"Dharma" or "Dhamma"? Language and Sectarianism

Pali language and marathi language very similar

Both Dhamma and Dharma mean the same thing. But Bauddha calling it Dhamma is only because of the language it is written in. Punjabis (Whether Hindu or Sikh) say it as Dharam, Up/Bihar calls it Dharm, in the Southern languages it is called Dharmaa. Western people call it Daarmaa.

In conclusion, it’s more about the concept rather than the pronunciation or language (which are again of the same origin). To bound Boudha or Dharma, literally, or within a language is, in my opinion a very trivial way of thinking.

Also Sanskrit was a language meant only for writing (especially scriptures) and many many words were(and still are) spelled very differently in colloquial languages. The term for it is called “Tatbhava” in contrast to “Tatsama” which is the same pronunciation as in Sanskrit.
Bottom line is what you call it should not matter. But in most of the Indian languages irrespective of religion, the word is closer to Dharma, which is ideal to embrace(Dhar/Dharan).

I think you don't have read
Buddha teaching
Dhamma and darma is very different
this is Not just issue of language.
Darma mean
believe in god heaven hell soul
Luck
But dhamma mean
If you don't believe in god soul heaven hell rebirth luck
This is dhamma
We buddhist people don't believe any god soul heaven hell luck
And creator rebirth.

Sanskrit is not older than Pali

Sir, Hinudisam is not religion please, most important budda didn't create Buddsiam but he show how to achieve a "thing" in our life, still buddsiam worshipping our culture/tradition example:- meditation is original from india by Hinudisam

Dhamma(our present awareness) , Dharma (truth), both are different

I think it is your channel so that is truly your choice. My preference is Pali and the Theravada tradition because of its focus on the actual original teachings of the Buddha. The Mahayana traditions added a great deal to the teachings that don’t exist in the original writings. I don’t even find use for the Abidhamma for that same reason. Sanskrit is the religious language of the Brahmans and as I understand it not the language of the common people. I have also been lead to believe that Pali was actually the dialect of the Magadha region of India where the Buddha taught. Vajrayana and the Mahayanas have added things that don’t belong to the Buddha’s instructions. A case in point is the entire concept of getting close to enlightenment without reaching it so you can bring people along with you; And this whole Bodhisatva concept. All not teachings of the Buddha what so ever. The concept of having a continual reincarnating leader who would wear two hats as spiritual and political leader.! Not there either. But I agree that both languages are of value so that understanding can be better improved.

Right sir, but Dr. Ambedkar differentiate between Dhamma and Dharma in his book ' The Buddha and his Dhamma. Please make one video on that. Thanks sir.

wrong , the word dharma is made up of two words dhar and ma , dhar comes from root word dhri , which means to hold , where dhamma is just mistranslation of dharma, accept it or not

We must be careful about arguing about the “proper” spelling. For in doing so, we may lose the point and the practice.

you wanted to say "can of worms" at the beginning, didn't ye? hehe

Actually it's very much controversial in India . Indian Buddhist rejects Sanskrit they believes Hindus corrupted Buddhist literatures . Hindus are monotheistic they believes everything is a god . They made Buddha was god and avatar of Vishnu then they claimed Buddhism is a subset of Hinduism . Even in present days they are still believing Buddha was god or avatar of Buddha . Hindus are highly ritualistic they started worshipping Buddha and do many rituals , ceremonies . Buddha was completely against of these types of things but ignorant Buddhist are also following Hindu version of Buddhism rather than the original teaching of Buddha . Buddhism is very much similar to Jainism . In Jain population only 20m and Buddhism was completely extinct ( then Ambedkar revived again ) . If Hindus are so peace loving and tolerant then why Hindus population is more 1 billion while jain Buddhist get extinct from their own land ?? This is why Orthodox Buddhist are rejecting Hindus literature , rituals , ceremonies etc .

Sanskrit = Latin, Pali = Italian. What it looks like.

dharma is sanskrit and dhamma is pali . done 😂
btw there r a group of people who wanna consider pali an entire different language but that isnt true ,
sanskrit and pali were like classical and vulgar latin

Doug why is it that you keep making videos of different topics that come up in my day to day life right after I encounter them? Could this be the law of attraction at work? Lol thanks for being a wonderful teacher

I can't recall ever feeling as confident in the high worth of a recurring donation as I do for my donations to Doug's channel!

Well, as an Indian buddhist there's an issue here. We tend to use dhamma over dharma cause dharma has brahminical connotation which we reject. 89% of Indian buddhist belong to dalit castes and follow ambedkarite radical buddhism.

I think Dharma to an English speaking person just seems more comfortable. I know that that's not why you should choose one word over the other, but it does make the idea more accessible, which is exactly what we want.

I also speak Swedish, and because of their language, I believe Dhamma may sound better to them and have the same effect.

Dharma and Dhamma are cognates. When neither of them live in our native language, it should not matter which one we use, especially if we are choosing secular buddhism.

The fact you only have ONE dislike on this video shows what a lovely community you attract. Idk who that dislike is but let's send them some loving kindness 🤣

I was under the impression the Buddha spoke Magadhi.

The final point (regarding the ''Anglicization''') is the clincher, for me, and an inevitable process of cultural appropriation (happening very quickly with the westward path of Buddhism!) Besides, try going to a dinner party, and watch the ''psuedos'' all exchange ''knowing'' looks as one mentions ''sutta's (sort of like the quick choice that must be made between ''forte''- an Italian musical direction and ''forte''- a French word for one's strong point). I'm aware of the one ups man ship of Sanskrit over Pali (a Western ''Ivory Tower'' case of what comes of extreme isolation and babbling to oneself self, of course, (and am as utterly un impressed and inured as with the whole ''Hinnayana '' canard!). In the meanwhile, it is an occasion to keep the citta flexible, warm, and way up in the gamma range of brain waves.

