See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/283503884

The contextual interpretations of kilesas (defilements) in the Pali commentaries

Research · November 2015

DOI: 10.13140/RG.2.1.4173.0002

CITATIONS READS
0 782

1 author:

Medagampitiye Wijithadhamma
University of Sri Jayewardenepura
5 PUBLICATIONS   0 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

All content following this page was uploaded by Medagampitiye Wijithadhamma on 05 November 2015.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 The contextual interpretations of kilesas (defilements) in the Pali
commentaries
Medagampitiye Wijithadhamma

Abstract

The word ‘kilesa’ (defilements) is a well-known word in the canonical and commentarial
literature. There are different classifications and interpretations of kilesas. In the Abhidhamma
and later Pali literature, ten defilements are identified. This paper attempts to make a study of the
contextual interpretations of kilesas in the commentaries.

Introduction

Kilesas, in Buddhism, are mental states that cloud the mind and manifest in unwholesome
actions. Kilesas include states of mind such as anxiety, fear, anger, jealousy, desire, depression,
etc. Contemporary translators use a variety of English words to translate the term kilesas, such as
afflictions, defilements, destructive emotions, disturbing emotions, negative emotions, mind
poisons, etc. In the suttas, kilesa is often associated with the various passions that defile bodily
and mental states. However, in the later Pali sources, different classifications of kilesas are
mentioned. The most commonly mentioned is the following list of ten according to the
Abhidhamma. greed (lobha), hate (dosa), delusion (moha), conceit (mana), wrong views (ditthi),
doubt (vicikiccha), torpor (thina), restlessness (uddhacca), shamelessness (ahirika), recklessness
(anottappa). Though the Abhidhamma pitaka classified these ten kilesas, many commentaries
have been interpreted them according to the context. The contextual interpretations of kilesas in
the Pali commentaries were examined in this article by using the method of analysis, with
following three sub topics.

(1) Specific references to kilesas

The commentaries present various passages in which particular unwholesome dhammas are
specifically referred to as kilesas. In the Saṃyutta Nikāya commentary, avijjā is considered as
the heading of defilements (kilesasīsa) that destroys the path-consciousness (maggacitta) (SA I:
184). In the same commentary, avijjā is also referred to as the root (mūla) of defilements: “eva

1
anicca-sa-ena kilesna mūla-bhūtya avjjya chinnya sabba-kiles samugghta
gacchantī ti” (when avijj which is the root of kilesas is cut off by means of knowledge about
perception of impermanence, all the defilements are uprooted) (SA II: 332).
The five unwholesome dhammas are also regarded as the root defilements (mūlak
kiles) for other defilements:
Tattha chando ti disu chando nma pubbuppattik dubbala-tah. S rajetu na
sakkoti. Aparpara uppajjamn pana balava-tah rgo nma. so rajetu sakkoti.
dadndīni ktu asamatho. pubbuppattiko dubbala kodho doso nma. So
tanuktu samattho. Aprpuppattiko balava-kodho paigha nma. Moho pana
sammoha-vasena uppanno ana. Evam ettha pancahi padehi tiī akusala-mūlni
gahitni. Tesu gahitesu sabbe pi tammūlak kiles gahit’va honti. Chandargo ti v
pada-dvayena aha lobha-sahagata-cittuppd. Doso-paighanti pada-dvayena dve
domanassa-sahagata-cittuppd. Mohena lobha-dosa rahit dve uddhacca-sahagata-
cittuppd gahit ti. Eva sabbe’pi dvdasa citt uppd dassit’va honti (SA III: 64).

