English
Regarding "suitable meaning," here in the Majjhimagaṇṭhipada and Cūḷagaṇṭhipada, this was said: " 'Suitable meaning' means the meaning suitable for the place to be commented on, and it is not said that there is also something unsuitable there." But in the Mahāgaṇṭhipada, nothing was said about this. But by someone, it was said, "suitable meaning according to the Mahāaṭṭhakathā method or the Vinaya logic." That seems suitable, because even in the Mahāpaccariya and others, an unsuitable meaning is sometimes explained. If it were said, "I will make the commentary taking only the Aṭṭhakathā," then the Theravāda teachings stated in the Aṭṭhakathās might be excluded. Desiring to include them too, he said "including the Theravāda." It means "having included even the Theravāda." "Saṃvaṇṇanaṃ" is the designation of the action for the subsequent verb. But the word "saṃvaṇṇanaṃ" mentioned earlier, should be construed there as the object of the prior verb "beginning." "Sammā" should be said. It should be understood that the shortness is due to the verse structure. Having shown the method of doing this, now, showing the method to be practiced by the listeners, he says, "That to me," and so on. This is what is meant: "Now, that description of mine, the Dhamma of the Lamp of Dhamma, the Tathāgata, the Dhamma of the teaching, or the Pāli Dhamma, the bhikkhus—the elders, being endowed with firm aggregates of virtue, etc., and the novices, being recently ordained, and the middlings, being in between them—with serene minds, believing it to be useful in the aforementioned way and authoritative according to the method to be explained later, with minds full of joy and delight, without being overcome by envy, should listen and hear." Therein, "of the Lamp of Dhamma" means that Dhamma itself is like a lamp because it dispels the darkness of delusion in beings, so the Buddha is the Lamp of Dhamma. "Of that Lamp of Dhamma." Now, having shown the purity of the tradition in his own description, and showing its authoritativeness, he says, "By the Buddha," and so on. Just as the Dhamma and Vinaya were spoken by the Buddha, so were they known in the same way by his sons, such as the Dhamma-commander. The Sinhalese Aṭṭhakathā teachers, being intelligent beings among those Buddha's sons, made the Aṭṭhakathās previously—this is the connection here. Therein, "Dhamma" includes the Suttas and Abhidhamma, and "Vinaya" means the entire Vinaya Piṭaka. By this, all of the Buddha's words are indicated. For all of the Buddha's words are of two kinds: Dhamma and Vinaya. "Spoken" means spoken by the Buddha, the Blessed One, both in Pāli and in meaning. For there is no text or word that was not explained by the Blessed One; the meaning of all of them was told. Therefore, it should be seen that the order of explaining the meaning of the three Piṭakas was also spoken by the Perfectly Self-Enlightened One himself. For the scattered teachings given by the Blessed One here and there are indeed the Aṭṭhakathās. "Known in the same way" means that just as it was spoken by the Buddha, so it was known without destroying a single word or a single letter, and the intention... and without distorting it, it is known and understood. "Not abandoning their intention" means not abandoning the intention of those sons of the Buddha. "They made commentaries" means they made the commentaries. In some places, the reading "aṭṭhakathāmakaṃsū" is seen, but even there the meaning is the same, and the 'ma' sound should be understood as having come about due to word-junction. By the plural designation "Aṭṭhakathā," it includes the Mahāpaccariya and so forth. "Therefore" means, because they made the commentaries earlier without distorting the intention of those sons of the Buddha, therefore. "Hī" is merely a particle, as the meaning of cause is already expressed by "tasmā" (therefore). If everything stated in the commentaries is authoritative, then even careless writings therein would be authoritative, so it says, "excluding careless writings." There, "careless writings" refers to careless readings that arose later due to writing carelessly during the time of being recorded in books. This is what is meant: whatever was written carelessly, without establishing mindfulness, like the statement "dukkata for both truth and falsehood" in the preliminary application of taking what is not given, that should be excluded and removed; everything else is authoritative. For it will be said there: "However, in the Mahāaṭṭhakathā, it is said that there is a dukkata for both truth and falsehood; that should be known as carelessly written. For there is no such thing as a dukkata in the place of a pācittiya in the preliminary application of taking what is not given." (Pārā. Aṭṭha. 