0

Content.
Introduction 1. Origin and development of the commentaries 2. Buddhagosha and his commentaries 3. Reasons for translating Shalahakath into Pli 4. Commentarial methodology of ven. Buddhagosha
Without excluding any proper meaning Including the opinion of the elders Barring any error and repetition of transcriptions Casting off only the language Condensing detail accounts Including authoritative decisions Undeviating any pli idioms cariyavda Bhnakamata Porna mata. Attanomati Providing philologically explanations

01 02 04 07 09

Conclusion Selected Bibliographies 19

18

Introduction.
We can see the effort of protecting the authenticity and fundamental meaning of word even in pre Buddhist Vedic texts. This particularly trend has highly accepted in Vedic tradition. Importance of protecting correspondence of word and meaning has implied in Raguvasa of Kalidsa. This propensity can consider as the main reason that effected for emergence of commentarial literature. The need of an accurate interpretation of the words of the Buddha was felt even the lifetime of the Buddha. After the Buddhas demise, it was very necessary to undertake this task by his initial disciples. We can assume this prominent task as the root of emergence of commentarial literature. However to understand the Buddhist doctrine in its main aspect commentarial literature provides a very effective and significant service. Actually they are the most valuable aid that have provide ever for the proper and scientific study of Buddhist text that known as Tripitaka. There in only one name that has remained prominent regarding the commentarial literature that develop the whole pli literal tradition and pioneer researching resources on Pli canon, that name is ven. Buddhagosa. According to the Chronicles, he arrived in Sri Lanka during the region of King Mahnma under the instructions of Ven, Revatha and associate the Mahvihra which was the pioneering institution of Theravda tradition in the contemporary Buddhist world to fulfill his goal. As an editor and translator, he performed his task very efficiently. As noted in tradition, obviously in this literal process he was not totally independent, he had to follow the Mahvihara rules and regulations that known as Mahvihra naya . In this assignment, I hope to make a critical observation on commentarial methodology of Ven. Buddhagosa, referring his commentaries, modern critics and secondary and tertiary sources, which have compiled regarding this context.

01.Origin of Commentarial literature

Commentary, which known as Ahakath means explanation or exposition. This term can separate in to two parts as Attha and kath. Here Attha meaning and kath a statement, explanation, or narrative so the meaning of this compound term is explanation of meanings. As mentioned in Sratthadpani this known as ahakath because it describe and spread the meanings.1 In addition, it has further described in the same text, commentary, as the miscellaneous discourses delivered by the Buddha in particular places are the commentaries.2 However regarding with this context ven. Buddhagosas definition is very useful to get a clear idea what commentary is? According to him, commentary means traditional teachings (cariya vda).
3

cariyavda is identified with commentaries. in the Sumangali

vilsini he has define commentary as explanation of connotations.4 As assert by G.P Malalasekara Ahakath means talks about the contents, meaning, or purpose of various parts of the doctrine. He has further explained that the Ahakath represent the most ancient, orthodox and a traditional interpretation of the Buddhas teaching.5 Here term attha imply eight meanings as reason, wealth, effectiveness, meaning, name, object, aim, significance. As well as in terms with the Indian tradition, a commentary means reading new meanings back into old texts according to ones own educations and outlook. It explain the words and judgments of others and accurately and faithfully as possible.6 As mentioned by Ven. Buddhagosa commentary or Ahakath is not only a translation of original pli text it has gone par excellence over that. As summed up by him in the main commentaries explain the difficult words, word-to-word explanation, reason that caused to deliver that, stories, connections what proceeds and what follows. It is very clear that commentary is not a direct translation of a text it should provide philosophical utterances, abstruse points of doctrine that occur in the particular texts. Commentary that consist six meanings known as Samksan, paksan, vivaran, vibhajan, utthnikarana, paatti and six syllabuses known as akkhara, pada, viyanana, nirukkti, niddesa, kra is a literal portion that has provided for well understand of the Dhamma which is very deep as bhva and Adhippya. Fountainhead of this literature runs into the lifetime of the Buddha. The need for an accurate interpretation of the words of the Buddha was felt from very early days, even the lifetime of the Buddha. At that time when disputes arise, regard doctrinal facts then the master undertook the further elucidation
1 2

Attho katyati etyati atthakath syeva ahakatha thakrassa hakra katv, Sratthadpani, CSCD Bhagavath tattha tatth pavattita pakiaka desanyevahi ahakath, Saratthadpani, CSCD 3 cariyavdo nmaatakath, Diganikyahakath I Simon Hewavitarane Bequest, Tripitaka publication press, Colombo,1918,395p 4 Atthapaksanattha ahakath, Diganikyahakath,i, op.cit,1p 5 Malalasekara G.P, The Pli literature of Ceylon, M.D Gunasena and Co,. ltd, Colombo,1958, 88p 6 Law, B.C, Life and work of the Buddhagosa, Asian educational services, New Delhi, 1997, 48p