Herein, among desire etc., desire is a weak craving which arises at primary level. It is not
able to take delight in. However, the strong craving which arises again and again is lust; it
is able to engross. A weak anger is unable to make one act with weapon, etc. it is called
hatred. The strong anger which enables one to do such actions, and which arises again
and again is called aversion. However, delusion is the unknowing arisen by means of
deluding or confusing. In this way, herein, the three unwholesome roots are identified by
five words. In those three unwholesome roots, all kilesas rooted in them are also
included. Optionally, by the two words ‘chanda rgo’ the arising of eight types of
consciousness accompanied by lobar are implied. By the two words ‘doso paigha’ the
raisings of two types of consciousness by grief are implied. By the word ‘moha’ the
arising of types of consciousness are implied which are dissociated from lobha and dosa,
but associated with ‘uddhacca’ and ‘vicikicch’. Thus the arising of all the twelve types
of consciousness are referred to.

2
 This quotation clarifies two points: (i) even though craving and anger classified into two
modes respectively, these five terms eventually denote the three unwholesome roots that
represent all the kilesas rooted in them and (ii) they also optionally represent the arising of the
twelve types of unwholesome consciousness.
In the context of ‘na kuppati’, three kilesas (i.e. rga, dosa and moha) are also regarded
as mūlakilesas, and present one thousand and five hundred kilesas (diyahakilesasahassa) (SA
I: 187). The very same idea is also referred to in the context of ‘dihekahe’: “ among one
thousand and five hundred kilesas which are headed by rga, dosa and moha, when wrong view
(dihi) is being abandoned by the path of stream-entry, doubt (vicikicch) together with wrong
view is abandoned, and all the kilesas leading to the state a loss (apyagamanīy) are abandoned
together with dihnusaya and vicikicchnusaya by means of the co efficiency of
abandoning’’ (Mnd A I: 102).
With regard to the specific number ‘diyahakilesasahassa’ the Dhammasagani-
mūlaīk mentions as follows: out of eight hundred and one kilesas which are referred to in the
khuddaka-vibhaga (Vbh A: 465), excluding one hunted and eight modes of behaviors of
craving, the remaining kilesas and sixty two types of wrong views are doubled by means of the
arisen and unarisen states, and they constitute the grand total of one thousand five hundred and
ten. The amount of more or less to this figure is ducky neglected (Dhs mt (Vri): 17). Its anuīk
further clarifies that eight hundred and one kilesas are the total number, that is, from the seventy-
three mental factors beginning with ‘jtimada’ etc. set forth as monads (ekakavasena) up to the
six octodecades (ahrasavaena) beginning with ‘ajjhattikssa updya ahrasa
tahvicaritni’. Out of them, the remaining kilesas by excluding one hundred and eight modes
of behaviors of craving become six hundred and ninety three, and together with sixty two wrong
views as referred to in the Brahmajla sutta, they become seven hundred and fifty five kilesas
(Dhs A (Vri): 17-18). When multiplied by two (i.e. uppanna and anupanna) they become one
thousand five hundred and ten. This anuīk presents five other views to assess
diyahakilesasahassa. Those views seen to signify that this number of kilesas is the
approximate figure to denote all types of kilesas (Cp A (Vri): 4). Following table duly illustrates
this enumeration.

3
Table: Different counting on ‘diyahakilesasahassa’ in the Dhammasagai anuīk < (Dhs-a (Vri): 17-19) >

jtimado’ti din ekakavasena (73) ekantkusal (14)