1.94). For whom is it authoritative? It says, "for the wise here who are respectful of the trainings." "Here" means in this Dispensation. Again, what is the connection of the word "yasmā" (since)? Here, nothing is said in the Mahāgaṇṭhipada and Gaṇṭhipada, but in the Majjhimagaṇṭhipada and Cūḷagaṇṭhipada, this is said: "Since it is authoritative, therefore, listen with pleased minds." Its connection should be understood thus. The Elder Vajirabuddhi says, completing the sentence, "Since what is stated in the commentaries is authoritative, therefore, what is stated here is also authoritative." There, "here" means in this Samantapāsādikā. should be taken. There, concerning the word "yasmā" (because), to show that this commentary now being spoken, is only different in terms of mere words, but in meaning is the same as the Aṭṭhakathā, because all that was said in the Aṭṭhakathās is proven to be authoritative by the connection stated first, he says, "tato ca bhāsantaramevā" (and from that, only a change of language), and so on. But if it is asked, why is what is said here also authoritative, by the connection stated later? Because, setting aside the mere words, this too is the Aṭṭṭhakathā itself, to show that it is authoritative, he says, "tato ca bhāsantaramevā" (and from that, only a change of language), and so on. Thus, the connection in the difficult passages has been shown in a confused and hard-to-understand way. But the venerable Acariya Buddhaghosa's words are not confused. Indeed, he would not speak in such a confused way. Therefore, we will show the intended meaning in an unconfused and easily understandable way, according to the existing connection. How? Because what is said in the Aṭṭhakathās is authoritative, therefore it should be diligently studied. Thus, the connection here should be seen. If it is said that what is in the Aṭṭhakathās is authoritative, but why should this commentary now being spoken be diligently studied? He says, "tato ca bhāsantarameva hitvā" (having left only the change of language), and so on. This is what is meant: Because what is said in the Aṭṭhakathās is authoritative, and because this commentary is distinguished only by the abandonment of a different language, and so on, but in meaning is not different, and for that very reason it will be authoritative, therefore it should be diligently studied with respect. Thus, the authoritativeness of the ancient Aṭṭhakathās, and the non-difference in meaning of this commentary from them, distinguished only by the abandonment of a different language, and so on— both of these should be seen as reasons for its being diligently studied. Indeed, even if the ancient Aṭṭhakathās are authoritative, it cannot be said that this commentary, being different from them and having a different meaning, should be diligently studied. Nor, even if this commentary is not different from them, if the ancient Aṭṭhakathās are not authoritative, can it be said that this commentary should be diligently It is proper to say 'should be trained in'; therefore, both of these, in the manner stated, should be seen as the reason for diligent training. 'Tato' means from the commentaries. 'Having abandoned the foreign language' means having removed the Sinhala language, which is like a garment. 'And having condensed the extensive path' means the intention is to explain by condensing such an extensive path, like the detailed explanation of the four acts, starting with 'apalokana', which is elaborated here and there in "a bhikkhu is one who has been ordained by a motion-fourth act, unshakeable, worthy of the status" (Pārā. 45), bringing what is stated above in the ancient commentaries. For thus he will say – "Here, only the motion-fourth act is mentioned, but in this place, it is said in all commentaries that one should extract the four Sangha acts and explain them in detail. And these, having been arranged in order as 'declaration act, motion act, motion-second act, motion-fourth act', are explained in detail by bringing the Pāli text from the Khandhaka and from the Kammavibhaṅga at the end of the Parivāra. We will explain these in the Kammavibhaṅga at the end of the Parivāra. If this is so, the explanation of the first Pārājika will not be burdensome, and the explanation of the Pāli as it stands will be easily understood, and those places will not be empty. Therefore, we will only provide a word-by-word explanation." (Pārā. Aṭṭha. 1.45 Bhikkhupadabhājanīyavaṇṇanā). 'Having not left out any decision' means having not left out any decision stated in those respective commentaries, having not made any remainder; it means not having abandoned even a little. By explaining the Pāli that has come in order, without abandoning what is proper to explain, and by explaining in its proper place what was explained in an improper place in the Sinhala commentaries, it is said 'without transgressing any order of the text'. The intention is that we will explain in order, without transgressing any order of the Pāli text. Of the words of the Suttanta experts the meaning of the words that appear in the Suttanta Pāli. It is the intention to fully explain