teachings to carry weapons. Caravan would be the only
          possibility I would think.
          Nina.
          Op 1-dec-2011, om 4:34 heeft Bryan Levman het volgende geschreven:

          > Presumably the sentence could mean either nuns shouldn't wander
          > without weapons in dangerous places and/or a nun shouldn't wander
          > without companions in such places, both of which things we might
          > say to our own children if they were travelling to an unsafe
          > location (stay with your friends, and keep a pepper spray in your
          > purse); so in the end I'm not sure if both meanings were meant,
          > although the "travel in a caravan" definition seems the most
          > logical if we have to pick one.



          [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
        • Yuttadhammo
          Friends, Just some thoughts on this strange argument; obvious it is pretty silly to think of Bhikkhunis going around carrying weapons :) First, the formation
          Message 4 of 14 , Dec 1, 2011
          • 0 Attachment
            Friends,

            Just some thoughts on this strange argument; obvious it is pretty silly to think of Bhikkhunis going around carrying weapons :)

            First, the formation satthika is not used anywhere to mean "with a weapon" - it is used to mean "of the caravan", i.e. caravaners (http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/caravanner), in the Pāyāsi Sutta.

            Second, nowhere is a sattha allowed, so it seems incongruous to suggest that bhikkhunis go around carrying one - a satthaka is explicitly allowed for bhikkhus cutting robes (Cv 5); ostensibly this refers to a miniature (-ka) knife (sattha).

            Third, the anāpatti clause, "anāpatti satthena saha gacchati" isn't what one would expect if the meaning were "carrying a knife"; it's not a common expression, but it is used elsewhere, e.g. pācittiya 67:

            “esāyyo, pabbajitena saha gacchatī””ti.

            One would expect something like the common "cīvaraṃ dhāreti" if the meaning were "carrying a knife".

            Fourth, weapons in general are considered "untouchable" by the commentary, touching which is subject to a dukkaṭa... can't find the canonical basis for it, but here's the passage in the commentary (to pārājika #2):

            sabbañca āvudhabhaṇḍādiṃ āmasantassa dukkaṭaṃ vuttaṃ, idaṃ anāmāsadukkaṭaṃ nāma.

            Hope this is welcome. Sorry that the DPR can't figure out asatthika yet :)

            Blessings,

            Yuttadhammo

            --- In Pali@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom <vangorko@...> wrote:
            >
            > Dear Bryan and Sister Dipa,
            > thank you. The life of a bhikkhu and bhikkhuni is a life with non-
            > violence. Think of the Parable of the Saw: even if robbers would saw
            > off your limbs, you still should have mettaa. It is not in the spirit
            > of the teachings to carry weapons. Caravan would be the only
            > possibility I would think.
            > Nina.
            > Op 1-dec-2011, om 4:34 heeft Bryan Levman het volgende geschreven:
            >
            > > Presumably the sentence could mean either nuns shouldn't wander
            > > without weapons in dangerous places and/or a nun shouldn't wander
            > > without companions in such places, both of which things we might
            > > say to our own children if they were travelling to an unsafe
            > > location (stay with your friends, and keep a pepper spray in your
            > > purse); so in the end I'm not sure if both meanings were meant,
            > > although the "travel in a caravan" definition seems the most
            > > logical if we have to pick one.
            >
            >
            >
            > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
            >
          • Hugo
            In addition to what Ven. Yuttadhammo and Nina mentioned: ... I don t think that it would be wise to recommend something that could have the Bhikkhuni expelled
            Message 5 of 14 , Dec 1, 2011
            • 0 Attachment
              In addition to what Ven. Yuttadhammo and Nina mentioned:

              On Thu, Dec 1, 2011 at 7:12 AM, Yuttadhammo <yuttadhammo@...> wrote:
              > Fourth, weapons in general are considered "untouchable" by the commentary, touching which is subject to a dukkaá¹­a... can't find the canonical basis for it, but here's the passage in the commentary (to pÄ rÄ jika #2):



              > --- In Pali@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom <vangorko@...> wrote:
              >>
              >> Dear Bryan and Sister Dipa,
              >> thank you. The life of a bhikkhu and bhikkhuni is a life with non-
              >> violence. Think of the Parable of the Saw: even if robbers would saw
              >> off your limbs, you still should have mettaa. It is not in the spirit
              >> of the teachings to carry weapons. Caravan would be the only
              >> possibility I would think.
              >> Nina.



              I don't think that it would be wise to recommend something that could
              have the Bhikkhuni expelled from the order:

              Pārājika: Rules entailing expulsion from the Sangha (Defeat)

              [.......]

              3. Should any bhikkhu intentionally deprive a human being of life, or
              search for an assassin for him, or praise the advantages of death, or
              incite him to die (saying,): "My good man, what use is this evil,
              miserable life to you? Death would be better for you than life," or
              with such an idea in mind, such a purpose in mind, should in various
              ways praise the advantages of death or incite him to die, he also is
              defeated and no longer in affiliation.