3 or explanation by himself. As well as in some occasions when the doctrine was not well grasped by monks on such occasions it was customary they betake themselves to one of initiated disciple of the Buddha for elucidation or explanation of doctrinal facts. These discussion and explanation can be regard as the first stage of Buddhist comments and exegetics. Mr B. C law also has admitted these friendly interviews, discussions and analytical expositions as the nucleus of commentaries.7 Vibhanga vagga that consist in Majjhima nikya and the whole Anguttra nikya imply the commentarial features that contain in original Buddhist text. As well as the Cla niddesa and Mah niddesa in Kuddhaka nikya have recognize as commentaries of Ahaka and Pryana vagga of Suttanipta. It sometimes happened that for a proper understanding of the text explanations of a commentarial nature were quite essential and in such a cases the commentary was naturally incorporated into the text and formed part of the text itself. Parivra pli and Suttavibhanga are great examples for that. Also regarding with this context as mentioned by G.G malalasekara and B.C law who were pioneering modern scholars, commentary originated from the discussion of great teachers. It is no doubt that these fundamental commentarial methodologies were the inspiration of latter commentators. However according to the tradition Ahakath were composed in the first council. As mentioned by the ven. Buddhagosa in his preface of Sumangala vilsini, Aakath were composed in first council and rehearsed at the two following councils also.8 Y mah kassapdhi vasihahakath pur Sangit anusangit pacchpica ishi y9 This tradition regarding origin of Ahakath may be accepted with certain modifications. It is hardly conservable that the original version of the Pli commentaries as we find them was fixed at the first council soon after the death of the Buddha. But it is very likely that certain abstruse point and ambiguous terms were the topics of discussion at the time of the first council ant that definite exposition and meanings to be attached to these were agreed upon. These interpretations would have formed the basis of commentaries of later times. With the development of heretical views and the growth of schisms in the Sangha, at the second and third council the elders who assembled there would have continued this process of interpretation of the Buddhas teachings.10 No doubt that the commentarial methodology developed with pli canon through some centuries with highly attention of great disciples.

7
8

Law, B.C, Life and work of the Buddhagosa, Asian educational services, New Delhi, 1997, 50-51p dito vassatehi pahi y sangit anusangit pacchpi ca, Diginikyahakath, op.cit 1p 9 Atthaslini, I Simon Hewavitarane Bequest, Tripitaka publication press, Colombo,1918,1p 10 Encyclopedia of Buddhism, vol ii, fascicle 2 (edit) Malalasekara. G.P, the Government press, Ceylon, 1967,336p

4 It further contains that in the Sumangala vilsini they were introduced to Ceylon by ven. Mahmahinda and he also translated them into Sinhala. As assert by G.P malalasekarathe commentaries that the Mahmahinda is said to have brought to Ceylon, along with the canon probably consist of the exposition as laid down at the third council which had just been concluded. 11 Commentaries that ven. Mahinda transmitted in to Sinhala came to be known as Shala ahakath. The earliest record that contains this story is Buddhagosa commentaries.12 But in Sratthadpani sub commentary of the Vinaya pitaka has clearly mentioned reason that caused to translate Pli commentaries in to Sinhala language. According to that allusion, Pli commentaries have translated to Sinahala to avoid the influence of heretical views of schisms of Sanga.13 The citation implies that Sinahala translation of commentaries is not a one-author work. This translation has done with interference of community of monks. We can assume that From the 3rd centuary B.C to 1st centaury A.D these commentaries protected by rote. As alluded in Dipavasa and Mahvasa in the region of kind Vaagmini Abhaya in the first centaury Pli canon put into writing along with commentaries. Here as commentaries, it should mean Shalaakath. It is not clear that how many books they mean as Sihalaakath , but in main this term referred in Buddhagosa commentaries to indicate the Mahaakath, Mahpaccariyahakath and

Kurundiahakath. During the centauries after the arrivel of Mahinda commentaries had developed with the social, philosophical and religious influence of ancient Ceylon. However, Sinhala commentaries which regard as the earliest literally works in Ceylon have been lost and no extant them in today. Ven. Buddhagosa composed his commentaries associating Sihalahakath under the instructions of Mahvihra, which is the most orthodox and traditional, school in Ceylon at the first half of fifth century. But according to tradition before he arrive to Sri Lanka he composed Atthaslini ahakath in India. According to the literal proofs, this 5th centuary A.C can consider as the origination period of Pli commentaries.

02.Buddhagosha and his commentaries

Buddhagosa was the most famous commentator of the Theravda school of Buddhism. It is very difficult to relate a trustful biographical account of Buddhagosa. His life story is cloaked in mysteries and legends. His great achievement exaggerated his biography to the par excellence of greatness. According to the Tradition, he was born in northern Indian Brahamnic family in the 5th century. Not far from the
11 12

Malalasekara G.P, The Pli literature of Ceylon, M.D Gunasena and Co,. ltd, Colombo,1958, 90p shaladpa pana hath vasin mahmindena hapti sihalabhya dpavsinamatthya, Diganikyahakath, op, cit, 1p 13 So yeva mahmahidattherena tambapaidpa hato pacch tambapaiyehi mah therehi nikyntara laddhi samkara parihrattham shala bhsya hapito, Sratthadpani,

5 Bodhgaya the place that Buddha attainted to enlightenment village called Gosa or Gosagma. He acquired mastery over three veds when he is seven years old. On one day Ven. Revath having heard Mantra recitation of Gosa said, who is this braying like an ass? In this manner the discussion arise between them was ended creating question mark of Gosas mind. In the end of Discussion thera ordained him after the ordination the name Buddhagosa ( voice of the Buddha) given to him because he was as profound in his eloquence as the Buddha himself. In Jambudpa he composed nodaya pakarana and Atthaslini. Then the Revatha Thero having seen his desirous of undertaking commentaries advice him to go to Ceylon and translate Shalahakath into pli. Following his preceptors advice Buddhagosa arrived to Sri Lanka in the region of king Mahnma. After that, he reached to Mahvihra and asked his goal of desirous of translating the Sihalaakath into Pli. Buddhagosa mentioned his wish to the Mahvihra monks, they realized well the importance of his works and the fruitful results that would follow their form because once the commentaries which contained a full exposition of the Dhamma, were available in a language understood by the monks of India, a new impetus would be given to the study of the orthodox teaching, and the glory of the religion would thereby be increased in manifold measure.14 However, Buddhagosa was not permitted to enter the Mahvihra library until he demonstrates his abilities. He compiled Visuddimagga to prove his commentating ability. Having rejoicing on this work Mahvihra monks gave him permission to render the teaching of the Buddha from Sinhalese into Mgadhi. According to Spence Hardy, Buddhagosa dwelt in the secluded Ganthkara vihra occupied with the work of translating, according to grammatical rules of Mgadhi, which is the root of all language, the whole of the Sinhala ahakth into Pli.15 According to Mahvasa all the Theriya teachers held this compilation in the same estimation as the Tripitaka. There after the objects of his mission having been fulfilled he returned to Jambu Dpa to worship at the Bo- tree. He is the most honorable and venerated author in Pli literature. Rhys Devids summed up in a few words most of what can be said about him, of his talent there can be no doubt, it was equaled only by his extraordinary industry. But of originality, of independent thought there is at present no evidence16 As a result of his extraordinary literal encouragement Buddhagosa will be remembered with reverence and gratitude as long as Buddhism remain living faith among mankind. Mahvasa states that Buddhagosa compiled work called nodaya in India about which nothing further not known. However, name of this book allure to assume that this as a kind of a book that deal
14 15

