Dear Rett and all,

At 02:15 AM 26-05-05, rett wrote:

>Yes, there seem to be two aspects in the commentary. One is that of
>paying attention to the passing away of wind-related sensations in
>the body. (such as the last micro-second of a breath or a burp or
>fart)

A fart? I'll try relax and pay more attention to it the next time I notice it coming. :-)

Anyway, I wouldn't think of "passing-away"s occurring only at the end of a breath or any bodily sensation.

>This could explain the impression described by Bhante Kumara,
>that the interpreters seem to stretch the interpretation beyond the
>most simple and obvious reading.

You hit the right nail on the head.

In highlighting the bit on "kaaye bhinne", I was just pointing out what is obvious. Reading the whole of that bit just makes me lose faith in the commentators. I suppose I can't simply put the blame on Ven Buddhaghosa, since (as I understand) he's just the compiler of the "official" views of the Mahavihara elders at that time. It is good for those who wish to understand this to read up the history. It's interesting and edifying to learn the context under which he compiled the Atthakathas. Perhaps even more interesting & important would be to learn about the history of the sponsor, i.e., the Mahavihara sect, which is moulded much of the present Theravadin teachings.

If anyone is interested in an alternative, modern commentary of the Satipatthana Sutta, I heartily suggest "Satipatthana: the direct path to realization" by (Ven) Analayo (BPS). Ven Bhikkhu Bodhi speaks very highly of the book in his review:
This book helps to fill what has been a glaring gap
in the scholarship on Early Buddhism...
His analysis combines the detached objectivity of the
academic scholar with the engaged concern of the
practitioner for whom meditation is a way of life rather
then just a subject of study.
The more I read it, the more I agree with him.

Again, I wish to say that the commentaries are helpful in many ways. I myself do sometimes refer to them for ideas, such as in preparing for talks. However, when it comes to stretching the meaning of the Pali, or adding its own ideas (particularly those that contradict the Pali) and apocryphal stories, I rather disappointed about them.

FYI, I was once a faithful, ultra-orthodox Theravadin. When met with Theravadin ideas that seems to disagree with simple reasoning, I constantly suppressed my own intellect and side with and even defended what was prevalently taught (which is very largely influenced by Pali commentarial ideas). But as I came to learn more, I began to see the silliness in that, and I can no longer go by orthodox views.

One issue close to me is about the antarabhava. Anyone interested?


peace

Kumâra Bhikkhu

An old error is always more popular than a new truth. (German proverb)