About paññatti 'concept'

Textual analysis and comparative discussion on early Buddhist sects and texts.
thomaslaw
Posts: 178
Joined: Fri Apr 19, 2013 12:55 am
Location: Australia

About paññatti 'concept'

Post by thomaslaw » Sat Jul 28, 2018 5:48 am

Dear Dhamma friends,

According to SN 14.13 (= SA 457), the conditions of paññāpeti 'to reveal' are derived from the dhātu of avijjā 'ignorance' (see Choong Mun-keat, The Fundamental Teachings of Early Buddhism, p. 138). The noun form of paññāpeti is paññatti 'concept'. So, paññatti should be a mental phenomenon, i.e. a dhamma.

However, paññatti in the Abhidhammattha Sangaha "Comprehensive Manual of Abhidhamma" (p. 25, edited by Bhikkhu Bodhi) is regarded as not a dhamma.

Is it correct to say paññatti 'concept' is a conditioned phenomenon (dhamma), according to suttas, but not Abhidhammas?

Thanks

Thomas

User avatar
DooDoot
Posts: 3150
Joined: Tue Aug 08, 2017 11:06 pm

Re: About paññatti 'concept'

Post by DooDoot » Sat Nov 03, 2018 11:04 am

thomaslaw wrote:
Sat Jul 28, 2018 5:48 am
According to SN 14.13 (= SA 457), the conditions of paññāpeti 'to reveal' are derived from the dhātu of avijjā 'ignorance' (see Choong Mun-keat, The Fundamental Teachings of Early Buddhism, p. 138).
This doesn't not appear to be so. In SN 14.13, paññāpeti appears to be a neutral phrase. In other words, it appears there can be ignorant paññāpeti and non-ignorant paññāpeti, as follows:
One explains, teaches, asserts, establishes, clarifies, analyzes, and reveals the inferior.
hīnaṃ ācikkhati deseti paññapeti paṭṭhapeti vivarati vibhajati uttānīkaroti;

One explains, teaches, asserts, establishes, clarifies, analyzes, and reveals the superior.
paṇītaṃ ācikkhati deseti paññapeti paṭṭhapeti vivarati vibhajati uttānīkaroti;

https://suttacentral.net/sn14.13/en/sujato
Sutta such as SN 12.20 and AN 3.136 appears to show there can be enlightened paññapeti:
A Realized One understands this and comprehends it,
Taṃ tathāgato abhisambujjhati abhisameti.

then he explains, teaches, asserts, establishes, clarifies, analyzes, and reveals it.
Abhisambujjhitvā abhisametvā ācikkhati deseti paññāpeti paṭṭhapeti vivarati vibhajati uttānīkaroti.

https://suttacentral.net/sn12.20/en/sujato
:alien:
thomaslaw wrote:
Sat Jul 28, 2018 5:48 am
However, paññatti in the Abhidhammattha Sangaha "Comprehensive Manual of Abhidhamma" (p. 25, edited by Bhikkhu Bodhi) is regarded as not a dhamma.
In the suttas, it seems everything is a "dhamma"; including unwholesome, wholesome and enlightened.
thomaslaw wrote:
Sat Jul 28, 2018 5:48 am
Is it correct to say paññatti 'concept' is a conditioned phenomenon (dhamma), according to suttas, but not Abhidhammas?
Unless I am mistaken, it seems this way. It seems this book or Abhidhamma has given the word "dhamma" a specific meaning, as shown below. Without reading any more, it seems this book or Abhidhamma has used the word "dhamma" similar to how the suttas use the word "dhatu" ("element"). :?: :shrug: Otherwise, it might be less confusing of the book capitalised the letter "d" as "Dhamma".

Regards :)
Attachments
paññāpeti and sabhava3.png
paññāpeti and sabhava2.png
paññāpeti and sabhava.png
Never ordained... not an anonymous-online-bhikkhu or ex-bhikkhu...

