Dear Robert,

thanks. There are two points I like to raise here.

1. As Buddha mentioned in the Kalama sutta on how we should exercise
proper examination on the suttas ourselves, the commentary can be
taken as the result of that exercise by someone before us. Of course,
we can always use it as a guide or reference, but ultimately the
understanding of the Buddha's teachings depends on ourselves.

2. The commentary explains the teachings. It may use a phrase for a
word, a sentence for a phrase, a paragraph for a sentence, to achieve
that. Or, it may omit a section of the text completely, as it sees
fit. Therefore, incorporating the commentary into a translation is not
advisable. Furthermore, by changing a word, a translator may have to
change a sentence; by changing a sentence, he may have to alter a
paragraph; by altering a paragraph, he may have to rewrite the sutta.

We have to remember that we are translating the sutta, not writing
what we think the sutta is about. Both have their own merits, but are
completely different.

metta,
Yong Peng.

--- In Pali@yahoogroups.com, rjkjp1 wrote:

I see, I thought your earlier meant we don't need to take account of
the Commentaries explanation of the meaning, now I understand.

> Allow me to explain my position by replying to your first
> two sentences.