Abhidhamma - It is all very well to say "What do I want to know all these definitions of terms for?"

Discussion of Abhidhamma and related Commentaries
BrokenBones
Posts: 1783
Joined: Sat Nov 10, 2018 10:20 am

Re: Abhidhamma - It is all very well to say "What do I want to know all these definitions of terms for?"

Post by BrokenBones »

dharmacorps wrote: Sun Sep 04, 2022 8:19 pm Seems to not be necessary to know the abhidhamma in order to reach liberation, which may be the achilles heel for most Buddhists.
Which is fortunate, because I too find it boring.

All the people in the pali canon who reached the noble attainments did so without the benefit of it as far as we know.

If you like it, good for you, but "bible thumping" the abhidhamma to other buddhists is likely to have little effect to those who it doesn't appeal to for those reasons.
Or putting it down to lack of wisdom or lack of merit ☺️

There is a whiff of Medieval Christian fanaticism shown by some proponents in the defence of Abhidhamma. Since this is the safe ocean of Abhidhamma section I cast no aspersions on it... only the extremist defence of it that sometimes arises.
auto
Posts: 4582
Joined: Thu Dec 21, 2017 12:02 pm

Re: Abhidhamma - It is all very well to say "What do I want to know all these definitions of terms for?"

Post by auto »

Ceisiwr wrote: Sat Aug 13, 2022 2:52 am All conditioned dhammas arise and cease, yes. Nibbāna is a dhamma, but the only one which is permanent and independent although it can still be a condition/cause for other dhammas.
Term 'conditioned' is worse than 'put together', like ToVincent try to tell.
Chariot is something what is put together from different parts. I think its how you should make difference between dhammas and focus on those what are nibbana or real compared to things what are put together.
User avatar
Eko Care
Posts: 1107
Joined: Mon Mar 18, 2019 7:13 am

Re: Abhidhamma - It is all very well to say "What do I want to know all these definitions of terms for?"

Post by Eko Care »

The problem is how many people can know the meaning of some apparently simple terms as Pannatti, Manasikara ...etc., let alone their range and extent.

Better to reflect it again.
It is all very well to say ‘What do I want to know all these
definitions of terms for, it only clutters the mind?’ The question is,
though, how many people when they seriously ask themselves as to the
extent and range of some such apparently simple terms as greed,
hatred and ignorance, can know their full and proper implications and
manifestations within their own thoughts and actions…This the
scriptures are at pains to make clear to even the dullest
reader…”.
User avatar
Ceisiwr
Posts: 22383
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2009 2:36 am
Location: Wales

Re: Abhidhamma - It is all very well to say "What do I want to know all these definitions of terms for?"

Post by Ceisiwr »

analysis wrote: Sun Sep 04, 2022 6:09 pm
Ceisiwr wrote: Sat Aug 13, 2022 2:32 am According to Theravāda there is one such dhamma. Nibbāna is a real existent which is independent and permanent.
If we take the extinguishing of a flame as a simile to attaining nibbana at the death,
we can say the state of extinguished is nibbana.

So "that state" can be considered a real existent.

It is independent because "that state" doesn't depend on causes (fuel).

Therefore "that state" can be considered permanent in the sense that it doesn't cease by a re-arising of the previous flame.

Am I correct?
I think that's a fair way to read it.
“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.”
Ontheway
Posts: 3062
Joined: Wed Aug 11, 2021 3:35 pm

Re: Abhidhamma - It is all very well to say "What do I want to know all these definitions of terms for?"

Post by Ontheway »

For dispelling confusion over concepts, aiding penetrating the truths and for the sake of clarity.
Hiriottappasampannā,
sukkadhammasamāhitā;
Santo sappurisā loke,
devadhammāti vuccare.

https://suttacentral.net/ja6/en/chalmer ... ight=false
User avatar
analysis
Posts: 46
Joined: Wed Jul 20, 2022 9:47 pm

Re: Abhidhamma - It is all very well to say "What do I want to know all these definitions of terms for?"

Post by analysis »

Ceisiwr wrote: Sun Oct 02, 2022 2:33 pm
analysis wrote: Sun Sep 04, 2022 6:09 pm Am I correct?
I think that's a fair way to read it.
:candle:
Ontheway wrote: Sat Oct 08, 2022 11:50 am For dispelling confusion over concepts, aiding penetrating the truths and for the sake of clarity.
You mean Abhidhamma, I guess.
:candle:
User13866
Posts: 1238
Joined: Mon Jun 20, 2022 5:50 am

Re: Abhidhamma - It is all very well to say "What do I want to know all these definitions of terms for?"

