The Prajñaptivāda ( Sanskrit ; traditional Chinese : 說假部 ; ; pinyin : Shuō Jiǎ Bù ) was a branch of the Mahāsāṃghika , one of the early Buddhist schools in India . The Prajñaptivādins were also known as the Bahuśrutīya -Vibhajyavādins .
71-794: According to Vasumitra , the Prajñaptivāda school is said to have developed as one of several Mahāsāṃghika subschools. They are recorded as having taken up residence in the Himalayas . According to Tāranātha , the Prajñaptivādins continued to flourish in Magadha through the Pala Empire as late as the 10th century CE. A. K. Warder writes that the Prajñaptivādins were not known to have left Buddhism's original territory (modern Northeast India , Bengal and Nepal ). The Samayabhedhoparacanacakra records that
142-583: A beautiful jeweled residence for the Buddha to the north-east of the bodhi tree , where he meditated and delivered the Abhidharma teachings to gathered deities in the Trāyastriṃśa heaven, including his deceased mother Māyā . The tradition holds that the Buddha gave daily summaries of the teachings given in the heavenly realm to the bhikkhu Sariputta , who passed them on. The Sarvāstivāda - Vaibhāṣika held that
213-518: A constantly flowing stream of experience occurrences. Human experience is thus explained by a series of dynamic processes and their patterns of relationships with each other. Buddhist Abhidhamma philosophers then sought to explain all experience by creating lists and matrices (matikas) of these dhammas, which varied by school. The four categories of dhammas in the Theravada Abhidhamma are: The Sarvastivada Abhidharma also used these, along with
284-476: A dharma exists. The concern here is primarily with what makes categorial types of dharma unique, rather than with the ontological status of dharmas." However, in the later Sarvastivada texts, like the Mahavibhasa, the term svabhava began to be defined more ontologically as the really existing “intrinsic nature” specifying individual dharmas. The Sautrantika school accepted the doctrine of svabhāva as referring to
355-521: A fifth category: "factors dissociated from thought" ( cittaviprayuktasaṃskāra ). The Sarvastivadas also included three dharmas in the fourth "unconditioned" category instead of just one, the dharma of space and two states of cessation. The Abhidharma project was thus to provide a completely exhaustive account of every possible type of conscious experience in terms of its constituent factors and their relations. The Theravada tradition holds that there were 82 types of possible dhammas – 82 types of occurrences in
426-420: A full picture of all aspects of the path in an attempt to provide a complete map of everything in some way related to the path." As Frauwallner explains, due to this scholastic impulse, lists grew in size, different mātṛkās were combined with each other to produce new ones, and new concepts and schemas were introduced, such as the differentiation of cittas and caitasikās and new ways of connecting or relating
497-656: A group in the early Buddhist texts . He also points out another such list that occurs in various texts "comprises several groups of elements of import for entanglement in the cycle of existence" and was modeled on the Oghavagga of the Samyuttanikaya . These lists were intended as a basic way of explaining the Buddhist doctrine, and are likely to have been accompanied by oral explanations, which continued to develop and expand and were later written down . Another related early method
568-498: A pot, that is a 'conceptual fiction'. The ultimately real is otherwise." For Vasubandhu then, something is not the ultimately real if it 'disappears under analysis', but is merely conventional. The ultimate goal of the Abhidharma is Nirvana and hence the Abhidharmikas systematized dhammas into those which are skillful (kusala), purify the mind and lead to liberation, and those which are unskillful and do not. The Abhidharma then has
639-521: A similar list that acts as a doctrinal summary is the Madhyama-āgama ("Discourse on Explaining the Spheres", MĀ 86) which includes a list of thirty one topics to be taught to newly ordained monastics . The last sutra of the Madhyama-āgama (MĀ 222) contains a similar doctrinal summary listing, which combines three lists into one: a list of eight activities, a list of ten mental qualities and practices, and
710-510: A soteriological purpose, first and foremost and its goal is to support Buddhist practice and meditation. By carefully watching the coming and going of dhammas, and being able to identify which ones are wholesome and to be cultivated, and which ones are unwholesome and to be abandoned, the Buddhist meditator makes use of the Abhidharma as a schema to liberate his mind and realize that all experiences are impermanent, not-self, unsatisfactory and therefore not to be clung to. The Abhidharmikas often used
