Vasubandhu and the Yogacarabhumi - Yogacara Elements in the Abhidharmakosabhasya

Vasubandhu and the YogCicCirabhumi YogCicCira Elements in the Abhidharmako.§abhCi�ya

SruDIA PHILOLOGICA BUDDHICA Monograph Series XVIII

Vasubandhu and the Yogacarabhumi Yogacara Elements in the Abhidharrnakosabha�ya

Robert Kritzer

Tokyo The International Institute for Buddhist Studies of The International College for Postgraduate Buddhist Studies 2005

Vasubandhu and the Yogacarabhumi Yogacara Elements in the Abhidharmakosabha�ya

Robert Kritzer

Tokyo The International Institute for Buddhist Studies of The International College for Postgraduate Buddhist Studies 2005

Published by the International Institute for Buddhist Studies of the ICPBS:

5-3-23 Toranornon, Minato-ku, Tokyo 105-0001, Japan

© Robert Kritzer 2005

First published

2005

Printed in Japan by Sanyosha Co., Ltd, Tokyo

All rights reserved Apart from any fair dealing for the purpose of private study, research, criticism or review, no part of the book may be reproduced or translated in any form, by print, photoprint, microform or any other means without written permission. Enquiries should be made to the publishers.

ISBN

4-906267-51-3

Correspondel(lce regarding all editorial matters should be sent to the Director of the International Institute for Buddhist Studies in Tokyo.

Contents Acknowledgements

ix

Introduction

xi

I.

II.

The Yoga.ca.rabhami

xii

The AbhidhannakosabhafYa

xx

Methodology and Results

xxxi

Methodology

xxxi

Distribution and General Characterization of Results

III.

xxxiii

Passages from the Abhidhannakosabha�ya and Related Passages from the Yoga.ca.rabhumi

1

Chapter 1

Dha.tunirde§a

2

Chapter 2

Indriyanirde§a

Chapter 3

Lokanirde§a

132

Chapter 4

Kannanirde§a

172

Chapter 5

Anusayanirdesa

268

Chapter 6

Ma.rgapudgalanirde§a

346

Chapter 7

lfla.nanirde§a

372

Chapter 8

Sama.pattinirde§a

384

36

Concordance of Passages from the Yoga.ca.rabhumi

391

Bibliography

397

Index

407

vii

Acknowledgments

I would like to thank Professor Yamabe Nobuyoshi for his constant advice and encouragement at every stage of my project. Both he and Professor Fukuda Takumi patiently explained innumerable difficult Sanslait and Chinese passages. Elizabeth Kenney provided me with many invaluable suggestions regarding the work as a whole. Ian Shortreed of Mercury Software produced the camera-ready copy. I am grateful to Professor Florin Deleanu for suggesting that I publish my work in the series Studia Philologica Buddhica and to the International Institute for Buddhist Studies for accepting my manuscript. The Japanese Ministry of Education funded an early stage of my research, and Kyoto Notre Dame University generously subsidized the cost of preparing the manuscript.

ix

1.

Introduction

Traditionally, Sarvastivada, Sautrantika , and Yogacara are considered to be three clearly separated Buddhist schools. Sarvastivada is seen as highly conservative, HInayanist, and obsessed with its detailed analysis of existence and experience. S autrantika is supposedly more progressive and more concerned with the Buddha' s spiritual message and is said to have Mahayanist tendencies. Finally, Yogacara is firmly on the side of Mahayana, having absorbed the basic Mahayana teaching of dharmasunyata (the emptiness of all the entities comprising existence), which informs its characteristic doctrine of idealism. Fortunately, it would be difficult to find a contemporary scholar of Buddhism who subscribes to such a simplistic scheme. Today, we no longer take for granted that Mahayana Buddhism is more advanced than or superior to HInayana, an appellation that has been largely superseded by non-derogatory ones such as " Sravakayana," and the very definition of Mahayana is coming under scrutiny (see Silk 2002). The occurrence of the term S autrantika before Vasubandhu has been questioned (KatO 1989: 10 1 -109), as has the existence of Sautrantika as an actual school (Kritzer 2003a). Moreover, early Y ogacara texts have been shown to rely on the Mfilasarvastivadin Agama tradition (Schrnithausen 1970), and a connection between meditators such as An Shih-kao, who were perhaps forerunners ofYogacara, and Sarvastivada has been suggested (Deleanu 1993 : 17; Yamabe 1997). Still, traces of the traditional rigid classifications linger in our minds, especially since the sources for historical information about Buddhist schools and their founders (for example Vasumitra' s Samayabhedoparacanacakra and Paramartha' s biography of Vasubandhu) accept these classifications so completely. Preconceptions regarding Sarvastivada, S autrantika, and Yogacara are a particular obstacle in the study of Vasubandhu, the renowned fifth century philosopher (or was it the fourth century? or were there two Vasubandhus, one in each century?), because his name is associated with all three schools.

xi

xii This book is a study of one of Vasubandhu' s works, the Abhidhanna­ kosabha�ya, which he is said to have written after he had become disillusioned with Sarvastivada and while he favored S autrantika, but before he converted to Maha­ yana and became a Yogacara Beginning with Hakamaya' s seminal article ( 1 986), Japanese scholars have been finding evidence that Vasubandhu sometimes relies on the Yogiiciirabhami, supposedly a Mahayana text, in his criticisms of Sarvastivada. These discoveries raise doubts about the actual course of Vasubandhu' s career. My systematic comparison of these two texts shows for the first time the extent of Vasubandhu' s dependence on the Yogiiciirabhumi. In order to complete this project, I have extensively referred to the *Nyiiyiinusiira, Sa�ghabhadra' s commentary o n the Abhidharmakosabhii�ya. Below, I introduce the relevant texts and explain the significance of my results. The Yogiiciirabhiimi General Description of the Text

Although the Yogiiciirabhumi is one of the most prominent early texts asso­ ciated with the Yogacara school, there is nothing even approaching a complete translation in a western language / nor is there a comprehensive monograph on the text. There are several reasons for this, one of which is the sheer length of the work: the Chinese translation is about six hundred TaishO pages. Furthermore, although virtually the entire Yogiiciirabhumi also exists in Tibetan translation, the Sanskrit text is only partially extant. Perhaps most daunting is the fact that the structure of the Yogiiciirabhumi is extremely complicated, and even the individual sections appear to consist of various chronological layers. In what follows, I can hope to give only a very general description of the structure and contents of the text and show its place in Yogacara literature. It is often assumed that two sutras, the Sarrzdhinirmocanasutra and the Mahiiyiiniibhidhannasutra, constitute the earliest Yogacara texts. However, Schrnithausen argues that at least some portions of the Yogiiciirabhumi predate both of these sutras ( 1 987: 1 1 - 1 2) as well as the three siistras associated with Maitreya (Mahayiinasutriilarrzkiira, Madhyiintavibhaga, and Dhannadhannatiivibhiiga) and the three siistras by Asanga (Hsien-yang sheng-chiao [un, Abhidhannasamuccaya, and Mahayiinasarrzgraha) ( 1 969a: 8 1 9-822). A final group of early Yogacara texts includes six siistras by Vasubandhu (Vyiikhyiiyukti, Kannasiddhiprakaral}a, Pratftya­ samutpiidavyiikhyii, Paiicaskandhaka, Virrzsatikii, and Trirrzsikii). The influence of the Yogiiciirabhi1mi is particularly evident in the Hsien-yang

1 An English translation of Hsiian-tsang' s Chinese translation is planned Tripitaka translation series but has not yet appeared.

� the BDK

xiii

sheng-chiao lun arid the Abhidhannasamuccaya, both of which on occasion quote from or closely paraphrase it. In the Mahiiyiinasal!lgraha and the Tril!lsikii, concepts from the Yogiiciirabhiimi are developed more systematically. In contrast to these works by Asailga, the Maitreya texts contain terms such as abhiitaparikalpa that do not appear in the Yogiiciirabhiimi (Schmithausen 1 987: 98-99), while they do not mention iilayavijfiiina. Furthermore, they were influenced by Tathagatagarbha ideas (Keenan 1 99 3 : 204) . Nevertheless, Schrnithausen asserts that the Maitreya texts "presuppose some elements" from portions of the Yogiiciirabhiimi ( 1 987 : 260-26 1 n. 98). As the title indicates, the Yogiiciirabhiimi deals with the stages (bhiimi) of Buddhist practice. The first section of the text, the MaulfBhiimi, 2 includes seventeen stages, and essentially the entire section exists in manuscript form. However, the S anskrit texts of only some of these stages have been edited. In Table 1 , I list only the editions of complete bhiimis. A complete account of published versions of all portions of the Sanskrit text can be found in Silk 200 1: 153- 1 5 8 . Hattori aptly characterizes the contents o f the Maulf Bhiimi: "The Yogiiciira­ bhiimi enumerates, classifies, and explains all elements that relate to the practice of each of the seventeen stages in the same manner as that of the Abhjdharma treatises" ( 1 987: 525)? However, the organization according to stages is not typical of the extant abhidharma texts, and it leads to a good deal of repetition, since similar topics often pertain to more than one stage. An examination of the Chinese translation shows that the individual chapters vary considerably in length. The two longest are the Bodhisattvabhiimi and the Sriivakabhiimi, both of which seem to have also existed as separate texts. At eighty-three Taisho pages, the shorter of these two, the Sriivakabhiimi, is considerably more than twice as long as the combined third, fourth, and fifth chapters (the Savitarkiidi-bhiiml), 4 which comprise the third longest section. Several other bhiimis are only one or two Taisho pages long. The second section, the Vini§Cayasal!lgrahal)� is not extant in S anskrit,

2 Until recently, the S anskrit title of the first section of the text was unclear (see Schrnithausen 1969: 17- 1 8 n. 4). However, Matsuda has discovered a reference to maulyiil!l bhiimau in a Sanskrit fragment of the Viniscayasal!lgrahal)! ( 1988: 1 8), leading Schrnithausen to adopt Maull Bhiimi as the best way of referring to this section (2000: 245).

3 Among others who make similar observations regarding the abhidharma-like nature of the Yogiiciirabhiimi are Wayman ( 1 96 1 : 45) and Rahula ( 1980: xiv). 4 For convenience, I use the designatiolJ Savitarkiidi-bhiimi to refer to the Savitarkii Saviciirii Bhiimi, Avitarkii Viciiramiitrii Bhiimi, and Avitarkiiviciirii Bhiimi.

XIV

although a few manuscript fragments exist.5 In addition to the Tibeta.T1 and Hslian­ tsang' s

5 The St. Petersburg fragments contain a portion corresponding to Yogilcilrabhamir' zi 3 1a5-59b2; T. 1579: 589b19-600c10 (Matsuda 1988). Furthermore, Matsuda has edited a folio of a manu�cript in Kathmandu containing a portion of the Smrzdhinirnwcanasiltra as quoted in the Vini§Cayasaf[!grahal)z, corresponding to T. 1579: 728c16-730c21 (1995).

xv Table 1 6 Stage

Edition(s)

1. Paficavijfiiinakiiyasamprayuktii Bhiimi 2. Manobhiimi 3 . Savitarkii Saviciirii Bhiimi 4. Avitarkii Viciiramiitrii Bhiimi 5. A vitarkiiviciirii Bhiimi 6. Samiihitii Bf!iimi 7. Asamiihitii Bhiimi 8. Sacittikii Bhiimi

Yogiiciirabhiimi:7 3 - 1 0 Yogiiciirabhiimi: 1 1 -72 Yogiiciirabhiimi: 73-232 Yogiiciirabhiimi: 73-232 Yogiiciirabhiimi: 73-232

9. Acittikii Bhiimi 10. Srutamayf Bhiimi 1 1 . CintiimayfBhiimi 12. Bhiivaniimayf Bhiimi 1 3 . Sriivakabhiimi 14. Pratyekabuddhabhiimi 1 5 . Bodhisattvabhiimi 1 6 . Sopadhikii Bhiimi 1 7 . Nirupadhikii Bhiimi

Wayman 1 960, 1984 (Schmitbausen 1 987: 220-222) Wayman 1 960, 1984 (Schmitbausen 1987: 220-222)

Sriivakabhiiml� Wayman 1 960 Bodhisattvabhiimi (Dutt); Bodhisattvabhiimi (Wogihara) Schmithausen 1 9 9 1 Schmitbausen 1 9 9 1

6 I have followed Wayman (196 1 : 43) in listing th e names of th e Bhiimis as they appear in Bhattacharya's text (Yogiiciirabhiimi: 3.7-12). Note that the third, fourth, and fifth bhiimis are not divided in the text Below, I refer to them as Savitarkiidi-bhiimi. Also, in the Tibetan translation, the Sriivakabhiimi andBodhisattvabhiimi are contained in separate volumes from the remainder of the MaulfBhiimi.

7 Bhattacharya' s edition of the first five bhiimis. 8 Shukla' s edition. A partial edition is found in Wayman 1 96 1 . The Sriivakabhiimi study group at TaishO University (TaishO Daigaku Sago Bukkyo KenkyUjo Shomonji Kenkyillcai *JE*'¥*,i:il-1��1iJfYi;pJfJl'fr.u:lill1iJfYi;f;;) has started publishing a new edition witb a Japanese translation. In addition to some portions published in periodicals (see Silk 2001 : 156), the first chapter of the text has appear$!d in book form (TaishO Daigaku Sago Bukkyo KenkyUjo ShOmonji Kenkyillcai 1 998).

xvi

Chinese translation, there is also a partial translation by Paramartha entitled Chueh­ ting tsang lun i*'JE��ifu' (T. 1 5 84). 9 Wayman describes the Viniscayasal'J'lgrahal}f as "a commentary on the seventeen bhiimis in their order" ( 1 96 1 : 43) ; in fact, as is noted in both the Chinese (T. 1579: 694c 1 6) and the Tibetan translations (yogiiciira­ bhiimi(" zi 300a6), the Pratyekabuddhabhiimi is not commented on in the Viniscaya­ sal'J'lgrahal}l. Wayman ' s description essentially agrees with that of Ui, who, relying on the commentary ofJinaputra (Tsui-sheng-tzu ��+), 10 says that in the Viniscaya­ sal'J'lgrahal}lvarious obscure but important points from the Maull Bhiimi are examined and authoritative explanations are given, hence the word viniscaya in the title ( 1 9 5 8 : 1 0) . The order of the remaining three sections differs between the Chinese (* Vivaral}asal'J'lgrahal}� Paryiiyasal'J'lgrahal}f, Vastusal'J'lgrahal}i) and the Tibetan editions (Vastusal'J'lgrahal}� Paryiiyasal'J'lgrahal}f, * Vivaral}asal'J'lgrahal}l). 1 1 These sections, too, are not extant in Sanskrit. 1 2 The *Vivaral}asal'J'lgrahalJ-f and Paryiiya­ sal'J'lgrahalJ-f are both very short, ten and twelve Taisho pages. Again relying on Jinaputra, Ui summarizes the contents of these sections : the *Vivaral}asal'J'lgrahalJ-f 9 The contents of this text correspond to the first part of the Vini§Cayasal'J'lgrahalJ-l on the Paficavijfiiinakiiyamanobhiimi ( Yogiiciirabhiimir' zi 1al -60b7; T. 1579: 579a8601 a25). 10 Yu-ch 'ieh shih-ti lun shih ffiii11JoajjJ±1!!. �ifu'flJ (T. 1 580). 11 The Tibetan translation actually contains a sixth section, *Vinayasal'J'lgrahal}f, between the Vastusal'J'lgrahal}f and the P aryiiyasal'J'lgrahalJ-f. In the Chinese translation, most of this section is included in the Vastusal'J'lgrahal}f, although, as far as I can tell, the first several folios of the Tibetan *Vinayasal'J'lgrahal}l(Yogiiciirabhiimi,:yi 1 a 1 -5a8) do not correspond to anything in the Chinese. The corresponding portion in the Chinese begins at T. 1579: 868c6. The end of the *Vinayasal'J'lgrahalJ-l (Yogiiciirabhiimi,:yi 27a2) coincides with T. 1579: 877c2. The Tibetan text abbreviates a list of definitions of five types of powers after the second item (bsam pa 'i stobs, i Ie Ii :tt�1J), while the Chinese goes on to define all five items (through T. 1579: 877c 17). The Sanskrit titles of the *Vinayasal'J'lgrahal}l and the *Vivaral}asal'J'lgrahal}f are not attested. Hakamaya proposes * Vyiikhyasal'J'lgrahal}f- instead of * Vivaral}asal'J'lgrahal}l (200 1 : 89). For the remaining titles, see Schrnithausen 1 969: 1 8 ns. 5-8. 1 2 Matsuda has identified and edited a one-folio fragment of the Paryiiyasal'J'lgrahal}f that is kept in Kathmandu (1 994). In the same article, he also reconstructs a portion of the text, identilies the siitras from which the words under discussion in the text are drawn, and shows the significance of this little-s tlfdied section of the Yogiiciira­ bhiimi.

xvii

describes in detail the principles for interpreting scripture; the Paryiiyasaf(tgrahmJf collects, classifies, and explains synonyms found in the satras; the Vastusaf(tgrahmJf explains all the significant contents of the tripi!aka (1958: 9). The Vastusaf(tgrahm:Zfis by far the longest and most important of these last three sections. In the Chinese translation, it consists of three main parts, concerning siitra

(ch 'i-ching shih �*,¥$ *Siltravastu), 1 3 vinaya (tiao-fu shih �ftlJ1:71:$ * Vinayavastu), 1 4 and abhidhanna (pen-mu shih *£;1:$ *Miitrkiivastu)Y The [lIst and longest part is to a large extent a commentary on the Saf(tyuktiigama (Mukai 1985). =

=

=

Composition and Authorship

Traditionally, the Yogiiciirabhilmi is considered to be the work of a single author: Maitreya, according to the Chinese translation; Asanga, according to Tibetan sources. However, Chinese sources say that Maitreya descended from heaven to transmit the Yogiiciirabhilmi to Asanga, so in both traditions the text is closely associated with Asari.ga Some modem scholars, notably Wayman (1989: 201c202) and Mukai (see Schrnithausen 1987: 183), insist that Asari.ga was the sole author of the entire Yogiiciirabhilmi. Others, like Hakamaya, maintain that Asari.ga was at least the compiler of the text (see Schrnithausen 1987: 183). However, Schrnithausen thinks that the text is a compilation of material that varies considerably in age and that the authors and compilers cannot be identified (most recently, 1987: 13-14, 184-185). Many scholars today agree with Schrnithausen on this point, including me (see Kritzer 1999: 13-17 for a more detailed discussion of this issue). Among both those who insist that Asanga alone composed the Yogiiciirabhilmi and those who believe that it is a compilation, there is some disagreement about the chronological order of the various sections. Wayman states that Asanga composed the text as follows: 1) the Sriivakabhilmi and the Samiihitii Bhilmi when he was very young; 2) the Paryiiyasaf(tgraha, the Vastusaf(tgrahalJf, the Srutamayf Bhilmi the Cintiimayf Bhilmi, and the Bhiivaniimayz Bhilmi before being converted to Mahayana; 3) the Bodhisattvabhilmi, the remainder of the Maulz Bhilmi, and the Vinitcayasaf(tgrahalJz after his conversion (Wayman 1989: 203). According to Schrnithausen, there are three main layers in the following chronological order: 1) parts of the Maulz Bhilmi, including the Sriivakabhilmi and the Bodhisattvabhilmi, and the Vastusaf(tgrahalJf; 2) the remainder of the Maulz Bhilmi; 3) the Vinitcaya-

1 3 T. 1579: 772b16-868b22. This corresponds to the entire Tibetan Vastusaf(tgrahalJf

(Yogiiciirabhilmi,:'i 143al-381b6).

14 T. 1579: 868c6-878a24. As mentioned in note 11, the [lIst portion (through T.

1579: 877c22) corresponds to the majority of the Tibetan *Vinayasaf(tgrahaIJf (Yogiiciira­ bhilmi,: yi 5a8-27a2).

1 5 T. 1579: 878a25-8 81c2. This part is entirely lacking in the Tibetan.

xviii

salJ1.grahm:lf ( 1 987: 14). Aramaki, on the other hand, mentions seven layers of the Yogiiciirabhiimi in a list of fourteen strata of early Yogacara texts: 1) the Sriivakabhiimi; 2) the VastusalJ1.grahm}f; 3) the Bodhisattvabhiimi; 4) the Maitreya, Visalamati, ParamaIthasaIp.bhava, and GUI)akara chapters of the SalJ1.dhinirmocana­ siitra in the ViniscayasalJ1.grahal}i', 5) what Schmithausen refers to as the Proof, Pravrtti, and Nivrtti portions of the exposition of iilayavijiiiina in the Viniscaya­ salJ1.grahal}i', 6) the Sacittikii Bhiimi of the ViniscayasalJ1.grahal}f; 7) the Maulf Bhiimi excluding the Sriivakabhiimi and Bodhisattvabhiimi (2000: 39 n. 2). While Wayman believes that AsaIiga composed the Yogiiciirabhiimi section

by section, both Schmithausen and Aramaki see the development of the text as a gradual accretion of material from various sources. Thus they do not simply identify sections that are earlier or later; rather they see different strata even within the same section. If one accepts their premises, then hardly any characteristic can be attributed to the Yogiiciirabhiimi as a whole. However, the heterogeneous contents of the text suggest that the Schmithausen-Aramaki approach is correct, even though the exact stratification remains uncertain. Nobody presumes to give an exact date for the Yogiiciirabhiimi or for its various strata. Those who attribute the text to Asanga naturally place the text during AsaIiga's lifetime, usually thought to span the end of the fourth and the beginning of the fifth century. However, if the text is a compilation assembled over a period of time, it seems likely that the oldest portions of the text might have been composed somewhat earlier than the end of the fourth century. Doctrinal Content

The Yogiiciirabhiimi is one of the oldest texts, if not the oldest, associated with the Yogacara school, and it contains some of the philosophical concepts distinctive to that school. Schmithausen has shown that the Yogiiciirabhiimi does 16 not contain all of the doctrines characteristic of later Yogacara texts. Nor does it maintain a consistent doctrinal position. Furthermore, the same terms can have somewhat different meanings in different sections of the text. Nevertheless, certain characteristically Yogacara terms and doctrines appear, sometimes for the fIrst time, in the Yogiiciirabhiimi. The most striking of these doctrines is iilayavijiiiina, "the container or store­ house of the latent residues or Impressions of previous actions (karman) and mind process, or. .. the basic layer of mind processes or even the very basic constituent of the whole living being" (Schmithausen 1 987: 1). The term iilayavijiiiina is completely 16

In addition to abhiitaparikalpa, Schmithausen mentions the term vijiiaptimiitra, which appears, but only once, in a quotation from the Sa1J1.dhinirm,pcanasutra (1987: 32, 297 n. 221).

xix

lacking in much of the Yogiiciirabhilmi, but it is explained in great detail in the ViniscayasalJ'!grahalJlOn the Paiicavijiiiinakiiyamanobhilm� which includes a logical "proof' of its existence. The development of the concept of iilayavijiiiina is explored thoroughly in Schmithausen 1987, and studies of iilayavijiiiina will probably rely 17 greatly on his work for some time to come. Another term important for the Yogacara school that is found frequently in the Yogiiciirabhilmi is blja (seed). Although the term blja is used metaphorically in the Agamas, it is first seen as a technical term in the early Yogacara literature, where bljas comprise or are contained in the iilayavijiiiina. Yamabe identifies seven different senses in which the term appears in the Yogiiciirabhilmi: see'ds of the future life; seeds of kle.sas; seeds of karma; seeds of good dharrnas; seeds of the pravrttivijiiiinas; seeds of rilpa; seeds of all dharrnas (1989). These seeds are not considered to be real dharmas; rather, they are designations for the potential of beings to produce good or bad results. Other distinctive Yogacara concepts found in the text include kli�!amanas (defiled mind) and iisrayapariivrtti (transformation of the basis of existence), as well as the three natures, i.e., parikalpitasvabhiiva (imaginary nature), paratantra­ svabhiiva (dependent nature), and parini�pannasvabhiiva (ultimate nature). But it must be emphasized that these terms appear only sporadically. Unlike in later Yogacara texts, most of them are not systematically presented. In addition, certain Sarvastivadin positions are refuted in the Yogiiciirabhilmi. Most important is the doctrine of sarviistiviida itself, namely the idea that past, present, and future dharrnas all really exist. The real existence, accepted by Sarvasti­ vada, of various other items, such as the cittaviprayuktasalJ'!skiiras and avijiiaptirilpa, is denied in the Yogiiciirabhilmi, which frequently appeals to the operation of bljas to explain phenomena that according to Sarvastivada result from real dharmas. Finally, much of the contents of the Yogiiciirabhilmi is not specifically Yoga­ cara at all. As I have mentioned above, a large percentage of the text is non-Mahayana abhidharrna. Wayman argues strenuously that Asanga was a Mahlsasaka before converting to Mahayana and that his abhidharrna is Mahlsasaka abhidharrna (J96l: 26-29; 1989), but his arguments are convincingly criticized by Schmithausen (1970: 18 94-95, 115_119). Certainly, in many cases the Yogiiciirabhilmi is in essential 17 18

An example of a recent study is the psychological discussion in Waldron 2003.

However, Wayman receives some support from Bareau, who points out the similarity between the list of eight asalJ'!skrtadharrnas in texts attributed to Asailga, including the Yogiiciirabhilmi, and a list of nine asalJ'!skrtas attributed to the Mahlsasakas in Vasumitra's Samayabhedo'paracanacakra. Bareau thinks that this proves conclusively that Asailga was a Mahlsasaka before he converted to Mahayana (1993). Hakamaya also points \lut the reliance of the Yogiiciirabhilmi on MahIsasaka here (1990: 254). On the other hand, Schmithausen reasonably maintains that the

xx

agreement with Sarvastivada,.- and it appears that, although it disagrees with Sarvastivada on some extremely important points, the Yogacarabhumi is closely connected to the Sarvastivada tradition.

The Abhidhannakosabhii
Vasubandhu's Abhidharmakosabhao?ya is best known as a compendium of Sarvastivadin abhidharma, but it is also famous for its criticisms of certain points of Sarvastivadin doctrine. In contrast to the Yogacarabhumi, it is completely extant in Sanskrit and is available in two editions.l9 There are two Chinese translations, Hsiian-tsang's (T. 1 558) and Paramartha's (T. 1 559), as well as a Tibetan translation (Tohoku 4090, Peking 559 1). Hsiian-tsang's Chinese translation has been completely translated into French by La Vallee Poussin ( 1 971),20 and this French translation has in turn been translated into English by Pruden ( 1 988- 1 990). Hsiian-tsang's Chinese translation has also been completely translated into Japanese by Nishi in the Kokuyaku Issaikyo series (Eidon-bu 25-26). In addition, several chapters have been translated separately into Japanese from the Sanskrit (Funahashi 1987; Sakurabe and Odani 199 1 ; Sakurabe, Odani, and Honj6 2004) and the Tibetan (Yamaguchi and Funahashi 1 955). Some important resources for the study of the Abhidharmakosa­ bha,l"yainclude Saeki's annotated edition of the Chinese translation ( 1 978), Hirakawa's index to the Sanskrit, Chinese, and Tibetan ( 1 973-1 978), and Fukuhara's study of

the karikas ( 1 973, 1986).

The Sarvastivadin abhidharma literature can be divided into .several general groupS?l First are the seven canonical texts, listed here in the chronological order suggested by Cox (Willemen, Dessein, and Cox 1 998: 177 ff.): Smigffiparyaya, Dharmaskandha, Prajiiaptisastra, Vijiianaki'iya, Dhatukaya, Prakarmyapada, and fact that the Yogacarabhumi contains some MahIsasaka teachings, including this list of asaYJ'lskrtas, is not enough to prove that the text is largely based on MahIsasaka

( 1 970: 1 1 9).

1 9 Abhidharmakosabha,I"Ya, edited b y P . Pradhan (1967), and Abhidharmakosa and Bha,l"ya of Acharya Vasubandhu with Sphu!artha commentary of Acarya Yasomitm, edited by Swami Dwarkidas Shastri ( 1 973). The Pradhan edition is more widely used by scholars.

20 In an earlier publication (1914-1918), La Vallee Poussin also translated Chapter Three from the Tibetan translation. 21 The following discussion is not intended to be exhaustive, and not all abhidharma

texts will be mentioned.

,

xxi

Jiiiinaprasthiina. 22 Next are three texts entitled Vibhiio!ii, nominally commentaries on theJiiiinaprasthiina, among which the one commonly known as the * Mahiivibhiio!ii

(T. 1545i3 is the longest and most famous. These texts contain discussions of various positions on doctrinal points, and the *Mahiivibhiio!ii establishes the orthodox position for the branch of the Sarvastivada school known as the KasmIra Vaibha�ikas (Willemen, Dessein, and Cox 1998: 237-238). The name Vaibha�ika, which is frequently used more or less synonymously with Sarvastivada, is derived from the title of this text. The Vibhiio!iis are followed by three texts known as *Abhidharmahrdaya: the *Abhidharmahrdayasastra of Dharmasrl or Dharma­ sre�thin, the *Abhidharmahrdayasiistra of Upasanta, and the *Sarpyuktiibhidharma­ hrdayasiistra. According to Dessein, these texts are for the most part organized according to the four noble truths, with various topics discussed in an appropriate order (Willemen, Dessein, and Cox 1998: 255-269). The Abhidharmakosabhii�ya closely follows the structure of the * Abhidharma­ hrdaya texts (Frauwallner 1 995: 1 37- 140; Willemen, Dessein, and Cox 1998: 269274). It purports to give an account of the abhidharma of the KasmIra Vaibha�ika school but frequently adopts unorthodox positions, especially those associated with Sautrantika. (More will be said about this later.) There are several reasons for the enduring fame of the Abhidharmakosabhii�ya. First of all, despite the deviations from orthodoxy, the text gives the clearest and most complete account of the Sarvastivadin system. Furthermore, the arguments for different points of view, orthodox and unorthodox, are skillfully presented so that they reveal the issues that are really at stake. It is also possible that the fact that Vasubandhu's name is associated with Mahayana as well as Sarvastivada added to the prestige of the Abhidharmakosabhii�ya in China, Tibet, Mongolia, and Japan. Finally, among modem scholars, its availability in Sanskrit, Tibetan, and Chinese, not to mention the excellent French translation, make it uniquely accessible among abhidharma works. The Abhidharmakosabhii�ya inspired some critical reaction from the defenders of Sarvastivada, notably Sarp.ghabhadra's *Nyiiyiinusiira (extant only in Chinese 4

i

and the Abhidharmadfpa (author unknown, extant only in Sanskrit). In addition, eight commentaries, originally in Sanskrit, are found in the Tibetan Bstan-'gyur, of

22 For complete titles, TaishO text numbers, and detailed discussions of authorship, contents, etc., see Willemen, Dessein, and Cox 1998: 177-229. 23 The term * Mahiivibhii�ii is not attested in Sanskrit, and I use it here only because it is the most common designation for this text. Elsewhere, I refer to T. 1 545 as "the Vibhii¢. " 24 A-p 'i-ta-mo shun cheng-Ii lun �rlJ .mJ!�JII&iDJl.!jjifii (T. 1562).

xxii

which Yasomitra's Abhidharmakosavyiikhyii25 (available in Sanskrit, as well) and Sthiramati's Tattviirtha 26 are particularly noteworthy.27 In China, three of Hsiian­ tsang's disciples, Shen-t'ai 1$*, P'u-kuang �:7t, and Fa-pao it., also wrote extensive commentaries?8 The Abhidhdrmakosabhii�ya contains nine chapters (see Table 2). The first eight chapters consist of verses, which generally are consistent with Sarvastivada, and commentary on each verse, in which Vasubandhu often discusses and sometimes accepts positions that disagree with Sarvastivada. The ninth chapter, often characterized as an appendix, is entirely prose. Although many commentaries cover all nine chapters, Srup.ghabhadra's *Nyiiyiinusiira ends with chapter eight. Dessein refers to chapters three and nine as "additional chapters," since they do not fit into a division of the entire text according to the four truths, a division that he traces back to the *Abhidharmahrdaya texts (Willemen, Dessein, and Cox 1998: 255-274). Vasubandhu's Career

The traditional account of Vasubandhu's career is found in Paramlirtha's

P 'o-su-p 'an-tou fa-shih chuan �!*�.Rit �ili� (T. 2049; translated in Takakusu

1 904)?9 Vasubandhu was originally a Sarvastivadin, and he composed the verses

(karikiis) of fue Abhidharmakosa from the Sarvlistivadin point of view, in accordance with the teaching of the Vibhii�ii. However, when he wrote his own commentary on his verses (the AbhidharmakosabhilD'a), he frequently rejected orthodox Sarvastivada

in favor of Sautrantika positions. Sarp.ghabhadra, an orthodox Sarvlistivadin from Kashmir, then wrote two works, one of which was extremely critical of Vasubandhu. Later, Vasubandhu converted to Mahayana under the influence of his older brother, AsaiJ.ga, and he wrote a number of commentaries on Mahayana siitras and siistras, as well as some Yogaclira siistras of his own. Like most dates in the history of Indian Buddhism, the date of Vasubandhu is

25 Tohoku 4092; Peking 5593. 6 2 Tohoku 442 1 ; Peking 5875. 27 Regarding Indian commentaries in Tibetan translation, see Mejor

199 1 .