Malalasekara G.P, The Pli literature of Ceylon, M.D Gunasena and Co,. ltd, Colombo,1958, 84p Encyclopedia of Buddhism, vol iii, (edit) Malalasekara. G.P, the Government press, Ceylon, 1972, 405p 16 Kaluphana, Devid.J , History of Buddhist philosophy, Motilal Banrsidass Publishers, Delhi, 1992,206p

6 with philosophical subjects. Visuddhimgga was his first work in Ceylon, which proved as a test subject for disquisition of Mahvihra monks. This can consider as an encyclopedia of Doctrine connecting the whole of Buddhist teaching in a connected volume. Many scholars have highly admired this book as the most prominent resources regarding the Buddhist philosophy. Grey says in his introduction of Buddhagosuppatti if he has written nothing else, it alone would have secured for him undying fame.
17

Buddhagosa did not rejoice only rewriting Sihalahakath in pli . He expands into a fuller and richer form what he found in old material to eliminate and elucidate the text of his comment. As Rhys Devids asserts, in its pages may be found something on everything in the earlier Buddhist literature. A closely packed microcosm or macrocosmic range.18 Samantapsdik is the commentary that dealing with Vinaya text, Buddhagosa says that he compiled this at first because the vinaya forms the foundation of Buddhist faith. This voluminous compilation consist not only explanation of disciplinary rules, but also contains great mass of social, political, moral, religious and philosophical history of Ancient India. Kankhvitharani is his other commentary on the Vinaya pitaka composed on Ptimokkha. After that, he composed commentaries on the four nikya in succession. Sumangalavilsini is the commentary on the Dganikya written in three parts, showing us Buddhagosas encyclopedic learning at its best, and composed in language less confused that that o his other commentaries. The Papacasdani on the Majjhima, the Sratthappaksini on the Sayutta and the Manoratha prani on the Anguttara nikya. In the introductory verses to each of these books he gives the circumstances in which, and names the scholars at whose instigation, he undertook and carried out the work.19 In addition to these, he composed commentaries on three books of the Khuddhaka nikya. The Kuddhalapha, the Suttanipta and the Dhammapada. The commentary on the first two divisions is called the Paramattha Jotik. But many scholars doubt on the ascribe the authorship of Dhammapadahakath to Buddhagosa. According to the G.P Malalasekara the chief stumbling block is the difference in language and style between this work and the other commentaries which undoubtedly belong to the Buddhagosa. Compared, for instance, with the commentary on the Majjhima nikya, the Dhammapadahakath resembles more the Jtka commentary than anything else.20 Buddhagosa also wrote a series of commentaries on the books of the Abhidhammapitaka. The best known of them is the Atthaslini that compose on Dhammasangini. Traditionally said to have been

17 18

Buddhagosuppatti (Edit) Grey James, Luzac, London, 1892, 31p Malalasekara G.P, The Pli literature of Ceylon, M.D Gunasena and Co,. ltd, Colombo,1958,, 86p 19 ibid 95p 20 Ibid, 96p

7 composed in India. Sammohavinodan is the commentary of the Vibhanga and exeges of the other five books collectively called the Paappakaanaakath. For the correct, understand of the Buddhist doctrine value of Buddhagoss work in indispensable. Many points of Buddhist teaching and many cruses of philosophy would be unintelligible to us but for his expositions. Though his philology is sometimes crude and often fanciful, yet his notes on rare words are invaluable and often conclusive. For nearly fifteen centauries, said sir Robert (now lord) charmers on one occasion, Buddhagosa has remained the unchallenged expounder of Buddhism for the Thera- Vadin or southern school. In the evolution of Buddhist thought he marked and epoch; he restated thought for his own day and stereotyped it ever since for the orthodoxviewed as a scholar rather than as a philosopher, there is ample evidence in his writings to show that he was a critical scholarfrom the point of view of textual criticism his help is invaluable to modern editions of pitaka texts; for through the Buddhagoss records they can base their text on the best manuscripts which existed 1,500 years ago. And where Buddhagoss reading is certain, it is an almost unerring guide in these later days.21

03.Reasons for translating Shalahakath into Pli

Sinhala commentaries recognize as the earliest literal works of the Sri Lanka which are not existing now. According to the Tradition, commentaries were composed in first council and rehearsed in second and third council. After the third council ven Mahida brought the Pli commentaries to Ceylon and translated them into Sinhala for the sake of inhabitants of island, those came to be known as Sihalahaktah. As mentioned by G.P Malalasekara, by the time of the third council such commentarial literature (using the word in the wider sense) had been more or less fully developed; and when after the conclusion of that synod, Mahinda came to Ceylon, he brought over with him the expositions of the teachings which had been sanctioned by the elders at that meeting. Very soon after Mahinds arrival he translated them into the language of land and there they continued to be studied and pondered upon and further developed by the monks of Ceylon.22 We cant think that the Sinhalese commentaries did not remain static in the same form. As asserted by tradition they began in the 3rd century B.C but kept growing and accumulating new material as they passed through the centuries. The signs of their growth, at least up to 2nd century A.C can be detected. The newly added material naturally enough, drawn from local incidents and social and religious life of the people of island. At the contemporary world these Sinhala commentaries may admired as the prominent recourses, which they had regarding Buddhist canon. Assertion of ven. Revatha who was the
21 22

