Aleksandar, it depends on whether one wants to restrict the use of ‘indicated 
(meaning)’ to lakṣita/lakṣaṇā.  I would think there are other, better 
renderings available for the latter when it is contrasted with abhidhā: 
‘indirect’, ‘figurative’, ‘suggestive’, etc., vs. ‘direct’, ‘literal’.  I 
realize that ‘indicate’ is within the range of meanings of forms of lakṣ- (in 
the basic sense of ‘target, thing aimed at’), but to my ear ‘indicate’ leans 
more to directness (lit., ‘pointing to’), and thus accords well with the 
“pointy” directness of sūc-.
Anyway, I would think that the absence of anything to do with literal vs. 
figurative meaning in the context should be enough to avoid confusion, no?

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: "Uskokov, Aleksandar" <[email protected]>
Date: Friday, May 14, 2021 at 12:21 PM
To: "Lubin, Tim" <[email protected]>, INDOLOGY <[email protected]>, Jim 
Ryan <[email protected]>, "[email protected]" <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: [INDOLOGY] Buddhist "sutta"

Thanks, Tim. The double-entendre has been on my mind too. You have no problem 
with "indicated meaning"? I am a bit reluctant to it because of possible 
confusion with figurative meaning (abhidhā vs. lakṣaṇā), which I don't think is 
intended.

Best wishes,
Aleksandar


Aleksandar Uskokov

Lector in Sanskrit

South Asian Studies Council, Yale University

203-432-1972 | [email protected]

________________________________
From: Lubin, Tim <[email protected]>
Sent: Friday, May 14, 2021 12:07 PM
To: Uskokov, Aleksandar <[email protected]>; 
[email protected] <[email protected]>; Jim Ryan 
<[email protected]>; Matthew Kapstein <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: [INDOLOGY] Buddhist "sutta"


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%7Cd63cd4ee045e47885c8608d916f45d58%7Cd1a80622a99943e58eb67873905e939e%7C1%7C1%7C637566061073741895%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C2000&sdata=fXIAHu%2F6gkPeNxl2oXPHwYOqxvRLGNx401px%2F8k2l4U%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%7Cd63cd4ee045e47885c8608d916f45d58%7Cd1a80622a99943e58eb67873905e939e%7C1%7C1%7C637566061073751888%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C2000&sdata=RGvMnrdua%2BnjRKmMqf4iLGJwiSkLnD4Z2CXwmFowPxI%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%7Cd63cd4ee045e47885c8608d916f45d58%7Cd1a80622a99943e58eb67873905e939e%7C1%7C1%7C637566061073761879%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C2000&sdata=nnRBIppDKfv5c%2FiG3772nIG5zu38rkddUs%2FxOtbzU3k%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%7Cd63cd4ee045e47885c8608d916f45d58%7Cd1a80622a99943e58eb67873905e939e%7C1%7C1%7C637566061073761879%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C2000&sdata=a5r3EXVE3RB4Lrv5vWQJzkln2kl1HhEyqd6RHAbfS04%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

Reply via email to