28 Respectively, Chu-she lun shu m%ffii!WiE (Dai Nihon zokuzokyo 1.8.3-4), Chu-she lun chi 1�%ffii!�G (T. 1 821), and CM-she lun shu 1�%ffii!WiE (T. 1 822). The last two of these are frequently referred to in Saeki 1978, on which La Vallee Poussin (1971) often seems to rely in tum. 29 Other accounts are found in the works of Hsiian-tsang and of Tibetan historians, particularly Bu-ston. Cox summarizes the differences among these accounts (1995:

53-55).

;

XXlll

Table

2

Subject-matter

1 . Dhatunirde§a

2. Indriyanirde§a 3 . Lokanirde§a 4. Karmanirde§a 5. Anusayanirde§a 6. Margapudgalanirde§a 7. Jiiananirde§a 8 . Samapattinirde§a 9. Pudgalanirde§a

Elements of existence Sense faculties Cosmology Action and its results Defilements The path and the noble ones (aryapudgala) Knowledge Meditation Refutation of a self or soul

3 0 For the titles of the first eight chapters, I follow Pradhan's Sanskrit text. For the

ninth chapter, I follow common usage, although I have not found any textual attestation ' of Pudgalanirde§a.

xxiv

not known exactly. Since different dates appear in Chinese sources, and since the number of works attributed to Vasubandhu is very large, his date has been a matter of considerable controversy among scholars. In what follows, I give a simplified account of the complex debate about Vasubandhu' s career.31 The source of the problem is that Paramfutha gives (or is reported to give) two different dates, one in the fourth century and one in the fifth. The later date appears in his biography of Vasubandhu, while the earlier date is attributed by K'uei-chi Q£ and Hui-hsiang �lf: to works of Paramfutha that are no longer extant (Frauwallner 1951 : 3-5). In order to make sense of this discrepancy, Frauwallner, in a well-known monograph, On the Date of the Buddhist Master of the Law Vasubandhu, proposes his theory of two Vasubandhus. According to Frauwallner, Vasubandhu the elder was the younger brother of Asanga. Frauwallner identifies this Vasubandhu the elder with the Vrddhacarya Vasubandhu and the Sthavira Vasubandhu mentioned in the Abhidharmakosavyakhya (1951: 2 1-22). This elder Vasubandhu became a believer in Mahayana, and he was the author of many Mahayana works, including the Satasastra, MadhyantavibMga, Dasabhumikasastra, SaddharmapUl:U!£In"Kopadesa, VajracchEdikiip rajfiiiparamitasiistra, and Bodhicittotpiidana­ siistra (195 1 : 55). Vasubandhu the younger, on the other hand, was a Sarvastivadin who moved in the direction of Sautrantika but never converted to Mahayana. He was the author of the Abhidharmakosa and AbhidharmakosabM�ya. The only other work that Frauwallner attributes to Vasubandhu the younger at this point is the Paramarthasaptatika, and he withholds judgement concerning the Vi'!!satika and Tri,!!sika, saying, "We must therefore employ other means in order to determine the author of these works; we must gain the necessary basis from their contents and the doctrines upheld in them" ( 1 95 1 : 56). He does not mention by name the

Vyakhyayukti, KarmasiddhiprakaralJa, Pratftyasamutpadavyakhya, Pancaskandhaka,

and Trisvabhavanirdeia, or the commentaries on the DharmadharmatavibMga, MaM­ yanasa,!!graha, and MahiiyanasutraZmrzkara.32 Schmithausen, following the principle stated by Frauwallner, has examined the doctrinal features of the Abhidharmakosabha�ya and the various Yogacara texts attributed to Vasubandhu. In his first publication concerning this issue, he basically agrees with Frauwallner's theory but added the Vi'!!satika and Tri,!!sika to the list of works by the author of the Abhidharmakos�bha�ya ( 1 967: 1 3 6), an 31 Perhaps the clearest account of this controversy is Kajiyama's (Nagao, Kajiyama, and Aramaki 1976: 419-422). A concise English summary can be found in Griffith s 1986: 164-165 n. 9. Other, more detailed accounts include: Jaini 1958b; Wayman 196 1 : 19-24; Hirakawa 1973-1978 v. 1 : ii-x; Kochumuttom 1982: xi-xiv; and Mejor 1991:

3-13. 3 2 This is not meant to be an exhaustive list of all the works that have ever been ' attributed to Vasubandhu.

xxv

addition later accepted by Frauwallner (1969: 425). In his most recent statement on this subject, Schrnithausen designates the Abhidharmakosabhii�ya, Vyakhyay ukti,

Karmasiddhiprakarm}a, Pratftyasamutpiidavyakhyii, Paiicaskandhaka, VilJ1satika, and TrilJ1sika as "works of Vasubandhu the Kosakara." Although he indicates that the texts he attributes to the Kosakara contain certain terms and ideas, particularly

salJ1tatipariJ}amavise�a, that are not found in the "Vasubandhu commentaries" (on the Madhyantavibhiiga, etc.) and the Trisvabhavanirdesa, Schrnithausennow refuses to commit himself regarding the authorship of the latter group of texts or the question of two Vasubandhus (1987: 262-263 n. 101). Frauwallner's theory has been attacked by various scholars since shortly after it was published, beginning with a very critical article by Sakurabe (1952), who, like Frauwallner, refers to a wide range of Chinese sources. Addressing the issue from a more doctrinal point of view, Jaini argues that criticisms in the Abhidharmadzpa of Vasubandhu' s "Sautrantika" views show how close these views are to Mahayana. Therefore, Jaini thinks that the account of Vasubandhu's career in Paramartha's biography is reliable and that after writing the Abhidharmakosa­ bha�ya, Vasubandhu wen t on to compose Mahayana works. Regarding Vasubandhu's date and his relation to Asailga, Jaini is noncommittal. He does not deny the existence of an older Vasubandhu (the Vrddhacarya mentioned in the Abhidharma­ kosavyakhya), but, unlike Frauwallner, he does not think that Paramartha conflated two Vasubandhus in his biography (Jaini 1958b)?3 Hirakawa challenges Frau­ wallner's interpretation of his Chinese sources and arrives at conclusions similar to Jaini's (1973-1978). In general, Japanese scholars do not accept Frauwallner's theory;34 instead, they account for differences among the various texts in terms of Vasubandhu's doctrinal development (Nagao, Kajiyama, and Aramaki 1976: 421).35 Most recently, Skilling sharply questions Frauwallner's methodology and attempts to establish the works of the Kosakara on the basis of either cross-references in Vasubandhu's texts (or references by Vasubandhu's commentators) or "the evidence of style, sources used, methodology, and development of ideas" (2000: 299). Skilling includes as works by the Kosakara the same texts as Schrnithausen, as well as the GathasalJ1graha texts36 and the Trisvabhiivanirdda. The authorship of the commen33 Wayman, Kochumuttom, and Griffiths generally agree with Jaini, while Mejor is somewhat ambiguous (1991: 111). 34 Hakamaya (2001: 107) cites works of Harada (1996, 1997, 1998) and Fukuda (1998b) as representative examples. 35 Hakamaya (2001: 107) has assembled an extensive bibliography of recent Japanese studies along this line, including those of Matsuda (1982a, 1982b, 1984, 1985) and Muroji (1993). Another recent contribution is Iwamoto 2000. 36 These include three texts only extant in Tibetan: GathiisalJ1grahaSilstra, Gathiirtha-

xxvi taries on the Mahayana siUras or the Maitreya texts remains a matter about which scholars are reluctant to say anything definite. It is probably fair to say that most scholars today, while admitting the existence of other figures named Vasubandhu, agree on the single authorship of at least the

Abhidharmakosabhii:;ya, Vyiikhyiiyukti, Karmasiddhiprakaral}a, Pratftyasamut­ piidavyiikhyii, Pancaskandhaka, Viy[!satikii, and TriY[!sikii. My comparison of the Abhidharmakosabhii:;ya and the Yogiiciirabhiimi provides further evidence of Vasu­ bandhu the Kosakara's affinity for Yogacara and thus supports Jaini's arguments against Frauwallner's theory. However, I do not directly address the issue of the authorship of the works attributed to Vasubandhu.

The Question of Sautrantika

Writers about Buddhism confidently use the term "Sautrantika" to refer to one of the four representative schools of Indian Buddhism (along with Sarvastivada, Madhyarnika, and Y ogacara). In fact, little is known about who the Sautrantikas were and what they believed. In the last twenty years, however, a number of studies, mainly originating in Japan, have begun to question old assumptions about Sautrantika, and a 2003 issue of the Journal of the International Association of Buddhist Studies is dedicated to this topic. The brief discussion in the present book is based on my introduction to the JIABS issue, "Sautrantika Reconsidered" (Kritzer 2003a). As the name suggests, a Sautrantika is one who follows the siitras, and Sautrantikas are generally considered to be people who disagreed with the Sarvasti­ vadin reliance on siistra, that is to say, on the Vaibha�ika abhidharma texts. What little we know of the history of the school comes from Vasumitra's Samaya­ bhedoparacanacakra, specifically in Hsiian-tsang's translation (I-pu-tsung lun lun �l'tG*fllii� [T. 2031]), and from several works of Hsiian-tsang's disciple, K'uei-chi. In the Ch 'eng wei-shih lun shu chi nX:Pft�t�:iZ!!�2, K'uei-chi gives the names of two early Sautrantika teachers, Kumaralata, whom he also calls "Dar�tantika" (T. 1830: 274a8-13), and Srllata (T. 1830: 358alO-12). The term Dar�tantika is also used to refer to a dissident group within Sarvastivada, and there are various opinions concerning the relationship between Sautrantika and Dar�tantika In the commentaries on the Abhidharmakosabhiiijya, the terms are very close to being synonymous, but it has also been suggested that Sautrantika and Dar�tantika are, respectively, positive and negative designations for the same group or that there were two distinct groups with these names (Cox 1995: 37-41).

saY[!grahaSiistra, and Ekagiithiib hii.rJu. Despite the fact that the GiithiisaY[!grahaSiistra

was translated into both German and English in the nineteenth century (Skilling 2000: 306 n. 22), these texts are rarely referred to, and I am grateful to Skilling for bringing them to my attention. ,

xxvii

Our main source of information about early Dar��antika/Sautrantika doctrine is the Vibhii�ii, where there are some eighty-six references to Dar��antika ideas (Kata 1989: 70). The term Sautrantika, on the other hand, does not appear to have been used in the original text of the Vibh�ii (Kat51989: 113-119). Nor is Sautrantika found in the *Sarrzyuktiibhidharmahrdaya, although three opinions are attributed there to Dar��antika. Harivarman's *Tattvasiddhisiistra, although it does not mention either Dar��antika or Sautrantika by name, frequently agrees with the Dar��antika positions in the Vibhii�ii (Mizuno 1930). Thus, it seems as though the earliest occurrence of the word Sautrantika is in the Abhidharmakosabhii�ya, where nineteen positions are attributed to "the Sautrantikas" (Kritzer 2003b); Vasubandhu agrees with these positions. Only two positions are attributed to the Dar��antikas,37 on the other hand, and Vasubandhu disagrees with tbese positions (Kat5 1989: 81-84; Cox 1995: 39). This suggests tbat Vasu­ bandhu does not consider Sautrantika and DarHantika to be identical. Among the Sautrantika opinions of which Vasubandhu approves are rejections of the reality of various dharmas accepted as real by Sarvastivada, including the cittaviprayukta­ sarrzskiiras (forces not associated with mind), the asarrzs/q"tadharmas (unconditioned dharmas), the anusayas (latent defilements), and vijiiaptirilpa (manifested matter) and avijiiaptiriipa (unmanifested matter). Vasubandhu also agrees with the Sautrantika rejection of the reality of past and future, the insistence that one cannot fall from arhatship, and the theory of seeds (bfja) that appears in many Sautrantika explanations. Many of these positions are also found in Yogacara texts, especially the Yogiiciirabhiimi, and scholars have characterized Sautrantika as a kind of bridge between Hfuayana Sarvastivada and Mahayana Yogacara This explanation fits well with the story of Vasubandhu's career as told by Paramiirtha: Vasubandhu was on his way to accepting Mahayana when he wrote the Abhidharmakosabhii�a. However, some suggest an even closer affinity between Vasubandhu's Sautrantika positions and Yogacara. For example, Jaini points out that the author of the Abhidharmadfpa reviles Vasubandhu as a vaitulika, a believer in Mahayana, and he stresses the similarity between some of Vasubandhu's statements and Yogacara doctrine (1959: 247-248). Hakamaya has shown that the term piirviiciiryiiJ:! (former teachers) in the Abhidharmakosabhii�a refers to Yogacara teachers, with whose explanations Vasubandhu often agrees (1986). Yamabe has identified tbe ViniscayasarrzgrahalJf of the Yogiiciirabhiimi as Vasubandhu's source for his bfja theory (1990) as well as for his idea of the mutual perfuming of niima and rilpa (2000a). In addition, Yamabe has identified the ManobhUmi as the source of a statement, attributed to the piirviiciiryas, concerning the transition from the antarii­ bhava to birth in the hells (1999). Miyashita (1986) and Harada (1993, 1996) have also noted similarities between the Abhidharmakosabhii�ya and the Yogiiciirabhiimi. 37 VasubandllU mentions the term three times, but two of his references are to tbe same Dar��antika opinion.

xxviii In 1993, on the basis of very limited evidence, I argued that Vasubandhu' s so-called Sautrantika definition of consciousness as a member of the formula of conditioned origination actually reflected Yogadira beliefs, in other words, that Vasubandhu was inserting Yogacara ideas into the Abhidharmakosabhii.rya under the guise of Sautrantika. In a number of publications since then, I have identified a variety of correspondences between the Abhidharmakosabhii.rya and the YogacarabhUmi (1994a, 1994b, 1996, 1998, 1999) Most recently, I have examined all the occurrences of the term Sautrantika in the Abhidharmakosabhii.rya and identified correspondences for a large majority in the Yogacarabhiimi (2003b). 38 It seems as though these corresponding positions in the Yogacarabhiimi can be categorized in two groups. One group consists of ideas that cannot be traced to the Dar�!antikas of the Vibhii�a and are in fact not found in texts earlier than the Yogacarabhiimi. Some examples include the theory of mutual perfuming, mentioned above, and the idea of sal'[ltatiparil}amavise�a. The other group includes ideas (for example, the denial of the reality of the cittaviprayuktasal'[lskiiras) that are also found, frequently in a less developed form, in the Vibha�a, where they are attributed to Dar�!antika. It is Vasubandhu who first calls positions belonging to both of these groups "Sautrantika." However, not all of the Dar�tantika positions are found in the Yogacarabhiimi, and it seems as though Vasubandhu accepts and labels as Sautrantika only ones that are. Furthermore, Vasubandhu also criticizes, without using the term Dar�!antika, a number of positions attributed to individual Dar�tantika teachers, such as Srllata. As Harada points out, in the case of many of these positions, Vasubandhu agrees with the Yogacarabhiimi in favoring the Sarvastivada opinion over the Dar�tantika (1993: 109-110). It must also be noted that Vasubandhu does not accept all the Dar�tantika opinions contained in the YogacarabhUmi. The two positions attributed to Dar�tantika by Vasubandhu in the Abhidharmakosabhiirya can both be found in the Yogacarabhiimi. But in each case, the Yogaciirabhiimi elsewhere also contains the Sarvastivadin position, with which Vasubandhu in these cases agrees.39s It is clear that there is a close relation between Vasubandhu' s S autrantika

38 In the same article, I examine a number of positions in the Karmasiddhiprakaral}a characterized by Lamotte as Sautrantika and identify definite or probable correspon­ dences in the Yogacarabhiimi for all of these positions. 39 Position 1: The Dar�tantikas say that there are four possibilities regarding the experience of the results of karma This statement implies eight types of karma, three of which are determined according to the lifetime in which their results will be experienced but undetermined as to whether they will be experienced at all. Vasubandhu rejects this, saying that ifkarma is determined according to the lifetime in which it comes to fruition, then its result definitely must be experienced (Pradhan: 230: 10-13; La Vallee Poussin 1971, v. 3: li6-117).

XXIX

ideas and the Yogiiciirabhiimi, but the precise nature of that relation is difficult to understand. Yamabe remarks that the passages in the Yogiiciirabhiimi to which the Sautrantika positions in the Abhidharmakosabhii�ya correspond do not appear to presuppose the idea of iilayavijfiiina (2000b: 68) . Furthermore, one idea that appears in several of the passages common to the two texts is saT[ltatipari�iimavise�a, which may be a concept that is superseded by the theory of iilayavijfiiina. If one accepts Schmithausen' s general line of reasoning, one might say that these passages were composed before the idea of iilayavijfiiina was formulated. The notion of saT[ltatipari�iimavise�a (transformation of the life-stream)40 is also found in Vasubandhu' s ViT[lsatikii, where Schmithausen characterizes it as a "trace" of Sautrantika (1967); presumably, he considers it to be a S autrantika element in the Yogiiciirabhiimi as well. Thus, one explanation for the correspondences between Vasubandhu' s Sautrantika positions and passages in the Yogiiciirabhiimi i s that the authors of both texts rely on a common source that represented an intermediate stage between Sarvastivada and fully developed Yogacara, based on the concept of iilayavijfiiina. But we search in vain for any text earlier than the Yogiiciirabhiimi containing ideas The ViniscayasaT[lgraha�f on the Savitarkiidi-bhumi gives the same four possibilities as the Dar�!fu1tikas (Yogiiciirabhiimir' zi 152a3-4; T. 1579: 635c5-6). The Yii-chieh-Iun chi (T. 1828: 362blO-22) discusses this passage and mentions that Sautrantika and Sauryodayika accept the MalIayana interpretation concerning this issue and arriv e at eight types of karma (I am indebted to Yamabe Nobuyoshi for this reference). The Savitarkiidi-bhiimi, on the other hand, gives the traditional explanation, which Vasubandhu accepts: karma can be determined or undetermined regarding whether its result will be experienced, and there are three possibilities regarding the lifetime in which it comes to fruition: in the present life; in the inunediately following life; in a later life (Yogiiciirabhiimi: 189.15-16, 189.19··190.1; Yogiiciirabhiimi,: dzi 1l0a5 , 1l0a8; T. 1579: 319b3, 319b7-9). Position 2: The Dar�!fu1tikas say that abhidhyii, vyiipiida, and mithyiid!�.ti are mental karma. Vasubandhu disagrees and accepts the Sarvastivadin view that they are karmapatha but not karma (Pradhan 237.15-20, 248.2-12; La Vallee Poussin 1971, v. 3: 136, 168-l70; see Kata 1989: 81-84 for detailed analyses of these passages). The Savitarkiidi-bhumi defines the three as mental karma (Yogiiciirabhiimi: 182.9-14; Yogiiciirabhiimi,: dzi 105b5-8; T. 1579: 317b22-29). The ViniscayasaT[lgraha/}f on the Savitarkiidi-bhiimi says that they are karmapatha but not karma (Yogiiciirabhiimi,: zi 153b3; T. 1579: 636a29). Schmithausen discusses these passages (1970: 117). Again, I thank Yamabe Nobu­ yoshi for the reference. 40 Cox' s translation (1995: 95).

xxx such as saf[!tatiparil'}iimavise�a or the mutual seeding of body and mind, according to which mind contains the seeds of the physical sense organs, and vice versa. And as we have seen, the term Sautrantika is not attested before the Abhidharma­ kosabhii�ya. My own conclusion is that in lhe Abhidharmakosabhiirya Vasubandhu uses the term Sautrantika to designate positions in the YogiiciirabhUmi that he prefers to those of orthodox Sarvastivada. As I argue elsewhere (1999: 203-204; 2003b), Vasubandhu in the Abhidharmakosabhii�ya adjusts the traditional Sarvastivadin abhidharma so that it no longer conflicts with the central theories of Yogacara. Unlike in the Yogacara texts attributed to him, his purpose in the Abhidharmakosabhii�ya is not to propound or defend these theories. Therefore, he does not mention iilayavijiiiina, which would be glaringly out of place in a work that is described by its author as being largely based on Sarvastivadin abhidharma, specifically that of the KasmIra Vaibha�ikas. 4 1 Instead, he borrows from the Yogiiciirabhumi ideas like bfja, which do not represent such a radical departure from tradition. Attributing an opinion to S autrantika may simply be Vasubandhu' s way of claiming that it is based on a more valid interpretation of sutra than its Sarvastivadin counterpart.

4 1 prayel'}a hi kiiSmfravaibhii.yikiil'}ilJ?'l nftyijdisiddha e�o 'smiibhir abhidharma iikhyiital} (Abhidharmakosabhiirya : 450.1-2; La Vallee Poussin 197 1 , v. 5: 223).

II.

Methodology and Results

Methodology

Although previous studies have identified a number of passages in the Abhidharrnako§abhii�ya that seem to be based on the Yogiiciirabhiimi, no systematic comparative study of these two texts had appeared before the private pUblication of my results for the first three chapters of the Abhidharrnako§abhii�ya (Kritzer 2001). The present work consists of the results for all eight main chapters of the text.42 This project was made feasible by the fact that we have Chinese translations by Hslian-tsang oftheAbhidharmako§abhii�ya, the *Nyiiyiinusiira, and the Yogiiciira­ bhiimi. Although these texts were translated over an eight-year period, 43 they contain similar translations of most technical terms. Since the three texts are now available electronically,44 they can be searched in a way that was impossible ten years ago. The first step was to identify passages in the Abhidharmako§abhii�ya that do not concur with Sarvastivada. In order to do this, I referred to Sarp.ghabhadra' s *Nyiiyiinusiira, in which many o f Vasubandhu' s statements are criticized for their deviations from orthodoxy. Conveniently, S arp.ghabhadra uses the appellation ching­ chu *Jli:.:t to refer to Vasubandhu in these cases. The meaning of ching-chu is not completely clear, and Cox summarizes what other scholars have said about the 42 In Kritzer 200 1 , I included the Chinese text of all relevant passages of the Yogiiciirabhiimi, together with the Sanskrit if edited text was available. Here, I add the Tibetan text of all passages, except for the handful for which no Tibetan translation exists. 43 The Abhidharrnako§abhii�a was translated between 651 and 654 (Lancaster 1979: 346,343), the *Nyiiyiinusiira between 653 and 654 (Lancaster 1979: 343), and the Yogiiciira­ bhami between 646 and 648 (Lancaster 1 979: 1 87). 44 All three texts are now available from both the Taish6 Shinshfi Daizakya Tekisuto Detabesu XiUJj-i�*$!t�Jli: T .:f- A r j"- Jy « A at Tokyo University (http://www.l.u­ tokyo.ac.jp/-sat/japan!) and the Chinese Buddhist Electronic Text Association (Chung­ hwa tien-tzu fo-tien hsieh-hui rp i'jH[-f-1�:!l1!-thh"j-) at Taiwan National University (htlp:llwww.cbeta.orglcdlindex.htrn). However, when I started this project, the only available text of the Yogiiciirabhiimi was from the Yugagya Shisa Kenkyilkai �{1.J01T }(!H�,pJfJE* at Nagasaki University. -

xxxi

xxxii term: "Some have suggested that this reflects Sa�ghabhadra' s identification of Vasubandhu as a S autrantika. However, a quotation from the * Nytiytinustira in Sthiramati' s commentary on theAbhidharmakosa suggests that the Sanskrit equivalent is siltrakiira. This could refer to Vasubandhu' s role as author of the siltra, in this case the ktirikti of the Abhidharmakosa, or it could be used with sarcasm suggesting Vasubandhu' s lack of familiarity with Buddhist scripture" ( 1 995: 56). This issue is far from settled. Given the fact that the vast majority of Vasubandhu' s departures from Sarvastivada are found in the bhtirya, not in the ktiriktis, it would seem strange for S�ghabhadra to preface his criticisms of what Vasubandhu says in the bha�ya with the epithet siltraktira. In any case, there is no doubt that in the approximately 250 places where SaIpghabhadra uses the term ching-chu he is always criticizing Vasubandhu. Next, I located the passage in the Abhidharmakosabharya on which S�gha­ bhadra was commenting. Sa�ghabhadra usually follows the order of the Abhi­ dharmakosabhtirya, but not always, so it was sometimes necessary to search rather far afield to find the corresponding passage. This task was made easier by the notes to the Kokuyaku Issaikyi5 Japanese translation of the * Nytiytinustira, which give the location of quoted passages in the Kandi5 Abidatsumakusharon (Saeki 1 978), the Japanese edition ofHsiian-tsang' s Chinese translation of the Abhidharmakosabhtirya. The final step was to search for a corresponding opinion in the Yogticiirabhilmi. This was made difficult by the fact that the two texts are organized in completely different ways, as we have seen above. Sometimes one can find phrases or sentences identical to those of the Abhidharmakosabhii�ya, used in similar contexts, to make the same argument, but these cases are inconveniently few. Despite the fact that both texts were translated by Hsiian-tsang, translations of S anskrit words can vary, and sometimes different Sanskrit words are used to convey the same idea. Frequently, Vasubandhu makes a statement to which Sa�ghabhadra takes exception that has no obvi.ous parallel in the . Yogticiirabhilmi, but the possibility remains that Vasubandhu' s argument relies on a statement in the Yogtictirabhilmi that appears in a totally different, perhaps seemingly unrelated context. The correspondences I have found are therefore not all equally convincing. Nevertheless, I have included even the more dubious ones, usually in parentheses. Finally, S�ghabhadra attacks many of Vasubandhu' s statements that do not appear to be related to anything in the Yogticiirabhilmi. S ometimes S a�ghabhadra finds fault with Vasubandhu' s presentation of Sarvastivadin positions ; o n other occasions, Vasubandhu may be expressing an idiosyncratic idea of his own that cannot be characterized as S autrantika or Yogacara. However, even some of these cases may upon further investigation reveal a connection to the Yogtictirabhilmi.

xxxiii

Distribution and General Characterization of Results Distribution within the YogacarabhUmi

The corresponding passages that I have found in the Yo gacarabhami are distrib­ uted approximately as follows:

Maulf Bhami Paftcavijftiinakayasamprayuktii Bhami Manobhami Savitarkiidi-bhami Samiihitii Bhami Asamiihitii Bhami Srutamayf Bhami Cintiimayf Bhumi Sriivakabhumi Bodhisattvabhumi

number of passages 1 8 25 2 1 3 10 5

ViniscayasaytlgrahalJf Paftcavijftiinakiiyamanobhami Savitarkiidi-bhumi Samiihitii Bhumi Sacittikii Bhumi Cintiimayfprajftii Bhami Sriivakabhumi Bodhisattvabhumi (Saytldhinirmocanasatra)

55 8 1 9 4 2 3 2 16

xxxiv As can be seen from this chart, Vasubandhu relies most heavily on portions of the Yogacarabhumi that have no specifically Mahayana content and, as I have mentioned, that do not expound the doctrine of alayavijiiana. Furthermore, I have found relatively few correspondences to what Schmithausen and Aramaki consider to be the oldest sections of the text, namely, the Sravakabhumi and the Bodhisattvabhumi of the Maulf Bhumi and the VastusaY{lgraha!!f. General Classification According to Theme45

Many of the correspondences between the Abhidharmakosabha:;ya and the Yogacarabhiimi can be classified according to a few general themes. In most cases, these involve rejections of major Sarvastivadin doctrines.

sarvastivada In Chapter Five of the Abhidharmakosabha:;ya, Vasubandhu criticizes at length the basic Sarvastivadin principle that past, present, and future dharmas all really exist. Many of his arguments are similar to those found in refutations of sarvastivada in the ViniscayasaY{lgraha!!f on the Paiicavijiianakayamanobhumi and the Savitarkadi-bhumi (items 5 . 1 2- 1 8 and 5.21-27 in Chapter Three of this book). p rajiiapti A number of points concern dharmas that the V aibha�ikas consider to be real entities but that both Vasubandhu and the Yogacarabhiimi classify as provisional (prajiiapn). In Chapter One, Vasubandhu indicates his disagreement with the Vaibha�ika definition of avijiiaptirupa, and S�ghabhadra, looking forward to Chapter Four, states that Vasubandhu does not accept avijiiaptiriipa as being real. Similarly, the ViniscayasaY{lgraha!!fon the Paiicavijiianakiiyamanobhumi defmes both *saY{lvararnpa and * asaY{lvararupa, equivalent to avijiiapti, as provisional, while the ViniscayasaY{lgraha!!f on the Cintiimayfprajiiii Bhiimi includes avijiiapti in a long list ofprajiiaptis (item 1 .2). In Chapter Two, Vasubandhu criticizes at great length the Vaibh�ika definitions of the cittaviprayuktasQY{lSkaras (dharmas associated with neither matter nor mind), calling them all prajiiaptis. Again, the ViniscayasaY{lgraha!!f on the Paiicavijiiana­ kiiyamanobhiimi also denies the reality of these dharmas, and some of its arguments are reflected in Vasubandhu' s discussion (items 2.7, 2. 13, 2. 15-28).46 Vasubandhu's well­ known theory of bfja is found in his discussion of the viprayukta, prapti, and Yamabe 45 Much of this section appears in a slightly different form in Kritzer 2000b.