User avatar
Volovsky
Posts: 215
Joined: Sat Jul 28, 2018 9:32 am

Re: About paññatti 'concept'

Post by Volovsky » Sat Nov 03, 2018 11:51 am

thomaslaw wrote:
Sat Jul 28, 2018 5:48 am
Is it correct to say paññatti 'concept' is a conditioned phenomenon (dhamma), according to suttas, but not Abhidhammas?
I don't think so. Especially, since paññatti in the suttas can also mean "mere designation", similar to Abhidhamma.
imā kho citta, lokasamaññā lokaniruttiyo lokavohārā lokapaññattiyo, yāhi tathāgato voharati aparāmasa”nti

But, Citta, these are merely names, expressions, turns of speech, designations in common use in the world, which the Tathāgata uses without misapprehending them.’
DN 9

User avatar
StormBorn
Posts: 189
Joined: Fri Jun 15, 2018 1:31 pm

Re: About paññatti 'concept'

Post by StormBorn » Sun Nov 11, 2018 3:52 pm

Volovsky wrote:
Sat Nov 03, 2018 11:51 am
thomaslaw wrote:
Sat Jul 28, 2018 5:48 am
Is it correct to say paññatti 'concept' is a conditioned phenomenon (dhamma), according to suttas, but not Abhidhammas?
I don't think so. Especially, since paññatti in the suttas can also mean "mere designation", similar to Abhidhamma.
Yes, mostly paññatti meant making known/lay down/set forth/declaring. Interesting that the word mostly appeared in the late KN texts and in the Parivara of the Vinaya.
“Greater in battle than the man who would conquer a thousand-thousand men, is he who would conquer just one—himself.”

thomaslaw
Posts: 178
Joined: Fri Apr 19, 2013 12:55 am
Location: Australia

Re: About paññatti 'concept'

Post by thomaslaw » Mon Nov 12, 2018 11:45 pm

StormBorn wrote:
Sun Nov 11, 2018 3:52 pm
Volovsky wrote:
Sat Nov 03, 2018 11:51 am
thomaslaw wrote:
Sat Jul 28, 2018 5:48 am
Is it correct to say paññatti 'concept' is a conditioned phenomenon (dhamma), according to suttas, but not Abhidhammas?
I don't think so. Especially, since paññatti in the suttas can also mean "mere designation", similar to Abhidhamma.
Yes, mostly paññatti meant making known/lay down/set forth/declaring. Interesting that the word mostly appeared in the late KN texts and in the Parivara of the Vinaya.
Designation (for paññatti) suggests it is a mental phenomenon, a product of mental construction. It should be a dhamma (phenomenon), according to suttas.

But according to Abhidhammattha Sangaha (p. 25, edited by Bhikkhu Bodhi), paññatti is not a dhamma.

thomaslaw
Posts: 178
Joined: Fri Apr 19, 2013 12:55 am
Location: Australia

Re: About paññatti 'concept'

Post by thomaslaw » Tue Nov 13, 2018 12:06 am

DooDoot wrote:
Sat Nov 03, 2018 11:04 am
thomaslaw wrote:
Sat Jul 28, 2018 5:48 am
However, paññatti in the Abhidhammattha Sangaha "Comprehensive Manual of Abhidhamma" (p. 25, edited by Bhikkhu Bodhi) is regarded as not a dhamma.
In the suttas, it seems everything is a "dhamma"; including unwholesome, wholesome and enlightened.
thomaslaw wrote:
Sat Jul 28, 2018 5:48 am
Is it correct to say paññatti 'concept' is a conditioned phenomenon (dhamma), according to suttas, but not Abhidhammas?
Unless I am mistaken, it seems this way. It seems this book or Abhidhamma has given the word "dhamma" a specific meaning, as shown below. Without reading any more, it seems this book or Abhidhamma has used the word "dhamma" similar to how the suttas use the word "dhatu" ("element"). :?: :shrug: Otherwise, it might be less confusing of the book capitalised the letter "d" as "Dhamma".

