The great Abhidhamma Pitaka authenticity debate

Textual analysis and comparative discussion on early Buddhist sects and texts.
theY
Posts: 309
Joined: Thu Sep 20, 2012 12:07 pm
Contact:

Re: The great Abhidhamma Pitaka authenticity debate

Post by theY » Fri Nov 24, 2017 2:52 am

Would you be so kind as to give a link to translations, or a link to a site such as Sutta Central where it is easier to work out exactly which passages you are quoting?
I already searched it in google before you asked for it from me, but I didn't found the translation.

I think it is very easier than me for you to find it. I am very confuse with english tipitaka's system.
mikenz66 wrote:
Fri Nov 24, 2017 2:35 am
Hi theY,
theY wrote:
Fri Nov 24, 2017 2:11 am
By buddha:
...
Perhaps we have a communication problem. This statement seems to agree that the "billions of mind moments" appears in the commentaries, not the suttas or abdhidhamma:
theY wrote:
Fri Nov 24, 2017 2:11 am
So, for me, your opinion are not make sense anyway. Therefore, I still keep the opinion that "billions of mind moments per second" was the comment from ancient commentary that derived from buddha time and appear in 1st saṅgāyaṇa, because it is more make sense and compatible with A.N. sutta, paṭṭhāna, and monk's behavior which I explained above.
:heart:
Mike
I agree that the conclusion such as "billions of mind moments" of citta-khaṇa appeared in commentary. But I don't agree that citta khaṇa never appeared in tipitaka, especially in paṭṭhāna of abhidhamma.

You never see the conclusion, it doesn't means there is nothing in the context.

It was sāriputta theory derived from buddha's sutta in A.N. that I quoted above. And it is very simple of "the very fast arising and vanishing of citta" that every samatha and vipassanā practitioners can notice by themselves.

I don't know why you think it needs hundreds years to make this theory, it is not make sense anyway.
Above message maybe out of date. Latest update will be in massage's link.
--------------------------------------------------
Tipitaka memorization is a rule of monks. It isn't just a choice. They must done it.
bahussuto nāma tividho hoti – nissayamuccanako, parisupaṭṭhāpako, bhikkhunovādakoti.
http://UnmixedTheravada.blogspot.com/20 ... monks.html

theY
Posts: 309
Joined: Thu Sep 20, 2012 12:07 pm
Contact:

Re: The great Abhidhamma Pitaka authenticity debate

Post by theY » Fri Nov 24, 2017 3:08 am

SarathW wrote:
Thu Nov 23, 2017 10:13 am
It seems to be a very common error to mix up the Abhidhamma Pitaka and later Comentaries. Mind moments are a much later development than the Abhidhamma...
Agree.
I had the same error of understanding until you point that out some time back. Here is the discussion.

https://discourse.suttacentral.net/t/su ... ha/4725/46
Buddha > abhidhamma > sāriputta > sāriputta's students > 1st saṅgayanā's abhidhamma and ancient commentary (ānanda was sutta-memorizer, not abhidhamma) > 3rd saṅgāyanā's kathāvatthu > ancient commentary translated in siṅhala language > siṅhala language ancient commentary and siṅhala language new commentary > buddha ghosa all commentary translation back to pāli & merge & rearranging.
Zom wrote:
Fri Nov 24, 2017 12:50 am
In ancient commentary, that authored in buddha times and added more important information
Again, don't you find it really strange, that actual description simply say nothing (just nothing at all) about such (from your point of view, of course) important thing as Abhidhamma?

And as for the "ancient commentary, that authored in buddha times" - this is a dubious information. They could be written for example 500 years later after the Buddha. Why? For example, because nothing in Suttanta itself supports such kind of (commentarial) view. If in the core text there is nothing on some topic, then this topic automatically becomes dubious and highly speculative.
You have a very low knowledge, Zom. Commentary already explained it but you still never notice.