4l; For more details, see Kritzer 1999: 225-248.

xxxv

has shown Vasubandhu' s reliance here on the Viniscayasa1!!graha�f(1 990). Also in Chapter Two, Vasubandhu indicates that he does not accept the reality of the unconditioned dharmas (asa1!!skrtadharmas). Statements in the ViniScaya­ sa1!!graha�f on the Pancavijniinakiiyamanobhumi and the Vastusa1!!graha�f similarly question the status of the individual asa1!!skrtadharmas (items 2.37-40). In Chapter Four, Vasubandhu declares that sa1!!sthiinarupa (shape) is merely a prajnapti. The definition of sa1!!sthiinarupa in the Pancavijniinakiiyasamprayuktii Bhami is similar to Vasubandhu' s, and the Viniscayasa1!!graha�fon thePancavijniina­ kiiyamanobhami explicitly says that sa1!!sthiinarupa is a prajnapti (items 4.3-4.6). There is, moreover, another possible correspondence regarding prajnapti. In Chapter One, Vasubandhu maintains that the skandhas, being collections (riiSi), do not have independent reality, and to support his position, he refers back to a sutra that he has quoted earlier. Although the Yogiiciirabhumi does not directly state that the skandhas are prajnapti, the idea that collections are prajnapti can be found in the Vastusa1!!graha�1. The ViniScayasa1!!graha�f on the Pancavijniinakiiyamano­ bhumi quotes the same sutra as Vasubandhu to show that the meaning of skandha is riisi. This may imply that the skandhas are prajnapti (items 1.5-6).

bfja

In Chapter Two, Vasubandhu relies on the Sriivakabhumi and on the Viniscaya­ sa1!!gra� on the Pancavijniinakiiyamanobhumi for his statement that bfjas are nothing other than niimarilpa or the iisraya (item 2. 1 1 ; see Yamabe 1990). He explains many of the cittaviprayuktasa/!!Skira i s in terms of bfjas, and in almost every case, a similar explanation can be found in the Viniscayasa1!!graha�f on the Pancavijniina­ kiiyamanobhumi (items 2.7-2. 16). Outside of the context of the cittaviprayuktasa1!!skiiras, other statements by Vasubandhu explicitly or implicitly rely on the idea of bfja in giving explanations that deviate from Vaibha�ika orthodoxy. For example,. Vasubandhu offers an opinion to the effect that the unperceived mahiibhutas in a composite object exist as seeds. A closely related statement is found in the ViniScayasa1!!graha�f on the Cintiimayfprajnii Bhami (item 2.4). In Chapter Five, Vasubandhu refutes the orthodox Vaibha�ika idea that paryavasthiina (active defJIement) and anusaya (latent defilement) are synonymous, and he insists that anusay as are defJIements in the state of seeds. This idea appears in several different sections of the Yogiiciirabhumi, including the Savitarkiidi-bhumi, the ViniScayasa1!!graha�fon the Savitarkiidi-bhami and the Cintiimayfprajfiii Bhumi, and the Vastusa1!!graha�f (items 5.3-5.4).

xxxvi The Coming Together of Causes and Conditions On a number of occasions, Vasubandhu offers the coming together of causes and conditions to account for events explained otherwise by the Vaibha�ikas. For example, regarding the Vaibha�ika opinion that it is the eye that sees riipa, Vasubandhu says that, according to the Sautrantikas, perception is nothing more than cause and effect: there is nothing that sees or is seen. The Yogacarabhiimi contains a number of similar statements, for eXaIDple, in the Viniscayasa1J1grahal)fOn the Pancavijnana­ kayamanobhiimi and in the Paramarthagathas and their commentary in the Cintamayf Bhiimi (item 1 . 14). Another example is Vasubandhu's denial of the reality of the reflected image, which, he says, appears due to the power of the coming together of causes and conditions. Although the Yogacarabhiimi does not explicitly state that the reflected image is unreal, a number of statements seem to imply its relative unreality. For example, in the Viniscayasa1J1grahal)f on the Sacittika Bhiimi, the prav.rttivijnanas are said to depend on aZayavijnana as the reflected image depends on the mirror. In the Viniicayasa1J1grahal)f on the Bodhisattvabhiimi (Saf!!dhinirmocanasiitra), the medita­ tional image is said to be no different from the consciousness in which it is perceived, just as the reflected image depends on the mirror, with the object acting as a condition (item 3 .6). Special People and Their Powers Finally, Vasubandhu makes a number of statements regarding the powers of special people that correspond to similar statements in the Yogacarabhiimi. For example, he says that one cannot fall from arhatship because an arhat has completely destroyed the defilements, including their seeds. The Viniicayasa1J1grahal)f on the Pancavijnanakayamanobhiimi makes the same argument (item 6.9). In his discussion of the cittaviprayuktasa1J1skaras, Vasubandhu states that jfvitendriya is not the result of karma in the case of the arhat, who can prolong his life by the power of his meditation. According to the Viniscayasa1J1grahal)f on the Pancavijnanakayamanobhiim� arhats, Tathagatas, and bodhisattvas have a special type of jfvitendriya that gives them the power to extend their ayuf:tsa1J1skaras. This jfvitendriya is defined as "proceeding due to own-force." All other types are defined as "not proceeding due to own-force." This seems to be equivalent to the distinction made in the Abhidharmakosabha.yya between jfvitendriya that is not vipaka (that of the arhat) and ordinary jfvitendriya, which is vipaka. Furthermore, in the Cintamayf Bhiim� the Buddha is said to obtain mastery of samadhi (samadhivasita), which he uses to discard his former ayuf:tsa1J1skaras and to produce a new body (item 2.3). A related example occurs in a discussion of why the Buddha chose a womb-birth over an apparitional one. One Vaibha�ik.a answer is that it was in order to leave a

xxxvii

body as a relic. Vasubandhu objects that this explanation will not satisfy those who think the Buddha has iidhi.J!hanikr rddhi, by means of which he can prolong his life. This is reminiscent of the Bodhisattvabhiimi, according to which the Buddhas and bodhisattvas can use their magical power to continue to exist after death (item 3.4). With the exception of bfja, one can find none of the characteristic terms of Yogacara among the above correspondences: words such as iilayavijiiiina, vijiiapti­ matra, and trisvabhava simply do not appear. Nor is there any explicit statement of Mahayana themes, such as the emptiness of dharmas or the three bodies of the Buddha. However, the disagreements regarding these abhidharma issues between Vasubandhu and Sarvastivada are far from insignificant. As Sarp.ghabhadra and the DIpakara often point out, Vasubandhu's criticism of the Vaibha�ika abhidharma system reflects a very different view of the world, one that we can now see is provocatively similar to that of the authors of the Yogiiciirabhiimi.

III.

Passages from the Abhidharmakosabhii�ya

and Related Passages from the Yogaciirabhumi

Abhidharmakosabhii.Jya 2 Chapter 1 Dhiitunirdeia

1.1) Vasubandhu says that the Vaibha�ikas maintain that the Buddha preached the abhidharma for the purpose of investigating dharmas and that KatyayanIputra and others collected the scattered abhidharma sayings of the Buddha and put them all together in the abhidharmapi!aka, just as Dharmatrata put together the Udiinavarga.

atas tadhetos tasya dharmapravicayasyiirthe siistrii kila buddheniibhidharma ukta!} / na hi vinii 'bhidharmopadeiena sirya!} sakto dharmiin pravicetum iti / sa tu prakfn:ta ukto bhagavatii bhadantakiityiiyanfputraprabhrtibhi!} pilJlj.fkrtya sthiipito / bhadanta­ dharmatriitodiinavargfyakaralJavad ity iihur vaibhii.Jikii!} (Pradhan: 3 . 1-4; T. 1558: Ib22-28; Poussin 1 : 5-6; S mp.ghabhadra criticizes Vasubandhu, whom he calls the sutra-master (ching-chu k:¥:.:E), for not believing that the abhidharmawas really preached by the Buddha and for believing that Katyayamputra and the others actually created it [T. 1 562: 329c 1 8-22] .)47

47 Here and below, I quote from Pradhan' s edition of the Abhidharmakosabhii.Jya, which I refer to as "Pradhan," and I abbreviate "La Vallee Poussin 1971" as "Poussin." For other works by Poussin, I include the date, for eXaIllp le, "Poussin 1936-1937." I have not systematically corrected the texts provided in this comparison. However, I have incorporated Hirakawa ' s corrections to Pradhan' s Sanskrit text. For the Tibetan text of the Yogiiciirabhami, I have generally relied on the Peking edition, but I have made some corrections on the basis of the Derge. The Chinese text of the Yogiiciirabhami is the electronic text provided by the Yugagy6 Shis6 Kenkyiikai , with the punctuation of the printed TaishO edition restored. In a few cases, I have supplied Chinese characters that ' were not included in the electronic version.

Yogaearabhami 3

1 . 1) In the * Vivaral!asay[!grahal!f, the insights of the Buddha' s disciples into, as well as the Buddha' s own understanding of, the nature of dharmas are both included . in the category matrkii, which is equated with the abhidharma. 48

gan du beom ldan 'das kyis mtshan fiid bstan pa dan gan du nan thos gii mthon bas rtogs pa la gnas pas ehos kyi mtshan nid mnon bar bstan pa de yan ma mo yin te ehos mnon pa yan yin no (Yogaearabhami,: yi 64b6-7); ll\!J 1J��JI;i!t� § )J(:J}5JU lli ¥:HI1§ o JZ.1J��JI;�i��r8Jt�lii' jQE o 1£( § pJTWi1!lli 1lu :J}5JU �i¥!G:1§ o J1t* � �)gfDEl),13ll!! o RPJl:t)gfDEl),1iJI1!*� �iiJffi jI )g (T . 1579: 753bl O-14)

48 See also item 8 . 3 .

Abhidharmakosabha:jya 4

Chapter 1 Dhatunirdeia

1 .2) Vasubandhu indicates his disagreement with the Vaibha�ika definition of avijfiaptirupa.

ucyata iti ilcilryavacanalJ1 darsayati (Pradhan: 8.8-9; T. 1558: 3a24-25; Poussin v. 1 : 2 1 ; Sarpghabhadra states that Vasubandhu misrepresents the Vaibha�ika definition and that he does not accept avijfiaptirupa as being real [T. 1 562: 335b1 6-c9].)

Yogacarabhumi 5

1 .2) Accorcting to the ViniscayasaY(!grahalJf on the Paiicavijiianakiiyamanobhumi, rapaskandha consists of both real and provisional rupas. * SaY(!vararapa (lii-i se 1f:{#:e ) and *asaY(!vararapa (pu lii-i se /f1$:{#:e) are defined as provisional. 49 (See also item 4.S.)

tatra sarvasmad rupaskandhasaY(!grhftad rupan navaprakaraY(! dravyasat spra�!avyasaY(!grhftat tu catvari mahabhutani dravyasanti I tadanyat prajiiaptisad veditavyaY(! I dharmayatanaparyapannaY(! puna rupal'(! dvividhaY(! dravyasat prajiiaptisac ca l yatprabhtivataJ:t samadhigocaraI!l nirmitavat tatphalaI!l tadvi�ayaI!l tatpratisaY(!yuktavijiianavi�ayaY(! ca tad dravyasat I say(!varasay(!varasay(!grhftay(! tu p rajfiaptisat; 50 de la gzugs kyi phwi pos bsdus pa 'i gzugs thams cad las mam pa dgu ni rdzas su yod do I reg byas bsdus pa las 'byun ba chen po bii ni rdzas su yod pa yin no I de las gian pa mams ni btags pa 'i yod pa yin par rig par bya 'o I chos kyi skye mched du gtogs pa 'i gzugs ni mam pa giiis te I rdzas su yod pa dan btags pa 'i yod pa 'o I mthu las byun ba 'i tin ne 'dzin gyi spyod yul sprul pa Ita bu de 'i 'bras bu dan I de ' i yul dan de dan mtshuns par ldan pa 'i mam par ses pa ' i yul gan yin pa de ni rdzas su yod pa yin no (Yogacarabhamit: zi 5 1 a7-b l ) ; tzP �-to e ii: Mme � o ft.�.��o . mm � @ *.�.� �o . � M8����o !!! Y!�e7JF�=fio �fj .��� ;S:�%ltf.R\5EpJT1T:ljnMp�1to 1J1,*1J1:tJ[11 1J1t§ ��l!Vi�:tJ[e �.�m� ;S:1$:{#:e /f1$:{#:e � ��� (T. 1579: 597b4-9; see Fukuhara 1 973 : 93) 0

0

According to the ViniscayasaY(!grahalJf on the Cintamayfprajiia Bhumi, avijfiapti is included, along with the cittaviprayuktasay(!skaras, in a long list of saY(!skrtadharmas that are prajiiapti.

'dus byas kyi min can gyi dnos po la skye ba dan I rga ba dan I gnas pa dan I mi rtag pa dan I sa bon dan mam par rig byed dan I mam par rig byed ma yin pa dan I thob pa dan I 'thob pa ma yin pa dan I srog gi dban po dan I ris mthun pa I min gi tshogs dan I tshig gi tshogs dan I yi ge 'i tshogs mams dan so so 'i skye bo fiid dan I tshogs pa dan ma tshogs pa dan I 'jug pa so sor nes pa dan I sbyor ba dan I mgyogs pa dan I go rims dan I dus dan yul dan grans fie bar 'dogs pa dan (Yogacarabhami,: zi 20Sa4-6) ; X:a0�%t��y!��o �.lL.!E�1t�1tfiro � 49 *Say(!vararupa and *asaY(!vararupa here seem to be equivalent to avijfiaptirupa. See Hirakawa 1 990: 1 90- 193.

50 According to Matsuda Kazunobu (private communication), this passage appears in a Sanskrit manuscript fragment of the ViniicayasaY(!grahalJf preserved in St. Petersburg, andMatsuda has reconstructed it as above (non-italicized portions represent • Matsuda' s reconstruction).

Abhidharmakosabhii�a 6 Chapter 1 Dhiitunirdeia

Yogacarabhiimi

7

1 .2 continued) *�*1�W;fJUt'i-:@:��tocrm� (T. 1579: 621b6- 1 O) 0

0

See also the Vastusalflgraha/Jf: bdag tu Ita ba rnam pa bii ni na 'o snam pa 'i brgyal skye ba 'i rkyen gyi bya ba byed pa yin te / 'di Ita ste rnam par brtags pa ni 'di las phyi rol pa 'i mu stegs can mams kyi gan yin pa 'o / lhan cig skyes pa 'i tha na ri dags dan bya ba mams la yan yod pa gan yin pa 'o (Yogtictirabhumi,: 'i 1 62a5-7); 1l*� !m�i:f\i:Ji!,;f.&PJf1i\;:ll::J� 1:.:f\i:'I�o -�7t7.lU:f\i:Ji!,o �� �>'i-:@:PJf�o =f�1:.:f\i:Ji!, o �� T��i}\�lj}§�1:.� (T. 1579:

779c1 0-12) 1 47 Elsewhere, as Schmithausen (1987: 439 n. 928) notes, Vasubandhu attributes the assertion of the existence of such a sahaja satkayad!.J!i to thepurviictiryas (Pradhan: 290. 1 9-2 1 ; T. 1558: 102c26-27; Poussin v. 4: 41). 0

Abhidhannakosabha�ya 132 Chapter 3 Lokanirde§a 3.1) According to Vasubandhu, in arnpyadhatu there is no support for consciousness external to consciousness itself. (According to the Abhidh1irmikas, the support is nikiiyasabhaga and jfvitendriya. i48 The projecting cause (a�epahetu) is sufficient to establish consciousness in a new lifetime, regardless of whether the realm contains rnpa or not. tasman nasty arnpil:za1J1 sattvana1J1 cittasantater anya1J1 nisraya iti sautrantikii!:z I api tu yasyas cittasantater ak�epahetur avftat!�l}-o rnpe tasya!:z saha rnpel}-a sa1J1bhavad rnpa1J1 nisritya prav.rttir yasyas tu hetur vftatr�l}-o rnpe tasya anapekrya rnpa1J1 prav.rtti!:z I hetos tadvimukhatvad iti (Pradhan: 1 12. 1 8-20; T. 1588: Poussin v. 2: 6; Sarpghabhadra identifies this as the opinion of the siitra-master [T. 1 562: 458c1-8] and criticizes it, insisting that nikiiya­ sabhaga and jfvitendriya are necessary to support consciousness in the absence of rnpa and showing that Vasubandhu' s explanation regarding arnpyadhatu is inconsistent with how consciousness arises in the other realms [T. 1562: 458c8-458c25].)

148 On this occasion, Vasubandhu does not explicitly deny the reality of nikiiyasabhaga andjfvitendriya. However, Sarpghabhadra, using the term ching-chu ("siitra-master"), points out that Vasubandhu' s rejection of the Abhidh1irmika position is based on such a ' denial (T. 1562: 458b 1 9-c 1).

Yogiiciirabhami 133

3 . 1) The ViniscayasalJ1grahal}lOn the Cintiimayfprajiiii Bhami inc1udes nikiiya­ sabhiiga and jrvitendriya, along with the other cittaviprayuktasalJ1skiiras, in a long . list of salJ1skrtadharmas that are prajiiapti and thus not real (see item 1 .3). ,

dus byas kyi min can gyi dnos po la skye ba dan / rga ba dan / gnas pa dan / mi rtag pa dan / sa bon dan mam par rig byed dan / mam par rig byed rna yin pa dan / thob pa dan / 'thob pa rna yin pa dan / srog gi dban po dan / ris mthun pa dan / min gi tshogs dan / tshig gi tshogs dan / yi ge 'i tshogs mams dan so so 'i skye bo iiid daw tshogs pa dan rna tshogs pa dan / 'jug pa so sor nes pa dan / sbyor ba dan / mgyogs pa dan / go rims dan / dus dan yul dan grans iie bar 'dogs pa dan ( Yogiiciirabhami,: zi 208a4-6); X1J�;ff J.1&�i¥!;W�o 1litrL1:.{s1::t1l!f;1tflTo ;ff £Z1I!f;£H�frJtlU'K IWJ:5to ;t $t1i] $t 3t $t Jl.1:.'11o 5foir /f5fOif1jfE"lE�1§lf!��*�a�:1J&tt (T. 1579: 659a12- 16) The Savitarkiidi"bhami specifies that the saytlSkiiras perfumed by karma, i.e., iik�epahetu, which consists of bfjas, project a new lifetime in all three realms. tatra viisaniihetvadhi�!hiinam adhi�!hiiYiik�epahetuJ:z prajiiiipyate / tat kasya hetoJ:z / tathii hi / subhiiSubhakarmaparibhiivitiil:z saytzSkiiriis traidhiituke�!iini�!agati.rv i�!iini�!iitma­ bhiiviin iik�ipanti ( Yogiiciirabhami: 1 07.20- 108.2) ; de la rgyu'i gnas bag chags la brten nas / 'phen pa'i rgyu 'dogs par byed de / de ci'i phyir fe na / 'di ltar dge ba dan / mi dge ba 'i las kyis yons su bsgos pa 'i 'du byed rnams kyis khams gsum du sdug pa dan / mi sdug pa 'i 'gro ba rnams su / sdug pa dan mi sdug pa'i Ius rnams 'phen par byed pa dan / de iiid kyi dban gis phyi rol gyi dnos po rnams kyan / phan sum tshogs pa dan / rgud par 'gyur ba 'i phyir te / de bas na 'du byed rnams kyi dge ba dan mi dge ba 'i las kyi bag chags la brten nas 'phen pa 'i rgyu 'dogs so � o,giiciira� amji f!!j 64b5-8); fit� #\' lN fit�o ,Otli��� 5J IN a pJT J2J-1lf1PJ a El3 i$-/f l¥* � � =3'f.a1'i1T o 1J��/f�� 1=jJ � 5 1 �/f � i3 H:o X&P El3 Jl:t:i� ...t 1J �Hi-�m �iito ;llk�J:fit�qT i$-/f i$-*� #\'fit�o :Ml�� 5 1 1N (T. 1 579: 301b28-c3) 149

!

The ViniicayasalJ1grahal}lOn the Paiicavijiiiinakiiyamanobhami says that, if conscious­ ness did not contain the seeds of rnpa, rebirth after falling from iirnpyadhiitu would be impossible. gal te rnam par ses pa gzugs kyi sa bon dan Idan pa ma yin du zin na / so so 'i skye bo gzugs med pa rnams su skyes pa tshe zad cin las zad nas de nas 'ci 'pho fin yan 'og tu skye pa 'i gzugs kyi sa bon med pas 'byun bar mi 'gyur ba fig na 'byun ste / de Ita bas na gzugs kyi sa bon dan Idan pa 'i rnam par ses pa de la brten nas / de 'i gzugs 149 For other relevant definitions of iik�epahetu in the Yogiiciirabhami, see Kritzer 1999: 155-165 . 0

134

Abhidharmako§abhii�ya Chapter 3 Lokanirdeia

Yogiiciirabhiimi 135

3 . 1 continued) 'byUJi bar rig par bya 'o (Yogiiciirabhamit: z i 1 6b4-6; see Schmit­ hausen 1987: 2 1 , 288 n. 172 b); qj[*;E'�t�MF1Mj+pJTJl.;l�1§- �1!!H�, 3'f. ��o �� •••• &�.� T � o � •• +.���o ����o ��.�.� fj+Jl.;l�D�\�o .tlJl:t:11& � -E. yt�� (T. 1 579: 5 83c7- lOi50 0

150 The Vastusa'!lgraha':!f also says that the bfjas of riipa exist in iirilpyadhiitu consciousness : gzugs med pa dag ni mam par ses pa med la yan brten la gzugs kyi sa bon la yan brten to / min dan gzugs kyi sa bon yan mam par ses pa la brten cin 'dug ste / gzugs kyi rgyun chad zin pa las kyan gzugs kyi sa bon de las phyi ma la 'byun bar 'gyur te (Yogiiciirabhiimi,: 'i 285b7-286al); tE.-E.3'f.o �t:ff 'I�;!;Jf �o *�� & -E. .+o � &-E..*�® . o � � � � :ff -E. .�o -E. . � E� . � � (T. 1579: 827c29-828a2). This would appear t o b e an example o f a case in the Yogiiciirabhiimi in which consciousness in iiriipyadhiitu maintains a connection with matter (see Schmithausen 1987 : 47-50). 0

Abhidharmakosabhii0la 136

Chapter 3 Lokanirde§a

3 .2i 51 In a discussion of the vijiiiinasthitis, Vasubandhu mentions the opinion of the Sautriintikas that the Abhasvara gods are said to have different ideas because, at the time of destruction of the universe, some of them have the idea of fear, while others do not. (According to the Vaibh�ikas, it is because their feelings alternate between pleasant and neither-pleasant-nor-unpleasant.) sautriintikii vyiicak�ate I sutra uktarrr yathii te niiniitvasarrrjiiinaJ.!. I tatra ye sattvii iibhiisvare devanikiiye 'ciropapannii bhavanti naiva sarrrvartanikufalii na vivartanf­ kusalii asya lokasya te tiim arci�arrr dr�.tvii bhftiiJ.!. santa udvijante sarrrvegam iipadyante I sahaivai�ii 'rciJ.!. sunyarrr briihmarrr vimilnarrr dagdhvii 'rviig iigami0latfti I tatra ye sattvii iibhiisvare devanikiiy e ciropapanniiJ.!. sarrrvartanfkusalii vivartanfkusala§ ciisya lokasya te tiin sattviin bhftiin iisviisayanti I mil bhai�!a milr�iiJ.!. mil bhai�!a miir�iiJ.!. I purvam apy e�ii 'rciJ.!. sunyarrr briihmarrr vimiinarrr dagdhvii 'traiviintarhite ti I ato 'rciJ.!. iigamavyapagama sarrrjiiitviit bhftii bhftasarrrjiiitviic ca te niiniitvasarrrjiiino na sukhiiduJ.!.khiisukhasarrrjiiitviid iti (Pradhan: 1 1 6. 16-23 ; T. 1 5 8 8 : 43alO- 1 9 ; Poussin v. 2: 20; Sarpghabhadra identifies this as the position of the sutra-master [T. 1 562: 463b5], with which the Sthavira' s position is said to agree [T. 1 562: 463b l l - 1 3 ] , and he rejects it, saying that fear is inconsistent with vijiiiinasthiti, which implies pleasant feelings and mental stability [T. 1 562: 463b6- 1 1].)

1 5 1 Before this item, in the context of a discussion of whether antariibhava is a gati, Vasubandhu mentions the opinion of "others" that the gatis can be kusala and kli�!a. According to the Vaibha�ikas, they must only be avyiikrta (Pradhan: 1 15 .3-6; T. 1558: 42b 1 3 - 1 6 ; Poussin 2: 14). S arpghabhadra identifies the opinion mentioned by Vasubandhu as the argument of the siitra-master (T. 1 562: 459c2-5) and criticizes it (T. 1 562: 459c5-460a21). But P' u-kuang says that this is a Mahasarpghika position (T. 1 8 2 1 : 1 52a14). I have found nothing in the Yogiiciirabhilmi to suggest disagreement with the Vaibha�ika position on this issue. Sarpghabhadra refers to the sutra-master three more times (T. 1562: 460b 1 1 , 26, 29) in the remainder of the discussion (Pradhan: 1 15.6-13; T. 1558: 42b 17-28; Poussin 2: 14; T. 1562: 460a21-460b29). 0

Yogileilrabhami 137

3 .2) According to the Srutamayf Bhumi, the Abhasvara gods have different ideas because when they see Brahma' s conflagration, some are afraid and some are not. 'od gsal gyi Zha gnas na ni sria phyir skyes pa mams / tsharis pa 'i 'jig rten tshig pa '; me lee mthori ba las 'jigs pa dmi / mi 'jigs pa 'i 'du ses su 'gyur bas / de dag ni 'du ses mi 'dra bar rig par bya 'o (Yogileilrabhumir-' dzi 2 1 1 aS-6); :7t11fJ"::: ,*7t1&1:.1lf EB flJ;tiltJii:t1S1��o fjjjJ a��:1f'I'l1l/f'I'l1l�o �ti$c:aN!t:1f ��Ji� (T. 1 579: 354c20-22) 0

Abhidharmakosabhii�a 138 Chapter 3 Lokanirdda 3 .3) One ofVasubandhu' s explanations forwhy there are only fourvijiiiinasthitis (i.e., why vijiiiinaskandha is not also a vijiiiinasthiti) compares vijiiiina to a seed and vijiiiinasthiti to a field: these two must be different. api ca lqetrabhiivena bhagavatii catasro vijiiiinasthitayo dditiiJ:t / bfjabhiivena ca sopiidiina1']'! vijiiiina1']'! krtsnam eveti na punar bfja1']'! bfjasya k�etrabhiivena vyavasthiipayii1']'! babhuvety abhipraya1']'! parikalpayiimiisa /ye dharmiiJ:t sahavartino vijiiiinasya te ' sya lqetrabhiivena siidhfyiil'J'lSO bhavantfti ta eviisya sthitaya uktiiJ:t (Pradhan: 1 1 8 . 10- 1 3 ; T. 1588: 43c8-c 14; Poussin v. 2: 25-26; Sarp.ghabhadra identifies this as the explanation of the sutra-master [T. 1562: 465b7-14] and says that the simile of seed and field is valid since it does not contradict sutra, but he rejects Vasubandhu' s explanation o f th e simile for several reasons [T. 1562: 465b 14-c9] .)

YogiiciirabMimi 139

3 .3) Th e VastusaJ?1grahalJ-f(Yogiiciirabhiimir' 'i201a2-b2; T. 1579: 794b6-24; Mukai 1985: 30) comments on SaJ?1yuktiigama, sutra 39 (T. 99: 8c26-9a27), in an explanation of how the sprout of the next life arises from the seed, which is vijiiiina. In this passage, vijfiiina is said to be the hetu and the four vijiiiinasthitis, which are compared to a field, are said to be pratyayas. ymi srid par skye ba 'i myu gu 'byun ba la ni rgyu gcig dan rkyen gfiis yod de / 'du byed rnam pa lna po dag la fion mons pa sa bon dan ldan pa'i roam par ses pa ni rgyu'o / rnam par ses pa 'i gnas bti tin dan 'dra ba dan / dga ' ba dan 'dod chags des rnam par ses pa skye ba de dan der fiin mtshams sbyar ba 'i phyir rlan par byed pa ni rkyen yin no / de la kha cig ni rnam par ses pa 'i gnas bti phunpor gtogs par 'gyur la dga ' ba dan 'dod chags ni des tshe 'di la gsar du bsags sin bsdus na (Yogiiciirabhumi,: 'i 20l a2- 4) ; Q3[ * - 1ZSl =�%1k1f:!¥ �1�-!t-:&o �\ll 1L �� 1'J 9=t rJH��ITPJfjlj!� ilo m � � lZSl o � 83 15'1§ iW- Jm �lil1! o m � � �� o JZ.. E!:L;; � i�ir,lJ A il o %:Jj� ����-!t.M-!tffi . o � . � � o � � �.o � 9=t 1f - � Jm iltt.��� � ;;; � tJ:o :Jj�:ffl. ¥* 9=t *HJTjM�&JJj:� -:& (T. 1 579:794b6- 12) See also an explanation in the VastusaJ?1grahalJ-f of defilement ( Yogiiciirabhiimi,: 'i 314b2-3 15a2; T. 1579: 840a12-24; Mukai 1985: 36), which comments on SaJ?1yuktiigama, sutra 374 (T. 99: 102c28-103a12).

>

152 Corrected from yin IZSl on the basis of the alternate reading in the TaishO note and the Tibetan translation, tin (Yogiiciirabhumi,: 'i 201a3), which corresponds to" k?etra.

Abhidharmakosabha1Ya 140 Chapter 3 Lokanirdesa

3.4) One Vaibhii�ika answer to the question of why the Buddha chose birth in the womb over an apparitional birth is that it was in order to leave a body as a relic. 1 53 Vasubandhu objects that this explanation will not satisfy those who think the Buddha has adhi�!hanikf rddh i, the power to maintain his body after death. adhi�!hiinikfm rddhi/'fl bhagavata icchatam na yukta e�a parihiiraf:/. (Pradhan: 1 1 9.25-26; T. 1558: 44a27-28 ; Poussin v. 2: 3 1 ; Sarp.ghabhadra identifies this as the explanation of the siitra-master [T. 1562: 467c25-26] and rejects it in favor of the Vaibha�ika explanation, saying that a body maintained after death by rddhi would not be impregnated with the Buddha' s special powers and so would not be very beneficial to the world [T. 1 562: 467c27-468a15].)

1 5 3 See the Vibhii�a (T. 1 545 : 627c9- 1 5).

