A Study Of "Arahanta" According To Pali Kathavatthu

Moggaliputta-tissa"s Points of Controversy (Kathavatthu) is the fifth in the series of seven Theravada Abhidammas. The treatise was was compiled during the 3rd Buddhist Council, which is at the period of King Asoka (B. C.200-300). Kathavatthu is composed of 226 points of contention. This research presented in this thesis is focused on the second on "Parihanikatha" (The controverted point of whether Arahanta can fall away from Arahanship) and the fourth "Sabbamatthitikatha" (The controversy of Everything exists") on "Arahattadikatha". In this thesis, the study on the "View of Arahanta" is composed of two sections. Firstly, a commentary for "Arahanta" is provided from the Early Buddhist point of view. Secondly, the intellectual development of "Arahanta" is examined. Series of problem such as whether an Arahanta has defilement (klesa), drop-out from the Arahanship, Five Points of Mahadeva and Sarvastivadin are included:1. In Primitive Buddhism, Buddha, Pacceka-buddha and the Savaka are covered by the concept of Arahanta, which is the ultimate status of Buddhist spiritual cultivation. However, Arahanta is not an unique term newly invented by Buddhism. Even at the pre-Buddhist Indian culture, the idea of Arahanta is already perceived as a Saint. Arahanta is not just a bout the one who is able to benefit himself interms of enlighenment, namely liberated from the circle of life and death (samsara), but also for those who are able to benefit all other beings in the community.2. During the period of Sectarian Buddhism, due to the problem of Five Points of Mahadeva, whether the Arahanta is the most ultimate status of Buddhist saint under strong suspicious. Various schools would have different understanding about what Arahantais. For Sarvastivadin, there are six different types of Arahanta, the first five would be disturbed by inappropriate attention (Ayonisomanasikara), under certain situations. Due to these conditions, the defilement (klesa) then aroused would cause the saint drop back from the Arahanship. Only the sixth, who is the one able to maintain the appropriate attention (Yonisomanasikara), can stay at Arahanship for permanence (Akuppadhamma). The Buddha, as an Arahanta, is believed by the Sarvastivadian that, he has the Upabhoga Parihani (受用退), thus would not drop back from the Arahanship. The Sectarian Buddhists had series of hot debate on whether the Arahanta would drop back. But afterward at the late period of Sectarian Buddhism, the focus of the discussion is shifted to Buddhahood, and how the Bodhisattva’s path can achieve that. Arahanta is not a key role anymore. From then on, Arahanta is perceived rather as a Savaka than the Buddha.Nevertheless, Therevada has different interpretations on Bodhisattva. Namely, Bodhisattva can be classificated as three types:Mahabodhisatta, Paccekabodhisatta and Savakabodhisatta". Although all three of them are targeted to achieve Arahantship, but the Mahaboddhisatta one, who vows to attain Buddhahood, would face with problems of drop back from Buddhahood accomplishment. Therefore, it would be further classificated as Aniyataboddhisatta and Niyataboddhisatta, namely those would and would not drop back from the Buddhahood. Nevertheless, Therevada believes that once all three types of Boddhisattva achieve the Arahantship, they will never face with the problem of drop back.3 The Sarvastivadian theory that Arahanta can arise defilement and drop back from Arahanship, is criticized in Katthavattu and other Pali treatises. There is a contradiction between the Sarvastivadian theme of (1) Three temporal aspects is real existence, the very nature of all phenomena exist permanently, and (2) Arahanship would be drop back caused by the inappropriate attention (Ayonisomanasikara). It is because of:if all three temporal aspects are real existence, then why the drop back of Arahanship is happened merely in the case of "inappropriate attention", but not that of "appropriate attention"? Since according to Sarvastivadan, defilement (klesa) is supposed to have the same basis during the three temporal dimensions, thus able to cause the drop back of the Arahanship, no matter it is an inappropriate or appropriate types of attention.Besides that, the Sarvastivadian theme that "all phenomena is real existence" is rejected by Thervada, as a wrong philosophy. According to Pali text, all enlightened personalities and their noble liberation are under the idea of Akuppadhamma (不动 法), thus, they do not drop back from the enlightenment, according to Primitive, and Therevada, Buddhism as well.4. The debate in the Katthavattu is composed of series of question and replies, between Theravadian own doctrine (Sakavadi) and other Schools’doctrine (Paravadi). The mechanism of the logic applied in the debate is known as eight fold of refutation (Atthaniggaha). There are two major methods:firstly, affirmation following by negation. Secondly, negation followed by affirmation. The typical, and complete, example to illustrate the logic applied in the debate, can be found in the Debate about the Person (Puggalakatha).It is composed of four meanings, while each of them covers two types of method, which becomes four meanings and eight methods in total. Katthavattu is the earliest logic text in Buddhism. Contemporary scholarship considers the format of logic within is similar to the Modus Tollens of Hypothetical Judgment in Western Logic.