Malalasekara G.P, The Pli literature of Ceylon, M.D Gunasena and Co,. ltd, Colombo,1958,, 100p Ibid, 91p

8 Buddhaogss preceptor is a great example for that because he has accepted Shalahakath as genuine. Pli commentaries has noted several names of Shalahakath which existed at that period. Mahhakath Uttaravihraakath Mahpaccariahakath Andhakaakath Kurindi ahakth Sakhepahakath

However, as mentioned in Sratthadpani Sri lankan monks translated Pli commentaries into Sinhala to avoid the influence of heretical views of schisms of Sanga.23 But in latter Buddhagosa translated those commentaries again into Pli with few editions for the benefits of Bhikkus outside the Ceylon, long life of Dhamma and happy of virtuous men. 24 On the other hand, we can assume that in the concurrent world as a Buddhist institution Abhayagiriya developed and famed internationally more than Mahvihra with the influence of Sanskrith language and guardianship of the tooth relic of the Buddha. Under these conditions, Mhvihra monks may comprehend well on the value of translating commentaries into pli the language that accepted in contemporary world as international communication language. In whatever way we cant trace the shalaakath in today. It is not known that how and when they disappeared. Eventually circumstance that effected to translate Sinhala commentaries into pli can categorize as follows. For the benefit of monks outside the Ceylon To the completion of necessary, that collecting the various notions in one common language and becoming to one standpoint. As a phase to protect the Dhamma and vinaya form heretical views. For the value that existence of canon and commentary in one language Because of development of Sinhala language, they may assume that it will difficult to understand for latter scholars. To make short the detail account. For the barring of error and transcription of sihalaakath

23 24

Sratthadipani, CSCD Na kinci attha abhisabhunti dpantare bhikku janssa yasm Tasm ima pli nynu rpa savadni samrabissa samantapsdik, op.cit 2p

04.Commentarial methodology of ven. Buddhagosa.

Buddhagosa who was the pioneer of the Pli commentarial literature compiled his commentaries using Shalahakath and many other traditional resources. In this chapter, I hope to make a critical examination of techniques employed in his commentaries. Current pli commentaries existed early in pli and they translated into Sinhala, but again they translated into pli. Thus, the Buddhagosas commentaries can recognize as back translation commentaries. Modern scholars prefer very much to accept Buddhagosas commentaries as editions rather than translations. While compiling the Pli commentaries Buddhagosa has used a constructive writing style. There are so many modern critics regarding the commentarial methodology which used by ven. Buddhagosa. According to the Prof. Gathre Dhammapla Buddhagoss commentaries are not verbatim translations he has composed them paying special attention on preservation of identify of meaning. As G.P Malalasekara assert, the author of a systematic and coherent a synopsis as the Visuddhi magga could not rest content with a mere translation; for that no great ability was required, and certainly far less extraordinary talent that he possessed. He wished to collect and systematize the knowledge, which the various works contained, to garner the criticism of ancient scholarship for the use of future generation of scholars.25 Ven. Walpola Rahula says, Buddhagoss work was that of an editor translator, but he seems to have performed his task so efficiently and with such discretions and authority that now he is regarded more or less as the author of commentaories.26 Buddhagosa describe himself what he did in the metrical introduction to the Samantapsdika, in commencing this commentary having embodied therein the Mah ahakath without excluding any proper meaning form the decisions contained in the Mah Paccari, as also in the famous Kurundi and other commentaries, and including the opinions of the elders I shall perform my task well. Let the young and the middle aged and the elderly monks who entertain a proper regard for the doctrines of the Tathgatha, the luminary of truth, listen to my words with pleasure. The Dhamma as well as the Vinaya was declared by the Buddha and his sons understood it in the same sense as it was delivered, and inasmuch as in the former time they (the Sinhalese commentators) composed the commentaries without disregarding their (sons) opinions, therefore, excepting any error of transcription, everything contained therein is an authority to the learned in this order, who respect ecclesiastical discipline form these commentaries, after casting off the language, condensing detailed accounts, including authoritative
25

Malalasekara G.P, The Pli literature of Ceylon, M.D Gunasena and Co,. ltd, Colombo,1958,85p Rahula thero, Walpola, History of Buddhism in Ceylon, M.D Guanasena and Co,. ltd, Colombo, 1956 (preface), xxiv p
26

10 decisions, without overstepping any Pli idiom (I shall proceed to compose my work). And, as this commentary will be explanatory of the meanings of words belonging to the Suttas in conformity with the sense attached to them therein, therefore ought it more diligently to be studied.27 In his Nikya commentaries he sheds further lights; and now rejecting the Sinhala language, adopting the graceful language that accords so well with the order of the text, not contradicting the faultless conclusions of the elders of the priesthood who dwell at the great monastery. And to the end that religion may long endure, I proceed to expound the meaning of my text, omitting all unnecessary repetitions.28 In terms with above connotation can clearly identify some special techniques used by Buddhaoga in his commentaries. Without excluding any proper meaning from the decisions, contain in primary sources. (Yo utthamattha aparicchajanto) Including the opinion of the elders (Anotogadha theravda) Barring any error of transcription (Ta vajjaitvna pamdalekha) Casting off only the language (Tatova bhsantarameva hitv) Condensing detail accounts (Vitthramaggaca samsaitv) Including authoritative decisions ( Vinicchaya sabbamasesaitv) Without overstepping any pli idioms ( Tantikkama kanchi avokkamitv)