Regards :)
I think the word "dhamma" used in the Abhidhamma book is not similar to how the suttas use the word "dhatu", which also means "natural condition" (cf. Choong Mun-keat, Fundamental Teachings of Early Buddhism, p. 149 on the Dhatu-samyutta).

The meaning of "dhamma" used in the Abhidhamma book is the so-called paramattha "ultimate reality". It seems not found in the suttas.

Is it the only Abhidhamma book using the word "dhamma" in this particular idea?

User avatar
DooDoot
Posts: 3150
Joined: Tue Aug 08, 2017 11:06 pm

Re: About paññatti 'concept'

Post by DooDoot » Tue Nov 13, 2018 3:09 am

thomaslaw wrote:
Tue Nov 13, 2018 12:06 am
The meaning of "dhamma" used in the Abhidhamma book is the so-called paramattha "ultimate reality". It seems not found in the suttas.
I think the above meaning can be derived from the suttas, such as in AN 3.136 (quoted below) and even in the Anapanasati Sutta, where the final tetrad (contemplation of Dhamma) of contemplation of impermanence (unsatisfactoriness, not-self), dispassion, cessation and relinquishment appears to be contemplation of ultimate reality (Dhamma).
Mendicants, whether Realized Ones arise or not, this law of nature persists, this regularity of natural principles, this invariance of natural principles:

“Uppādā vā, bhikkhave, tathāgatānaṃ anuppādā vā tathāgatānaṃ, ṭhitāva sā dhātu dhammaṭṭhitatā dhammaniyāmatā.

all conditions are impermanent.

Sabbe saṅkhārā aniccā.

A Realized One understands this and comprehends it,

Taṃ tathāgato abhisambujjhati abhisameti.

then he explains, teaches, asserts, establishes, clarifies, analyzes, and reveals it:

Abhisambujjhitvā abhisametvā ācikkhati deseti paññāpeti paṭṭhapeti vivarati vibhajati uttānīkaroti:

‘All conditions are impermanent.’

‘sabbe saṅkhārā aniccā’ti.

https://suttacentral.net/an3.136/en/sujato
Never ordained... not an anonymous-online-bhikkhu or ex-bhikkhu...

User avatar
Volovsky
Posts: 215
Joined: Sat Jul 28, 2018 9:32 am

Re: About paññatti 'concept'

Post by Volovsky » Tue Nov 13, 2018 6:01 am

thomaslaw wrote:
Mon Nov 12, 2018 11:45 pm
Designation (for paññatti) suggests it is a mental phenomenon, a product of mental construction. It should be a dhamma (phenomenon), according to suttas.

But according to Abhidhammattha Sangaha (p. 25, edited by Bhikkhu Bodhi), paññatti is not a dhamma.
The word dhamma has so many meanings. Better if you first specify, which one you have in mind in each case. The meaning you are referring in Abhidhamma as "dhamma vs paññati" is (probably) derived from
Dhamma1 (m. & rarely nt.) [Ved. dharma & dharman, the latter a formation like karman (see kamma for expl;n of subj. & obj. meanings); dhṛ; (see dhāreti) to hold support: that which forms a foundation and upholds constitution.
And this is explained as something which holds/has its own nature, i.e. something which actually exists and cannot be "split" to a smaller constituents. House is a concept because it consists of four walls. Khandhas, āyatanas, dhātus are ultimate.

The important thing is that three characteristics are applied only to absolute reality. And I don't think this idea is so alien to Nikayas, since Buddha would always apply anicca-dukkha-anatta only to what in Abhidhamma is called "absolute reality": khandhas, āyatanas, dhātus, etc. He wasn't saying something like: "Is Koṇḍañña permanent or impermanent, is he sukha or dukkha, atta or anatta?" in Anattalakkhana sutta, but he refered to 5 khandhas, same in many other suttas. Therefore I think Abhidhamma here simply recapitulates, what was already in the suttas to make this distinction clear, which is essential for practice of vipassana.

thomaslaw
Posts: 178
Joined: Fri Apr 19, 2013 12:55 am
Location: Australia

Re: About paññatti 'concept'

