The Pali term Ariyan

[David N. Snyder]

Another topic being discussed right now is the "inner Hitler" so thought it might also be a good time to look at the Pali term Ariyan.

It is usually translated as "Noble" or "Noble One" and applies to those who have reached the supra-mundane attainments, including Sotappana (stream-entrant), Sakadagami (once-returner), Anagami (Non-returner), and Arahant.

The term was around during the Buddha's time and before for those who are Noble or perhaps high caste from before the Buddha's time.

As a JuBu, some people have asked me what my opinion is of the use of this term. I personally am not offended if people use the term, because the ancient Indians used this term long before Hitler and Nazis corrupted it and used it in a very negative and racist way.

But with that said, I never use the term myself, simply because there is so much negativity associated with the term now. Yes, the ancient Indians had the term first, but the term is so much associated with the Nazis now, that I simply prefer to use the English translation of 'Noble' or 'Noble One.'

[David N. Snyder]

Last month I asked Ven. Dhammika if he could write something about the Pali term Ariyan and here is what he wrote:


In a comment to my post of the 23rd David asked if I could say something about the Pali Buddhist term ariya, which congers up images of Nazism and its idea of so-called Aryan superiority. So hear goes. The Vedic Sanskrit word arya first appears in the Rig Veda (2000-1500BCE) where it is used as the name of a group of people who had migrated into India from perhaps what is now Iran (from arya) in prehistoric times and gradually subdued the aboriginals who they called dasa or dasyu. Like most peoples, the aryas saw themselves as superior to others and the word arya gradually came to mean ‘noble’, ‘esteemed’ or ‘superior’. By the time of the Buddha the word had come to include the idea of ethical or intellectual excellence and the Buddha always used it in that sense. Thus in the Tipitaka we have terms like Ariya sacca = Noble Truth, and many others.

When Sanskrit and Avestan studies began in Europe in the late 18th century the word arya was noticed and came to be used for the family of languages we now call Indo-Iranian, i.e. most Indian, Iranian and European languages, and by extension, the people who spoke those languages. Europeans, particularly blue-eyed, blond-haired ‘Nordic’ peoples came to be seen as the ancestors of the ancient Aryans who had conquered India in ancient times, just as the British had conquered India (and half the rest of the world) in the 19th century. Thus the word took on a distinctly racist and imperialist coloring. By the late 19th century such an association was being discarded in scientific circles but among ill-informed people and especially among the more loony right-wing groups, particularly in Germany, it lingered. Hitler picked it up and the rest is history, very ugly history. As Nazism perverted everything it touched, it likewise gave the word arya/ariya something of a bad reputation. But of course, no informed person could find any similarity between how the word was (and sometimes still is) used by racists and how it is used in Buddhism. For all the uses of ariya in the Tipitaka have a look at the PTS’s Pali-English Dictionary and their new A Dictionary of Pali. The article ‘Arya’ in the Encyclopedia of Buddhism examines the use of the word within the wider Buddhist context and the article ‘Aryan’ on Wikipedia gives a pretty good account of the words use in philology and politics.

The Aryan race myth was never more effectively discredited than by those who loudly proclaimed it, not just in their behavior but even in their looks - Hitler with his sickly yellow skin and black hair, the grotesquely obese Goring, Dr. Gobbles with his club foot, cadaverous features and beak-like nose, the offish bald-headed Julius Streicher with his paunch, and the weakly, shortsighted Himmler. It’s hard to decide which of this bunch of Aryan supermen was the worst but if I was forced to choose I’d probably pick Julius Streicher. Even the other Nazis found him repulsive (although characteristically Hitler always liked him) and in 1940 he was quietly sacked and told not to attend any more Party functions. God! How unsavory would you have to be to be blackballed by the Nazis!

Related to this, the swastika, so often associated with the Nazis, has been used in Buddhism (and in nearly all cultures and religions) for centuries. Here is carvings incorporating swastikas on the Dharmik Stupa at Sarnath where the Buddha taught his first proclaimed the Dhamma.

http://sdhammika.blogspot.com/2010/03/o ... hists.html

[Cittasanto]

in a e-mail discussion group I use to go to, one of the members used 'Aristocrats' which I though quite a nice way to render it?

[David N. Snyder]

in a e-mail discussion group I use to go to, one of the members used 'Aristocrats' which I though quite a nice way to render it?

Probably not a good way, in my opinion. Aristocrat is usually associated with 'elite' or the highest social class, almost a caste.

