Kathavatthu
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Kathāvatthu (Pāli) (abbrev. Kv, Kvu), literally "Points of Controversy", is a Buddhist scripture, one of the seven books in the Theravada Abhidhamma Pitaka. It primarily documents doctrinal points that were debated from the time of King Ashoka.
Translation: Points of Controversy, tr. S.Z. Aung & C.A.F. Rhys Davids (1915, 1993), Pali Text Society[1], Bristol.
Contents |
[edit] Origins
The Kathavatthu was compiled in order to clarify the various points of controversy regarding Dhamma that had arisen among early Buddhist schools. Some of these disputes had provided the rationale for the convening of the Third Buddhist Council, traditionally by King Ashoka, in the 3rd Century BCE.
According to tradition, this work was compiled by the venerable Moggaliputta Tissa in his role as leader of the Third Council.[1] The Kathavatthu is said to record the answers that were deemed orthodox by the assembled senior monks. Based on linguistic, thematic and structural evidence, it seems likely that Moggaliputta Tissa only began the work, with further debates added as more "heresies" came to the notice of Theravada authorities.[2][3]
[edit] Organization
The Kathavatthu documents over 200 points of contention.[4] The debated points are divided into four paṇṇāsaka (lit., "group of 50"). Each paṇṇāsaka is again divided, into 20 chapters (vagga) in all. In addition, three more vagga follow the four paṇṇāsaka.[3]
Each chapter contains questions and answers by means of which the most diverse views are presented, refuted and rejected. The form of the debates gives no identification of the participants, and does not step outside the debate to state explicitly which side is right.
The views deemed non-heretical by the commentary's interpretation of the Katthavatthu were embraced by the Theravada denomination. According to the Commentaries those whose views were rejected include the Sarvastivada.[5]
[edit] Canonicity
 Early Buddhism |
| Scriptures |
| Councils |
| Schools |
|
First Sangha |
The inclusion of the Kathavatthu in the Abhidhamma Pitaka has sometimes been thought of as something of an anomaly. First, the book is not regarded as being the words of the Buddha himself - its authorship is traditionally attributed to Moggaliputta Tissa. However this is not unusual: the Vinaya's accounts of the first two Councils are obviously also not the Buddha's actual words.[6] Second, the subject matter of the Kathavatthu differs substantially from that of the other texts in the Abhidhamma – but this is true of the Puggalapannatti as well.
Scholars sometimes also point to the inclusion of some obviously later (relatively new) sections of the Kathavatthu in the Tipitaka as an indication that the Pāli Canon was more 'open' than has sometimes been thought, and as illustrative of the process of codifying new texts as canonical. In fact this too is not unusual, there being quite a bit of relatively late material in the Canon.[7]
[edit] Interpretation
The debates are understood by the tradition, followed by many scholars, as disputes between different schools of Buddhism. However, L. S. Cousins, described by Professor Gombrich as the West's leading abhidhamma scholar,[8] says:
"In spiritual traditions the world over, instructors have frequently employed apparent contradictions as part of their teaching method – perhaps to induce greater awareness in the pupil or to bring about a deeper and wider view of the subject in hand. The Pali Canon contains many explicit examples of such methods. (Indeed much of the Kathāvatthu makes better sense in these terms than as sectarian controversy.)"[9]
[edit] See also
- Moggaliputta-Tissa
- Buddhist Councils > Third Buddhist Council
- Early Buddhist Schools > Vibhajjavada, Sarvastivada
[edit] Notes
- ^ According to Hinüber (2000), p. 71:
- "According to tradition, it [the Kathāvatthu] was composed by Moggalliputtatissa 218 years after the Nirvāṇa (As 4,25). Consequently, this is the only canonical text exactly dated to the year in the tradition."
- ^ McDermott (1975), p. 424 n. 2, states:
- "... Although a core of the Kathāvatthu may date back to the third century B.C., it is nonetheless clear that the work we now know by this name is a composite. Two kinds of evidence indicate its composite nature. First, the debate concerning the existence of a personal entity ... shows certain linguistic peculiarities which are not to be found in the rest of the text.... The second kind of evidence involves the points of controversy themselves. ... [C]ertain points of doctrine discussed in the Kathāvatthu were held by Buddhist schools which were not yet in existence at the time of Aśoka.... It would seem that we may assume, then, that additions were made to the original of the Kathāvatthu as new doctrinal disagreements arose."
- ^ a b Hinüber (2000), p. 71, para. 145. Hinüber comments: "This somewhat irregular structure [of the Kathāvatthu] seems to indicate that the text had been growing over a certain time, and whenever new controversies arose they were included."
- ^ Hinüber (2000), p. 72, writes: "A little more than 200 points were discussed in Kv [the Kathāvatthu], although it seems that the tradition assumes a larger number." Geiger & Ghosh (2004), p. 10, write: "This book contains the refutation of 252 different wrong teachings...."
- ^ Hinüber (2000), p. 73, writes:
- "A strong disadvantage of the presentation of the controversies in Kv [the Kathāvatthu] is the lack of any indication of the respective school to which the heretical views under discussion may belong. These are mentioned much later only in the commentary.... In this respect Kv differs from the Vijñānakāya [the parallel text of the Sarvastivada], where the interlocutors are named."
- ^ Hinüber (2000), p. 71, further states:
- "... the canonicity of Kv [the Kathāvatthu] was not universally accepted, because it clearly is not buddhavacana. However, it is saved as such by the view that the Buddha had spoken the mātikā [the abhidhammic classification scheme] in heaven (As 4,3-30), which Moggalliputtatissa unfolded ... at the third council after Aśoka had purged the Saṃgha (Kv-a 6,2-7,29). When the canon was recited on this occasion, Kv was included. Obviously, the tradition was always aware of the relatively late date of Kv."
- ^ Hinüber (2000), p. 73, writes:
- "It is not entirely obvious why Kv has been included in the Abhidhammapiṭaka. The form of the text, which contains discussions, is nearer to the Suttantas than to the Abhidhamma.... The reason may be chronological. At the time when Kv was formed under Aśoka, the four great Nikāyas may have been closed collections already, while the Abhidhamma was still open."
- "It is not entirely obvious why Kv has been included in the Abhidhammapiṭaka. The form of the text, which contains discussions, is nearer to the Suttantas than to the Abhidhamma.... The reason may be chronological. At the time when Kv was formed under Aśoka, the four great Nikāyas may have been closed collections already, while the Abhidhamma was still open."
- ^ The State of Buddhist Studies in the World 1972-1997, ed Swearer & Promta, Chulalongkorn University, Bangkok, 2000, page 182
- ^ in Buddhist Studies in Honour of Hammalawa Saddhatissa, ed Dhammapala, Gombrich and Norman, University of Jayawardenepura, Nugegoda, Sri Lanka, 1984, page 67
[edit] Sources
- Geiger, Wilhelm & Batakrishna Ghosh (trans. fr. German) (2004). Pāli Literature and Language. New Delhi: Munshiram Manoharlal Publishers. ISBN 81-215-0716-2.
- Hinüber, Oskar von (2000). A Handbook of Pāli Literature. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter. ISBN 3-11-016738-7.
- McDermott, James P. (1975). "The Kathavatthu Kamma Debates" in the Journal of the American Oriental Society, Vol. 95, No. 3 (Jul. - Sep., 1975), pp. 424-433.
|
||||||||
