It is the highest purpose in Buddhism to detach all pains (dukkha), attain the nirvana (nibbana), and become an arhat (arahant). However, among the arhats who have achieved spiritual enlightenment, various kinds of arthats exist. In SN.8.7 Pavarana (SN.I.191), the Buddha explained four kinds of arhats that tevijja, chalabhinna, ubhatobhagavimutta, pannnavimutta. In this text, tevijja and chalabhinna are explained as an arhat who is "a possessor of the threefold clear vision" and "a possessor of the six branches of higher knowledge," respectively. However, the explanation about ubhatobhagavimutta and pannavimutta is not clear in this text. On the other hand, both kinds of arhat are variously explained in other places. How then should we understand these two terms? At first glance, ubhatobhagavimutta is those who have attained cetovimutti and pannavimutti, and pannavimutta is those who have attained only pannavimutti. In addition, according to AN.2.3 Bala-vagga 10 (AN.I.61) in connection with cetovimutti and pannavimutti, one would leave raga and attain cetovimutti by practicing samatha. On the other hand, one would leave avijja and attain pannavimutti by practicing vipassana. According to the above viewpoint, ubhatobhagavimutta will mean those who practice samatha and vipassana for the attainment of cetovimutti and pannavimutti. And pannavimutta is those who practice only vipassana just for the attainment of pannavimutti. In other word, it could be understood here that ubhatobhagavimutta requires jhana or aruppa, whereas pannavimutta requires neither jhana nor aruppa. However, is that right? If it was right, why has the example of pannavimutti mentioned independently not yet found in the early Pali Canon (Nikaya) despite of a plenty of examples that cetovimutti and pannavimutti are mentioned together? In order to understand this problem, especially the relation between pannavimutta and jhana from the early Pali Canon's point of view, I have studied the previous works focused on the early Pali Canon and have reached to the following conclusions. 1. At first glance, ubhatobhagavimutta is those who have attained cetovimutti and pannavimutti, and pannavimutta is those who have attained only pannavimutti. The former is so, but the latter is not. Unlike its term, pannavimutta has attained not only pannavimutti but cetovimutti as well. This is why, in early Pali Canon, we have not found the example of pannavimutti mentioned independently despite of a plenty of examples that cetovimutti and pannavimutti are mentioned together. 2. Ubhatobhagavimutta is explained that they experience santa vimokha and attha vimokha. Santa vimokha and attha vimokha are the spiritual stage of aruppa which is beyond jhana. On the other hand, although pannavimutta has no experience of either santa vimokha or attha vimokha, they also attain cetovimutti, not only pannavimutti. This clarifies that samatha was needed by pannavimutta. However, samatha mentioned here is only a stage of jhana for the attainment of cetovimutti, not yet attaining the stage of aruppa. In short, pannavimutta needs jhana.

View full abstract

King Ajatasattu was a ruler of Magadha in Buddha's days. Various texts in ancient India keep reports about his life and events. Especially in Buddhist scriptures, he is famous for his patricide. In this paper, I will collect the descriptions about his deeds in Pali Buddhist scriptures. Through this work, I can reconstruct his life and survey the change of his mental situation before and after confessing his offense in front of the Buddha. And we can also get some information about the relation between Buddhism and kingship in ancient India.

View full abstract

This essay examines the characteristics of the philosophy of language of the Vaibhasikas and Sautrantikas (i.e., of Vasubandhu) discussed in the Abhidharmakosabhasya by consulting the Sphutartha Abhidharmakosavyakhya by Yasomitra and the Tattvarthanama Abhidharmakosabhasyatlka of Sthiramati, the two major Indian commentaries to the text. The Vaibhasika scholars claim that nama (name), pada (phrase) and vyanjana (syllable), which are cittaviprayuktasamskaras (conditioned forces dissociated from mind), are real linguistic existents. They maintain that these three linguistic elements exist as independent dharmas. The Vaibhasikas understand that the linguistic elements in mind (nama, pada and vyanjana) have one-to-one correspondence with a certain object or a certain phenomenon, and express a fixed meaning. The Sautrantika scholars, on the other hand, only admit physical sounds as real existents of the linguistic elements. There is no need to admit the existence of vyanjana (syllable) separate from sounds, and nama and pada are temporary mental constructions that exist only as a continuum of physical sounds. Therefore, in order to understand the meaning of a certain object or a certain phenomenon, there must be limitations on sounds determined by linguistic conventions. The Vaibhasika and the Sautrantika scholars engaged in contentious disputes over the process how linguistic activities that allow us to know external objects. How the scholars of these two schools analyzed the working of language is considered to be the climax of the development of Abhidharma Buddhism in the Indian Buddhist scholastic world.

View full abstract

Lokappadipakasara (14^<th> century) is the Pali text describing the three lokas (three-fold division)-Sahkharaloka (the world of phenomena), Sattaloka (the sentient world), and Okasaloka (the cosmos). This text was written by Medhankara sangharaja, a Burmese monk who lived in fourteenth century. Since then, this text was transmitted widely on the tradition of Theravada countries such as Myanmar, Sri Lanka and Thailand. Many Khmer palmleaf manuscripts are extant in Thailand. However, there were problems in the transmission process on their tradition. A number of missing or additional descriptions are found. The purpose of this study is to compare the contents of Burmese, Sinhalese, Khmer palm-leaf manuscripts with the printed texts in Thailand and Sri lanka, in order to consider the pattern of quotation among them.

