Lably
Skip to content

Moggaliputta-Tissa

Indian Buddhist monk and scholar (c. 327–247 BCE)

  • 7 min read
  • 2 chapters

Related on Lably

Through Buddhism, Magadha and India

Moggaliputtatissa is seen by the Theravada Buddhist tradition as the founder of "Vibhajjavāda", the tradition of which Theravada is a part as well as the author of the Kathāvatthu. He is seen as the defender of the true teaching or Dhamma against corruption, during a time when many kinds of wrong view had arisen and as the force behind the Ashokan era Buddhist missionary efforts.

The Sri Lankan Buddhist philosopher David Kalupahana sees him as a predecessor of Nagarjuna in being a champion of the Middle Way and a reviver of the original philosophical ideals of the Buddha.

Overview

Evidence from various Buddhist sources show that Moggaliputtatissa seems to have been an influential figure who lived during the time of emperor Ashoka. He is associated with the Third Buddhist councils and with the missionary work which led to the spread of Buddhism during the reign of Ashoka. He also seems to have been a staunch critic of certain Buddhist doctrinal views, mainly Sarvāstivāda (an eternalist theory of time), Pudgalavāda ("personalism") and Lokottaravāda ("transcendentalism"). Because of this, he is seen as one of the founders and defenders of the Theravada, which to this day rejects these three doctrines as unorthodox deviations from the original teaching of the Buddha Dhamma. Theravada sources state that with the aid of Moggaliputtatissa, Ashoka was able to purge the Buddhist Sangha of numerous heretics.

Theravada sources, especially the Kathāvatthu, also explain these Buddhist doctrinal debates in detail. Bhante Sujato also notes how the Sarvāstivāda Abhidharma text called the Vijñānakāya contains a section titled the "Moggallāna section" which contains arguments against the theory of "all exists" from "Samaṇa Moggallāna". The Śāripūtraparipṛcchā, a text of the Mahāsaṅghikas, also mentions a figure by the name of "Moggallāna" or "Moggalla-upadesha" (Chinese: 目揵羅優婆提舍) as the founder of "the Dharmaguptaka school, the Suvarṣaka school, and the Sthavira school." According to Sujato, it is likely that this is a variant rendering of Moggaliputtatissa.

According to Johannes Bronkhorst however, the current historical evidence shows that the main issues discussed at the Third Council of Pataliputra, which led to the expulsion of monks from the sangha were actually issues of Vinaya (monastic discipline), not doctrine.

Authorship of the Kathāvatthu

Certain Theravada sources state that Moggaliputtatissa compiled the Kathāvatthu, a work which outlines numerous doctrinal issues and views and lays out the orthodox Theravada positions.

Bhante Sujato, in his study of the Buddhist sectarian literature, notes how the passages depicting the Third council in the Sudassanavinayavibhāsā does not mention the compilation of the Kathāvatthu by Moggaliputtatissa, but that later works such as the Samantapāsādikā and Kathāvatthu-aṭṭhakathā add this attribution. He concludes that the attribution of the Kathāvatthu to Moggaliputtatissa "are interpolations at a late date in the Mahāvihāra, presumably made by Buddhaghosa." According to Sujato, this work could not have been composed at the time of the third council "for it is the outcome of a long period of elaboration, and discusses many views of schools that did not emerge until long after the time of Aśoka." Nevertheless:

...there is no reason why the core of the book should not have been started in Aśoka's time, and indeed K. R. Norman has shown that particularly the early chapters have a fair number of Magadhin grammatical forms, which are suggestive of an Aśokan provenance. In addition, the place names mentioned in the text are consistent with such an early dating. So it is possible that the main arguments on the important doctrinal issues, which tend to be at the start of the book, were developed by Moggaliputtatissa and the work was elaborated later.

Upagupta

According to John S. Strong, numerous parallels between the stories told about Upagupta in the northern tradition and Moggaliputtatissa in the southern tradition have led various scholars such as L.A. Waddell and Alex Wayman to conclude that they are the same person. Rupert Gethin writes:

As has long been recognised, there are striking parallels in the stories of Moggaliputta Tissa and Upagupta. Both are closely associated with Asoka as important monks in his capital, yet Pali sources know of no Upagupta just as northern sources know of no Moggaliputta Tissa. Is it plausible that two monks of such importance and eminence should be completely forgotten by the other tradition? Of course, one possibility is that Moggaliputta Tissa and Upagupta are one and the same. Yet this makes little sense of the narrative differences. While Upagupta shares with Moggaliputta Tissa a narrative association with Aśoka, Upagupta does not help Aśoka expel non-Buddhist ascetics from the Saṅgha, he does not preside over a third council, and he does not recite the Kathāvatthu. Rather than seeing the story of Upagupta as somehow corroborative evidence that Moggaliputta Tissa was associated with Asoka in the manner described in the Samantapāsādikā, it seems more reasonable to see the details of the stories that associate figures such as Moggaliputta Tissa, Upagupta and Mahinda with Asoka as part of a more general strategy to enhance the reputation and prestige of these teachers and their lineages.

Influence

In Theravada Buddhism, Moggaliputtatissa is seen as a heroic figure of the Ashokan era, who purified the Sangha of non-Buddhists and heretical views as well as the leader of the Sangha during the spread of Buddhism throughout South Asia, most importantly to Sri Lanka.

The Sri Lankan Buddhist philosopher David Kalupahana saw Moggaliputtatissa's main philosophical contribution as the "elimination of absolutist and essentialist or reductionist perspectives" which were incompatible with the original Buddhist philosophy. He also saw Moggaliputtatissa as a precursor to Nagarjuna, in that both were successful in defending the middle way approach which avoids both eternalism and nihilism and both defended the doctrine of the insubstantiality of dharmas (dharma nairātmya).

Sign in to keep reading

One more chapter is free with a Lably account.

More in Notable people