Post by User13866 »

This is afaik the best piece of writing on Abhidhamma
I.B. Horner says that the term abhidhamma occurs not more than ten times in the first two pitakas (the Suttapitaka and the Vinayapitaka), three of these being in the Vinaya.’ (Book of Discipline III, p xi). She says that the word abhidhamma (apart from its use in interpolated material) should be ‘taken as referring to some material or method in existence prior to the compilation of this [Abhidhamma] Pitaka, and out of which it [the Abhidhamma Pitaka] was gradually elaborated and eventually formed.’ (Book of Discipline, Vol. III, p xi)
The 'interpolated material' occurs in the Book of the Discipline Vol. III p415: [Regarding the bhikkhunis, who were supposed to ask for leave before asking the Sangha a question] "Not given leave" means: without asking for permission. "Should ask a question" means: if having asked for leave in regard to suttanta, she asks about discipline or about abhidhamma, there is an offense of expiation.

This is the only place in the canon where the triad suttanta, vinaya and abhidhamma occur together, and is 'unhesitatingly asssumed to be an interpolation by Oldenburg. (ref: Book of Discipline, Vol. III, pxiv and Encyclopaedia of Buddhism, Vol. 1, p 39)

This view is substantiated by Horner. She says that ‘abhidhamma’ in the passage ‘probably means the literary digest of this name. This passage would therefore seem late, dating from some time after the compilation of the three pitakas.’ (Book of Discipline III, p 415)

The PTS Pali-English Dictionary says the word 'abhidhamma' was probably not used by the Buddha in the very earliest days of his teaching: 'As the word ‘abhidhamma’ standing alone is not found in the Sutta Nipata or the Anguttara Nikaya, and only once or twice in the Digha Nikaya, it probably came into use only towards the end of the period in which the four Nikayas [of the suttas] grew up.'

In the vinaya, at one place the term abhidhamma occurs with vinaya, suttanta, and also gatha (which means poems):

[Regarding monks, for whom it is an offense to disparage the learning of vinaya] "There is no offense if, not desiring to disparage, he speaks saying: ‘Look here, do you master suttantas, or verses (gatha), or what is extra to dhamma [abhidhamma] and afterwards you will master discipline"Book of the Discipline Vol. III p42

Horner says, ‘The very presence of the word gatha is enough to preclude the term abhidhamma from standing for the literary exegesis of that name, for no reference to the third pitaka would have combined a reference to part of the material (poems) which one of the pitakas finally came to include.’ (Book of Discipline, Vol. III, p xii) Her logic here is that, since gatha does not mean Gatha Pitaka, abhidhamma does not mean Abhidhamma Pitaka. So, what does ‘abhidhamma’ actually mean here?

Horner says:

‘Although we can say fairly confidently what abhidhamma does not mean here, it is by no means so easy to assess what it does mean. A monk may say to another, "Master suttanta, or verses (gatha) or abhidhamma, and afterwards you will master discipline."’ (Book of Discipline, Vol. III p xii)

Regarding this passage, she proposes that abhidhamma means ‘an intellectual exercise perhaps, devoid of all extraneous matter, in which the meaning of dhamma terms and concepts is to be grasped through their grouping, through their classified relations of identity and dependence and so on, instead of through the more picturesque, personal and hortatory methods, often made intelligible by homely parable and simile, which is the suttanta way of presenting dhamma.’(Book of Discipline, Vol. III p xiii)

She says that the word ‘abhidhamma’, occuring in the suttas and vinaya, although not indicating a complete and closed system of philosophy, ‘had been intended to stand for something more than dhamma and vinaya, perhaps in the sense of some more than usually complete grasp and mastery of them, due to further study and reflection’. (The Indian Historical Quarterly, XVII p299)

She proposes that the value of the gathas lay in ‘their appeal to the more emotional type of disciple…whereas the mastery of abhidhamma would provide a field to attract the more intellectual type, while mastery of suttantas would stir the normally virtuous man of average mental equipment.’ (p xiv)

T.W. Rhys Davids suggests the suttas that typify the early abhidhamma:

‘The last two suttas of the Digha Nikaya [the Sangiti Sutta and the Dasuttara Sutta] with their catechism as a monologue by the catechumen, and of the absence of narrative - they become practically abhidhamma rather than Sutta Pitaka…In the Majjhima Nikaya we have abhidhamma talk in the two Vedalla Suttas’. (Dialogues of the Buddha, Vol. III p199-200)

