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

Re: Introduction and Question

Expand Messages
  • abhidhammika
    Dear Mark Hulbert, Everett Thiele, and all How are you? Mark asked 3 questions: (a) do Sanskrit first then move on to Pali, (b) do Pali first (as it is
    Message 1 of 3 , Jun 30, 2003
      Dear Mark Hulbert, Everett Thiele, and all

      How are you?

      Mark asked 3 questions:

      "(a) do Sanskrit first then move on to Pali,

      (b) do Pali first (as it is easier, in
      principal?) then move on to Sanskrit, or

      (c) figure what the heck and
      just try doing both at once?"


      When I began to study English with the aim of achieving capability to
      use it like a native speaker, I had somewhat similar questions. I
      read somewhere that it is easier to understand English if you first
      study Latin as there are a lot of words adopted from Latin. But, I
      did not manage to get a complete set of Latin grammar, with the first
      volume missing (so I was never able to begin the study).

      So I concentrated on learning the available texts of English grammar
      works and dictionaries (mainly from Oxford Uni Press).

      Later when I immigrated to Australia, English has become the only
      compulsory means of daily communication (read, write, speak, listen,
      hear all the time).

      Now my dreams are in English.

      What I am getting at here is that I become a daily (and nightly in
      dreams) user of English without having studied Latin.

      My answer to Mark's questions would be that it is not necessary to
      study Sanskrit to master Pali, and vice versa.

      As a multi-lingual myself, I do recommend any willing and capable
      persons to learn different or related languages, as it is always good
      to know more than one language. It is fun.

      But, we can master a language without prior understanding of any
      other language.

      With regards,

      Suan Lu Zaw

      http://www.bodhiology.org



      --- In Pali@yahoogroups.com, "mchulbert" <mchulbert@y...> wrote:


      Hello:

      I am a new member and have just started learning Pali using the Pali
      Primer and Warder. I have had a latent interest in Buddhism for many
      years (hatched while completing a Ph.D in philosophy 10 years ago),
      but I am now starting to get serious and read the Suttas and just
      about anything else I can get my hands on.

      Ultimately, I would like to gain some proficency in both Pali and
      Sanskrit, so my question is: is there a particularly strong reason to
      learn Sanskrit first and then progress to Pali, or does the reverse
      make just as much sense? I keep reading that Pali is a "simplified"
      version of Sanskrit and Walshe, in the introduction to his
      translation of the Digha Nikaya, notes the existence of certain rules
      of thumb that approximate a Sanskrit-to-Pali conversion. Given these
      facts, does it make sense for someone like me to (a) do Sanskrit
      first then move on to Pali, (b) do Pali first (as it is easier, in
      principal?) then move on to Sanskrit, or (c) figure what the heck and
      just try doing both at once? (If it is relevant, I have some small
      background in classical languages, having been force fed Latin at
      school in England and spent some time working with medieval Latin
      texts as a graduate student.)

      I've been lurking on the list for a week or so and it seems like a
      great place with some really nice folks.

      Metta to all.

      -- Mark







      Replies Name/Email Yahoo! ID Date Size
      2864 Re: Introduction and Question Everett Thiele Mon
      6/30/2003 5 KB
    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.