Abhidhamma: word of Buddha?

[zan]

Mātikā
feminine

a water course Vism.554 (˚âtikkamaka); Mhvs.35, Mhvs.96; Mhvs.37, Mhvs.50; Snp-a.500 (= sobbha); Dhp-a.ii.141 (its purpose: “ito c’ ito ca udakaṁ haritvā attano sassa-kammaṁ sampādenti”); Vv-a.301
tabulation, register, tabulated summary, condensed contents, esp. of philosophical parts of the Canonical books in the Abhidhamma; used in Vinaya in place of Abhidhamma Piṭaka; probably the original form of that (later) Piṭaka Vin.i.119, Vin.i.337; Vin.ii.8 [cp semantically in similar sense Lat. mātrix = E. matric i.e. register. In BSḳ. mātrikā

Ven. Ananda said, “There is the case, friend, where a monk masters the Dhamma: dialogues, narratives of mixed prose & verse, explanations, verses, spontaneous exclamations, quotations, birth stories, amazing events, question & answer sessions. He teaches the Dhamma in detail—as he has heard it, as he has remembered it—to others. He gets others to recite the Dhamma in detail—as they have heard it, as they have remembered it. He holds a group chanting of the Dhamma in detail—as he has heard it, as he has remembered it. He thinks about & evaluates the Dhamma as he has heard it, as he has remembered it; he contemplates it with his intellect. He enters the Rains in monasteries in which there are senior monks who are learned, who know the tradition, who are holders of the Dhamma, the Vinaya, & the Matika. 

-AN 6.51

So, the argument that the Abhidhamma strictly was not around nor approved of by the Buddha, and that it is something that came about long after his death and the compiling of the suttas is conclusively false. It was around and was called matika, and accepted by his immediate disciples. Simple as that. Arguments could be made that the existing Abhidhamma patika is an expanded version of the matikas, and that parts of it weren't around during the Buddha's time, however the argument that the entire Abhidhamma pitaka is a late, post Buddha invention is destroyed by the mention of the matikas in the suttas (in the above and also at AN 11.17, and per the dictionary entry above it is mentioned in the Vinaya. I'm looking for other mentions, I feel like I read a mention in DN but am having trouble finding it. Will update if I find it).

‘In such-and-such monastery there are several senior mendicants who are very learned, knowledgeable in the scriptures, who have memorized the teachings, the texts on monastic training, and the outlines.
‘amukasmiṁ nāma āvāse sambahulā therā bhikkhū viharanti bahussutā āgatāgamā dhammadharā vinayadharā mātikādharā.

-DN 16

“Here, friend Sāriputta, two bhikkhus engage in a talk on the higher Dhamma and they question each other, and each being questioned by the other answers without foundering, and their talk rolls on in accordance with the Dhamma. That kind of bhikkhu could illuminate this Gosinga Sāla-tree Wood.”

"Idhāvuso sāriputta, dve bhikkhū abhidhammakathaṁ kathenti, te aññamaññaṁ pañhaṁ pucchanti, aññamaññassa pañhaṁ puṭṭhā vissajjenti, no ca saṁsādenti, dhammī ca nesaṁ kathā pavattinī hoti.

-MN 32

With the addition of that DN 16 quote, that pretty much sums it up. The abhidhamma is clearly attested in the suttas and vinaya. Any attempts to demonstrate it being strictly a late work are thus invalid, and so are then also invalid any attempts to entirely prove it as being false, or as a totally incorrect understanding of the Buddha's teaching. In other words, playing the suttas against the abhidhamma to refute the latter is a false dichotomy. The bulk of the abhidhamma is merely a tabulation and outline of the suttas. A tabulation of a larger work cannot be refuted by the larger work itself, such would be illogical.

Might a minority of parts of the abhidhamma be later? Perhaps, but not the majority of it. The majority of the abhidhamma is a tabulation of what is found in the suttas.

[Ontheway]

Mātikā
feminine

a water course Vism.554 (˚âtikkamaka); Mhvs.35, Mhvs.96; Mhvs.37, Mhvs.50; Snp-a.500 (= sobbha); Dhp-a.ii.141 (its purpose: “ito c’ ito ca udakaṁ haritvā attano sassa-kammaṁ sampādenti”); Vv-a.301
tabulation, register, tabulated summary, condensed contents, esp. of philosophical parts of the Canonical books in the Abhidhamma; used in Vinaya in place of Abhidhamma Piṭaka; probably the original form of that (later) Piṭaka Vin.i.119, Vin.i.337; Vin.ii.8 [cp semantically in similar sense Lat. mātrix = E. matric i.e. register. In BSḳ. mātrikā

Ven. Ananda said, “There is the case, friend, where a monk masters the Dhamma: dialogues, narratives of mixed prose & verse, explanations, verses, spontaneous exclamations, quotations, birth stories, amazing events, question & answer sessions. He teaches the Dhamma in detail—as he has heard it, as he has remembered it—to others. He gets others to recite the Dhamma in detail—as they have heard it, as they have remembered it. He holds a group chanting of the Dhamma in detail—as he has heard it, as he has remembered it. He thinks about & evaluates the Dhamma as he has heard it, as he has remembered it; he contemplates it with his intellect. He enters the Rains in monasteries in which there are senior monks who are learned, who know the tradition, who are holders of the Dhamma, the Vinaya, & the Matika. 