kodho ca upanho cti din dukavasena (36) kusalbykatasdhra (25)
tīi akusalamūlnī’ti din catukkavasena (56) kusalattikasdhra (14)
pacorambhgiyni sayojannīti din pacakavasena upacaydidvaya eka katv sattavīsati rūpni (27)
(75) (14+25+14+27=80)
cha vivdamuūlnīti din chakkavasena (84) imesu bhvadvaye eka hapetv (80 – 7=79)
Satta anusayti din satthakavasena 49) ajjhattik, bhir (79 x 2 = 158)
aha kilesavatthūnīti din ahakavasena (64) ekekasmi dasanna dasanna kilesna uppajjanato asīti adhika
nava ghtavatthūnīti din navakavasena (81) diyahakilesasahassa honti.
dasa kilesavatthūnīiti din dasakavasena (70) (158 x 10 = 1580)
ajjhattikassuppdya ahrasa tahvicaritnīti din dvdasasu akusalacittuppdesu
(108) pahame vīsati dhamm, dutiye dvvīsati, tatiye vīsati, catutthe dvvīsati,
eva ekdhikesu ahasu kilesasatesu. pacame ekūnavīsati, chahe ekūnavīsati, sattame ekūnavīsati ahame
(73+36+105+56+75+84+49+64+81+70+108+=801) ekavīsati, navame ekūnavīsati. dasame ekavīsati, ekdasame soasa,
ses tenavutdhika chasata kiles (801- 108 = 693) dvdasame soasti sabbe akusalhamm
te brahmajlasuttgathi dvsahiy dihīhi saha chattisdhikni dve satni, ime chasu rammaesu pacceka
pacapasdhika sattasata honti : (693+62 = 755). chattisdhikni dv satni, sabbe soasdhikni cattri satni ca sahassa
*uppannnuppannabhvenadiguitni diyahakilesa hontiti evapi diyaha kilesasahassa veditabba.
sahassni dasdhikni honti. appaka pana ūnamadhika v (20+22+20+22+19+19+19+21+19+21+16+16 =236 x 6 = 1416)
na gaanūpaga hotīti diyahakilesasahassanti vutta Here, the total number is 234.
(755 x 2 = 1510) * (from Dhs m (Vri), p.17)
dvdasa – akusalacittuppdesu
pahame cha kiles, dutiye satta, tatiye cha, catutthe satta,
pacame cha, chatthe satta, sattame cha, ahame satta, arūpadhamm (53), rūprūpni (18) , ksadhtu (1), lakkhaarūpni (3):
navame paca, dasame cha, ekdasame paca, dvdasame (53+18+1+3= 75)
cattroti sabbe dvsattati, ajjhattabahiddhbhedato : (75 x2 = 150)
(6+7+6+7+6+7+6+7+5+6+5+4=72) ekekasmi dasa dasa kilestipi diyahakilesasahassa. (150x10=1500)
pacadvrik pacasu rūpdīsu rammaesu. (72 x 5 = 360) tath ettha vedana sukhindriydivasena pacavidha katv sattapasa
manodvrik pana chasu rammaesu. arūpadhamm, ahrsa rūprūpni cti pacasattati
(72 x 6 = 432) : ( 360 + 432 = 792) vipassanūpagadhamm ajjhattabahiddhbhedato pasasata honti. etesu
ajjhattabahiddhvisayatya catursīti adhika ekekasmi dasa dasa kilestipi diyahakilesahassa.
diyahakilesasahassa. (792 x 2 = 1584 (57+18+=7.5 75.x2 = 150.x10 = 1500)
rūprammadīni paca, avasesa rūpa vedan sa
sakhra via vasena paca dhammrammaak ses
cti dasa, te ajjhattabahiddhbhedato vīsati, paatti cti

4
ekavīsatiy rammaesu dvsattati dvsattati kilesti
dvdasdhika diyahakilesasahassa hoti.
(5+5 = 10 .10x2 = 20.20+1= 21.21x72=1512)

