Sutta method and Abhidhamma method

[Eko Care]

How much Abhidhamma study is required to qualify as a real buddhist?

I'm not going to say 1kg or 2kg.

Would those spoken about in the suttas who seemingly gain enlightenment without studying Abhidhamma be considered fake Buddhists?

Could anyone see they gained Abhidhamma-less enlightenment?

Is there an exam one must pass to qualify as Real?

Oh dear, not SAT or ACT.

Don't look for it in the Twilight Zone, look for it in the mirror.

Thank you and I'm not going to say "same to you!"

You’re using it as an identity to support superiority,

It's showing mind-reading powers, as usual.

and it’s really disconcerting the way you try to impress upon others ..

It is because the observer is anti-Abhidhamma. It's natural.

As the OP says:

If we read Suttas alone, what we understood is clashed with another Sutta or with Abhidhamma.

and also clashed with other people.

The only way to prevent this clashing is the adherence to the ancient way of interpretation.

Instead of getting disconcerted, may be you all can adhere atleast to something else.

or try spending time reading some introductory thing like the below.

The Abhidhamma Piṭaka is a detailed scholastic analysis and summary of the Buddha's teachings in the Suttas. Here the suttas are reworked into a schematized system of general principles that might be called 'Buddhist Psychology'. In the Abhidhamma, the generally dispersed teachings and principles of the suttas are organized into a coherent science of Buddhist doctrine.

Dhammasaṅganī
The Dhammasaṅgani (Summary of Dharma) is a manual of ethics for monks. It begins with a mātikā (translated as matrix) which lists classifications of dhammas (translated as phenomena, ideas, states, etc.). The mātikā starts with 22 threefold classifications, such as good/bad/unclassified, and then follows with 100 twofold classifications according to the Abhidhamma method. Many of these classifications are not exhaustive, and some are not even exclusive. The mātikā ends with 42 twofold classifications according to the sutta method; these 42 are only used in the Dhammasaṅgani, whereas the other 122 are used in some of the other books as well.

The main body of the Dhammasaṅgani is in four parts. The first part goes through numerous states of mind, listing and defining by lists of synonyms, factors present in the states. The second deals with material form, beginning with its own mātikā, classifying by ones, twos and so on, and explaining afterwards. The third explains the book's mātikā in terms of the first two parts, as does the fourth, by a different method (and omitting the sutta method).

Vibhaṅga
The Vibhanga (Division or Classification) consists of 18 chapters, each dealing with a different topic. For example, the first chapter deals with the five aggregates. A typical chapter consists of three parts. The first of these parts explains the topic according to the sutta method, often word-for-word as in actual suttas. The second is Abhidhamma explanation, mainly by lists of synonyms as in the Dhammasaṅgani. The third employs questions and answers, based on the mātikā, such as "How many aggregates are good?"

Dhātukathā
The Dhātukathā (Discussion of Elements) covers both the matika and various topics, mostly from the Vibhaṅga, relating them to the 5 aggregates, 12 bases and 18 elements. The first chapter is fairly simple: "In how many aggregates etc. are good dhammas etc. included?" The book progressively works up to more complicated questions: "From how many aggregates etc. are the dhammas dissociated from attention etc. dissociated?"

Puggalapaññatti
The Puggalapaññatti (Designation of Person) starts with its own mātikā, which begins with some standard lists but then continues with lists of persons grouped numerically from ones to tens. This latter portion of the mātikā is then explained in the main body of the work. It lists human characteristics encountered on the stages of a Buddhist path. Most of the lists of persons and many of the explanations are also found in the Anguttara Nikaya.

Kathāvatthu
The Kathāvatthu (Points of Controversy) consists of more than two hundred debates on questions of doctrine. The questions are heretical in nature, and are answered in such a way as to refute them. It starts with the question of whether or not a soul exists. It does not identify the participants. The commentary says the debates are between the Theravāda and other schools, which it identifies in each case. These identifications are mostly consistent with what is known from other sources about the doctrines of different schools. It is the only portion attributed to a specific author, Moggaliputta.