-AN 6.51

So, the argument that the Abhidhamma strictly was not around nor approved of by the Buddha, and that it is something that came about long after his death and the compiling of the suttas is conclusively false. It was around and was called matika, and accepted by his immediate disciples. Simple as that. Arguments could be made that the existing Abhidhamma patika is an expanded version of the matikas, and that parts of it weren't around during the Buddha's time, however the argument that the entire Abhidhamma pitaka is a late, post Buddha invention is destroyed by the mention of the matikas in the suttas (in the above and also at AN 11.17, and per the dictionary entry above it is mentioned in the Vinaya. I'm looking for other mentions, I feel like I read a mention in DN but am having trouble finding it. Will update if I find it).

‘In such-and-such monastery there are several senior mendicants who are very learned, knowledgeable in the scriptures, who have memorized the teachings, the texts on monastic training, and the outlines.
‘amukasmiṁ nāma āvāse sambahulā therā bhikkhū viharanti bahussutā āgatāgamā dhammadharā vinayadharā mātikādharā.

-DN 16

“Here, friend Sāriputta, two bhikkhus engage in a talk on the higher Dhamma and they question each other, and each being questioned by the other answers without foundering, and their talk rolls on in accordance with the Dhamma. That kind of bhikkhu could illuminate this Gosinga Sāla-tree Wood.”

"Idhāvuso sāriputta, dve bhikkhū abhidhammakathaṁ kathenti, te aññamaññaṁ pañhaṁ pucchanti, aññamaññassa pañhaṁ puṭṭhā vissajjenti, no ca saṁsādenti, dhammī ca nesaṁ kathā pavattinī hoti.

-MN 32

With the addition of that DN 16 quote, that pretty much sums it up. The abhidhamma is clearly attested in the suttas and vinaya. Any attempts to demonstrate it being strictly a late work are thus invalid, and so are then also invalid any attempts to entirely prove it as being false, or as a totally incorrect understanding of the Buddha's teaching. In other words, playing the suttas against the abhidhamma to refute the latter is a false dichotomy. The bulk of the abhidhamma is merely a tabulation and outline of the suttas. A tabulation of a larger work cannot be refuted by the larger work itself, such would be illogical.

Might a minority of parts of the abhidhamma be later? Perhaps, but not the majority of it. The majority of the abhidhamma is a tabulation of what is found in the suttas.

The six books of Abhidhamma (Dhammasangani, Vibhanga, Dhatukatha, Puggalapannati, Yamaka, and Patthana) existed before the Third Council. Only Kathavathu was completed by Arahat Mahinda Thera during the Third Council.

[TRobinson465]

Yeah. Well I think the fact that the Abhidhamma and matika is mentioned in the suttas does suggest there is something legitimate about the abhidhamma. That and the fact that it exists across almost all buddhist schools.

Again I don't think the fact that the Abhidhamma differs among schools is the strongest argument for a non Buddha origin. The sutta pitaka and Vinaya pitaka differs across schools as well although maybe not as much. The whole argument against reviving the Bhikkhuni order in Theravada using existing bhikkhunis in the Dharmaguptika lineage revolves around the fact that the Dharmaguptika school's Vinaya differs from the Theravada one...

[Ontheway]

Yuttadhammo Bhikkhu's opinion on Abhidhamma Pitaka.



I agreed with him. To be Buddhist, you can learn Abhidhamma or skip the Abhidhamma up to certain level. But to a serious Dhamma practitioner, Abhidhamma knowledge is inevitable.

[BrokenBones]

Yuttadhammo Bhikkhu's opinion on Abhidhamma Pitaka.
....

I agreed with him. To be Buddhist, you can learn Abhidhamma or skip the Abhidhamma up to certain level. But to a serious Dhamma practitioner, Abhidhamma knowledge is inevitable.

Only Abhidhamma adherents are serious practitioners?

I've heard some nonsensical Abhidhamma teachings before but your statement beats them all.

Use them as an adjunct if you're so inclined but to place them above the Buddha's actual words is beyond belief.

You do know who the Buddha was? Surely you don't buy into the Abhidhamma tales of how it came about. The Tibetan termas are more believable.

[Ontheway]

You can say whatever you want. People will see for themselves.

