>I think when people do not immediately understand a Co phrase, they
>may think that the Co is wrong, but why is the fault with the Co?

Perhaps it's important for us to always try to be aware of the
reading strategies we are using at a given time. Two (of many
possible ones) are practice-oriented reading and language-oriented
reading. I think you post is a very good and useful explanation of
practice-oriented reading, where the goal is to support and develop
mindfulness and insight training through the canon and commentaries.
To a certain degree then, the canon is interpreted through the lense
of a scholastically-developed system (theravaada orthodoxy).
Peculiarities in the canon tend to be evened out in favor of
doctrinal regularity.

Language-oriented reading treats Pali as a middle indic language
which can be approached through many avenues, including the
commentaries, but also through comparison with other middle indic
languages and through other research tools. The goal is to understand
what texts meant to the people that originally spoke and heard them.
Sometimes this research discovers that later commentators have a
wrong understanding of a word or sentence. The commentator's
udnerstanding might be fine for orthodox practice, but it's probably
not linguistically what was originally meant. Similarly scientists
can claim that dinasours lived millions of years ago, though they may
face opposition from people who believe the Bible's account that the
world is only 5000 years old.

I don't think these two methods of study and practice need to oppose
each other. But if a statement coming from one of these approaches is
interpreted as though it were coming from the other, it will sound
wrong. Practice-oriented statements, interpreted as though they were
scholarly, will seem uncritical and dogmatically rigid.
Language-oriented statements interpreted as though they were
practice-oriented will seem prideful, overly critical and faithless.
But if we are clear about the sort of statements we are making, and
read each other in that light, then I don't believe there need be any
conflict between the two.

best regards,

/Rett

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]