Re: Dhs 981

Thank you for your able and learned defense of the information you
kindly provided us. Some years ago I tried to extend my understanding
of Pali beyond the Sutta Pitaka, so I have some appreciation of how
formidable Commentarial Pali can be.  I don't wish to trouble you,
but how do you suggest one go about becoming acquainted with the Pali
of Buddhaghosa and Dhammapaala?   How extensive must one's knowledge
of the Abhidhamma be in order to make use of the Commentaries?  Is it
best just to begin with the Visuddhimagga and persevere until one
becomes accustomed to its style and terminology, or are there
particular texts that might prove helpful and less dry and difficult
for the beginner?  Any comments or suggestions would be highly valued
from you.
Dear Joseph Dawson,

Thank you for your kind note.

In my opinion, Dhammapaala is a far superior scholar to Buddhaghosa,
with a highly intimate acquaintance with the (non-Buddhist) Indian
tradition as a whole, ranging from such things as medicinal remedies
to musical composition and notation, dramatic dance postures, and the
like, not to mention the 20 or 22 types of bride.

As to your question as to how to set about learning commentarial
Pali, I must confess that there is, as far as I am aware, no actual
text available that really introduces one to anything but a
superficial knowledge of Pali, and at that always canonical Pali.
Maybe I should try to produce one dealing with commentarial Pali one
of these days, if only the funding were to become available.

Warder's "Introduction to Pali" is good as far as it goes, but is
confined to the language of the Diighanikaaya.  There are several
other books, but none seems to embrace commentarial Pali.  It is not
so much a question of a development in the meaning of terms between
the two bodies of literature.  The real difficulty lies rather in
understanding the style and syntax of commentarial Pali.  I do not
know whether you are aware of my translation of the Udaana commentary
(Pali Text Society,1994-1995), but in the introduction to same I give
a few general remarks about the method of composition of such texts,
and the real reasons for same.

Probably the best way to start is to take some commentary (and there
are few) which have already been translated, and then compare the
original with its translation.  In my own case, I was originally
asked to revise a translation of the Petavatthu commentary originally
produced in Burma.  In the end, I had to re-do the whole thing, and
then re-do it yet again, since I had, in the meantime, learned so
much.  All a bit like repainting the Sydney Harbour Bridge--when you
get to the end of the job, the first section already needs
repainting !

I do not think the Visuddhimagga would be the best place to start. 
Actually, I prefer Dhammapaala's style, and you might start with my
own translation of the commentaries on the Petavatthu and
Vimaanavatthu--very enjoyable texts in themselves, and less cluttered
with doctrine/dogma.

Of course, the commentaries frequently allude to aspects of the
teaching that have long since been lost to us.  Once the composer of
a commentary finished his summary of all the extant commentaries
available to him, he seems to have discarded the originals which he
had been summarising, just as someone writing an essay throws away
the initial drafts once the final version is completed.

Finally, although a knowledge of the Abhidhamma is surely useful,
there is, in my experience, surprisingly little reference to such
texts in the commentaries, save for commentaries on those texts
specifically belonging to the canonical Abhidhamma.

I hope I may have been of a little help.  If I can be of further
assistance, please do not hesitate in approaching me.

Peter Masefield.

--- In palistudy@..., Robert Kirkpatrick <robertkirkpatrick@...>
wrote:
> dear mike,
> the forwarded note didn't come through,
> robert
> --- "m. nease" <mlnease@...> wrote:
> > Dear Jim,--- Jim Anderson  wrote:> In spite of Tadao's
> > comments, I think your> translation isn't literal
> > enough!Thanks very much, I'm sure it isn't--exactly why I'm
> > here.  I'll work on it and respond at length when time
> > permits.Meanwhile I thought you might be interested in this
> > note and might, if you have time, like to contact Dr Masefield
> > if you haven't done already: From: Peter Masefield   To:
> > pali-intro-l@... Note: forwarded message attached.Fwd:
> > Re: sukara-maddava/commentarial pali

> http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/