The reason Rhys Davids says that the Digha Nikaya suttas are ‘practically abhidhamma’ is because ‘tradition itself has recognised a distinction in style between the Dhamma [i.e. the suttas] and the Abhidhamma. Thus the suttas embodying the Dhamma are said to be taught in the discursive style, which makes free use of the simile, the metaphor and the anecdote. This is contrasted with the non-discursive style of the Abhidhamma which uses very select and precise, and therefore thoroughly impersonal terminology which is decidedly technical in meaning and function’. (WS Karunaratne, Encyclopaedia of Buddhism, Vol. 1, p38)

The Mahagosinga Sutta provides a valuable clue as to what abhidhamma meant in the earliest period of Buddhism. In the sutta, Ven Sariputta asks Ven MahaMoggallana what type of monk he thought would most illumine the Gosinga sal-wood. Ven MahaMoggallana replies:

‘In this connection, reverend Sariputta, two monks are talking on Further Dhamma[abhidhamma]; they ask one another questions; in answering one another’s questions they respond and do not fail, and their talk on dhamma goes forward’. (M 1 211. Tr IBH)

When the Buddha heard of Ven MahaMoggallana’s answer, he said, as I’ve said: ‘It is good, it is good. For, Sariputta, Moggallana is a talker on dhamma’.

This suggests that the earliest abhidhamma arose from the dialogues of monks of ‘the more intellectual type’. Intellectual interest in dhamma would naturally lead to conversations involving questioning and enquiry.

To discover what ‘abhidhamma’ meant in the earliest days, one should study the conversations between monks of the intellectual type. The Mahavedalla Sutta is a good example of this. It records a conversation between Ven Kotthita the Great and Ven Sariputta. Ven Sariputta was said by the Buddha to be ‘chief of those of great intuitive wisdom’. Ven Kotthita the Great was called ‘chief of those who have mastery in logical analysis’. These two monks were obviously very fond of discussing dhamma together. Many of their conversations are recorded in the Sutta Pitaka.

We have now said that the earliest abhidhamma was the field of the intellectual types. It was characterized by catechism, and by intellectual conversations. As one of the recurrent features of these conversations is analyses of terms, we could reasonably assume that a third feature of the earliest abhidhamma was analysis. Ven Sariputta, ‘chief of those with intuitive wisdom’, was a master of analysis, as is made clear in this passage:

‘Your reverences, when I had been two weeks ordained a monk, I grasped the analysis of meanings specifically and according to the letter (atthapatisambhida sacchikata odiso byanjanaso) That I explain it in various ways, I teach it, expound it, proclaim it, lay it down, open it up, analyse it and make it clear….[and likewise for the analysis of conditions (dhammapatisambhida), the analysis of definitions (niruttipatisambhida), and the analysis of intellect (patibhanapatisambhida)]. (Gradual Sayings, II, 159, Tr FL Woodward).

-ooOoo-qq0åq
https://budsas.net/ebud/ebsut065.htm
It is noteworthy that in Question's of King Milinda we have an actual account of Nagasena being upset about having studied Abhidhamma before the Sutta and that it was due to not being taught the sutta.
Thereupon, the Venerable Rohana took young Nāgasena to the Vattaniya
monastery of Vijamba Vatthu hermitage and having spent a high there took him
on to the Rakkhita plateau and there, in midst of the innumerable company of
the Arahats, young Nāgasena was admitted, as a novice, into the Order. And
then, when he had been admitted to the Order the Venerable Nāgasena said the
Venerable Rohana: ‘I have, O Venerable One, adopted your dress; now teach
me those words of spell (manta). Then the Venerable Rohana thought thus to
himself:’ “in what of the (three) treasuries (pitaka) ought I first to instruct him,
in the code f Discipling (vinaya), in the teaching or Discourses (suttanta) or in
the Higher Teaching (Abhidhamma)?” and in as much as he saw that Nāgasena
was intelligent, and could master the Treasury of Higher Teaching (Abhidham-
ma-pitaka) with ease, he gave him his first lesson in that.
And the Venerable Nāgasena, after hearing it but once, knew by heart the
whole of the Higher Teaching (Abhidhamma) that is to say -
(1) Damasangni or “Enumeration of Phenomena” adorned with the

matrix of the Triads (tika-mātikā) and the Matrix of the Dyads (duka-

mātikā) and also with such states as are kammically wholesome

(kusalā dhammā) kammically unwholesome (akusalā dhammā) and

kammically neutral (abyakatā dhammā);