View full abstract

Though Islam is the dominant force, Bangladesh is a multi-cultural and multi-religious country. It is shared by Muslims, Hindus, Buddhists, Christians and some animists. The Buddhist community of Bangladesh consists of various ethnic communities, such as Barua, Chakma, Rakhaim, Marma, Tanchangya, Mro, Kheyang, Lusai etc. Except Barua, all other Buddhist communities live in Chittagong Hill Tracts (hereafter CHT), and known as Adivasi (aborigine). They have their own language, scripts, literature and folk culture. They follow Theravada Buddhism. CHT is adjacent to North Indian Boarder and Myanmar. From December 2011 to January 2012, I conducted an extensive field work jointly with Dr. Dilip Kumar Barua, Professor of the Department of Pali and Buddhist Studies, University of Dhaka, on Paritta rituals. It is noteworthy that foreigners are prohibited to enter CHT. It requires government permission. But I got the permission with the help of Rev. Pragyananda Thera, a famous monk of Chakma Community. As a result, I got the opportunity to collect the materials on Parittal Rituals observed by Buddhist ethnic groups of CHT. In this paper, through a case study, I will examine the method of Paritta ritual of these ethnic groups, and consider the belief that they hold for this rituals. Moreover, I will focus on the characteristics of there rituals comparing with those found in other Thearavada countries, especially in Thailand.

View full abstract

Gotama attained enlightenment by his own way, so he became a Buddha. But he was still kept in his own interest. Brahman changed his mind, and he decided to preach to people, and taught the way to the enlightenment. The tale of Brahma-ayacana is a kind of literature to tell that the compassionateness (karunnata) evolved the Buddha to the tathagata. The first sermon is called "tathagatena vuttd", and it led to the formation of the Buddhist Order (Bhikkhusanghci). According to the Mahakhandhaka of the Vinaya-pitaka, first the word 'tathagata' was adopted to describe a process of the evolution from a buddha kept in his own interest to the bhagavant with compassionateness to people of the world. The present writer considers that 'tathagata' is composed of tatha and gata, it means 'proceeded thus'. The word shows an evolution of the Buddha. Secondly 'tathagata' was used to signify that bhagavant. Then it became an epithet for him.

View full abstract

In the Pannasa-jataka transmitted in central Thailand, there are as many as eight stories of self-sacrifice (ajjhattika-dana), where a bodhisatta declares that he carries out his self-sacrifice not to get the achievement of a savaka or paccekabuddha but to attain omniscience. Such declaration is rare in the Pali Nikayas or their commentaries. In the same way, parallel or similar kinds of stories in the avadanas or jatakas transmitted in Sanskrit and Chinese do not refer to the disengagement from the achievement of a savaka or paccekabuddha, with the exception of the story of Kancanasara. Since the direct source of the bodhisatta's declarations including the reference to the achievement does not seem to exist in the Pali Nikayas or their commentaries, there is a possibility that the bodhisatta's declarations found in the Pannasajataka are derived from a very old origin which is shared with the story of Kancanasara.

View full abstract

Not only Buddhist deities but also indigenous Korean deities have been worshiped at Buddhist temples in Korea. The indigenous deities include mountain deities (山神), solitary saints (獨聖) and the Big Dipper (七星神). They have been worshipped since the early period of Korean history when Buddhism was introduced. Among these deities, mountain deities in particular had a significant impact on Buddhism in Korea. They probably began to be worshiped in Buddhist temples during the Baekje (百濟) era. Another important characteristic of Korean Buddhism is its adoption of the assembly of deities called shenzhong (Jp. sinshu神衆), who are said to have derived from the Huayuan jing (華嚴經). In the 20^<th> century, Buddhist monks claimed that in order to purify Buddhist faith, Buddhist and indigenous deities should be separated. However, despite their claim, ordinary people still remain syncretic in their faith, which makes it difficult to separate the two.

View full abstract

[in Japanese]

View full abstract

In the past, I analyzed the characteristics of Santi Asoke by referring to literature on Santi Asoke (cf. Moribe 1997, Moribe 2009). Of above-mentioned literature, noticeable studies were Akagi 1991 , Fukushima 1993, Jackson 1989a and Essen 2002. However, a full-scale study was only Essen 2002. Therefore, it seemed that a study of Santi Asoke was insufficient. But luckily, I got the book written by Marja-Leena Heikkila-Horn (Marja-Leena Heikkila-Horn 1997) quite recently. And when I finished reading the book, I determined to make a short report of the book. The book is a concise version of a doctoral dissertation written by Marja-Leena Heikkila-Horn on the basis of her fieldwork in Santi Asoke of Bangkok from October, 1994 to April, 1995. According to Marja-Leena Heikkila-Horn, in the past, Western scholars had little interest in Santi Asoke Buddhist group. And there was no voluminous book written in English. Besides, studies by scholars in the early days, such as Jackson, Olson and Taylor, were not based on sufficient fieldwork, and their interpretations of Santi Asoke, reflected the images of Santi Asoke seen by the leading monks in Thai Buddhism whom they studied. In this note, I will pick up and describe the following four subjects. (1) Santi Asoke's leader, Pothirak's home environment before becoming a Buddhist monk. (2) Relations and differences between Santi Asoke and mainstream Buddhist groups criticized by Santi Asoke. (3) Social classes which Santi Asoke's members belong to. (4) Why did Santi Asoke have to be legally banned?

View full abstract