Yamaka
The Yamaka (Pairs) consists of ten chapters, each dealing with a different topic; for example, the first deals with roots. A typical chapter (there are a number of divergences from this pattern) is in three parts. The first part deals with questions of identity: "Is good root root?" "But is root good root?" The entire Yamaka consists of such pairs of converse questions, with their answers. Hence its name, which means pairs. The second part deals with arising: "For someone for whom the form aggregate arises, does the feeling aggregate arise?" The third part deals with understanding: "Does someone who understands the eye base understand the ear base?" In essence, it is dealing with psychological phenomena.

Paṭṭhāna
The Paṭṭhāna (Activations or Causes) deals with 24 conditions in relation to the matika: "Good dhamma is related to good dhamma by root condition", with details and numbers of answers. This Paṭṭhāna text comprise many cause and effects theory detail expositions, limitation and unlimitation of to their direction depended nature with ultimate.

[BrokenBones]

The Wikipedia article, simple and basic as it was, gave me a headache. Is that really what the Buddha taught in the suttas? I think not.
Perhaps some of it is entirely true (maybe) but the Buddha was only interested in teaching towards the ending of suffering... not prolonging it with endless lists.

Faith & joy are the first steps out of suffering...

https://suttacentral.net/sn12.23/en/suj ... ript=latin

Such lists hardly inspire.

[Ceisiwr]

Theravada has long been supporting Theravadins to elevate themselves morally.

Of course, and other Buddhist traditions (and non) support people to act morally.

[pegembara]

Different strokes for different folks
or
Same stroke for everyone?

Take your pick
IMO the 4 Noble Truths and dependent origination is where it is at.

"Monks, the All is aflame. What All is aflame? The eye is aflame. Forms are aflame. Consciousness at the eye is aflame. Contact at the eye is aflame. And whatever there is that arises in dependence on contact at the eye — experienced as pleasure, pain or neither-pleasure-nor-pain — that too is aflame. Aflame with what? Aflame with the fire of passion, the fire of aversion, the fire of delusion. Aflame, I tell you, with birth, aging & death, with sorrows, lamentations, pains, distresses, & despairs.

"The ear is aflame. Sounds are aflame...

"The nose is aflame. Aromas are aflame...

"The tongue is aflame. Flavors are aflame...

"The body is aflame. Tactile sensations are aflame...

"The intellect is aflame. Ideas are aflame. Consciousness at the intellect is aflame. Contact at the intellect is aflame. And whatever there is that arises in dependence on contact at the intellect — experienced as pleasure, pain or neither-pleasure-nor-pain — that too is aflame. Aflame with what? Aflame with the fire of passion, the fire of aversion, the fire of delusion. Aflame, I say, with birth, aging & death, with sorrows, lamentations, pains, distresses, & despairs.

"Seeing thus, the well-instructed disciple of the noble ones grows disenchanted with the eye, disenchanted with forms, disenchanted with consciousness at the eye, disenchanted with contact at the eye. And whatever there is that arises in dependence on contact at the eye, experienced as pleasure, pain or neither-pleasure-nor-pain: With that, too, he grows disenchanted.

"He grows disenchanted with the ear...

"He grows disenchanted with the nose...

"He grows disenchanted with the tongue...

"He grows disenchanted with the body...

"He grows disenchanted with the intellect, disenchanted with ideas, disenchanted with consciousness at the intellect, disenchanted with contact at the intellect. And whatever there is that arises in dependence on contact at the intellect, experienced as pleasure, pain or neither-pleasure-nor-pain: He grows disenchanted with that too. Disenchanted, he becomes dispassionate. Through dispassion, he is fully released. With full release, there is the knowledge, 'Fully released.' He discerns that 'Birth is ended, the holy life fulfilled, the task done. There is nothing further for this world.'"

That is what the Blessed One said. Gratified, the monks delighted at his words. And while this explanation was being given, the hearts of the 1,000 monks, through no clinging (not being sustained), were fully released from fermentation/effluents.

https://accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn ... .than.html

[Ceisiwr]

…

A question. You obviously see a lot of negatives in other Buddhist traditions, old and new, but what are the good things you see in them?

[Ontheway]

Hi Ekocare, I think both are legit ways to studying Buddha's teachings.

But for the modern so called "new age Buddhist" or "secular Buddhist", sometimes their style is hardly a Suttanta method one. One example is the one life model of Paticca samuppada. More like personal interpretation in my opinion.

[Eko Care]

Hi Ekocare, I think both are legit ways to studying Buddha's teachings.

