Dear Matthew and Aleksandar, Matthew, you say: “Once more, SŪC, and nothing to do with thread, …” But we should remember that sūc- is also (indeed, most literally) connected with piercing (with a needle) and sewing. Sūcī/sūcaka = needle, sūcita = pierced, sūcika = tailor, sūcitā = needlework.
So a double-entendre is involved here: the sūtras have “indicated meanings” but also “stitched meanings,” and so, paradoxically, the nirukti deriving it from sūc- is still an indication of a basic meaning of ‘thread’. Best, Tim _________________________________________ Timothy Lubin Jessie Ball duPont Professor of Religion and Adjunct Professor of Law 204 Tucker Hall Washington and Lee University Lexington, Virginia 24450 American Council of Learned Societies fellow, 2020–21 National Endowment for the Humanities fellow, 2020–21 https://lubin.academic.wlu.edu/<https://nam11.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Flubin.academic.wlu.edu%2F&data=04%7C01%7CLubinT%40wlu.edu%7C118620c8eb3b4049237308d886c1df18%7Cd1a80622a99943e58eb67873905e939e%7C1%7C0%7C637407514521888642%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000&sdata=KGZJIHllkEOJZN9s48rB6YkrExmYG1owecyuPn%2FuR%2Bg%3D&reserved=0> http://wlu.academia.edu/TimothyLubin<https://nam11.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwlu.academia.edu%2FTimothyLubin&data=04%7C01%7CLubinT%40wlu.edu%7C118620c8eb3b4049237308d886c1df18%7Cd1a80622a99943e58eb67873905e939e%7C1%7C0%7C637407514521888642%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000&sdata=etrMzh0RHx8819v5PH6KeTgeHQpeNVqeSUP62IDVn9c%3D&reserved=0> https://ssrn.com/author=930949<https://nam11.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fssrn.com%2Fauthor%3D930949&data=04%7C01%7CLubinT%40wlu.edu%7C118620c8eb3b4049237308d886c1df18%7Cd1a80622a99943e58eb67873905e939e%7C1%7C0%7C637407514521888642%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000&sdata=F9JfpSkLrSfrImfMeIXPIjpUIVYIYcwfbvm8dqcxedE%3D&reserved=0> https://dharma.hypotheses.org/people/lubin-timothy<https://nam11.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fdharma.hypotheses.org%2Fpeople%2Flubin-timothy&data=04%7C01%7CLubinT%40wlu.edu%7C118620c8eb3b4049237308d886c1df18%7Cd1a80622a99943e58eb67873905e939e%7C1%7C0%7C637407514521898628%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000&sdata=sncUovdIh9wA0ezo8n2xpYpllaMKMetH86tMA6Jtg9A%3D&reserved=0> From: INDOLOGY <[email protected]> on behalf of INDOLOGY <[email protected]> Reply-To: "Uskokov, Aleksandar" <[email protected]> Date: Friday, May 14, 2021 at 11:09 AM To: INDOLOGY <[email protected]>, Jim Ryan <[email protected]>, "[email protected]" <[email protected]> Subject: Re: [INDOLOGY] Buddhist "sutta" Dear Matthew, Thank you for sharing this. The same idea appears as part of the definition found in Vācaspati’s Bhāmatī on BSBh 1.1.1 (and I imagine elsewhere) – yathāhuḥ laghūni sūcitārthāni svalpākṣarapadāni ca | sarvataḥ sārabhūtāni sūtrāṇy āhur manīṣiṇaḥ || I have been thinking for a while about the best way to render this sūtrāṇi … sūcitārthāni in English and am currently leaning towards “sūtras are statements that index their meaning.” I wanted to avoid “indication” because of possible confusion with figurative meaning, but perhaps that is too cautious? What would you (the forum) suggest? Best wishes, Aleksandar Aleksandar Uskokov Lector in Sanskrit South Asian Studies Council, Yale University 203-432-1972 | [email protected] ________________________________ From: INDOLOGY <[email protected]> on behalf of Matthew Kapstein via INDOLOGY <[email protected]> Sent: Friday, May 14, 2021 2:25 AM To: [email protected] <[email protected]>; Jim Ryan <[email protected]> Subject: Re: [INDOLOGY] Buddhist "sutta" Dear friends, Without wishing to prolong too much what has already been a very long (though highly informative!) thread (so to speak), I thought that this might be of some interest: In the early 9th century Tibetan work, the “Two-Volume Lexicon” (sgra sbyor bam po gnyis pa), which was compiled by a team of Tibetan translators working under the guidance of a group of monastic scholars from Aparāntaka (Kashmir/Gandhāra/Bactria) and provides nirukta-style explanations of several hundred key terms in Sanskrit with Tibetan commentary, sūtra is glossed arthasūcanād sūtra [read, of course, arthasūcanāt sūtram]. Once more, SŪC, and nothing to do with thread, was prominent in the Buddhist understanding of the term. Matthew Matthew Kapstein Directeur d'études, émérite Ecole Pratique des Hautes Etudes, Paris Numata Visiting Professor of Buddhist Studies, The University of Chicago ________________________________ From: INDOLOGY <[email protected]> on behalf of Jim Ryan via INDOLOGY <[email protected]> Sent: Wednesday, May 12, 2021 12:42 PM To: [email protected] <[email protected]> Subject: [INDOLOGY] Buddhist "sutta" Dear all, Thanks to all of you who contributed to this robust and quite informative “thread” (sūtra!) on the proper derivation of the Buddhist term sutta from the Sanskrit. I tossed a pebble in the pond, I thought, which made ripples beyond expectations. A thorough treatment of the issue that leaves open, perhaps, a fillip of sorts (this said without having yet read Nathan McGovern’s article.) Of course, the philological question rather quickly leads to deeper issues regarding the conceptualization of types of text among traditions. I hadn’t even considered Jain notions of sutta/sūtra, comments on which emerged along the way. Best wishes, Jim Ryan California Institute of Integral Studies
_______________________________________________ INDOLOGY mailing list [email protected] https://list.indology.info/mailman/listinfo/indology
