Ma`rifat Adyan

This article investigates the patterns and approaches that Buddhist commentators have used or devised to achieve the definitive intention of their leader. Unlike the Theravāda orthodox, who rejected any interpretation of the Buddha's words, the Mahāyāna Buddhists, arguing that the Buddha presented appropriate teachings for each audience, divided Buddhist literature into two categories; The first category, texts that carry a definitive meaning, and the second, texts with interpretable meanings. The main question of the research is what are the methodological criteria for establishing the criteria of correct interpretation, and preventing commentators from falling into the abyss of arbitrary interpretation. The results of the research show that, on the one hand, the theoretical framework of Buddhist monks for interpreting texts was the discovery of the “author's intention”, and on the other hand, the criterion for the correctness of later interpretations was considered the "consensus" of the elders and wise men, as well as the conformity with the interpretations of the predecessors, which is a “normative” view of interpretation. The research data has been collected using library sources and analyzed with an analytical-interpretive method, and its goal is developmental. Initially, the explicit implications for the correct understanding of the Buddha's sermons in the Pāli Canon are studied, and then, the efforts of the elders of the Mahayana school, such as Nāgārjuna and Chandrakirti, and then Tsong Khapa in Tibetan Buddhism will be mentioned.