(2) Vibhanga or “The Book of Treatises”, adorned with a series of
eighteen treatises beginning with the ‘Treatise on the five Groups of
Existence” (khandha-vibhanga);
(3) Dhātukathā or “Discussion with reference to the Elements”,
adorned with the fourteen chapters beginning with the chapter which
deals with Inclusion and Non-Inclusion (sangaho asangaho);
(4) Puggala Paññatti or “Description of Indeviduals”, which makes
discussions on the six kinds of “Descriptions” (paññatti) including
“The Description of Groups” (khandha paññatti) and “The Description
of Bases” (āyatana paññatti);
(5) Katha Vatthu or “Points of Controversy”, with its thousand
sections, five hundred on as many points of our own views, and five
hundred on as many points of our opponent views;
(6) Yamaka or “The Book of pairs”, with its ten divisions such as
Mula-Yamaka, Khandha-Yamaka, etc.; and
(7) Patthāna or “The Book of Origination”, with its twenty four
chapters beginning with the Casual Relationship of Root (hetu
paccayo) and Causal Relationship of Object (arammana-paccayo), etc.

[....]

Then the innumerable company of the Arahats on the Rakkita

plateau then and there admitted the venerable Nāgasena, then twenty years of
age, to full membership in the order by ordaining him as a monk, on the
morning of the next day after he had thus been admitted to full membership in
the order, the venerable Nāgasena rearranged (as is usual) the mode of wearing
the yellow robe, and taking his bowl and robe, accompanied his teacher on his
round for alms to the village. As he went, this thought arose within him: “It was
after all, empty-headed (tuccho) and witless (bālo) of my teacher to leave the
rest of the Buddha’s word aside, and teach me the Higher Teaching
(abhidhammā) first.”
Then the venerable Rohana become aware in his own mind of what was
passing in the mind of venerable Nāgasena, and he said to him: “That is an
unworthy reflection that thou art making Nāgasena; it is not worthy of thee so to
think.”
“O fraternity! How strange and wonderful”, thought venerable Nāgasena.
“That my teacher should be able to tell in his own mind what I am thinking of!
It would do well for me to beg pardon of my teacher.” And he said “Forgive me,
O Venerable One; I will never make such a reflection again.”

I personally think these texts were a substitute for the lack of access to the entirety of Sutta and a study manual for cross-referencing & interrogation.

I personally find it quite useful but it's not obvious to me that there is anything which can't be inferred from the Sutta, apart from what is in the Points of Controversy.

I also appreciate the vinaya-like definitions for some of the terms.
Ontheway
Posts: 3062
Joined: Wed Aug 11, 2021 3:35 pm

Re: Abhidhamma - It is all very well to say "What do I want to know all these definitions of terms for?"

Post by Ontheway »

User13866 wrote: Wed Oct 12, 2022 6:24 am This is afaik the best piece of writing on Abhidhamma
I.B. Horner says that the term abhidhamma occurs not more than ten times in the first two pitakas (the Suttapitaka and the Vinayapitaka), three of these being in the Vinaya.’ (Book of Discipline III, p xi). She says that the word abhidhamma (apart from its use in interpolated material) should be ‘taken as referring to some material or method in existence prior to the compilation of this [Abhidhamma] Pitaka, and out of which it [the Abhidhamma Pitaka] was gradually elaborated and eventually formed.’ (Book of Discipline, Vol. III, p xi)
The 'interpolated material' occurs in the Book of the Discipline Vol. III p415: [Regarding the bhikkhunis, who were supposed to ask for leave before asking the Sangha a question] "Not given leave" means: without asking for permission. "Should ask a question" means: if having asked for leave in regard to suttanta, she asks about discipline or about abhidhamma, there is an offense of expiation.

This is the only place in the canon where the triad suttanta, vinaya and abhidhamma occur together, and is 'unhesitatingly asssumed to be an interpolation by Oldenburg. (ref: Book of Discipline, Vol. III, pxiv and Encyclopaedia of Buddhism, Vol. 1, p 39)

This view is substantiated by Horner. She says that ‘abhidhamma’ in the passage ‘probably means the literary digest of this name. This passage would therefore seem late, dating from some time after the compilation of the three pitakas.’ (Book of Discipline III, p 415)

The PTS Pali-English Dictionary says the word 'abhidhamma' was probably not used by the Buddha in the very earliest days of his teaching: 'As the word ‘abhidhamma’ standing alone is not found in the Sutta Nipata or the Anguttara Nikaya, and only once or twice in the Digha Nikaya, it probably came into use only towards the end of the period in which the four Nikayas [of the suttas] grew up.'