To be a layfollower of the Buddhasasana, it is quite satisfactory if he/she taken refuge in Triple Gems and observing the Five Precepts, perform meritorious deeds according to Dana, Sila, and Bhavana.

To be a real serious Dhamma practitioner, intended to gain deep penetration into the Four Noble Truths and thus gaining Patisambhidā insight (like Arahant Sariputta Thera, who is capable of explaining Dhamma in details, with distinction, with many different ways and methods, pertaining to the same truths expounded by the Buddha) which is so complex and difficult, one will need to relies on Pāli Tipitaka and that includes Abhidhamma knowledge. One will need the knowledge on Khandhas, Ayatanas, Dhatus, Saccas, & Indriyas to deeply understand and breakthrough in the Dhamma. Furthermore, one will need to have knowledge in Paṭṭhāna in order to really see the Correlation and Conditionality among the 12 linking factors in Paṭiccasamuppāda.

Without Abhidhamma knowledge, one will be easily mistakenly interpret the doctrinal concepts in the Dhamma taught by Sutta Pitaka. This is why now certain EBT monk and laymen supports the doctrine of "Soul"; certain EBT monk taught that there is an "eternal consciousness"; certain EBT monk underestimating BuddhaDhamma as a "simple teaching" while it is not; certain EBT monk attack Vinaya Pitaka by saying it is a form of Silabbata paramasa and even supports the removal of Vinaya rules; certain EBT monk dared to removes or reorganise Pāli Suttas. Like what Venerable Bhikkhu Yuttadhammo said, one can put down Abhidhamma Pitaka if one intended for just learning the Dhamma casually (but at the risk of ambiguity). But to be able to look into the reality of mind and matter, to break away from fetters and develop further in Vipassana, one needs support from Abhidhamma Pitaka.

Of course, I know who is the Buddha. He is our Teacher, the Enlightened One, Teacher of Gods and Men, the Blessed One.

Abhidhamma knowledge is first taught (in full details) by the Buddha to Santusita Deva at Tavatimsa Heaven, then the Buddha summarised the teachings to Arahant Sariputta Thera (in very brief manner). After listening to Abhidhamma expositions, 80 kotis of Devas and Devis attained Arahantship. Santusita Deva attained Sotapatti Magga Phala. Arahant Sariputta Thera, having received the brief outline of Abhidhamma, demonstrated his mighty ability of bright wisdom in explaining, analysing, asking & answering with concise terms and meanings, thereby he fill in the full expositions of Abhidhamma based on outline given by the Buddha. Arahant Sariputta Thera arranged the Dhamma into 7 sections and taught them to his 500 students (in not too long and not too short manner). At the end the 500 students attained Arahantship and from Arahant Sariputta Thera and his students starts remembering Abhidhamma teachings. The version of Abhidhamma Pitaka now we have here contains the outlines given by the Master, full expositions by Arahant Sariputta Thera. Among the seven sections of Abhidhamma, only Kathavathu is further completed by Arahant Moggaliputta Tissa Thera during the Third Council based on outline preserved. By this council, Arahant Moggaliputta Tissa Thera refuted all schismatic schools at that time, purified the sangha community, and spread the Saddhamma to many other countries.

The original Tipitaka, or Dhamma-Vinaya, or Five Nikayas, or 84000 Dhammakkhandhas (as mentioned by Arahant Ananda Thera) were all preserved well by the ancient Elders since the First Council till now. In these ancient enlightened Elders we have confidence, for they are the bearers of Dhamma taught by the Lord Buddha, and it is this reason we call ourselves "Theravada" now.

[BrokenBones]

You can say whatever you want. People will see for themselves.

I'm actually quite glad you went into a bit of detail, it helps highlight my opinion... I prefer LOTR myself.

I know this is the classical section but you're making slanderous claims against Buddhavacana and reducing it to a secondary if not needless part of the Dhamma in favour of the much later teachings of Abhidhamma... speechless.

[Ontheway]

Yes, the Buddha's teachings are all recorded in Pāli Tipitaka, preserved by the ancient Elders in councils and transmitted from one generation to next generation via Theriya-parampāra.

From these great Arahants, bearers of True Dhamma, we now received the great teachings of the Enlightened One in the form of Pāli Tipitaka.

[BrokenBones]

Yes, the Buddha's teachings are all recorded in Pāli Tipitaka, preserved by the ancient Elders in councils and transmitted from one generation to next generation via Theriya-parampāra.

From these great Arahants, bearers of True Dhamma, we now received the great teachings of the Enlightened One in the form of Pāli Tipitaka.

Three into two doesn't go. Calling it the Pali Tipitaka doesn't change the fact that only the suttas and vinaya were the original Buddha's Dhamma.

My earlier allusion to LOTR is more appropriate than I thought. The real LOTR geeks take great delight in the beautiful elvish language and the fantastical stories and minutiae surrounding them... for some it becomes more real than reality... parallels.

