josaphatbarlaam wrote: ↑Wed Oct 13, 2021 1:05 am
Supposedly it is the perspective of Moggaliputta-Tissa at the supposed 3rd council and differentiates the Abhidhammists against the Sarvāstivādans, Pudgalavādans, and Lokottaravādans.
All those had their own Abhidharma too.
Technically then it is a sectarian designation not the original name of Buddhists. The original name was undoubtedly Sakyans or Sakyaputta. But it seems Vibhajjavāda is the more honest designation for Theravada, because its not the position of the elders but of one elder, Moggaliputta-Tissa, and his clique. Surely the Sarvāstivādans, Pudgalavādans, and Lokottaravādans also had plenty of elders on their side.
They did. Ven. Kātyayanīputra for the Sarvāstivādins is an example. Interestingly Ven. Moggaliputta-Tissa makes an appearance in a Sarvāstivādin text which is similar to the Kathāvatthu, of sorts. There his ideas are refuted, without much chance of a reply, in favour of Sarvāstivādin positions. For example, they call him a proponent of cognition of nothing because he argues that dhammas which have ceased can still be known, which is contrary to the Sarvāstivādin position regarding dhammas existing in the past (since this is how we can think about the past).
Others were labelled this too. The best explanation I’ve seen is that it applies to those who make distinctions between the past, present and future. Interestingly the Pudgalavādins also accepted tri-temporal realism and so could also be called Sarvāstivāda, and possibly used this label sometimes. Sometimes Sarvāstivādins preferred to call themselves the school of logic (I forget what the Sanskrit name for that is), or Shunyatavadins when arguing against the Pudgalavādins. Sometimes Hetuvāda (causation school). We know that others were calling themselves Sarvāstivādins as Ven. Saṃghabhadra makes a point of arguing that the label can be only applied to those who accept tri-temporal realism and also accept the 3 unconditioned dharmas (space and 2 types of nirvana). Interestingly this would mean one of the elders of the school, before his time, wasn’t a Sarvāstivādin as he didn’t accept space or one of the nirvanas (I forget which along with the venerable’s name at the moment).