In the vinaya, at one place the term abhidhamma occurs with vinaya, suttanta, and also gatha (which means poems):

[Regarding monks, for whom it is an offense to disparage the learning of vinaya] "There is no offense if, not desiring to disparage, he speaks saying: ‘Look here, do you master suttantas, or verses (gatha), or what is extra to dhamma [abhidhamma] and afterwards you will master discipline"Book of the Discipline Vol. III p42

Horner says, ‘The very presence of the word gatha is enough to preclude the term abhidhamma from standing for the literary exegesis of that name, for no reference to the third pitaka would have combined a reference to part of the material (poems) which one of the pitakas finally came to include.’ (Book of Discipline, Vol. III, p xii) Her logic here is that, since gatha does not mean Gatha Pitaka, abhidhamma does not mean Abhidhamma Pitaka. So, what does ‘abhidhamma’ actually mean here?

Horner says:

‘Although we can say fairly confidently what abhidhamma does not mean here, it is by no means so easy to assess what it does mean. A monk may say to another, "Master suttanta, or verses (gatha) or abhidhamma, and afterwards you will master discipline."’ (Book of Discipline, Vol. III p xii)

Regarding this passage, she proposes that abhidhamma means ‘an intellectual exercise perhaps, devoid of all extraneous matter, in which the meaning of dhamma terms and concepts is to be grasped through their grouping, through their classified relations of identity and dependence and so on, instead of through the more picturesque, personal and hortatory methods, often made intelligible by homely parable and simile, which is the suttanta way of presenting dhamma.’(Book of Discipline, Vol. III p xiii)

She says that the word ‘abhidhamma’, occuring in the suttas and vinaya, although not indicating a complete and closed system of philosophy, ‘had been intended to stand for something more than dhamma and vinaya, perhaps in the sense of some more than usually complete grasp and mastery of them, due to further study and reflection’. (The Indian Historical Quarterly, XVII p299)

She proposes that the value of the gathas lay in ‘their appeal to the more emotional type of disciple…whereas the mastery of abhidhamma would provide a field to attract the more intellectual type, while mastery of suttantas would stir the normally virtuous man of average mental equipment.’ (p xiv)

T.W. Rhys Davids suggests the suttas that typify the early abhidhamma:

‘The last two suttas of the Digha Nikaya [the Sangiti Sutta and the Dasuttara Sutta] with their catechism as a monologue by the catechumen, and of the absence of narrative - they become practically abhidhamma rather than Sutta Pitaka…In the Majjhima Nikaya we have abhidhamma talk in the two Vedalla Suttas’. (Dialogues of the Buddha, Vol. III p199-200)

The reason Rhys Davids says that the Digha Nikaya suttas are ‘practically abhidhamma’ is because ‘tradition itself has recognised a distinction in style between the Dhamma [i.e. the suttas] and the Abhidhamma. Thus the suttas embodying the Dhamma are said to be taught in the discursive style, which makes free use of the simile, the metaphor and the anecdote. This is contrasted with the non-discursive style of the Abhidhamma which uses very select and precise, and therefore thoroughly impersonal terminology which is decidedly technical in meaning and function’. (WS Karunaratne, Encyclopaedia of Buddhism, Vol. 1, p38)

The Mahagosinga Sutta provides a valuable clue as to what abhidhamma meant in the earliest period of Buddhism. In the sutta, Ven Sariputta asks Ven MahaMoggallana what type of monk he thought would most illumine the Gosinga sal-wood. Ven MahaMoggallana replies:

‘In this connection, reverend Sariputta, two monks are talking on Further Dhamma[abhidhamma]; they ask one another questions; in answering one another’s questions they respond and do not fail, and their talk on dhamma goes forward’. (M 1 211. Tr IBH)

When the Buddha heard of Ven MahaMoggallana’s answer, he said, as I’ve said: ‘It is good, it is good. For, Sariputta, Moggallana is a talker on dhamma’.

This suggests that the earliest abhidhamma arose from the dialogues of monks of ‘the more intellectual type’. Intellectual interest in dhamma would naturally lead to conversations involving questioning and enquiry.

