Update: 2016-02-20 08:49 PM -0500


Buddhist Hybrid Sanskrit Grammar and Dictionary


by Franklin Edgerton (1885–1963), Sterling Professor of Sanskrit and Comparative Philology, Yale University, Motilal Banarsidass Publishers Private Ltd., Delhi, 1st ed. New Haven, 1953. ISBN: 81 208-0998-x (Vol. 1), ISBN: 81 208-0997 (Set of 2 books).

Scanned from the original book by Dr. Zin Tun, up to p009, and digitized by Daw Khin Wutyi. From p010 onwards, Daw Khin Wutyi has typed from the original book which I (U Kyaw Tun) have brought with me on my trip from DeepRiver to Yangon where Daw Khin Wutyi is based. This TIL edition is edited, with additions from other sources, by U Kyaw Tun (UKT) (M.S., I.P.S.T., USA) and staff of Tun Institute of Learning (TIL) . Not for sale. No copyright. Free for everyone. Prepared for students and staff of TIL Research Station, Yangon, MYANMAR :  http://www.tuninst.net , www.romabama.blogspot.com

index.htm | Top

Contents of this page 

Buddhist Hybrid Sanskrit - BHS


Edgerton notes
Edgerton's footnotes are continuously numbered without any reference to pages. However for this TIL edition, I have given the page numbers as well. Thus fn001-02 means, it is footnote #02 found on p001, and fn003-07 is footnote #07 found on p003.
• There is no footnote on p.007


UKT notes 


Contents of this page

Buddhist Hybrid Sanskrit - BHS


1.33.  As we saw, the most striking peculiarity of this language is that from the very beginning of its tradition as we know it (that is, according to the mss. we have), and increasingly as time went on, it was modified in the direction of standard Sanskrit, while still retaining evidences of its Middle Indic origin. In all its texts, even the oldest, at least as shown by our manuscripts and editions, Sanskritisms are constantly presented cheek by jowl with Middle Indic forms, and often with hybrids which strictly are neither one nor the other. These Sanskritisms are much too common to be comparable with stray Sanskrit loanwords or loan-forms which may have been occasionally adopted in many a genuine Middle Indic vernacular. (fn004-12)

1.34.  Sinologists date Chinese translations of some BHS works as early as the 2d century A.D.; and these are not the earliest works in BHS, which must apparently be pre-Christian, by perhaps more than one century. (fn005-13) It seems, then, that in quite early times some north-Indian Buddhists abandoned their original principle of using genuine vernaculars, and partially yielded to the prestige of the classical and learned language of their brahman neighbors. Yet they made no effort to ‘translate’ into Sanskrit. BHS works, especially the oldest, retain in all parts clear evidences of being based on some form of Middle Indic, only partially, and it seems haphazardly, Sanskritized.

1.35. This mixture can, in my opinion, never have been spoken as a real vernacular. Yet it existed for centuries as a religious language, and seems to have become the prevalent language used by north-Indian Buddhists generally for religious purposes. At least, little else is preserved to us except some works in normal standard Sanskrit.

1.36. The extent of Sanskritization varies greatly in different periods, and even in different parts of some of the same works. Nearly all BHS works are composed in a mixture of prose and verse. In Mv (the Mahāvastu, see note 13), probably the earliest, the Sanskritization is relatively slight and imperfect, and all parts, both prose and verses, are affected by it to about the same extent.

1.37. In many other BHS texts (those of my second class, see Bibliography), e. g. in SP, LV, Gv, Suv, Samādh, the verses are presented in a relatively Middle Indic form, linguistically similar to the Mv; but the prose is far more (p005c1end-p005c2begin) Sanskritic in appearance, to such an extent that superficially, in its phonology and morphology, it looks like almost standard Sanskrit. (fn005-14) [UKT ¶]

UKT 140523: I wish I could go through at least some of BHS texts mentioned above. Somehow or other LV = Lalitavistara has struck me as a good start. See my note on Lalitavistara

However, even the prose shows its Middle Indic base, first, by the fact that it occasionally shows non-Sanskrit forms; and secondly, by the fact that its vocabulary is just as Middle Indic as that of the verses. That is, it contains large numbers of words which never occur, or do not occur with the same meanings, in standard Sanskrit. They are words of the Buddhist, that is a Middle Indic, tradition, even tho they may appear in a Sanskritized garb. These words include, of course, many technical terms of the Buddhist religion, but the great majority are non-religious terms, words applicable in secular language. They stamp the language of the works containing them as based upon another dialect than Sanskrit.