              [.......]


              --
              Hugo
            • Nina van Gorkom
              Venerable Yuttadhammo and dear Hugo, Thank you for the additional info, Nina. ... [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
              Message 6 of 14 , Dec 2, 2011
              • 0 Attachment
                Venerable Yuttadhammo and dear Hugo,
                Thank you for the additional info,
                Nina.
                Op 1-dec-2011, om 16:51 heeft Hugo het volgende geschreven:

                > In addition to what Ven. Yuttadhammo and Nina mentioned:
                >
                > On Thu, Dec 1, 2011 at 7:12 AM, Yuttadhammo <yuttadhammo@...>
                > wrote:
                > > Fourth, weapons in general are considered "untouchable" by the
                > commentary, touching which is subject to a dukkaá¹ a...



                [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
              • Yuttadhammo
                ... Given the origin of the exception to this rule, where there was a large group going, but the Bhikkhus had the Bhikkhunis go later, whereupon they were
                Message 7 of 14 , Dec 2, 2011
                • 0 Attachment
                  Forgot about one more reference in the patimokkha, pācittiya 27:

                  >“yo pana bhikkhu bhikkhuniyā saddhiṃ saṃvidhāya ekaddhānamaggaṃ paá¹­ipajjeyya, antamaso gāmantarampi, aññatra samayā, pācittiyaṃ. tatthāyaṃ samayo . *satthagamanÄ«yo* hoti maggo sāsaṅkasammato sappaá¹­ibhayo â€" ayaṃ tattha samayo”ti.

                  From the CPED:

                  >satthagamanīya: (a path) to be passed with a caravan. (adj.)

                  It literally means, that which cannot be travelled without a sattha:

                  >*satthagamanīyo* nāma maggo na sakkā hoti vinā satthena gantuṃ.

                  Given the origin of the exception to this rule, where there was a large group going, but the Bhikkhus had the Bhikkhunis go later, whereupon they were assaulted by thieves, and no mention of weapons anywhere, it seems clear that sattha refers to the large group in this instance. Given the similarity to the Bhikkhuni rule, there is little doubt the meaning there is the same.
                • Sister Dipa
                  Thank you Bhante Yuttadhammo, I am gathering this iformation to present to the person who has the impression that I.B. Horner was correct in her translation. I
                  Message 8 of 14 , Dec 2, 2011
                  • 0 Attachment
                    Thank you Bhante Yuttadhammo,
                    I am gathering this iformation to present to the person who has the impression that I.B. Horner was correct in her translation. I hope that by providing these responses that the individual will be convinced that it does indeed mean caravan.

                    thanks,
                    Sister Dipa

                    --- In Pali@yahoogroups.com, "Yuttadhammo" <yuttadhammo@...> wrote:
                    >
                    > Friends,
                    >
                    > Just some thoughts on this strange argument; obvious it is pretty silly to think of Bhikkhunis going around carrying weapons :)
                    >
                    > First, the formation satthika is not used anywhere to mean "with a weapon" - it is used to mean "of the caravan", i.e. caravaners (http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/caravanner), in the Pāyāsi Sutta.
                    >
                    > Second, nowhere is a sattha allowed, so it seems incongruous to suggest that bhikkhunis go around carrying one - a satthaka is explicitly allowed for bhikkhus cutting robes (Cv 5); ostensibly this refers to a miniature (-ka) knife (sattha).
                    >
                    > Third, the anāpatti clause, "anāpatti satthena saha gacchati" isn't what one would expect if the meaning were "carrying a knife"; it's not a common expression, but it is used elsewhere, e.g. pācittiya 67:
                    >
                    > “esāyyo, pabbajitena saha gacchatī””ti.
                    >
                    > One would expect something like the common "cīvaraṃ dhāreti" if the meaning were "carrying a knife".
                    >
                    > Fourth, weapons in general are considered "untouchable" by the commentary, touching which is subject to a dukkaṭa... can't find the canonical basis for it, but here's the passage in the commentary (to pārājika #2):
                    >
                    > sabbañca āvudhabhaṇḍādiṃ āmasantassa dukkaṭaṃ vuttaṃ, idaṃ anāmāsadukkaṭaṃ nāma.
                    >
                    > Hope this is welcome. Sorry that the DPR can't figure out asatthika yet :)
                    >
                    > Blessings,
                    >
                    > Yuttadhammo
                    >
                    > --- In Pali@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom <vangorko@> wrote:
                    > >
                    > > Dear Bryan and Sister Dipa,
                    > > thank you. The life of a bhikkhu and bhikkhuni is a life with non-
                    > > violence. Think of the Parable of the Saw: even if robbers would saw
                    > > off your limbs, you still should have mettaa. It is not in the spirit
                    > > of the teachings to carry weapons. Caravan would be the only
                    > > possibility I would think.
                    > > Nina.
                    > > Op 1-dec-2011, om 4:34 heeft Bryan Levman het volgende geschreven:
                    > >
                    > > > Presumably the sentence could mean either nuns shouldn't wander
                    > > > without weapons in dangerous places and/or a nun shouldn't wander
                    > > > without companions in such places, both of which things we might
                    > > > say to our own children if they were travelling to an unsafe
                    > > > location (stay with your friends, and keep a pepper spray in your
                    > > > purse); so in the end I'm not sure if both meanings were meant,
                    > > > although the "travel in a caravan" definition seems the most
                    > > > logical if we have to pick one.
                    > >
                    > >
                    > >
                    > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                    > >
                    >
                  • Bryan Levman
                    Dear All, Strictly speaking asatthika means without a caravan ; asatthaka (with the -i- -a-) would mean without a weapon. (See CPD s.v. a-sattha without
                    Message 9 of 14 , Dec 3, 2011
                    • 0 Attachment
                      Dear All,