I'd probably argue that if someone is doing a formal introduction to Buddhism in general they should probably use both, either when they introduce the term or in a glossary at the end or something like that. Otherwise I don't really care that much, tend to use Sanskrit myself cause when I was learning about Buddhism for the first time I was reading Zen and Vajrayana based books.

Perhaps those people who debate 'Dharma' vs 'Dhamma' need to learn the meaning of it rather than focusing of labels.

This kind of sectarianism is the thing I’d never expected from the Buddhists but that’s what I’ve faced many times. I recognize authority of most of the Pali Canon but I found Mahayana texts in particularly more helpful to me spiritually. I just love how beautiful they are, so I often prefer to say that I belong to Mahayana tradition. And often it doesn’t end well. Many followers of Theravada are explicitly rude to you and your tradition and believe that Mahayana is a “degenerative form of Buddhism” that was corrupted by pagan traditions and etc. I’ve experienced this rudeness so many times that I’ve consciously started avoiding followers of Theravada tradition.

Great video! I lean toward the Theravada tradition, but it seems like nit picking over Pali vs Sanskrit is to miss the overall point. It sounds like attachment to views, which isn’t condoned in any Buddhist doctrine that I’m aware of, Mahayana or Theravada. You discussed it very skillfully, Doug!

Thank you for your video doug, I have a question for you. If buddha close to his death made all of his expriences and teachings into a book, what do you think he would not include, take out or stream line some teachings which we find in suttas today? Many of his words are all over from his life time, and surely his opinions changed at least a little bit and he Got exprienced in how to translate his expriences into understandable teachings. How would he react to todays buddhist texts (excluding information that might have been myhtologized and remembered falsely), what would he change. He was Said to be a great teacher, so one Wonders as to what he would write for us 😌

One is not more real; but early Buddhism seems to prefer Dhamma. Later Dharma. I see you as drawing your secular Buddhism from early. So, I wouldn't mind, and might expect you to to use Dhamma, but you've outlined well, ways you may, and may not fit, AND good reason too, like Dharma being more seen, such as in our Dictionaries. I use Dharma mostly, because I'm a Zen Buddhist, but also it's easier for my speech rhythms. But, since I don't have tensions that the Path may've, and have many friends in other interpretations or Branches, I try to say Dhamma speaking to kin [i see all Buddhists as kin or try to], if they would. Or reading the Dhammapada for instance, or meditations outside Mahayana or speaking on them after.

I truly feel the Branches are more alike than different, and I try to respect it. Plus, while I came to feel strongly Zen eventually, before that I studied alone and Refuge in my heart alone, a good while. This leave some not Zen habits, like reading widely, Metta (though that gaps may be closing in recent years it seems to me) like having a lot of friends and interests in all branches.

What one says, or how it's pronounced, to me, not so important, but maybe, you were saying, using one as "more real" or as a club to kin that prefer the other, it a cruelty and misses some goals of the Way...

Bows, Jikai

Do Buddha wrote books on his own ???

I have typically seen this kind of sectarian exacting among new / young people. I feel like there is a desire to ascribe to something and “get it exactly right”. I expect that these same people will mellow as they age and get more experience.

Perhaps an example of intolerance and exclusionist mentality in Buddhism?

To quarrel with someone and/or cause hatred because of such a matter is - in the light of the Dharma (or Dhamma - just as you please) - totally absurd. Nothing could be further away from the heart of the Buddha's techings...

I have seen this particularly strong tendency among Theravada monks to reject Sanskrit. I think they also tend to associate Sanskrit with language of the Vedas and have a strong attachment to their views. In my experience attachment to rigid views stunts a person’s growth. There is fascinating work done by Yogacarins such as Vasubandhu and Asanga. Just limiting oneself to one single school is counter productive. There are brilliant commentaries in several non-Theravada schools.

You have a beautiful community here and we love you just the way you are

Hello Doug. I would like to bring in a different perspective here.

Linguistically, Dhamma or Dharma are just two terms, ideally, carrying the same meaning belonging to two different Indic languages, Pali (Prakrit) and Sanskrit respectively.
However, over the ages the two terms have grasped different meanings around them. While you did cover the Theravada and Mahayana aspect of these terms, I feel you missed on its Brahmanical meaning.

Dharma over the centuries, following the demise of Buddhism in India, has attained the Brahmanical notion of upholding the varna (caste) system. Brahmanical scriptures like the Manusmriti, time and again, reaffirm upholding the varna order as the greatest ideal of Dharma. Whereas Dhamma denotes morality and the righteous way of living as taught by the Budhha. And precisely for this reason, Dr. Ambedkar, too, refrains from using Dharma and instead uses Dhamma in his masterpiece - The Buddha and his Dhamma.

I agree that for your Western audiences Dharma is a much familiar term. However, as a non-Brahman Indian, I would, too, any day favour Dhamma over Dharma. After all, semantics do matter.

Doesn't matter Dhamma or Dharma
Its your personal choice, you are the most knowledgeable person in field of Buddhism I've seen so far on the internet.

Great video as always, Doug. I agree in that I feel it is rather frivolous to get so worked up on terminology, especially when the words (e.g. Dhamma and Dharma) mean the exact same thing. I also feel that it makes perfect sense to use the Sanskrit terms when speaking to a general audience, since Sanskrit is the closest there is to a Pan-Buddhist language. Even monks and scholars within the Theravāda generally need to have some knowledge of Sanskrit in order to ascertain certain grammatical and etymological points in Pāli. There is of course no perfect Pan-Buddhist language, but I think that's just a showing of one of the greatest boons to Buddhism: an incredible amount of cultural diversity.

Dharma is just your obligations to fulfill in this lifetime