1.38. Even the verses are written, in all our mss. and editions, in a partially Sanskritized manner. This applies to Mv (and to its prose parts) as well as to the verses of other texts. For example, consonant clusters which in all Middle Indic would be assimilate, or otherwise altered, are usually (tho not always) written as in Sanskrit. [UKT ¶]

UKT 140519: What did Edgerton meant by "consonant cluster". In all probability it is would be vertical conjuncts found at the boundary of syllables. They could also be medials (monosyllabic) and certain conjuncts (disyllabic) at the beginning of syllables.

Word-final consonants which would be dropped in all Middle Indic are often written. [UKT ¶]

UKT 140519: A "word-final consonants" is probably a coda consonant whose intrinsic vowel has been killed. They are invariably basic consonants - not medials and conjuncts, which would break up when used as codas.

But a careful study of the metrical structure of the verses has revealed the fact that in some respects, at least, this Sanskritized spelling is mere window-dressing, and misrepresents the actual pronunciation, which was Middle Indic. For example, a consonant cluster at the beginning of a word is proved by the meter to have been pronounced as single consonant; e. g. a written sthitaḥ  [UKT: <s> & <th> can mean IPA [s] and [tʰ] ] was pronounced thi- , or ṭhi-. (fn005-15) [UKT ¶]

UKT 140519: We must remember that Edgerton is following IAST, which means that "thi-" is {hta.} (r4c2 dental), and  "ṭhi-" is  {HTa.} (r3c2 retroflex). In Bur-Myan, though articulated differently, they sound almost the same.  

Internally, meter can give (p005c2end-p006c1begin) no evidence on this particular matter; Skt. ucyate and M Indic (v)uccati  would fit the meter equally well. But since (v)uccati  is actually written fairly often, we many reasonably suspect the real linguistic value of orthographic ucyate . And if the verses were demonstrably pronounced, in large part at least, in a thoroughly Middle Indic way, despite partially Sanskritized spelling, is it not at least a plausible guess that the accompanying prose of the same works may have been pronounced similarly, despite much more extensive orthographic Sanskritization? (fn006-16)


Contents of this page

Edgerton Footnote

Edgerton's footnotes are continuously numbered without any reference to pages. However for this TIL edition, I have given the page numbers as well. Thus fn001-02 means, it is footnote #02 found on p001, and fn003-07 is footnote #07 found on p003.

fn004-12. A few examples (hundreds could easily be cited) of close juxtaposition of Skt. and M indic forms in §§ 8.108, 110. - [UKT¶]

UKT 140521: In the following, Edgerton is citing Pali, a language derived in Lanka. Buddhism was brought into Lanka by Asokan missionaries, and was used mainly by the Theravada Buddhists. It was thus Magadhi mixed with Lanka speech and Sanskrit which was already there.

Pali was brought into southern Myanmarpré from Lanka and taken northwards to Pagan. Magadhi was already in northern Myanmarpré long before the Buddha had come on scene. It was brought in by two groups of royal fugitives from northern India. The first group was the one headed  by King Abhiraza as mentioned by Bur-Myan chronicles. Since the account of Abhiraza was discredited by the Western colonial-historians as nothing more than a fable, Edgerton must have failed to looked into the Pal-Myan sources. He was probably not aware that what he had called "consonant clusters" are monosyllabic medials and disyllabic conjuncts. I am giving my rendering of the words he had cited:

«vākya» - {wa-kya.}
  - use of monosyllabic medial {kya.}
«ārogya» - {a-rau:gya.}
  - use of monosyllabic {gya.}
«kva» - {kwa.}
  - use of monosyllabic {kwa.}  which
  may be pronounced as disyllabic {k~wa.}
«brāhmaṇa» -  {braah~ma.Na.}
  - {ha.}-killed is the coda of the first syllable, and {ma.}
  is the initial consonant of the second syllable.