5
 In the sallekhaha a- niddesa, the Paisambhidmagga commentary deals
with the seventeen unwholesome dhammas along with their lakkhaas. In fact, these
seventeen unwholesome dhamms have been referred to as upakkilesas in the four
Nikyas. However, in the commentary period, they are designated as kilesas. First, the
commentary refers to the three kilesas as major kilesas (sīsakilesas) as follows:
rgo’ti rajanahena. doso’ti dussanahena. moho’ti
muyhanahena. rajanalakkhao rgo, dussanalakkhao doso, muyhahalakkhao
moho’ti ime tayo sīsakilese vatv, idni pabhedato sassento ‘Kodho’ti di ha (Ps A I:
362).
In the sense of delighting, it is called lust. In the sense of hating, it is called
hatred. In the sense of deluding, it is called delusion. Lust has the characteristic of
delighting; hatred has the characteristic of disliking; delusion has the characteristic of
deluding. After having referred to these three major defilements, now ‘anger’ etc. are said
while showing analytically.
The remaining fourteen factors are specified by lakkhaas follows (Ibid):
(i). kodha (anger) has the characteristic of kujjhana (irritation). Here, it is
intended as anger with the seven base.
(ii). upanha (enmity)has the characteristic of bearing enmity. It is nothing but
anger having attained a firm state.
(iii). makkha (contempt) has the characteristic of looking down upon other's
virtue. The meaning is wiping off (punchana) other’s virtue.
(iv). palsa (domineering) has the characteristic of interfering (yugaggha).
The meaning is to estimate other's virtue by way of interfering.
(v). iss (envy) has characteristic of diminishing other's accomplishment
(sampatti). The meaning is envying (usūyan).
(vi) macchariya (avarice) has the characteristic of concealing one's own
accomplishment. The meaning is ‘my wonderful possession should not be
of others’.
vi) my (deceit) has characteristic of concealing (paicchda) the sins
committed by one self. It is like my in the sense of concealing.

6
 (viii) saheyya (fraud) has the characteristic of stimulating non-existent
qualities in oneself. The meaning is the state of being crafty.
(ix) thambha (obstinacy) has the characteristic of swollen state
(uddhumtabhva) of consciousness. The meaning is the callous state
(thaddhabhva) of consciousness.
(x) srambha (presumption) has the characteristic of outdoing (karauttariya)
(xi) mna (conceit) has the characteristic of haughtiness (uati)
(xii) atimna (arrogance) has the characteristic of excessive haughtiness.
(xiii) mada (vanity) has the characteristic of intoxicated state.
xiv) pamda (negligence) has the characteristic of devoting of consciousness
(cittavosagga ) to the five codes of sensual Pleasure.

The commentary further mentions, ‘‘Thus, after having specifically distinguished

the separation (puthū) (See Ps I: 102) [from liberation] by means of defilements (kilesas)
; sabbe kiles is said in order to show cohesively all the said and other unsaid
defilements’’ (Ps A I: 362). In another context, the Mahniddesa commentary states, all
the kilesas mean all the unwholesome dhamms (sabbe kilesti sabbe pi akusal
dhamm)’’ (Mnd A I: 64)
In the Majjhima-nikya commentary, a passage signifies that the sixteen
uppakkilesas represent all the kilesas. After having clarified each of the sixteen
upakkilesas, the commentary remarks:
‘‘kasm pana Bhagav upakkilesa dassento lobha dikatv dassetī’ti. tassa
pahamuppattito. Sabbasattna hi yattha katthaci upparnnna antamaso
suddhvsabhūmiya pi, sabbapahama bhavanikantivasena lobho uppajjati
tato attano attano anurūpa paccaya paicca yathsambhava itare. Na ca ete
soase’va cittassa upakkiles. etena pana nayena sabbe’pi kilese gahit yeve
hontī’ti veditabba (M A I: 170).

However, why does the Blessed One, while explaining upakkilesas, begin with
greed? Because greed arises first. For wherever living beings appear even in the

7
 celestial plane of Suddhavsa, greed arises first by means of hankering for
existence. Then, according to the circumstance, other upakkilesas arise depending
on their own suitable conditions. These sixteen are not only upakkilesas of
consciousness, but all of the kilesas are implied thereby. Thus it should be
understood.

In the Aguttara-nikya commentary, ‘papaca’ is interpreted as the proliferation

of kilesas which are active by means of craving, wrong view and conceit, and which are
firm n their intoxicating mode (A A III: 348). Regarding ‘ahakramamakramn
nusaya’ it states: the view of conceiving ‘I am’ , the craving of conceiving ‘mine’, and
underlying tendency to conceit are kilesas belonging to one-self and others (A A II: 206).