Post by thomaslaw » Tue Nov 13, 2018 11:33 pm

DooDoot wrote:
Tue Nov 13, 2018 3:09 am
thomaslaw wrote:
Tue Nov 13, 2018 12:06 am
The meaning of "dhamma" used in the Abhidhamma book is the so-called paramattha "ultimate reality". It seems not found in the suttas.
I think the above meaning can be derived from the suttas, such as in AN 3.136 (quoted below) and even in the Anapanasati Sutta, where the final tetrad (contemplation of Dhamma) of contemplation of impermanence (unsatisfactoriness, not-self), dispassion, cessation and relinquishment appears to be contemplation of ultimate reality (Dhamma).
Mendicants, whether Realized Ones arise or not, this law of nature persists, this regularity of natural principles, this invariance of natural principles:

“Uppādā vā, bhikkhave, tathāgatānaṃ anuppādā vā tathāgatānaṃ, ṭhitāva sā dhātu dhammaṭṭhitatā dhammaniyāmatā.

all conditions are impermanent.

Sabbe saṅkhārā aniccā.

A Realized One understands this and comprehends it,

Taṃ tathāgato abhisambujjhati abhisameti.

then he explains, teaches, asserts, establishes, clarifies, analyzes, and reveals it:

Abhisambujjhitvā abhisametvā ācikkhati deseti paññāpeti paṭṭhapeti vivarati vibhajati uttānīkaroti:

‘All conditions are impermanent.’

‘sabbe saṅkhārā aniccā’ti.

https://suttacentral.net/an3.136/en/sujato
Seeing and knowing 'anicca, dukkha, anatta' in the SN suttas, for e.g., is indicated as yathaabhuuta.m 'things as they really are' (dhammas), not as paramattha 'ultimate reality' (dhammas).

thomaslaw
Posts: 178
Joined: Fri Apr 19, 2013 12:55 am
Location: Australia

Re: About paññatti 'concept'

Post by thomaslaw » Wed Nov 14, 2018 12:01 am

Volovsky wrote:
Tue Nov 13, 2018 6:01 am
thomaslaw wrote:
Mon Nov 12, 2018 11:45 pm
Designation (for paññatti) suggests it is a mental phenomenon, a product of mental construction. It should be a dhamma (phenomenon), according to suttas.

But according to Abhidhammattha Sangaha (p. 25, edited by Bhikkhu Bodhi), paññatti is not a dhamma.
The word dhamma has so many meanings. Better if you first specify, which one you have in mind in each case. The meaning you are referring in Abhidhamma as "dhamma vs paññati" is (probably) derived from
Dhamma1 (m. & rarely nt.) [Ved. dharma & dharman, the latter a formation like karman (see kamma for expl;n of subj. & obj. meanings); dhṛ; (see dhāreti) to hold support: that which forms a foundation and upholds constitution.
And this is explained as something which holds/has its own nature, i.e. something which actually exists and cannot be "split" to a smaller constituents. House is a concept because it consists of four walls. Khandhas, āyatanas, dhātus are ultimate.

The important thing is that three characteristics are applied only to absolute reality. And I don't think this idea is so alien to Nikayas, since Buddha would always apply anicca-dukkha-anatta only to what in Abhidhamma is called "absolute reality": khandhas, āyatanas, dhātus, etc. He wasn't saying something like: "Is Koṇḍañña permanent or impermanent, is he sukha or dukkha, atta or anatta?" in Anattalakkhana sutta, but he refered to 5 khandhas, same in many other suttas. Therefore I think Abhidhamma here simply recapitulates, what was already in the suttas to make this distinction clear, which is essential for practice of vipassana.
Khandhas, āyatanas, dhātus are not ultimate reality, according to the SN/SA suttas. They are rittaka 'without reality' and su~n~naka 'just empty' (e.g. SN 22.95, SN 35.197. Cf. Choong MK, The Fundamental Teachings of Early Buddhism, pp. 54, 92).

