Vibhajyavāda

Vibhajyavāda (Sanskrit; Pāli: Vibhajjavāda; traditional Chinese: 分別說部; ; pinyin: fēnbiéshuō-bù; Vietnamese: Phân biệt thuyết bộ, Phân tích bộ) is a term applied generally to groups of early Buddhists belonging to the Sthavira Nikāya, which split from the Mahāsāṃghika (due either to the former attempting to make the Vinaya stricter, or the latter wishing to reform it; see: Sthavira Nikāya main article) into two main groups: the Sarvāstivāda and the Vibhajyavāda, of which the latter are known to have rejected both Sarvāstivāda doctrines (especially the doctrine of "all exists") and the doctrine of Pudgalavada (personalism).

[1][2][3] During the reign of Ashoka, these groups possibly took part in missionary activity in Gandhara, Bactria, Kashmir, South India and Sri Lanka.

The word Vibhajyavāda may be parsed into vibhajya, loosely meaning "dividing", "analyzing" and vāda holding the semantic field: "doctrine", "teachings".

Thus, it would make sense that the term refers to "the Abhidhamma movement as an analytic approach to Dhamma in general, and as a critique of the ‘self’ in particular".

[9] The Vibhajyavādins rejected the Sarvāstivāda claim that all dhammas (principles, phenomena) exist in the past, present and future.

[2] The Sarvāstivāda Vijñānakāya states their position as defended by Moggaliputtatissa as: "The past and future are not; the present and the unconditioned exist.

The Vibhajyavādins held that at stream entry, understanding of the Four Noble Truths came at once (ekābhisamaya), while the Sarvāstivāda asserted that this happened only gradually (anupubbābhisamaya).

[18] According to LS Cousins, the precursor to these schools was probably involved in missionary activity around the time of Ashoka into the regions of Kashmir, Gandhara, Bactria, Andhra and Sri Lanka.

[17] The Theravādins hold that Vibhajyavāda was the favored doctrine during a Buddhist council that took place in Pataliputra under Ashoka.

[15] The Sarvāstivādin Abhidharma Mahāvibhāṣa Śāstra describes the Vibhajyavādins as being the type of heretics who "make objections, who uphold harmful doctrines and attack those who follow the authentic Dharma".