(2) Collective references to kilesas in the commentaries

While dealing with kilesas collectively the commentaries present some significant
conceptual features. The Nettippakaraa commentary clarifies ‘dasa vatthuke
kilesapuje’.

‘dasa vatthuke kilesapuje’ti dasavidhakrae kilesasamūheti attho. tatth

kilespi kilesavatthu, kilesna paccayadhammpi kilesavatthu. tesu
kraabhvena purimasiddh kiles parato paresa kilesna paccayabhvato
kiles’pi kilesavatthu. ayonisomanasikro, ayonisomanasikraparikkhat ca
dhamm kilesuppttihetubhvato kilesappaccaypi kilesavatthūti dahabba.’
(Netti A (Vri): 319).

‘in the group of defilements with the ten bases’ means in the mass of defilements
with the tenfold cause. Herein the base of defilements’ means either defilements
or the causal factors of defilements. Among them the former defilements which
have accomplished the state of cause become the bases of defilements because
they become the condition of the other later defilements. It should be known that
the conditions of defilements also become the bases of defilements due to being

8
 the cause of the origin of defilements. In this case unwise attention and belonging
to unwise attention become the bases of defilements.

This quotation indicates that all the ten groups of unwholesome factors in the
Nettippakaraa are kilesas as well as kilesavatthus. The commentarial contribution is to
bring out and ‘ayonisomanasikra’ and ‘ayonisomanasikraparikkhat dhamm’ as
kilesapaccay (the conditions of defilements) in this particular context.
In dealing with ‘kilesabhūmi’ the same commentary regards it as ‘kilesatthna’ or
kilesvattha and reveals how the process of the four bhūmis (i.e. anusayabhūmi,
pariyuhnabhūmi etc.) is sequentially fulfilled as follows.
snusayassa pariyuhna jyatīti appahīnnusayassa paccayasamyoge
rgdayo pariyuhnavasena pavattanti. pariyuhito sayujjatīti yo
rgdīhi pariyuhitacitto, so kmargdīhi sayujjati nma. sayujjanto
updiyatīti yo kmargasayojandīhi sayutto. so kmupdndīni
akusalakammni ca updiyati (Ibid: 365).

‘in one who has anusaya, obsession is born’ means lust, etc, are active by means
of obsession when the condition of unabandoned underlying tendency is
combined. One who is obsessed is fettered' means one whose mind is obsessed by
lust, etc. is fettered by kmarga, etc. When fettered, he grasps' means one who
is fettered by the fetter of kmarga (lust for sensual pleasure) grasps the
grasping of kma (sensual pleasure) and unwholesome kamma.

In the course of elucidating the question as to which kilesas a noble one abandons
in the past the future or the present, the Paisambhidmagga commentary interprets
‘hetunirodha dukkhanirodho’ as follows.
kilesna bījabhūtassa santnassa anuppdanirodh angatakhandhabhūtassa
dukkhassa hetubhūtna kilesna anuppdanirodho hoti. eva dukkhassa
hetubhūtakilesna anuppadanirodh dukkhassa anuppdanirodho hoti (Ps A
III: 688-689).

9
 Due to the complete cessation of continuity in the form of seed belonging to
defilements, there is the complete cessation of kilesas which cause the suffering
of the future aggregates. Thus, from the complete cessation of defilements which
cause the suffering, there occurs the complete cessation of suffering.