To discover what ‘abhidhamma’ meant in the earliest days, one should study the conversations between monks of the intellectual type. The Mahavedalla Sutta is a good example of this. It records a conversation between Ven Kotthita the Great and Ven Sariputta. Ven Sariputta was said by the Buddha to be ‘chief of those of great intuitive wisdom’. Ven Kotthita the Great was called ‘chief of those who have mastery in logical analysis’. These two monks were obviously very fond of discussing dhamma together. Many of their conversations are recorded in the Sutta Pitaka.

We have now said that the earliest abhidhamma was the field of the intellectual types. It was characterized by catechism, and by intellectual conversations. As one of the recurrent features of these conversations is analyses of terms, we could reasonably assume that a third feature of the earliest abhidhamma was analysis. Ven Sariputta, ‘chief of those with intuitive wisdom’, was a master of analysis, as is made clear in this passage:

‘Your reverences, when I had been two weeks ordained a monk, I grasped the analysis of meanings specifically and according to the letter (atthapatisambhida sacchikata odiso byanjanaso) That I explain it in various ways, I teach it, expound it, proclaim it, lay it down, open it up, analyse it and make it clear….[and likewise for the analysis of conditions (dhammapatisambhida), the analysis of definitions (niruttipatisambhida), and the analysis of intellect (patibhanapatisambhida)]. (Gradual Sayings, II, 159, Tr FL Woodward).

-ooOoo-qq0åq
https://budsas.net/ebud/ebsut065.htm
It is noteworthy that in Question's of King Milinda we have an actual account of Nagasena being upset about having studied Abhidhamma before the Sutta and that it was due to not being taught the sutta.
Thereupon, the Venerable Rohana took young Nāgasena to the Vattaniya
monastery of Vijamba Vatthu hermitage and having spent a high there took him
on to the Rakkhita plateau and there, in midst of the innumerable company of
the Arahats, young Nāgasena was admitted, as a novice, into the Order. And
then, when he had been admitted to the Order the Venerable Nāgasena said the
Venerable Rohana: ‘I have, O Venerable One, adopted your dress; now teach
me those words of spell (manta). Then the Venerable Rohana thought thus to
himself:’ “in what of the (three) treasuries (pitaka) ought I first to instruct him,
in the code f Discipling (vinaya), in the teaching or Discourses (suttanta) or in
the Higher Teaching (Abhidhamma)?” and in as much as he saw that Nāgasena
was intelligent, and could master the Treasury of Higher Teaching (Abhidham-
ma-pitaka) with ease, he gave him his first lesson in that.
And the Venerable Nāgasena, after hearing it but once, knew by heart the
whole of the Higher Teaching (Abhidhamma) that is to say -
(1) Damasangni or “Enumeration of Phenomena” adorned with the

matrix of the Triads (tika-mātikā) and the Matrix of the Dyads (duka-

mātikā) and also with such states as are kammically wholesome

(kusalā dhammā) kammically unwholesome (akusalā dhammā) and

kammically neutral (abyakatā dhammā);

(2) Vibhanga or “The Book of Treatises”, adorned with a series of
eighteen treatises beginning with the ‘Treatise on the five Groups of
Existence” (khandha-vibhanga);
(3) Dhātukathā or “Discussion with reference to the Elements”,
adorned with the fourteen chapters beginning with the chapter which
deals with Inclusion and Non-Inclusion (sangaho asangaho);
(4) Puggala Paññatti or “Description of Indeviduals”, which makes
discussions on the six kinds of “Descriptions” (paññatti) including
“The Description of Groups” (khandha paññatti) and “The Description
of Bases” (āyatana paññatti);
(5) Katha Vatthu or “Points of Controversy”, with its thousand
sections, five hundred on as many points of our own views, and five
hundred on as many points of our opponent views;
(6) Yamaka or “The Book of pairs”, with its ten divisions such as
Mula-Yamaka, Khandha-Yamaka, etc.; and
(7) Patthāna or “The Book of Origination”, with its twenty four
chapters beginning with the Casual Relationship of Root (hetu
paccayo) and Causal Relationship of Object (arammana-paccayo), etc.

[....]