The problem is compounded in Skt-Dev, when {kya.} & {gya.} are equated to row#2 palatal aksharas: {kya.} as च , and {gya.} as ज . I am not giving IAST or IPA because these would add more confusion.

Here I must note that Skt-Dev has no medials. Medials are known only in Bur-Myan and in Pal-Myan. Please note Romabama is a transcription and can give pronunciations - it is not a transliteration. To show how we pronounce the conjuncts, I have coloured the aksharas. I must also note that none of my Indian friends - Bengali-speakers, Gujarati-speakers, Hindi-speakers and Tamil-speakers could correctly pronounce my Burmese name U Kyaw Tun which involves the monosyllabic medial {kya.}.

Pali contains such borrowed Sanskrit words and forms, e.g. vākya , ārogya , kva (Geiger 53.3), and brāhmaṇa (and (p004fnc2end-p005fnc1begin) its relatives); this last word is certainly a Skt. loan, as shown partly by the initial br- (which is not conclusive), but especially by the ā before a consonant cluster [UKT: conjunct] and the lack of mentathesis in hm (cf. Geiger 49.1). [UKT ¶]

UKT: Edgerton was looking for mentathesis in  hm  . What did he mean? He probably did not know hm  was a conjunct , and therefore the two aksharas belong to different syllables and there could be no relation between them. My problem is to find what exactly the word "mentathesis" is. Did Edgerton make a spelling mistake - which I could not imagine - and the word should have been "metathesis".  See my note on mentathesis .

Notorious is the Pali gerund suffix -(i)tvā , which must be a Skt. loan-form. Even Aśokan inscriptions, with the single exception of -tpā in the west (Girnar), show only -tu , and the only other record of -tvā elsewhere in Middle Indic (unless BHS be counted as such) seems to be the dialect of the 'Pkt. Dharmapada' (ms. Dutreuil de Rhins; e.g. ñatva , Senart p. 218; hitva  p. 219). But the number of such words and forms is so limited in Pali that it is far from constituting a parallel to BHS. They are no more significant, as dialect mixture, than the so-called Māgadhisms of Pali, mentioned above.... fn004-12b

fn005-13. According to Winternitz, Hist. Ind. Lit. II (1933). 247, the ‘nucleus’ of the Mahāvastu, which is commonly and I think rightly regarded as the oldest BHS work we have, ‘originated as far back as the 2nd century B.C.’, tho it was expanded later, some additions being as late as the 4th century A.D. and perhaps later yet. On stratification in Mv see references in fn. 21, to § 1.81. On classification, in part chronological, of BHS texts, see Bibliography. - fn005-13b

fn005-14. No other fully preserved work is comparable with Mv in presenting its prose parts, as well as the verses, in a largely Middle Indic guise. We know, however, that there must have been others. In Śikṣ (154.17), which is largely a mosaic of quotations from older works, we find a prose passage cited from a lost work called Bhikṣuprakirṇaka, and this prose is precisely like that of Mv, and radically different from the prose of any other work preserved to us. One ms. of Jm contains a short Jātaka story (printed in the Appendix to the Jm ed.) told in the same language and style, and perhaps borrowed directly from an older form of Mv, where it occurs (ii.244 f.); but the Jm insertion contains some passages not found in our mss. and the ed. of Mv, as well as many variants (in part mere corruptions). - fn005-14b

fn005-15. See my article on ‘Meter, Phonology, and Orthography in Buddhist Hybrid Sanskrit’, JAOS 66.197 ff. This applies to texts preserved in older forms, the first and second classes listed with Bibliography; not to the verses of the third class.

