saṃdhā (15748)

saṃdhā
Entry 15748, Page 556, Col. 2

(saMDA, saMDA)
saṃdhā¦ (cf. the Skt. mg. Absicht, pw s.v. 3, and saṃdhāya), (special, cryptic,) esoteric meaning, the ‘real’ meaning of a Buddhist text or doctrine, opp. to its prima facie or superficial meaning; perh. always in comp. with a word for speech, words, or the like; but see also saṃ- dhi (5); see ābhiprāyika, which S.K. De, NIA 1.5, is right in relating to this; my note in JAOS 57.185 ff. is prob. misleading in regarding complete meaning as basic; Tib. regularly dgoṅs (te), meaning, intention, often pre- ceded, sometimes replaced, by ldem po(r), in a riddlesome way; nevertheless the implication of the word is always fundamental, ‘real’ meaning, as is esp. shown by SP 60.12--13 (prose) yat punar bhagavann asmābhir anupasthiteṣu bo- dhisattveṣu saṃdhābhāṣyaṃ bhagavato 'jānamānais tva- ramāṇaiḥ prathamabhāṣitaiva tathāgatasya dharmadeśanā śrutvodgṛhītā, but in as much, Lord, as we, not knowing the Lord's words as He really intended them (esoterically, cryptically, Tib. ldem por dgoṅs te bśad pa), there being no bodhisattvas on hand, in our haste heard and accepted merely His prima-facie words; so, saṃdhā-bhāṣya (Tib. usually as above) SP 29.7; 34.2, 10; 39.11; 70.5 (vs, Tib. ldem ṅag, omitting dgoṅs) and 8 (vs, Tib. as in 60.12--13 but om. ldem por); 273.14 and 337.2 (vss); saṃdhā-bhāṣita (Tib. generally as in 60.12--13) 125.2, 3 (see below; ldem por om. in 3); 199.2 (gsuṅs for bśad); 233.11 (parama- saṃdhā-bhāṣita-vivaraṇo hy ayaṃ dharmaparyāyas); 288.2; saṃdhā-vacanehi, °naṃ, SP 59.4 and 5 (here Tib. om. dgoṅs; in 4 ldem poḥi ṅag [= bśad or gsuṅs] rnams, riddle-words; in 5 ldem po ṅag); note Buddha's words in [Page557-a+ 71] SP 125.1 na sahasaiva sarvajñajñānaṃ saṃprakāśayāmi, I do not reveal the Omniscient's knowledge all at once, given as reason for his hearers' failure to understand saṃdhā- bhāṣitaṃ, since (3) …durvijñeyaṃ…tathāgatānāṃ …saṃdhābhāṣitam. Note that this form seems to occur only in SP, while the ger. saṃdhāya is more widespread; saṃdhi, however, seems to be used, tho rarely, in the same sense, and once in Laṅk text has saṃdhyā-bhāṣya, q.v., clearly in this same mg., and prob. error for saṃdhā°.

{{#arraymap:

|; |@@@ | | }}