"Birth makes no Brahmin, nor non-Brahmin, makes; it is life‘s doing that mold the Brahmin true.
Their lives mold farmers, tradesmen, merchants, and serfs. Their lives mold robbers, soldiers,
chaplains, and kings. By birth is not one an out-caste. By birth is not one a Brahmin. By deeds is
one an out-caste. By deeds is one a Brahmin."
Majjhima Nikaya 98, Vasettha Sutta 57-59

[David N. Snyder]

In some of the very old Pali Text Society translations you can see the use of the term ariya and ariyan quite often, but I notice in the modern translations, especially those by Bhikkhu Bodhi, it is written / translated as 'noble' or noble one.

[Cittasanto]

in a e-mail discussion group I use to go to, one of the members used 'Aristocrats' which I though quite a nice way to render it?

Probably not a good way, in my opinion. Aristocrat is usually associated with 'elite' or the highest social class, almost a caste.

"Birth makes no Brahmin, nor non-Brahmin, makes; it is life‘s doing that mold the Brahmin true.
Their lives mold farmers, tradesmen, merchants, and serfs. Their lives mold robbers, soldiers,
chaplains, and kings. By birth is not one an out-caste. By birth is not one a Brahmin. By deeds is
one an out-caste. By deeds is one a Brahmin."
Majjhima Nikaya 98, Vasettha Sutta 57-59

depends which time context you place it, I guess.

think Victorian period and the formal etiquet of dining or just the fish knife.

[retrofuturist]

Greetings David,

Thank you for compiling this valuable information.

It is good to be able to see what was intended by the use of a word at the time it was used, without the distortion of later worldly developments.

Metta,
Retro.

[Paññāsikhara]

Personally, I prefer to translate it as "holy", rather than "noble" (or anything similar, like "aristocrat", etc.) because these latter senses are social, which is quite irrelevant to how the Dhamma uses the term.

I suspect that this very early decision amongst western buddhology to use the term "noble" is related to the general overview that they had of the time, ie. the "aryan invader" theory. Despite early linguists who stated explicitly that "aryan" referred to language type, and not ethnic group (let alone social group), still, some continued to portray the Vedic brahmans as "invaders" from the NW, into India, subjugating the other indigenous peoples there (such as the Dravidians). Such a theory was then used to explain the history of India to the Indians themselves, in a manner which then justified the invasion of India by the Europeans. "After all, you brahmins were invaders, now we have invaded you!" The Nazi position is merely the step which made a small twist in theories of groups such as the Theosophists: Whereas at the early times, it was the Vedic brahmins who were the superior people on the planet, overcoming the indigenous black people of India, now the European Aryans have come to claim their place as the superior ethnic group of the present day and age. Theosophy theory of species, race, etc. is complex. The Nazi's did their spin. It was common amongst many philosophical thought movements of that day and age.

This "aryan invader" theory has now largely been debunked amongst scholars. However, because the flow down effect takes a generation or two, and many still read very old and dated material, it is still common. I shuddered when I encountered a Uni Buddhist prof who trotted this stuff out in "history of Indian Buddhism" as if it were "simple fact", rather than a dated and highly debatable theory. (Made me seriously doubt his scholarship, which was later proven as the course progressed.) It is most strange when it comes from Indians, Sri Lankans, etc. themselves, particularly the older generation who basically have what I call a "Pali text society" mentality, and still live in the latter days of the 19th century colonial Brittania. A bit of serious modern research will soon erase these problems.

Hence, to me, any relation with ethnic group or social group is totally missing the point. The only time I ever use "noble" is for the most entry level classes on Buddhism, where I suspect that people may already be familiar with the term "four noble truths", etc. At the first opportunity though, I introduce the principle of "four holy truths", that which is "true" to those who are holy. Then I wean them out of "noble", and never use the term again. (Fortunately, most of the teaching I do nowadays is either in Chinese, and / or for Chinese, so I can easily point to the Chinese translations, which use mainly 聖 which is much closer to "holy / saintly" than "noble", or 正 "correct", also used for "samyak". Another case of how the choice of terms by classic Chinese translators can give us insight into how the terms were understood by the Indic scholars themselves at that time.)

Some may argue against the term "holy" on the grounds of borrowing from Christianity, but I'd take that any day when compared to the fascist racial theories of some forms of early European Buddhology, and the twisted ideologies which followed in their wake.

