Dear D.C.
I'd like to comment on this statement of yours:
"For me commentaries are interpretations. So they have no value." taken from
the following :
<< 2. However, I found the word in the Commentaries. For me commentaries are
interpretations. So they have no value. But more importantly, we have no
way of giving them a meaning. I give below three instances of aveti in the
commentaries.>>
I agree that the commentaries are interpretations but I don't agree with
your conclusion that they therefore have no value. The commntaries
(aṭṭhakathās) were around long before Mahinda brought them to Sri Lanka and
rendered them into Old Sinhalase and afterwards restored to their Pali
originals by Buddhaghosa. They represent a time-honoured and widely-accepted
interpretation of what the Buddha and his disciples once said long long ago.
In my view, the commentaries have immense value.
You aren't the only one to dismiss the value of the commentaries. I once
knew a Sinhalese bhikkhu, a former head of the Toronto Mahavihara, who
rejected the commentaries as well as the Abhidhammapiṭaka. My view is that
any text that is written in reasonably good Pali is worthy of consideration.
They all have something of value to offer.
Best wishes,
Jim
----- Original Message -----
From: "Dc Wijeratna dcwijeratna@... [palistudy]"
<palistudy@yahoogroups.com>
To: <palistudy@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: December 5, 2014 10:50 AM
Subject: Re: [palistudy] avagamana
Dear Bryan, Ven. Bodhi, and Jim
*Avecca, Acala and Aveti*
My comments are as follows:
1. To start with I must make a confession. I don’t know Sanskrit; I don’t
know Pali (language) either.
2. I accept only the words attributed to Lord Buddha (Bhagavā Buddho,
usually shortened Bhagavā in the Suttas.) as the vocabulary of the Teaching
of the Buddha; not Buddhism.