I’ve recently been exploring the skeptical/sutta-based/existential-phenomenological perspectives of Samanera Bodhesako, Bhikkhu Akiñcano (author of Making Sense of Dhamma), Hillside Hermitage, Samanadipa, and others linked with Path press Publications, and most recently picked up a copy of The Buddha’s Teaching: It’s Essential Meaning by R. G. de S. Wettimuny.
Wow, what a book! I mean it seems quite evident to me that the teachers I’m aware of who are approaching practice through this lens owe a great deal of their interpretations of Ñāṇavīra Thera’s norotiously difficult Notes on Dhamma, as well as the translations, vocabulary and succinct descriptions they’re using to the author of It’s Essential Meaning.
This book, not only impressive for it’s content, but it’s delivery and readability, is one I shall likely be returning too.
I’ve just made a start on his subsequent book, published posthumously in 1978, and have high hopes.
I’d be keen to hear the perspectives of others who have read It’s Essential Meaning, from others who are seriously exploring this take on the dhamma, and also welsome recommendations on material along similar lines.
That is my father’s book printed by me and lately reprinted by some Venerable monks for free distribution.
That book was not originally printed posthumously but was laterly reprinted (last year) …His teacher was Ven. ÑĀNAVIRA and I posses Ven Ñānaviras original notes through which Notes on Dhamma was published. This book was printed after Ven. Ñānavira condemned his first book written after 20 yrs of research on Dhamma and thereafter this came as a quick correction.
If you’re able to get hold of his last book which was posthumously done by me and my younger brother Mithra (1000 copies for free distribution), titled The Buddha’s Teaching, and the Ambiguity of Existence which consists of 381 pages, it will greatly assist you to win the Path.
Theruwan Saranai.
One of the most important things to remember with these dense interpretations is not to lose sight of what is practically applicable when it comes to then making use the information that you accumulate. It is very easy to get enamored by these various writers, and over time to become very familiar with the idiosyncratic language and ideas. This is by no means a bad position to be in, but it is not a substitute for rolling up your sleeves and doing the work. In fact, Ajahn Nyanamoli often jokes about being able to get a PhD in Notes on Dhamma, but that it doesn’t necessarily bring you any closer to knowing firsthand what Ven. Nanavira was saying.
When all is said and done I recommend giving an extremely careful listening to the talks of Ajahn Nyanamoli and Ven. Anigha who each could not be more direct about the categorical difference between what sounds accurate in theory and what is actually understood. While it is an important distinction in its own right, I do imagine both monks are acutely aware with just how easily a person could end up totally satisfied with that theoretical understanding and be divorced from any actual striving. This is compounded by the fact that these talks and writings represent somewhat of an opposition to other more mainstream views, which tends to make them highly intriguing and fascinating. Such things can lead to seemingly boundless inspiration and satisfaction, but even that will eventually wear off and a person will be left a decision about what they actually value and what they are willing to give up.
What I find encouraging in my visits to the Hillside Hermitage subreddit, is the growing number of people willing to express humility and self honesty about their struggles, whereas it could just as easily be a culture of arrogance and superiority. This is no different from what we find across the Buddhist community, especially when things get exclusive, but seeing as though Ven. Nanavira is often recognized as nothing more than troubled monk who wrote a complicated book and then committed suicide, followers are often presumed to be arrogant, close-minded and disrespectful, especially when it comes to attitudes towards traditional Theravada. While there was a time when these attitudes were more prevalent, I find it increasingly rare nowadays. This is definitely thanks to talks from Hillside Hermitage and Samanadipa where it is made abundantly clear that such behavior is often the mark of someone who has made no use of the Buddha’s teachings.
Greetings Sunil,
I have just started reading the 1978 version of Ambiguity of Existence (in the preface of which is reference to your late fathers death, if I remember correctly. There seems to be another version available digitally, published in 2014, but I had read on a forum that it was heavily edited, potentially obscuring some of the original meaning of your father’s work, so I opted to make a start on the 1978 version though the version I have is a little doesn’t display ideally on my e-reader.
Also, where might one find the most recent version produced by you and your brother? I’d be keen to hear your perspective on the differences between these various versions.
The differences , I think I explained before.
The smaller book was published after immediate realization to his thinking and dedicated to Ven. Ñānavira.
The last book 381 pages was published posthumously and is the expansion of the first book.
Dear Sunil, I’m so happy to see you here! I read these books many years ago and still recall Existential Ambiguity as an insightful and challenging work. Thanks to you for your efforts to keep your father’s understanding alive.
