Abhidhamma historical origins

A discussion on all aspects of Theravāda Buddhism
User avatar
Ceisiwr
Posts: 22405
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2009 2:36 am
Location: Wales

Re: Abhidhamma historical origins

Post by Ceisiwr »

sphairos wrote: Sat Sep 11, 2021 8:33 pm
Again, it's not "Theravādin", "Theravāda", but it's your personal, an English lad's of XXI century London, views, understanding and imagination.

There is not English word "real" in the Pāli scriptures, and I argue no Pāli equivalent to the word exists at all.

In reality dhammas are seen at the uttermost level as "empty", "hollow" etc., and even without "sabhāva" sometimes.

And "empty" doesn't go well together with "real" or etc.
I think you have mistaken a description for an argument. There is also no need to be so insulting. I'm not English :tongue:
“Knowing that this body is just like foam,
understanding it has the nature of a mirage,
cutting off Māra’s flower-tipped arrows,
one should go beyond the King of Death’s sight.”
User avatar
mikenz66
Posts: 19943
Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2009 7:37 am
Location: Aotearoa, New Zealand

Re: Abhidhamma historical origins

Post by mikenz66 »

sphairos wrote: Sat Sep 11, 2021 8:33 pm ...
There is not English word "real" in the Pāli scriptures, and I argue no Pāli equivalent to the word exists at all.

In reality dhammas are seen at the uttermost level as "empty", "hollow" etc., and even without "sabhāva" sometimes.

And "empty" doesn't go well together with "real" or etc.
Yes, here's a very old post that has some relevant quotes:
mikenz66 wrote: Sat Jul 11, 2009 9:23 pm To save tiltbillings from repeating himself:
http://www.lioncity.net/buddhism/index. ... &p=1215334" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
tiltbillings wrote: What kind of "ultimate things" are dhammas? Piatigorsky, in his studies of the Theravadin Abhidhamma Pitaka texts (THE BUDDHIST PHILOSOPHY OF THOUGHT 1984, 181) points out dharmas/dhammas are not substances; they are not 'things' in and of themselves:

We simpy cannot say that 'a dharma is... (a predicate follows)', because a dharma, in fact, 'is' no thing, yet [it is] a term denoting (not being) a certain relation or type of relation to thought, consciousness or mind. That is, dharma is not a concept in the accepted terminological sense of the latter, but a purely relational notion.
(Nyanaponika ABHIDHAMMA STUDIES @ page 41 BPS; page 42 Wisdom.)
By arranging the mental factors in relational groups a subordinate synthetical element has been introduced into the mainly analytical Dhammasangani. By so doing, the danger inherent in purely analytical methods is avoided. This danger consists in erroneously taking for genuine separate entities the “parts” resulting from analysis, instead of restricting their use to sound practical method with the purpose of classifying and dissolving composite events wrongly conceived as unities. Up to the present time it has been a regular occurrence in the history of physics, metaphysics, and psychology that when the “whole” has been successfully dissolved by analysis, the resultant “parts” themselves come in turn to be regarded as little “wholes.”
(Prof. Dr. Y. Karunadasa @ THE DHAMMA THEORY, page 9:)
In the Pali tradition it is only for the sake of definition and description that each dhamma is postulated as if it were a separate entity; but in reality it is by no means a solitary phenomenon having an existence of its own. . . . If this Abhidhammic view of existence, as seen from its doctrine of dhammas, cannot be interpreted as a radical pluralism, neither can it be interpreted as an out-and-out monism. For what are called dhammas -- the component factors of the universe, both within us and outside us -- are not fractions of an absolute unity but a multiplicity of co-ordinate factors. They are not reducible to, nor do they emerge from, a single reality, the fundamental postulate of monistic metaphysics. If they are to be interpreted as phenomena, this should be done with the proviso that they are phenomena with no corresponding noumena, no hidden underlying ground. For they are not manifestations of some mysterious metaphysical substratum, but processes taking place due to the interplay of a multitude of conditions. http://www.zeh-verlag.de/download/dhammatheory.pdf
(Harvey @ in his excellent INTRODUCTION TO BUDDHISM, characterizes the Theravadin position, page 87:)
"'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 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."
(A.K. Warder @ in INDIAN BUDDHISM, page 323, discussing the Pali Abhidhamma commentarial literature, states:)
"The most significant new idea in the commentaries is the definition of a 'principle' or element (dharma): dharmas are what have (or 'hold', 'maintain', dhr. is the nearest equivalent in the language to the English 'have') their own own-nature (svabhaava). It is added that they naturally have this through conditions."
Dhammas in the Theravada Abhidhamma Pitaka are "ultimate things" only as a way of talking aspects about the relational flow of experience, not in terms of describing static realities. In other words, dhammas are empty of self. See my signature:
User avatar
Ceisiwr
Posts: 22405
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2009 2:36 am
Location: Wales

