________________ 61 Sautrantika and Abhidharmika The Sb. of these five Vibhangas closely follow the Mahasatipatthana-sutta and read like commentaries on the latter. The satipatthana formula, for instance, is directly borrowed without any change. The formula begins as : idha bhikkhu ajjhattam kaye......etc. The mention of the term bhikkhu in a preaching given to the gods has not escaped the notice of the commentator. Buddhaghosa says : "Although the Lord spoke this in the world of gods and no monk was present there, the term bhikkhu is used to show that only monks practise the four satipatthanas. A question is naturally asked whether bhikkhus alone could practise them. Buddhaghosa concedes that even gods can practise them. He broadens the meaning of the term bhikkhu and says that whosoever practises them is a bhikkhu, no matter whether a woman or a god". This explanation once more demonstrates the determination of the commentators to prove the authenticity of the Abhidharma and the legends connected with its origin. The Ab. of these five Vibhangas do not much differ from the suttanta explanations. The same topics are presented here with reference to the supra-mundane (lokuttara) consiousness and in connection with various kinds of samadhis and patipadas. Consequently, there are a few changes, for instance, the enumeration of only five angas of the magga instead of the traditional eight. In the Magga-vibhanga, the magga is treated in the same manner as in the Sachcha. vibhanga. Here also the term ariya is dropped. Such changes appearing in the Abhidamma must have been repugnant to the followers of Sutras. Such changes might well have given rise to new doctrines unaceptable even to the Abhidharmikas. Even the commentator Buddhaghosa appears very uneasy about such changes. In his commentary on the Sachchavibhanga he explains the Abhidharmika formula of the panchangika-magga by quoting a Sutra passage. But in his commentary on the same formula in the Magga-vibhanga he attributes the panchangika-magga-vada to a vitanda-vadin and controverts his view by quoting a different Sutta. 1.Vbh. A. p. 216. 2 Vbh, A, p. 123, 3 Ibid. p. 319.