781-564: Is also among the storied promulgators of the two truths doctrine (using some of the same technical terms), and who in his Mūlamadhyamakakārikā only cites one text by name, that being the Kātyāyana Gotra Sūtra , of which the Prajñaptivādins were known to be fond. Vasumitra (Buddhism) Vasumitra was a Buddhist monk of the Sarvastivada school who flourished in the 2nd century CE. A native of Gandhāra , he presided over
SECTION 10
#1732855885822852-406: Is called the mātṛkā ("attribute"), and refers to lists of terms divided by a dyad or triad of attributes. For example, terms could be grouped into those things that are rūpa (form, physical) or arūpa (formless), saṃskṛtam (constructed) or asaṃskṛtam, and the triad of kuśalam (wholesome), akuśalam (unwholesome), or avyākṛtam (indetermined). An early form of this method can be found in
923-539: Is merely a conceptual construct imputed by the mind on a flux of dhammas. However, dhammas are never seen as individually separate entities, but are always dependently conditioned by other dhammas in a stream of momentary constellations of dhammas, constantly coming into being and vanishing, always in flux. Perception and thinking is then seen as a combination of various dhammas. Cittas (awareness events) are never experienced on their own, but are always intentional and hence accompanied by various mental factors (cetasikas), in
994-429: Is not something inherent in a dhamma as a separate ultimate reality, but arise due to the supporting conditions both of other dhammas and previous occurrences of that dhamma." The Visuddhimagga of Buddhaghosa , the most influential classical Theravada treatise, states that not-self does not become apparent because it is concealed by "compactness" when one does not give attention to the various elements which make up
1065-525: Is said to have been taught by the Buddha just before passing away. Analayo notes that these various lists served a useful purpose in early Buddhism since they served as aids for the memorization and teaching of the Buddhist doctrine . The use of lists containing doctrinal statements can similarly be seen in Jain literature . The fact that these lists were seen by the early Buddhists as a way to preserve and memorize
1136-946: Is sometimes found in the Suttas, and state everything in psycho-philosophically exact language." In this sense, it is an attempt to best express the Buddhist view of " ultimate reality " ( paramārtha-satya ). There are different types of Abhidharma literature. The early canonical Abhidharma works, such as the Abhidhamma Piṭaka , are not philosophical treatises but mainly summaries and expositions of early Buddhist doctrinal lists with their accompanying explanations. These texts developed out of early Buddhist lists or matrices ( mātṛkās ) of key teachings. Later post-canonical Abhidharma works were written as either large treatises ( śāstra ), as commentaries ( aṭṭhakathā ), or as smaller introductory manuals. They are more developed philosophical works which include many innovations and doctrines not found in
1207-436: Is that besides the small number of fundamental doctrinal statements, the Buddha's sermons also contain a quantity of doctrinal concepts. The most suitable form for collecting and preserving these concepts would have been comprehensive lists. Lists of this kind were called mātṛkā , and it was from these lists that the Abhidharma later developed. The extensive use of mātṛkā can be found in some early Buddhist texts , including
1278-453: Is the 'dhamma theory' and this theory 'penetrated all the early schools'. For the Abhidharmikas, the ultimate components of existence, the elementary constituents of experience were called dhammas (Pali: dhammas ). This concept has been variously translated as "factors" (Collett Cox), "psychic characteristics" (Bronkhorst), "phenomena" (Nyanaponika) and "psycho-physical events" (Ronkin). The early Buddhist scriptures give various lists of
1349-541: Is ultimately real as opposed to only conventionally real (such as a chariot or a person). However, the Sarvastivadins did not hold that dharmas were completely independent of each other, as the Mahavibhasa states: "conditioned dharmas are weak in their intrinsic nature, they can accomplish their activities only through mutual dependence" and "they have no sovereignty (aisvarya). They are dependent on others." Svabhava in
