https://suttacentral.net/abhidhamma
The long-standing consensus among historical scholars is that the books of the Abhidhamma were compiled in the centuries after the Buddha. It is not possible to determine definite dates. However, it is likely that the common core of the Vibhaṅga/Dharmaskandha/Śāripūtrābhidharmaśastra predates the separation between these traditions, which happened around the time of King Ashoka in about 250 BCE, less than two centuries after the Buddha’s death. But the bulk of the content must have been developed after this time. A number of details, such as the fact that the works were accepted as canonical in the Milinda, around 100 BCE, suggests that they were completed before this time. So a range of 300 BCE–100 BCE for the composition of the canonical Abhidhamma texts seems reasonable.
The great Abhidhamma Pitaka authenticity debate
Re: Information about Abhidhamma
You always gain by giving
Re: The great Abhidhamma Pitaka authenticity debate
Hiriottappasampannā,
sukkadhammasamāhitā;
Santo sappurisā loke,
devadhammāti vuccare.
https://suttacentral.net/ja6/en/chalmer ... ight=false
sukkadhammasamāhitā;
Santo sappurisā loke,
devadhammāti vuccare.
https://suttacentral.net/ja6/en/chalmer ... ight=false
Re: The great Abhidhamma Pitaka authenticity debate
Your reference claims that theseOntheway wrote: ↑Mon Aug 30, 2021 9:35 am Essay on Abhidhamma Origin:
http://tibetanbuddhistencyclopedia.com/ ... Abhidhamma
01. The Sangitiparyaya, - Chinese, Sāriputra, Sanskrit and Tibet Mahākausthila
02. The DharmasKandha - Chinese, Maudgalyāna, Sanskrit and Tibet Sāriputra
03. The Prajñapti - Chinese, Kātyāyana, Sanskrit and Tibet Maudgalyāna
04. The Vijñānakāya - Chinese, Sanskrit and Tibet, Devasarman
05. The Dhathukathā - Chinese, Vasumitra, Sanskrit and Tibet Pūrna
06. The Prakarana - Chinese, Sanskrit and Tibet Vasumitra
07. The Jñāprasthāna - Chinese, Sanskrit and Tibet Kātyāyaniputra
are Mahāyāna Abhidharma texts. They aren't. These are the texts of the Sarvāstivādin Abhidharma. Mahāyāna Abhidharma would be Yogācāra.
“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.”
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.”
Re: The great Abhidhamma Pitaka authenticity debate
Ya, I think so. The author should use the Sarvastivada word instead. But judging from his/her text, he/she is refer to Sarvastivada.Ceisiwr wrote: ↑Mon Aug 30, 2021 10:49 amYour reference claims that theseOntheway wrote: ↑Mon Aug 30, 2021 9:35 am Essay on Abhidhamma Origin:
http://tibetanbuddhistencyclopedia.com/ ... Abhidhamma
01. The Sangitiparyaya, - Chinese, Sāriputra, Sanskrit and Tibet Mahākausthila
02. The DharmasKandha - Chinese, Maudgalyāna, Sanskrit and Tibet Sāriputra
03. The Prajñapti - Chinese, Kātyāyana, Sanskrit and Tibet Maudgalyāna
04. The Vijñānakāya - Chinese, Sanskrit and Tibet, Devasarman
05. The Dhathukathā - Chinese, Vasumitra, Sanskrit and Tibet Pūrna
06. The Prakarana - Chinese, Sanskrit and Tibet Vasumitra
07. The Jñāprasthāna - Chinese, Sanskrit and Tibet Kātyāyaniputra
are Mahāyāna Abhidharma texts. They aren't. These are the texts of the Sarvāstivādin Abhidharma. Mahāyāna Abhidharma would be Yogācāra.
Hiriottappasampannā,
sukkadhammasamāhitā;
Santo sappurisā loke,
devadhammāti vuccare.
https://suttacentral.net/ja6/en/chalmer ... ight=false
sukkadhammasamāhitā;
Santo sappurisā loke,
devadhammāti vuccare.