Or, better still, I just leave the term as "aryan". It is quite curious, that this term "aryan" and also the good old srivatsa (= svastika) itself, is primarly connected with Nazism / Fascism only amongst the West. In Asia, these are so obviously Buddhist / Brahmanic / Jain / etc. that they have almost no negative connotation at all. I have a few young Buddhist friends who wear svastika necklaces in a similar manner as Christians may wear a crucifix on a necklace. It hangs on there in public for all to see. They would be horrified to hear that they are connected to Nazism, so I simply don't mention it, I do not wish to disturb their pure faith in the Triple gem. I think it is time to reclaim these symbols of Buddhism - but in an intelligent and gradual manner, of course!! (My experience in Zuid Afrika (South Africa) indicates that in some places, this may take a while, though. Seems that more than a few neo-Nazis have taken root in that "rainbow nation"! Still, they were always puzzled why the Chinese would use this symbol, as they would be the first object of it's fascist hatred.)

[Paññāsikhara]

In many ways, the term "aristocrat" may be applicable to "khattiya". The khattiya, or Skt ksatriya, is from Skt root ksetra, or "field". In other words, the original meaning is that they are the land owners, the landed gentry so to speak. That is fairly in accord with the notion of aristocracy, at least from some periods of European history.

[Paññāsikhara]

From part of an essay I wrote some years ago: A Brief History of India

The Āryans – Invaders or Indigenous?

Many theories have been proposed as to why there is no further evidence of these civilizations after ~1500 BCE. European continental philologists[1] of the 19th century proposed a theory of an Indo-European “Āryan” language root (later adapted to an ethnic root by others), encompassing the ancient languages and religions (and races) of Europe, India and beyond. Although philologically and linguistically brilliant, such theories abounded with cultural, religious and political agendas. This theory was then linked to a theory that the Āryan peoples “invaded” north west India ~1500 BCE, bringing their Vedic religion with them.[2]
In the wake of modern Indian independence, much has been said to reclaim the Āryans as indigenously Indian. Recently it has been ironically stated that “the [Āryan] homeland is at, or close to the homeland of the author of the book in question...”[3] Others have also effectively debunked as myths, theories such as the “Āryan invasion of India”, that “Harappan culture became extinct”, and so forth.[4]
Furthermore, geographical studies indicating the partial drying of the Sarasvati river, possibly due to seismic activity[5], in ~1500 BCE, indicate peaceful reasons for the decline of these civilizations. New archeological research indicates a continuation of cultural elements up until the present day.[6] Genetic studies have also been applied.[7] The debate continues, unabated!

[1] From Coeurdoux, to Charles Wilkins, Sir William Jones, Max Müller, Monier-Williams, Jacobi, et el.
See A L Basham: The Wonder that was India, (Rupa, 2003), pp. 4-8.
[2] A L Basham: The Wonder that was India, (Rupa, 2003), pp. 26-31.
[3] Professor Michael Witzel, The Home of the Āryans, pg. 1.
[4] For an excellent account, see Professor Lal: Why Perpetuate Myths? A Fresh Look at Ancient Indian History, http://www.geocities.com/ifihhome/articles/bbl002.html
[5] See Kalyānarāman, et el: http://www.hindunet.org/saraswati/kach/quakekutch.htm
[6] Much valuable information can be found at: http://www.harappa.com/har/indus-saraswati.html
[7] See http://www.genome.org for a wide range of studies, disparate and contradictory, on this subject.

[David N. Snyder]

Thanks for that, Venerable. Interesting to see the history and how it effects the language.

[Lazy_eye]

Many theories have been proposed as to why there is no further evidence of these civilizations after ~1500 BCE. European continental philologists[1] of the 19th century proposed a theory of an Indo-European “Āryan” language root (later adapted to an ethnic root by others), encompassing the ancient languages and religions (and races) of Europe, India and beyond. Although philologically and linguistically brilliant, such theories abounded with cultural, religious and political agendas. This theory was then linked to a theory that the Āryan peoples “invaded” north west India ~1500 BCE, bringing their Vedic religion with them.[2]

Yes, and there were some obvious howlers in the Nazi adaptation of this theory. One was the breezy assumption that spread of language = spread of a "race". That is clearly not always true.

Second was the identification of Indo-Europeans with Nordics, which is probably flat-out wrong since the evidence points to the Pontic-Caspian steppe (the area between the Black Sea and Caspian) as the likely Indo-European "homeland".

Interestingly, Sanskrit is said to have striking affinities with the Baltic languages (Lithuanian, Latvian) which are considered the living languages closest to Proto-Indo-European. This would not mean that the Vedas originated somewhere near Vilnius, though -- preservation of archaic language elements often happens on the periphery rather than at the center.

