English
and later, the great elders of Tambapaṇṇi established it in the Sinhala language to prevent the mixing of doctrines from other schools. Since the Aṭṭhakathā, which consists of the Blessed One's scattered teachings and is in conformity with the suttas, was compiled and stated by the Dhamma-reciting elders in the manner of explaining the Pāli, therefore it is called 'the teachers' doctrine'. And by this, it should be understood that the Aṭṭhakathā is included in meaning within the suttas and what is in conformity with the suttas. And just as this is so, so too is one's own opinion authoritative. For even the chief disciples and others, without relying on the Buddha's word and what is in conformity with his word, cannot by their own power of knowledge state any conventional or ultimate truth in the suttas, abhidhamma, or vinaya. Therefore, all speech is included in the suttas and what is in conformity with the suttas. However, because the Aṭṭhakathā and so on are separately compiled, the remainder, taking it from the suttas and what is in conformity with the suttas, the Vinaya is designated as fourfold. Although one's own opinion is formulated only by comparing it with the suttas and so on, nevertheless, it is not specifically stated in the suttas and so on, therefore it is said: 'apart from the suttas, what is in conformity with the suttas, and the teachers' doctrine'. By subsequent understanding, that is, the suttas and so on... by the understanding that follows. By grasping the method, by grasping the method obtained from the suttas and so on. Having first shown one's own opinion in general, now, specifying that same opinion, he says, "Moreover," and so on. There, by the saying, "in the suttantas, abhidhamma, vinaya, and commentaries," it should be understood that this statement is common to all three Pitakas. Theravāda means the acceptance of the Elder Mahāsumma and others. Now, showing the way to proceed there, he says, "But that," and so on. There, by the meaning, by the meaning grasped by oneself according to the method. The Pāḷi, the Pāḷi with commentary, which is the basis of one's own acceptance. By the Pāḷi, by the Pāḷi with commentary brought by another for its refutation, relying on the meaning grasped by oneself, and comparing it with the Pāḷi, this is the meaning. In the teacher's doctrine, in the commentary extracted by oneself and by another. Should be introduced, should be entered into with knowledge. It enters and it agrees, it enters by way of comparison with what one has extracted, it agrees with what another has extracted. All weak, said because of the absence of true understanding of the meaning due to the defilement-tendencies of a non-omniscient person. That there might be a discrepancy between the teacher's doctrine and the suttas due to error in recitation, he says, "The other should not be accepted." It should be accepted completely, he shows that only such meanings as agree with the suttas should be extracted from the great authorities, because only such extracted meanings are in accordance with the suttas. Therefore he says, "For the sutta is stronger than the sutta's conformity." Or, even if the sutta's conformity is a part of the sutta, there is nothing directly stated, like in the sutta, "This is permissible, this is not permissible," he says, "The sutta... and so on... is stronger." Unassailable, unobstructable. Like the council-making Sangha, like the council-making Sangha because of its authority. "Like the time when the Buddhas were present," by this, he shows that it is the Dhamma taught by the Buddhas themselves, it is said to be like the living Buddha. For if the sutta is obstructed, the Buddha himself is obstructed. is. "One's own speaker, taking a discourse, speaks," means one's own speaker, taking his own discourse, uses it. "The other speaker, in accordance with the discourse," means a speaker of another school, taking what is in accordance with the discourse in his own school, speaks," so it is said in the Sāratthadīpanī (Sārattha. Ṭī. 2.45). However, in the Vimativinodanī (Vi. Vi. Ṭī. 1.45), it is said: "Regarding 'one's own speaker, taking a discourse, speaks,' etc., whoever is accustomed to taking and speaking the meaning as it truly is, that one is 'one's own speaker.' 'Discourse' means the Pāli text included in the three recitations. 'Other speaker,' whether he be a resident of the Great Monastery or a resident of another school, whoever is accustomed to taking and speaking the meaning in a contrary way, that one is here called 'other speaker.' 'In accordance with the discourse' means something that is presented as 'come from the three recitations,' whether it is included in the three recitations or not, through distortion or deception, as being in accordance with the discourse. Some say 'in accordance with the discourse of another school,' but that is not appropriate, because both one's own speaker and the other speaker must take only discourses, etc., that are included in the three recitations. For thus it will be said: 'What is included in the three recitations, come from the Pāli, is understood; it should be taken,' etc. (Pārā. Aṭṭha. 