https://suttacentral.net/ja6/en/chalmer ... ight=false
-
- Posts: 14
- Joined: Fri Dec 10, 2021 3:02 pm
- Location: balikpapan indonesia
Re: The great Abhidhamma Pitaka authenticity debate
good news
I have finished memorizing abhidhammatthasangaha
chapter 1 ( Pali ) both orally & in writing
Re: The great Abhidhamma Pitaka authenticity debate
good news indeed. Note: 'memorizing' is anicca.Joh4ndenov4n wrote: ↑Sat Aug 27, 2022 5:06 am
good news
I have finished memorizing abhidhammatthasangaha
chapter 1 ( Pali ) both orally & in writing
-
- Posts: 14
- Joined: Fri Dec 10, 2021 3:02 pm
- Location: balikpapan indonesia
Re: The great Abhidhamma Pitaka authenticity debate
because of "anicca"
these 5 aggregates keep repeating again and again
until " cuti citta " arrives
Re: The great Abhidhamma Pitaka authenticity debate
Remember: Cuti citta, the final moment of consciousness (vijñāna) in this life, is anatta.Joh4ndenov4n wrote: ↑Sun Aug 28, 2022 11:45 pm
because of "anicca"
these 5 aggregates keep repeating again and again
until " cuti citta " arrives
Re: The great Abhidhamma Pitaka authenticity debate
Good effort indeed. Sadhu sadhu sadhuJoh4ndenov4n wrote: ↑Sat Aug 27, 2022 5:06 am
good news
I have finished memorizing abhidhammatthasangaha
chapter 1 ( Pali ) both orally & in writing
I just can remember the content of that chapter like 89 types of consciousness (or further divides into 121 types of consciousness), 52 cetasikas, Rupa (Primary materiality: 4 elements with derivative materiality: 24 kinds), and Nibbāna.
Hiriottappasampannā,
sukkadhammasamāhitā;
Santo sappurisā loke,
devadhammāti vuccare.
https://suttacentral.net/ja6/en/chalmer ... ight=false
sukkadhammasamāhitā;
Santo sappurisā loke,
devadhammāti vuccare.
https://suttacentral.net/ja6/en/chalmer ... ight=false
- Noble Sangha
- Posts: 94
- Joined: Tue Nov 30, 2021 5:27 pm
Re: The great Abhidhamma Pitaka authenticity debate
Besides this thread and retro’s refutation of the abhidhamma, just wondering if others would know of or have come across other threads on here or other forums that might be worth taking a look into that debates on the authenticity of the Abhidhamma? As well it would mention something new on the refutation of support for the abhidhamma besides what’s already mentioned in this thread and retro’s refutation of the abhidhamma.
The reason why I’m asking this is because I’m looking to finalize my research in regards to this topic and will be releasing a writing on this topic within a few months time that will hopefully put an end to the debate / disagreement within the Theravada community and practitioners on the authenticity of the abhidhamma. I actually don’t need to prove anything to myself since I already know and see that the Abhidhamma is the Buddha’s teachings. But there seems to be others and well known monks within the Theravada community that doesn’t believe that the abhidhamma is the Buddha’s teachings and worse of all, disseminate such teachings to the public. It’s really unfortunate to see.
The reason why I’m asking this is because I’m looking to finalize my research in regards to this topic and will be releasing a writing on this topic within a few months time that will hopefully put an end to the debate / disagreement within the Theravada community and practitioners on the authenticity of the abhidhamma. I actually don’t need to prove anything to myself since I already know and see that the Abhidhamma is the Buddha’s teachings. But there seems to be others and well known monks within the Theravada community that doesn’t believe that the abhidhamma is the Buddha’s teachings and worse of all, disseminate such teachings to the public. It’s really unfortunate to see.
I am a Buddhist that doesn't practice Buddhism. What I practice is nekkhamma, abyāpāda, avihiṁsā, viraga, nirodha or the Noble Eight Fold Path. The elimination / eradication / extermination of defilements, kilesa's, raga, dosa, moha and asava's.
Lineage: Buddha > Sthaviravada > Vibhajjavada > Theravada > Striving for Nibbana.
Lineage: Buddha > Sthaviravada > Vibhajjavada > Theravada > Striving for Nibbana.
Re: The great Abhidhamma Pitaka authenticity debate
There is an essay by Bhikkhu Sujato on Sutta Central: https://suttacentral.net/abhidhamma-gui ... to?lang=en that might be helpful for your purposes.Noble Sangha wrote: ↑Tue Jan 31, 2023 12:42 am Besides this thread and retro’s refutation of the abhidhamma, just wondering if others would know of or have come across other threads on here or other forums that might be worth taking a look into that debates on the authenticity of the Abhidhamma? As well it would mention something new on the refutation of support for the abhidhamma besides what’s already mentioned in this thread and retro’s refutation of the abhidhamma.
That, and Bhikkhu Sujato's essay about Theravada here: https://discourse.suttacentral.net/t/ho ... list/23019 and subsequent discussion, and his talks on the Visuddhimagga here: https://discourse.suttacentral.net/t/se ... hosa/21520 are much more nuanced than the "refutation" you mentioned. They argue that the Theravada ideas evolved, not that they are worthless.The Books of the Theravāda Abhidhamma
For the most part, the long and complex texts of the Theravāda Abhidhamma are concerned with analyzing and classifying material, not with explaining it. Presumably they would have been taught by experienced teachers in monasteries, who would have drawn out, explained, and illustrated the abstruse texts. Eventually such explanations were codified and recorded in the Pali commentaries.
