I still think Professor Smith’s interpretation makes sense. nirutti does not refer to any particular language, it makes better sense to take sakAya niruttiyA as "in my own words", i.e. without embroidering on it. The
Buddha did not want his teaching to be distorted by fanciful interpretations.
What language the Buddha actually spoke is an entirely different question. Was the Buddha really concerned
with the linguistic varieties in India?
The census takers in modern India ask people what language they speak. A villager from Ratnapur (I have
invented this village name) will say he speaks Ratnapuri. A worker from Hoshiapur will give his language
as Hoshiapuri.
Stella Sandahl
Professor emerita
University of Toronto
The Pali doesn't actually say "Buddha's own dialect". That's the whole point of the problem and why it has been discussed by many scholars. It says "in his own dialect." This is ambiguous: we don't know whether "his own" (saka) refers to the Buddha or to a person in the audience. Is the Buddha saying "teach people in my language" or "teach people in their own language?"