Professor Helmer Smith (‘Les deux prosodies du vers bounddhique’, K. Human. Vetensk. Lund 1949-1950, 1; Lund, 1950; 43 pp.) has honored my article on Meter etc., cited above, by a somewhat detailed critique. [UKT¶]

UKT 140523, 160220: My knowledge of Pali is minimal, and I am not surprised at my ignorance of the Critical Pali Dictionary by Helmer Smith (1882-1956). It is stated:
"His whole intellectual disposition qualified Helmer Smith for philological studies. His keen intelligence and quick comprehension permitted him to master languages and to surmount interpretative difficulties with exceptional ease. In Sanskrit, Pāli and Prākrit his reading was extensive; he studied a number of modern Indian languages and literatures, especially Sinhalese, Hindi, Tamil, Burmese; and besides he was an excellent classical scholar and possessed a very good knowledge of Old Norse language and literature."
- http://pali.hum.ku.dk/cpd/intro/helmer_smith_obituary.html 140523, 160220

On a number of important points, I am glad to find, he agrees with me, notably on the purely orthographic and artificial character of initial consonant clusters in the writing (my §§ 15, 39 ff.). On the other hand, he is unwilling to accept many of my cases of syllable-lengthening m.c., especially by nasalization or consonant doubling. On p. 4, top , he expresses fear that I may mislead beginners by my use of the term ‘m.c.’ Of course I agree with him that such phenomena originated in genuine linguistic developments of doublet forms, each usable at will, and hence both used, according to metrical convenience. He seems, however (if I understand him), unwilling to grant that once such doublets existed in certain categories, analogy could operate to create similar doublets where historically they ‘ought’ not to exist. [UKT ¶]

UKT 140523: What did Prof. Edgerton mean by "historically", when there is no reliable history of this period. If there had been reliable accounts, Western scholars would have noted the account of the second exodus of Kṣatriya from the birthplace of the Buddha to Tagaung in the very lifetime of the Buddha.

To me it seems impossible to doubt the reality of such analogical extensions, many instances of which are used in BHS only in verses where they fit the meter, and where the ‘regular’ form would not fit. The term ‘m.c.’ seems therefore appropriate to them. See table of abbreviations for my use of ‘m.c.’.

UKT 140523: On page roman 29 (XXIX), Prof. Edgerton defines "m.c."
"metri causa". I include under this term two classes of cases, ...

One of the two ways in which he seeks to avoid acceptance of my interpretations in this category is to explain otherwise the individual cases mentioned in my article. In reply, I would note, first, that in the JAOS article I cited only a very few examples. Many more are cited in this grammar, but even here my lists are by no means exhaustive. [UKT ¶]

The cumulative weight of the great mass of materials seems to me to make fruitless such efforts to explain some of them away, by pluralistic, and ( p005fnc2end-p006fnc1begin ) sometimes force or even impossible, explanations. Let me cite a single instance (p. 4): ‘que, seul, mīḍhaṃ-gilī (ɔ: -gilān Pāṇ 6.3.70), épithète des prāṇaka, donnerait un sens å [LV] 197.3. I think Professor Smith, had he investigated this passage with his usual care and acumen, would not have made this statement. [UKT ¶]

In this LV verse, the Bodhisattva has three dreams about himself; in pāda a , four black and white animals ( prāṇaka has this meaning here, not ‘insects’ as Mr. Smith may possibly take it, and as it may be used) lick his feet; in pāda b , four-colored birds come to him and ‘become one-colored’ (red bhuta = bhūta , with Tibetan, instead of –dbhuta ); in c-d , he walks on ‘mountains of dung’ without being soiled, Instead of ‘mountains of dung’, Mr. Smith would have ‘dung-swallowing’ (animals, or insects). [UKT ¶]

UKT 140523: For easy reading I separated Edgerton's arguments into separate paras.

But: (1) between the prāṇaka of pāda a , and pāda c , intervenes pāda b , with the unrelated ‘birds’; Smith’s syntax seems to me impossible.