Re: Abhidhamma historical origins

Post by Ceisiwr »

mikenz66 wrote: Sat Sep 11, 2021 9:54 pm
No one said they were “static realities”, just realities. That is how orthodox Theravada sees them.
“Knowing that this body is just like foam,
understanding it has the nature of a mirage,
cutting off Māra’s flower-tipped arrows,
one should go beyond the King of Death’s sight.”
sphairos
Posts: 968
Joined: Mon Jun 21, 2010 4:37 am
Location: Munich, Germany

Re: Abhidhamma historical origins

Post by sphairos »

Ceisiwr wrote: Sat Sep 11, 2021 10:10 pm
mikenz66 wrote: Sat Sep 11, 2021 9:54 pm
No one said they were “static realities”, just realities. That is how orthodox Theravada sees them.
"conventional (because the language itself is conventional) realities", "empty realities". "middle way (between the existence and non-existence) realities".

Sorry for the insult, of course Welsh :)
How good and wonderful are your days,
How true are your ways?
sphairos
Posts: 968
Joined: Mon Jun 21, 2010 4:37 am
Location: Munich, Germany

Re: Abhidhamma historical origins

Post by sphairos »

mikenz66 wrote: Sat Sep 11, 2021 9:54 pm
sphairos wrote: Sat Sep 11, 2021 8:33 pm ...
There is not English word "real" in the Pāli scriptures, and I argue no Pāli equivalent to the word exists at all.

In reality dhammas are seen at the uttermost level as "empty", "hollow" etc., and even without "sabhāva" sometimes.

And "empty" doesn't go well together with "real" or etc.
Yes, here's a very old post that has some relevant quotes:
mikenz66 wrote: Sat Jul 11, 2009 9:23 pm To save tiltbillings from repeating himself:
http://www.lioncity.net/buddhism/index. ... &p=1215334" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
tiltbillings wrote: What kind of "ultimate things" are dhammas? Piatigorsky, in his studies of the Theravadin Abhidhamma Pitaka texts (THE BUDDHIST PHILOSOPHY OF THOUGHT 1984, 181) points out dharmas/dhammas are not substances; they are not 'things' in and of themselves:

We simpy cannot say that 'a dharma is... (a predicate follows)', because a dharma, in fact, 'is' no thing, yet [it is] a term denoting (not being) a certain relation or type of relation to thought, consciousness or mind. That is, dharma is not a concept in the accepted terminological sense of the latter, but a purely relational notion.

Dhammas in the Theravada Abhidhamma Pitaka are "ultimate things" only as a way of talking aspects about the relational flow of experience, not in terms of describing static realities. In other words, dhammas are empty of self. See my signature:
Thanks, Mike. Exactly what I mean.