1420-657: Is very close to the fully developed position of the Mahāyāna sūtras . André Bareau considers the origin of the Mahāyāna tradition to be in the early Mahāsāṃghika schools, and cites the Bahuśrutīyas and Prajñaptivādins as sub-sects of the Mahāsāṃghika that may have played an important role in bridging the flow of Mahayana teachings between the northern and southern Mahāsāṃghika traditions. The Prajñaptivādins were early articulators of
1491-488: The Buddhist doctrine that was expanded over time. Thomas and Frauwallner both argue that while the Abhidharma texts of the different schools were compiled separately and have major differences, they are based on an "ancient core" of common material. Rupert Gethin also writes that the mātikās are from an earlier date than the Abhidharma texts themselves. According to Frauwallner, The oldest Buddhist tradition has no Abhidharmapitaka but only mātṛkā . What this means
SECTION 20
#17328558858221562-721: The Chinese Canon and also in Sanskrit fragments, such as the Śāriputra Abhidharma Śāstra of the Dharmaguptaka school and various texts from the Pudgalavāda tradition . These different traditions have some similarities, suggesting either interaction between groups or some common ground antedating the separation of the schools. In the Theravāda tradition it was held that the Abhidhamma
1633-465: The Dasuttara Sutta . The explanations of the various elements in these lists also dealt with how these elements were connected ( saṃprayoga ) with each other. Over time, the need arose for an overarching way to classify all these terms and doctrinal elements, and the first such framework was to subsume or include ( saṃgraha ) all main terms into the schema of the 12 āyatanāni, the 18 dhatāvah , and
1704-1208: The Mahāsāṃghika school seems not to have accepted them as part of their Buddhist canon. Another school included most of the Khuddaka Nikāya within the Abhidhamma Piṭaka . After the closing of the foundational Buddhist canons , Abhidharma texts continued to be composed, but now they were either commentaries on the canonical texts (like the Pāli Aṭṭhakathās and the Mahāvibhāṣa ), or independent treatises ( śāstra ) in their own right. In these post-canonical texts, further doctrinal developments and innovations can be found. As Noa Ronkin writes, "post-canonical Abhidharma texts became complex philosophical treatises employing sophisticated methods of argumentation and independent investigations that resulted in doctrinal conclusions quite far removed from their canonical antecedents." As Frauwallner writes, these later works were attempts to build truly complete philosophical systems out of
1775-460: The Sarvāstivādin and Theravādin schools. These differences are much more pronounced than among the other canonical collections ( Sūtras , Āgama , and Vinaya ). As such, the Abhidharma collections of the various Buddhist schools are much more unique to each sect. The various Abhidharmic traditions grew to have very fundamental philosophical disagreements with each other (such as on the status of
1846-718: The Saṅgīti Sutta and Dasuttara Sutta of the Dīgha Nikāya , as well as the Saṅgīti Sūtra and Daśottara Sūtra of the Dīrgha Āgama . Similar lists of numerically arranged doctrinal terms can be found in AN 10.27 and AN 10.28. Tse fu Kuan also argues that certain sūtras of the Aṅguttara Nikāya (AN 3.25, AN 4.87–90, AN 9.42–51) illustrates an Abhidharma method. Another text which contains
1917-635: The Sūtra Piṭaka and the Vinaya Piṭaka , the Mahīśāsaka , Theravāda , Dharmaguptaka , and Sarvāstivāda Vinayas all provide different accounts which mention that there was some kind of Abhidharma to be learned aside from the sūtras and Vinaya. According to Analayo, "the Mūlasarvāstivāda Vinaya does not explicitly mention the Abhidharma, although it reports that on this occasion Mahākāśyapa recited
1988-610: The early Buddhist schools . However, these differences did not mean the existence of totally independent sects, as noted by Rupert Gethin, "at least some of the schools mentioned by later Buddhist tradition are likely to have been informal schools of thought in the manner of ‘Cartesians,’ ‘British Empiricists,’ or ‘Kantians’ for the history of modern philosophy." By the 7th-century, Chinese pilgrim Xuanzang could reportedly collect Abhidharma texts from seven different Buddhist traditions . These various Abhidharma works were not accepted by all Indian Buddhist schools as canonical; for example,
