Where does the idea of 'three tone' chanting/recitation come from?

Discussion
1

I have found evidence both in the Thai and Sri Lankan tradition of the idea of chanting using (only) three tones. However, I can’t find a sutta/vinaya example of where this idea came from.

Is it from the vinaya, commentarial or inherited from earlier vedic tradition?

I can think of a few Sri Lankan styles which don’t conform to these tone rules, such as Dhammaruwan (technically not typical SL style). Are there other rules?

6 Likes
2

“There are these five drawbacks to singing the Teaching with a drawn-out voice: one delights in the sound; others delight in the sound; householders criticize it; for one who takes pleasure in performing with the voice, the concentration is disrupted; later generations follow one’s example.

You shouldn’t sing the Teaching with a drawn-out voice. If you do, you commit an offense of wrong conduct.”

Being afraid of wrongdoing, the monks did not chant. They told the Buddha.

“I allow chanting.”

Three-tone chanting avoids monotony without breaking this rule.

3

I think the issue in question is where the three tone method comes from. The rule you quote only has to do with drawing out the sound. Which, by the way, is exactly the style for overnight paritta chanting in Sri Lanka. I’m not sure how or even if people square those two.

If I had to make a guess, I’d think chanting was already such a common thing that there was no need to spell out in detail how it was to be done.

2 Likes
4

Venerable, I imagine you have already seen this, but I include it here for the sake of completeness. (and the fact it doesn’t mention tones)

From The Buddhist Monastic Code by Ajahn Thanissaro.

One is not allowed to deliver the Dhamma with a drawn-out singing voice (sara, the word for “voice” here, also means “vowel” and “sound”). The disadvantages to such a delivery are that one becomes impassioned with one’s voice; others become impassioned with it; householders look down on one; as one desires to contrive the sound of one’s voice, one’s concentration lapses; and people coming after will take it as an example. However, there is an allowance for “sarabhañña”—translated as vowel-reciting. The Commentary notes here that “all 32 techniques of vowel-reciting—such as ‘waves’ (trills? vibrato?) ‘pulling the cow’s teat (!),’ and ‘rough’—are allowable as long as they don’t ‘lose’ the consonants, distort the meaning, or deviate from the etiquette of a contemplative.” What precisely this means is hard to decipher. Many of the sarabhañña chanting styles that have developed in Asia are quite song-like. Different Communities have different ways of drawing the line between drawn-out singing voice and vowel-intoning, and a wise policy for the individual bhikkhu is to hold to an interpretation no less strict than that of the Community to which he belongs.

I wonder, @REddison, if you have any insights.

2 Likes
5

How?
You could totally draw-out sounds and still only use three tones. I don’t see these things as mutually exclusive.

1 Like
6

They aren’t. But tonal chanting is a way to solve the monotony “problem” without breaking the rule against drawn out chanting.

3 Likes