Dhamma Wheel Buddhist Forum

Hey everybody,

I'm slowly trying to expand my vocabulary, and I hoped maybe someone can help me out with a terminology question. When you see the epithet "Blessed One" in English translations of the suttas, is it almost always a translation of the term "bhagava?" For example, in the Fire Sermon (Thanissaro Bhikkhu's translation:)

"I have heard that on one occasion the Blessed One was staying in Gaya, at Gaya Head, with 1,000 monks. There he addressed the monks..."

at the beginning, and

"That is what the Blessed One said..."

at the end.

I checked the Pāḷi (are those the right diacritics?) transliteration on Access to Insight, and this is what it gave me:

28. Ekaṃ samayaṃ bhagavā gayāyaṃ viharati gayāsīse saddhiṃ bhikkhusahassena, tatra kho bhagavā bhikkhū āmantesi.

at the beginning, and

28. Ekaṃ samayaṃ bhagavā gayāyaṃ viharati gayāsīse saddhiṃ bhikkhusahassena, tatra kho bhagavā bhikkhū āmantesi.

at the end. I'm sorry the excerpts aren't more concise, but I know very, very little about the language. I'm not sure how the syntax works, or whether I need to worry about noun declension like in Latin...thanks for your patience, everybody.

Añjali,
Vakkali

Vakkali wrote:Hey everybody,

I'm slowly trying to expand my vocabulary, and I hoped maybe someone can help me out with a terminology question. When you see the epithet "Blessed One" in English translations of the suttas, is it almost always a translation of the term "bhagava?" For example, in the Fire Sermon (Thanissaro Bhikkhu's translation:)

"I have heard that on one occasion the Blessed One was staying in Gaya, at Gaya Head, with 1,000 monks. There he addressed the monks..."

at the beginning, and

"That is what the Blessed One said..."

at the end.

I checked the Pāḷi (are those the right diacritics?) transliteration on Access to Insight, and this is what it gave me:

28. Ekaṃ samayaṃ bhagavā gayāyaṃ viharati gayāsīse saddhiṃ bhikkhusahassena, tatra kho bhagavā bhikkhū āmantesi.

at the beginning, and

28. Ekaṃ samayaṃ bhagavā gayāyaṃ viharati gayāsīse saddhiṃ bhikkhusahassena, tatra kho bhagavā bhikkhū āmantesi.

at the end. I'm sorry the excerpts aren't more concise, but I know very, very little about the language. I'm not sure how the syntax works, or whether I need to worry about noun declension like in Latin...thanks for your patience, everybody.

Añjali,
Vakkali

Hello ,

I am no authority on Pali , and i am sure others will put to rest the doubts which you have raised . But for some reason , whenever , i get to hear or read these kind of verses , it is so inspirational in its diction . It is as if, one has lived in these moments of time.

thank you,

sanjay

Bookmark the PTS Dictionary search page to look up any Pali words.

Bhagavant

What is the significance of the difference between the form "bhagavā" (as in "Iti pi so bhagavā araham....") and "bhagavant"?

Vakkali wrote:I'm not sure how the syntax works, or whether I need to worry about noun declension like in Latin

Yes, nouns and adjectives have various suffixes depending on declension.

Jetavan wrote: What is the significance of the difference between the form "bhagavā" (as in "Iti pi so bhagavā araham....") and "bhagavant"?

Nominative singular noun versus vocative singular adjective.

[url=http://buddhism.lib.ntu.edu.tw/lesson/pali/reading/vanda3.htm]Pali Reading Lesson 3[/url] from National Taiwan University wrote: bhagavā: bhagavant-, N.m.: Blessed One (epithet of the Buddha, possessive form of the word bhaga-, N.m.: good fortune, happiness, prosperity. Bhaga- is derived from the verb root bhaj-, to share. Thus bhagavant means literally "having good fortune").
Nom.Sg. = bhagavā.

A guide to declension of masculine nouns ending in '-nt' can be found here.

culaavuso wrote:Nominative singular noun versus vocative singular adjective.

Bhagavantam seems to be the singular accusative form of the noun rather than vocative, while bhagavā is the nominative sing.