2059-408: The two truths doctrine that is so important to the Mahāyāna, where it is usually found in the relationship between skillful means (Skt. upāya ) and wisdom (Skt. prajñā ). Ian Charles Harris has noted that the doctrines of the Prajñaptivāda school are indeed similar to the early Mahāyāna view of the two truths. There is also evidence that the Prajñaptivādins were an influence on Nāgārjuna , who
2130-569: The 4th Buddhist council in Kashmir , administered by Kanishka I . He is credited as contributing to the Mahāvibhāṣā . Vasumitra put forward a thesis to defend the tenet of the Sarvastivada school that dharmas exist in the past and future as well as the present. According to this argument, dharmas exist in a noumenal or latent state in the future until they attain a moment of causal efficacy (karitra) in
2201-411: The 5 skandhāh . Over time, the initial scholastic method of listing and categorizing terms was expanded in order to provide a complete and comprehensive systematization of the Buddhist doctrine . According to Analayo, the beginning of Abhidharma proper was inspired by the desire "to be as comprehensive as possible, to supplement the directives given in the early discourses for progress on the path with
Prajñaptivāda - Misplaced Pages Continue
2272-521: The Abhidharma literature as "the end-product of several centuries of intellectual endeavor". The Vinaya accounts on the compilation of the Buddhist Canon following the parinirvāṇa of Gautama Buddha (c. 5th century BCE) offer various and sometimes conflicting narratives regarding the canonical status of Abhidharma. While the Mahāsāṅghika Vinaya does not speak of an Abhidharma apart from
2343-404: The Abhidharma to be the pure and literal ( nippariyaya ) description of ultimate truth ( paramattha sacca ) and an expression of perfect spiritual wisdom ( prajñā ), while the sutras were considered 'conventional' ( sammuti ) and figurative ( pariyaya ) teachings, given by Gautama Buddha to specific people, at specific times, depending on specific worldly circumstances. They held that Abhidharma
2414-580: The Abhidharma was based on early and ancient lists of doctrinal terms which are called mātikās (Sanskrit: mātṛkā ). Migot points to the mention of a " Mātṛkā Piṭaka" in the Cullavagga as the precursor to the canonical Abhidharma . Migot argues that this Mātṛkā Piṭaka , said to have been recited by Mahākāśyapa at the First Council according to the Ashokavadana , likely began as a condensed version of
2485-478: The Abhidharma, and hence the way of enlightened persons like the Buddha, who have developed the true insight ( vipassana ), sees reality as the constant stream of collections of dharmas, and this way of seeing the world is ultimate truth (paramārtha-satya). As the Indian Buddhist Vasubandhu writes: "Anything the idea of which does not occur upon division or upon mental analysis, such as an object like
2556-450: The Buddha and his disciples taught the Abhidharma, but that it was scattered throughout the canon. Only after his death was the Abhidharma compiled systematically by his elder disciples and was recited by Ananda at the first Buddhist council. The Sautrāntika school ('those who rely on the sutras') rejected the status of the Abhidharma as being Buddhavacana (word of the Buddha), they held it
2627-452: The Buddhist sūtras deal with sequences and processes, while the Abhidharma texts describe occasions and events. Modern scholars generally believe that the canonical Abhidharma texts emerged after the time of Gautama Buddha , in around the 3rd century BCE. Therefore, the canonical Abhidharma works are generally claimed by scholars not to represent the words of the Buddha himself, but those of later Buddhist thinkers . Peter Skilling describes
2698-542: The Noble Path is eternal and immutable, and that it is not possible for it to be lost or destroyed. They also held that the path was not something that could be cultivated through contemplation. However, they believed that the Path could be attained through all-knowledge (Skt. sarvajñāna ) and the accumulation of merit . Whether one meets an untimely death or attains the Noble Path, the Prajñaptivādins viewed all such outcomes as being
2769-466: The Prajñaptivādins viewed all conditioned phenomena as being mere concepts or notions (Skt. prajñapti ), and therefore they were considered to be suffering . Contrary to the Sarvāstivādins , the Prajñaptivādins did not view the skandhas or the five elements as suffering. Instead these were viewed as existing merely as nominal entities without any ultimate existence. The Prajñaptivādins believed that
2840-621: The Theravāda school, while the Abhidharmakośa (4–5th century CE) of Vasubandhu remains the primary source for Abhidharma studies in both Indo - Tibetan Buddhism and East Asian Buddhism . In the modern era, only the Abhidharma texts of the Sarvāstivādins and the Theravādins have survived as complete collections, each consisting of seven books with accompanying commentarial literature. A small number of other Abhidharma texts are preserved in
