|
Vibhajjavāda (Pāli) or Vibhajyavāda (Sanskrit), is an umbrella classification for Buddhist denominations that promote analysis as a primary tool for developing insight. The Vibhajjavadins are claimed to have seen themselves as orthodox Sthaviras. The word Vibhajjavāda can be broken into Vibhajja, loosely meaning "analysis", and vāda meaning "doctrine" or "teachings". Hence, the term "Vibhajjavāda" can mean "the doctrine of analysis". This doctrine says that the first step to insight has to be achieved by the aspirant's experience, critical investigation, and reasoning instead of by blind faith. The Third Buddhist Council, under the leadership of Moggaliputta Tissa emphasized this analytical approach. Some sub-divisions of Sthavira School which adopted this approach were regrouped and termed as the followers of Vibhajjavāda. Those not included in the Vibhajjavāda group were the Mahāsānghikas, ancestor of Sarvāstivāda and Sammitīya, who were regarded as having the ‘wrong view’ by the Vibhajjavādins, according to the Kathavatthu, a work ascribed to Moggaliputta Tissa. After the Third Council, the Vibhajjavādins gradually evolve into four groups: the Mahīśāsaka, Kāśyapīya, Dharmaguptaka and the Tāmraparnīya. Theravada is descended from the Tāmraparnīya, which means 'the Sri Lankan lineage'. On the other hand, some sources suggest that Mahīśāsaka, Kāśyapīya and Dharmaguptaka did not evolve directly from from Vibhajjavādins, although an original connection between these groups is posited due to the similarities of their respective Vinayas. According to Sinhalese tradition, Buddhism under the name of Vibhajjavāda was brought to Sri Lanka by Mahinda in 246 BCE, who is believed to be the son of Emperor Asoka. The Theravāda descendants of this school claim that Vibhajjavāda represents doctrinal orthodoxy. However, proponents of this approach are frequently mentioned in the Sarvāstivādin Mahā-vibhāsa, where they are viewed as the type of heretics who "make objections, who uphold harmful doctrines and attack those who follow the authentic Dharma". This characterization was a response to the methodology and type of arguments recorded in the Kathavatthu, where part of Sarvāstivādin doctrines is refuted. Only three questions in the Kathavatthu are directed against Sarvāstivāda, which probably means that the rest of the Sarvāstivāda doctrine did not differ much from the Vibhajjavādins at the time of the Third Council.
Further reading Lance Cousins, "On the Vibhajjavādins", Buddhist Studies Review 18, 2 (2001) See also Early Buddhist schools | ||||||||
|
| |||||||||
 |
|
| |