Yo gacarabhumi 141

3 .4) The Bodhisattvabhumi says that the Buddhas and bodhisattvas can use their magical power to continue to exist after death. kiT[lcic ca nirmal}am adhiti�thati yad uparate 'pi bodhisattve tathagate va 'nuvartata eva (Bodhisattvabhumi: 64.23-25); byan chub sems dpa ' 'am i de biin gsegs pa 'das pa 'i og tu yan sprul pa la la gnas pa kho nar byin gyis rlob pa dan ( Yogacara-bhUmi; ii 42a4-5) ; D0 � .!lX;1'f��1��ili ijlli�&1� EE 1Hcif:JJ ffift&lljUf (T. 1 5 7 9 : 493b6-7)

Abhidharmakosabhii�ya 142 Chapter 3 Lokanirdesa 3 .5) According to Vasubandhu, denying the existence of antarabhava by comparing death and rebirth to an object and a reflected image is wrong because the reflected image is not real. pratibimbam asiddhatvad asamyac canidarsanamlpratibimba'!l ntimtinyad evotpadyate dharmtintaram ity asiddham etat (Pradhan: 1 20. 1 9-20; T. 1 5 8 8 :44b28-c l l ; Poussin v. 2: 34-35; Kritzer 2000a: 243247 ; S arp.ghabhadra identifies this as the explanation of the siitra-master [T. 1 562: 470a1 8-b2J and criticizes it at very great length, refuting each of Vasubandhu' s argu­ ments and insisting that the reflected image is in fact real [T. 1562: 470b2-472a22J .)

Yogiiciirabhflmi 143

3 .5) According to the ViniscayasaT[lgraha1J! on the Paiicavijiiiinakilyamanobhami, the comparison between death and rebirth and object and image is invalid and does not disprove the existence of the antariibhava. bar mdo 'i srid pa yod par rgyu gan gis khon du chud par bya ie na / smras pa / si

� � = � = � � � � �� � � � � � � �

pa ' i phyir dan / mam par 'khrul pa tsam yin pas brag ca lta bur yan mi run ba dan / ma 'gags pa 'i phyir gzugs briian lta bur yan mi run ba dan / 'gro bab med pa 'i phyir dmigs pa 'dzin pa lta bur yan mi run ste / gan gi phyir dpe de dag mi run ba de 'i phyir bar mdo 'i srid pa yod par rig par bya ste (Yogiicarabhami,: zi 55a5-8) ; Fp�1ilJ IEl 1��D� r:p �J1� 0 :@.tiJ£J1:tiQ 80 ��PJT1]1(gt' L" L,pJT 0 � � jl�J;1l[ iI!! � M;h

tto /f!ff. fr D�rIl��Ltto /f!ff. fr D�1�/fi$;tto uF/f�mfrDJf;zpJT*�o ?F1T1:Uto EB frD;ll!:: � pJTm!,Pffii o /f!ff. J!! J1l[o ;ll!:: tt'i"�D5E� r:p � (T. 1 579: 599a9- 14)

Abhidharmakosabhii�ya 144 Chapter 3 Lokanirdeia

3 .6) According to Vasubandhu, the reflected image, which is not real, appears due to the power of the coming together of causes and conditions. He says that the variety of the capabilities of dharmas is unthinkable. siimagryiis tu sa tasyas tadrsaf:z prabhavo yat tatha darsanafJ1 bhavati / acintyo hi dharma1J.iifJ1 saktibhedaf:z (Pradhan: 121 .4-5; T. 1558: 44c1O- 1 l ; Poussin v. 2: 35; Srup.ghabhadra identifies this as the explanation of the siltra-master [T. 1 562: 472a22-24] and criticizes it bitterly, suggest­ ing that if one denies the reality of the reflected image, one might as well deny the reality of all dharmas [T. 1562: 472a24-clO] ; see Fukuda 1998a: 3-9; Kritzer 2000a: 243-244.)

Yogiiciirabhilmi 145

3 . 6) According to the ViniicayasalJ'lgrahal}f on the Sacittikii Bhilmi, the prav.rtti­ vijiiiinas depend on the iilayavijiiiina as the reflected image depends on the mirror; this suggests the relative unreality of the reflected image. 1 54 don dam pa 'i tshul mam par biag pas 'jug pa gan ie na I mdor bsdu na mam par ses pa ni mam pa giiis te I kun gii mam par ses pa dan I 'jug pa'i mam par ses pa 'o I de la kun gii mam par ses pa ni gnas yin no I 'jug pa 'i mam par ses pa ni gnas pa yin te I de yan mam pa bdun te I mig gi mam par ses pa nas I yid dan yid kyi mam par ses pa ' i bar te I chu ' i cho bo dan I rlabs Ita bu ' am I me Ion dan gzugs briian Ita bu yin no (Yogiiciirabhilmi; zi 1 89b l-3; see Schrnithausen 1 987: 325-326 n. 357); 'i:1iiJ.:t���Jf�JjJ!:rr.i£Jjljo �iil �:ff=fJ&o -*�iiJii:Jfl)�o =*�fJ&o �iiJ ii:Jfl)�ilt�pfift{o *$�;llk �Mt{o lI:�qj[-f::Ai: o pJT�iil BR�JY�:f:�o ft�f]7j(,i�1t{1l:Jl: iJlEo ��f]�{�1t{1I::.I31l1� o �f];llk.:t 1t{��j�JIJ1&pfift{�Mt{i£JjIj (T. 1579: 651b13-17) The definitions in the Savitarkiidi-bhilmi of saktivaicitrya hetvadhi�!hiina and siimagrfhetvadhi�!hiina may be relevant here: saktivaicitrya refers to the multiplicity of forces necessary to produce the variety of dharmas associated with kiimadhiitu, rilpadhiitu, and iirupyadhiitu, as well as non-associated (aniisrava) dharmas, while in the case of siimagrf of production, when the totality of causes necessary for the production of any dharma is realized, the dharma arises. tatra saktivaicitryalJ'l hetvadhi�!hiinam adhi�!hiiya pratiniyamahetuJ:t prajiiiipyate I tat kasya hetoJ:t I tathii hi I kiimapratisa1J1yuktii dharmii vicitrasvabhiivii vicitriid svabhiivavi�e§iic chaktivaicitryiid utpadyante Iyathii kiimapratisa1J1yuktii eva1J1 rupa­ pratisalJ'lyuktii iirilpyapratisalJ'lyuktii apratisa1J1yuktiiJ:t I tasmiic chaktivaicitryam adhi�!hiiya pratiniyamahetuJ:t prajiiiipyate I tatra siimagrfhetvadhi�!hiinam adhi�!hiiya sahakiirihetuJ:t prajiiiipyate I tat kasya hetoJ:t I tathii hi I sviim utpatti­ siimagrfm iigamya kiimapratisa1J1yuktiinii1J1 dharmiiIJiim utpiido bhiiviiti I yathii kiimapratisa1J1yuktiiniim eva1J1 rilpapratisa1J1yuktiiniim iirilpyapratisa1J1yuktiiniim apratisalJ'lyuktiinii1J1 I yathotpattisiimagry eva1J1 priiptisiimagrf siddhisiimagrf ni�patti­ siimagrf kriyiisiimagrfI tasmiit siimagrfm adhi�!hiiya sahakiirihetuJ:t prajiiiipyate 1 54 In a similar passage in the Viniscayasa1J1grahaIJf on the Bodhisattvabhilmi �a1J1dhinirmocanasutra), the meditational image is said to be no different from the consciousness in which it is perceived, just as the reflected image depends on the mirror, with the object acting as a condition; this suggests that the reflected image has no independent reality (yogiiciirabhUmi,: 'i 74b6-75a3 ; T. 1579: 724a3-13; Sa1J1dhi­ nirmocanasiltra,: 90.22-9 1 . 17; T. 676: 698a22-b9). Fukuda thinks that Vasubandhu carefully avoids stating a position similar to the one that underlies this famous passage (1 998a: 9). However, as we can see, SaJ1lghabhadra clearly thinks that Vasubandhu' s statement has radical implications. 0

AbhidhannakosabhiiifYa 146 Chapter 3 Lokanirdeia

Yogiicarabhfimi 147

3 . 6 continued) (Yogacarabhfiini: 109 . 1 9- 1 1 0.7); de Ia rgyu'i gnas dan mthu sna tshogs la brten nas / so sor nes pa 'i rgyu 'dogs par byed de / de ci 'i phyir ie na / 'di Itar 'dod pa Idan pa 'i chos no bo fiid rnam pa sna tshogs pa rnams ni l no bo fiid kyi khyad par rnam pa sna tshogs / mthu rnam pa rna tshogs can las byun ba 'i phyir ro / 'dod pa dan ldan pa rnams ji Ita ba biin du / gzugs dan ldan pa rnams dan / gzugs med pa dan ldan pa rnams dan / Idan pa ma yin pa 'i rnams kyan de dan 'dra ste / de bas na mthu sna tshogs Ia brtenl 55 nas / so sor nes pa 'i rgyu 'dogs so / de la rgyu 'i sna tshogs pa brten nas / Ihan cig byed pa 'i rgyu 'dod par byed de / de ci 'i phyir ie na / 'di Itar ran skye ba 'i tshogs dan phrad nas 'dod pa dan Idan pa 'i chos rnams skye ba 'i phyir ro / 'dod pa dan Idan pa rnams ji Ita ba biin du / gzugs dan Idan pa rnams dan / gzugs med pa dan ldan pa rnams dan / Idan pa ma yin pa rnams kyan de dan 'dra 'o / skye ba 'i tshogs pa ji Ita ba biin du thob pa 'i tshogs pa dan / grub par gyur pa 'i tshogs pa dan / 'grub pa 'i tshogs pa dan / gnas pa 'i tshogs pa dan / byed pa 'i tshogs pa rnams kyan de dan 'dra ste / de bas na tshogs pa Ia brten nas Ihan cig byed pa 'i ryu 'dogs so ( Yogacarabhamit: dzi 66a3-b 1); 1:& � JJIj Jj]

� � *.o ���. � o m��Mo ��.R� � ttJj] ������� •• � ttJj] � o ��.�o � ����.&�.��. o ��*��Jj] �*.o ���. � o 1M015-1ZS11:&.o ���[PJ$lZSIo pfi��1PJo ��3i1� § �5f015-tIto OpJ\. .¥!��DOpJ\. .¥!o �D ����.&�.Y!�. o �D�5fD 15- o �D�1�$;$hfffl 5fD 15-�.o �tIt1MD15-1:&.:Iitil�� [PJ$1ZSI (T. 1 579: 302a2 1 0)1 56 _

1 55 Corrected from rten on the basis of the Derge. 1 56 See the defInition in the ViniscayasaY[!grahal}! on the Paficavijfianaktiyamano­ bhfimi of samagrf as a cittaviprayuktasaY[!Skara: all the causes and conditions that can produce dharmas are referred to by the single term samagrf(Yogacarabhiimir' zi 26b3-4; T. 1 579: 587b29-c2). See also Kritzer 1999: 249-253. 0

Abhidharmakosabha0'a 148 Chapter 3 Lokanirdeia 3.7) According to Vasubandhu, avidya in the avasthika interpretation ofpratftyasamutpada is accompanied by all the other klesas, like a king by his retinue. sahacaryat tadvasena te�arrz samudacarac ca / rajagamanavacane tadanu­ yatrikagamanasiddhavat (Pradhan: 1 3 1 . 1 9-20; T. 1588: 48b21-23 ; Poussin v. 2: 63 ; SaJ.1lghabhadra identifies this as the opinion of the sutra-master [T. 1 562: 484a12-14] and, objecting to Vasu­ bandhu's understanding of the word sahacarya on the grounds that it establishes an improper separation between avidya and the rest of the klesas, refers approvingly to the Vaibha�ika position that avidya here refers to the five skandhas of the past life in the state of defilement [T. 1562: 484a15-27] .)

Yogacarabhumi 149

3 .7) (Perhaps it is relevant that in the Savitarkadi-bhami, avidya is said to be viparyasamula, while satkayadr�!i, part of antagrahadr�!i, srlavrataparamarsa, and raga are viparyasa proper, and mithyiidNP, part of antagrahadr�!i, pratigha, mana, and vicikitsa are viparyasani�yanda. tatra viparyasamulam avidya / viparyasaJ:t 1 57 satkiiyadr�!ir antagrahakadr�!er eka­ defo dr�!iparamarso ragas ca / viparyasaniryando mithyadr�!ir antagrahadr�!er ekadefaJ:t pratigho mana vicikitsa ca [ Yogacarabhami 166. 16- 1 8 ; see Schmithausen 1987: 449 n. 963 ] ; de la phyin ci log gi rtsa ba ni ma rig pa 'o / phyin ci log ni 'jig tshogs la Ita ba dan / mthar 'dzin par Ita ba 'i phyogs gcig dan / Ita ba mchog tu 'dzin pa dan / tshul khrims dan brtul lugs mchog tu 'dzin pa dan / 'dod chags so / phyin ci log gi rgyu mthun pa ni / log par Ita ba daw mthar 'dzin pa 'i Ita ba 'i phyogs gcig dan / kon khro ba dan / na rgyal dan / the tshom mo [Yogacarabhumi,: dzi 97a8-b2] ; lfH�*�o �iil #!lli l¥3 o ruHftl ill � o �iil lll ]Jl.!UIIU� o jf¥J\�-5to � Jf!l. Il:M�Jf!l.&�o fftl �mE�o �U��jftl\�-5to �'I�&lfl [T. 1579: 3 1 4b14- 1 6])

1 57 Corrected by Schmithausen from viparyasani�yandaJ:t on the basis of the Tibetan and Chinese. 0

Abhidharmako§abhii�ya 150 Chapter 3 Lokanirde§a 3 . 8) Vasubandhu questions the iivasthika interpretation of pratftyasamutpiida: if each member contains all five skandhas, why should the members receive the name, avidyii, etc . ? iivasthika1:r kile�to 'yam yady migam aligaT[! paficaskandhii1:r kiT[! ktiralJam avidyiidfn eva dhanniin kfrtayati smalpriidhiinyiit tv aligakzrtanamlavidyiipradhiiniim avasthiim avidyilT[! jagiida saT[!skiirapradhiinaT[! saT[!sktiran yiivaj jariimaraIJam ity ado�a1:r (Pradhan: 1 3 3 . 1 0- 1 3 ; T. 1 5 8 8 : 48c22-26; Poussin v. 2: 66-67; SaIl1ghabhadra identifies this as the opinion of the siitra-master, who uses the word kila to show that he does not accept the Vaibha�ika iivasthika interpretation [T. 1 562: 494b 1 5 - 1 9 ] . SaIl1ghabhadra then presents the first o f the Sthavira' s six detailed objections t o the iivasthika interpretation [494b21-c1 0] and refutes it [494c 1 0-495b 19].)

Yogdcdrabhiimi 151

3 .8) (Although the Yogdcdrabhami does not have a discussion o f this issue, it nowhere states that the members of the formula consist of the five skandhas, and none of the various pratftyasamutpdda expositions in the text resembles the Sarvastivadin dvasthika interpretation.)

152

Abhidharmakosabhii�ya

Chapter 3 Lokanirdesa

3.9) Vasubandhu refutes the Sthavira' s explanation of why ayoniso manasikiira is not mentioned as an anga of the pratftyasamutpiida fOlmu1a. According to the Sthavira, ayoniso manasikiira is said in a sutra to be the cause of avidyii, but another SLUra says that it is produced by avidyii. Thus, the mutual dependence of the two eliminates the need to mention ayoniso manasikiira as a separate anga. According to Vasubandhu, the real reason is that the purpose of the Pratftyasamutpiidasutra was to explain the connections between the past and present lives and the present and future lives; therefore, no furthet members are required. avidyiijariimaraJ}OYo� parelJiingiintariinabhidhaniit saf!1Siirasyiidyantavattvaprasanga� / na ciiparipun:1O nirde§a iti / kilJ1 kiira�am / pravrttisalJ1murjhebhyo vineyebhyal; kathalJ1 paralokiid ihaloka ihalokiic ca puna� paraloka� salJ1badhyata ity etiivato 'triirthasya vivak�itatviit / etasya ca purvam evoktatviit / purviipariintamadhye�u salJ1mohavinivrttaye 15 8

(Pradhan: 135.21-136. 1 ; T. 1588: 49c lO-17; Poussin v. 2: 72; Sarpghabhadra identifies this as the opinion of the siltra-master [T. 1562: 497b22-28], and he criticizes Vasubandhu for inventing his own explanation, which differs from the perfectly ade­ quate Vaibh�ika explanation, which Vasubandhu already has mentioned/59 namely that avid)ii, as a kle§a, arises from kle§a and from karma [T. 1562: 497b28-c12].)

158 The passage quoted contains only Vasubandhu' s explanation of his own position. 15 9 Pradhan: 1 35.2-3 ; T. 1588: 49b 1 3 ; Poussirt v. 2: 69.

Yogiiciirabhiimi 1 53

3 .9) The sarfra portion of the pratftyasamutpiida expositions in the Savitarkiidi­ bhiimi and the Vastusal'[!grahal}f states that pratftyasamutpiida can be summarized with reference to three aspect�: how one is born into the present from the past;O how one is born into the future from the present; and how one can attain to purification in the present life. sarfral'[! katamat / samiisatas tribhir iikiiraiJ:t pratftyasamutpiidasya vyavasthiinal'[! bhavati / yathii piirviintiin madhyiinte sambhavati / yathii ca madhyiintiid apariinte sambhavati / yathii ca ca madhyiinte sambhiito vartate vyavadiiniiya ca paraiti (Yogiiciirabhiimi: 198. 17- 1 9) ; Ius gan ie na / mdor bsdu na / rten cili 'brei par 'byun ba ni rnam pa gsum du giag pa yin te / snon gyi mtha ' nas ji ftar dbus kyi mthar 'byun ba dan / dbus kyi mtha ' nas ji Itar phyi ma ' i mthar 'byUli ba dan / dbus kyi mthar byun nasji Itar gnas pa dan/ rnam par byan bar 'gyur ba ' 0 (Yogiiciirabhiimi,: dzi 1 15b3-4) ; �� Ell= �t1§�:rr � �o ljl!l1;£� �� r:p W.f-�o fJf r:p W.f-1&���o r:p �� � 8 ;S:Jf!B iJlE:Qo ;S:Jf!Bjtiji-�Jt (T. 1579: 321a17- 1 9) 1 6o

1 60 The remainder of the sarfra portion explains this process in detail (see Kritzer 1999: 82-87). See also Yogiiciirabhiim i; 'i 287b5-6; T. 1579: 828c9- 12.

Abhidhannakosabhiirya 154

Chapter 3 Lokanirdeia

3 . 10) Vasubandhu sees a contradiction between the sutra statement, "I teach pratftyasamutpiida and pratftyasamutpannadhannas, " and the abhidhanna teaching that both terms refer to all saY[lskrtadhannas. Arguing on the Sarvastivadins' own terms, he shows that they would have to include future dhannas among the pratftyasamutpannadhannas, which would not make sense. Instead, he follows the opinion of Vasumitra in the Vibhii�ii (T. 1545: 1 1 8b25-c5; Poussin v. 2: 74 n. 1) in explaining that the migas of the pratftyasamutpiida formula are pran"1yasamutpiida in that they are cause and pratftyasamutpanna in that they are result. tajjtitfyatviit tat tatraivtitideio yathii na ca tiivad riipyate riiparrt cocyate tajjiitfyatviid ity ado�aJ:! / siitriibhiprayas tv ayam ucyate I hetur atra samutpiidaJ:! samutpannaY[l pha1arrt matam / hetubhutam miga[m] 161 pratftyasamutpiidaJ:! samutpadyate 'smiid iti ler"tviiphalabhutam miga[m] 162pratftyasamutpannam I evaY[l sarviilJY migiiny ubhayathii sidhyanti / hetuphalabhiiviit I na caivaY[l satyavyavasthii bhavanty apek�iibhediit I yad apekrya pratftyasamutpiido na tad eviipekrya pratftyasamutpannal'[! hetuphalavat pitTPutravac ca (Pradhan: 136.6- 1 1 ; T. 1 5 8 8 : 49c23-50a3 ; Poussin v. 2: 74; SaJ1lghabhadra discusses Vasubandhu' s explanation at great length [T. 1 562: 498b 1 5-499a1 ] , stating that Vasubandhu misunderstands the sutra, while the A.bhidhiirmikas understand it correctly [T. 1562: 498c26-499alJ.)

161 162

See Hirakawa 1 973- 1 978, v. 1: 420. See Hirakawa 1 97 3 - 1 978, v. 1 : 267.

Yogiiciirabhami 155

3 . 10) In the Savitarkiidi-bhaini, pratftyasamutpiida is defined as the nature of sal!1skiiras to arise, while pratftyasamutpannatii is defined as the fact that they have arisen. katamaJ:! pratftyasamutpiidaJ:! / katamii pratftyasamutpannatti / yii utpattidharmatii163 sal!1skiirii�iim ayal!1 pratftyasamutpiidaJ:! / yii punar utpannataiva sii pratftya­ samutpannatety ucyate (Yogiiciirabhami: 219.8-1 1); rten cili 'brei par 'byUli ba ni gan / rten cin 'brei par 'byun ba fiid ni gan i.e na / 'du byed mams kyi skye ba 'i chos fiid gan yin pa de ni / rten cin 'brei par 'byun ba 'o / skyes pa fiid gan yin pa de ni rten cin 'breipar 'byun ba fiid ces bya 'o (Yogiiciirabhami,: dzi 128b7-8); :L:1iiJ��o :L:1PJ�l'.o �j'j �1Tl'.�¥:t;'11:ill:::t *��o IlP1BE1'.8m:t �1'. (T. 1579: 325c10-12) In the Vini§Cayasal!1graha�f on the Paficavijfiiinakiiyamanobhami, it is said that,

among those dharmas that arise due to conditions, causes are called p ratftyasamutpiida, while results are called pratftyasamutpanna. The same principle is applied to the members of the pratftyasamutpiida formula. de la rgyu gan yin pa de la ni rten cin 'brei par 'byun ba i.es bya 'o / 'bras bu gan yin pa de ni rten cili 'brei par byunl 64 ba i.es bya bar bita bar bya 'o / de la rna rigs pa 'i bag ia fial rna spans pa yod pas rna rig pa 'i kun nas dkris pa 'byun no / rna rig pa 'i kun nas dkris pa skyes pa 'i phyir 'du byed mams kyi 'jug pa skye '0 / de bi.in du 'du byed kyi sa bon rna spans pa yod pas 'du byed mams 'byun no / 'du byed mams skyes pa 'i phyir mam par Ses pa 'jug pa skye ' 0 / de biin du rten Gin 'brei par 'byun ba'i yan lag lhag rna mams kyi 'jug pa 'i tshui yan ci rigs par rig par bya 'o (Yogiiciirabhumi,: zi 86b4-7); �9;aJl:t r:p 12SI :t *��*:t�l'.o J1:t$li J3!j Il;! HR/f IllJT :1iti5co 1BE$li J3!j*I:1i a J1:t $li J3!j rll'.ti5c o 1BE�t1T " o �a :ill:: �:/HT�iT/f lllJT ti5co �MT1�l'. o �t1Tl'.ti5c1�:1i �M'o �a:ill::pJTt��r��3tl1rE"jElJ1.o �aAPJT��9;a7ffm (T. 1 579: 6 1 lb19-24)

1 63 Punctuation corrected from Bhattacharya' s pratftyasamutpannatii yii utpatti­ dharmatii / on the basis of the Tibetan and Chinese. 1 64 Derge reads 'byuii.

Abhidharmakosabhil.rJa 156 Chapter 3 Lokanirde§a 3 , 1 1) Vasubandhu criticizes the avasthika interpretation as being unjustifiable by sutra because the Pratftyasamutpadasutra is nftartha. atra tu sautrantika vijfiapayanti / kilJ1 khalv eta i:j,taya ueyante ya yasye:j,tir ahosvit sutrarthaJ:z / sutrartha ity aha / yadi sutrartho nai:ja sutrarthaJ:z / kathalJ1 k,rtva / yat tavad uktam avasthika e:ja pratftyasamutpado dvadasapafieaskandhika avastha dvadasaftganfty etad utsutram / sutre 'nyatha nirde§ad / avidyii katamii / yat tat purvante 'jfiiinam iti vistarerza / yae ea nftiirthGlJ'! na tat punar neyalJ1 bhavatfti nai:ja sutriirthaJ:z (Pradhan: 1 3 6 , 1 4- 1 8 ; T, 1 5 8 8 : 50a7 - 1 3 ; Poussin v, 2: 75; S arp.ghabhadra identifies this as the opinion of the siltra-master [T, 1562: 495c22-27], relates it to the last of the Sthavira' s six detailed objections to the iivasthika interpretation [T, 1562: 494c610], and refutes it, turning Vasubandhu' s argument about nftiirtha and neyiirtha sutras against him [T, 1562: 495c27-496al l] .) 1 65

1 65 See item 3 :8,

Yogacarabhami 1 57

3 . 1 1) In the pratftyasamutpada exposition of the Savitarkiidi-bhumi, the explana­ tion of the individual members essentially follows and comments upon the Pratftya­ samutpadasutra (Yogacarabhumi: 204. 1"-212.3 ; Yogacarabhumir" dzi 1 1 9al- 124a6; T. 1 579: 322b2-324a15 ; see Kritzer 1 999: 33-52 for a summary of this section). Due to the length of the passage, I do not provide the text here.

Abhidharmakosabhii�ya 158 Chapter 3 Lokanirde§a 3 . 12) Vasubandhu' s defense of the etymology of the word pratftyasamutpiida 1 66 against the criticism of the Grammarians is based on the idea that, although past and future dharmas are nonexistent, the coming together of conditions results in the arising of dharmas. The meaning of pratftyasamutpiida is expressed in the sutra statement: "this being, that exists ; from the arising of this, that arises." nai�a do�a!; / idaf!! tiivad ayaf!! pra�tavya!; siibdika!; / kim avastho dharma!; utpadyate vartamiina utaho 'niigata iti / ki1'(L cata!; / yadi vartamiina utpadyate / kathaf!! vartamiino yadi notpanna!; / utpannasya va punar utpattiiv anavsthaprasaJiga!; / athiiniigata utpadyate / katham asata!; kartrtva1'(L siddhaty akartrkii vii kriyeti / ato yad avastha utpadyate tad avastha eva pratyeti / kim avasthas cotpadyate / utpiidiibhimukho 'niigata!; / tad avastha evapratyayaf!! pratyetfty ucyate / ani�panna1'(L cedaf!! yad uta siibdikfya1'(L kartrkriyiivasthiina1'(L bhavatfty 9a kartiibhutir ity e�ii kriyii / na catra bhavitur arthiit bhutim anyiif!! kriyiif!! pasyama!; / tasmad acchalaf!! vyavahiire�u / qa tu vakyartha!; / asmin saty asya bhiiva!; asyotpiidiid idam utpadyata iti yo 'rtha!; so 'rtha!; pratftyasamutpiida iti (Pradhan: 1 3 8 .9-16; T. 1588: 50b25-c7; Poussin v. 2: 78-79; Sarrtghabhadra identifies this as the explanation of the sutra-master [T. 1562: 481b23-29] and refutes it, saying that it implicitly accepts that the moment of arising of a dharma belongs to the future; this is inconsistent with Vasubandhu' s denial of the real existence of future dharmas [T. 1 562: 481b29-c4] .)

1 66 Vasubandhu, in response to a question (according to P'u-kuang [T. 1 821 : 169cl8], from the Mahiisarp.ghikas), gives an etymological definition ofpratftyasamutpiida, which Sarrtghabhadra attributes to the sutra-master (T. 1562: 48 1b8-13). Sarrtghabhadra also identifies the Grammarians' objections as hypothetical \lnes posed by the sutra-master (T. 1562: 481bI6- 17).

Yogiiciirabharni 159

3 . 1 2) In the nirukti portion of the pratftyasamutpiida exposition in the Savitarkiidi­ bhami, the momentary nature of conditioned origination is stressed, since conditions quickly perish, but the efficacy of these conditions, even though they are in the past and no longer existent, is maintained. Furthermore, it is said that the complete meaning of pratrtyasamutpiida is expressed in the satra statement: "this being, that exists; from the arising of this, that arises." punaly. pratyayata utpiidaly. pratzryasarnutpiidaly. / k�a1}ikiirtharn adhikrtya / punaly. pratyayiid atftiid atyaktiit svasantatiiv utpiidaly. pratftyasarnutpiidaly. / asrnin satidaf!! bhavaty asyotpiidiid idam udpadyate niinyathii ity etarn artharn adhikrtyaitan nirvacanaf!! dra�tavyarn (Yogiiciirabharni: 214.7_ 1 0); 1 67 rkyen las skyes pa dan / skad cig rna 'i don gi dban du bya ste / rnyur du 'jig pa dan Idan par skye pa ni rten cin 'brei par 'byun ba'o / gian yan rkyen 'das pa dan / rna btan ba las ran gi rgyud du skye ba ni / rten chi 'grel par 'byun ba ' 0 / 'di yod pas 'di byun / 'di skyes pas 'di skye pa ste / gian du rna yin no / ies bya ba 'i don 'di 'i dban du byas nas / de nes pa 'i tshig tu Ita bar bya 'o ( Yogiiciirabhami,: dzi 125b5-7) ; 1t*1R§f:,*f.&io ��timzBo *ll1'D %��o � . � o �*� � •• o 1t*,*.�*W�*.o * � ffi . W�� ��o � .� o � m����� o �����o �So *�.�o . � . � (T. 1579: 324c3-7)

1 67 Bhattacharya' s notes contain some questionable remarks about both the Tibetan translation and the cOI1tents of the manuscript. I have here reproduced his text without attempting to improve on it.

Abhidharmakosabha�a 160 Chapter 3 Lokanirdeia 3 . 1 3) According to the purvlicliryas, 168 "this being, that exists" refers to the fact that if the cause is not abandoned, the result will arise; for· example, "if avidyli is not abandoned, the saTflskliras will not be abandoned." "From the arising of this, that arises" corresponds to "Due to the arising of [avidyli] , [the saTflSkaras] arise." aprahfrt0tpattijiiiipaniirtham ity iiciiryii!:t / avidyiiyiim aprahfrtiiyiiTfl saTflSkiirii na prahfyante / tasyli evotpiidiid utpadyanta iti vistara!:t (Pradhan: 1 3 9 ; 1 2- 14; T. 1 5 8 8 : 5 1 a6-8 ; Poussin v. 2: 82-83 ; Sa.I11ghabhadra identifies these teachers as the sutra-master' s own teachers, whom he, Sa.I11ghabhadra, does not respect [T. 1 562: 483a7-13], and refutes them, reasoning that their argument would logically imply that avidyii is conditioned by the saTflSkiiras and that, if the saTflskiiras are not abandoned, avidyii will not be abandoned [T. 1 562: 483a13- 1 9].)

168

iicliryii iti p arviiciiryii!:t (Abhidharmakosavylikhyii: 298 . 1 8- 1 9).