2911-597: The canonical Abhidharma. Abhidharma remains an important field of scholarship among the Theravāda , Mahāyāna , and Vajrayāna schools of Buddhism . The Belgian Indologist Étienne Lamotte described the Abhidharma as "Doctrine pure and simple, without the intervention of literary development or the presentation of individuals" Compared to the colloquial Buddhist sūtras, Abhidharma texts are much more technical, analytic, and systematic in content and style. The Theravādin and Sarvāstivādin Abhidharmikas generally considered
Prajñaptivāda - Misplaced Pages Continue
2982-479: The commentaries gained canonical status. Thus, according to Analayo: just as the combination of the prātimokṣa with its commentary was central for the development of the Vinaya, so too the combination of mātṛkās with a commentary was instrumental in the development of the Abhidharma. Thus the use of a mātṛkā together with its exegesis is a characteristic common to the Abhidharma and the Vinaya, whose expositions often take
3053-461: The commentator Yaśomitra even states that "the Sautrantikas can be said to have an abhidharma collection, i.e., as texts that are declared to be varieties of sutra in which the characteristics of factors are described." [REDACTED] Religion portal The Abhidharma texts' field of inquiry extends to the entire Buddhadharma , since their goal was to outline, systematize and analyze all of
3124-464: The constituents of the person such as the five skandhas, the six or 18 dhatus , and the twelve sense bases . In Abhidhamma literature, these lists of dhammas systematically arranged and they were seen as the ultimate entities or momentary events which make up the fabric of people's experience of reality. The idea was to create an exhaustive list of all possible phenomena that make up the world. The conventional reality of substantial objects and persons
3195-413: The doctrine can be seen in the Saṅgīti Sūtra and its various parallels, which mention how the Jain community became divided over doctrinal matters after the death of their leader. The sutta depicts Śāriputra as reciting a list of doctrinal terms and stating that the community will remain "united, unanimous, and in unison we will not dispute" regarding the teaching and also states they will recite together
3266-537: The doctrine. The close connection between the Saṅgīti Sūtra and Abhidharma can be seen in the fact that it became the basis for one of the seven canonical Abhidharma texts belonging to the Sarvāstivāda school, the Saṅgītiparyāya , which is effectively a commentary on the sūtra. Frauwallner notes that basic fundamental concepts such as the 12 āyatanāni , the 18 dhatāvah , and the 5 skandhāh often occur as
3337-465: The doctrines of the Prajñaptivāda school were similar to those of the main Mahāsāṃghika school. According to André Bareau , the name Prajñaptivāda refers to their doctrine that phenomena are the product of conceptualization (Skt. prajñapti ). The Prajñaptivādins distinguished between conventional truth (Skt. saṃvṛti ) and ultimate truth (Skt. paramārtha ), and between reality (Skt. tattva ) and mere concepts (Skt. prajñapti ). Vasumitra writes that
3408-409: The early Abhidhamma texts was then not a term which meant ontological independence, metaphysical essence or underlying substance, but simply referred to their characteristics, which are dependent on other conditions and qualities. According to Ronkin: "In the early Sarvāstivāda exegetical texts, then, svabhāva is used as an atemporal, invariable criterion determining what a dharma is, not necessarily that
3479-409: The early Buddhist community and also by geographic distance. According to Frauwallner, the period of the development of the canonical Abhidharma texts is between 250 and 50 BCE. By the time, the different canons began to be written down, and as a result the Abhidharma texts of the early Buddhist schools were substantially different, as can be seen in how different the canonical Abhidharma texts are in
3550-409: The experiential world, while the general Sarvastivada tradition eventually enumerated 75 dharma types. For the Abhidharmikas, truth was twofold and there are two ways of looking at reality. One way is the way of everyday experience and of normal worldly persons. This is the category of the nominal and the conceptual (paññatti), and is termed the conventional truth (saṃvṛti-satya). However, the way of