If you are lazy to read pāli, I will make the timeline conclusion from commentary for you:
Buddha > abhidhamma > sāriputta > sāriputta's students > 1st saṅgayanā's abhidhamma and ancient commentary (ānanda was sutta-memorizer, not abhidhamma) > 3rd saṅgāyanā's kathāvatthu > ancient commentary translated in siṅhala language > siṅhala language ancient commentary and siṅhala language new commentary > buddha ghosa all commentary translation back to pāli & merge & rearranging.
Commentary already said, but you has not ability to read it, Zom.

Whatever texts added after was marked the author reference in each place, that added, in commentary. If they mixed it fussy, you may can not know "this is added", now.
Above message maybe out of date. Latest update will be in massage's link.
--------------------------------------------------
Tipitaka memorization is a rule of monks. It isn't just a choice. They must done it.
bahussuto nāma tividho hoti – nissayamuccanako, parisupaṭṭhāpako, bhikkhunovādakoti.
http://UnmixedTheravada.blogspot.com/20 ... monks.html

User avatar
mikenz66
Posts: 15230
Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2009 7:37 am
Location: New Zealand

Re: The great Abhidhamma Pitaka authenticity debate

Post by mikenz66 » Fri Nov 24, 2017 3:21 am

Hi theY,
theY wrote:
Fri Nov 24, 2017 2:52 am
I agree that the conclusion such as "billions of mind moments" of citta-khaṇa appeared in commentary. But I don't agree that citta khaṇa never appeared in tipitaka, especially in paṭṭhāna of abhidhamma.
Certainly. I did say that the basic ideas are in the tipitika.
theY wrote:
Fri Nov 24, 2017 2:52 am
You never see the conclusion, it doesn't means there is nothing in the context.

It was sāriputta theory derived from buddha's sutta in A.N. that I quoted above. And it is very simple of "the very fast arising and vanishing of citta" that every samatha and vipassanā practitioners can notice by themselves.
Agreed. This experience is reported by meditators quite frequently, though often not at the "billions per second" rate.
theY wrote:
Fri Nov 24, 2017 2:52 am
I don't know why you think it needs hundreds years to make this theory, it is not make sense anyway.
OK, I see the confusing. The commentaries were written down hundreds of years later. However, that doesn't mean that the ideas were not much earlier.

My reading of the suttas suggests that they are very brief summaries, and that the Buddha and his students were providing a lot more details (this is said explicitly in a number of places), so it would not be unreasonable if some of the practical advice in the Commentaries was quite early.

:heart:
Mike

theY
Posts: 309
Joined: Thu Sep 20, 2012 12:07 pm
Contact:

Re: The great Abhidhamma Pitaka authenticity debate

Post by theY » Fri Nov 24, 2017 5:01 am

mikenz66 wrote:
Fri Nov 24, 2017 3:21 am
OK, I see the confusing. The commentaries were written down hundreds of years later. However, that doesn't mean that the ideas were not much earlier.

My reading of the suttas suggests that they are very brief summaries, and that the Buddha and his students were providing a lot more details (this is said explicitly in a number of places), so it would not be unreasonable if some of the practical advice in the Commentaries was quite early.

:heart:
Mike
Yes, the commentary happened just in a second that buddha finished each teaching.

Although, the target listener(s) can understood that sutta, but it didn't means the others, such as ānanda, can understood that sutta, too.
Above message maybe out of date. Latest update will be in massage's link.
--------------------------------------------------
Tipitaka memorization is a rule of monks. It isn't just a choice. They must done it.
bahussuto nāma tividho hoti – nissayamuccanako, parisupaṭṭhāpako, bhikkhunovādakoti.
http://UnmixedTheravada.blogspot.com/20 ... monks.html

User avatar
Zom
Posts: 1735
Joined: Fri May 08, 2009 6:38 pm
Location: Russia, Saint-Petersburg
Contact:

Re: The great Abhidhamma Pitaka authenticity debate

Post by Zom » Fri Nov 24, 2017 12:34 pm

Commentary already said, but you has not ability to read it, Zom.
How rude 8-)

However, I repeat, that information in the Commentary concerning 1st council and Abhidhamma is very dubious, strongly reminding mahayanic stories of "secret suttas" brought by Nagarjuna from Naga Realm ,)

If we take bare facts, theravadin abhidhamma was composed by some scholar monks from 250 to 350 BCE - the gradual process of its composition is well seen. By the way, some other scholar monks composed their own versions and one of it (sarvastivadin) is well preserved and differs much from theravadin one - unlike suttas and vinayas which are the same. Many monks (thousands, according to chinese pilgrims Xuanzang and Faxian) in India plainly denied Abhidhamma as heretical teaching (this fact alone could be possible only if Abhidhamma was a later composed material). But no "pali" will help here to know and understand that. One have to take into account the history of Buddhism (and not a religious version, but academic, that is, unbiased, one), buddhology, indology, linguistics. And here western scholars, whom you dislike so much, are more proficient than any traditional theravadin scholar monk, who confines himself only with religious data of his own tradition.

User avatar
Subharo
Posts: 107
Joined: Thu Sep 10, 2015 8:22 pm

Re: The great Abhidhamma Pitaka authenticity debate

Post by Subharo » Tue Dec 05, 2017 12:59 pm

Zom wrote:
Fri Nov 24, 2017 12:34 pm
Commentary already said, but you has not ability to read it, Zom.
How rude 8-)

However, I repeat, that information in the Commentary concerning 1st council and Abhidhamma is very dubious, strongly reminding mahayanic stories of "secret suttas" brought by Nagarjuna from Naga Realm ,)

If we take bare facts
Zom and TheY, I think the two of you might as well argue from opposite cliffs with a canyon in between you for eternity. It seems that you come from two very different cultures, with very different ways of thinking.

Please consider the following quotation:
“The Scientific Revolution has not been a revolution of knowledge. It has been above all a revolution of ignorance. The great discovery that launched the Scientific Revolution was the discovery that humans do not know the answers to their most important questions. Premodern traditions of knowledge such as Islam, Christianity, Buddhism and Confucianism asserted that everything that is important to know about the world was already known. The great gods, or the one almighty God, or the wise people of the past possessed all-encompassing wisdom, which they revealed to us in scriptures and oral traditions. Ordinary mortals gained knowledge by delving into these ancient texts and traditions and understanding them properly. It was inconceivable that the Bible, the Qur’an or the Vedas were missing out on a crucial secret of the universe – a secret that might yet be discovered by flesh-and-blood creatures.
― Yuval Noah Harari, Sapiens: A Brief History of Humankind
Zom, you come from a culture where the Scientific Revolution occurred and reshaped virtually everyone's way of thinking. TheY, I'm venturing a guess that you come from a culture that Harari would call "Premodern".

As I see it, (and please correct me if I'm wrong) here is the crux of your impasse:

Zom, you feel you are entitled to bring any and all historical or linguistic or archaeological or what-have-you evidence to the table to make valid arguments (as would any Westerner, pretty much), but from TheY's point of view, those arguments could never add up to anything whatsoever. And why not? Because those arguments were not drawn internally from the Tipitika itself. Only arguments drawn internally from the Tipitika (which is to be interpreted literally and Fundamentally) have any validity. Those internal arguments ARE validity. And arguments external to the Tipitika are Fundamentally wrong.

