[Buddha-l] liturgical languages]

[jkirk]

Richard: Let me note my contribution about Buddhist monks chanting in
Kalaw, Burma.
Reading this (RH, below) you'd think nobody had ever reported
anything from first-hand experience about Theravadin chanting
that disagrees with your take on it. I said that what I heard was
melodious and beautiful, and I do not have a tin ear.
I implied that the monks had not deliberately, or otherwise, made
their unison chanting cacophonous.
I guess that makes you a true intellectual, indifferent to your
list-surroundings.
JK
===============================================
> On Fri, 2005-04-29 at 09:59 -0400, curt wrote:
>
> > Of course, chanting by ordinary Western lay people is not always
beautiful
>
> Chanting by Theravadin monks can also be decidedly unmelodious, even
> cacophonous. It depends on how much the monks adhere to the Buddha's
> advice not to make beautiful sounds lest it distract from the meaning of
> the words. The local Thai monks in Albuquerque chant in a pretty
> unappetizing way. First they chant in unmusical Pali and then in equally
> unmusical English translation. They also hand out a booklet to visitors
> that has the Pali text with an interlinear translation so that everyone
> can know what they are chanting.
>
> Years ago I had a long discussion with a bhikkhu about chanting, and he
> said that ideally when several people are chanting together, they should
> each be in a slightly different key, so as to avoid harmony that might
> sound beautiful to the ear. I have no idea how frequently this advice is
> given, but my experience in listening to monks is that it is commonly
> observed. Most monks I have heard chanting make Bob Dylan sound like
> Luciano Pavarotti.
>
> I have also heard that one should never let the voice hit two notes in
> the same syllable; in other words the voice should not glide from one
> note to another. Each syllable should be distinctly pronounced and on a
> distinctive note.
>
> Clearly there are Buddhists who prefer a relatively non-aesthetic, even
> anti-aesthetic, approach to dharma recitation and other rituals, while
> others (such as Sangharakshita) emphasize the importance of beauty in
> ritual. To my mind, the most sensible advice in this matter, as in so
> many other matters, is Buddhaghosa. For people given to sensual
> attachments, he says, beautiful surroundings and beautiful rituals
> should be avoided. For people given to hatred or depression, beautiful
> surroundings and beautiful rituals can be a useful antidote to their
> particular maladies. For intellectuals, it makes no difference, since
> they tend to be indifferent to their surroundings.
>
> Indifferently yours,
> Richard
>
> --
> Richard Hayes
> Department of Philosophy
> University of New Mexico
> _______________________________________________
> buddha-l mailing list
> buddha-l at mailman.swcp.com
> http://mailman.swcp.com/mailman/listinfo/buddha-l
>