Seeing knowing khandhas, āyatanas as anicca-dukkha-anatta is not ultimate reality; it is just 'things as they really are'.

Eg. dukkha, being not real, arises (by conditions); having arisen it ceases completely (by conditions). It is a result of previous action (karma), but there is no doer (anatta). When dukkha arises, it arises; when dukkha ceases, it ceases. Everything exists, this is one extreme. Everything does not exist, this is the other extreme (e.g. SN 12.15. Cf. Choong MK, The Fundamental Teachings of Early Buddhism, pp. 193-4).

User avatar
Volovsky
Posts: 215
Joined: Sat Jul 28, 2018 9:32 am

Re: About paññatti 'concept'

Post by Volovsky » Wed Nov 14, 2018 12:26 am

thomaslaw wrote:
Wed Nov 14, 2018 12:01 am
Seeing knowing khandhas, āyatanas as anicca-dukkha-anatta is not ultimate reality; it is just 'things as they really are'.
Let's do it one by one. First, do we agree that khandhas, etc. are intrinsically different from "person, house, table", etc and vipassana (seeing 3 characteristics) is meant to be practiced only for the former ones (i.e. khandhas, etc)?

thomaslaw
Posts: 178
Joined: Fri Apr 19, 2013 12:55 am
Location: Australia

Re: About paññatti 'concept'

Post by thomaslaw » Wed Nov 14, 2018 12:44 am

Volovsky wrote:
Wed Nov 14, 2018 12:26 am
thomaslaw wrote:
Wed Nov 14, 2018 12:01 am
Seeing knowing khandhas, āyatanas as anicca-dukkha-anatta is not ultimate reality; it is just 'things as they really are'.
Let's do it one by one. First, do we agree that khandhas, etc. are intrinsically different from "person, house, table", etc and vipassana (seeing 3 characteristics) is meant to be practiced only for the former ones (i.e. khandhas, etc)?
khandhas, ... person, house, table (concepts) ... are all anicca, anatta, and rittaka 'without reality' (dhammas).

User avatar
Volovsky
Posts: 215
Joined: Sat Jul 28, 2018 9:32 am

Re: About paññatti 'concept'

Post by Volovsky » Wed Nov 14, 2018 2:27 am

thomaslaw wrote:
Wed Nov 14, 2018 12:44 am
khandhas, ... person, house, table (concepts) ... are all anicca, anatta, and rittaka 'without reality' (dhammas).
I don't think you answered my questions. Rather you have made your own question and answered to it.

User avatar
robertk
Posts: 2936
Joined: Sat Jan 03, 2009 2:08 am

Re: About paññatti 'concept'

Post by robertk » Wed Nov 14, 2018 2:57 am

thomaslaw wrote:
Wed Nov 14, 2018 12:01 am


Khandhas, āyatanas, dhātus are not ultimate reality, according to the SN/SA suttas. They are rittaka 'without reality' and su~n~naka 'just empty' (e.g. SN 22.95, SN 35.197. Cf. Choong MK, The F.


rittaka means void- it is void of anything lasting, void of self .
khandhas , ayantanas and dhatus are real but insubstantial, void of self.

thomaslaw
Posts: 178
Joined: Fri Apr 19, 2013 12:55 am
Location: Australia

Re: About paññatti 'concept'

Post by thomaslaw » Wed Nov 14, 2018 3:05 am

robertk wrote:
Wed Nov 14, 2018 2:57 am
thomaslaw wrote:
Wed Nov 14, 2018 12:01 am


Khandhas, āyatanas, dhātus are not ultimate reality, according to the SN/SA suttas. They are rittaka 'without reality' and su~n~naka 'just empty' (e.g. SN 22.95, SN 35.197. Cf. Choong MK, The F.


rittaka means void- it is void of anything lasting, void of self .
khandhas , ayantanas and dhatus are real but insubstantial, void of self.


It is empty (void) of both, existence and non-existence, which are based on self-attachment.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 14 guests