Beginning with a disrespect towards commentaries

A discussion on all aspects of Theravāda Buddhism
User avatar
Eko Care
Posts: 1107
Joined: Mon Mar 18, 2019 7:13 am

Beginning with a disrespect towards commentaries

Post by Eko Care »

When a beginner enters to Buddhism,
there are many Gurus eagerly waiting,
to wash their brain in a subtle way.

And if any newbie begins learning,
through a particular teacher of the modern western world,
he would most probably be injected,
some of the odd views,
along with good Sutta explanations.

Either by personal views of these teachers,
or by chronological approaches of them,
the beginner will have been fed,
a subtle disrespect towards commentaries.

With this disrespect,
the beginner will not learn,
the value of the commentaries,
and valuable interpretations in them,
at least to a considerable degree.

His mind may argue that
"I'm not going to place any later material over the Buddha's own words",
yes! it is correct,
nevertheless,
he will not be able to identify that
the interpretation of the text,
he is currently using,
is more later than the Commentary.

By thinking in a modern interpretation,
and by disrespecting early Sangha,
either he will end up with views,
or he commit demerit at least,
which will contribute again,
towards a net of views.
User avatar
Aloka
Posts: 7797
Joined: Wed Jan 21, 2009 2:51 pm

Re: Beginning with a disrespect towards commentaries

Post by Aloka »

Constantly speculating about such things is pointless - and can become interfering attempts at brainwashing newcomers in itself. Please allow people to have some intelligence and common sense to enable them to discern what is right for themselves, instead of trying to take control all the time.


:anjali:
User avatar
Eko Care
Posts: 1107
Joined: Mon Mar 18, 2019 7:13 am

Re: Beginning with a disrespect towards commentaries

Post by Eko Care »

Aloka wrote: Mon Apr 12, 2021 4:26 pm Constantly speculating about such things is pointless - and can become interfering attempts at brainwashing newcomers in itself.
May be, to a rational boundary-less person.
Aloka wrote: Mon Apr 12, 2021 4:26 pm can become interfering attempts at brainwashing newcomers in itself.
That is what the OP do address. You have proven OP by this comment.
Aloka wrote: Mon Apr 12, 2021 4:26 pm Please allow people to have some intelligence and common sense to enable them to discern what is right for themselves,
You repeat what OP says.
Aloka wrote: Mon Apr 12, 2021 4:26 pm instead of trying to take control all the time.
Isn't this comment a way of trying to take control, as usual?
Last edited by Eko Care on Mon Apr 12, 2021 5:18 pm, edited 3 times in total.
dharmacorps
Posts: 2298
Joined: Thu Aug 06, 2015 7:33 pm

Re: Beginning with a disrespect towards commentaries

Post by dharmacorps »

Disrespect to the dhamma can be shown in many forms. Don't worry about other's disrespect, look at where you are showing disrespect.
User avatar
mikenz66
Posts: 19943
Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2009 7:37 am
Location: Aotearoa, New Zealand

Re: Beginning with a disrespect towards commentaries

Post by mikenz66 »

Eko Care wrote: Mon Apr 12, 2021 3:22 pm His mind may argue that
"I'm not going to place any later material over the Buddha's own words",
yes! it is correct,
nevertheless,
he will not be able to identify that
the interpretation of the text,
he is currently using,
is more later than the Commentary.
I'm always suspicious of pronouncements along the lines of: "I just follow the Buddha's teachings...". The unspoken subtext usually seems to be: "... and you don't... ".

I try to give others the benefit of the doubt, and assume that all serious practitioners are trying to understand and follow the Buddha's teachings. All are influenced by what they have heard, read, and experienced, so their current interpretations differ in various ways.

So, I would rephrase the conceit more generally as:
They do not identify that their current interpretation of the texts is likely to be imperfect.
Maybe there some awakened beings whose understanding is perfect do post on internet forums. I have no way of confirming or denying that, of course...

