Theravada Abhidhamma
The Theravada 'Abhidhamma tradition, also known as the Abhidhamma Method', refers to a scholastic systematization of the Theravāda school's understanding of the highest Buddhist teachings. These teachings are traditionally believed to have been taught by the Buddha, though modern scholars date the texts of the Abhidhamma Piṭaka to the 3rd century BCE. Theravāda traditionally sees itself as the vibhajjavāda, which reflects the analytical method used by the Buddha and early Buddhists to investigate the nature of the person and other phenomena.
According to Bhikkhu Bodhi, a modern Theravāda scholar, the Abhidhamma is "simultaneously a philosophy, a psychology and an ethics, all integrated into the framework of a program for liberation."
There are different textual layers of Abhidhamma literature. The earliest Abhidhamma works are found in the Pali Canon. Then there are exegetical works which were composed in Sri Lanka in the 5th century. There are also later sub-commentarial works composed in later historical periods.
Background and sources
The primary source for the Abhidhamma is the Abhidhamma Piṭaka, a set of seven texts which form the third "basket" of the Theravāda Tipiṭaka. It is generally accepted by modern scholars that these works began to be composed during the 3rd century BCE. They therefore cannot be the direct work of the Buddha himself, but of later disciples and scholars.However, according to some scholars like Rupert Gethin, it is possible that some elements found in Abhidhamma, such as the mātikās are from an earlier date than the books themselves. This has been studied by Erich Frauwallner, who argues that there are kernels of early pre-sectarian material in the earliest Abhidhamma texts. According to Frauwallner's comparative study, these texts were possibly developed and "constructed from the same material", mainly early mātikās which forms the "ancient core" of early Abhidhamma.
The extensive use of mātikā can also be found in some suttas of the Sutta Pitaka, which have been seen as a "proto-abhidhamma" by scholars such as Johannes Bronkhorst and Frauwallner. These suttas include the Saṅgīti Sutta and Dasuttara Sutta, the two last suttas of the Dīgha Nikāya. Tse fu Kuan also argues that certain sutras of the Aṅguttara Nikāya depicts an early Abhidhamma type method.
The Khuddaka Nikāya includes a number of Abhidhamma type texts not found in the Abhidhamma Piṭaka. One of these is the Paṭisambhidāmagga. Others include the Niddessa, the Nettipakaraṇa and the Peṭakopadesa.
The Sri Lankan branch of the Theravāda school later developed further Abhidhamma texts, including commentaries on the books of the Abhidhamma and special introductory manuals. Major commentaries include the Atthasālinī, the Sammohavinodanī and the Pañcappakaṇaraṭṭhakathā, a commentary on the other books of the Abhidhamma Piṭaka. The Sri Lankan tradition also produced practice manuals, such as Vimuttimagga c. 1st or 2nd century CE.
The 5th century scholar Buddhaghosa is one of the most influential Abhidhammika of the Theravāda. His Visuddhimagga remains one of the most important Theravāda texts. Chapters XIV to XVII are a kind of summary of the Abhidhamma. His commentaries on the suttas also reflect an Abhidhamma perspective. A further period of medieval Sri Lankan scholarship also produced a series of texts called the sub-commentaries.
There is also a genre of short introductory manuals to the Abhidhamma, like the 5th century Abhidhammāvatāra. The most influential of these manuals remains the short and succinct Abhidhammattha-saṅgaha of Ācariya Anuruddha. According to Bhikkhu Bodhi, this text has remained "the main primer for the study of Abhidhamma used throughout the Theravada Buddhist world," and various commentaries have been written on it.
Abhidhamma remains a living tradition in Theravāda nations today and modern Abhidhamma works continue to be written in modern languages such as Burmese and Sinhala. Abhidhamma studies are particularly stressed in Myanmar, where it has been the primary subject of study since around the 17th century. One of the most important figures in modern Myanmar Buddhism, Ledi Sayadaw, was well known for his writings on Abhidhamma. This commentary, which critiqued an older 12th-century commentary from Sri Lanka led to a lively controversy, as different figures debated on Abhidhamma topics.
The books of the Abhidhamma Piṭaka were translated into English in the 20th century and published by the Pāli Text Society. The translators were C. A. F. Rhys Davids, U Thittila, U Narada, B.C. Law.
Dhamma theory
In the Pāli Nikayas, the Buddha teaches through a method in which experience is explained using various conceptual groupings of physical and mental processes, which are called "dhammā". Examples of lists of dhammas taught by the Buddha in the Nikayas include the twelve sense 'spheres' , the five aggregates and the eighteen elements of cognition.Expanding these various models, the Pāli Abhidhamma concerned itself with providing a finer and more exhaustive understanding of all phenomenal experience by explaining, analyzing and classifying all dhammas and their relationships. According to Y. Karunadasa, for the Abhidhamma, dhammas are "the basic factors into which all things can be resolved" and "elementary constituents, the ultimate realities behind manifest phenomena." This "Dhamma theory" is the central theory or cornerstone of the Pāli Abhidhamma. According to various scholars of Abhidhamma, the main point of this theory is to provide a useful schema for meditative contemplation and insight into the nature of phenomena.