(2) Tib. reads ri  ‘mountain (s)’, for –girī .

(3) In Mv ii. 137.3 ff. the same three dreams are recorded, in the same order, and in line 11
mīḍha-parvatasya  disproves Smith’s emendation of LV.

(4) To me, at least, it is of some interest that ‘A’ (on the whole perhaps the best ms. Of LV) is cited by Lefmann as mīḍhagbhirī , i. e. mīḍhaggirī ; this may be the true reading; it tends to support my view of the equivalence of nasalization and doubling of consonants as means of metrical lengthening; Smith’s emendation could not deal with it. – This case shows how even the greatest of scholars may go astray on an individual case. [UKT ¶]

It consoles me, a little, for the (at least) two errors which Smith’s sharp eyes detected in my work; he is quite right (pp. 2-3) on Mv i.70.17 and Laṅk 268.15, which should be deleted from my §§ 72, 71. I can only express gratitude to him, and chagrin at my own carelessness. (As to matīnāṁ , printed in my § 75 for matīnāṁ , it was not an ‘emendation’, as Smith p. 9 naturally supposed, but – I hope – a mere misprint; or else a slip in copying. [UKT ¶]

I am much less inclined to accept most of Smith’s other ‘corrections’ or variant interpretations of passages treated in my work.) I cannot here deal at length with Mr. Smith’s more general considerations. He relies extensively on Pali metrics, and even to some extent on Vedic. [UKT ¶]

UKT 140523: By his own admission, Edgerton was a Sanskritist whereas Smith was a Paliist. Since I maintain that Pali as spoken in Myanmarpré was derived directly from Magadhi brought in by Abhiraza, and not a mere copy of the Lanka-derived Pali, Myanmar scholars should look into sources other than from Lanka. Perhaps the Critical Pali Dictionary by Helmer Smith, might be a starting point.

I frankly have never understood Pali meter, as a whole. (I hope and expect to profit from Prof. Smith’s studies, based on his vast knowledge of Pali, which infinitely surpasses my own.) At certain points I have noted resemblances to BHS, but a great many Pali verses baffle me; they seem to involve principles which I am unable to formulate, but which in any case seem to me, for the present at least, and even after reading Smith, quite different from ( p006fnc1end-p006fnc2begin) any in BHS. [UKT ¶]

UKT 140523: The Vedic language is not Sanskrit. It is probable when the Sanskrit speakers came into India, they came into contact with the original languages most of which was Vedic. Vedic was not IE (Indo-European). It was Tib-Bur (Tibeto-Burman) which again has no relation to Chinese. The oldest Vedic verse still extent is the Gayatri Mantra, which has a different meter from Sanskrit (of Panini). Because Panini and others were finding that what the Sanskrit speakers were pronouncing was different from Vedic, they set out to construct more than one grammar to codified "broken" Vedic into what they called Sanskrit. Panini's grammar is the only one accepted today. Vedic --> Magadhi --> Pal-Myan was how the languages have changed. It was the Hindu religionists who claimed that Sanskrit was passed on to them by the Mahabrahma himself. Since, as a down-to-earth scientist, I cannot accept any axiom such as that of Mahabrahma creating the world, the only change I can imagine is the one presented above. Please note: this remark is pure speculation on my part.

As to Vedic meter, BHS seems to me radically different in fundamental principles, and I think it dangerous to interpret the latter by the former. BHS meter, in fact, seems to me in some important respects quite individual, despite, of course, many points of resemblance to Pali and Classical Skt. Meters. At least provisionally, and at first, I believe it should be studied by itself. [UKT ¶]

Such study is complicated. First, the text tradition of most BHS texts is wretched. Corruptions abound everywhere, notably in Mv, and (probably near the other end of the chronological scale) in such a text as Mmk. We must collect, for each text, forms, and metrical patterns too, which are attested by considerable amounts of evidence; having done that, we may, cautiously, suggest that apparent deviations may be text-corruptions. [UKT ¶]

UKT 140523: Please remember that there was no printing press in those days and each mss was the work of one human being with no editors to check his or her work, and there could be mistakes in spelling. These human beings would have differing L1 (mother tongue) which would interfere with the spelling he or she had adopted.