:heart:
Mike
User avatar
pitithefool
Posts: 343
Joined: Mon Feb 15, 2021 5:39 am

Re: Beginning with a disrespect towards commentaries

Post by pitithefool »

mikenz66 wrote: Mon Apr 12, 2021 7:21 pm
Maybe there some awakened beings whose understanding is perfect do post on internet forums. I have no way of confirming or denying that, of course...

:heart:
Mike
The only things we really have are those suttas, the commentaries, and the modern practitioners. How can we tell if another being is enlightened when we ourselves may not be? The only way to tell what is trustworthy is to tally it with the suttas, and tally it with the vinaya.
Please note: This profile picture is not actually a picture of the user.
SarathW
Posts: 21233
Joined: Mon Sep 10, 2012 2:49 am

Re: Beginning with a disrespect towards commentaries

Post by SarathW »

pitithefool wrote: Tue Apr 13, 2021 2:39 am
mikenz66 wrote: Mon Apr 12, 2021 7:21 pm
Maybe there some awakened beings whose understanding is perfect do post on internet forums. I have no way of confirming or denying that, of course...

:heart:
Mike
The only things we really have are those suttas, the commentaries, and the modern practitioners. How can we tell if another being is enlightened when we ourselves may not be? The only way to tell what is trustworthy is to tally it with the suttas, and tally it with the vinaya.
Agree.
Let alone Sutta, commentaries and the interpretation of teachers we have to keep open eye on other religions as well as modern science etc.
Even if you have the living Buddha it is not possible to have a perfect solution to learning.
Basically there is no solution to this problem in my opinion.
“As the lamp consumes oil, the path realises Nibbana”
User avatar
DooDoot
Posts: 12032
Joined: Tue Aug 08, 2017 11:06 pm

Re: Beginning with a disrespect towards commentaries

Post by DooDoot »

Eko Care wrote: Mon Apr 12, 2021 3:22 pm a subtle disrespect towards commentaries.
There appear two problems with the above idea:

1. The commentaries are not even readily accessible for beginners to read.

2. The suttas (DN 16, for example) clearly say the Buddha taught everything necessary.
pitithefool wrote: Tue Apr 13, 2021 2:39 am The only things we really have are those suttas, the commentaries, and the modern practitioners.
Really? Can you provide a link to the commentaries? Thanks
Eko Care wrote: Mon Apr 12, 2021 3:22 pm he commit demerit at least,
Example of a commentary is here.
Eko Care wrote: Mon Apr 12, 2021 1:14 pm which will contribute again,
towards a net of views
The below sounds like a very tangled up net of views.
Eko Care wrote: Mon Apr 12, 2021 3:22 pmClassical Theravada followers had the interpretation of the word "Thatagata" as the "Being/Satta/Atta" in those (Abyakata Vagga) specific suttas's commentaries. Therefore, most of the non-classical Theravadins who disrespect the commentaries, have the risk of being trapped in to "Puggala Vada".
:shrug:
There is always an official executioner. If you try to take his place, It is like trying to be a master carpenter and cutting wood. If you try to cut wood like a master carpenter, you will only hurt your hand.

https://soundcloud.com/doodoot/paticcasamuppada
https://soundcloud.com/doodoot/anapanasati
User avatar
pitithefool
Posts: 343
Joined: Mon Feb 15, 2021 5:39 am

Re: Beginning with a disrespect towards commentaries

Post by pitithefool »

DooDoot wrote: Tue Apr 13, 2021 3:54 am
1. The commentaries are not even readily accessible for beginners to read.

2. The suttas (DN 16, for example) clearly say the Buddha taught everything necessary.
We only have incomplete translations in Enligsh of the sutta pitaka, let alone its commentaries and subcommentaries.
pitithefool wrote: Tue Apr 13, 2021 2:39 am The only things we really have are those suttas, the commentaries, and the modern practitioners.
Really? Can you provide a link to the commentaries? Thanks
[/quote]

:shrug: Not really tbh. The main source I have for information on the Pali commentaries is what I've heard here and from others plus whatever I've read in Bhikkhu Bodhi's translations.

