# “A text without a context is a pretext for a proof text”

**URL:** <https://classicaltheravada.org/t/a-text-without-a-context-is-a-pretext-for-a-proof-text/536>\
**Category:** Authenticity of Texts\
**Tags:** interpretation, ebt, context\
**Created:** [October 25, 2022, 8:40am UTC](https://classicaltheravada.org/t/a-text-without-a-context-is-a-pretext-for-a-proof-text/536 "2022-10-25T08:40:38Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 2\
**Page:** 1

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![ekocare](https://classicaltheravada.org/user_avatar/classicaltheravada.org/ekocare/32/1116_2.png) [@ekocare](https://classicaltheravada.org/u/ekocare)\
**Post date:** [October 25, 2022, 8:40am UTC](https://classicaltheravada.org/t/a-text-without-a-context-is-a-pretext-for-a-proof-text/536/1 "2022-10-25T08:40:38Z")

</div>

Actually in many cases, the text-critical approach tends to ignore the context and interpret the words. It is one of the weaknesses in this approach that any mature one can easily notice.

> [@Dhammanando](#):
>
> > [@josephzizys](#):
> >
> > This strange clustering of the four foundations of mindfulness in the Samyutta however is even more striking than it seems, because if we remove the occurrences in the standard formula listing dhamma subjects known as the 37 factors of awakening, that is the phrase “cattāro satipaṭṭhānā, cattāro sammappadhānā, cattāro iddhipādā, pañcindriyāni, pañca balāni, satta bojjhaṅgā, ariyo aṭṭhaṅgiko maggo” then the Vinaya has no mention of cattāro satipaṭṭhānā at all. This is somewhat troubling, recall that the Vinaya mentions the first jhana 48 times.
> 
> Among Bible scholars a popular saying has it that, **“A text without a context is a pretext for a proof text”.** With that in mind, you’ll need to do a little more than just counting occurrences.
> 
> Now virtually all of the Vinaya’s mentions of the first jhāna are in the context of the fourth pārājika and eighth pācittiya rules for bhikkhus, along with their corresponding rules for bhikkhunīs. The former prohibits false declarations of any kind of uttarimanussadhamma; the latter prohibits truthful declarations of an uttarimanussadhamma when talking to unordained people.
> 
> That being so, your data is readily accounted for by the simple fact that the first jhāna is an uttarimanussadhamma, while the four satipaṭṭhānas are not.

Even the monks who have a yogacara bent (Bhikkhu Nanananda, Analayo etc.) seems define meanings of the words ignoring the context. For an instance they define the meaning of “Nama” in Pancakkhanda, in the same way as in Paticcasamuppada, but the Atthakata defines the meaning depend on the context.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![bksubhuti](https://classicaltheravada.org/user_avatar/classicaltheravada.org/bksubhuti/32/19_2.png) [@bksubhuti](https://classicaltheravada.org/u/bksubhuti)\
**Post date:** [October 27, 2022, 2:03pm UTC](https://classicaltheravada.org/t/a-text-without-a-context-is-a-pretext-for-a-proof-text/536/2 "2022-10-27T14:03:18Z")

</div>

I think that they are just searching for keywords without really knowing what they are talking about. Furthermore, they are only looking in the mula texts.

Vipassana is satipaṭṭhānā and it is mentioned easily in the commentary many times as “vipassanaṃ”

Furthermore, one should also take into the account of the  
anattalakkhana and āditta suttas found in the mahavagga.

even **diṭṭhadhammā** means so much. I really see how easy it is for people to make mistakes and wrong conclusions.