In Mv I have found a very considerable number of cases which agree with the metrical principles I have set up. In view of the known frightful corruption of the mss., I think we may apply the above principle to seeming exceptions. On the whole I am inclined to treat Mmk in the same way. But there are some texts of my class 3 (see the introduction to my Bibliography) where I still hesitate, because of the lack (in their mss.) of a compelling number of cases supporting my formulas. (Divy is an example.) Some of these Class 3 texts may belong, metrically, to a developed, or broken-down, system of metrics, compared to the texts of Classes 1 and 2. In footnote 21 to § 1.81 I call attention to some stanzas inserted very late in the Nepalese version of SP which are metrically very aberrant, and which I cannot analyze satisfactorily. In principle, therefore, I am not averse to recognizing different ‘prosodies’ in BHS texts as we have them. So far, I remain unconvinced by Professor Smith’s particular views as regards types of BHS prosody. There is not room in this already swollen publication to discuss them in detail, not have I as yet had time to give sufficient study to his (I am sure, very valuable and important) studies in Pali metrics. - fn005-15b

fn006-16. In Hoernle, Ms. Remains, 161 f., Lüders wrote: ‘I am even inclined to believe that the original (sc. Of SP) was written in a pure Prakrit dialect which was after-wards gradually put into Sanskrit.’ (Cf. the next paragraphs. SP is in no way distinctive among BHS works.) If Lüders had been aware of the above evidence, perhaps he would have been ready to consider with me the possibility that the ‘putting into Sanskrit’ was in part purely orthographic. I think, however, that Lüders was quite wrong in identifying the ‘original dialect’ as Māgadhī, solely on the ground of vocatives in –āho; these are not exclusively Mg. (§ 8.88). -- fn006-16b
(p006fnc2end-p008fnc1begin) (p007 has no footnote. fn008-17 is on p008)

Contents of this page

UKT notes


- UKT 140523 . Lalita is a female and is associated with the Mother Goddess of Tripura 'three cities'. She was probably the Mother Goddess of pre-Buddhist traditions. See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tripura_Sundari 140523.

From Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lalitavistara_Sutra 140523

The Lalitavistara Sūtra (Skt.) is a Mahayana sutra  that tells the story of the Buddha from the time of his descent from the Tushita heaven until his first sermon in the Deer Park near Benares. The title Lalitavistara has been translated as "The Play in Full" or "Extensive Play," referring to the Mahayana view that the Buddha’s last incarnation was a "display" or "performance" given for the benefit of the beings in this world.

The sutra consists of twenty-seven chapters: [1]

Ch.01: In the first chapter of the sutra, the Buddha is staying at Jetavana grove with a large gathering of disciples. One evening, a group of divine beings visit the Buddha and request him to tell the story of his awakening for the benefit of all beings. The Buddha consents.

Ch.02: The following morning, the Buddha tells his story to the gathered disciples. He begins the story by telling of his previous life, in which the future Buddha was living in the heavenly realms surrounded by divine pleasures. In this previous life, he was known as the Bodhisattva. The Bodhisattva is enjoying the immense pleasures of his heavenly life, but due to his past aspirations, one day the musical instruments of the heavenly palace call out to him, reminding him of his prior commitment to attain awakening.

Ch.03. Upon being reminded of his previous commitments, the Bodhisattva announces, to the despair of the gods in this realm, that he will abandon his divine pleasures in order take birth in the human realm and there attain complete awakening.

Ch.04. Before leaving the heavenly realms, the Bodhisattva delivers one final teaching to the gods.

Ch.05. The Bodhisattva installs the bodhisattva Maitreya as his regent in the heavenly realms, and then sets out for the human realm accompanied by great displays of divine offerings and auspicious signs.