:heart:

I find the Wikipedia article on Theravāda Abhidhamma very good. Very knowledgeable people compiled it. There are good quotes that we should be very cautious to speak about "reality" from the Abhidhammic point of view.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Therav%C4%81da_Abhidhamma
Furthermore, according to Tse Fu Kuan, the Dhammasaṅgaṇi, "does not appear to uphold that dhammas are ultimate realities as against conventional constructs like persons." This text also states that “all dhammas are ways of designation (paññatti)”, that “all dhammas are ways of interpretation (nirutti)” and that “all dhammas are ways of expression (adhivacana)”.[60]

Tse-fu Kuan, Abhidhamma Interpretations of " Persons " (puggala): with Particular Reference to the Aṅguttara Nikāya, J Indian Philos (2015) 43:31–60 doi:10.1007/s10781-014-9228-5
Last edited by sphairos on Sat Sep 11, 2021 10:47 pm, edited 1 time in total.
How good and wonderful are your days,
How true are your ways?
User avatar
mikenz66
Posts: 19943
Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2009 7:37 am
Location: Aotearoa, New Zealand

Re: Abhidhamma historical origins

Post by mikenz66 »

Ceisiwr wrote: Sat Sep 11, 2021 10:10 pm
mikenz66 wrote: Sat Sep 11, 2021 9:54 pm
No one said they were “static realities”, just realities. That is how orthodox Theravada sees them.
How to translate paramattha dhammas is not completely clear, as the quotes I gave from various writers who are much better versed than me in the material shows. My preference would be something like "irreducible phenomena".

:heart:
Mike
sphairos
Posts: 968
Joined: Mon Jun 21, 2010 4:37 am
Location: Munich, Germany

Re: Abhidhamma historical origins

Post by sphairos »

Moreover, it is the position of the magnum śāstric opus of prajñāpāramitā guys / Śūnyavādins / Madhyamikas, Mahāprajñāpāramitopadeśa, that in actual fact Śrāvaka sūtras already speak about the "absolute emptiness":

I. Great emptiness in the two vehicles
This is about the great emptiness (mahāśūnyatā).

1) In the śrāvaka system, it is the emptiness of dharmas (dharmaśūnyatā) that is the great emptiness (mahāśūnyatā).

https://www.wisdomlib.org/buddhism/book ... 26203.html

Not that one should look for their approvement, but I find it very interesting.
How good and wonderful are your days,
How true are your ways?
sphairos
Posts: 968
Joined: Mon Jun 21, 2010 4:37 am
Location: Munich, Germany

Re: Abhidhamma historical origins

Post by sphairos »

To the question of OP:

There are still in Burma and Thai monks who know the whole Tipitaka and first level commentaries by heart. It is humanly possible. There are special exams for them where they prove that they have learnt them.

But I don't think when the texts were coming into being there were not writing materials. It is just not productive/comfortable to work with such amounts of text orally. The system likely was two-fold : the manuscripts and oral transmission.
How good and wonderful are your days,
How true are your ways?
User avatar
Ceisiwr
Posts: 22405
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2009 2:36 am
Location: Wales

Re: Abhidhamma historical origins

Post by Ceisiwr »

mikenz66 wrote: Sat Sep 11, 2021 10:47 pm
Ceisiwr wrote: Sat Sep 11, 2021 10:10 pm
mikenz66 wrote: Sat Sep 11, 2021 9:54 pm
No one said they were “static realities”, just realities. That is how orthodox Theravada sees them.
How to translate paramattha dhammas is not completely clear, as the quotes I gave from various writers who are much better versed than me in the material shows. My preference would be something like "irreducible phenomena".

:heart:
Mike
Irreducible and so real, as opposed to concepts which are always unreal since they neither rise nor cease.

“The mental and material are really here,
But here there is no human being to be found,
For it is void and merely fashioned like a doll—
Just suffering piled up like grass and sticks.”