Zom and TheY, have I represented your views correctly?
Subharo Bhikkhu
"There is but one taste on this path, the taste of freedom" -The Buddha :buddha1:

User avatar
Zom
Posts: 1735
Joined: Fri May 08, 2009 6:38 pm
Location: Russia, Saint-Petersburg
Contact:

Re: The great Abhidhamma Pitaka authenticity debate

Post by Zom » Tue Dec 05, 2017 1:20 pm

Zom, you feel you are entitled to bring any and all historical or linguistic or archaeological or what-have-you evidence to the table to make valid arguments (as would any Westerner, pretty much), but from TheY's point of view, those arguments could never add up to anything whatsoever. And why not? Because those arguments were not drawn internally from the Tipitika itself. Only arguments drawn internally from the Tipitika (which is to be interpreted literally and Fundamentally) have any validity. Those internal arguments ARE validity. And arguments external to the Tipitika are Fundamentally wrong.
If you want to know my position, I will just cite Buddha in this very Tipitaka itself:

"There are five things, Bharadvaja, that
may turn out in two different ways here and now. What five?
Faith, approval, oral tradition, reasoned cogitation, and reflective
acceptance of a view. These five things may turn out in
two different ways here and now. Now something may be fully
accepted out of faith, yet it may be empty, hollow, and false; but
something else may not be fully accepted out of faith, yet it may
be factual, true, and unmistaken. Again, something may be
fully approved of...may be well cogitated...may be well reflected
upon, yet it may be empty, hollow, and false; but something
else may not be well reflected upon, yet it may be factual, true,
and unmistaken. [Under these conditions] it is not proper for a
wise man who preserves truth to come to the definite conclusion:
'Only this is true, anything else is wrong.'"


Now, as Buddha says, it is foolish to say something is true only because a tradition says so. If one wants to know something, one has to be as much objective as possible, taking into account as many arguments as possible.

User avatar
Subharo
Posts: 107
Joined: Thu Sep 10, 2015 8:22 pm

Re: The great Abhidhamma Pitaka authenticity debate

Post by Subharo » Tue Dec 05, 2017 4:01 pm

Zom wrote:
Tue Dec 05, 2017 1:20 pm
Now, as Buddha says, it is foolish to say something is true only because a tradition says so. If one wants to know something, one has to be as much objective as possible, taking into account as many arguments as possible.
Zom, some people are intelligent enough to break out of a cage constructed of circular logic, and others aren't. That's just how it is. So I guess this debate can pretty much NEVER end then.
Subharo Bhikkhu
"There is but one taste on this path, the taste of freedom" -The Buddha :buddha1:

User avatar
Zom
Posts: 1735
Joined: Fri May 08, 2009 6:38 pm
Location: Russia, Saint-Petersburg
Contact:

Re: The great Abhidhamma Pitaka authenticity debate

Post by Zom » Tue Dec 05, 2017 7:58 pm

Debate? No, of course not -)

But others, who doesn't know all this, at least, will have some different point of views on the matter, which is not bad.

User avatar
Sovatthika
Posts: 312
Joined: Tue Jun 27, 2017 7:31 am
Contact:

Re: The great Abhidhamma Pitaka authenticity debate

Post by Sovatthika » Mon Dec 11, 2017 6:08 pm

'I have preached the truth without making any distinction between exoteric and esoteric doctrine: for in respect of the truths, Ananda, the Tathagata has no such thing as the closed fist of a teacher, who keeps some things back.

DN 16
"Just as the ocean has a single taste — that of salt — in the same way, this Dhamma-Vinaya has a single taste: that of release."
— Ud 5.5

Saengnapha
Posts: 326
Joined: Wed Sep 13, 2017 10:17 am

Re: The great Abhidhamma Pitaka authenticity debate

Post by Saengnapha » Tue Dec 12, 2017 2:55 am

Subharo wrote:
Tue Dec 05, 2017 4:01 pm
Zom wrote:
Tue Dec 05, 2017 1:20 pm
Now, as Buddha says, it is foolish to say something is true only because a tradition says so. If one wants to know something, one has to be as much objective as possible, taking into account as many arguments as possible.
Zom, some people are intelligent enough to break out of a cage constructed of circular logic, and others aren't. That's just how it is. So I guess this debate can pretty much NEVER end then.
Really?

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 6 guests