... ... ...

Go back Lalitavistara-note-b

Contents of this page


- UKT 160220

I came across Mahāvastu, by J. J. Jones in pdf format sometime ago and have downloaded it. It is now available in TIL SD-Library - JJJones-Mahavastu<Ô> / bkp<Ô> (link chk 160220).
In it Jones quoted F. Edgerton, who in 1936, in Bulletin of the School of Oriental Studies, Vol. VIII, p.516, states:
"The proto-canonical Prakrit on which Buddhist hybrid was based, was a dialect closely related to both Ardhamāgadhī and Apabhramśa, but not identical with either."

From Wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mah%C4%81vastu 160220

The Mahāvastu (Sanskrit for "Great Event" or "Great Story") is a text of the Lokottaravāda school of Early Buddhism. It describes itself as being a historical preface to the Buddhist monastic codes (vinaya). Over half of the text is composed of Jātaka and Avadāna tales, accounts of the earlier lives of the Buddha and other bodhisattvas. [1] [2]

The Mahāvastu contains prose and verse written in mixed Sanskrit, Pali and Prakrit. [3] [4] It is believed to have been compiled between the 2nd century BCE and 4th century CE. [2] [5]

Pali Canon parallels

The Mahāvastu's Jātaka tales are similar to those of the Pali Canon although significant differences exist in terms of the tales' details. Other parts of the Mahāvastu have more direct parallels in the Pali Canon including from
- the Digha Nikaya (DN 19, Mahāgovinda Sutta),
- the Majjhima Nikaya (MN 26, Ariyapariyesana Sutta; and, MN 36, Mahasaccaka Sutta),
- the Khuddakapātha,
- the Dhammapada (ch. 8, Sahassa Vagga; and, ch. 25, Bhikkhu Vagga),
- the Sutta Nipata (Sn 1.3, Khaggavisā ṇa Sutta; Sn 3.1, Pabbajjā Sutta; and, Sn 3.2, Padhāna Sutta),
- the Vimanavatthu and
- the Buddhavaṃsa. [1] [6]

Mahayana themes

The Mahāvastu is considered a primary source for the notion of a transcendent (lokottara) Buddha, common to all Mahāsāṃghika schools. According to the Mahāvastu, over the course of many lives, the once-human-born Buddha developed supramundane abilities including:
- a painless birth conceived without intercourse;
- no need for sleep, food, medicine or
- bathing although engaging in such "in conformity with the world";
- omniscience; and,
- the ability to "suppress karma." [7]

English translation

• Jones, J.J. (trans.) (1949–56). The Mahāvastu (3 vols.) in Sacred Books of the Buddhists. London: Luzac & Co. vol. 1, vol. 2, vol. 3

Go back Mahavastu-note-b

Contents of this page


- UKT 140521: "Mentathesis" is an unusual word. Probably it was misspelled for "Metathesis".

From Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metathesis_linguistics 140521

Metathesis (from Greek "I put in a different order"). Most commonly it refers to the switching of two or more contiguous sounds, known as adjacent metathesis [1] or local metathesis: [2]

• foliage > **foilage
• cavalry > **calvary

Metathesis may also involve switching non-contiguous sounds, known as nonadjacent metathesis, long-distance metathesis, [1] or hyperthesis: [3]

• Latin parabola > Spanish palabra 'word'
• Latin miraculum > Spanish milagro 'miracle'
• Latin periculum > Spanish peligro 'danger, peril'
• Latin crocodilus > Italian cocodrillo 'crocodile'

Many languages have words that show this phenomenon, and some use it as a regular part of their grammar (e.g. the Fur language). The process of metathesis has altered the shape of many familiar words in the English language, as well.

The original form before metathesis may be deduced from older forms of words in the language's lexicon, or, if no forms are preserved, from phonological reconstruction. In some cases, including English "ask" (see below), it is not possible to settle with certainty on the original version.

UKT: More in the Wikipedia article.

Go back mentathesis-note-b

Contents of this page

End of TIL file