Then the innumerable company of the Arahats on the Rakkita

plateau then and there admitted the venerable Nāgasena, then twenty years of
age, to full membership in the order by ordaining him as a monk, on the
morning of the next day after he had thus been admitted to full membership in
the order, the venerable Nāgasena rearranged (as is usual) the mode of wearing
the yellow robe, and taking his bowl and robe, accompanied his teacher on his
round for alms to the village. As he went, this thought arose within him: “It was
after all, empty-headed (tuccho) and witless (bālo) of my teacher to leave the
rest of the Buddha’s word aside, and teach me the Higher Teaching
(abhidhammā) first.”
Then the venerable Rohana become aware in his own mind of what was
passing in the mind of venerable Nāgasena, and he said to him: “That is an
unworthy reflection that thou art making Nāgasena; it is not worthy of thee so to
think.”
“O fraternity! How strange and wonderful”, thought venerable Nāgasena.
“That my teacher should be able to tell in his own mind what I am thinking of!
It would do well for me to beg pardon of my teacher.” And he said “Forgive me,
O Venerable One; I will never make such a reflection again.”

I personally think these texts were a substitute for the lack of access to the entirety of Sutta and a study manual for cross-referencing & interrogation.

I personally find it quite useful but it's not obvious to me that there is anything which can't be inferred from the Sutta, apart from what is in the Points of Controversy.

I also appreciate the vinaya-like definitions for some of the terms.
Yet he was reprimanded by Arahant venerable Rohana

"venerable Rohana become aware in his own mind of what was
passing in the mind of venerable Nāgasena, and he said to him: “That is an
unworthy reflection that thou art making Nāgasena; it is not worthy of thee so to
think.
”"

And that time Nagasena wasn't enlightened as an Arahant yet. Therefore he has this unworthy thought. But then after he attained Arahantship, he accepted the triple baskets of Dhamma.
Hiriottappasampannā,
sukkadhammasamāhitā;
Santo sappurisā loke,
devadhammāti vuccare.

https://suttacentral.net/ja6/en/chalmer ... ight=false
Ontheway
Posts: 3062
Joined: Wed Aug 11, 2021 3:35 pm

Re: Abhidhamma - It is all very well to say "What do I want to know all these definitions of terms for?"

Post by Ontheway »

Ontheway wrote: Sat Oct 08, 2022 11:50 am For dispelling confusion over concepts, aiding penetrating the truths and for the sake of clarity.
You mean Abhidhamma, I guess.
:candle:
[/quote]

Yes, I was referring to Abhidhamma.

Though I have to say Abhidhamma is very difficult to penetrate. Yet, I will continue to study.
Hiriottappasampannā,
sukkadhammasamāhitā;
Santo sappurisā loke,
devadhammāti vuccare.

https://suttacentral.net/ja6/en/chalmer ... ight=false
User avatar
analysis
Posts: 46
Joined: Wed Jul 20, 2022 9:47 pm

Re: Abhidhamma - It is all very well to say "What do I want to know all these definitions of terms for?"

Post by analysis »

User13866 wrote: Wed Oct 12, 2022 6:24 am -ooOoo-qq0åq https://budsas.net/ebud/ebsut065.htm
Dear [name redacted by admin], are there any acceptable fair ways that we could assign more weight to the opinions of the scholars in your link, over what the Atthakata says, while both parties accept that there was an Intellectual Analysis apart from the Suttanna?
User13866 wrote: Wed Oct 12, 2022 6:24 am It is noteworthy that in Question's of King Milinda we have an actual account of Nagasena being upset about having studied Abhidhamma before the Sutta and that it was due to not being taught the sutta.
It doesn't say that it was due to not being taught the sutta, but due to not being taught the Rest Pitakas including both Vinaya and Sutta. (or not being taught all the 3 Pitakas simultaneously)
As he went, this thought arose within him: “It was after all, empty-headed (tuccho) and witless (bālo) of my teacher to leave the
rest of the Buddha’s word aside, and teach me the Higher Teaching (abhidhammā) first.”
And then the Arahant Rohana recognizes Venerable Nagasena's thought was wrong.
Then the venerable Rohana become aware in his own mind of what was
passing in the mind of venerable Nāgasena, and he said to him: “That is an unworthy reflection that thou art making Nāgasena; it is not worthy of thee so to think.”
And then Venerable nagasena begs pardon.
It would do well for me to beg pardon of my teacher.” And he said “Forgive me, O Venerable One; I will never make such a reflection again.”
So this evidence is counter-productive. It affirms the value of the Abhidhamma.
User13866
Posts: 1238
Joined: Mon Jun 20, 2022 5:50 am

Re: Abhidhamma - It is all very well to say "What do I want to know all these definitions of terms for?"