One of the main problems I have with the commentaries is (especially for beginners) they seem to complicate things. I remember the first time I was reading through the Nikayas that are available in English, I kept going to the notes section (BB transl.) to look at the comments when I got confused about something. My teachers all told me, and I quote, "don't worry about the commentaries, just read the suttas". If you don't cross reference things found in the suttas with commentaries but rather with other suttas, I think that's better,

Another problem I've already hinted at is that sometimes you find things in commentaries that both conflict with other commentaries and with the suttas. The suttas, as far as I can tell, do not contradict themselves, so I think it can be assumed that they're a little more reliable from that alone.

Finally some food for though: A lot of the commentaryi in Pali dates from a time between when the Tipitaka was commited to writing until the the advent of the internet. One thing I often take for granted is how easy it is, using say accesstoinsight, to search the suttas based on key words, phrases or subject. Nobody in the past would have been able to do that unless they had the canon completely committed to memory and I don't think (but correct me if I'm wrong) that would have been really commonplace after the canon was written down.

I can't 100% defend suttavadi but I could never in my right mind place the commentary at the same level of authority as the suttas. I do agree that a huge amount can be learned from them and they shouldn't be denounced completely, but like I said, they can apparently contradict the suttas/vinaya and we have a the internet now to quickly and reliably cross reference scripture to see if and where those inconsistencies exist.
Please note: This profile picture is not actually a picture of the user.
User avatar
Ceisiwr
Posts: 22402
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2009 2:36 am
Location: Wales

Re: Beginning with a disrespect towards commentaries

Post by Ceisiwr »

pitithefool wrote: Tue Apr 13, 2021 2:08 pm
Finally some food for though: A lot of the commentaryi in Pali dates from a time between when the Tipitaka was commited to writing until the the advent of the internet.
They are likely older than that, possibly 250 BC if not earlier. Roughly 150 years after the Buddha’s life ran out. Some suttas actually contain commentary within them. All of the prose section of the Uddanas likely are. If we look to some of the Sarvāstivādin Agamas what is commentary in Theravada is found as part of the sutra there. Likely other Pali Suttas contain commentary also.
“Knowing that this body is just like foam,
understanding it has the nature of a mirage,
cutting off Māra’s flower-tipped arrows,
one should go beyond the King of Death’s sight.”
User avatar
pitithefool
Posts: 343
Joined: Mon Feb 15, 2021 5:39 am

Re: Beginning with a disrespect towards commentaries

Post by pitithefool »

Ceisiwr wrote: Tue Apr 13, 2021 2:21 pm
pitithefool wrote: Tue Apr 13, 2021 2:08 pm
Here this brings up an interesting point.

I would still honestly argue that a new interpretation that tallies with the suttas and vinaya is still better than an old one that does not.

Even if we consider that some of the suttas may indeed be commentary, those suttas are still to be taken as more authoritative based on their age.

In short, the suttas contained in the sutta pitaka should be taken as most authoritative, and all commentaries and later material should be read and tallied with them as best as possible to see if they conflict.

The reason that I argue this is because it's very possible that the consensus had strayed from the original view over thousands of yours and we should therefore take the oldest texts as authoritative in order to tell if and where subtle differences have accumulated over time from the original.

I think we should also strive to discern what the Buddha originally taught as well and that in itself can be a dangerous path. I think if we're trying to figure out what the Buddha had originally taught, we have to work with the possibility that what we have today might not represent the Buddha's message accurately, but also that it may be genuine. From that, we should construct from what we have a set rules to tell whether a teaching should be accepted or not.