While they introduced a number of new terms and methods, the canonical Abhidhamma texts are doctrinally conservative. Many of the concepts familiar from later Abhidhamma are not found—ultimate vs. conventional truth, mind moments, kalāpas, the idea that each phenomena is defined by its sabhāva or indvidual essence. While some new terms are found, for the most part they seem to have been introduced in order to clarify and disambiguate the terminology, and weren’t intended to convey specific new concepts. That is not to say that there are no new ideas, just that they play a fairly minor role overall.
I think they key question is: What is meant by "The Buddha's Teachings"? And how should they be regarded? Is it a matter of taking every word in the Canon literally? Or is it a matter of finding them useful? Does one have to take MN123 https://suttacentral.net/mn123 as a literal account of the Buddha's birth for it to be a valuable sutta? [One can ask the same question about the Heart Sutra https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heart_Sutra, in which Avalokiteśvara supposedly taught Śariputra about emptiness on Vulture's Peak, which, to bring us back to topic, is arguably a polemic about taking the Abhidharma approach too literally.]Noble Sangha wrote: ↑Tue Jan 31, 2023 12:42 amThe reason why I’m asking this is because I’m looking to finalize my research in regards to this topic and will be releasing a writing on this topic within a few months time that will hopefully put an end to the debate / disagreement within the Theravada community and practitioners on the authenticity of the abhidhamma. I actually don’t need to prove anything to myself since I already know and see that the Abhidhamma is the Buddha’s teachings. But there seems to be others and well known monks within the Theravada community that doesn’t believe that the abhidhamma is the Buddha’s teachings and worse of all, disseminate such teachings to the public. It’s really unfortunate to see.
Mike
Re: The great Abhidhamma Pitaka authenticity debate
I doubt this claim by Sujato. In the Abhidhamma we do find talk of conventional vs ultimate truth and momentariness. It’s in the Kathāvatthu. Now some of the Kathāvatthu is later than others, with the section on arguments against the Pudgalavāda being the oldest. It’s there we find the conventional vs ultimate distinction, and so this type of thinking in Theravāda likely goes back to the time of Moggaliputtatissa. Now we know that all of the other schools accepted the conventional vs ultimate distinction and that all of the other early schools accepted momentariness, so it would be strange to think that when the canonical Abhidhamma texts were written Theravāda was an exception to this. I think rather the views of the commentaries and the Abhidhamma texts go hand in hand, developing together.mikenz66 wrote: ↑Tue Jan 31, 2023 3:45 am While they introduced a number of new terms and methods, the canonical Abhidhamma texts are doctrinally conservative. Many of the concepts familiar from later Abhidhamma are not found—ultimate vs. conventional truth, mind moments, kalāpas, the idea that each phenomena is defined by its sabhāva or indvidual essence.
“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.”
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.”
Re: The great Abhidhamma Pitaka authenticity debate
Locking this thread is overdue. Abhidhamma is canonical to Theravada.
viewtopic.php?p=2#p2
j. Excessive posting against core Theravada principles
viewtopic.php?p=2#p2
j. Excessive posting against core Theravada principles
Re: The great Abhidhamma Pitaka authenticity debate
I'm not expert, but the Kathāvatthu seems a much later than the rest of the Abhidhamma. And I don't think that the Theravada consider it to have been taught by the Buddha, do they? From Bhikkhu Sujato's Abhidhamma introduction:Ceisiwr wrote: ↑Tue Jan 31, 2023 6:46 amI doubt this claim by Sujato. In the Abhidhamma we do find talk of conventional vs ultimate truth and momentariness. It’s in the Kathāvatthu. Now some of the Kathāvatthu is later than others, with the section on arguments against the Pudgalavāda being the oldest. It’s there we find the conventional vs ultimate distinction, and so this type of thinking in Theravāda likely goes back to the time of Moggaliputtatissa. Now we know that all of the other schools accepted the conventional vs ultimate distinction and that all of the other early schools accepted momentariness, so it would be strange to think that when the canonical Abhidhamma texts were written Theravāda was an exception to this. I think rather the views of the commentaries and the Abhidhamma texts go hand in hand, developing together.mikenz66 wrote: ↑Tue Jan 31, 2023 3:45 am While they introduced a number of new terms and methods, the canonical Abhidhamma texts are doctrinally conservative. Many of the concepts familiar from later Abhidhamma are not found—ultimate vs. conventional truth, mind moments, kalāpas, the idea that each phenomena is defined by its sabhāva or indvidual essence.
The Kathāvatthu is the only book of the Abhidhamma ascribed by the Theravāda to a specific author, Moggaliputtatissa, a senior monk at the time of King Ashoka. The core of the work probably formed then, but it grew substantially over time. One or two of the core discussions appear to share a common basis with the Vijñānakāya.
Mike