5. A Note on Buddhaghosa’s Commentaries. 
By Brmata Cuaran Law, M.A.. M.R.AS. 
INTRODUCTION. 
Tradition ascribes to Thera Buddhaghosa the authorship 
of several exegetical works, which, as we have them now 
-headed by the encyclopaedic Visuddhimagga. He is said to 
have written commentaries on the whole of the Vinaya Pitaka 
including the Patimokkha, the four Nikayas, and on the seven 
books of the Abhidhamma-Pitaka. The commentaries on some 
of the important books of the Khuddaka Nikaya are also attribu- 
ted to him. Regarding Buddhaghosa, Mrs. Rhys Davids says : 
“It may readily be granted that Buddhaghosa must not be 
accepted en bloc. The distance between the constructive genius 
of Gotama and his apostles as compared with the succeeding ages 
of epigoni needs no depreciatory criticism on the labours of the 
exegesists to make itself felt forcibly enough. Buddhaghosa’s 
philology is doubtless crude and he is apt to leave the cruces 
unexplained, concerning which an Occidental is most in the 
dark. Nevertheless, to me his work is not only highly te ibe bi 
but also a mine of historic interest. To put it aside is to lose 
the historical perspective of the course of Buddhist philosophy.””! 
Here however we are concerned with the works of Buddha- 
ghosa as indicating the development of his own mind rather 
than giving the expositions of earlier thoughts. 
CuHaPprTer I. 
Origin and Development of Buddhaghosa’s Commentaries. 
Before we discuss the question of the origin and develop- 
ment of Buddhaghosa’s commentaries a word or two about the 
nature of a commentary seems necessary. commentary 
— reading new meanings back into old texts according 
e’s own education and vouslaok: Its motive is to explain 
ns annie and Cangas of others as accurately and faithfully 
as possible. This remark applies equally to all commentaries, 
Sanskrit and Pali alike. 
The teacher Revata is represented as saying to his pupil 
Buddhaghosa, “The Pali or Tripitaka only has been brought 
over here, no commentary is extant in this place. The diver- 
gent opinions of teachers other than the Theravadins do not 
1 Introductory Essay, Buddhist Psychological Ethics, p. xxv. 