Baltic shares a common ancestor with Slavic, and so an obvious link would be between Balto-Slavic and Indo-Aryan. From what I understand, there is some genetic evidence pointing to this as well.

[zavk]

Although philologically and linguistically brilliant, such theories abounded with cultural, religious and political agendas.

Thanks for your interesting posts, Ven. To pick up on some of your points.

Buddhism became an object of academic study in Europe at a time when there was a fixation with tracing Europe's supposed 'Aryan roots'. This, as Ven. has pointed out, was a problematic assumption that was tied to various cultural, political, and religious agendas. With their scholarship on 'Aryan nobility', European scholars were able to claim that Indian civilization had long abandoned its Aryan roots and that it was now in a state of decay. European civilization of the time was seen to better embody Aryan nobility. This sort of ideas served as a kind of implicit justification for the European colonisation of the subcontinent.

So within this climate, European scholars of Buddhism took it upon themselves to uncover a more 'pristine' Buddhism which they believe had long been lost in India. The Buddha was seen as quintessentially Aryan. They stressed the ethical, pragmatic, and rationalistic aspects of the teachings, ignoring and devaluing whatever local practices that Asian Buddhists might have. With this version of 'pristine' or 'original' Buddhism, the European scholars used it to criticise the supposedly degenerate Hinduism that they saw in India--crippled by their religious beliefs India was seen to be politically ineffective. This served to justify the paternalism of colonial rule.

The European version of an 'original' Buddhism was also used to denigrate the Buddhism found in colonies like Ceylon and Burma. In these countries, Christian missionaries often used this interpretation of an 'original' Buddhism to claim that native Buddhism had become 'a crude mass of semi-idolatry and silly superstition; encrusted by dead formalism, and sunk in apathetic ignorance.’ (These were the words of Jonathan Titcomb, Bishop of Rangoon from 1877-1882.)

Interestingly, Asian Buddhists were able to turn these ideas against the European colonisers. A good example of this is Anagarika Dharmapala. In the face of criticisms by the colonial rulers and Christian missionaries in his country, Dharmapala adopted European ideas about Buddhism and Aryan nobility to restore pride to Sinhalese Buddhism. For example, he argued that even though the British call themselves Aryans they are not true Aryans because they are not native to the soil of the India. He also said that: 'Buddhism is a spiritualized Aryanism. The ethics of the Bible are opposed to the sublime principles of the Aryan Doctrine promulgated by the Aryan Teacher. We condemn Christianity as a system utterly unsuited to the gentle spirit of the Aryan race.'

For Dharmpala, the Sinhalese are 'true Aryans' because they descended from an Aryan prince called Wijaya whose people left their Indian home to occupy the land of Ceylon. He wrote:

The descendents of the Aryan colonists were called Sinhala, after their city, Sinhapura, which was founded by Sinhabahu, the lion-armed king. The lion-armed descendents are the present Sinhalese, whose ancestors had never been conquered, and in whose veins no savage blood is found. Ethnologically, the Sinhalese are a unique race, inasmuch as they can boast that they have no slave blood in them, and never were conquered by either pagan Tamils or European vandals who for three centuries devastated the land, destroyed ancient temples, burnt valuable libraries, and nearly annihilated historic race.

As can be seen, Dharmapala views about Aryanism/Buddhism were intertwined with various political, cultural and religious agendas. In Sri Lanka today we see certain Buddhist institution supporting the idea that the Tamils have no right to be in the country. Are these Buddhist institutions drawing upon the this linkage between the Sinhalese, Aryanism and Buddhism? I can't say for sure. It is a possibility. But I do know that such a view about the 'rightful' inhabitants of Sri Lanka has resulted in a lot of unwholesome actions.

Dharmapala is a great reformer of Buddhism—no doubt about it. Much of the Buddhism we have today has been influenced by his efforts. Much of the Buddhism we have today has also been influenced by the European scholarship of the nineteenth century. But when we examine these historical circumstances, we can see that Buddhism was caught up with certain conditions that led to unskilful tendencies. So I think it is important to be aware of these conditions so that we can be mindful of whether our approach to Buddhism is skilful or not.

[Paññāsikhara]

Good post, Z!

Fascist views based on forms of ethnic superiority are certainly not limited to any one group, such tendencies can be found anywhere that the "me & mine" view extends itself out into the family, the race, the nation, and so on.