1.45). Indeed, one's own speaker does not take the discourse, etc., of another school as authoritative. So that when those discourses, etc., are shown, one should stand by them. And it will be said: 'The other shows many reasons and decisions from the discourse proving its unsuitability... and having accepted it as good, one should stand by what is unsuitable' (Pārā. Aṭṭha. 1.45). Therefore, even by the other speaker, what is not included in the three recitations is shown as not included. The only differences are the falsity of that discourse, etc., which is not in the three recitations, and the interpretation of the meaning otherwise by the shadow of the words of what is included. And there, what is false is removed. What is interpreted otherwise is compared with another discourse, etc., to show its contrary nature. But if the meaning taken by the other speaker is consistent with the Suttanta, etc., then one's own speaker, abandoning his own understanding, It should be known that for both, the Sutta that came from the Three Councils is the standard. Therefore, in the Kathāvatthu commentary, it is said: "Five hundred Suttas for one's own view, and five hundred for the other's view." Even a thousand Suttas, due to the diversity in grasping the meaning, are taken as those that came from the Three Councils, not from other Nikāyas. However, in the Vajirabuddhiṭīkā (Vajira. ṭī. Pārājika 45), it is said: "The opponent means one who knows our doctrine, belonging to another Nikāya." How does the opponent follow the Sutta? The Sutta "except for water for cleaning teeth" is for one's own view. In accordance with that, the water of a coconut fruit is also water, says the opponent. "The water of the coconut, When old, increases bile; That same water, when young, Suppresses bile, increases strength." When the opponent says this, the proponent, because it is a grain-fruit and because it spreads the meaning of food, refutes it by saying: "That is only for a certain time." "Without making a rejection or a censure" means: without making a rejection, a refutation, or a dismissal, saying "what is this?"; or a censure or blame, saying "what does this fool say, what does this fool know?" "Following the Sutta" means following the Sutta in another Nikāya, which is not stated by oneself. "It should be brought into the Sutta" means "it should be brought into the Sutta by one's own view," in the Sāratthadīpanī (Sārattha. ṭī. 2.45). However, in the Vimativinodanī (Vi. Vi. ṭī. 1.45), it is said: "It should be brought into the Sutta" means that the Sutta-conformity taken by oneself, which was made in conformity with a certain Sutta, should be brought into that Sutta, or into another Sutta similar to it, by way of correspondence in meaning. The meaning is that it should be shown by making it correspond, saying "for this and this reason, it corresponds in this Sutta." "One should stand only in the Sutta" means one should stand only in one's own Sutta. "Ayaṃ" means the proponent. "Paro" means the opponent. "The teacher's view should be brought into the Sutta" means that the teacher's view, which arose by way of explaining a certain Sutta, should be brought into that Sutta, or into another similar Sutta, by way of correspondence of earlier and later meaning. to be brought down. "The teacher's view is blameworthy" is written through carelessness, and established by those of divergent views; this method applies everywhere. However, in the Vajirabuddhi commentary, regarding "another's teacher's view"— when the other party says, "Although one avoids the toll, it is still theft, having entered into the usage as stated in the commentary, 'Thus acting, one incurs a pārājika offense'," the proponent of our view refutes it by showing the Sutta, "One avoids the toll, an offense of dukkata," along with the statement from the Mahāaṭṭhakathā found there, saying, "For one acting thus, it is only a dukkata." Regarding "another's personal opinion"— when the other party says, "If one intends to steal another's property before noon, but it happens after noon, that is still an act of stealing before noon. Therefore, the principal is not released. Since yours is the Theravāda view, the principal incurs a pārājika offense," the proponent of our view rejects it by showing the Sutta, "Whether before or after, if one steals that merchandise, the principal is not guilty." Regarding "another's Sutta"— when the other party says, "The Sutta written in the Paṭṭhāna, 'The condition of indeterminate cause is a condition by way of object for the condition of determinate cause,' shows that Nibbāna is not the only object for the Noble Path," the proponent of our view refutes it by saying it comes down in line with the Suttas such as the Object Triad.