3621-426: The field of knowledge that this method is said to study. Bhikkhu Bodhi calls it "an abstract and highly technical systemization of the [Buddhist] doctrine," which is "simultaneously a philosophy , a psychology and an ethics , all integrated into the framework of a program for liberation ." According to Peter Harvey , the Abhidharma method seeks "to avoid the inexactitudes of colloquial conventional language, as
SECTION 50
#17328558858223692-412: The form of a commentary on a summary list. Therefore, the different Buddhist Abhidharma texts were developed over time as Buddhist monks and philosophers expanded their analytical methods in different ways. Since this happened in different monastic communities located in different regions, they developed in separate doctrinal directions . This divergence was perhaps enhanced by the various schisms in
3763-448: The hand. They are mere states ( dhamma ) occurring due to conditions and void. In this way the characteristic of not-self becomes more evident." The Sarvastivadins saw dharmas as the ultimately 'real entities' (sad-dravya), though they also held that dharmas were dependently originated . For the Sarvastivadins, a synonym for svabhava is avayaya (a 'part'), the smallest possible unit which cannot be analyzed into smaller parts and hence it
3834-538: The major achievements of the classical period of Indian philosophy ." Two interpretations of the term "Abhi-dharma" are common. According to Analayo, the initial meaning of Abhidharma in the earliest texts (such as the Mahāgosiṅga-sutta and its parallels) was simply a discussion concerning the Dharma , or talking about the Dharma. In this sense, abhi has the meaning of "about" or "concerning," and can also be seen in
3905-531: The mātṛkā(s)." Analayo thinks that this reflects an early stage, when what later became Abhidharma was called the mātṛkās . The term appears in some sūtras, such as the Mahāgopālaka-sutta (and its Sanskrit parallel) which says that a learned monk is one who knows the Dharma, Vinaya, and the mātṛkās. Western scholars of Buddhist studies such as André Migot , Edward J. Thomas , Erich Frauwallner , Rupert Gethin , and Johannes Bronkhorst have argued that
3976-401: The parallel term abhivinaya (which just means discussions about the vinaya). The other interpretation, where abhi is interpreted as meaning "higher" or "superior", and thus Abhidharma means "higher teaching", seems to have been a later development. Some Western scholars have considered the Abhidharma to be the core of what is referred to as " Buddhism and psychology ". Other scholars on
4047-473: The person, or temporal eternalism ). Thus, according to Frauwallner, the different Abhidharma canons contained collections of doctrines which were sometimes unrelated to each other and sometimes contradictory. These different Abhidharmic theories were (together with differences in Vinaya ) some of the various causes for the splits in the monastic Saṃgha , which resulted in the fragmented early Buddhist landscape of
4118-569: The person. The Paramatthamañjusa Visuddhimaggatika of Acariya Dhammapala , a later Theravada commentary on the Visuddhimagga , refers to the fact that we often assume unity and compactness in phenomena and functions which are instead made up of various elements, but when one sees that these are merely empty dhammas, one can understand the not-self characteristic: "when they are seen after resolving them by means of knowledge into these elements, they disintegrate like froth subjected to compression by
4189-465: The present. This marks their entry into a functional relationship with other phenomena. When this moment is past, they reenter into a noumenal state that is understood as "past." Vasumitra's theory of temporality was accepted in preference to the views posited by other monks such as Dharmatrāta , Ghoṣa , and Buddhadeva . Vasumitra is the eighth zen ancestor. According to Soto Zen tradition, Vasumitra "always wore clean clothing. He used to wander around
4260-416: The result of merit and karma . The Prajñaptivādins held that the Buddha's teachings in the various piṭakas were nominal (Skt. prajñapti ), conventional (Skt. saṃvṛti ), and causal (Skt. hetuphala ). Therefore, all teachings were viewed by the Prajñaptivādins as being of provisional importance, since they cannot contain the ultimate truth. It has been observed that this view of the Buddha's teachings
4331-408: The teachings. Abhidharmic thought also extends beyond the sutras to cover new philosophical and psychological ground which is only implicit in sutras or not present at all. There are certain doctrines which were developed or even invented by the Abhidharmikas and these became grounds for the debates among the different early Buddhist schools . The "base upon which the entire [Abhidhamma] system rests"