The meaning of "ariyan" as used by the Buddha is, ironically quite the opposite of this. The basic entry point of such a state of sanctity is the removal of the view "me & mine". Ultimately, there could be no such association with even the physical body or mental states, let alone "my people, my race, my nation".

The Buddhist meaning "ariyan" is the opposite of fascism and racism. This is something well worth keeping in mind.

[David N. Snyder]

The meaning of "ariyan" as used by the Buddha is, ironically quite the opposite of this. The basic entry point of such a state of sanctity is the removal of the view "me & mine". Ultimately, there could be no such association with even the physical body or mental states, let alone "my people, my race, my nation".

I have heard the Brahma Viharas were even taught in a way to show "boundless" good qualities across all borders and the "boundless" term in particular to specify no distinction to borders, nations, etc.

"He lives, having pervaded, with the thought of compassion, one quarter; likewise the second; likewise the third; likewise the fourth; so above, below, and across; he dwells, having pervaded because of the existence in it of all living beings, everywhere, the entire world, with the great, exalted, boundless thought of compassion that is free of hate or malice."
AN 3.65

[Paññāsikhara]

Although, for the Theravada, the most common description of "boundless" (or whatever other translation of aparimana may be given) is to the effect of "to all living beings regardless of ...", looking into the vedallas, one may also notice that it is "without restriction" in the sense of not being restricted by defilements. One could also link in the a-pari-mana to the absence of mana, the root sense of "me & mine", which "weighs up" (man) oneself and others. This second sense is not in contradistiction to the former, but indicates its fulfillment and perfection. This may suggest that correct practice of the four immeasurables also involves a degree of putting aside "me & mine". The Buddha got a lot of mileage out of each word he spoke, that's for sure!

[Dmytro]

Hello,

I would like to share some links regarding the origins of the Indo-Ariyan culture.

Linguistic evidence:

The Indo-Europeans and Historical Linguistics
http://www.usu.edu/markdamen/1320hist&c ... s/07IE.htm

Genetic evidence:

Genetic Evidence on the Origins of Indian Caste Populations
http://genome.cshlp.org/content/11/6/994.full

Genetic affinities among the lower castes and tribal groups of India: inference from Y chromosome and mitochondrial DNA
http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2156/7/42

Atlas of the Human Journey (See marker M17)
https://genographic.nationalgeographic. ... atlas.html

"A widely cited theory proposed in 2000 that there may have been two expansions: first, R1a1a originally spreading from a Ukrainian refugium during the Late Glacial Maximum; and then, the spread being magnified by the expansion of males from the Kurgan culture.[15]"

Haplogroup R1a (Y-DNA)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haplogroup ... 28Y-DNA%29

Archaeological evidence:

Kurgan Hypothesis
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kurgan_hypothesis

Metta, Dmytro

[Dmytro]

P.S. And some glosses from a retrograde who still looks in Pali texts for the definition of the Pali terms:

‘‘imesaṃ kho, bhikkhave, catunnaṃ ariyasaccānaṃ yathābhūtaṃ abhisambuddhattā tathāgato arahaṃ sammāsambuddho ariyoti vuccatī’’ti

(Saṃ. Ni. 5.1093)

‘‘Cattārimāni, bhikkhave, ariyasaccāni. Katamāni cattāri? Dukkhaṃ ariyasaccaṃ, dukkhasamudayaṃ ariyasaccaṃ, dukkhanirodhaṃ ariyasaccaṃ, dukkhanirodhagāminī paṭipadā ariyasaccaṃ. Sadevake loke samārake sabrahmake sassamaṇabrāhmaṇiyā pajāya sadevamanussāya tathāgato ariyo; tasmā ‘ariyasaccānī’ti vuccanti’’.

(Saṃ. Ni. 5.1098)

Na tena ariyo hoti, yena pāṇāni hiṃsati;
Ahiṃsā sabbapāṇānaṃ, ‘‘ariyo’’ti pavuccati.

(Dhammapada 270)

‘‘Chetvā āsavāni ālayāni, vidvā so na upeti gabbhaseyyaṃ;
Saññaṃ tividhaṃ panujja paṅkaṃ, kappaṃ neti tamāhu ariyoti.

