[INDOLOGY] The Buddhist term sutta

Tue May 11 19:52:24 UTC 2021

  PS: In all fairness, though, Jim's query was precisely for philological
commentary, and so I think that all the discussion so far has been exactly
appropriate. This thread will remain as a rich bibliographic survey and a
reference point on an admittedly small but interesting problem.

On Tue, May 11, 2021 at 2:44 PM DIEGO LOUKOTA SANCLEMENTE <
diegoloukota at ucla.edu> wrote:

>
>   Hello Artur,
>
>   I see your point, and it resonates with things I have thought. In the
> period in which I am most interested, the exact original etymon of MIA
> *sutta* is largely irrelevant—what is crucial is knowing how the term was
> understood in the period, namely as equivalent to Sanskrit *sūtra*—and
> therefore I have not intervened in the discussion. I believe in the
> philological method, and in the absolute need for its technical rigor and
> intricacy. At the same time, I personally envision philology as a tool, a
> wonderful tool but a tool after all, that can allow us to enrich and deepen
> our knowledge of a social, historical, or linguistic past. I understand,
> though, that other people do treat philology as a goal in itself, and I
> have no objection to that.
>   However, I am not sure whether this is exactly the case here. In the
> specific case of the etymology of MIA *sutta*, I would argue that knowing
> what exactly the practitioners of the śramaṇic religions viewed as closest
> to their sacred discourses can indeed tell us about ancient social
> understandings, affinities, or tensions (did they envision their texts as
> more akin to the Vedic hymns or to the orthodox ritual manuals?) and about
> the chronology of those dynamics.
>    I wish, though, that when engaging not only with the general public but
> with the field itself, we could be more explicit about the social,
> historical, or linguistic relevance of a given philological problem. What
> exactly is at stake behind a technical conundrum is not always
> crystal-clear even to the professional.
>
>   *namaskaromi*,
>
>   Diego
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Tue, May 11, 2021 at 2:04 PM Artur Karp <karp at uw.edu.pl> wrote:
>
>> I have long asked myself about the point of doing Indology in its purely
>> philological guise.
>>
>> The Angulimala-sutta conveys the images of violence and offers
>> suggestions for resolving conflicts - irrespective of whether the Pali
>> suffix -sutta is derived from the OIA -su-ukta or -sutra.
>>
>> But, perhaps, this differentiation affects our understanding of the text?
>>
>> Artur
>>
>>
>> <https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=webmail> Wolny
>> od wirusów. www.avast.com
>> <https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=webmail>
>> <#m_-7681000515353254917_m_-3357868069995123081_DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2>
>>
>> wt., 11 maj 2021 o 19:12 Artur Karp <karp at uw.edu.pl> napisał(a):
>>
>>> Dear colleagues,
>>> the question of the etymology of the Pali term sutta is interesting in
>>> itself.
>>>
>>> But - can its resolution broaden our understanding of the institution of
>>> slavery in ancient India?
>>> Would it help us to better understand the ideological bases of genocidal
>>> practices directed against tribal communities?
>>> The phenomenon of untouchability?
>>>
>>> Best,
>>>
>>> Artur
>>>
>>>
>>> <https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=webmail> Wolny
>>> od wirusów. www.avast.com
>>> <https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=webmail>
>>> <#m_-7681000515353254917_m_-3357868069995123081_m_3128617822932058490_DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2>
>>>
>>> wt., 11 maj 2021 o 18:47 Rupert Gethin via INDOLOGY <
>>> indology at list.indology.info> napisał(a):
>>>
>>>> Could someone confirm the wider Prakrit evidence?
>>>>
>>>> Tim commented with reference to the Pali commentarial explanation of
>>>> *sutta* as *suvutta*:
>>>>
>>>> But this is not really much to support *sutta* < *sūkta*, since the
>>>> regular Pāli form parallel to *sūkta* includes the glide -v-, as Skt
>>>> *ukta* ~ Pāli *vutta* and similarly in other MIA languages, which all
>>>> seem to preserve the initial v- of the verbal root **vac*- (Pischel
>>>> §337), despite the vowel change a > u before a labial (§104).
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> But unless I am misreading something here, Pischel (§337) notes that
>>>> Jaina Śaurasenī, Śaurasenī and Māgadhī all have utta < ukta
>>>>
>>>> And Turner’s* A comparative dictionary of the Indo-Aryan languages *
>>>> includes Prakrit *sutta* under *sūkta*:
>>>>
>>>> 13545 *sūktá* ʻ well recited ʼ RV., ʻ eloquent ʼ MatsyaP. [su -- 2,
>>>> uktá -- ]
>>>> Pk. *sutta* -- ʻ handsomely said ʼ; OG. *sūta* ʻ speaking properly ʼ.
>>>>
>>>> https://dsal.uchicago.edu/cgi-bin/app/soas_query.py?page=780
>>>>
>>>> Rupert
>>>> --
>>>> *Rupert Gethin*
>>>> Professor of Buddhist Studies
>>>>
>>>> University of Bristol
>>>> Department of Religion and Theology
>>>> 3 Woodland Road
>>>> Bristol BS8 1TB, UK
>>>>
>>>> Email: Rupert.Gethin at bristol.ac.uk <Rupert.Gethin at bristol.ac.uk>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> INDOLOGY mailing list
>>>> INDOLOGY at list.indology.info
>>>> https://list.indology.info/mailman/listinfo/indology
>>>>
>>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> INDOLOGY mailing list
>> INDOLOGY at list.indology.info
>> https://list.indology.info/mailman/listinfo/indology
>>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://list.indology.info/pipermail/indology/attachments/20210511/42b6a317/attachment.htm>