[Buddha-l] ;sa;svat. Was Eternalism

[jkirk]

Thanks to Ashok for enlightening us as to what was going on with
this word.
Cheers, Joanna
====================================


I'm sending this for Ashok as he is having trouble posting it.

From: Ashok Aklujkar <ashok.aklujkar at ubc.ca>
Date: Sat, 28 Mar 2009 12:00:24 -0700
To: Buddhist discussion forum <buddha-l at mailman.swcp.com>
Conversation: ;sa;svat. Was [Buddha-l] Eternalism
Subject: Re: ;sa;svat. Was [Buddha-l] Eternalism


It seems that there was a verbal nominal derivative ;sa;s
(derivable from a verbal root ;sa;s by adding a zero suffix, like
recent English "read" from the verbal root "read" in such
sentences as "It is a good read") in Vedic Sanskrit.

A comparative degree of this Vedic nominal can be said to exist
in the Vedic adjective ;sa;siiyas (on the pattern of lagh(u) -->
laghiiyas, gur(u) --> gariiyas etc.). Contextually, ;sa;siiyas
means 'more numerous, oftener.'

The meaning of ;sa;s, therefore could have been 'one which renews
itself, one which recurs/reappears,'  leading to the meaning 'one
which persists, one which is indestructible, eternal.'

Mayrhofer (Kurzgefasstes etymologishes Woerterbuch des
Altindischen, part 3, p. 317-318), from whom I have paraphrased
the preceding information, does not explain how exactly a
possessive -vat (cf. his use of ;sa;svaan as the entry title)
added to an adjective would work. Perhaps he presupposes that an
abstract or event/feature meaning like 'recurrence' underlies the
nominal ;sa;s. However, he generally seems to be thinking along
the right lines.

The further derivations ;saa;svata and ;saa;svatika meaning
'permanent, eternal' from ;sa;svat are linguistically not a
problem.

ashok aklujkar


      

_______________________________________________
buddha-l mailing list
buddha-l at mailman.swcp.com
http://mailman.swcp.com/mailman/listinfo/buddha-l