Yogiiciirabhumi 161

3 . 13) In the pratftyasamutpiida exposition i n the Savitarkiidi-bhumi, i t i s said that "this being, that exists" means that, from undestroyed conditions, something else arises. katham asmin sandal'[! bhavanty ucyate / aprahfl}iit pratyayiit tadanyotpiidiirthena (Yogiiciirabhumi: 221 . 1 6) ; ci'i phyir 'di yod pas 'di 'byun ies bya ie na / rkyen ma spans pa las de las gian pa skye ba 'i phyir ro (Yogiiciirabhumi,: dzi 1 30a6-7); r,,� � 1PJm B Jl:t�t)c1EFff a 1§: El3 * IIm*�o t�1��¥M)c (T. 1579: 326a27-28) In the Vastusal'[!grahal}f, the sutra (Sal'[!yuktiigama) statement, "this being, that exists" (T. 99 [satra 298]: 85a14; Mukai 1985: 35), is explained as meaning "because this cause is not destroyed, that result is not destroyed." "From the arising of this, that arises" means "Since this undestroyed cause arises, that undestroyed result will arise." rgyu rna spans pa Ita ba las 'bras bu ma spans pa skye bar 'gyur ba gan yin pa 'di ni ji Ita ba biin du yod pa ' 0 (Yogiiciirabhami,: 'i 299b8); JiZ. � Jl:t Iti *lImt)co �11tJ:!�: * limo Jl:t*lIm lti � t)co 1�*IIm*�o �Q ::llk � ��QPJT�'I1: (T. 1579: 833c9- 1 1)

Abhidharrnakosabhil�ya 1 62 Chapter 3 Lokanirdeia

3 . 14) Vasubandhu criticizes another opinion (that of the Sthavira), according to which "this being, that exists" means that, when the effect exists, the destruction of the cause exists. According to Vasubandhu, if the Buddha had had this intention, he would have said, "this being, that does not exist" Furthermore, why would the Buddha, when expounding pratftyasamutpiida, have spoken first about the destruction of the cause? punar tiha asmin satfdaY[! bhavatrti karye sati karal}asya vintiSo bhavaffti / sytin matam ahetukaY[! tarhi ktiryam utpadyata ity ata tiha ntihetukaY[! /yasmtid asyotptidtid idam utpadyata iti / e�a cet sutrtirtho 'bhavi�ad asmin saffday[! na bhavatzty eviicak�ata / purvaY[! ca ttivat karyasyotptidtineviica�ata l 69 pasctid asmin saffday[! na bhavaffti / evaY[! hi stidhuf:t kramo bhavati / itarathil tu pratztyasamutpiidaf:t katama ity tider arthe kaf:t prathamo vintisavacanasya / tasmiin naive�a sutrtirthaf:t (Pradhan: 139: 17-2 1 ; T. 1 5 8 8 : 5 1a12- 1 9 ; Poussin v. 2: 83; Sarp.ghabhadra identifies this as the criticism of the siltra-master [T. 1 562: 482c5-28] and condemns Vasubandhu for only criticizing the wording of the Sthavira' s interpretation of the sutra; according to Sarp.ghabhadra, the Sthavira should also be condemned for suggesting that the result can arise before the cause has ceased to exist. 170 Sarp.ghabhadra seems to be implying that Vasubandhu accepts this idea, which, as we have seen, is attributed to Vasubandhu' s teachers.)

169 The reading purvaY[! ca kiiryasyotpiidam in the Abhidharrnakosavyiikhyii (289.3435) seems preferable. 170 At the end of the discussion, Sarp.ghabhadra again criticizes the siltra-master for arguing with the Sthavira about the meaning of the sutra r�ther than completely rejecting his argument (T. 1 562: 483a5-7).

Yogacarabhami 163

3. 1 4) (The following is the same passage that is quoted in item 3 . 1 3.) In the pratftyasamutpada exposition in the Savitarkiidi-bhiimi, it is said that "this being, that exists" means that, from undestroyed conditions, something else arises. katham asmin satfdal'(! bhavatfty ucyate / aprahf1:zat pratyayat tadanyotpadarthena (Yogacarabhumi: 221 . 16); ci 'i phyir 'di yod pas 'di 'byU/i ies bya ie na / rkyen ma spans pa las de las gian pa skye ba 'i phyir ro ( Yogacarabhumi,: dzi 130a6-7); r,,� ;r;; 1PJ m § J1:t:ff il;i1i: &':ff � EI3 *IWT�o �1���M)c (T. 1579: 326a27-28) 0

Abhidharmakosabhii�ya 1 64 Chapter 3 Lokanirde§a 3 . 1 5) Vasubandhu mentions an opinion that good prajiia can be mixed with deflled prajiia in the same way that consciousness can be deflled by raga, even when raga is not currently active. kilJ'! punar evalJ'! ne�ate / kli�.taya prajiiaya kusaZa prajiia vyavakJryamal)a na visudhyati I ato 'sau tasya upakZe§a iti / yad vapi ragopakli�.talJ'! cittalJ'! na vimucyate / kilJ'! tad avasyalJ'! ragaparyavasthitalJ'! bhavati I upahatalJ'! tu tat tathii ragel)a bhavati yan na vimucyate I talJ'! punarbhavanalJ'! vyavartayato vimucyate I evam avidyopakli�.ta prajiia na visudhyatfty avidyopahatalJ'! parikalpayamaJ:! (Pradhan: 141. 1 9-23 ; T. 1588; 5 1c29-52a6; Poussin v. 2: 9 1 ; Sarp.ghabhadra says that the sutra-master is presenting a hypothetical argument (chia tso chiu �{tt)c) for the theory that avidya is actually kuprajiia [T. 1562: 501 a5-12] ; Sarp.ghabhadra refutes this argument in detail and concludes by reiterating that avidya is a separate, real dharma [T . 1562: 501a12-c23] . Neither Yasomitra [Abhidharmakosavyakhya: 301 .34302. 1 ] nor the Chinese commentators (T . 1 82 1 : 173c20; T. 1 822: 605b29) think that Vasubandhu agrees with this position.)1 7 l

17 1 La Vallte Poussin says that Fa-pao and P'u-kuang disagree on this point (v. 2: 91 n. 1), but he appears to be mistaken. They both say that Vasubandhu accepts the Sarvastivadin position here, and Fa-pao adds that Vasubandhu does not necessarily adopt the positiop. of any one school: he accepts what reason dictates (T. 1 822: 605b29-c1).

YogacarabhiImi 165

­

3 . 15) (Although a passage in the Viniscayasal'[lgraha/}f on the Paiicavijiiana kayamanobhiImi implies that avidyii may exist as a bfja [YogiiciirabhiImi,: zi 86b4-7; T. 1579: 6 1 1 b 1 9-24; see item 3 . 1 0] , I have found no discussion in the Yogiiciirab hiImi concerning the mixture of good and defiled prajiiii. )

Abhidharmakosabhii!ya 166 Chapter 3 Lokanirdeia 3 . 16) Vasubandhu mentions the opinion of others that not all the mental vedaniis are manopaviciiras; only the defiled ones are. For example, the arhat has a mental satisfaction, the obj ect of which is a dharma that is good but laukilm. apara iiha l asty eva7[! manopaviciirii1)ii7[! vaibhii�ik'fyo 'rthal}J sutriirthas tv anyathii driyate I na hi yo yasmiid vftariigaJ:! sa tad iilambanam upavicaratfti yuktam I ataJ:! siisravii api na sarve saumansyiidayo manopaviciiriiJ:! I ki7[! tarhi I sii7[!kleiikii yair mana vi�ayiin upavicaratfti I katha7[! copavicarati I anunfyate ca pratihanyate ciipratisa7[!khyiiya copek�ate ye�iim pratipa�e1)a �a! siitatii vihiirii bhavantil cak�u�ii rapii1)i dr�!Vii naiva sumanii bhavati na durmanii upe�ako viharati smrtimiin sa7[!prajiinan eva7[! yiivan manasii dharmiin vijiiiiyeti I na hy arhaflJ laukika7[! niisti kusala7[! dharmiilambana7[! saumanasya7[! yat tu tat sii7[!kleiika7[! manasa upaviciirabhuta7[! tasyaiva prati�edho lak!Jata iti (Pradhan: 149.23 - 1 50.7; T. 1588: 54b3- 12; Poussin v. 2: 1 14- 1 15; Sru:p.ghabhadra says that this alternate opinion is hypothetically offered (chia wei i shuo �%H�m) by the siitra-master [T. 1 562: 508a20-29] and criticizes it, upholding the Vaibhli�ika position that even an undefIled mental vedanii is manopaviciira [T. 1 562: 508b l - 1 8].)

Yogacarabhami 167

3 . 16) (I have been unable to find anything in the Yogacarabhami relevant to this discussion.)

Abhidharmakosabhii�a 168 Chapter 3 Lokanirdda ' 3 . 17) According to Vasubandhu, a moment (k�al)a) endures for as long as a dharma takes to obtain its existence when all conditions are present. k�al)asya tu kil'(t pramiil)am / samagre�u pratyaye�u yiivatii dharmasyiitmaliibhaJ:t (Pradhan: 176. 12; T. 1588: 62a20-22: Poussin v. 2: 177; Sarpghabhadra identifies this as the rash explanation of the sutra-master [T. 1562: 521b23-25] and criticizes it from the Vaibhii�ika standpoint, saying that, since past and future dharmas are actually real, it makes no sense to talk of "obtaining existence" [T. 1 562: 521b25-c 14].)

Yogacarabhumi 1 69

3 . 17) The Viniscayasaf!1grahalJ1 0n the PaficavijiUinakiiyamanobhumi, in an expla­ nation of why the saf!1skrtalak�alJas are prajfiapti, at least strongly implies that the k�alJa of the arising (jiit!) of a saf!1skrtadharma is the very duration of the dharma (Yogiicarabhumi,: zi 21bl-24b7; T 1 579: 585c9-586c25 ; see Rospatt 1 995, especially pages 94-1 10). In particular, vyaya is defined as the destruction of the lak�alJas of all saf!1skrtadharmas after the moment of arising. de Ita bas na skye ba 'i skad cig gi 'og tu 'jig pa 'i skad cig ni 'du byed rnams kyi 'jig pa ies bya 'o (YogacarabhUmi,: zi 22a3-4); �;fU1.l�i'£�t1T1§3\iHlt:t�i�o UF:t�1jt (T. 1579: 585c27-28) *K�alJajati is defined as the fact that all saf!1skrtadharmas arise anew from moment to moment. rnams skad cig skad cig la skye ba ni skad cig gi skye ba ies bya'o (Yogacarabhilmi,: zi 23a1); J1t J:jJ�qT;fiJ1.l�;fU1.l�*Jf*JfmiJ�o i5;fU1.l� (T. 1579: 586a2122)

de la 'du byed

Abhidharmakosabhii�ya 170 Chapter 3 Lokanirdda

3 . 1 8) According to Vasubandhu, the reason that the Buddhas do not appear in the world during the period of diminishment, when people' s life spans shrink from one hundred years to ten years, is that the five ka�iiyas become very strong then. kasmiin na satiit / tadii hi paficaka�iiyii abhyutsadii bhavanti / tadyathii 'yu�ka�iiyaf:z kalpaka�iiyaf:z kldaka�iiyaf:z dr�!ika�iiyqf:z sattvaka�iiyas ca (Pradhan: 1 8 3 . 1 -2; T. 1 5 8 8 : 64a20-22; Poussin v. 2: 193; S arp.ghabhadra identifies this as the position of the sutra-master [T. 1562: 523c26-27] and says that the reasoning is wrong; in fact, a Buddha will appear even when lives are short and the ka�iiyas are strong, as long as someone can properly achieve what the Buddha accomplished [T. 1 562: 523c27-524a8].)

Yogtictirabhilmi 171

3 . 1 8) ( I have been unable t o find any discussion in the Yogticiirabhumi i n which the non-appearance of the Buddha is linked to the five ka.Jtiyas. However, it is perhaps relevant that in the Bodhisattvabhumi, tiyu.Jka.Jiiya is defined as the period, like our own, in which the human life span diminishes to less than a hundred years. tadyathti etarhy alpalJ'! jfvitalJ'! manu.Jytil}tilJ'! / yas ciralJ'! jfvati / sa var.JasatalJ'! [Bodhisattvabhumi: 252. 1 9-20] ; 'di Ita ste / da Itar gyi mi rnams ni 'tsho ba 'i yun thUli ste / gan yun rin du 'tsho ba des kyan 10 brgya 1 7 2 thub par zad do [ Yogtictira­ bhumi,: ii 152a4-5]; frDn�4'�A��}HJEo t�ffi:�*/f':i!WI8$o tr�/f'jjjjJ o J&1S �i� [T. 1579: 538a7-9])

1 72 Corrected from rgya o� the basis of the Derge and the Chinese.

Abhidharmakosabhii�a 172 Chapter 4 Karmanirdeia 4. 1) According to Vasubandhu, k�alJika means "possessing a moment," that is, being destroyed immediately after coming into existence. He compares this to the word daJ:uJika, which means "possessing a stick (dalJrJa)." ko 'yal'J'! k�alJo nama / atmalabho 'nantaravinasf/ so 'syastfti �alJikam / dalJrJikavat (Pradhan: 1 93.2; T. 1558: 67c 1 1-12; Poussin v. 3: 4; Srup.ghabhadra identifies this as the opinion of the sutra-master [T. 1 562: 533b21-22] and criticizes it on the grounds that, unlike a man and a stick, which are different things, there are no two separate things corresponding to �a7Ja and �alJika [T. 1562: 533b22-c4; Poussin 1 936-1937: 146] ; see Rospatt 1995: 105-1 10.)

Yogiiciirabhumi

173

4. 1 ) (I have found nothing in the YogiiciirabhUmi corresponding specifically to this argument, but similar notions of momentariness appear in the text. See,. for example, item 3 . 17.)

Abhidharmakosabhii�a 174 Chapter 4 Karmanirdesa

4.2)

Vasubandhu asserts that destruction is not dependent on a cause.

sal'J1Sk[1asyiivafya1J'l vyayat iikasmiko hi bhiiviinii1J'l viniisaf:1, / ki1J'l kiira1)am / karyasya hi kiira1)a1J'l bhavati / viniisaS ciibhiivaf:1, / yiis ciibhiivas tasya ki1J'l kartavyam / so 'siiv iikasmiko viniiSo yadi bhiivasyotpannamiitrasya na syiit paScad api na syiid bhiivasya tulyatviit / athiinyathfbhataf:1, na yukta1J'l tasyaiviinyathiitvam / na hi sa eva tasmiid vila�ano yujyate (Pradhan: 193.5-10; T. 1558: 67c 17-20; Poussin v. 3 : 5 ; Sarp.ghabhadra identifies this as the opinion of the siitra-master [T. 1 562: 533c6-9] and criticizes it, saying that, because of the validity of the sa1J'lsk[1alak�a1)as, destruction must have a cause [T. 1 562: 533c9-2 1 ] ; see Rospatt 1 995: 1 80- 1 8 1 .)

Yogi'ici'irabhiimi 175

4.2) In the Paiicavijfiiina!diyamanobhiimi of the ViniscayasaT[lgrahm:zf, it is said that all saT[lskiiras are destroyed due to their own nature. tatra si'ikalyena riipaskanda� lqm:zika� vaktavya� I tat kasya heto� I utpannasya vini'isopafambhata� I na cotpi'idakiiral}aT[l vini'isakiiral}aT[l [Il yujyate vilalqal}atvi'it I ni'i-(lacuna) � svarasavini'i§a� sarvasaT[lskiiri'iI}i'iT[l veditavya� I atas ca k�al}ikatvaprasiddhi� (Sanskrit manuscript as quoted by Rospatt [ 1 995: 1 82 n. 399]); de fa gzugs kyi phun po thams cad ni skad Gig pa yin par brjod par bya 'o I de ci 'i phyir i.e na I skyes nas 'jig pa dmigs pa 'i phyir ro I skye ba 'i rgyu ni 'jig pa 'i rgyu yin par mi run ste I mtshan iiid mi 'dra ba ' i phyir ro I skyes pa gnas pa ' i rgyu de las gi.an pa yan mi dmigs pas de 'i phyir 'du byed thams cad ni ran gi nan gis 'jig pa yin par rig par bya ste I de 'i phyir skad cig pa iiid rab tu grub bo ( Yogi'ici'irabhiimi,: zi 58a4-6); 1l*-.jjJg" g � § ���iJ1i�iff!l;'l1.o fliJ.l-.J.ii)co �qT*l��.tlP:t�iff!l;o :ffl, PJ

1�ii)c o JUf!@'��§��z l2Sl.tlP�iff!l; l2SI o ;!t:t§J!,ii)co X¥!�8t�f*{! I2SI /fPJ1�ii)co jH)c��D-tv�tqT.gr{fJIiff!l;o EBJJtl�JUiJ1J��$: (T. 1 579: 600a1 8-22) 1 73

173 This passage is translated by Rospatt, who also provides the Tibetan text and the text from the Sanskrit manuscript (1995: 181-182 n. 399). Rospatt thinks that the argument here is somewhat ?ifferent from that of the Abhidharmakosabhi'i�a ( 1 995: 1 8 1 - 1 82).

Abhidharmakosabhil�a 176 Chapter 4 Karmanirde§a 4.3) Vasubandhu attributes to the Sautrantikas the opinion that sal'[lsthanarilpa is only a p rajiiapti, because if it were real, then a single sal'[lsthanarilpa, for example, length, would be perceived by two rilpfndriyas, for example, the eye and the body. nasti sal'[lsthanal'[l dravyata iti sautrantikiiJ:t / ekadinmukhe hi bhilyasi va'?la utpanne dfrghal'[l rilpam iti prajiiapyate / tam evapek�alpfyasi hrasvam iti / caturdisal'[l bhilyasi caturasram iti / sarvatra same vrttim iti / eval'[l sarvam / tad yatha 'latam ekasyal'[l disi de§antare:jv anantare:ju nirantaram asu drsyamanal'[l dfrgham iti pratfyate sarvato drsyamanal'[l ma':l¢alam iti na tu khalujatyantaram asti sal'[lsthanam /yadi hi syat dvigrahyal'[l syat cak:ju:ja hi dr:j!Va dfrgham ity avasryate kayendriye':lapi spr:j.tveti dvabhyam asya graha':lal'[l prapnuyat / na ca rilpayatanasya dvabhyal'[l graha':lam asti / yatha va spra:j!avye dfrghadigraha':lal'[l tatha va'?le sal'[lbhilvyatam (Pradhan: 1 94. 14-2 1 ; T. 1 5 5 8 : 68b 1 - 1 1 ; Poussin v. 3 : 8-9; Sarp.ghabhadra identifies this as the opinion of the sutra-master [T. 1562: 535c23-536a4] and criticizes it at length, arguing that a single indriya, for example, the eye, perceives two different characteristics, for example, length and whiteness [T. 1 562: 536a4-b5].)

Yogtlctlrabhami 177

4.3) In the Paficavijfitlnaktlyamanobhami of the Viniscayasal!lgraha'!f, sal!lsthtlnarapa (shape) is said to be a prajfiapti because it is nothing more than a conglomeration of rapa with no characteristics of its own. rili po dan thun nu fiid la sogs pa gan dag dbyibs i.es bya ba de dag !ryan ci rdzas su yod pa 'am / btags pa 'i yod pa yin par brjod bar bya i.e na / smras pa / btags pa 'i yod pa yin par brjod par bya 'o / de ci'i phyir i.e na / bsags pa las gnas pa ni dbyibs ses bya ba 'i nes pa 'i tshig yin pa dan bsags pa tsam dmigs pa dan / mtshan fiid las gi.an pa 'i don mi dmigs pa dan / bltos sin bltos na no bo fiid 'dres par ' gyur ba dan - � -k /i5' jp", -k BT1 F'"."-2:lE ,h' =ww a. (Yogtlctlrabhamii zi 56al-3); J�"Ja � P13 =r J(>Fl Jw:T llilVFl -9 P o "'''" Jl.-.rP; J �)J; � o :g-''''1l'l 1l'l a � -w.;ff o M��o g.@tt�� � *o �;ff �'€Sg.��o .*'€S ffi � � � tio JZ.�,t§i'ifo t§i'ifZyt;ff El 'I�� 1�yt�;ff *rt �L�g: (T. 1 579: 599b7- 1 1) 0

See also the Paficavijfitlnaktlyasamprayukttl Bhami, where the definition is the same, but sal!lsthtinarapa is not said to be a prajfiapti (Yogtlctlrabhami: 4. 1 5- 17; Yogtlctlra­ bhami,: dzi 3a4; T. 1 579: 279b6-7). In a passage in the Paficavijfitlnakayasamprayukttl Bhami Gust after the one mentioned

above), it is stated that sal!lsthiinarapa is a conglomeration of rapa having features distinguished as "long," etc.

sal!lsthtinal!l katamat /yo rapapracayo dfrghadiparicchediikaraJ:r. ( Yogtlctlrabhami: 5.2); dbyibs gan i.e na / gan gzugs rgyas par rin po la sogs par yons su bcad [corrected from gcad on the basis of the Derge] pa 'i mam pa 'o ( Yogtlctlrabhami,: dzi 3a6); * '€S ��'Il ;E''€Sg.i'tJ}f*73'-7.iU t§ (T. 1579: 279b8-9)

Abhidharmako§abha�ya 178 Chapter 4 Karmanirdeia 4.4) The Sarvastivadins explain that saYflSthanariipa is not perceived by touch, etc. Instead, the notion of length, etc., arises from our memory when we perceive something, just as when we see a fire, we remember that fire is hot. Vasubandhu argues that this is a false analogy, because fire and heat are invariably associated, whereas touch and shape are not. sm.rtimiitra1!l tatra spra�!avyasiihacaryiit bhavati / sa tu siihacaryiit bhavati na tu siik�iit grahaT}am/yathii 'gniriipa1!l d!�.tvii tasyo�T}atiiyii1!l smrtir bhavatipu�pagandha1!l ca ghriitvii tad vaTTJa iti / yuktam atriivyabhiciiratviid anyeniinyasya smaraT}a1!l na tu ki1!lcit spra�tavya1!l kvacit saYflSthiine niyata1!l yatas tatra smaraT}a1!l niyamena syiit / athiisaty api siihacaryaniyame sa1!lsthanasmaraT}a1!l niyamena syiit / vaTTJe 'p i syiit vaTTJavad vii sa1!lsthane 'py aniyamena syiit / na caiva1!l bhavati / ayuktam asya spr�!avyiit smaraT}am (Pradhan: 1 94.22- 195.3; T. 1558: 68b 1 1-20; Poussin v. 3 : 9- 10; Sarpghabhadra identifies this as the opinion of the sutra-master [T. 1 562: 536b5-7] and says that Vasubandhu' s argument does not successfully disprove the real existence of sa1!lsthanariipa as a separate entity from vaTTJa [T. 1 562: 536b7- 1 8] .)

Yogiiciirabhfimi 179

4.4)

(Although the Yogiiciirabhi1mi states that sa/'flsthiinari1pa is not a real entity [see item 43], nothing corresponding to this argument can be found in the text.)

Abhidharmako§abka�ya 1 80 Chapter 4 Karmanirdeia 4.5) Vasubandhu argues that saYf1Stkananlpa, unlike real nlpa (i.e., va�a), cannot be found in an atom. It is merely a designation for many things arranged in a certain way. yac ctipi kil[!cit pratighal[! nlpam asti tad avaiyal[! paramtilJau vidyate / na ctilJau tat na ca sal[!stkanal[! paramtilJau vidyate dfrghtidi / tasmtid bahu�v eva tatka sal[!nivi�.te�u dfrghtidiprajfiaptiJ:t / atha matal[! sal[!stkanaparamtilJava eva tatka sal[!nivi�!ti dfrghtidisal[!jfitil[! labhanta iti / so 'yam kevalaJ:t pa�aptitas te�tim asiddhatvtit / siddha­ svala�alJtintil[! hi te�til[! sal[!cayo yujyate / na ca saYf1Stkantivayavtintil[! va�tidivat svabkavaJ:t siddha iti kuta e�til[! sarrzcayaJ:t (Pradhan: 195.6- 1 0 ; T. 1558: 68b22-29; Poussin v. 3 : 1 0- 1 1 ; Sa�ghabhadra identifies this as another "proof' of the umeality of sarrzsthtinarupa, presumably the idea of the sutra-master [T. 1 562: 536bI9-26] , and criticizes it, arguing that va�a and sarrzsthtinarupa are in fact two independently existing types of rupa and that, just as atoms of varlJa are proved to exist, so are atoms of sarrzsthtinarupa [T. 1562: 536b26-c2 1 ] . )

Yogiiciirabhami 181

4.5) The Vini§Cayasal'[lgraool}-z on the Paficavijfiiinakii:yamanobhami adduces, as another reason for why sal'[lsthiinaropa is a prajfiapti, the fact that it can be divided . by thought, like a cart de bios bye bas sin rta la sogs pa dan ' dra ba 'i phyir ro ( Yogiiciirabhami,: zi 56a3); X�DlJ�11E:W:PJ��� (T. 1579: 599b l l)

AbhidharmakosabhiI0Ia 1 82 Chapter 4 Karmanirdeia 4.6) The Sarvastivadins ask what kayavijiiapti is, if it is not sal[lsthiInarupa. Vasubandhu answers that it is sal[lsthiinarupa but that sal[lsthiinarupa is prajiiapti, not dravya. athedanfl[l kiiyasya gatil[l niriik.rtya sal[lsthanal[l ca tatra bhavanta� sautriintika� kiil[lkayavijiiaptil[l prajiiapayantilsal[lsthiInam eva hi te kiiyavijiiaptil[lprajiiapayanti I na tu punar dravyata� (Pradhan: 1 95. 15-17; T. 1558: 68c8-9; Poussin v. 3 : 12; SaIllghabhadra says that the siitra-master is stating the opinion of his own school [T. 1562: 537a24-26] and criticizes it, suggesting that since Vasubandhu and the Sautrantikas argue that sal[lsthiInarfipa is not different from van:ra, then they must think that va'?la is prajiiapti, too [T. 1562: 537a26_b 13].) 174

174 In the course of this argument, SaIllghabhadra refers to Sautrantika three times (T. 1 562: 537b3, b7, b8). It seems as though he is all but identifY.ing Sautrantika as the school of the siitra-master.

Yogiiciirabhiimi 1 83

4.6) (The Yogiiciirabhiimi does not define kiiyavijnapti as sa'!lsthiinariipa. But see 4.3 and 4.5 for its assertion that sa'!lsthanariipa is prajnapti. )

Abhidharmakosabhii�a 1 84 Chapter 4 Karmanirde.1a 4.7) Vasubandhu defines kiiyavijfiapti as an action that has the body as its object. He equates this action with the volition that initiates the movement of the body. Viigvijfiapti and manovijfiapti are to be understood similarly. tiilJl ca prajfiapayantaJ:! kathalJl kiiyakarma prajfiapayanti / kiiyiidhi�!hiinalJl karma kiiyakarma yii cetanii kiiyasya tatra tatra prCl!letrf/ evalJl viilimanaskarTnCl!lz api yathii­ yogalJl veditavye / yat tarhi cetanii karma cetayitvii cety uktalJl salJlkalpacetanii purvalJl bhavaty evalJl caivalJl ca kari�iimfti / tathii cetayitvii pasciit kriyii cetanotpadyate / yayii kiiyaJ:! preryate sii 'sau cetayitvii karmety ucyate (Pradhan: 195. 17-2 1 ; T. 1558: 68c10-17; Poussin v. 3: 12- 1 3 ; Sa.rp.ghabhadra identifies this as the opinion of the siitra-master [T. 1 562: 537b13-21] and criticizes it in great detail [T. 1 562: 537b21-539b29] ; in the course of this argument, Sa.rp.ghabhadra attri­ butes to Sautrlintika the belief that all karma is cetanii, a belief that he refutes from the Sarvastiviidin point of view (T. 1 562: 537c I7-538b7.)

Yogiiciirabhiimi 1 85

4.7) According to the Savitarkiidi-bhiim� both ktiyiibhisal'(lsktira and viigabhisal'(lskiira arise due to, and after, abhisal'(lskiiralakoJaJJa. 175 karmasvabhiivaJ:t katamaJ:tlyo dharma utpadyamano abhisal'(lskiiralakoJanas cotpadyate tasya cotpiidiit kiiyiibhisal'(lskiiro viigabhisal'(lskiiras tad uttarakiilal'(l pravartate I ayam ucyate karmasvabhiivaJ:t ( Yogiiciirabhiimi: 170. 17-19); las kyi no bo nid gan ie na I , chos gan skye ba na mnon par 'du byed pa P6 mtshan nid kyan skye la I de skyes pas de '! rjes ia Ius kyi mnon par 'du byed pa dan I nag gi mrion par 'du byed pa 'jug par 'gyur de I 'di ni las kyi no bo nid ces bya 'o (Yogiiciirabhiimi,: dzi 99b5-6); * §\ 'i1::r;; Wo � � ���o m�ffi�o & � ���o � � m�*�� �m�@.o � ::6 * §\ 'i1: (T. 1579: 3 15a1 8-20) The Manobhumi says that the activity of cetanii is to arouse vitarka, kiiyakarma, vtikkarma, etc. cetanti kil'(lkarmikii I vitarkaktiyaviikkarmiidisamutthiinakarmikii ( Yogiiciirabhiimi: 60. 1 3 - 1 4) ; sems pa las ci byed ce na I rtog pa dan I Ius dan nag gi las ! 77 la sogs pa bsLon ba'i las byed do ( Yogiictirabhiimi,: dzi 34b 1 ) ; \!t fF 1ilJ * o �lHA:��1PJ � �:g­ *��* ( 1 579: 29 1 c l l - 12) ,

See also the Viniscayasal'(lgrahalJI On the Pancavijniinakiiyamanobhumi for the same statement (Yogiiciirabhumi,: zi 62b 1 ; T. 1 579: 602a2). The Savitarkiidi-bhumi defines karma as eetanii as well as kiiyakarma and viikkarma, which arise after a volition. k.rtal'(l karma katamat I yae eetital'(l eetayitvii punaJ:t kiiyena vtieti samutthiipital'(l (Yogiieiirabhiimi: 190.6-7); byas pa 'i las gan ie na I bsams pa 'am i bsams nas kyan ius daJi nag gis kun nas bsLan ba gan yin pa ' 0 ( Yogiieiirabhiimi,: dzi 1 l0b4); 1'F*if �� �,IjlSI * o �,1jlSI, 8pJT� �*�:g-* (1579: 3 1 9b13- 14) 0

,

1 75 The Kokuyaku Issaikyo translation equates abhisal'(lskiiraiakoJalJa with manas­ karma and says that the point of the passage is that karma is eetanii in essence (Kokuyaku Issaikyo Yuga-bu 1: 151 n. 27; the contents of this note are based on the Karmasiddhi­ prakaralJa [T. 1609: 785c22-28], a portion of which is quoted by P'u-kuang [T. 1 82 1 : 205a6-8]). 1 76 Corrected from pa pa 'i on the basis of the Derge. 1 77 Corrected from nag gi La sogs pa on the basis of all other version s .