Yes, that is what Abhidhamma says.

A question. You obviously see a lot of negatives in other Buddhist traditions, old and new, but what are the good things you see in them?

It is unrelated to the topic.
As a short answer: I see positives as well. But they are less/un important in Theravada discussions.

[Radix]

Why learn "Theravada Fundamentals" first, and view the Tipitaka through that lens... rather than start with the Buddha's teaching, and then see the rest, including "Theravada Fundamentals", through that lens?

An abhidhamma is a meta-text. Everyone who reads the suttas is operating out of an abhidhamma. An abhidhamma is inevitable. The only difference is in how aware a person is of doing this, and how explicit and how complete their abhidhamma is.

Starting with sectarian views sounds sectarian to me.

Denying that one is, in fact, coming to the suttas from a particular perspective, doesn't change that one is, in fact, coming to the suttas from a particular perspective.

It's an idealistic "protestant" notion that one can read a primary religious text and understand it adequately solely from itself, and/or that disregarding the existing tradition(s) related to that text somehow makes for a correct, pure reading of said text.

[Radix]

Arguing ‘ex cathedra’ usually doesn’t lend credence to one’s assertion.

And in religion, it shouldn't.

Its usefulness should be self-evident to any Buddhist.

Only to real Buddhists.

The only pattern I’m seeing here is the elevation of yourself above others through Theravada.

When you use the word "Buddhist", do you mean something specific by it, or do you mean 'pretty much anything'?

[Radix]

You’re using it as an identity to support superiority, and it’s really disconcerting the way you try to impress upon others that being a real Buddhist is to belittle anyone who doesn’t follow your chosen tradition.

On the contrary, the problem at hand is that some Buddhists (many Western Buddhists among them) assume more familiarity toward Buddhism, esp. toward the suttas than is actually warranted. Such people see Buddhism as "their own private matter". They view themselves as divorced from the actual schools and lineages of Buddhism, and even see this as somehow good, as something that gives them an advantage in understanding the Dhamma.

[bpallister]

am i a real Buddhist?

[BrokenBones]

You’re using it as an identity to support superiority, and it’s really disconcerting the way you try to impress upon others that being a real Buddhist is to belittle anyone who doesn’t follow your chosen tradition.

On the contrary, the problem at hand is that some Buddhists (many Western Buddhists among them) assume more familiarity toward Buddhism, esp. toward the suttas than is actually warranted. Such people see Buddhism as "their own private matter". They view themselves as divorced from the actual schools and lineages of Buddhism, and even see this as somehow good, as something that gives them an advantage in understanding the Dhamma.

Some Buddhists take this view...

'Thus indeed is the Blessed One: he is accomplished, fully enlightened, endowed with [clear] vision and [virtuous] conduct, sublime, knower of the worlds, the incomparable guide of men who are tractable, the teacher of gods and men, enlightened and blessed.'
https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitak ... .nypo.html

They take the suttas as the Supreme teachings.

Others take later teachings created by lesser people; some wise some not so wise. Caught up in schisms, petty lineage and sect power grabs or the desire for intellectual superiority. Scholars, who would cut a flower into a million pieces to 'see' what makes it beautiful.

They like to cast doubt on the efficacy, clarity, purity and the supreme legitimacy of the suttas in order to push whichever later teaching appeals to them. They even invent fairy stories to place these teachings as being taught by the Buddha and recited at the 1st Council (very similar to secret teachings & terma found in TB and Mahayana... but we're not really talking about them ).

Some even use race and or cultural reasons in order to attack the naysayers.

But it's all good... we're all Buddhists

[retrofuturist]

[Ceisiwr]

Some Buddhists take this view...

But it's all good... we're all Buddhists

You and Eko Care are mirror images of each other.

[robertk]

Scholars, who would cut a flower into a million pieces to 'see' what makes it beautiful.

Dear BrokenBones
these days - as much or even more than in the past- we are weak in understanding. The Abhidhamma and Commentaries greatly help in breaking down what we thought was lasting, what we thought was a whole.
We read about, for example, seeing in the suttas yes, but we might still think seeing lasts. The Abhidhamma hammers home the momentariness and many conditions needed for a moment of seeing to arise.
So the suttapitaka and Abhidhammapitaka are both necessary.