- This topic has 3 replies, 2 voices, and was last updated 1 month ago by
.
-
Posts
-
-
Dear Lal,
I am providing you with a link to a short paper I wrote in response to an editorial I received regarding the meaning of the Pali word samma. If you would, since I quote you in many places in my response to this editorial, I wanted to get your take on the entire topic being discuss, as I believe the integrity of the Pali word “samma” has been the subject of much speculation in relation to the opinions of researchers such as Richard Gombrich. I would like your assessment of whether my reply is in line with the Buddha’s concept of accuracy and correctness.
-Dipa
First Access:
Second Access: I send a direct copy to your email.
1 user thanked author for this post.
-
Quick comments:
End of p. 1, it states: “This creates a philosophical problem for a literal interpretation of mundane right view, which often involves ensuring a favorable rebirth. As the user rightly points out, this seems to conflict with the central doctrine of anatta (no-self). The idea of a fixed, enduring self that persists from life to life to enjoy the fruits of merit is a metaphysical concept the Buddha explicitly avoided.”
- The concept of rebirth (unlike the concept of reincarnation in Hinduism) does not conflict with the core idea of a ‘no-everlasting self.’
- See “What Reincarnates? – Concept of a Lifestream.”
On p. 3: “The evidence from textual criticism and scholars like Gombrich strongly supports the thesis that the formal classification of Right View into mundane and supramundane tiers is a later scholastic development..”
- No. The eight factors of the mundane eightfold path and the Noble Eightfold Path are discussed in detail in the “Mahācattārīsaka Sutta (MN 117)“, starting with the mundane and Noble Sammā Diṭṭhi, which I linked to.
- One learns and comprehends that kamma (actions, speech, and thoughts with a defiled mind) leads to corresponding consequences (kamma vipaka) while on the mundane path. One cannot comprehend the Noble (supramundane) Samma Ditthi without that.
- I see that you referenced the above sutta on p. 4. That is good.
Regarding the discussion on ‘Samma‘:
- ‘Sammā‘ can be taken to mean “right’ or ‘correct’ in the mundane path.
- In the lokuttara sense, “sammā” is derived from “saṅ” + “mā,” meaning “to become free of saṅ.” Saṅ represents defilements or rāga, dōsa, mōha. Here, “mā” means “becomes free of.” For example:
- “Mā hoti jāti, jāti” means “may I be free of repeated birth.”
- “mā mé bāla samāgamō” means “may I be free of association with those who are ignorant of Dhammā.”
- See “What is “San”? Meaning of Sansara (or Samsara).”
Let me know if you need further input on any other specific parts of the document.
1 user thanked author for this post.
-
My key concern was perhaps not made as clearly as I had hoped:
“Whether or not the word evolved, shouldn’t we return to the earliest known usage and context of the term sammā to understand its meaning authentically — as a function of liberation, not metaphysical elaboration?”
Quoting Gombrich, reifying the concept of sammā-diṭṭhi — turning it into a metaphysical thing rather than a process or function — contradicts the very spirit of the Buddha’s teaching. Furthermore, this parallels the Buddha’s silence on unknowables (avyākata), where he repeatedly emphasized:
“Does this view lead to dispassion, cessation, and awakening? If not, it is not the Dhamma.”
(Saṃyutta Nikāya 12.48; Saṃyutta Nikāya 22.3)The person who wrote this is not a Pali scholar, rather is a person who has not had any formal training and his concepts, perceptions and knowledge are derived mostly from Mahayana Zen and Sanskrit. I feel, at least in my experience, some persons are more interested in the intellectual side of the Buddha’s teachings, as I believe the writer of the article is. At times I find that people, even intelligent people get stuck on the intellectual academic perspectives (ontology, etymology, etc) without seeing the scope of meaning that the Buddha intended. Perhaps my view is somewhat adolescent in that I seek to know the meaning of a Pali word before I jump to conclusions or base my understanding on the views of anyone other than the Buddha.
My response was an attempt, perhaps an adolescent one, to put forward the idea that to pull single Pali words, or Sanskrit words for that matter, and rely on a singular, isolated meaning, particularly a philosophical meaning derived from incorrect understanding derived from a Sanskrit derivative, is, as the Buddha stated…”a thicket of views.” To consider the meaning of a single Pali word, the context in which it is used is, in my estimation, critical.
Sometimes the various comments of scholars can create “a thicket” of views rather than lend clarity to the fact that, as the Buddha said that if it does not reduce greed, hatred, and delusion, then it is not in alignment with the path—it is not sammā or Dhamma. Am I correct in these assessments, and do you think my reply was overkill? Your direction is always appreciated.
In relation to this post you can see the threads on a site I recently created titled “Theravada Pariyatti.” https://www.facebook.com/groups/pariyatti
-
At times, given the plethora of spurious information published on the Internet, and even by so-called scholars, such as Gombrich, I am skeptical until I have thoroughly researched and understand the contextual meaning of a Pali word or a sutta. I am not so interested in the etymological, ontological or philosophical aspects as I am in the context within the Pali texts. This is where your efforts and writings help immensely. I purchased the Pali Text Society’s entire Pali Canon in both Pali and English. Not a small investment. Needless to say, these have become my daily and nightly reading. In terms of what I know and understand, I certainly feel as a child at times, but one that is determined to examine the…no pun intended…right view. The proof, as the British say, is in the pudding. The only aspect of whether I can know the validity or truth of something is encapsulated in direct experience garnered through practice.
“And what is right view that is noble, undefiled, transcendent, a factor of the path? It’s the wisdom—the faculty of wisdom, the power of wisdom, the awakening factor of investigation of principles, and right view as a factor of the path—in one intent on the noble, intent on the undefiled, who possesses the noble path and develops the noble path.”
“This is called right view that is noble, undefiled, transcendent, a factor of the path.”
“They make an effort to give up wrong view and embrace right view: that’s their right effort.”
“Mindfully they give up wrong view and take up right view: that’s their right mindfulness.”
“So these three things keep running and circling around right view, namely: right view, right effort, and right mindfulness.”
“In this context, right view comes first.”
“In this context, right view comes first. Right view is the anterior condition for all the path factors. (Tatra, bhikkhave, sammādiṭṭhi pubbaṅgamā hoti.)”
-
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.