Without excluding any proper meaning form the decisions, contain in Primary sources. It is very clear that the task before Buddhagosa was by no means an easy one in any way. The very copiousness of the material was an embracement. When he set out from India to make his concise commentary, his idea was merely to study the Sinhala Ahakath and translate them into pli. But now, faced often with conflicting views, contradictory assertions, and sometimes incompatible doctrines, he has to expunge, abridge, enlarge, and make a new a commentary of this own.29 So he wished to collect and systematize the knowledge which the various works contain and the garner of the criticism of ancient scholarship for the benefit of future generation. So therefore, he did not shrink form rewriting them so as to expand what he found into a fuller and richer form, to illuminate and elucidate the text of his comment. But he approached his task with no iconoclastic desire to supersede the earlier scholiasts, on the contrary, he studied with great assiduity what his predecessors has written and incorporated pious care in their works. He has one great object predominantly in view, namely, to inspire reverence for what he
27
28

Samantapsdik nma vinayahakath (edit) Vanarathna Ranjit, Samayavadhana publication, Colombo,1997,2p Diganikyahakath I Simon Hewavitarane Bequest, Tripitaka publication press, Colombo,1918, 1-2p 29 Malalasekara G.P, The Pli literature of Ceylon, M.D Gunasena and Co,. ltd, Colombo,1958, 93p

11 considered supreme authoritative.30 If he can completely agree with the description that consist in primary sources at outright he has accepted that (Ya aakathsu vutta ta suvuttameva)31 Thus Buddhagosas work formed a synthetic unity, deliberately planned as a consistent scheme for dealing with the traditions which had come down through the centuries, handed down by distinguish members of the order and ever growing in the scope of their expositions of the canon.

Including the opinions of the elders Including the opinions of the elders means being partially to Theravada, or In other words obeying to Mahvihra tradition. Traditional commentaries were protected in Mahvihra that consider as the most prominent orthodox institution of Theravda Buddhism. They protected them avoiding any space of entering heretical views. As well as with the increasing of power of Abhyagiriya cause to monks of Mahvihra to be cautious in welcoming a Indian monk like Buddhagosa who came to translate orthodox Sinhala commentaries into pli for the benefit of Indian Buddhism. That is why firstly they check the abilities of the Buddhagosa before giving permission to access into the Mahvihra library. Therefore, to achieve his goal and compilation of his purpose Buddhagosa had to submissive the Mahvihra tradion. In his commentaries Buddhagosa has pledged his allegiance to the Mahvihra tradition. Mahvihravsna desan nayanissita32 cariyavda avihya vibhajjavdssna33 samaya avilomanto therna theravasadipna Suipunavinicchayna mahvihrdivsna34 Mahvihravsna vcanmagganissita35 mahvihravsna dpayanto vinicchaya36 Suvisuddha asakia niputthavinicchaya Mahvihravsna samaya avilomaya37

30
31

Malalasekara G.P, The Pli literature of Ceylon, M.D Gunasena and Co,. ltd, Colombo,1958, 94p Vibhanga attakath, CSCD 32 Visuddhimagga, (edit) Buddhadatta thero, Pamunuwe, Tripitaka Pulication press, Colombo, 1919,02p 33 Pacappakaranaakath, CSCD 34 Diganikyahakath I Simon Hewavitarane Bequest, Tripitaka publication press, Colombo,1918i, 1p 35 Jtakahakath, CSCD
36 37

Visuddhimagga, (edit) Buddhadatta thero, Pamunuwe, Tripitaka Pulication press, Colombo, 1919,200p

12 Here the term Samaya indicate the boundaries that imposed by Mahvihra monks to Buddhagosa. Vibhangahakth which known as Sammodhavinodani consists a clear description about the Mahvihra manner. Tass atthasavaana karontena, Vibhajjhavdi mandala otretv Sakasamaya avokkamantena Parasamaya anhuyantena Sutta appatibhgantena Vinaya anulomantena Mahpadese olokentena Dhamma dpentena Attha Sangntena Thamevattha upaparikkhantena Aparehipi Pariyyehi niddissantena

Ca yasm attha sava ktabb hoti As mentioned in above quotations it is fixed that Buddhagosa agreed to follow these ten facts in his commentaries. However, regarding these ten factrs Mr. Aruna K. Gamage has mentioned an opposite notion in his one article. As he alluded, these ten facts are not an act that compulsory to follow by commentators while they compiling their commentaries. That is only the system that he followed while describing the dependent co- origination in accordance with Theravda tradition. It should emphasis that there are not any evidences in commentaries to conclude that as law of Mahvihra. 38 But as mentioned in the Pli canon even in the life time of the Buddha if it arise any kind of doubt regarding doctrinal facts Buddha has preached Satharamahpadesa to correct those wrong views. In other hand, Buddhagosa undertook this literal process about ten centuries after the demise of the Buddha. So in course of time with the influence of heretical views of various sects and with the development of Abhyagiriya, it was very essential of a clear standpoint to assay the correctness of doctrinal views. As well as, we can assume that Mahvihra monks were very cautious while dealing with a south Indian monk who wants to translate Shalahakth into Pli which protected by Mahvihta monks having offered their lives. Thus

38

ud. Ydia;%Sh ix.%yh" zzwgqjdpdka jykafia yd wGl:dlrKhZZ" wreK fla .uf.a" ixia( uy;j m[a[dr;k ys" ue,af,a m[a[dr;k ys" mshis m%skaka isiag" .xf.dv," kqf.af.dv' 2008, 287p