"Dhammā" has been translated as "factors", "psychic characteristics", "psycho-physical events" and "phenomena". Noa Ronkin defines dhammas as "the constituents of sentient experience; the irreducible ‘building blocks’ that make up one's world, albeit they are not static mental contents and certainly not substances."
According to Karunadasa, a dhamma, which can be translated as "a 'principle' or 'element' ", is "those items that result when the process of analysis is taken to its ultimate limits". However, this does not mean that they have an independent existence, for it is "only for the purposes of description" that they are postulated. They are also said to be not-self and thus empty.
After all, dhammas are interconnected and interdependent in various relationships. Thus, the Pali Abhidhamma is not a type of pluralism, since it relies on both analysis and synthesis. According to Karunadasa, this "has enabled it to transcend the binary opposition between pluralism and monism, or as one Pāli commentary says, the binary opposition between the principle of plurality and the principle of unity."
That the Pali Abhidhamma sought to avoid both absolute pluralism and monism can be seen in various commentarial statements that warn against a one-sided focus or grasping on the principle of plurality. For example, the sub-commentary to the Dīgha Nikāya says that "the erroneous grasping of the principle of plurality is due to the undue emphasis on the radical separateness of the dhammas."
Likewise, dhammas "are not fractions of a whole indicating an absolute unity" or manifestations of a single metaphysical substratum, since this would be the opposite error, a one-sided focus on the principle of unity. Instead, they are simply a "multiplicity of inter-connected but distinguishable co-ordinate factors." This is said to correspond to the idea that the Buddha's teaching is an ontological middle way between various extremes, such as absolute existence and non-existence, or radical plurality and absolute monism.
While dhammas are said to be distinguishable from each other, they are said to arise together in clusters due to their inseparability. This principle can also be seen in the suttas which state that some dhammas are said to be blended in such a way that they cannot be separated out. The fact that dhammas always arise together is also connected to their conditional dependence on each other. In the Abhidhamma, nothing arises without a cause, from a single cause or as a single effect. Therefore, in Abhidhamma "it is always the case that a plurality of conditions gives rise to a plurality of effects. Applied to the dhamma theory this means that a multiplicity of dhammas brings about a multiplicity of other dhammas."
Their nature and characteristics
According to the Atthasalini: "Dhammas bear their own particular natures. Alternatively, dhammas are borne by conditions, or according to particular natures." The use of the term sabhāva in the description of dhammas is not found in the books of the Abhidhamma Pitaka, but does appear in other texts such as the Nettippakarana and in the commentaries. Theravāda commentaries sometimes equate the two terms, such as the Visuddhimagga which states that ‘dhamma means sabhāva ’.However, it should be remembered that the Theravāda conception of sabhāva does not mean an essence or a substantial mode of being, since dhammas are not permanent, or totally discrete entities. They are always in dependently conditioned relationships with other dhammas and always changing. Therefore, it is only for the sake of description that they are said to have their "own nature". According to Karunadasa, this usage of sabhāva is only of provisional validity, "an attribution made for the convenience of definition." It merely refers to the fact that "any dhamma represents a distinct fact of empirical existence which is not shared by other dhammas."
According to Peter Harvey, the Theravāda view of a dhamma's sabhāva is that it refers to an individualizing characteristic that "is not something inherent in a dhamma as a separate ultimate reality, but arise due to the supporting conditions both of other dhammas and previous occurrences of that dhamma". This is shown by other definitions given in the commentaries, which state that a dhamma is "that which is borne by its own conditions," and "the mere fact of occurrence due to appropriate conditions."
Similarly, Noa Ronkin argues that in Theravāda Abhidhamma, "sabhāva is predominantly used for the sake of determining the dhammas’ individuality, not their existential status". Sabhāva is therefore synonymous with salakkhaṇa, which is what differentiates one type of dhamma from another for the convenience of definition. Salakkhaṇa is also called as "individual characteristic", "special characteristic", "the characteristic which separates it from other characteristics", and "intrinsic characteristic". For example, this mode of description is what allows us to say that the individual characteristic of the earth element is solidity. This is contrast to "universal characteristics" of all dhammas, which are those features all dhammas share.
Thus, while in Theravāda Abhidhamma, dhammas are the ultimate constituents of experience, they are not seen as substances, essences or independent particulars, since they are empty of a self and conditioned. This is spelled out in the Patisambhidhamagga, which states that dhammas are empty of sabhāva.
According to Ronkin, the canonical Pāli Abhidhamma remains pragmatic and psychological, and "does not take much interest in ontology" in contrast with the Sarvastivada tradition. Paul Williams also notes that the Abhidhamma remains focused on the practicalities of insight meditation and leaves ontology "relatively unexplored". Ronkin does note however that later Theravāda sub-commentaries do show a doctrinal shift towards ontological realism from the earlier epistemic and practical concerns.