Abhidhannakosabhii�a 1 86 Chapter 4 Kannanirdda 4.8) One Sarviistiviidin argument in support of the reality of avijfiaptiriipa is that the sutra says that there are three types of riipa, one of which is invisible and not subject to collision (apratigha). According to Sarviistiviida, this must be avijiiapti (Pradhan: 196.6-9; T. 1558: 68c29-69a4; Poussin v. 3: 14). Vasubandhu, in making what he describes as the Sautrantika argument against Sarviistivada, quotes those who practice yoga (yogiiciirii/:l) as saying that, due to the power of meditation, a riipa that is the object of meditation is produced in meditators. This riipa is invisible because it is not the object of c�rindriya, and it is not subject to collision because it does not cover any place. Vasubandhu defends this statement against a possible Sarviistiviidin objection. yat tiivad uktaT{! trividhariipokter iti I tatra yogiiciirii upadisantil dhyiiyiniilp. samiidhi­ vi�ayo178 riipaT{! samiidh iprabhiiviid utpadyate I ca/qurindriyiivi�ayatviit anidarsanam I ddiiniivaral)atviid apratigham iti I atha mataml katham idiinfT{! tat rupam iti I etad avijiiaptau samiinam (Pradhan: 1 97.4-7; T. 1558: 69a29-b4; Poussin v. 3: 1 8 ; Sarp.ghabhadra identifies this as the opinion of the stitra-master [T. 1562: 540c21-24] and criticizes it, saying that riipa produced by meditation, like other types of riipa, such as riipa in the antariibhava, and riipa in a dream, is based on visible riipa; the implication, I believe, is that in contrast avijiiaptiriipa has no relation whatsoever to visible riipa [T. 1 562: 540c24-541 a8] .)

1 78 The reading in the Abhidhannakosavyiikhyii is better: sa iidhivi�ayariipam "l (355 . 15).

Yogiiciirabhiimi I S7

4.S) The Viniscayasa/pgrarnl1:rJ: on the Paficavijfiiinakiiyamanobhiimi includes, in the category of really existent, riipa that is: 1) like a transformation belonging to the domain of samiidhi as the result of supernatural power; 2) the result of that [samiidhi] ; 3) the object of that [samiidhi] ; 4) the object of the consciousness associated with that [samiidhi] . 'This is contrasted with *sal!lvarariipa and *asal!lvarariipa, which are merely prajfiapti. (See also item 1 .2.) dharmiiyatanaparyiipannal!l punii riipal!l dvividhal!l dravyasat prajfiaptisac ca I yat prabhiivataJ:! samadhigocaral1l nirrnitavat tatphalal1l tadvi�ay� tatpratisal!lyukta vijfiiinavi�ayal!l ca tad dravyasat I sal!lvariisal!lvarasal!lgrhftal!l tu prajfiaptisat; 179 chos kyi skye mched du gtogs pa 'i gzugs ni mam pa gfiis te I rdzas su yod pa dan btags pa 'i yod pa 'o I mthu las byun ba 'i tin ne 'dzin gyi spyod yul spruZ pa ita bu de 'i 'bras bu dan I de 'i yut dan de dan mtshuns par idan pa 'i mam par ses pa 'i yui gan yin pa de ni rdzas su yod pa yin no ( Yogiiciirabhiimi,: zi 5laS-bl); i!! y!!fi1l;e$;ff =:fl o �ilI .;ff � ;ff *;ff mx: 1.W1EPJT1T:tJ[3Mp �1to 1J1:!f;:iJ1:tJ[ & iJ1t§ ���:tJ[ e�. 4m;ff *1tf�1�:)f1t.1S���;ff (T. 1579: 597b6-9) ­

0

0

1 79 According to Matsuda Kazunobu (private communication), this passage appears in a Sanskrit manuscript fragment of the Vini§Cayasal!lgraha1J-f preserved in St. Petersburg, and Matsuda has transcribed it as above (non-italicized portions represent • Matsuda' s reconstruction).

AbhidhannakosabhtiDJa 188 Chapter 4 Kannanirdeia 4.9) Another Sarvastivadin argument in support of the reality of avijfiaptiriipa is that the satra says that there is an aniisravariipa. Vasubandhu again quotes those who practice yoga, who say that the riipa produced by the power of samiidhi is aniisrava if the samiidhi in which it is produced is aniisrava. yad apy uktam aniisravarapokter iti tad eva samiidhiprabhiivasa1!lbhata1!l riipam aniisrave samiidhiiv aniisrava1!l varl}ayanti yogiiciirii� (Pradhan: 197.7-8; T. 1558: 69b4-6; Poussin v. 3: 18-19; Sarp.ghabhadra identifies this as the opinion of the sutra-master [T. 1 562: 541al l-13], questions the identity of these yogiiciiras, expressing surprise that Vasubandhu quotes from them in interpreting satra (T. 1 562: 541a13- 15), and allows that an aniisravarapa, different from both vaTl}a and sa1!lsthiinariipa, may be produced by the power of samiidhi; however, this rapa can actually be nothing other than avijfiaptirapa [T. 1562: 541 aI3-19] .)

Yogiiciirabhumi 1 89

4.9) The Vinisca:yasal?1graha!lf on the Paficavijfiilnakilyamanobhumi says that the rupa that is the object of samildhi arises on the basis of the mahilbhutas associated with that samildhi, and it arises on the basis of laukikasamiidhi, whether silsrava or aniisrava.. However, it does not arise on the basis of lokottarasamiidhi because it is caused by a samildhi in which prapafica is present. tat puna/:! samildhigocaral?1 rupal?1 yatpratisal?1yukta/:! samildhiJ:! tatpratisal?1yuktilny eva tanmahilbhutiiny upiidilya laukikal?1 silsravanasraval?1 samildhim upiidilyotpadyate na tu lokottaral?1 / saprapal?1cilkiirasamildhihetukatvilt tasya; 1 80 tili lie 'dzin gyi spyod yul gyi gzugs de yali tili lie 'dzinl8 1 'byuli ba chen po dag rgyur byas pa 'i gzugs gali dali mtshulis par ldan pa de dag fiid dali de yali mtshulis par ldan pa yin no / 'jig rten pa 'j tili lie 'dzin zag pa dali bcas pa dali zag pa med pa la brten nas skye ba yin gyi / 'jig rten las 'das pa las ni ma yin te / de ni spros pa 'i mam pa dali bcas pa 'i tili lie 'dzin gyi rgyu las byuli ba ' i phyir ro (Yogilciirabhumi,: zi 5 1 b l-3); X.7£PJT1T� 1'!i'1:&Jl:t�7£o l!P EE Jl:t�*flpJT:@o X. Jl:t7£� 1.El�t.!t Fa' 1fi,ffl � i,ffl EE 7£rm1:.o �F I±\ t.!t Fa' EE Jl:t7£� 1fIl�ilB1T7£� IEJ Et (T . 1 579: 597b9- 12)

1 80 According to Matsuda Kazunobu [private communication], this passage appears in a Sanskrit manuscript fragment of the Viniscayasal?1graha!lfpreserved .in St. Peters­ burg, and Matsuda has transcribed it as above .

Abhidharmakosabhii�ya 190 Chapter 4 Karmanirde§a 4. 10) A third Sarvastivadin argument in support of the reality of avijfiaptirupa is that the sutra says that merit increases. Vasubandhu quotes the purvilcilryas, who say that the merit increases when the recipients of a gift use the gift, even though, in the time between the giving of the gift and its use, the giver of the gift might have a bad thought. Due to the nature of dharmas, the sa1!ltatis of the givers of gifts are perfumed by the volition toward the recipient that accompanied the gift, and their sa1!ltatis undergo a gradual transformation until they can give rise to greater results. 1 8 1 yad apy ukta1!l pWJ-yilbhivrddhivacanad iti tatrilpi purvilcilryil nirdisanti dharmatil hy e�il yathil yathil dilf!'1:!il1!l diiyil/:! paribhujyante tathil tatoo bhoktfr}il1!l gUlJavise�ad anugrahavise�ilc cilnyamanasilm api datfr}ii1!l tadiilambanadiinacetanilbhilvitil/:! sG1!ltatayaJ:! s� pari1Jilmavi§e�a1!l prilpnuvanti yeniiyatyillJz bahutaraphaliibhi­ n�pattaye samartOO bhavanti (Pradhan: 1 97. 14-17; T. 1558: 69b 1 3-20; Poussin v. 3 : 20; Sarp.ghabhadra identifies this as the opinion of the siltra-master [T. 1 562: 541 c8-14] , explains the terms sa1!ltati, parilJilma, and vise�a, says that he has already refuted similar ideas that Vasubandhu is now deviously expressing in different words, and proceeds once again to criticize the theory of parilJilmavise�a and the bfja metaphor from the Vaibha�ika standpoint [T. 1 562: 541c14-542b6] .)

1 8 1 Hakamaya mentions this passage and suggests the possibility that the idea of pari1Jilmavise�a here may be that of a Sautrantika group that prec,eded Vasubandhu and that cannot be identified with Y ogacara But he leaves the question open ( 1986).

Yogiiciirabhami 191

4. 1 0) (The Yogiiciirabhumi does not explain the accumulation o f merit in terms of the transformation of the saf!ltati. However, the following passages may be relevant: The Savitarkiidi-bhumi uses the phrase visi�!ii saf!lskiirasantatiJ:z pravartate in explain­ ing how good or bad actions produce desired or undesired results. [See item 2. 12.] ye�u saf!lskiire�u yac chubhiiSubhaf!l karmotpannaniruddhaf!l bhavati tena hetunii tena pratyayena visi�!ii saf!lskiirasantatiJ:z pravartate sii viisanety ucyate / yasyiiJ:z prabandhapatitiiyii i�!iini�!aphalaf!l nirvartate [Yogiiciirabhumi: 128.2'-4] : 'du byed gan dag la dge ba dan mi dge ba 'i las skyes nas 'gags pa yod la / rgyu de dan rkyen des 'du byed bye brag can gyi rgyud 'jug pa de la ni bag chags ies bya ste / de rgyun du gnas pa las sdug pa dan mi sdge pa 'i 'bras bu grub par 'gyur ba 'i phyir [ Yogiiciirabhumir' dzi 75b4-5] : �\ll DN�1T r:p o iW:1fi$/fi$* o ;S::1:;S:i� El3 J1:t IzsH�1�1TJl¥H3!4§ *"ji'ij*!I\�11 "&�o El3 J1:t;f§*.?JTm"&�tfg{ �V&i�1N m.�o n��� � o .��� ��o � � �� � � � .��.affi .W. � � >g{ �o � �ffi.�.>g{ ��o ���*�o ���ft�:i&o W��.� )'11[ (T. 1 579: 305bl-6) The Viniscayasaf!lgrahal}! on the Paiicavijiiiinakiiyamanobhilmi gives a similar explanation, but with the addition of the term *karmabiJa.

bcom ldan 'das kyis las 'das pa ni yod de gal te las 'das pa med du zin na 'di na la las gnod pa dail bcas pa dail / gnod pa med pa 'i tshor ba myoil ba mi 'gyur ies gail gsuils pa de la dgoils pa gail ie na / 'das pa 'i tshor bas rnams su las dge ba dail mi dge ba bskyed Giil 'gags pas phyi rna la 'bras bu 'dod pa dail mi 'dod pa milon par 'grub par de 'i sa bon gyis 'du byed kyi rgyun phyi rna phyi rna yoils su bsgom pa las dgoils nas :i& * � �*� � � /f. {iiCiira h �m zl � -6); !� D t!t� -, Sv� l'JiffifJ 1'l 1Jl: % x o �1,,,,- �.� l'JiffifJ �1Jl:% x o ll:t1PJ'Ill JOl,o :g-�*� � �� � � B� B .o ��.*���*o ��.�.�.>g{ o ��ffi •• •�lWi'o t!t�. �M D �1§*io ��m § ��*� (T. 1579: 585b7-13)

T!

�

!i

�

�

§�'" �

� J

!! !

Abhidharmakosabhii�ya 322 Chapter 5 Anusayanirdda

5.24) Vasubandhu suggests that those who believe in the real existence of past and future are guilty of tIllnking that results are eternal: if the result always exists, then what efficacy does karma have?

yasya tv atftiiniigatarrz dravyato 'sti tasya phalarrz nityam eviistfti kirrz tatra karmalJaJ:r siimarthyam (Pradhan: 300.21-22; T. 1558: 106a13-14; Poussin v. 4: 63; SaIflghabhadra in two places identifies this as the objection of the siltra-rnaster [T. 1562: 630all-13, 634a23-25; Poussin 1936-1937: 82-83, 113] and answers Vasubandhu ' s question: karma makes the result produce its special activity; that is, karma brings the result into the present [T. 1562: 630a13-25, 634a25-b9; Poussin 1 936-1937: 1 13-1 14].)

Yogaearabhami 323

5.24) In the Savitarkiidi-bhami, the fITst of sixteen mistaken theories (among which the third is belief in the real existence of past and futrrre) is hetuphalasadvtida, the belief that the result is always present in the cause. This theory is shown to be mistaIcen because: 1) if cause and result have the same characteristics, there is no clifference between them and hence it is illogical to say that one is present in the other; 2) if they have clifferent characteristics and if the nature of the result is that it has not yet arisen, then it is illogical to say that the result exists in the cause; 3) if they have different characteristics and the natrrre of the result is that it has already arisen, then it is illogical to say that the result arises in the cause. Therefore, the result is not already present in the cause; rather, there being a cause, the result arises in dependence on conditions ?63

sa idal'[! syad vaeanfya!:z kaeeid ieehasi hetulak�al!al'[! phalala�a1!G1'[! hetor va puna!:z phalala�al!am abhinnala�al!al'[! va bhinnala�al!al'[! va I saeed abhinnala�al!al'[! I tena nasti hetuniyarna!:z I phalaniyarna iti nirvi§i�!atvad hetuphalayor hetau phalal'[! vidyata iti na yujyate I saeed bhinnalak�al!al'[! I tena kaecid ieehasi anutpannala�al!al'[! votpannala�al!arj1. va I saeed anutpannala�al!al'[! I tena hetau phalam anutpannam astfti na yujyate I saeed utpannalak�al!al'[! I tena hetau phalam utpadyata iti na yujyate Itasman nasti hetau phalGl'[!lhetau tu satipratyayam apekryotpadyate (Yogaearabhilmi: 1 19. 17-120.3); de la 'di skad ees brjod par bya ste I [ci 'i rgyu 'i mtshan Hid dan 'bras bu 'i mtshan Hid dan I rgyu la 'bras bu 'i mtshan Hid tha dad pa rna yin pa 'i mtshan Hid dam] /264 'on te tha dadpa 'i mtshan Hid du 'dod I gal te tha dad pa rna yin pa'i mtshan fiid gcig yin na ni I des na rgyu dan 'bras bu gHis la bye brag med pa 'i phyir I rgyur nes pa dan 'bras bur nes pa med pas I rgyu las 'bras bu yod ees byar mi run no I gal te mtshan Hid tha da pa zig yin na ni I des na ci rna skyes pa 'i mtshan Hid dam I 'on te skyes pa 'i mtshan Hid du 'dod I gal te ma skyes pa 'i mtshan Hid cig yin na ni I des na rgyu la 'bras bu ma skyes pa zig yod do zes bya bar yan mi run no I gal te skyes zin pa 'i mtshan Hid cig yin na ni l des na rgyu las 'bras bu skyes zin pa zig skye '0 zes byar mi run no I de bas na rgyu la ni 'bras bu med kyi I rgyu yod na rkyen la ltos te skye bar 'gyur ro ( Yogaearabhami(" dzi 7 1b8-72a4); !¥.1ll' F,,' i'Bto 1kiPJfi]fllX o iPJ1lf I!l ;:f'§ o iPJ 1lf*ffi o l!l * ffi ffi o •• �.o ��.ffi o �� I!I *=a��o 1!I *=ao ���U�io 1!I r:p �*o �!¥'j�}llL ��.;:f'§ o i'i� I!I *=TI��o 1!I *=Tlo ���U�o 1!I r:p �*o �!¥'j�}'!o ��.;:f'§ o 1k�idPJo 1!I r:p *'lio .*� 263 Unlike Vasubandhu, the Savitarktidi-bhilmi does not explicitly relate the belief in an eternal result to sarvtistivooa. However, it is highly likely that Vasubandhu' s criticism of sarvastiviida is borrowed, at least in part, from the criticism of hetuphalasadviida in the Savitarktidi-bhilmi.

2 64 The portion in brackets is from the Derge, which agrees more closely with the Sanskrit and the Chinese. The sentence in the Peking appears to be conupt: ci'i rgyu 'i mtshan Hid dan rgyu las 'bras bu 'i mtshan Hid too dad pa rna yin pa'i mtshan Hid dam. •

Abhidharmakosabhii�ya 324 Chapter 5 Anusayanirdda

Yogiiciirabhiimi 325

Abhidharmakosabha�ya 326

Chapter 5 Anusayanirdesa

5.25) Vasubandhu accuses the Sarvastivadins of having the same views as the Sfupkhya teacher, Var�agaJ.lya, who says that that which does not exist canno t be produced, while that which exists cannot be destroyed.

var�agQ/Jyavadas caivaY(t dyotito bhavati / yad asty asty eva tat / yan nasti nasty eva tat / asato nasti saY(tbhavaJ:t / sato nasti vinasa iti (Pradhan: 301 . 1-3; T. 1558: 106aI6-1 8 ; Poussin v. 4: 63-64; Srupghabhadra identifies this as the statement of the siltra-master [T. 1562: 634a5-6; Poussin 1936-1937: 1 12] and claims that it is Vasubandhu' s theory that actually resembles Var�agaJ).ya' s because for Vasubandhu the present can only be existent, while the past and future can only be nonexistent [T. 1562: 634a6-19; Poussin 1936-1937: 1 12_1 13].)265

265 S rupghabhadra discusses this passage out of order.

Yogiiciirabhami 327

5.25) The Savitarkiidi-bhami attributes to Var�agaI).ya the belief in hetuphaiasadviida, according to which the result exists eternally in the cause.

hetuphaiasadviidaJ:! katamaJ:t / yathiipfhaikatyaJ:t sramalJo briihmalJo vii evarruir�.tir bhavaty eval'(lviidf nityal'(l nityakiiial'(l dhruval'(l dhruvakiiial'(l vidyata eva hetau phaiam iti tad yathii viir�agalJyaJ:t ( Yogiiciirabhami: 1 1 8. 14- 1 1 9.2); rgyu ia 'bras bu yod par smra ba gan ie na / 'di itar 'di na dge sbyon nam bram ze kha cig / rtag pa rtal66 pa 'i dus dan / ther zug ther zug gi dus su / rgyu ia 'bras bu yodpa kho na ies de itar ita iin / de skad smra ba dag yod de / 'di ita ste / khyu mchog pa 'i tshogs ita bu 'o (Yogiiciira­ bhamit: dzi 71a8-bl); I!I �� * �ilil* 0 ���J]� �;f!f¥j;F� ;f!f�*i F� o ��J]:ijldtJL�J] �ililo 'ffi 'ffi � 'i'§:t§JI� 1f��1!I � *� *'110 �� ffi:Jt5j..)gf"F�J]�n (1'. 1579: 303c810)

266 Corrected from brtag on the basis of the Derge.

Abhidharmako§abM�ya 328 Chapter 5 Anu§ayanirde§a

5 . 26) Vasubandhu says that the Sarvastivadins misunderstand what "all exists" means. He refers to the Buddha's statement, "'all exists' means the twelve ayatanas , 7 exist, , 26 and adds that "all" can also indicate the three times, as long as this is understood according to Vasubandhu' s interpretation?68

tasmiln naivaf!! sarvastiviida� §asane sadhur bhavati / yad atftanagataf!! dravyato 'stfti vadati / eVaf[! tu siidhur bhavati / yatM sutre sarvam astfty uktaf[! tatM vadati / kathaf!! ca sutra sarvam astfty uktam / sarvam astfti brahma'.la yavad eva dvada§ayatananfti / adhvatrayaf!! va / yatha tu tad asti tathoktam (Pradhan: 301 .5-8; T. 1558: 106312-26; Poussin v. 4: 63-64; Sarp.ghabhadra identifies this as the negation of the sutra-master [T. 1 562: 630c14- 19; Poussin 1936-1 937: 88] and criticizes it, saying that the intention of the sutra quoted by Vasubandhu was not to say anything about the essential nature of the three times, whereas the sutras read by S arp.ghabhadra affmn the existence of past and future; furthermore, Sarp.ghabhadra implies that Vasubandhu sides with those who think that all dharmas are either prajnapti or completely unreal [T. 1562: 630c19-63 1 a3 ; Poussin 1936-1 937: 88-89].)

267 Saf!!yuktagama,

sutra 3 1 9 (T. 99: 9 1 314-b3; see Pasadika 1986: 99).

268 P'u_kuang identifies Vasubandhu' s statement as a Sautrantika position, according to which not all of the tiyatanas consist of exclusively real dharmas: some include dharmas that are not ultimately real: �O�pJT/ff ffiHR./ff i§ *'¥f!i��mo ::5=�o ::5=

'j' ::5=wr ::5=&- �O�pJT/ff ffiJm/ff i§ �FiI''j'/ff 5Mo:mtEo :i@J*wr/ff o ** &-/ff :m;l'ik'j'/ff :m + =�)\�'j'/ff [!lJ�Y5.l''j'/ff . 1-'5.l''j'1Wio �O-§.� r:p r.� -§.'j'/ff %-§.'j'1Wio �� r:p 1Wi�G�Ij 1!��'j'/ff ;f§ *jf��t*ff. ���'j'1Wio �j!)� ' r:p [!lJ*'j'/ff o ��j!)f{1Wio Y1� r:p JE;t�*� . �. 1ll . }�'j'/ff o �{,pJT¥1,mL� . :ll. 'j' 1Wio hZ./f';f§.@\Y1o =:1Wi1.l,Y1v1';l'ik'j'1Wi (T. 1 821 : 3 1 4a3-12). 0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

Yogdcdrabhami 329

5.26) The Savitarkiidi-bhami cites the same satra as Vasubandhu in connection with its refutation of past and future. It explains that belief in the real existence of past and future can arise from misunderstanding of satras. For example, the Budciha ' s statement, ' ' ' all exists' means the twelve dyatanas exist," might b e taken t o mean that the twelve ayatanas are real entities.

iha dharmiko va punaf:t satrantan ayonisaf:z kalpayati / tad yatha / sarvam astfti dvadaiiiyatanani!dvadasayatanani lak�al}ato iJidyante ( Yogacarabhami: 124.2-3); chos 'di pa yari mdo sde la tshul biin rna yin par rtogs ste / 'di Ita ste / skye mched bcu gfiis po thams cad yod de skye mched bcu gfiis po mams ni mtshan fiid kyis yod do (Yogiicarabhami/,' dzi 73b6); X1:E.rI:t1*� ,b'�'!lQ*J�/f�Q;f1.5tJ3Ij�to �\!l�Q*� § - W��IlP+=� o .rI:t+=�.t§j&� (T. 1579: 304b28-c2) 0

0

The Savitarkadi-bhami later explains that the satra has a hidden meaning: some "existent" dharmas are really existent, while others are not. Existent dharmas have a mark that shows they are existent, while nonexistent ones have a mark that shows they are nonexistent. Otherwise, yogins would only be able to know existent dharmas; they would not be able to know nonexistent ones ?69 Hence, they would not be able to discern immediately the dharmas that they perceive.

yad apy uktal'J'! sarvam asti yavad eva dvadasayatananfti tad api sati sallak�al}astital'J'! sandhiiyoktal'J'! / asati casalla�al}astital'J'! / tathapi sallak�al}d api dharma sallak�al}al'J'! dharayanti / asalla�al}a api dharma asalla�al}Ql'J'! dharayanti / tasmiid dharma ity ucyante / anyatha tu sato jnanad asatas cajnanad yogino na nirantarajfieyadharma­ pan�a syad iti na yujyate (Yogdcarabhiimi: 127. 1 3- 1 8); skye mched bcu gfiis po ji sfied pa thams cad yod do ies gsuris pa gari yin pa de yari / [yod pa la yod pa 'i mtshan fiid yod pa dari med pa la med pa 'i mtshan fiid yod pa la dgoris nas gsuris pa yin tel pO 'di ltar yod pa 'i mtshan fiid kyi chos mams kyari / yod pa 'i mtshan fiid 'dzin la / med pa ' i mtshan fiid kyi chos mams kyari med pa 'i mtshan fiid 'dzin te / de bas na chos mams ies bya ' 0 / de Ita ma yin du zin na yod pa mi ses pa dmi / med pa mi ses pas mal 'byor pas ses bya 'i chos la rgyud chags su rtog par mi 'gyur bas mi ruri rio ( Yogdcarabhiimi,: dzi 75a8-b3) ; X91fHR.-W���\!l +=�o �,b'��1*'lti

�m��t§ o ,b'� �1*W�m��t§ o ?fi0,�1ilJo ;E';ff t§ ¥H�t��t§ o ;E'�t§ ¥HM��t§o j&�t{�;g �1*1�;g �� ;E'�.rI:t� �*11�qT�Ill 9;Q,b'� �/f9;D,b'� 0

0

269 The Tibetan, however, reads differently from the Sanskrit and Chinese: "due to ignorance of that which exists and due to ignorance of that which does not exist." 270 The portion in brackets is from the Derge, which agrees more closely with the Sanskrit and the Chinese. The sentence in the Peking appears to be corrupt: yodpa la yari

yodpa 'i mtshan fiidyodpa la dgoris pa yin te.

0

Abhidharmakosabha.rya 330 Chapter 5 Anusayanirdesa

YogiiciirabhUmi 331

Abhidharrnakosabhii�ya 332 Chapter 5 Anusayanirdeia

5 .27) The Sarvastivadin argues that, if the past and future are unreal, it is impossible to explain how one can be bound by a past or future kleia to a thing (vastu) in the past or future. Vasubandhu answers that one is bound by an anusaya produced by a past kleia or by an anusaya that is the cause of a future kleia. One is bound to a thing in the past or future due to the anusaya of a kleia that has had or will have that thing as its object.

tajjataddhetvanusayabhiivat kleiena tadalambane kleianusayabhiivad vastuni sa'!lyukto bhavati (Pradhan : 301.9-10; T. 1558: 106a27-29; Poussin v. 4: 64-65; Sarpghabhadra identifies this as the statement of the sutra-master [T. 1562: 634c9- 1O; Poussin 1 936- 1 937: 1 1 6] and maintains that Vasubandhu is contradicting his own position by callin g past and future things vastu when according to him they do not really exist [T. 1562: 634c 1 0- 1 9 ; Poussin 1936-1937: 1 16-1 17].)

Yogacarabhami 333

5 .27) The Yogacarabhami asserts the nominal existence of anusayas, which are kleSas in the form of seeds (see item 3). The ViniicayasaJ!lgrahalJl on the Savitarkiidi-bhami also addresses the issue . of asso­ ciation with past and future kle§as, referring to anusayas. It says that one is not associated with past kle§as, because one was already associated with them in the past. In the present, one is associated with the anusayas of this type of (past) kle§a, and, if the klesas are actualized, then one is associated with their paryavasthanas. One is not associated with future anuiayas and paryavasthtinas because one will be associated with them in the future.

de la 'ching ba mtha ' dag dan ldan pa 'i gan zag gis non mons pa 'i kun nas dkris pa bskyed nas 'gog par byed Gin span bar ni mi byed pa 'i tshe na / non mons pa de 'das pa 'am ma ons pa 'am da ltar byun ba 'i dnos po gan dag dan ldan pa yin ie na / 'das pa dan ni ldan par gyur zin pas ldan pa ma yin no / da ltar byun ba dan ni de 'i rigl71 bag la nal dan ldan pa yin te gal te non mons pa mnon du gyur na ni / kun nas dkris pa dan yan ldan no / ma 'olis pa dan ni bag la nal dan kun nas dkris pa dan yan ldan par 'gyur te ldan pa ni ma yin no (Yogacarabhami,: zi 1 1 8b8-1 19a3); r,,� J3. -W�.f1mtf-f11Ja *-i�1JHiU!� iMX:*t1§:;Ijk�1JH�:aNliJ4J� �$; lfI)**J!I5 �1:E J[J) o �� $; 8 � ��� � o ili*�1:E � � •• m � . m o m � . � o � �m������ � *Jlt>co m�:1i&�o :a�**:t!t . �IUUJl tJ, ��t>co ��� � (T. 1579: 623b6-1 1) 0

271

The Derge adds kyi non mons pa 'i here.

'

Abhidharmakosabhti�a 334 Chapter 5 Anusayanirdesa

5.28) Vasubandhu says that the Vaibha�ikas, who believe in the real existence of past and future but cannot explain it, say that the nature of dharmas is profound; it canno t be proved logically .

asty eva tv atftanagatam iti vaibha�ikiif.! I yatra netuf!! sakyate tatratmakiitmanaivaf!! veditavyam I gambhfra khalu dharmatal navaiyaf!! tarkasadhya272 bhavatfti (Pradhan: 3 0 1 . 1 0- 1 3 ; T. 1558: 1 06b 1-4; Poussin v. 4: 65; SaJ1lghabhadra identifies this as the statement of the sutta-master [T. 1562: 634c19-22; Poussin 1936-1937: 1 17] , criticizes Vasubandhu for attributing to the Vaibha�ikas words that are not their own, and claims that he has successfully refuted Vasubandhu' s (and the Sthavira' s) denial of the existence of past and future [T. 1562: 634c22-635a9; Poussin 1936-1937: 1 17-1 1 8] .)

272 Corrected from tarhy asadhya (Hirakawa: 1 973- 1978, v. 1 : 433).

Yogiiciirabhiimi 335

5 .2 8) The Yogiiciirabhiimi does not specifically explain the past and future with reference to the profound nature of dha rrno.s . However, the terni gambhfra, like acintya, appears far more frequently ill the Yogiiciirabhiimi than in Sarvlistivlidin texts, often to characterize that which is difficult to explain. .

The Cintiimayf Bhiimi lists four ways in which things are unutterable. One of these is that they are unutterable due to being profound, and one example is the inexpressible nature of dhannas.

zab pa 'i phyir ni 'di lta ste / chos fiid brjod du med pa daft ( Yogiiciirabhiim�: dzi 235a6-7); = ilii*�:If'PJ�o �� § #:;tl: (T. 1579: 363a2) The ViniicayasaT(lgrahaJ:if on the Bodhisattvabhiimi (Sarrtdhininnocanasiitra) says that the dhanna-nature of all dhannas is very profound.

chos roams kyi chos fiid kyan zab ste (Yogiiciirabhiimir· 'i 67b6-7); �#:;#:;tl:ljH�:ilii* (T.l579: 721b4)

Abhidharmakosabhii�ya 336

Chapter 5 Anusayanirde§a

5 .29) Vasubandhu says that one who has destroyed a kle§a that is to be destroyed by insight into dubkha is still associated with the remaining defilements that have that as their object, i.e., the other kle§as of the same type as the destroyed kle§a. Yasomitra gives the following example: even if an adhimiitriidhimiitra kle§a has been destroyed, one is still associated with the adhimiitramadhya anusaya, etc. (Abhidharmakosavyiikhyii: 477.33-478.4).

prahf1Je dubkhadrgdheye sal!lyukta(i se�asarvagai(i / priik prahf1Je prakiire ca se�ais tadvi�ayair malai� / dubkhajftiine samutpanne samudayajftiine 'nutpanne du(ikha­ darsanaprahiitavyo nikiiyab prahf1Jo bhavati / tasmin prahf1Je tadiilambanaib samudaya­ darsanaprahiitavyai(i sarvatragaib sal!lyuktab (Pradhan: 301 .20-302.3; T. 1558: 1 06b I 2- 16; Poussin v. 4: 66-67; Sarp.ghabhadra objects to the phrase tadvi�aya, which he thinks is unnecessary [T. 1562: 636c7- 1 1], and examines and criticizes the siitra-master' s possible reasons for including it [T. 1562: 636c l l -21].)