13 it is very fair to think that those facts as a way of methodology that they used to avoid the difficulties of their compilations. On the other hand, we can assume that these theories had followed by Mahvihra monks to omit the variations and defectives consist in sources, and choose the correct philosophy of the Buddha. This same manner has may introduced to the Buddhagosa by Mahvihra monks to fulfill his compilation of Pli commentaries. When analyzing Buddhagosa commentaries it is very clear that he has associated not only Mahvihra tradition but also many traditional resources to complete his literal purposes. However, he has expressed that in his every commentary, as a standpoint to follow the Mahvihra tradition and compile his commentaries without including sectarian notions. Just as Mahvihra monks were cautious in welcoming Buddhagosa, So Buddhagosa was careful in introducing any new idea into Mahvihra tradition in a way that was too obvious. one prominent example shows how Buddhagosa achieved his goal. In the commentary on the Dhammasangini, Buddhagosa makes a very important remark regarding the theory of moments (khanavda). He says, herein, the following present (santatipacuppanna) finds mention in the commentaries (akath), the enduring present (addh- paccppanna) in the discourses (sutta). Some say (kecivadanti) that the thought existing in the momentary present (khanapaccuppanna) becomes the object of telepathic insight.39 As well as Buddhagosa is very cautious when he deals with canonical matters left unexplained in the commentaries what were before him. Sometimes he explains a point and hastens to add a clause of apologetic warnings; as this has not been handed down in the commentaries, it should be accepted after investigations. (ahakathsu pana angatatth vmansetv gahetabba).Even when Buddhagosa is forced by his own reasoning to disagree with the ahakths he hesitated to give his definite opinion. As it is said in all the Aakaths he says sometimes it is not possible to reject (the explanation) what is correct should be found out or the commentators should be taken on trust.40

Barring any error and repetition of transcriptions In the prefaces of Buddhagos commentaries he has clearly mentioned the way that he going to exegesis. As mentioned in those one of his very important exegetical technique is barring error and repetition of transcriptions ( ropento vigatadosa, hitv punappungatamattha attha paksaissmi). It is no doubt that the Sihalaakath had international standard in contemporary literal background. That is why ven. Revath who was the preceptor of Buddhagosa inspired him to go to Ceylon and translate sinhalaakath into Pli. However, in course of the development of the Sinhala aakath we can expect of deviations and repetitions. Thus, Buddhagosa has mentioned as a part of his task in his
39
40

Kaluphana, Devid.J , History of Buddhist philosophy, Motilal Banrsidass Publishers, Delhi, 1992,208p Adhikram E.W, Early history of Buddhism in Ceylon, M.D Gunasena and Co,. ltd, Colombo,1953,14p

14 translation the removal of the errors and repetitions, which he found in the originals. There were also places where an explanation did not tally with the canonical text and where Buddhagosa had to give preference to the latter.41 Sometimes he has critiques those deviations and repetitions. As examples in Samantapsdik showing the deviations in Andakaakath he has showed those fault and also sometimes he has harsh in criticism as follows. This is wrongly said42 that agrees neither with the Aakath nor with the canon, and therefore should not be accepted43 He has followed a special method to barred the repetitions form his commentaries. Firstly he composed Visuddhimagga as the common commentary for canon. Then in his other commentaries if there is something which he had descried earlier in Visuddhimagga or any other commentary in such occasions he has refer readers to those commentaries. 44

Casting off only the language This means using Pli language instead of Sinhala language without changing the particular content. Nevertheless, it is very difficult to prove through examples because of unavailable of Shalaakath.

Condensing detail accounts It is no doubt that the Sinhalese commentaries did not remain static in the same form, they began in the 3rd centuary B.C but kept on growing and accumulating new material as they passed through the centuries. The newly added material was , natuarally enough drawn form local incidents and social and religious life of the people of the island. The purpose of adding this new local material was not to teach history or local conditions, but to illustrate or elucidate doctrinal and ethical points in a striking and homely manner.45 In course of his explanation, Buddhagosa says, in his introduction to the commentaries he only translated these Sinhalese commentaries into Pli and in so doing he left out unnecessary details and repetitions as well as irrelevant matter, (vitthramaggaca samsaitv) but without prejudice to the traditions of the Mahvihra. Some of material thus left out, though not useful to this purpose. It was left out perhaps because it was too well known to the people at that time. That those
41 42

Adhikram E.W, Early history of Buddhism in Ceylon, M.D Gunasena and Co,. ltd, Colombo,1953,11p Samantapddik iii, (edit) Kogen Mizuno, P.T.S London, 1966,697p 43 Samantapsdik, ii, (edit) Kogen Mizuno, iii,P.T.S London, 1966, 8,18,214,222p 44 Itipana sabba yasm visuddhimagge may suparisuddha vutta tasm bhiyyo na ta idha vicrissmi majjhe visuddhimaggo esa catunnapi gamna hi hatv pksaissati tattha yathbhsita attha Sumgangalvilsini, op.cit 2p 45 Rahula thero, Walpola, History of Buddhism in Ceylon, M.D Guanasena and Co,. ltd, Colombo, 1956 ,(preface)

xxv

15 stories were well known by both preacher and their audiences is evident from the fact that Buddhagosa in many places only refers to them but does not give them in full. For instance, in Visuddhimagga he says, (Telakandarika vatthu cettha kathetabba ) here the story of Telakandarika also should be related46. So there are enough reasons to believe that that there was a common stock of fables and legends in ancient Ceylon which commentators borrowed abundantly whenever they were in need of a story to illustrate a point or to gratify the religious sentiments of the devotees. An example for this is found In the Samanta psdik where Buddhaogsa says that the Mahhakath contained detail accounts on certain subjects, but he does not proceed to include them. As well as in many occasions he has thoroughly emphasis that in his literal purpose he takes only the substance from commentaries. Mulahakath sra dya ima may karontena,47 Pornaakathna sra dya ima may niha patt48. So it is very obvious that pli commentaries are not mere translation of Sinhala commentaries.