I think the most important factors would be: (in no real order)

1.Whether it tallies with the oldest and most authoritative texts
2.Age of the text in question
3.Whether parallels can be found in different recensions of the texts
4.And whether practicing it results in the third noble truth

I'm pretty convinced that the advice given in the sutta pitaka ion this subject can at the very least give us the tools we need to discern dhamma from adhamma if we examine it carefully.

But hey, those are just my 2 cents. I don't claim ultimate knowledge in anything, much less this
Please note: This profile picture is not actually a picture of the user.
User avatar
SDC
Posts: 9062
Joined: Mon Dec 14, 2009 11:08 pm

Re: Beginning with a disrespect towards commentaries

Post by SDC »

I used to be a “commentaries aren’t necessary” guy until several members here, along with AK Warder, took me to school on just how invaluable the work of ancient grammarians and scholars is to the translation process. So as we sit here and read the suttas, it is impossible to bypass the what the commentaries have already provided. I’ve recently repeated a famous line: “translation is interpretation”, and there is no doubt that how the oral tradition was interpreted by the ancients is inherently part of how the suttas have been translated in modern times; and that is prior to the introduction of any additional interpretive material. So I do not believe there is even a valid position where someone could deny the significance and importance of the commentaries as they read English translations that would be seriously deficient without the work of the ancient scholars.

Now if people want to object to a twofold application of the commentaries, where, from Pali rendered to English, a scholar takes a second pass to further interpret the meaning, then I believe such objections are valid. I won’t go as far as to say that this practice of double dipping is completely redundant and pointless, but readers should bear in mind that the translator has already done so and there is no guarantee that this second pass has gotten you any closer to knowing how to train. In fact it may have just added a bunch of tasteless pork into your starter-knowledge, which if there is too much, can become burdensome. This is a serious impasse, at which point the reader is faced with how to appropriately apply these ideas.

This is when a teacher becomes invaluable. Not a teacher who guides you through their interpretation of how their teacher interpreted the ancient’s interpretation of the suttas, but a teacher who can steer towards the context within which the suttas apply now, i.e. a teacher who can use their knowledge to show you where in your experience you need to look for the things that are described so you can go to work. So instead of getting mired in multiple layers of interpretation, none of which apply to you, find a teacher who shows you - using whatever words are rightly directed - the two layers that matter the most: the wrong view that is held and the right view that is the aspiration.

In short, find “another’s utterance” who doesn’t teach you how to just accumulate facts once you’ve reached that impasse, but one who shows you where to repeatedly apply and push those facts in order for progress to be made.

Edit: spelling and grammar, I blame my new iPhone
“Life is swept along, short is the life span; no shelters exist for one who has reached old age. Seeing clearly this danger in death, a seeker of peace should drop the world’s bait.” SN 1.3
plabit
Posts: 63
Joined: Fri Mar 19, 2021 2:49 am

Re: Beginning with a disrespect towards commentaries

Post by plabit »

SDC wrote: Tue Apr 13, 2021 4:41 pm I used to be a “commentaries aren’t necessary” guy until several members here, along with AK Warder, took me to school on just how invaluable the work of ancient grammarians and scholars is to the translation process.
Its a specious argument though. Rabbi Tovia Singer makes this argument in his attempts to convert Christians to Judaism. "The king james translators accepted the Talmud! So you should too and become a Jew!" Because philologists use all available material in an ancient language when making a dictionary, of course the Hebrew dictionary makers used the Talmud, and of course for Pali they use the so-called commentaries. But using a text to help define words in an ancient language with a rather limited literature and subjugating yourself to that text as a doctrinal aurhority are two completely different things.
plabit
Posts: 63
Joined: Fri Mar 19, 2021 2:49 am

Re: Beginning with a disrespect towards commentaries

Post by plabit »

