This is a topic that fascinates me. I am not sure where to start. First, a caveat. From what I can gather, the Buddha did not have the Suttas and Vinaya committed to writing; even though Brahmani script was available. If I understand correctly, he also instructed his disciples to preach in the Prakrit, not the Vedic / Sanskrit. This suggests to me that the Buddha wanted the common people to hear the spoken word preached in every day language.

That said, I think looking at etymologies can be helpful in translating Buddhist terms from Pali and Sanskrit. Indic languages share some things in common with English and other Indo-European languages languages. There are lots of cognates. The construction of nouns and adjectives from verbal roots, using prefixes and suffixes, is similar. It’s not the only thing to look at. We need to consider context. Also, the way Sanskrit words were translated into Chinese can help. And, In the end, I think it’s about what the concepts mean to us in terms of our direct experience. A tentative grasp of the concepts expressed by Buddhist technical terms can help one sort things out.

If I am trying to understand a Pali term; I’ll find the Sanskrit equivalent (if it’s different). Next, I’ll see how various sources translate and define the terms. Then, I’ll attempt break the Sanskrit down into prefixes, verbal roots, and suffixes. After that, I look for any English cognates and try to trace those back, sometimes through Germanic words, to the Latin and maybe the Greek. I’ll ponder the various nuances. Finally, I’ll look at Chinese translations.

I consciously try to avoid drawing any definitive conclusions from any of my linguistic ruminations and musings. That does not mean I do not glean anything useful. I just try to stay rather tentative; to maintain non-attachment to opinions. Often, I hit a dead end, and I’ll mark the spot in the back of my mind.

In the nest entry, I shall be looking at a word often translated as conditioned, as well as it’s opposite, unconditioned.