112 Journal of the Asiatic Society of Bengal. [N.S., XV, 
He, on the contrary, confined himself to bringing out the inner 
significance and true philosophical bearing of Buddha’s first 
principles. 
Then we have to make our acquaintance with Thera 
Mahakotthitha, who was an authority next to none but Buddha 
himself on Patisambhida or methodology of Buddha’s analytical 
system. He gives us the characteristic marks or specific differ- 
ences of current a sean terms signifying the various elements 
of experience. e warns us at the same time against a possible 
misconception. reat understanding, perception, sensation 
and so forth are not entities. They are not dissociated, but all 
are inseparably associated ® in reality. The first part of Maha- 
kotthitha’s explanation may be said to be the historical founda- 
tion of the Lakkhanahara in the Nettipakarana, of some pas- 
sages in the Milinda-Pafiho * in the commentaries * of Buddha- 
ghosa; we have similiar contributions from Maggallana. Ananda, 
Dhammadinna and Khema, but we need not multiply instances. 
A careful examination of the contents of the second book 
of the Abhidhammapitaka has proved beyond doubt that there 
is no hard and fast line between the Sutta andthe Abhidhamma 
Pitakas, the division resting mainly upon a difference of modus 
operandi. The Abhidhamma method was based upon, and 
followed closely in the line of, the Sutta a rape which is 
evidently earlier. It goes without saying that the spans 
between the two methods is not only one of < ee, but a 
times, one of kind. In spite of the fact that the Abhidhamma 
exposition is direct, definite and methodical, we cannot s 
that in all cases its value is greater than the Sutta teas 
tion. There will always be a difference of opinion among Bud- 
dhist scholars as to whether the Abhidhamma books contain 
the genuine words of Buddha Gotama.’ It is nevertheless 
certain that the major part of that literature is based upon the 
teachings and expositions of the great teacher. There may be 
a Sariputta or some other unseen hands at work behind the 
scene, but on the whole, the credit, as history eae it, belongs 
ultimately to Buddha himself. The whole of the Abhidhamma 
Pitaka has been separately classed by Buddhaghosa as Veyyaka- 
rana or Exposition. We are told that this class comprises also 
the gathaless or prose suttas which are not found in the, re- 
maining eight classes of early Buddhist literature.6 The fore- 
going discussion has shown that the Vedallas need not be 
1 Pajanati pajanatiti...... tasma pafifiava ti Misia 
Vijanati vijanatiti...... tasm4 vififananti vucca 
es jhima Nikaya, I, oe 292, 
2 Ibid.—Ime dhammA samsattha& no visamsattha.... . 
: Malinda Paaho, p. 62. (Edited by ee. rend 
+ e.g. Sumangala-vilasini, 1, pp. 62-6. 
5 See for a learned discussion on ae subject among the Theras, 
Atthasélini, ts 
6 Suma ngala-vilasini I, p. 324; Atthas@lini, pp. 25-26. 