Post by User13866 »

analysis wrote: Wed Oct 12, 2022 8:01 pm Dear [name redacted by admin], are there any acceptable fair ways that we could assign more weight to the opinions of the scholars in your link, over what the Atthakata says, while both parties accept that there was an Intellectual Analysis apart from the Suttanna?
:hello:
I don't know about assigning weight here because i am not familiar with the Atthakata content you reference
analysis wrote: Wed Oct 12, 2022 8:01 pm So this evidence is counter-productive. It affirms the value of the Abhidhamma.
I did want to affirm the value of Abhidhamma, referencing the QKM was to draw attention to it being taught even in precedence of the other things.

Whether Nagasena was rightly upset, imho is a moot point. The story of Nagasena looks somewhat fantastic to me as it is, but i assume it is possible that learning the Abhidhamma first worked out well for him.

I personally value Abhidhamma books for the well drawn out definitions, eg
Therein what is mindfulness-awakening-factor? Herein a monk is mindful, furnished with excellent mindfulness-penetration, he remembers, remembers constantly, what has long been done and long been said (concerning release). This is called mindfulness-awakening-factor.
[...]
I also appreciate how the compilers pinned down 'analogical contact'. There are other important things not fully spelled out in the Sutta like the particularities of the conjoinment to do with aggregates.

I don't have anything bad to say about the Theravadin Abhidhamma books and i think they are rightly canonical.

I don't study it much because it's not a practice manual but it's imo a great aid for one who wants to master Sutta.
User avatar
Eko Care
Posts: 1107
Joined: Mon Mar 18, 2019 7:13 am

Re: Abhidhamma - It is all very well to say "What do I want to know all these definitions of terms for?"

Post by Eko Care »

User13866 wrote: Thu Oct 13, 2022 6:19 am I also appreciate how the compilers pinned down 'analogical contact'. There are other important things not fully spelled out in the Sutta like the particularities of the conjoinment to do with aggregates.

I don't have anything bad to say about the Theravadin Abhidhamma books and i think they are rightly canonical.

I don't study it much because it's not a practice manual but it's imo a great aid for one who wants to master Sutta.
Yes it is a great aid to master Suttas.

If one stays childlike for the whole lifetime then he will not see it until the death.
User avatar
Pondera
Posts: 3072
Joined: Thu Aug 11, 2011 10:02 pm

Re: Abhidhamma - It is all very well to say "What do I want to know all these definitions of terms for?"

Post by Pondera »

Ceisiwr wrote: Tue May 03, 2022 3:26 pm
Ontheway wrote: Tue May 03, 2022 3:11 pm Definitely I shared the same sentiment with user Sabbe_Dhamma_Anatta there. I am glad that I opened my heart to both Abhidhamma Pitaka and Atthakatha.

But one thing is true though, Abhidhamma canon texts are so long, detailed, repetitive.... Many times I almost fall asleep reading the texts. :zzz:

Even when I recite Paṭṭhāna text (both paccayuddeso and paccayaniddeso) during my daily chanting activity, I have to really force myself to stay awake. But once I finish the recitation, I was like back to normal.

I guess it has something to do with lacking of merits? :embarassed:
A lot of people find it boring. I do too.
Lol. This is *exactly* what I was trying to tell you half a year ago when you seemed super excited about them.

I *respect* your knowledge of Abhidhamma, but I’m glad you can admit that some of the lists are, let’s say, a little *long* and a little *dry* 😆
Like the three marks of conditioned existence, this world in itself is filthy, hostile, and crowded
User avatar
Eko Care
Posts: 1107
Joined: Mon Mar 18, 2019 7:13 am

Re: Abhidhamma - It is all very well to say "What do I want to know all these definitions of terms for?"

Post by Eko Care »

analysis wrote: Wed Oct 12, 2022 8:01 pm
As he went, this thought arose within him: “It was after all, empty-headed (tuccho) and witless (bālo) of my teacher to leave the rest of the Buddha’s word aside, and teach me the Higher Teaching (abhidhammā) first.”
And then the Arahant Rohana recognizes Venerable Nagasena's thought was wrong.
Then the venerable Rohana become aware in his own mind of what was passing in the mind of venerable Nāgasena, and he said to him: “That is an unworthy reflection that thou art making Nāgasena; it is not worthy of thee so to think.”
And then Venerable nagasena begs pardon.
It would do well for me to beg pardon of my teacher.” And he said “Forgive me, O Venerable One; I will never make such a reflection again.”
Even Venerable Nagasena had to beg pardon for underestimating Abhidhamma. What about modern protestant critics?
Post Reply