YogQcQrabhilmi 337

5 .29)

(I have found nothing in the YogQcQrabhilmi corresponding to this argument.)

Abhidharmakosabhii:;ya 338 Chapter 5 Anusayanirdesa

5.30) In an explanation of four synonyms for anusaya, Vasubandhu says that anusayas are called yoga when they are not strongly active, and they are called upiidiina because due to them one grasps objects of desire.

niitimiitrasamudiiciin/Jo 'pi yogii vividhaduJ:tkhasm]1yojaniit I iibhfk:;/Jyiinu:;migato vii I kiimiidyupiidiiniid upiidiiniinfti (Pradhan: 308.20-2 1 ; T. 1558: 108b8-1 1 ; Poussin v. 4: 80-81 ; Sffi1lghabhadra identifies these as the explanations of the siitra-master [T. 1562: 642aI3-19] and criticizes them, saying that, in the case of the first two synonyms (iisrava and ogha), Vasubandhu' s explanation i s actually the same as that o f th e Vaibha�ikas, while hi s explanations of yoga and upiidiina are simply wrong: if the anusayas were not strongly active, they could not bond beings to suffering; if upiidiina were the cause of tr:;1Jii, the pratftya­ samutpiida formula would be contradicted because upiidiina must be the condition for bhava [T. 1562: 642a19-b8].)

YogacarabhUmi 339

5.30) The explanations of the yogas and upadiinas in the Vastusal'J'lgrahalJf are perhaps more similar to Vasubandhu' s explanations than to the presumably standard Sarvastivll.din explanations that precede them (Pradhan: 30S. 1 6). The Vastusal'J'lgrahalJf states that the yogas are the kle.fas operating together without either increase or destruc­ tion (or without either duplication or omission).

mtshuris par spyod pa mams kyi lhag chad med pa 'i non mons pa de dag nid la ni sbyor ba mams ses bya 'o (Yogacarabhiimi,: 'i 224b5); ;fl*;S:�:J:JH��:5j-qT1!f�F!��Fi�o !lp1::. jijfm-wm't� o m��� (T. 1579: S03b20-21) The same passage states that the upadanas function to obtain objects of desire and riches.

ga1i gi phyir ne bar len ie na / 'dod pa mams thob par bya ba 'i phyir dan Ions spyod pa 'i phyir ni daTi po 'o (Yogacarabhiimi/ 'i 224bS); r,,� 1PJjijf �*o ��1��w\lit� �JflilR€W* (T. 1579: S03b26-27)

Abhidharmakosabhii�ya 340 Chapter 5 Anusayanirdesa

5.3 1 ) In a discussion of the antidotes (pratipa�a) to the kle§as, one of which is distance (darfbhiiva), Vasubandhu objects to the Sarvastivadin explanation of temporal distance. According to Sarvastivada, past and future things are distant because they have no efficacy. Vasubandhu argues that the asal'[lslqtadharmas would likewise have to be distant because they have no efficacy. The Sarvastivadin counters that the two nirodhas are not distant since they are possessed at all times. Vasubandhu then states that past and future dharmas (according to Sarvastivada) can also be possessed at all times and thus could not, according to the Sarvastivadin logic, be distant.

akiiritriit tarhi tad daram / asal'[lsk.rtasya katham antikatvQl'(l sidhyiiti / sarvatra tat­ priipte!; / atftiiniigate 'p i tat prasaligaf:! (Pradhan: 321. 10-1 1 ; T. 1558: 1 1 1c10-12; Poussin v. 4: 107; Sarp.ghabhadra identifies this last as the statement of the siitra-master [T. 1562: 65 1c13-14] and criticizes it, saying that Vasubandhu is wrong to apply the same reasoning to the asal'flSlqtadharmas as to past and future [T. 1562: 65 1c14-21].)

Yogilcilrabhiimi 341

5.3 1 ) (I have found nothing in the Yogilcilrabhiimi corresponding to this argument. But see the next item.)

Abhidhannakosabha�a 342 Chapter 5 Anusayanirde§a

5 .32) In a discussion of four types of distance, Vasubandhu offers his own explanation of temporal distance: the future is distant due to the nature of dhannas because it has not been acquired; the past is distant because it has already departed. 273

evlJT!l tu yuktal'!l syilt I dharmasvalalqaIJiid aniigatlJT{l daram asal'!lpriiptatviit I atft� ca pracyutatviid iti (Pradhan: 321 . 14-15; T. 1558: l l lcI6-18; Poussin v. 4: 107 ; Srup.ghabhadra identifies this as the statement of the siitra-master [T. 1562: 65 1c25-27] and accuses Vasubandhu of being prejudiced when he implies that "distance" is equivalent to "lacking svabhiiva" and thus insists on his theory of the unreality of past and future [T. 1562: 65lc27-652a3].)

273 P'u-kuang says that, according to Vasubandhu, past and future are distant since they ' have no real existence, while the present, which i ; real, is near (T. 1821: 325c26-27) .

Yogiiciirabhami

343

5.32) Unlike the AbhidhnrmakO§abhiJ..r.ya, the YogiiciirabhUmi does not contain an

explanation of four types of distance (darfbhitva), including pratipalqa. However, the Vini§cayasaJ!lgraJuu:!f on the Cintiimayfprajfiii Bhami, immediately after a discussion of the practice of antidotes ( YogiiciirabhUmi,: zi 230b8-231a4; T. 1579: 667a8-14) , explains past dhnrmas as having causes that are already exhausted and svabhitvas that are already destroyed. 'das pa 'i chos rgyu spyad zinpa ilO bo iiid zig pa (YogticiirabhUmi,: zi 231a6); :f!l ;}i:i::1PJ

�*1to �j!j ESJ8�mo Ej '118i� (T. 1579: 667a20)

The same passage explains future dhnrmas as not yet having received their causes and not yet having received their svabhiivas. ma 'ons pa 'i chos rgyu ma spyad pa / lio bo fiid ma spyad pa (YogticarabhUmi,: zi

231b5); 1J[;}i:z;1ilJ**1to �j!j ESJ*� § '11*st (T. 1579: 667b5-6)

Abhidhannakosabha�ya 344 Chapter 5 Anusayanirdesa

5.33) Vasubandhu says that the person who achieves, after becoming detached from kiimadhatu, the sixteenth and last moment of darsanamarga (margtinvayajfiiin a), which is equivalent to the beginning of bhavantimarga, gives up the five preceding parijiiiis while obtaining avarabhagfyapraharnparijfiii.

pafica tyajati vftartigapurvf mtirgtinvayajfitine / sa hy avarabhtigfyaprahal}aparijfiti­ ltibhe purvikii1:t pafica parijfitis tyajati (Pradhan: 326.7-8; T. 1558: 1 13b15-17; Poussin v. 4: 1 1 8 ; Smp.ghabhadra identifies this as the statement of the sutra-master [T. 1562: 657b9-1O] and criticizes it, saying that Vasubandhu should have said, "the person who achieves margtinvayajfiiina�tinti [the fifteenth moment of darsanamarga]," because the first five parijfiiis are actually given up at this earlier moment [T. 1562: 657b1O-14].)

Yogacarabhumi

5.33)

345

(I have found nothing ill the Yogacarabhami correspondirtg to this argument.)

346

Abhidharmakosabha�ya

Chapter 6 Miirgapudgalanirdefa

6. 1 )

Vasubandhu objects to the Vaibha�ika definitions of the three types of prajfiii (srutamayf, cintiimayf, bhiivaniimaYl) and mentions the defInitions of "other people": srutamayfprajiiii is a determination produced by means of the speech of an authorita­ tive person; cintiimayfprajiiii is produced by logical reasoning; bhavaniimayfprajiiii is produced by samiidhi. asyii'!l tu kalpaniiyii'!l cintiimayf prajiiii na siddhyatfty apare / yii hi niimiilambanii srutamayfpriipnoti yii 'rthalambanii bhavantiyayfti / ida'!l tu l�a1:za'!l niiniravadya'!l vidyate / iiptavacanapriimii1:zyajiitaniscaya!:t srutamayf / yuktinidhyiinajas cintiimayf / samiidhijo bhavaniimayfti (Pradhan: 3353-6; T. 1558: 1 16c17-21; Poussin v. 4: 143-144; SaI!lghabhadra identifIes this as the opinion of the siltra-master [T. 1562: 669a12-16], who, according to SaI!lgha­ bhadra, does not understand the Vibha�ii, and repeats the Vaibh�ika definition given in the Abhidharmakosab�a, according to which srutamayf prajiiii is based on name, cinfiimayfprajiiii is based on both object and name, and bhavaniimayfprajfiii is based

only on an object, with no awareness of name [T. 1562: 669a17-b2].)

Yogiiciirabhumi

347

6.1) A passage from the Paryiiyasa'!1grahalJz concerning the understanding of impermanence suggests defInitions of at least the fIrst two types of prajiiii that are very close to the definitions attributed by Vasubandhu to "other people": srutamayf prajiiii is equated with understanding because knowledgeable people speak thus, a.'1d cintiimayzprajiiii is equated with judgement. However, the definition of bhiivanii­ mayf prajfiii, which equates bhiivaniimayf prajiiii with investigation or pondering, does not mention samiidhi. lam ses par byed pa ni thos pa las byun ba 'i ses rab kyis te / ses pa gsun ba 'di skad du gsun no ies bya ba '0 / yan dag par ses par byed pa ni bsams pa las bywi ba '0 / lies par rtog pa ni bsgoms pa las byUli ba 'i ste (Yogiiciirabhiimi,: yi 47a5-6); X�IrT1!f 0 /lDp)fmt

,� o �t��iiii 1!f PJ]::@�#.�to ���T1!fo ,\!:,p)fmt�o i'��T1!fo 1J�P)fM� (T. 1579:

768b25-27)

348

Abhidharmako§abhii�ya

Chapter 6 MiirgapudgaZanirdeta 6.2) Vasubandhu rejects the Abhidhamrikas' defInitions of asaY(!tu�!i and mahecchata. According to them, asaY(!tu�.ti is the desire to have more of what one already possesses, while mahecchatii is the desire to get what one does not possess. But Vasubandhu says that asaY(!tu�!i is dissatisfaction with the quantity or quality of what one already possesses, while mahecchatii is desire for things of good quality or great number that one does not possess.

evaY(! tu yujyate / Zabdheniipra1}fjeniiprabhatena paritiiso274 'saY(!tu�!* /aZabdhapra1}fta­ prabhatecchii mahecchatii (Pradhan: 335.16-17; T. 1558: 1 17a9-12; Poussin v. 4: 145-146; Sarpghabhadra identifies this as the opinion of the sutra-master [T. 1562: 669c5-7J and rejects it, defending the Abhidhamrika defInitions [T. 1562: 669c8-24J.)

274 HiJ:akawa corrects this to aparito�o (1973-1978, v. 1: 434), but Sakurabe and Odani

leave it as it stands (1999: 72 n. 3).

Yogiiciirabhiimi

349

6.2) (The Yogiiciirabhiimidoes not contain any explanation of the differences between asa'!ltu�.ti and mahecchatii. )

350

Abhidharmakosabhii�ya

Chapter 6 Miirgapudgalanirdefa

6.3) The Buddha taught the four iiryava'!lfas in order to stop the desire for the object of the notions of "I" and "mine." Vasubandhu equates the object of the notion of "mine" with clothing, the object of the notion of "I" with the body, and desire with thirst. sa eviirtha/:! puna/:! parisgeIJ-ocyate / mamakiiravastu clvariidayo 'harJ1kiiravastv iitma­ bhiivalJ / tatrecchii tr�1J-ii (Pradhan: 337.4-5; T. 1558: 1 17b1-2; Poussin v. 4: 148; Sarp.ghabhadra identifies this as the

opinion of the siltra-master [T. 1562: 67Oc17-19] and discusses but does not attack it, except to say that the last pada of the verse, on which this is a comment, is superfluous [T. 1562: 67Oc19-27].)

Yogiiciirabhurni

6.3)

(I have found nothlng relevant in the Yogiiciirabhurni.)

351

352

Abhidharmakosabhii:jya

Chapter 6 Margapudgalanirde.fa

6.4) Some teachers say that the meditator follows his exhalation all the way to the far ends of the universe. But Vasubandhu objects: since anapanasmrti is attention to things as they really are (tattvamanasikara), this statement is illogical. (The implication seems to be that a practice such as that ascribed to those teachers would involve imagination, i.e., the adhimuktimanaskara typically associated with practices like asubhabhiivana, rather than observation.) yavad vayumaT;u;lalalJ1 vairambhas ca vayava ity apare / tad etat tattvamanasikara­ tvan na yuktam

(Pradhan: 340.4-5; T. 1558: 1 1 8b7-8; Poussin v. 4: 155; Sarp.ghabhadra identifies this as the opinion of the siitra-master [T. 1562: 674a12-13] and, after explaining it, disagrees with Vasubandhu's reasoning, saying that, even if what Vasubandhu suggests is true, the meditator who follows his exhalation to the ends of the universe would not thereby emerge from anapiinasm.rti because his intention to practice aniipanasmr!i would not be destroyed [T. 1562: 674a13-17].)

Yogiiciirabhilmi

353

6.4) The Yogiiciirabhilmi does not specify the maximum distance to which the exhalation can be followed. However, the VastusalJ1graha(lfexplains the relationship between iiniipiinasmrti and yoniso manasikiim, which here may be quite similar to tattvamanasikiira : the yogiiciira, when he practices the four smrtyupasthiinas on the basis of iiniipiinasmrti, recognizes his undestroyed internal ayoniso manasikiira, thereby being able to destroy it and produce yoniso manasikiira. rnal 'byor pa ni dbugs niub pa dan 'byun ba dran pa la brten nas dran pa fie bar giag pa gii bsgom pa na tshul biin yid la byed pa la brten nas nan gi tshul biin ma yin pa yid la byed pa ma spans par yod pa la yan tshul biin ma yin par yan dag pa ji Ita ba biin du rab tu ses so I tshul biin ma yin pa yid la byed pa la tshul biin ma yin par ses nas kyan tshul biin ma yin pa yid la byed pa spans nas de span par bya ba 'i phyir tshul biin yid la byed pa 'ba ' iig gcig tu nes par sgom par byed do I de la lam gyi bii mdo chen po Ita bu ni Ius la sogs pa 'i chos bii 'o I niul gyi phun po Ita bu ni tshul biin ma yin pa yid la byed pa ste I mi brtan pa dan I sfiin po med pa dan sems rmons par byed pa 'i phyir ro I sar dan lho dan nub dan byan gi phyogs nas 'ons pa 'i 'khyogs dan bion pa dan I sin rta dan I sin rta phal pa Ita bu ni tshul biin yid la byed pa ste Ius la sogs pa bii la dmigs pa 'i sgo nas 'di Ita ste I niul gyi phun po Ita bu'i tshul biin ma yin pa yid la byed pa de giom pa ' i phyir dan I thams cad kyi thams cad du rgyud rnam par dag par bya ba 'i phyir iugs so (Yogiiciirabhilmi,: 'i 377a8-b4); i;![ * •• � fi o � ffi B�.m�k. � �� o ���.Y.�ko �R* � � ' L,pJT;ff �F �f'F. o fr01fT 9;o �.�P1.o 1J� � pJT;ff fro �1t.o fr o 1f T 9;O �J.Mo 3'1. 0 m; T 9;0 8 1J� � pJT;ff �P1.1t. - riiJ �)lJto 1J� � pJT;ff fr o �1t . o - riiJ 11�'I§I o .iJ:k%1lf7j( � imz�3:0 JZ.1J�li:t rp !r � � 1*fro � *� 0 �P1.1t.frD � ± 1i o /f� $�3:0 /f il1f�3:o jUJL' L'�3: o frO f1.1t.fro � JJ*J!�*}lnl[*,� o !r � � :tJ�J'f· r� *U�t��1lffrO�±1i?Ff1.1t.o iJF%--E:}J:t§*j¥�i* (T. 1519: 866c10-20)

354

Abhidharmako§abhi:i�ya

Chapter 6 Margapudgalanirde§a 6.5) Vasubandhu explains that the element dharmajiiana in the term dharma­ jiiana�anti expresses the fact that this �anti is anasrava. It is a case of calling something by the name of its niryandaphala. He compares it to the appellations "flower tree" and "fruit tree."

aniisravajiianiirtha1!l niryandena vi§e�alJam / dharmajiianiirtha1!l275 �antily. / p�pa­ phalavr�avat

(Pradhan: 350.�5; T. 1558: 121b2-4; Poussin v. 4: 180; SaI!lghabhadra identifies this as the opinion of the sutra-master [T. 1562: 683a27-29] and criticizes it, saying that Vasu­ bandhu's comparison is invalid, and insists that the real reason dharmajiiana�anti is antisrava is that it is produced immediately after the laukikagradharmas; since they are the highest sasrava state, what follows them must be antisrava [T. 1562: 683a29-b9].)

275 Corrected from ka �ajiianartha1!l (Hirakawa 1973-1978, v. 1: 434).

YogiiciirabhL7mi

6.5)

(I have found nothing relevant in the Yogiiciirabhami. )

355

356

Abhidharmakosabhii�a

Chapter 6 Miirgapudgalanirde1a 6.6) According to Vasubandhu, the k�iintis are iinantaryamiirga because they cannot be impeded from removing the priiptis of kldas, while the jiiiina s are vimuktimarga because, for those who are free from the priiptis of kldas, the priipti of visaT}'tyoga arises at the same time. iinantaryamargii!:t276 �iintaya!:t kldapriiptivicchedaT}'t praty antarayitum asakyatviit / vimuktimiirgiis tu jfiiiniini / kldapriiptivimuktiiniiT}'t visaT}'tyogapriiptisahotpiidiit

(Pradhan: 352. 13-14; T. 1558: 122al4-16; Poussin v. 4: 190; SaI!lghabhadra identifies this as the definition of the siitra-master [T. 1562: 690a3-5] and criticizes it, saying that, by Vasubandhu' s logic, vimuktimarga should also be called iinantarya; according to SaI!lghabhadra, iinantaryamarga is so calle d because there is no interval between it and vimuktimarga [T. 1562: 690aS-1 3].)

276 Corrected from anantaryamiirgiilJ (Hirakawa 1973-1978: v. I : 434).

Yogilcilrabhumi

357

6.6) (The Yogilcilrabhiimi contains several explanations that contrast ilnantarya­ milrga with vimuktimilrga. However, these passages do not suggest that ilnantarya . means "without impediment." See the Srilvakabhumi: tasya parijnilnilbhyilsild ilnantaryamilrga utpadyate / kle§illJ.ilY(l prahalJ.ilya yena prajahati / prahV}e ca punar vimuktiY(l silk�iltkaroti [Srilvakabhumi: 504. 14-17]; de yons su ses sin goms par byas / non mons pa mams spans pa 'i phyir bar chad med pa 'i lam skye bar byed cin des spon bar byed do / spans pas na mam par grol ba mnon sum du byed do [ Yogilcilrabhumi/ wi 232b7-8]; �D;€:9;a 8ttfl��tft.:� r13H!� lWi�t�Jjj� o ::g; fl�tft.:1Wi �Jjj� 1Wi 8�i1�J!rtER.o ::g; fl�t!)c�i [T. 1579: 476b29-c2] 0

tatrilnantaryamilrgabhavanil yayil prajahati / tatra vimuktimilrgabhilvanil yayil sarnanantaraprahV}e kle§avimuktiY(l sil�iltkaroti [ Srilvakabhumi: 505.21-506.2]; de la bar cad med pa'i lam bsgom pa ni gan gis non moils pa spon bar byed pa 'o / de la rnam par grol ba 'i lam bsgom pa ni gan gis non moils pa spans rna thag tu rnam par grol ba 'i mnon sum du byed pa 'o [ Yogilcilrabhumit: wi 233bl-2]; � r135 :@:fl�1lr �� EB J1:�tft.:lElWi�l'I·� o J!rtER.:@:fl�1lr �� EB JI:�tft.:�IWi� r13' �i1�J!rUR. [T. 1579: 476c19-21J 0

0

See the ViniscayasaY(lgrahalJ.f on the Srilvakabhumi: de rna thag tu spon ba ni lam gnis pa yin no / spans rna thag pa ni lam gsum pa yin no [Yogilcilrabhumit: zi 271a5]; ��� r13' lWio ;€:*=:@:o � r135 1Wi8 o ;€:*=:@: [T. 1579:

683a12]

277 This section is not extant in Tibetan.

358

Abhidharmakosabhil�ya

Chapter 6 Margapudgalanirdesa 6.7) Vasubandhu rejects the opinion of "others," who say that thesabhisarrzskara­ parinirvayin anagamin reaches nirvana by a marga the object of which is sarrzskrta, while the anabhisarrzskaraparinirvttyin anagamin reaches rurvana by a marga the object of which is asarrzskrta. Instead, he quotes a satraT78 that mentions the anabhi­ sarrzskaraparinirvayin anagamin before the sabhisarrzskaraparinirvayin anagamin and says that this order is correct because the anabhisarrzskaraparinirvayin anagamin, being more accomplished, requires less time and no effort to attain nirvana 279

sarrzsk.rtasarrzskrtalambanamarganirval}ad ity apare I tat tu na l ati prasangatl satre tv anabhisarrzskaraparinirvtlyrp arvarrz pa!hyate I tathaive ca yujyate I vahyavahimargayor anabhisarrzskarabhisarrzskarasadhyatvad ayatnayatnapraptita/:z

(Pradhan: 359.5-7; T. 1558: 124b24-29; Poussin v. 4: 212; Slli1lghabhadra identifies this as the opinion of the sutra-master [T. 1562: 696c23-24] and comments on it, saying that there are also some satras that mention the sabhisarrzskaraparinirvayin anagamin [lIst; therefore, there is nothing wrong with the traditional Vaibha�ika order [T. 1562: 696c24-28].)

278 A note to the Kokuyaku Issaikyi5 translation (Bidon bu 26.2: 271 n. 30) identifies this satra as Sarrzyuktagama no. 821 (T. 99: 21 1al-5). 279 P'u-kuang identifies tlns as a Sautrantika explanation (T. 1 82 1 : 361a23).

Yo giieiirabhiimi

359

6.7) The Sriivakabhiimi lists the aniigiimins in the same descending order as Vasubandhu and gives similar defInitions of the siibhisaf!1Skiiraparinirviiyin and anabhisaf!1Skiiraparinirviiyin aniigiimins.

anabhisaf!1SkiiraparinirvayfpudgalaJ:t katarnaJ:t1yo 'niibhisaf!1Skiim}iiprayatneniikhedena miirgC/l?1 sarrzmukhfkrtya tatropapannaJ:t parinirviity ayam ucyiite anabhisaf!1Skiira­ parinirviiyfpudgalaJ:t I siibhisaf!1SkiiraparinirvayfpudgalaJ:t katarnaJ:t Iyo 'bhisGf!1SkiirelJf1 prayatnena khedamiirgarrz sarrzmukhfkrtya tatropapannaJ:t parinirviity ayam ucyate siibhisiimskiiraparinirvayf pudgalaJ:t (Sriivakabhiimi; 1 80. 15- 1 8 1 .6); gan zag mnon par 'du byed pa med par yons su mya nan las 'da ' ba gan ie na I smra ba I mlion par 'du byed pa med pd80 dan I 'bad pa med pa dan I nal ba med pas281 lam mnon du byas sin I der skyes nas yons su mya nan las 'da ' ba gan yin pa ste I de ni gan zag mrion par 'du byed pa med par yoris su mya rian las 'da ' ba ies bya 'o I gan zag mrion par 'du byed pa beas pas yoris su mya nan las 'da ' ba gari ie na I smra ba I mnon par 'du byed pa dari 'bad pa dan I nal bas lam mnon du byas siri I der skyes nas yons su mya nan las 'da ' ba gan yin pa ste I de ni gan zag mrion par 'du byed pa bcas pa?82 yoris su mya nan las 'da ' ba ies bya 'o (Yogiiciirabhiimi,: wi 83b8-84a4); �1PJ�1TffiilE�*it'f{tJU If.io �1!I 1:.1�E/fts1Ja1T/f11oJ)jffl o /f EE *f��:mT:ElWjffi ffiilE�o ;l1k::15�1T�JtilE �*it'f{1Jolf.io �1PJ;ff1T�JtilE�*it'f{1Jo lf.io �1!I1�1:. E ��ts1Ja1T11o*J)jffl EE i'uJK * 1��:mT:ElWjffi �JtilE�o ;l1k::15;ff1T�JtilE�*it'f{1Jolf.i (T. 1579: 425a24-29) 0

2 80 Corrected from mrion par 'du byed pa on the basis of the Derge. 2 81 Corrected from rial ba med pa dan on the basis of the Derge. 2 82 The Derge reads gari zag mnon par 'du byed pa med par, but this is clearly

mistaken.

.

360

Abhidhannakosabhii�ya

Chapter 6 Miirgapudgalanirdeia 6.8) According to Sarvastivada, an aniigiimin who has experienced nirodha­ samiipatti is called kiiyasiik�in because he experiences it directly with his body, not

with consciousness, which is lacking in this state. According to Vasubandhu, however, the aniigiimin, when he emerges from meditation, proclaims that nirodhasamiipatti is like nirvana and acquires a calmness of his conscious body that he has never before attained. He is said to experience this calmness with his body due both to his experience of obtaining a calm body during meditation and to his recognition of this calmness after emerging from meditation. eval'J'l tu bhavitavyam / sa hi tasmiid vyuttht'iyiipratilabdhapurviil'J'l savijii.iinakiil'J'l kiiya­ siintil'J'l pratilabhate / yato 'syaival'J'l bhavati siintii vata nirodhasamiipattir nirviil)a­ sadrif vata nirodhasamiipattir iti / evam anena tasyiif:! siintatvaf!! kiiyena sii�iitJq-taf!! bhavati /priiptijfianasii�iitkriyiibhyiif!! praty�fkiiro hi sii�iitkriyii (Pradhan: 363.15-18; T. 1558: 126a21 -25; Poussin v. 4: 224; Sarp.ghabhadra identifies

this as the opinion of the sutra-master [T. 1562: 699b12-16] and criticizes it, saying that the term kiiyasiik�in applies to the aniigiimin both during and after nirodhasamiipatti [T. 1562: 699b16-24].)

Yogiiciirabhiimi

361

6.8) (The Yogiiciirabhami does not explain why the aniigiimin who obtains nirodhasamapatti is called ki1yasiil�in. However, Vasubandhu' s explanation of the term may be related to his rejection, similar to that found in the Yogiiciirabhiimi, of the reality of past and future dharmas: how can the aniigiimin be said to "experience directly" that which occurred in the past? The Viniscayasal'{lgrahalJ-f on the Savitarkildi­ bhiimi contains a passage in which a person who, being very calm, has arisen from an iiryavihiira that is similar to nirvana, is said to have arisen from nirodhasamapatti. The

temporal relationship between the meditation and the practitioner' s awareness of it [as indicated by the use of the perfect tense in the Tibetan translation] may be similar to that proposed by Vasubandhu. mchog tu rab tu ii iili mya nan las 'das pa dan 'dra ba 'i 'phags pa'i gnas pa las langs pa ni 'di Ita ste / 'gog pa 'i snoms par 'jug pa las lans so [Yogticiirabhiimi,: zi 152b4-5]; =1tt�-;ftlWill!.��1§1J;C�1:l:�o �\ll i���3?: [T. 1579: 635c24-25])

362

Abhidharmakosabha�ya

Chapter 6 MiirgapudgaZanirdeSa 6.9) Vasubandhu agrees with the Sautrantikas, who say that one cannot fall from arhatship. arhattviid api niisti parihal}ir iti sautriintikii/:! / e�a eva ca nyiiya/:! / katham · idarrr gamyate / iigamiid yuktitas ca (Abhidharmakosab�a: 375. 10- 1 1 [but the whole

argument continues until 377.5]; T. 1558: 130a16-130c16; Poussin 4: 258 [-265]; Saqlghabhadra identifies this as the opinion of the siitra-master [T. 1562: 7 1 1c2-6] and criticizes it in great detail [T. 1562: 711c6-7 16a13; I have not distinguished here between his brief quotations of Vasubandhu' s opinions and his lengthy criticisms] ; Kat6 1989: 78.)

Vasubandhu argues that the defInition of an arhat is one whose klesas are completely destroyed. This implies that the seeds of his klesas are likewise destroyed, in which case it is impossible for the klesas to arise again. yadi tiivad arhatas tadriipa/:! pratipak�a utpanno yena kleSii atyantam anutpatti­ dharmatiim iipannii/:! / katharrr puna/:! parihfyate / atha notpanna/:! / katharrr �fl}iisravo bhavati / atyantam anayoddhrtiiyiirrr tadbfjadharmatiiyiim ak�fl}iisravo vii puna/:! katham arhan bhavatfty evarrr yukti/:! (Abhidharmakosab�a: 376.17-20; T. 1558:

130c2-4; Poussin 4: 263-264; Saqlghabhadra identifies this as the opinion of the siitra­ master [T. 1562: 7 15c29-716a4], and, referring to the Vaibha�ika theory of sarrryoga­ priipti and visarrryogapriipti [see Cox 1995: 89-92], explains how it is indeed possible to fall from arhatship [T. 1562: 7 16a4-13; see also Ivliyashita 1982].)