Visuddhimagga
“Knowing that this body is just like foam,
understanding it has the nature of a mirage,
cutting off Māra’s flower-tipped arrows,
one should go beyond the King of Death’s sight.”
User avatar
mikenz66
Posts: 19943
Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2009 7:37 am
Location: Aotearoa, New Zealand

Re: Abhidhamma historical origins

Post by mikenz66 »

Ceisiwr wrote: Sat Sep 11, 2021 11:21 pm Irreducible and so real, as opposed to concepts which are always unreal since they neither rise nor cease.

“The mental and material are really here,
But here there is no human being to be found,
For it is void and merely fashioned like a doll—
Just suffering piled up like grass and sticks.”


Visuddhimagga
Well "real" here is a translation, and it is a very problematic word in almost any context.

However, for reference, here is khantibalo's handy English-Pali for that passage: viewtopic.php?f=23&t=41133
https://tipitaka.theravada.su/node/table/33043
"Nāmañca rūpañca idhatthi saccato, The mental and material are really here,
Na hettha satto manujo ca vijjati; But here there is no human being to be found,
Suññaṃ idaṃ yantamivābhisaṅkhataṃ, For it is void and merely fashioned like a doll—
Dukkhassa puñjo tiṇakaṭṭhasādiso"ti.
Just suffering piled up like grass and sticks.
And from the PED definitions
idhatthi saccato can be broken down to:
idha - here ...
atthi - is exists; is found ...
sacca - truth. adj. true; real

:heart:
Mike
sphairos
Posts: 968
Joined: Mon Jun 21, 2010 4:37 am
Location: Munich, Germany

Re: Abhidhamma historical origins

Post by sphairos »

Ceisiwr wrote: Sat Sep 11, 2021 11:21 pm
mikenz66 wrote: Sat Sep 11, 2021 10:47 pm
Ceisiwr wrote: Sat Sep 11, 2021 10:10 pm

No one said they were “static realities”, just realities. That is how orthodox Theravada sees them.
How to translate paramattha dhammas is not completely clear, as the quotes I gave from various writers who are much better versed than me in the material shows. My preference would be something like "irreducible phenomena".

:heart:
Mike
Irreducible and so real, as opposed to concepts which are always unreal since they neither rise nor cease.

“The mental and material are really here,
But here there is no human being to be found,
For it is void and merely fashioned like a doll—
Just suffering piled up like grass and sticks.”


Visuddhimagga
Quoted above:

Furthermore, according to Tse Fu Kuan, the Dhammasaṅgaṇi, "does not appear to uphold that dhammas are ultimate realities as against conventional constructs like persons." This text also states that “all dhammas are ways of designation (paññatti)”, that “all dhammas are ways of interpretation (nirutti)” and that “all dhammas are ways of expression (adhivacana)”.[60]
How good and wonderful are your days,
How true are your ways?
SarathW
Posts: 21234
Joined: Mon Sep 10, 2012 2:49 am

Re: Abhidhamma historical origins

Post by SarathW »

To me, Paramattha Dhamma means which we can perceive in the ultimate sense.
That is sight, taste, smell touch, sound, and consciousness.
Even if you are trying to understand an atom this is all you will know.
“As the lamp consumes oil, the path realises Nibbana”
User avatar
Ceisiwr
Posts: 22405
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2009 2:36 am
Location: Wales

Re: Abhidhamma historical origins

Post by Ceisiwr »

mikenz66 wrote: Sat Sep 11, 2021 11:59 pm
And from the PED definitions
idhatthi saccato can be broken down to:
idha - here ...
atthi - is exists; is found ...
sacca - truth. adj. true; real

:heart:
Mike
Which supports what I said. To orthodox Theravada the sabhava-dhammas are real, whilst conceptual dhammas are not.
“Knowing that this body is just like foam,
understanding it has the nature of a mirage,
cutting off Māra’s flower-tipped arrows,
one should go beyond the King of Death’s sight.”
User avatar
Ceisiwr
Posts: 22405
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2009 2:36 am
Location: Wales

