bodhisattva/bodhisatva

girish jha jhakgirish at YAHOO.COM
Sat Dec 20 01:58:51 UTC 2008


Dear Mr Bhattacharya,
The Sanskrit word Bodhisattva is accepted by Buddhists also in Buddhist Sanskrit and is not a hybrid one.
The derivation of bodhi and sattva: 
<Budh +affix in by sarvadhātubhya in(Unādi).Bodhi is a kind of Samādhi. 
Sato bhāvah sattvam. <as +satr=sat,sat+affix tva=sattvam.Sattvam dravye guṇe cite vyavasāyasvabhāvayoḥ 
One who has strongly resolved for bodhi is bodhisattva..There may be some copyist’s 
mistakes in manuscripts.The author of Nyasa commentry on Kasika,too,is mentioned with the status of Bodhisattva and the term contains 'tt' there. 
Regards, 
Sincerely 
GIRISH K. JHA 
SANSKRIT,PATNA UNIV.INDIA 

--- On Fri, 12/19/08, girish jha <jhakgirish at yahoo.com> wrote:

From: girish jha <jhakgirish at yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: bodhisattva/bodhisatva
To: "Indology" <INDOLOGY at liverpool.ac.uk>
Date: Friday, December 19, 2008, 5:48 PM







Dear Mr Bhattacharya,
The Sanskrit word Bodhisattva is accepted by Buddhists also in Buddhist Sanskrit and is not a hybrid one.
The derivation of bodhi and sattva: 
<Budh +affix in by sarvadhātubhya in(Unādi).Bodhi is a kind of Samādhi. 
Sato bhāvah sattvam.Sattvam dravye guṇe cite vyavasāyasvabhāvayoḥ 
One who has strongly resolved for bodhi is bodhisattva..There may be some copyist’s 
mistakes in manuscripts.The author of Nyasa commentry on Kasika,too,is mentioned with the status of Bodhisattva and the term contains 'tt' there. 
Regards, 
Sincerely 
GIRISH K. JHA 
SANSKRIT,PATNA UNIV.INDIA 


--- On Thu, 12/18/08, Dipak Bhattacharya <dbhattacharya2004 at YAHOO.CO.IN> wrote:

 

--- On Thu, 12/18/08, Dipak Bhattacharya <dbhattacharya2004 at YAHOO.CO.IN> wrote:

From: Dipak Bhattacharya <dbhattacharya2004 at YAHOO.CO.IN>
Subject: Re: bodhisattva/bodhisatva
To: INDOLOGY at liverpool.ac.uk
Date: Thursday, December 18, 2008, 8:56 AM

18 12 08
The origin of -satva in bodhisatva may be satvan 'valiant' thematised
like dharman>dharma. The Tibetan equivalents seem to support this.
A discussion in this line occurs in 'The preliminaries of the
Vajraavalii' S.K.Pathak Felicitation volume S.P.Bhandar Kolkata, 2008.
Unfortunately I have not yet got the book. 
DB

--- On Thu, 18/12/08, Jonathan Silk <kauzeya at GMAIL.COM> wrote:

From: Jonathan Silk <kauzeya at GMAIL.COM>
Subject: Re: bodhisattva/bodhisatva
To: INDOLOGY at liverpool.ac.uk
Date: Thursday, 18 December, 2008, 9:22 PM

Ah. This may well be (without reading it of course I say nothing), but
irrespective of the history, *within Sanskrit* °satva was, I think it is
fair to say, always understood as °sattva; the question then is simply one
of orthography. But this is far from the only case in which degemination
occurs, another reason to uncouple the question of etymology/history from
that of orthography.

JAS

On Fri, Dec 19, 2008 at 12:30 AM, Walter Slaje <slaje at t-online.de> wrote:

> The passage I have referred to contains a thorough excursus on the
> linguistic and notional development of the term "bodhi-satva"
(roughly:
> *sakta > °satta > °satva).
>
> WS
>
>  "Jonathan Silk" <mailto:kauzeya at GMAIL.COM> schrieb:
> > I am afraid that at the moment I do not have to hand the review cited
by
> Prof Slaje, but anyway, so-called failure to geminate on the one hand, and
> Paninian but 'irregular' gemination on the other (e.g., karmma
etc) are
> regular features of many Buddhist Sanskrit (or if one insists,
'hybrid'
> Sanskrit) manuscripts, not limited to those of Nepal. (Sometimes this is
> script-dependent; in so-called Khotanese-style MSS we find even prrajñ
> etc., although the language is Sanskrit) I would not consider it a
> linguistic feature at all, merely ('merely'?) a habit of scribes.
I am not
> even sure that I would be willing to go so far as to compare it to the
> habit
> (which I personally find charming) of scholars like Edgerton and
Bloomfield
> to write elefant and the like.
>
> Jonathan Silk
>
> On Thu, Dec 18, 2008 at 11:10 PM, Walter Slaje
<mailto:slaje at t-online.de>
> wrote:
>
> > > Dear Victor,
> > > Everyone, including you, has spelt 'bodhisattva'. All
the manuscripts i
> > have consulted read 'bodhisatva'! I wonder if anyone has
given a thought
> to
> > if the latter is not incorrect? DB
> >
> >
> > On bodhi-sattva /°satva cp.
> >
> > Oskar von Hinueber, Ein Meilenstein in der Erforschung des
> > zentralasiatischen Buddhismus.
> > Zu einem neuen Katalog khotan-sakischer Handschriften
> > (Skjærvø, Prods Oktor: Khotanese Manuscripts from Chinese
> > Turke stan in the British Library: a complete catalogue with texts
> > and translations, London 2002), ZDMG 157. 2007, 385-394
> > ("bodhisattva"-elucidation on pp.387-389)
> > WS
>
> --
> J. Silk
> Instituut Kern / Universiteit Leiden
> Postbus 9515
> 2300 RA Leiden
> Netherlands
>
>  --
> Prof. Dr. Walter Slaje
> Hermann-Loens-Str. 1
> D-99425 Weimar (Germany)
> Tel/Fax: +49-(0)3643 501391
> -----------------------------------------
> Seminar für Indologie
> Institut für Altertumswissenschaften
> Martin-Luther-Universität Halle-Wittenberg
> Emil-Abderhalden-Str. 9
> D-06108 Halle (Germany)
> Tel: +49-(0)345-55-23650
> Fax: +49-(0)345-55-27139
> walter.slaje at indologie.uni-halle.de
> www.indologie.uni-halle.de
> -----------------------------------------
> Ego ex animi mei sententia spondeo ac polliceor
> me studia humanitatis impigro labore culturum et provecturum
> non sordidi lucri causa nec ad vanam captandam gloriam,
> sed quo magis veritas propagetur et lux eius, qua salus
> humani generis continetur, clarius effulgeat.
> Vindobonae, die XXI. mensis Novembris MCMLXXXIII.
>



-- 
J. Silk
Instituut Kern / Universiteit Leiden
Postbus 9515
2300 RA Leiden
Netherlands



      Connect with friends all over the world. Get Yahoo! India Messenger at
http://in.messenger.yahoo.com/?wm=n/



      





More information about the INDOLOGY mailing list