Including authoritative decisions Buddhagosa work appears to have been to make a critical study of not only the different Sinhala and Dravidian commentaries but also the other source of material, such as the canon and various traditions and opinions. When it appear disparities regarding the same context in various commentaries, in such cases the interpretations given in the several commentaries are recorded and the decision is left open.49 If there any doubts in primary sources he has urged readers to pay attention and analyze that (Sabbaakathsu pana vuttant na sakk patiseditu gavesitabb ettha yutti).50 Undeviating any pli idioms Original pli canon was the median of Buddhagosas work. So Buddagosa has often compared commentarial interpretations with the canonical and where it disagrees, it has rejected. It implies that if any point of view the Mahvihra traditions contradict with canon then he had a right to discard that also. Where there were interpretations of Sinhalahakath does not tally with canon where Budhagosa had to give preferences to the latter.51 He has used comparing doctrinal facts with Dhamma and vinaya as the criteria to get the real idioms of Pli. However, commentators hadnt any permission to conclude this is
46
47

Rahula thero, Walpola, History of Buddhism in Ceylon, M.D Guanasena and Co,. ltd, Colombo, 1956, (preface)xxv p Diganikyahakath I Simon Hewavitarane Bequest, Tripitaka publication press, Colombo,1918,225p 48 Vibhagattakath, CSCD 49 Adhikram E.W, Early history of Buddhism in Ceylon, M.D Gunasena and Co,. ltd, Colombo,1953,11p 50 Paramatthadpani nma Pacappakaranahakath - Simon Hewavitarane Bequest, Tripitaka publication press, Colombo, 1936, 561p 51 Yamakahakath, CSCD

16 Sutta or this is vinaya. So they were in controversial stage regarding these criterias. Not only has that even cariyavda contradicted with canon Buddhagosa has rejected that also. cariyavda The individual views or opinions expressed by well-known teachers who have specialized knowledge of canon are classed as the cariyavdas (exposition of the elders). Among the individual opinions recorded are those of Dgabhnaka tripitaka mahsiva, tripitaka culbhaya, Tripitaka mahdhammarakkhita, Tripitaka culanga, Moravpivsi Mahdatta and Mahsiva thera. However, these opinions if they are not corroborated by text or the commentary are not to be regarded as essential correct. Similar in significance to the cariyamatas are the expositions attributed to the cariyas referred to often in the Pli commentaries as cariy vadanti, cariy katayanti52Great example shows to this in the Atthaslini, Bhnakamata Buddhagosa has also made fairly wide use of the tradition handed down by the Bhnaks.Bhnaks mean reciteros of various portions of the canon. There were the bhnaks of the Digha, Majjhima, Anguattara, Samyutta nikyas, of the two vibhngs and of the Dhammapada. It is not known whether the views of the Bhnaks were already found in Shalahakath or alternatively, in what form they were available.54 However Buddhagosa has used many references of Bhnaks in his commentaries. As an example, Porna mata. As to what is denoted by the term Porna several interpretations have been put forward by scholars. According to Rhys Devids they are the fathers of Theravda ssana. Commentaries contain numerous quotations from the Porn which for the most part are introduced with the words tenhu porn it imply that porns have touch upon variety of subjects. As an example can quote few quotations, Tenevassa porn eva vacanattha vadanti56 Majjhima bhnak pana eva vadanti55 ekacce cariy ekavra hotti; vadanti53

52
53

Adhikram E.W, Early history of Buddhism in Ceylon, M.D Gunasena and Co,. ltd, Colombo,1953, 15p Atthaslini, CSCD 54 Encyclopedia of Buddhism, vol ii, fascicle 2 (edit) Malalasekara. G.P, the Government press, Ceylon, 1967,342p 55 Diganikyahakath I Simon Hewavitarane Bequest, Tripitaka publication press, Colombo,1918,8p

17 Porn pana addhne gacchante na payissati, jraasabhvo pana na hotiyevti vadanti.57 Attanomati ( presenting his own opinion) Whenever Buddhagosa has to give his own views on any point, compelled to do so by the absence of any explanation elucidating it in the Sinhalese commentaries with the note of avicritameta pornehi aya pana me attano mati58 he has mentioned the views of his own. Pathavi abhinandatti vuttappakrameva pathavi tahdhi abhinandati, assdeti, parmasati cti vutta hoti. Pathavi maatti eteneva etasmi atthe siddhe kasm eta vuttanti ce. Avicritameta porehi. Aya pana me attano mati,59

Providing philologically explanations Ven. Buddhagosa has tried to explain every doubtful words and phrases. In this exercise, he has associated way of philological explanation also. While he explains word or phrase, he has given derivation and grammatical explanation of particular word or phrase. Khoti avadhranatthe padapranamatte v nipto60 Paccatta parasena jintti pasenadi61 Tathgatassti ahahi kraehi bhagav tathgato ,Tath gatoti tathgato, tath gatoti tathgato tathalakkhaa gatoti tathgato, tathadhamme ythvato abhisambuddhoti tathgato, tathadassitya tathgato, tathavditya tathgato, tathkritya tathgato, abhibhavanahena tathgatoti.62

56 57

Papancasutdani, CSCD Sratthappaksini, CSCD 58 Majjhimanikyahakath Simon Hewavitarane Bequest, Tripitaka publication press, Colombo, 1943. 26p 59 Papancasudani, CSCD 60 Diganikyahakath I Simon Hewavitarane Bequest, Tripitaka publication press, Colombo,1918,172p 61 Paramatthajotik, CSCD 62 Sumangalailsini,CSCD

18

Conclusion,
Considering the Buddhagosas rank in Buddhist world no doubt, that he is the greatest commentator and exegetist .the service that he rendered to Buddhist religion was the most useful and enduring one. Buddhist followers are gratitude to his service until the end of Buddhist philosophy. It is very suitable to grant that as Mr Rhys Devids says that the method adopted in his commentaries follows very closely the method of those much older ones preserved in the canon, but the literal skills with which he used it is a great advance, more especially in lucidity, over older documents. Obviously Buddhist way of explanation that trace to the life time of the Buddha systematized and gave its perfect and final shape by Buddhagosa through his commentaries using traditional and his own methodological ways. Hence the philosophical ides scattered in the Tripitaka are to be found in a systematic form in his commentaries.