I'll bow out here because I'm probably violating TOS but I would lay the same claim at your feet regarding the reducing of Buddhavacana to a mere introduction to the Buddha's Dhamma and one that needs the peerless teachers words to be explained.

[Ontheway]

Okay. That's your opinion.

I think you have just make a firm stance to entirely reject Pāli Abhidhamma Pitaka and therefore only Dipitaka is correct. A view was shared by the Sauntrantikas in the past too. In that case, you are officially not "Theravadin".

But that's your choice. I wouldn't comment further on it.

For myself, I will hold on Pāli Tipitaka that was preserved well by the ancient Arahant Theras and Theris via unbroken Theriya-parampāra, thus Theravāda. I will take this as my "raft".

[BrokenBones]

Okay. That's your opinion.

I think you have just make a firm stance to entirely reject Pāli Abhidhamma Pitaka and therefore only Dipitaka is correct. A view was shared by the Sauntrantikas in the past too. In that case, you are officially not "Theravadin".
...

I never said I adhered completely to the Theravada sect of Buddhism. I do listen to 1/3 of the sects teachings (vinaya doesn't really concern me) and make them the recipient of dana. Do you think that people who reject the Abhidhamma are not followers of the Buddha?

[Coëmgenu]

Way back on the first page of the thread, Robert quotes the traditional tale of the origin of the Kathavatthu:

...when he came to the Kathãvatthu the Buddha laid down the table of contents in the way mentioned above. In doing ao he foresaw that two hundred and eighteen years after his death, Tisaa, Moggali’ø son, seated in the midst of one thousand Bhikkhus, would elaborate the Kathavathu as is stated above. And 'Tissa Mogali son, expounded the book not by his own knowledge but according to the table of contents laid down, as well as by the method given, by the 'teacher...

To a non-believer in the classical tradition, it seems incredible, and not necessarily "incredible" in the positive sense. It seems like an impossible supernatural story. On reflecting on this story, I have some observations to make about it, which will not be as pedestrian as "dismiss it, it's mythology."

It is quite possible that, among the suttas, matikas, and various other sayings attributed to the Buddha, there was a special particular document (or barring textualization an oral teaching in the form of a list of statements) preserved and transmitted exclusively by the Theras of the forerunners of the modern Theravada sect. This document or piece of oral recitation would be a compendium of doctrine particular to the sect that they believed defined it in contradistinction to the other sects. Like many such documents and/or recitations, it would have been believed to trace back directly to the Buddha, whether or not such was the case.

Ven Moggaliputtatissa could have consulted such a document or recitation, particular if it were very prestigious. It is possible that he could have based his entire presentation and argumentation on that other source material, laying out his arguments systematically in a structural manner as one does in a modern essay. The structure would reflect the source. Hence it would become "the table of contents of the Kathavatthu," the Kathavatthu being the preserved memory of Ven Moggaliputtatissa's presentation of orthodoxy and subsequent refutation of heresy at the Third Council. Thus, what seems like an incredible and unlikely story may not be so unlikely at all.

[Ceisiwr]

Way back on the first page of the thread, Robert quotes the traditional tale of the origin of the Kathavatthu:

...when he came to the Kathãvatthu the Buddha laid down the table of contents in the way mentioned above. In doing ao he foresaw that two hundred and eighteen years after his death, Tisaa, Moggali’ø son, seated in the midst of one thousand Bhikkhus, would elaborate the Kathavathu as is stated above. And 'Tissa Mogali son, expounded the book not by his own knowledge but according to the table of contents laid down, as well as by the method given, by the 'teacher...

To a non-believer in the classical tradition, it seems incredible, and not necessarily "incredible" in the positive sense. It seems like an impossible supernatural story. On reflecting on this story, I have some observations to make about it, which will not be as pedestrial as "dismiss it, it's mythology."

It is quite possible that, among the suttas, matikas, and various other sayings attributed to the Buddha, there was a special particular document (or barring textualization an oral teaching in the form of a list of statements) preserved and transmitted exclusively by the Theras of the forerunners of the modern Theravada sect. This document or piece of oral recitation would be a compendium of doctrine particular to the sect that they believed defined it in contradistinction to the other sects. Like many such documents and/or recitations, it would have been believed to trace back directly to the Buddha, whether or not such was the case.

Ven Moggaliputtatissa could have consulted such a document or recitation, particular if it were very prestigious. It is possible that he could have based his entire presentation and argumentation on that other source material, laying out his arguments systematically in a structure manner as one does in a modern essay. The structure would reflect the source. Hence it would become "the table of contents of the Kathavatthu," the Kathavatthu being the preserved memory of Ven Moggaliputtatissa's presentation of orthodoxy and subsequent refutation of heresy at the Third Council. Thus, what seems like an incredible and unlikely story may not be so unlikely at all.