The commentary further clarifies that this interpretation is to show the

abandoning of defilements that have got a plane (bhūmiladdha) (Ibid: 689).
According to commentaries, there is a difference between bhūmi (plane) and
bhūmiladdha (that which has got a plane). ‘Bhūmi’ means the five aggregates belonging
to the three planes of existence, which are the objects of insight. ‘Bhūmiladdha’
means a group of defilements (kilesajta) capable in those aggregates. Bhūmiladdha has
to be understood from the viewpoint of base (vatthu). It should be known that the group
of defilements is bhūmiladdha in the sense of not being abandoned, herein, when the
defilements are underlain (or inherent) in the sense of not being abandoned in someone’s
aggregates, only those aggregates of him, but not of others, become the base of those
defilements (Ps A I: 171. Also see Sn A I: 5).
Why the bhūmiladdha has to be understood in the sense of base (vatthu) is more
clearly illustrated in the account of the Suttanipta commentary and the Visuddhimagga.
In the case of the stream-enter (sotpanna), etc. when a given defilement that is the root
of the circle of rebirth has been abandoned by means of a given path in a given noble
person’s aggregates, then his aggregates are no longer called a ‘plane’ for such
defilements since his aggregates are no longer a base for defilements. But in an ordinary
man, the defilements that are the root of the circle of rebirth are not abandoned at all, and
hence whatever kamma he performs always becomes either wholesome or unwholesome.
So far he the circle goes on revolving around with kamma and defilement(s) as its
condition (Sn A I: 5-6). When a clansman feels repulsive towards the occurrence of
aggregates, he opts out to develop the four paths in his own continuity; then, the
continuity of his aggregates is unable to prolong the continuity for a subsequent
existence. It becomes now unproductive of future existence since all kinds of kamma
beginning with bodily kamma turn out to be merely functional. For the effect of the four

10
paths has entirely exterminated the defilements, the roots of the circle of rebirth. Without
grasping, he inevitably attaints the complete extinction with the cessation of the last
consciousness (Ibid: 6).
The Majjhima-nikya commentary reveals that the destruction of kilesas is
achieved not only through wisdom but also with the help of other factors of
enlightenment. It is said, “The wisdom cuts off defilements. It is not able to cut off
defilements only by its own nature. Just as an axe by itself is not able cut something that
is not to be cut off; it cuts off something depending on the energetic action of a person.
Similarly, without the six enlightenment factors, wisdom alone is not able to cut off
defilements (M A v: 96-97).”
(3) Kilesas as generalization of the other technical terms
In the etymological accounts of the term savas, the commentaries point out that
the etymologies are applicable to savas that stands for defilements (yattha kiles
sav’ti gacchanti) or savas stands for defilements that become the bases of dispute
(ettha vivdamūlabhūt kiles sav’ti gat) (Ibid I: 61). In the Apadna
commentary, ‘sabbsave’ is also interpreted as ‘skalakilese’ (Ap A I (Vri): 251). The
Majjhima-nikya commentary interprets ‘through the destruction of savas’ (savna
khay) as ‘through the destruction of all the kilesas by the path of Arahantship (M A I:
164).
In the Vibhaga commentary, paigha, vicikicch and uddhacca are referred to
as ‘balavakilesas’ (powerful defilements) whish occupy the position of craving (tah) in
the links of paiccasamuppda (Vbh A: 209-210). In the context of
anupdparinbbna, the Majjhima-nakya commentary explains two divisions of
updnas (gahanupdna and paccayupdna) (M A II: 156), and it signifies that any
dhammas associate with updnas is equated with defilements (kilesas).
While commenting on ‘paca jarata’, the Sayutta-nikya commentary
specifically refers to the five nīvaraas ‘conditions’ (paccay) of defilements: “when the
five hindrances are considered as ‘sleeping’, the five faculties are indeed
‘awakening’. However, only due to the five hindrances, one takes the impurity of

11
defilements because the former becomes the conditions of the latter (i.e. defilements) (SA
I: 25).
In the Itivuttaka commentary (Itv A I: 107), the ten sayojanas beginning with
kmarga are also regards as a group of defilements (kilesajta) that binds up living
beings to birth as well as ageing. In comprehensively interpreting those fetters through
two divisions, orika and anusahagata, the Paisambhidmagga commentary
identifies kmarga and paigha with methunarga and vypda that are regarded as
orik (the gross defilements) accordingly. It revels that both kmarga and paigha
become subtle to the once-returner in two ways: by the occasional origin and by the
slowness of obsession. For in the case of the once-returner, these two kilesas do not arise
frequently as in the case of the ignorant ordinary person.

