1 – 5 of 5
Blogger Dan said...

Dear J,

I truly think the Tibetan translation of sangha is relevant here, at the very least because it reflects an attempt at etymology (as happened a lot in finding ways to translate Buddhist concepts) from quite a while ago, at a time when Indian Buddhist understandings were still quite alive.

Sometimes Tibetans nowadays understand the dge-'dun to mean something like 'aspiring to/wishing for virtue,' but I think it reflects an older, perhaps, but anyway not obsolete meaning of the syllable 'dun, which means 'gathering, assembly, council.' This latter fits splendidly with your conclusion, but still I wonder why those old Tibetans would have understood the first syllable of the Sanskrit to mean 'virtuous.' My suspicion at the moment is just that they understood the entire word to mean 'assembly,' but found that translation inadequate or not specific enough... so they added the 'virtuous' part. Actually, in some versions of the refuge prayer as said in Tibetan, sangha IS represented by the word tshogs, 'assembly.'

Cheers!
D.

Friday, November 19, 2010

Blogger Jayarava said...

Hi Dan

While I don't doubt that Tibetan understandings can help at times and I appreciate you taking the time to write in, I don't think Tibetan sheds much light on Indic etymology. It represents an understanding some 1000 years (at least!) after the term began to be used in India; though probably a great deal more than 1000 years as the term, as I say above, seems to contain an anachronism that suggests an ancient lineage; and of course has other Indo European cognates which confirm this impression.

At best the Tibetan represents an understanding of what the term meant after about 1000 CE, though of course we don't know from what source you are working, or whether the Tibetan understanding has changed with time (which is fairly likely given the 1200 or so years of Tibetan Buddhism). Tibetan etymologies of Sanskrit words are seldom reliable, and more often than not reflect India traditional etymologies which are not based on scientific principles.

So thanks, it is interesting to some degree, but not directly relevant.

Best Wishes
Jayarava

Friday, November 19, 2010

Anonymous star said...

I like the sense of sangha being that we carry together.

Sunday, November 21, 2010

Anonymous Anonymous said...

As a matter, mainly, of curiosity: it seems (though I may have missed something, certainly) that in your discussions of etymologies you never cite Mayrhofer (neither his Etymologisches Wörterbuch des Altindoarischen (EWA) nor his earlier Kurzgefaβtes etymologisches Wörterbuch des Altindischen (KEWA). Are these not available to you at present, or is there another reason for this (to me slightly surprising) omission?

With thanks for posting interestingly on interesting topics,

H.I.

Tuesday, November 23, 2010

Blogger Jayarava said...

Hi H.I.

Probably the main reason is that I don't read German, so I don't go looking for sources with German titles.

I have no systematic training in this field, so I look at what ever is to hand. I do try to cross check between what sources I do have. Also some of my sources such the Online Etymological Dictionary do use a wider variety that I do, so I figure I'm tapping into a wider pool that way.

However if there is ever an insight you think is lacking I'd be pleased to hear it. I just work until I think I've understood what's in my sources, and present something plausible - whether that meets the standards of scientific etymology is doubtful :-)

I'll have a look at those titles you mention.

Best Wishes
Jayarava

Tuesday, November 23, 2010

You can use some HTML tags, such as <b>, <i>, <a>

Comment moderation has been enabled. All comments must be approved by the blog author.

You will be asked to sign in after submitting your comment.
OpenID LiveJournal WordPress TypePad AOL
Please prove you're not a robot