Re: Abhidhamma historical origins

Post by Ceisiwr »

sphairos wrote: Sun Sep 12, 2021 12:19 am
Furthermore, according to Tse Fu Kuan, the Dhammasaṅgaṇi, "does not appear to uphold that dhammas are ultimate realities as against conventional constructs like persons." This text also states that “all dhammas are ways of designation (paññatti)”, that “all dhammas are ways of interpretation (nirutti)” and that “all dhammas are ways of expression (adhivacana)”.[60]
This is the relevant section
2.3.3.5. Tapanīyaduka
Katame dhammā tapanīyā? Kāyaduccaritaṁ, vacīduccaritaṁ, manoduccaritaṁ—ime dhammā tapanīyā. Sabbepi akusalā dhammā tapanīyā.

Katame dhammā atapanīyā? Kāyasucaritaṁ, vacīsucaritaṁ, manosucaritaṁ—ime dhammā atapanīyā. Sabbepi kusalā dhammā atapanīyā.

2.3.3.6. Adhivacanaduka
Katame dhammā adhivacanā? Yā tesaṁ tesaṁ dhammānaṁ saṅkhā samaññā paññatti vohāro nāmaṁ nāmakammaṁ nāmadheyyaṁ nirutti byañjanaṁ abhilāpo—ime dhammā adhivacanā.

Sabbeva dhammā adhivacanapathā.

2.3.3.7. Niruttiduka
Katame dhammā nirutti? Yā tesaṁ tesaṁ dhammānaṁ saṅkhā samaññā paññatti vohāro nāmaṁ nāmakammaṁ nāmadheyyaṁ nirutti byañjanaṁ abhilāpo—ime dhammā nirutti.

Sabbeva dhammā niruttipathā.

2.3.3.8. Paññattiduka
Katame dhammā paññatti? Yā tesaṁ tesaṁ dhammānaṁ saṅkhā samaññā paññatti vohāro nāmaṁ nāmakammaṁ nāmadheyyaṁ nirutti byañjanaṁ abhilāpo—ime dhammā paññatti.

Sabbeva dhammā paññattipathā.

2.3.3.9. Nāmaduka
Tattha katamaṁ nāmaṁ? Vedanākkhandho, saññākkhandho, saṅkhārakkhandho, viññāṇakkhandho, asaṅkhatā ca dhātu—idaṁ vuccati nāmaṁ.

Tattha katamaṁ rūpaṁ? Cattāro ca mahābhūtā, catunnañca mahābhūtānaṁ upādāya rūpaṁ—idaṁ vuccati rūpaṁ.

Which are the states that are equivalent terms?

That which is an enumeration, that which is a designation, an expression, a current term, a name, a denomination, the assigning of a name, an interpretation, a distinctive mark of discourse on this or that state.

All states are processes of equivalent nomenclature.

Which are the states that are explanations?

Answer as in § 1306.

All states are processes of explanation.

Which are the states that are expressions?

Answer as in § 1306.

All states are processes of expression.

In this connexion,

What is name?

The four skandhas and unconditioned element.
https://suttacentral.net/ds2.3.3/en/rhysdavids_litt

The Atthasālinī interprets it along the lines of nothing is without a name or beyond being named and that when the sabhāva-dhamma arises so does it's name, thus juxtaposing the two. Apparently the Abhidhammatthavikāsinī explains that concepts too are dhammas, but they are asabhāva-dhammas and so are unreal/not true (whichever you prefer). Personally I don't have an issue with unreal concepts being in the Dhammasaṅgaṇī. Even the commentaries recognise this. For example, it lists shape amongst the visual dhammas yet shape is an unreal concept in the commentaries. Only colour is real in terms of vision. My initial explanation still stands. Namely, that for for orthodox Theravāda the sabhāva-dhammas are real. The only difference between the Vaibhāṣika and Theravāda on this is not the reality of the dhammas, but in the nature of their existence.
“Knowing that this body is just like foam,
understanding it has the nature of a mirage,
cutting off Māra’s flower-tipped arrows,
one should go beyond the King of Death’s sight.”
User avatar
Ceisiwr
Posts: 22405
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2009 2:36 am
Location: Wales