Conclusion

Based on the information cited here from the commentaries, I have made an attempt to
identify the contextual interpretations of the defilements. There are specific and collective
references to kilesas in the commentaries and they have been generalized with the other
technical terms such as savas and nīvaraas by the commentators.

ABBREVIATIONS
AA - Aguttara-nikya Ahakath
Ap A - Apadna Ahakath
BPS - Buddhist Publication Society
Cp A - Cariy Pitaka Ahakath
Dhs A - Dhammasagani Ahakath
Itv A - Itivuttaka Ahakath
MA - Majjhima-nikya Ahakath
Mnd A - Mahniddesa Ahakath
Netti A- Nettippakaraa Ahakath

12
 Ps - Paisambhidmagga
Ps A - Paisambhidmagga Ahakath
PTS - Pali Text Society
SA - Syutta - nikya Ahakath
Sn A - Suttanipta Ahakath
Vbh A - Vibhaga Ahakath

REFERENCES
Primary Sources
Aguttara-nikya Ahakath, Vol. I (1968). ed. M. Walleser and H. Kopp, London,
PTS.
—. Vol. III (1966). ed. H. Kopp, London, PTS.
Apadana Commentary, (1988), ed. C.E. Godakumbura, London, PTS.
Cariyapitaka Commentary (Paramatthadipani VII), (1939), ed. D.L. Barua, London, PTS.
Itivuttaka Commentary, ed. M.m. Bose, Vol. I (1977), London, PTS.
Majjhima-nikya Ahakath, Vol. I (1983); ed. J.H. Woods and D. Kosambi, London,
PTS.
—. Vol. II (1979) ed. J.H. Woods and D. Kosambi, London, PTS.
—. Vol. IV (1977), ed. I.B. Horner, London, PTS.
Maha Niddesa Commentary, (1980), ed. Ven. A.P. Buddhadatta, Vol. II & London, PTS.
Patisambhidamagga, (1979), ed. A.C. Taylor, London, PTS.
Patisambhidamagga Commentary, ed. C.V. Joshi, Vol. I (1933), London, PTS.
Suttanipta Ahakath, (Paramatthajotika II) (1989),ed. Helmer Smith, London, PTS.
Syutta - nikya Ahakath, Vol. I (1929, 1977), ed. F.L. Woodward, London, PTS.
—.Vol. II (1932, 1977), ed. F.L. Woodward, London, PTS.
—.Vol. III (1937, 1977), ed. F.L. Woodward, London, PTS.
Vibhanga Commentary, (1980), ed. Ven. A.P. Buddhadatta, London, PTS.
Electronic Devices as Primary Sources
Chatthasangayana Tipitaka CD Rom, Vipassana Institute, Igatpuri, India.
Secondary Sources

13
 Bodhi, Bhikkhu. (1999). A Comprehensive manual of Abhidhamma. Kandy, BPS.
Weeraratne, W.G. (1999). Encyclopedia of Buddhism Vol. VI, Sri Lanka, The
Government of Sri Lanka.
Sumanapala, G.D. (2005). Abhidhamma Interpretations of Early Buddhist Teachinges,
Singapore, Buddhist Research Society.

Ven. Dr. Medagampitiye Wijithadhamma

B.A.(Hons) in Pali, M.A. in Linguistic, Ph.D. in Pali (Peradeniya)
Lecturer,
Department of Pali and Buddhist Studies,
University of Sri Jayewardenepura,
Gangodawila, Nugegoda
Sri Lanka.
yatagama3@yahoo.com

14

View publication stats