Reply To: Pure Octad constituents

October 29, 2024 at 8:13 am #52570
Lal
Keymaster

OK. Then that should be enough. 

1. Even during the Buddha’s time, no one knew about the details of the gandhabba. The Buddha or other bhikkhus did not teach Abhidhamma (including pure octads and that a gandhabba is made of pure octads.)

  • That is why those concepts are not in the Sutta Pitaka.

2. The Buddha explained the framework of Abhidhamma to Ven. Sariputta. He and his lineage of bhikkhus started on the monumental task of providing the details of Abhidhamma. It begins with the structure of a citta (with cetasika or mental factors), a fundamental building block of a pure octad (suddhāṭṭhaka), and explains the details in a systematic analysis.

  • That is equivalent to the efforts of modern scientists to explain all material phenomena starting with a set of elementary particles. 
  • Of course, they have been unable to accomplish that and will not be.
  • That is because material phenomena arise based on mental phenomena. 

3. It took many generations of bhikkhus to finalize the Abhidhamma Pitaka. 

  • Arahants attended four “recitals” or Councils (Dhamma Sangayana) conducted at the following times after the passing away of the Buddha:  After three months, one hundred years, two hundred years, and five hundred years.
  • At each Council, all three Pitaka (Sutta, Vinaya, Abhidhamma) available at that time were recited to ensure their self-consistency. Of course, the first two Pitakas were complete even in the first Council, but Abhidhamma Pitaka was finalized only at the third Council. Then, that complete Tipitaka was written down in the fourth council.
  • See “Abhidhamma – Introduction.”

4. Many Commentaries were written at various times to explain the details of the Sutta and Abhidhamma Pitaka. 

5. It seems that one book of the Abhidhamma Pitaka may have been lost. That book should provide details of pure octads and the details of the mental body.

  • However, a Commentary that summarized that “missing book” (together with details of the other sections of Abhidhamma) survived. 
  • Most people learn Abhidhamma using a few books available in Sinhala and English. See the references listed in “Abhidhamma – Introduction.”

6. At some point, I will probably have to write a book explaining all this.

  • People did not need to learn Abhidhamma at the time of the Buddha. They were able to grasp the concepts without getting into Abhdiahmma, which is probably why the Buddha did not teach Abhidhamma to a wider audience at that time. In addition, it would not have been possible to compile the material in Abhidhamma within the Buddha’s lifetime. 
  • But Abhidhamma would suit those who like to “dig deeper.” 

7. Allocating time to explain different aspects is a huge task. I will try to tackle various aspects at a given time as I see fit.

  • Others (who learned Dhamma from Waharaka Thero; see “Parinibbāna of Waharaka Thēro“) also do that, but many do not go into Abhidhamma.  
  • I have not seen anyone else discuss these details. Of course, Waharaka Thero discussed them, and I am building on that with my scientific background. 

8. Each person needs to choose the way forward. If Abhidhamma seems too complex, it is not necessary to learn those details. As I pointed out above, most people were not even aware of Abhdidhamma during Buddha’s time. 

  • On the other hand, Abhidhamma could help many these days. See “Sutta Learning Sequence for the Present Day” 
  • I quote the following from that post. Many people at Buddha’s time belonged to the ugghaṭitañña and vipañcitañña categories. They could understand concepts with only a little explanation.

“4. As pointed out by Buddha, There are three types of people who can comprehend Tilakkhana, categorized according to their “inherent capabilities.” That has nothing to do with “book knowledge,” but has everything to do with one’s inherent capabilities accumulated over many, many lives.

  • The first category is ugghaṭitañña or “persons with high wisdom”; they could grasp concepts very quickly. Then some belong to the vipañcitañña category, and they needed a bit more explanation to understand the concepts. The third category is neyya; they need detailed explanations (i.e., patiniddesa)  to grasp a concept. People in the last group of “padaparama” are unable to comprehend Dhamma.”

9. P.S. I just revised the post “Abhidhamma – Introduction” to provide the name of the Commentary based on which the References in that post were compiled.