SECTION 60
#17328558858224402-666: The term svabhāva (Pali: sabhāva) to explain the causal workings of dharmas. This term was used in different ways by the different Buddhist schools. This term does not appear in the sutras. The Abhidharmakośabhāṣya states: “dharma means ‘upholding,’ [namely], upholding intrinsic nature (svabhāva)” while the Theravādin commentaries holds that: “dhammas are so called because they bear their intrinsic natures, or because they are borne by causal conditions.” Dharmas were also said to be distinct from each other by their intrinsic/unique characteristics (svalaksana). The examination of these characteristics
4473-416: The topic, such as Nyanaponika Thera and Dan Lusthaus , describe Abhidharma as a Buddhist phenomenology while Noa Ronkin and Kenneth Inada equate it with process philosophy . Bhikkhu Bodhi writes that the system of the Abhidhamma Piṭaka is "simultaneously a philosophy , a psychology and an ethics , all integrated into the framework of a program for liberation ." According to L. S. Cousins ,
4544-649: The twelve links of dependent arising . These two do not have any parallels in Pali. According to Analayo, another important doctrinal list which appears in the early texts is the "thirty seven qualities that are conducive to awakening" ( bodhipākṣikā dharmāḥ ). This mātṛkā appears in various sūtras, like the Pāsādika-sutta , the Sāmagāma-sutta (and their parallels), and in the Mahāparinirvāṇa-sūtra , where it
4615-407: The various canonical Abhidharma texts. Some of these texts surpassed the canonical Abhidharma in influence and popularity, becoming the orthodox summas of their particular schools' Abhidharma. Two exegetical texts, both from the 5th century, stand above the rest as the most influential. The works of Buddhaghosa (5th century CE), particularly the Visuddhimagga , remains the main reference work of
4686-446: The various elements with each other. According to Analayo, these various lists were also not presented alone, but included some kind of commentary and explanation which was also part of the oral tradition. Sometimes this commentary included quotations from other sutras, and traces of this can be found in the canonical Abhidharma texts. As time passed, these commentaries and their accompanying lists became inseparable from each other, and
4757-400: The villages carrying a wine vessel, whistling and singing. People thought he was crazy." Dharmas The Abhidharma are a collection of Buddhist texts dating from the 3rd century BCE onwards, which contain detailed scholastic presentations of doctrinal material appearing in the canonical Buddhist scriptures and commentaries . It also refers to the scholastic method itself, as well as
4828-595: Was held to be extremely important, the Sarvastivada Mahavibhasa states "Abhidharma is [precisely] the analysis of the svalaksana and samanya-laksana of dharmas". According to Peter Harvey, the Theravadin view of dharmas was that "'They are dhammas because they uphold their own nature [sabhaava]. They are dhammas because they are upheld by conditions or they are upheld according to their own nature' (Asl.39). Here 'own-nature' would mean characteristic nature, which
4899-493: Was not a later addition, but rather was taught in the fourth week of Gautama Buddha 's enlightenment. The Theravada tradition is unique in regarding its Abhidharma as having been taught in its complete form by the Buddha as a single teaching, with the exception of the Kathavatthu , which contains material relating to later disputes and was held to only have been presented as an outline. According to their tradition, devas built
4970-428: Was taught by the Buddha to his most eminent disciples, and that therefore this justified the inclusion of Abhidharma texts into their scriptural canon . According to Collett Cox, Abhidharma started as a systematic elaboration of the teachings of the Buddhist sūtras, but later developed independent doctrines. The prominent Western scholar of Abhidharma, Erich Frauwallner , has said that these Buddhist systems are "among
5041-406: Was the work of different monks after his death, and that this was the reason different Abhidharma schools varied widely in their doctrines. However, this school still studied and debated on Abhidharma concepts and thus did not seek to question the method of the Abhidharma in its entirety. Indeed, there were numerous Abhidharma texts written from an Abhidharma perspective. According to K.L. Dhammajoti,
#821178