19

Selected Bibliography.
Primary Sources
1. Atthaslini nma Dhammasanginiahakath - Simon Hewavitarane Bequest, Tripitaka publication press, Colombo, 1943 2. Buddhagosuppatti (Edit) Grey James, Luzac, London, 1892 3. Papacasdani nma Majjhimanikyahakath Simon Hewavitarane Bequest, Tripitaka publication press, Colombo, 1943 4. Paramatthadpani nma Pacappakaranahakath - Simon Hewavitarane Bequest, Tripitaka publication press, Colombo, 1936 5. Samantapsdik, (edit) Kogen Mizuno, iii,P.T.S London, 1966, 6. Samantapsdik nma vinayahakath (edit) Vanarathna Ranjit, Samayavadhana publication, Colombo,1997 7. Sratthappaksini nma Sayuttanikyahakath - Simon Hewavitarane Bequest, Tripitaka publication press, Colombo, 1943 8. Sumangalavilsini nma Diganikyahakath Simon Hewavitarane Bequest, Tripitaka publication press, Colombo, 1918 9. Visuddhimagga, (edit) Buddhadatta thero, Pamunuwe, Tripitaka Pulication press, Colombo, 1919

Secondary sources
1. Encyclopedia of Buddhism, vol ii, fascicle 2 (edit) Malalasekara. G.P, the Government press, Ceylon, 1967 2. Encyclopedia of Buddhism, vol iii, (edit) Malalasekara. G.P, the Government press, Ceylon, 1971 3. Adhikram E.W, Early history of Buddhism in Ceylon, M.D Gunasena and Co,. ltd, Colombo,1953 4. Geiger, Wilhelm, Pli literature and Language, oriental books reprints corporation, New Delhi, 1978 5. Hazra, K.L, Pli Language and literature, vol ii, D.K Printer world, New Delhi, 1994 6. Kaluphana, Devid.J , History of Buddhist philosophy, Motilal Banrsidass Publishers, Delhi, 1992 7. Law, B.C, Life and work of the Buddhagosa, Asian educational services, New Delhi, 1997 8. Malalasekara G.P, The Pli literature of Ceylon, M.D Gunasena and Co,. ltd, Colombo,1958 9. Rahula thero, Walpola, History of Buddhism in Ceylon, M.D Guanasena and Co,. ltd, Colombo, 1956

20

Tertiary Sources.
1. Some exegetical techniques employed in the Pli commentaries, Lily da Silva,Sri lanka journal of Buddhist studies, vol, ii, Buddhist and Pli university of Sri Lanka, 1988

Electronic Sources
2. CSCD Chatthasangyan CDROM, Vipassan mediation institute. Thailand

Selected Sinhala Bibliography oa;Shsl uQ,dY%

1. Wmr;k ys" fldhd.," md,s wGl:d idys;Hh m%Njh yd ldYh" w;a m%skagia" .xf.dv," kqf.af.dv' 2007 2. pkaor;k 3. nqoaOo;a; ys" ,nqfyakaf.dv" fmd,aj;af;a" md,s wGl:d idys;Hh" r;ak iuhjOk fmd;a uqKd,h" urodk" fld<U 10' fojk uqKH 2006' ys" md,s idys;Hh" m%ldYlfhda" fld<U 10' ^f;jk uqKh& 2005 4. Nr;isxy WmdoHdh" md,s idys;Hfha b;sydih" m( ysmsfha m[a[dls;a;s ys" tia f.dvf.a iy ifydaorfhda" fld<U 10' 2003' 5. iq.;is ys" ufya" md,s idys;Hh wOHhk 01" ksfhda .%e*slaia" .xf.dv," kqf.af.dv' 2009

;D;Shsl uQ,dY%
1. zwNsia;=;sZ zznqoaOf>daI me,kaj;af;a 2004 2. zkeK,lrZ" uykqjr' 2006 j;af;a.u ngfmd< OudjdidNsodk fuOdkkao ys" rer wNskkaok T*afia ix.%yh" ms%kagia" zziSy,Gl:dZZ" wfndauq,af,a ys Ou;s,l kdys' ioaOdkkao ixia( kdys l< uydpdh wNskkaok ksrela;s pkau ix.%yh" ud.hZZ" wgqjdlrKfha wkq.ukh

fnKavdr"

Ydia;%m;s wkqr nuqKqisxy" iuka m%ldYlfhda" .xf.dv," kqf.af.dv'

21 3. ud. Ydia;%Sh ix.%yh" zzwgqjdpdka jykafia yd wGl:dlrKhZZ"

wreK fla .uf.a" ixia( uy;j m[a[dr;k ys" ue,af,a m[a[dr;k ys" mshis m%skaka isiag" .xf.dv," kqf.af.dv' 2008 4. iNdId 10 l,dmh" foHdoh iure l,dmh" zzmd,s wGl:dj, olakd mfhaIK l%ufohZZ" fn,a,k [dKu, kdys" ixia( ; fj,f.or" rcfha uqKd,h" 1999 5. idr.fiS Ydia;%Sh ix.%yh - 2005" ixia( ueo.msfha ;Ou ys" wGl:d m%Njhg n, mE fya;= yd iSy,Gl:d md,shg ke.Sf wruqKq" uqjweg.u [dKdkkao ys" md,s yd fn!oaO wOHhk ix.uh" fmardfoKsh YajoHd,h" fmardfoKsh'Ydia;%Sh ix.%yh 1986"