                      Strictly speaking asatthika means "without a caravan"; asatthaka (with the -i- > -a-) would mean "without a weapon." (See CPD s.v. a-sattha "without stick nor sword"), although change from an -a- > -i- (while retaining it's meaning) is quite common, especially in this case as the -a- comes before an accent, the long -ā in the last syllable (asatthakā > asatthikā, see Pischel, Grammar, section 101). So that does not tell us anything. Interestingly, the word satthaka, with the meaning "razor" is one of the eight parikkhāras, per the PED (s.v. satthaka and kesa), i. e. the requisites of a monastic, so presumably this bhikkhunī would have one.  But the passage would not make sense if it referred to a knife, as everyone has indicated,


                      Metta,

                      Bryan




                      ________________________________
                      From: Rosa Grau <rgrau66@...>
                      To: Pali@yahoogroups.com
                      Sent: Tuesday, November 29, 2011 1:55:28 PM
                      Subject: RE: [Pali] asatthikaa caravan or armed?


                       
                      Dear sister Dipa, the reason for not being sure what the word means is
                      because of homonymy.

                      asatthika is made up of three parts:

                      a - privative particle, meaning "not", compare in English un- or in-
                      (unable, impossible)
                      sattha - meaning either caravan or weapon, knife (could be even something
                      else, see PED); this word has evolved from various etymologies and coalesced
                      phonetically in Pali, compare English mean (v. signify), mean (n. average),
                      mean (a. not generous)
                      -ika - meaning that the word is an adjective, just as the English -ic
                      (classic, fanatic, automatic)

                      Having said that, DOP (A Dictionary of Pali) makes it a derivate of sattha,
                      caravan: "asatthika, not travelling with a company or caravan", and gives
                      the example you are probably referring to from Vin IV 295,15.

                      In any case, just to confirm Buddhist theories, words do not have meaning by
                      themselves, but only in dependence of other words, pragmatic considerations
                      and so on.

                      Hope this helps.
                      Rosa

                      _____

                      From: Pali@yahoogroups.com [mailto:Pali@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Sister
                      Dipa
                      Sent: dimarts, 29 / novembre / 2011 16:09
                      To: Pali@yahoogroups.com
                      Subject: [Pali] asatthikaa caravan or armed?

                      In I.B.Horner's Book of Discipline Vol. 3 page 317 she has translated
                      asatthikaa as weapon, with a footnote saying that "translators differ as to
                      whether this means "without a weapon" or not (having joined) a caravan."

                      I assume that there has been some progress made amongst translators since
                      this was written. I would like to find definitive proof that this word means
                      caravan and not weapon.

                      I have not been able to find the definition in the Chattha Sangayana.
                      In DPR the word is divided up with (as) and then (atthikaa). In the result I
                      don't see any definition but "good" "bad" which doesn't help.

                      Can anyone point me in a direction which will help me to resolve the meaning
                      of this word and why it is so hard to find the meaning?

                      with friendliness,
                      Sister Dipa

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




                      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                    • Ong Yong Peng
                      Dear Dipa and friends, this reflects the fact that people do not truly understand what Buddhism really is. For example, India people may not distinguish
                      Message 10 of 14 , Dec 3, 2011
                      • 0 Attachment
                        Dear Dipa and friends,

                        this reflects the fact that people do not truly understand what Buddhism really is. For example, India people may not distinguish Buddhism and Hinduism, while China people may not know the differences between Buddhism and Taoism. It is really how Buddhism became integral to the society and culture it settled in without creating a social upheaval like what Christianity and Islam did in their history.

                        This must have proved difficult for early translators like Horner, because I think they did understand the idea of translating to context, but they may have got a "not-so-correct" context to start with, which is why we see these mistakes cropping up in the early translations.

                        And then, there are people who are influenced by theosophical, new-age and pseudo-Buddhist groups who like to keep their own incorrect interpretations of Buddhist teachings.


                        metta,
                        Yong Peng.



                        --- In Pali@yahoogroups.com, Sister Dipa wrote:

                        I am gathering this iformation to present to the person who has the impression that I.B. Horner was correct in her translation. I hope that by providing these responses that the individual will be convinced that it does indeed mean caravan.
                      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.