Re: Abhidhamma historical origins

Post by Ceisiwr »

sphairos wrote: Sat Sep 11, 2021 10:59 pm Moreover, it is the position of the magnum śāstric opus of prajñāpāramitā guys / Śūnyavādins / Madhyamikas, Mahāprajñāpāramitopadeśa, that in actual fact Śrāvaka sūtras already speak about the "absolute emptiness":

I. Great emptiness in the two vehicles
This is about the great emptiness (mahāśūnyatā).

1) In the śrāvaka system, it is the emptiness of dharmas (dharmaśūnyatā) that is the great emptiness (mahāśūnyatā).

https://www.wisdomlib.org/buddhism/book ... 26203.html

Not that one should look for their approvement, but I find it very interesting.
That is interesting, but it's difficult to know who they had in mind there. What we know of Theravāda and Sarvāstivāda-Vaibhāṣika it couldn't be them, since in those systems of thought the dhammas are empty of atta but not of sabhāva and so are ultimately real. The Mahāprajñāpāramitā Sūtra does have a section called "The three meditative stabilizations (samādhi) according to the Abhidharma" were it does say that ultimately the dhammas are empty, but it's not an Abhidharma that I am at all familiar with.
a. Śūnyatā-samādhi.
Question. – What is the gate of nirvāṇa called emptiness (śūnyatā)?

Answer. – It considers dharmas as empty (śūnya), without ‘me’ (ātman) or ‘mine’ (ātmīya). Dharmas being the result of a complex of causes and conditions (hetupratyayasāmagryutpanna), there is neither agent (kāraka) nor patient [206b] (French, sic) (vedaka).[1] This is what is called the gate of emptiness. For more on this gate of emptiness, see what has been said in the chapters on patience (p. 912–926F) and wisdom (p. 1104–1106F)

b. Ānimitta-samādhi.
Knowing that there is neither ‘me’ nor ‘mine’, why do beings become attached mentally (cittenābhiniviśante) to dharmas? The yogin reflects and says to himself: “Dharmas being the outcome of causes and conditions, there is no real dharma (bhūtadharma); there are only characteristics (nimitta)[2] and beings, seizing these characteristics, become attached to ‘me’ and ‘mine’. Now I must see if these characteristics have a perceptible reality or not.” Having examined them and considered them, he determines that they are all non-existent (anupalabdha). Whether it is a matter of the male characteristic (puruṣanimitta) or of the female characteristic (strīnimitta), the characteristics of identity or difference (ekatvānyatanimitta), etc., the reality of these characteristics does not exist (nopalabhyate). Why? Being without me and mine, all dharmas are empty and, being empty, they are neither male nor female. As for the identity and difference, these are names (nāman) valid only in the hypothesis of ‘me’ and ‘mine’. This is why male and female, identity and difference, etc., are really non-existent.

Furthermore, when the four great elements (mahābhūta) and derived matter (upādāyarūpa) limit [the element] space (ākāśa), we say there is a body (kāya). Then, within a complex of causes and conditions (hetupratyayasāmagrī) with the inner and outer bases of consciousness (ādhyātmikabāhyāyatana), there arises the consciousness element (vijñānadhātu) and the body, making use of this grouping of elements (dhātusāmagrī), performs various activities; it speaks, it sits down, it arises, it goes and it comes. This grouping of six elements, which is empty [of intrinsic nature], is improperly qualified as a man or improperly qualified as a woman.[3]...
https://www.wisdomlib.org/buddhism/book ... 25598.html

Perhaps Coëmgenu can help us?
Coëmgenu wrote: Sat Sep 11, 2021 6:35 pm
“Knowing that this body is just like foam,
understanding it has the nature of a mirage,
cutting off Māra’s flower-tipped arrows,
one should go beyond the King of Death’s sight.”
Post Reply