DooDoot wrote: Tue Apr 13, 2021 3:54 am 1. The commentaries are not even readily accessible for beginners to read.
The same scholars who could translate the commentaries but refuse to, argue we should follow the commentaries. In the end what they mean is "I can make up whatever I want, say its in the commentaries, and you must believe me." Until there are at least 3 different translations of a text in English, it doesn't exist. That is, the average person has no way to judge the accuracy of the translation except by comparing to other translations. So until 3 exist, yelling "follow the commentaries, bigot" is meaningless.
User avatar
Eko Care
Posts: 1107
Joined: Mon Mar 18, 2019 7:13 am

Re: Beginning with a disrespect towards commentaries

Post by Eko Care »

SDC wrote: Tue Apr 13, 2021 4:41 pm I used to be a “commentaries aren’t necessary” guy until several members here, along with AK Warder, took me to school on just how invaluable the work of ancient grammarians and scholars is to the translation process. So as we sit here and read the suttas, it is impossible to bypass the what the commentaries have already provided. I’ve recently repeated a famous line: “translation is interpretation”, and there is no doubt that how the oral tradition was interpreted by the ancients is inherently part of how the suttas have been translated in modern times; and that is prior to the introduction of any additional interpretive material. So I do not believe there is even a valid position where someone could deny the significance and importance of the commentaries as they read English translations that would be seriously deficient without the work of the ancient scholars.
We can see the views of many Buddhists have changed after they matured.
And also we can see the difference between Mature and Naive approaches by looking at the quality of their works and admirers of them.
Eko Care wrote: Tue Apr 13, 2021 2:22 am
salayatananirodha wrote: Tue Mar 30, 2021 5:45 am I want to know why ñāṇananda is so critical of visuddhimagga in his works but his meditation teacher ñāṇarāma appears to rely on it
Ven. nanarama had said the below to current abbot ven. Dhammajiva while bhikkhu Nananada was not present.

"If the critisizers of ven. Buddhagosa can understand that they don't possess at least one tenth of the knowledge and wisdom of ven. Buddhaghosa, they will never do that"
Question about Nanarama's stages of purification
And Maria Heim is one of the very few scholars ...
Despite more than two hundred years of modern academic study of the Pali literature, Pali commentaries still remain understudied. We know very little about the reading practices of the traditional Pali commentators and philosophers themselves. Maria Heim is one of the very few scholars invested in filling this major lacuna in Buddhist studies.
Voice of the Buddha: Buddhaghosa on the Immeasurable Words. By Maria Heim (Oxford University Press, 2018). Interview by Richard Marshall.
  • I have tried to point out that modern ways of reading based on historicist philology that began in the late 18thcentury in Europe are hardly universal. As we note that the theories and interpretative practices of modern philology are themselves products of a certain localized history, we can become aware of alternative ways of reading and thinking about texts from other times and places that were innocent of them.
  • I have always been fascinated in how context can change the meaning of an utterance. The utterance “I love you” has different reference, feeling-tone, and purpose when whispered the first time to one’s lover, called out to one’s five-year old on the school bus on the first day of school, spoken to one’s dying parent, or shouted out to fans by a celebrity. What it "means" seems to differ in these cases. Buddhaghosa is also sensitive to this when he reads the Buddha's sermons, which are always embedded in stories of the people with whom the Buddha spoke when he gave his sermons. In Buddhaghosa's reading these narratives can be one key for unlocking some of the meaning and significance of the doctrinal message of the sermon because the commentary can show how the message spoke to them in their particular circumstances.
  • This idea is foreign to Buddhists so I don’t frame Buddhaghosa’s thinking around the “will” nor around the question of “free will.” This is not to say that he was not interested in freedom – indeed his entire program is an effort to achieve it.
  • Readers should probably read Buddhaghosa's own words if they are interested in this – Bhikkhu Nanamoli's translation of the Visuddhimagga is a gem.
  • I find myself in much sympathy with Nyanaponika Thera's Abhidhamma Studies.
  • Philology is terribly out of fashion these days ..
Last edited by Eko Care on Tue Apr 13, 2021 7:54 pm, edited 4 times in total.
Post Reply