(Suttanipata 540)

Ariyāti niddosā. (Mahavagga-Atthakatha, Anguttara-Nikaya-Atthakatha, Parivara-Atthakatha)

Ariyāyāti niddosāya. (Mahaniddesa-Atthakatha)

Ariyāti nikkilesā visuddhā. (Uparipannasa-Atthakatha)

Ariyāyāti parisuddhāya. (Pathikavagga-Atthakatha, Majjhimapannasa-Atthakatha)

Ariyāyāti vikkhambhanavasena ca samucchedavasena ca kilesehi ārakā ṭhitāya parisuddhāya. (Majjhimapannasa-Atthakatha, Anguttara-Nikaya-Atthakatha)

Ariyāyāti vikkhambhanavasena kilesehi ārakā dūre ṭhitāya niddosāya. (Udana-Atthakatha)

Ariyoti taṃ taṃ maggavajjhehi kilesehi ārakattā ariyabhāvakarattā ca ariyo. (Mahavagga-Atthakatha)

Ariyoti puthujjanabhūmiṃ atikkanto. (Nidanavagga-Atthakatha)

Ariyoti taṃtaṃmaggavajjhakilesehi ārakattā, ariyabhāvakarattā, ariyaphalapaṭilābhakarattā ca ariyo. (Patisambhidamagga-Atthakatha)

[Dmytro]

P.P.S. And now I would like to present the real reasons why the term 'ariya' is translated as 'noble' by the Pali Text Society. (Here in Ukraine we don't have to follow the party line of 'democratic' political correctness).

Excerpts from the 'ariya' and 'ariyaka' articles in the Pali-English dictionary by Margaret Cone:

ariya,
1. belonging to the Ariya people; Vin I 229,9 (yāvatā ... ariyaṃ āyatanaṃ yāvatā vaṇippatho); -
2. (i) of noble birth; high-caste, eminent; Abh 696; Ja VI 201,9 (ajjhenam ariyā paṭhaviṃ janindā); - (ii) noble, sublime, fine; belonging to the noble ones (used esp.of the Buddha's teaching and followers, almost = "Buddhist"); a noble one (one who is not puthujjana); Abh 435; 1002 (sotāpannādike agge ariyo); Vin I 197,9 (ariyo na ramati pāpe); ...
3. (n.) Ariya speech; & Ja V 362,27 (ariyaṃ bruvāno vakkango cajanto mānusiṃ giraṃ; cf 363,2: ariyan ti sundaraṃ niddosaṃ) - see also ariyaka;

ariyāyatana, n., the region of the Ariyas; A III 441,6 (ariye paccājāti dullabhā lokasmiṃ indriyānaṃ avekallatā dullabhā lokasmiṃ; Mp III 414,15: ariya ti majjhimadese);

ariyagaṇa, a company of the noble men; Ja VI 49,6 (52,6: ariye ti brāhmaṇagaṇe, te kira tadā ariyācārā ahesuṃ);

ariyagabbha, progeny of the noble ones; Mp 271,4 (ariyaṃ vaḍḍhemī ti ekaṃ kulaputtaṃ ... upasampādesi);

ariyavutti, noble in conduct; S I 100,11 (taṃ ariyavuttiṃ medhāvī hīnajaccaṃ pi pūjaye); Vv 84:41 (so mātaraṃ pitaraṃ cāpi jantu dhammena poseti ariyavutti)


ariyaka
1. the Ariya language; Vin III 27,35 foll. (ariyakena milakkhassa santike sikkhaṃ paccakhāti so ca na paṭijānāti; ... Sp 255,27: ariyakaṃ nāma ariyavohāro Māgadhabhāsa); Sp 250,20 (ariyakena vā vadati milakkhakena vā); -
2. who is an Ariya, who speaks the Ariya language; Vin III 27,37 (milakkhakena ariyakassa santike sikkhaṃ paccakkhāti so ca na paṭivijānati); -

anariyaka, foreign, non-Ariya; (a non-Ariya language; ?) Sp 255,28 (milakkhakaṃ nāma yo koci ariyako andhadamiḷādi; Sp-ṭ II 81,6: ariyako ti Māgadhavohārato añño).


Metta, Dmytro

[Kusala]

Hello Dhamma friends. Just thought I'd bring this thread back up... http://newsgram.com/blog/2011/03/24/eth ... g-of-arya/

Ethnic meaning of ‘Arya’

"In debates on the politically controversial term Arya, we keep hearing from Hindus and Buddhists that it only means “noble,” as in the Buddha’s “four noble truths.” This speaks of a deficient sense of the realization that terminology is susceptible to change.

While the term had no racial (“Nordic”) or linguistic (“Indo-European”) meaning, it did originally have an ethnic meaning. On this, invasionist linguist JP Mallory and anti-invasionist historian Shrikant Talageri agree..."