YagiiciirabhL7mi

363

6.9) The Viniscayasal!lgraluilJf on the PancavijiiiinakttyarnanabhL7mi says that the arhat, who has destroyed the kle§as and their bfjas, cannot fall from arhatship. beam ldan 'das kyis ji skad du dge slmi dag dgra beam pa yan tshe 'di la lhag pa 'i sems las byun ba bde bar gnas pa bii po de dag las gan yan run ba las yans su nams par na smra ies gan gsuns pa de la / gal te de 'i non mons pa can gyi chas thams cad kyi sa bon dag yan dag par beam na ni /ji ltar de la 'ag rna pa 'i non mons pa 'byun bar ' gyur / gal te mi 'byun na ni ji ltar de yans su nams par ' gyur ie na / yans su nams pa ni gftis po 'di dag yin te / span ba'i yans su nams pa dan / gnas pa 'i yans su ftams pa 'a / de la span ba 'i yans su nams pas ni so sa 'j skye bo kho na yans su nams par 'gyur ro / gnas pa 'i yons su nams pas ni 'phags pa dan / so so skye bo yan yons su nams pa 'gyur ro / de la 'jig rten pa 'i lam gyis non mons pa spans pa yan mnan du byed pa ni span ba 'i yons su nams pas yans su nams par 'gyur te / gnas pa 'i yons su nams pas yons su nams par 'gyur ba yan de yin no / 'jig rten las 'das pa 'i lam gyis non mons pa spans nas / de las gian pa 'i phral gyi bya ba dag la rab tu chags pa 'i blo can yid la mi byed pa 'i rgyus de 'i mjug thogs su tshe 'di la bde bar gnas pa la snon ji lta bar phyis kyan de biin du mnon du byed mi nus la / sa 'og rna pa 'i non mons pa ni / mnon du mi byed pa gan yin pa de ni de lta na gnas pa 'i yons su ftams par 'gyur ba yin gyi span ba 'i yans su nams pa ni rna yin no / gal te dgra beam pa non mons pa thams cad spans pa 'i non mons pa can gyi ehas de dag thams cad kyi sa bon yan dag par rna beam na ni /ji ltar na dgra beam pa sems sin tu mam par grol ba dan / zag pa zad par 'gyur / gal te yan dag par beam na ni de 'i sems kyi rgyud non mons pa can gyi ehos thams cad kyi [corrected from kyis on the basis of the Derge] sa bon med pa la tshul biin rna yin pa yid la byed pa tsam yan 'byun bar mi 'gyur na / non mons pa lta smos kyan ci dgos te / de lta bas na 'jig rten las 'das pa 'i lam gyis non mons pa spans pa la ni yons su nams ba med par khan du ehud par bya 'o ( YogiiciirabhL7mi,: zi 17b7-1 8bl); r���Dti!:� 8 0 ftm�iiJ *ii�Z�1J01Z911tIlU::A,'1*:m1*'li:�1t i=j:l JliI- jffi ill o *�-� � R.�fi B�W o �M�� T�m�o ������Mill o �ill � =.o - * Eill o = *�ill o 13 Eill * ��.�0 13 � ill * 0 ��� *��.�o � ti!: OO � E�m���:m�o � � . � Eill � ill o ���ill o � l±l ti!:� Ej:J[ 'I'� B {, �ti!:19J 0 � .w11tW �D fJlH'F� 0 El3 Jl:t� §�1J0 ;tt i=j:l Fa' 0 :m 1* ��.�:m�� %m���� � o �;tt T � B Em���:m� o � � � . � ill � ill o #� Eill o X� B E -� m� � �*i.o jffi � - � � �.�*�W * 0 �1iiJ�.,�, �fljH\HiiJ*i i�*�ti�jk!'io � BjkWo 1JN§ *j i=j:l 7ip {, t L-CJ Nihon Bukkyo­ gakkai Nenpi5 65 (2000): 127-46. [2000a] Review of Rebirth and Causation in the Yogacara Abhidharma by Robert Kritzer. Bukkyogaku Semina 72 (2000): 59-69. [2000b] Yamaguchi Susumu LlJ 0 � and Funahashi Issai fltm-� . Kusha-ron no Genten Kaimei: Seken-bon 1�%�ifu' 0) J.lli: �:f!lf J3)3 i:!t r"� Q"b . Kyoto: H6z6kan, 1 955.

______ ,.

406

Index S�veral terms, such as Abhidha1711£lkosabhi'o/Ya, *Nyiiyiinusiira, Poussin, Pradhan, SaIpghabhadra, sutra-master, VasUbaIldhu, and Yogik;iirabhiimi, occur very frequently in ilie body of ilie book Therefore, only occurrences in ilie introduction have been indexed.

tihrfkya 48-49 iijiiiitiivfndriya 36, 3 8 - 3 9 iijiiendriya 3 6 , 3 8 -39 iikiira 374-375 iikasa 1 9 , 32, 1 1 5-1 1 7 aklie!a 258 aklie!iivyiikrta mithyiijiiiina 292 iikeepahetu 1 32- 1 3 3 akusala 1 2 8 , 1 3 1 , 292-293 , 3 64 akusala dharma 128 akusalamula 248 iilambanagrahal:zaprakiira 374 iilayavijiiiina xiii, xviii-xix, xxix-xxx, xxxiv, xxxvi-xxxvii, 2 1 , 67, 145,

Abhasvara gods 1 3 6 - 1 37 abhidharma xiii, xvii, xix-xxi, xxvi, xxx, xxxvii, 2-3 , 1 54, 224, 3 8 8 - 3 8 9 407

Abhidharmadfpa xxi, xxv, xxvii, 36, 42

*Abhidharmahrdaya xxi-xxii, 48 *Abhidharmahrdayasiistra xxi Abhidharmakosabhii�a vii, xii, xxxxii, xxiv-xxxii, xxxiv, xxxvi Abhidharmakosavyiikhyii xxi, xxiv, xxxv, 44, 126, 1 60, 1 62, 1 64, 1 86, 1 96 , 202, 204, 230, 250, 256, 284, 302, 336, 368, 374, 386, 3 8 8

203

Abhidharmiimrta 4 8 abhidharmapi!aka 2 Abhidharmasamuccaya xii, xiii, 77,

alobha 47 amoha 47 anabhisaJ?'lSkiiraparinirviiyin aniigiimin 358-359 aniigiimin 360-3 6 1 aniijiiiitamiijiiiisyamfndriya 3 6 , 3 8 -3 9 iinantarya 356-357 iinantaryakarma 220 iinantaryamiirga 3 8 , 356-357, 3 8 2 iiniipiinasmrti 352-353 anapatriipya 48-49 aniisrava 130, 1 45 , 1 8 8 - 1 89 , 354 aniisrava citta 204 aniisrava indriya 36-3 8 aniisravadharma 1 0 8 aniisravarupa 1 8 8 aniitman 376 ariga 152 Arigiirakareupamasutra 3 64 anityatii 82- 83 antagriihadr�!i 149, 290 antartibhava xxvi� 1 3 6, 142- 143, 1 86

103, 389

Abhidharmasamuccayabhii�ya 262, 389

Abhidhiirmika

1 32, 1 54, 202, 206, 240,

348

abhidhyii 250-25 1 abhijiiii 3 8 0 , 382- 1 0 abhikeu 230 *abhinirvrttijiiti 75 abhisamayiintika saJ?1vrtijiiiina 378-379 abhisaJ?1skiiralakeal:za 1 85 abhutaparikalpa xiii, xviii acintya 3 3 5 Acittikii Bhumi xv adhimokea 3 7 0 adhimuktimanaskiira 352 adhipatiphala 267 adhie!hiina 3 1 4 iidhiethiinikfrddhi xxxvii, 140 adveea 47

407

408 antariiyahetu 267 antariiyahetvadhi�!hiina 267 . anusaya xxvii, xxxv, 1 1 8, 268, 270- 273 , 276, 280, 3 3 3 , 3 3 8 anuvartaka 204, 206 anvayajiiiinak�iinti 280 anyathiitva 60, 73, 82, 86, 92 apatrapii 22 apratigha 1 8 6 apratisal'flkhyiinirodha 19, 1 1 5 , 120121 Aramaki Noritoshi xviii, xxv, xxxiv arhat xxvii, xxxvi, 1 8 , 39, 42 -43 , 108, 1 30, 1 66, 230, 3 62-364, 3 66-367 iirtlpyadhiitu 22, 1 32-13 3 , 135, 145, 278 iirya 52-5 3 , 200, 202 iiryadharma 62-63 iiryaval'flsa 350 iiryavihiira 3 6 1 asaik�a 39, 1 3 1 asaik�acitta 130- 1 3 1 asaik�adharma 220, 222, 224 asamiihita 372 Asamiihitii Bhiimi xv, xxxiv, 373 asal'fljiiisamiipatti 66-67 asal'flskrta 19, 1 15 , 358 asal'flSkrtadharma xix, xxvii, xxxv, 1 81 9 , 1 14, 340 asal'fltu�ti 348-349 asal'flvara 199, 228, 248 *asal'flvarartlpa xxxiv, 5, 1 87 Asanga xii-xiii, xvii-xix� XXii, Xxiv-xxv asat 3 1 8 iisaya 202 iisrava 235, 3 3 8 iisravaqayajiiiinasiik�iitkriyii 3 8 0 iisraya xxxv, 10, 59, 202, 220-221 , 378 iisrayapariiv.rtti xix, 202 iisrayapariv[1ti 203 asubhabhiivanii 352 iitmabhiiva 69, 272, 278-279, 350 iitman 28-29 iitmaviida 320 avarabhiigfyaprahii�aparijiiii 344 avasthii 296

iivasthika 148, 1 50- 1 5 1 , 1 5 6 avidyii 148-150, 152, 156, 1 60, 1 64- 165, 262-263 avijiiapti xxxiv, 5, .8, 10-1 1 , 95, 1 86, 1 94, 1 96, 198, 200, 202, 248 , 256 avijiiaptirtlpa xix, xxvii, xxxiv, 4, 9, 1 1 , 1 86, 1 8 8 , 190, 1 9 8 avikalpita 292 Avitarkii Viciiramiitrii Bhiimi xiii Avitarkiiviciirii Bhiimi xiii avyiikrta 292- 293, 382 iiyatana 12, 16- 1 8 , 2 1 , 328-329 ayoniSo manasikiira 152, 353 iiyuflsal'flSkiira xxxvi, 43 iiyus 68 iiyu�ka�iiya 1 7 1 Bareau,

Andre xix

xv, 55, 155, 159, 305, 385 bhava 279, 3 3 8 bhiivaniiheya 206, 2 0 8 , 280 bhiivaniiheyakleia 3 8 , 2 8 1 bhiivaniimiirga 344 bhiivaniimayf346- 347 Bhiivaniimayf BhUmi xv, xvii bhavariiga 278 bhik�u 215, 2 1 8 , 224, 230 -23 1 , 233, 236, 240, 242, 245 bhi�u sal'flvara 2 1 5 bhik�u Sfla 2 3 0 , 234 bhiimi 376 bfja xix, xxvii, xxx, xxxiv-xxxv, xxxvii, 44, 50-52, 54- 56, 5 8 -60, 64, 95, 1 1 1 , 127, 1 3 3 , 1 3 8 , 165, 190, 272-273 , 279, 3 04, 362- 363 bodhi 2 1 2 Bodhicaryiivatiirapaiijikii 304 Bodhicittotpiidanaiiistra Xxiv bodhipa�adharma 368 bodhisattva xxxvi-xxxvii, 43, 79, 1 4 1 , 23 1 , 233 Bodhisattvabhiimi xiii, xv, xvii-xviii, xxxiii-xxxiv, xxxvi-xxxvii, 75, 79, 1 4 1 , 145, 1 7 1 , 22 1 , 23 1 , 233 , 267, Bhattacharya, Vidhushekhara

409 3 3 5 , 37 1 , 3 9 1 bodhisattvaszlasa,?,vara 23 1 bodhyanga 212 Brahma 137, 290 Bn-ston xxii

2- 3 , 43, 72, 74, 140- 141 , 1 62, 170- 1 7 1 , 2 14, 2 1 8, 220, 222, 224, 234, 242, 295, 298-299 , 302-305, 308 -309, 3 1 6, 3 1 8 , 3 2 1 , 328-329, 350, 3 8 8 - 3 8 9 buddhatva 220 Bnddha xi, xxxvi-xxxvii,

dal}¢ika 172 darsana 280 darsanaheya 3 8 , 63, 206, 208, 280-2 8 1 , 379 darsanaheyakleia 3 8 , 2 8 1 darianamarga 344, 378- 379 Dar�lantika xxvi-xxix, 32, 250, 3 12, 3 84, 386 Dasabhamikasastra xxiv daue!hulya 387 Deleann, Florin xi Dessein, Bart xxi-xxii

caitasika 28-29 caitta 28, 65, 67, 374, 384 cakeurindriya 1 86, 304-305 cakeurvijiiana 47, 384 caya 282 cetana 1 84-1 85, 258, 260 cetovimukti 371 chanda 368 Ch 'eng wei-shih lun JlX:Pl��All 34, 38, 8 1 , 95, 267, 383 Ch 'eng wei-shih lun shu chi JlX: plt ��ilii

J!t§[, xxvi

ching-chu iI:?[j: xxxi-xxxii, 2 Chii-she lun ch d � ��§[, xxii Chii-she lun shu {���i91E xxii Chiieh-ting tsang [un i;k:JEi1t�ilii xvi, 295 cintamayf 346-347 Cintamayf Bhami xv, xvii, xxxiii, xxxvi, 43, 1 9 1 , 235, 263, 335 Cintamayfprajiia Bhami xxxiii-xxxv, 5, 1 9 , 45, 95, 1 3 3 , 273 , 343 citta 28, 64, 67, 130, 1 64, 204, 2 1 0, 270, 368, 372, 374, 384 cittaikagrata 384 cittamahabhamika dharma 384 cittaviprayukta 270-271 cittaviprayuktasa,?,skara xix, xxviixxviii, xxxiv-xxxvi, 5, 63, 94-95, 1 3 3 , 147 Cox, Collett xxii, xxix, 38, 62, 70, 1 22, 1 25, 3 1 2, 3 14, 3 1 6 dana 1 9 1 dal}¢a 172

dharma 128 Dharmadharmatavibhaga xii, xxiv dharmadhatu 28- 29 dharmajiiana 354 dharmajiianakeanti 280, 354 dharmakaya 221 dharmapravicaya 2, 2 1 2 Dharmaskandha xx dharmasmrtyupasthana 380 Dharmasrl xxi, 48, 270 dharmasanyata xi dharmata 190- 1 9 1 dharmatayukti 1 9 1 Dharmatrata 2, 32 dhatu 12, 1 6- 1 8, 22 Dhatukaya xx dhyana 1 29, 2 1 0, 2 1 2, 3 82, 3 86-387 dhyanabhumi 2 1 0 dhyananga 212, 3 8 6 dhyanasa,?,vara 2 1 1 , 244-245 digbhagabheda 35 DIpakara xxxvii

divyacakeus 382 divyasrotra 3 82-3 8 3 dravya 1 82, 272 dre!adharmasukhavihara 38-39, 366 dmam 252-253 dmi 1 3 1 , 263, 284, 290, 292 duF:zkha 284, 286, 336 duF:zkhasatya 284 darfbhava 340, 343 Ekagathabhaeya xxvi

410 Jaini,

ekiigratii 3 8 4 Fa-pao

it. xxii,

P.S. xxiv-xxvii, 42

janakapratyaya 308 jarii 79, 8 3 , 87, 92- 93

1 64, 3 8 8

Frauwallner, Erich xxi, xxiv-xxv

jiiti 71, 7 3 , 75, 79, 82-8 3 , 86- 87, 1 6 9 , 297

Fukuda Takumi xxv, 122, 1 45 Fukuhara Ry6gon xx, 5, 1 5 Funahashi Issai xx, 1 9 8 , 228, 2 3 0 , 244, 252,254

jihvii 22 jihviivijiiiinadhiitu 22 Jinaputra xvi jfvitendriya xxxvi, 42-43, 68-69, 1 32133

gambhfra 335 gandha 22 gandhadhiitu 22-23 Giithiirthasarp.grahasiistra xxvi Giithiisarp.graha xxv Giithiisarp.grahasiistra xxv-xxvi gati 1 3 6

jiiiina 3 5 6

Jiiiinaprasthiina xx-xxi, 104, 106 Kajiyama Yuichi xxiv-xxv

kiimadhiitu 129, 1 45 , 256, 290, 344, 376, 386

kiimavairiigya 128 Kanda Abidatsumakusharon �� JliiJ .m Jt��*� xxii kiiritra 88, 92, 1 22- 123, 294-296

Gho�aka 3 8 0

ghriira 2 2 ghriiravijiiiinadhiitu 22 gotra 237 grah 126

karma xix, xxviii-xxix, xxxvi, 42, 6 8 69, 1 1 1 , 1 3 3 , 1 84- 1 85 , 1 9 1 , 1 9 9 ,

Griffiths, Paul xxiv-xxv

204, 250-25 1 , 266 -267, 322 Hakamaya Noriaki xii, xvi-xvii,

xix,

xxv, xxvii, 190, 252, 293, 379 Harada Was6 xxv, xxvii-xxviii

*karmabfja 305, 321 karmapatha xxix, 1 9 8 , 25 1 , 256, 258, 260, 262

Harivarman xxvii

Karmasiddhiprakarara xii, xxiv-xxvi,

hetu 1 0 8 , 1 3 9 hetuphalasadviida 3 2 3 , 327

kiiryakiirarayukt 123

Hirakawa Akira xiv, xviii-xix, 3 , 5 , 70,

ka�tiya 170- 1 7 1

xxviii, 1 8 5

1 54, 228, 252, 254, 334, 3 4 8 , 354,

KaSmIra Vaibh�ika xxi, xxx, 230, 240, 388

3 5 6 , 3 6 8 , 376

Kathiivatthu 42

Hinayana xi, xxvii Honjo Yoshifumi xx, 3 1 8

Kat6 JunshO xi, xxvii, 32, 362

hrf22

KiityiiyanIputra 2

Hsien-yang sheng-chiao lun

�

!mm��

xii-xiii, 77, 103, 105, 1 1 9, 267

HSiian-tsang �� xii, xiv, xx, xxii, xxvi, xxxi-xxxii, l 1 0 , 204, 295 , 3 80, 3 84 Hui-hsiang

�::t$

xxiv

indriya 3 6 - 3 7 , 39, 65, 176, 246 I-pu-tsung lun lun �g�*fftli� xxvi Iwamoto Akemi xxv

kavarjfkiiriihiira 22

kiiya 1 85 , 282 kiiyiibhisarp.skiira 1 8 5 ktiyakarma 1 84- 1 8 5

ktiyasiik�in 360- 3 6 1 ktiyavijiiapti 1 82- 1 84 kiiyendriya 3 6 Keenan, John xiii

kila 32 klesa xix, 3 8 -39, 52, 1 1 9 , 129, 1 4 8 , 203 ,

411 258, 263 , 270, 273 , 277, 284, 3 3 3 , 3 3 6 , 339-340, 3 5 6 , 362-363

kli�ta 1 3 6, 372 kli�tamanas xix, 293

Kochumuttom, Thomas xxiv-xxv, 34, 374

Kosakara xxv-xxvi

k�alJa 1 68 - 1 69, 1 72 *k�alJajtiti 1 69 k�alJika 172, 175 k�tinti 354, 356 ksetra 139

K' uei-chi R£ xxiv, xxvi

Kumaralata xxvi

kuprajiiti 1 64 kusala 1 3 6 , 204, 372 kusalacitta 1 30- 1 3 1 kusaladharmachanda 3 9 kusalamahtibhiimika 46 kusalamula 54-5 5 , 126-127 , 245 , 248, 262 La Vallee Poussin, Louis de xx, xxii, xxviii-xxx

*lak�alJtirtha 95

Lamotte, Etienne xxviii

laukika 166 laukikacitta 222 laukiktigradharma 354 laukikamtirga 52, 129, 364 laukikasamtidhi 1 89 lokottara 63 lokottarasamtidhi 1 8 9 Madhyamika xxvi

Madhytintavibhtiga xii, xxiv-xxv Madhytintavibhtigastistra 374 Madhytintavibhtigatfkti 374 mahtibhumika dharma 47 mahtibhuta xxxv, 10-1 1 , 44- 45 , 65, 1 8 9

Mahtiytintibhidharmasutra xii Mahtiytinasa'!lgraha xii-xiii, xxiv Mahtiytinasutrtila'!lktira xii, xxiv mahecchatti 348-349 MahIsasaka xix-xx

Maitreya xii-xiii, xvii-xviii, xxvi

Majjhimaniktiya 235 mtina 149 manas 21 manasktira 46-47 manovijiitina 308 Manobhiimi xv, xxvii, xxxiii, 2 1 , 3 5 , 47, 55, 1 1 1 , 1 27, 1 8 5 , 253, 279, 3 8 5

manopaviciira 1 6 6 manovijiitina 2 1 , 24, 4 7 , 3 0 9 , 3 84 manovijiiapti 1 84 marana 73 miirg� 1 30, 2 1 2, 246, 284, 286, 3 5 8 -359 mtirgadu#n 236-237, 242 mtirgtiliga 2 1 2 mtirgiinvayajiiiina 344 mtirgiinvayajiitinak�tinti 344 matam 1 54, 1 62, 1 86, 252-253 mtitrkti 3, 389 *Mtitrktivastu xvii Mats�da Kazunobu xiii-xiv, xvi, xxv, 5, 1 87 , 1 8 9

MaulfBhumi xiii, xv-xviii, xxxiii-xxxiv, 267

Mejor, Marek xxii, xxiv-xxv

middha 372-373 mfmtimsa 368 mithyadr�ti xxix, 1 49, 208, 250-25 1 , 262-263

mithyiijiitina 290

Miyashita Seiki xxvii, 265, 362

Mochizuki Shinka 214, 230

Mukai Akira xvii, 85, 1 3 9, 1 6 1 , 298, 305, 309, 3 1 7

mulaccheda 248

Mahasfup.ghika 4 2 , 1 3 6 , 1 5 8

Millasarvastivadin xi

Mahayana xi-xii, xvii, xix, xxi-xxii,

Muroji Gijin xxv

*Mahtivibhti�ti xxi

xxiv-xxvii, xxix , xxxiv, xxxvii, 32,

42

muni 3 8 8

Nagao Gajin xxv

412

nama 94, 96-98, 100, 1 02 namakiiya 95, 103 namariipa xxxv, 5 8 Nanda 8 4

nikayasabhaga 6 8 , 120, 1 3 2- 1 3 3 , 244 nirodha 286, 340 nirodhasamapatti 66-67 , 360-3 6 1 nirodhasatya 289 nirukti portion of the pratrtyasamutpada exposition 1 5 9 Nirupadhika Bhilmi xv nirupadhise�anirva1}a 39, 1 1 1 nirvana 108, 308, 3 5 8 , 360- 3 6 1

Nishi Giyii xx, 3 84 ni�andaphala 262, 266-267, 354 nztartha 1 5 6 , 230 nityadr�!i 290 *Nyiiyanusara xii, xxi-xxii , xxxi-xxxii Odani Nobuchiyo

ogha 3 3 8

xx

pada 94, 102 padakaya 95, 103 paka 1 1 0 Paiicaskandhaka xii, xxiv-xxvi, 22, 4 8 Paiicavijiianakiiyamanobhiimi xvi, xix ,

Paramarthasiinyatasiitra 3 04-305 paratantrasvabhava xix parijfia 344 parikalpitasvabhava xix *parikalpitasvabhavalak�a1}a 95 pari1}ama 190 pari1}amavise�a 1 90 parini�pannasvabhava xix paryavasthana xxxv, 55 , 127, 23 1 , 23 3 , 272-27 3 , 276, 3 3 3

Paryiiyasa1flgraha1}fxvi, xxxiii , 29, 239,347

Piisiidika (Bhikkhu) 44, 84, 235, 304, 3 1 8 , 328

PiiSciittya 372

pen-wu chin-yu *�4-:ff 83 P 'o-su-p 'an-toufa-shih chuan �l*� Jf¥*aill'/i xxii Poussin See La Vallee Poussin, Louis de

P ' u-kuang ,lb't

xxii , 1 2 , 1 3 6 , 1 5 8 , 1 64 ,

1 8 5 , 220, 244, 252, 260, 328, 342,

3 5 8 , 380, 3 84, 3 8 6

xxxiii-xxxvi, 5, 1 3 , 1 5 , 1 9 , 2 1 , 23 ,

phala 1 1 0- 1 1 1 , 1 54, 246, 3 22-323 *phalaprajfiapti 1 1 9 Pradban, P. xx, xxiii, xxviii-xvi prahf1}aklesa 52 prajfia 1 1 9, 1 64- 1 6 5 , 263 , 346- 347 , 3 6 8 ,

63, 65, 67, 69, 7 1 , 73, 7 5 , 8 3 , 87,

prajfiapti xxxiv-xxxv, 5, 12, 19, 5 1 , 54,

3 3 , 3 5 , 37, 3 9 , 43, 5 1 , 5 3 , 57, 59,

9 3 , 1 0 1 , 1 0 3 , 1 1 1 , 1 17 , 1 2 1 , 1 2 3 ,

129, 1 3 3 , 143, 147, 155, 1 6 5 , 1 69,

175, 177, 1 8 1 , 1 85 , 1 87 , 1 89 , 1 9 9 ,

203 , 2 1 1 , 2 1 5 , 227, 245 , 263 , 295,

297-299, 3 0 3 , 305, 309, 3 1 5 , 3 2 1 ,

363

Paiicavijiianakiiyasamprayukta Bhami xv, xxxiii , xxxv, 47 , 177 paiicopadanaskandha 282 parajika 23 1 , 2 3 3 , 235, 240- 241 , 245 Paramlirtha xi, xvi, xx, xxii, xxiv-xxv, xxvii, 36, 1 1 0, 204, 295, 384

paramartha 220 Paramarthagatha xxxvi, 3 3 Paramarthasaptatika xxiv

37 1 , 374

66-67, 69, 95, 1 02, 1 17 , 1 2 1 , 1 3 3 , 1 69, 176- 177, 1 80"1 83, . 1 87, 2 1 8,

273 , 328

Prajfiaptislistra xx prajiiavimukti 3 7 1 prajfiendriya 3 7 Prakara1}apada xx prapafica 1 8 9 prapti xxxiv, 3 8 , 50-5 1 , 1 2 6 , 1 2 8 , 356 prasadariipa 3 8 3 prasrabdhi 3 6 8 , 3 8 6

pratigha 149, 1 8 0 pratimo�asa1flvara 23 1 pratipa�a 340, 343 , 362 pratipannakamarga 246

413 *pratisa'!ldhijiiti 75 pratisa'!lkhyiinirodha 19, 1 14- 1 1 5,. 1 1 8119 pratftyasamutpiida 148, 1 50, 152-155, 158-159, 1 62, 338 pratftyasamutpiida exposition 29, 1 1 1 , 1 5 1 , 157, 1 6 1 , 1 63 Pratftyasamutpiidasiltra 1 52, 156- 1 57 Pratftyasamutpiidavyiikhyii xii, xxivxxvi

pratftyasamutpannadharma 1 54 pratftyasamutpannatii 72, 74, 155 pratyaya 1 04, 158, 308 pratyekabuddha 221 , 3 8 8 Pratyekabuddhabhilmi xv-xvi pravartaka 204, 206, 208 pravrttivijfiiina xix, xxxvi, 145 prayogamiirga 39 prthagjana 129, 244 prthagjanatvam 62- 63 prfti 368, 3 8 6-387 Pruden, Leo xx

puru�akiira 122 puru�akiiraphala 122 puru�endriya 36 pilrviiciirya xxvii, 64, 1 3 1 , 160, 1 90, 1 94, 252-254, 292, 378-5, 386 pilrvaniviisiinusmrti 380 riiga 1 49, 1 64, 268, 276, 279, 370 riigiinusaya 272, 276 Rahu1a, Walpola xiii

rasa 22 rasadhiitu 22-23 riiSi xxxv, 1 2 rddhi 140, 368-369 rddhipiida 368- 369 Rospatt, Alexander von 74-75,

77, 79, 169, 172, 174- 175 rilpa xix, xxvii, xxxvi, 5 , 8 , 10, 1 6, 32-3 3 , 3 5 , 64, 70, 95, 1 0 1 , 1 1 7 , 1 3 2- 1 3 3 , 1 3 5 , 154, 177, 1 80, 1 8 6 189, 191, 3 12 rilpadhiitu 22-23, 145, 278 , 376 rilpaskandha 5, 7 1 , 94

rilpfndriya 1 7 6 sabhiigahetu 1 04-105, 1 0 8 , 294 siibhisa'!lskiiraparinirviiyin aniigiimin 35 8-359 Sacittikii Bhilmi xv, xviii, xxxiii, xxxvi, 145 �arliiyatana 59 SaddharmapuIJrlarfkopadeia xxiv Saeki Kyokuga xx, xxii, xxxii, 3 3 , 384 sahabhilhetu 1 22 sahaja satkiiyadr�!i 1 3 1 saik�a 1 3 1 , 364 saik�acitta 130- 1 3 1 saikeadharma 222 saktivaicitrya hetvadhie!hiina 145 Sakurabe Hajime xx, xxv

samiidhi xxxvi, 43 , 1 87- 1 8 9 , 200, 202, 212, 346-347, 368-369, 3 84-385 samiidhfndriya 37 samiidhivieayarilpam 1 8 6 siimagrf 145, 147 siimagrf hetvadhie!hiina 1 45 Samiihitii Bhilmi xv, xvii, xxxiii, 49, 279, 387 samanantarapratyaya 1 04 samiipatticitta 66 siimarthya 88, 122-123, 125, 294, 304, 322 Samayabhedoparacanacakra xi, xix, xxvi

Sa'!ldhinirmocanasiltra xii, xiv, xviii, xxxiii , xxxvi, 145, 221 , 335 S arpghabhadra xii, xxi-xxii, xxxi-xxxii, xxxiv

sa'!lgha 222 sa'!lghiita 282 SaI]1khya 326 sa'!lkeipta 372 sa'!lprayukta 270 sa'!lprayuktahetu 122 sa'!lsiira 263 sa'!lskiira 59-60, 72, 79, 82, 1 3 3 , 155, 160, 175, 295, 299, 303 , 305, 309 sa'!lskrta 66, 80, 358, 370

414 'sa,!,skrtadharma 5, 72-73, 7 7 , 8 0 , 8 3 , 87-88, 93, 95, 1 3 3 , 1 54, 1 69, 1 94 sa,!,skrtalak�alJa 70-73, 75, 79-8 1 , 84, 86, 88-89, 169, 174, 297 sa'!'sthiinariipa xxxv, 176- 1 8 3 , 1 8 8 sa'!'tiina 1 94, 1 96, 198- 1 99, 240, See also sa'!'tati sa'!'tiinavi§e�a 320 sa'!'tati 62, 1 90-1 9 1 , 304- 305, 321 sa'!'tatiparilJiima 198, 320 sa'!'tatiparilJiimavise�a xxv, xxviii-xxx, 60, 1 1 0, 1 9 8 *sa'!'tatisthiti 7 5 samucchinnakusalamiila 54- 55, 1 27 samudaya 286 samudayasatya 287 sa'!'vara 2 1 0, 215, 226, 228, 245 , 248 *sa,!,varariipa xxxiv, 5, 187 sa'!'vrtijiiiina 376, 378-379 samyagiijfva 200, 368 samyagdr�!i 202, 212 samyagviic 200, 202, 368 samyakkarmiinta 200, 368 samyaksa,!,kalpa 368 sa'!'yogapriipti 362 Sa'!'yuktiigama 139 *Sa,!,yuktiibhidharmahrdaya xxi, xxvii, 28, 48 Sa'!'yuktiigama xvii, 44, 84, 139, 1 6 1 , 209, 304, 3 1 8 , 328, 358 Sa/igf!iparyiiya xx sapradesa 35 sarfra portion of the pratftya­ samutp iida exp o s i ti o n s 153 S arvastivada xi-xii, xix-xxii, xxvi­

1 22, 1 86, 214, 256, 286, 340, 360, 370 sarviistivada xix, xxxiv, 298, 323, 328 xxxii, xxxvii,

S arvastivadin xix-xxii, xxiv, xxvi, xxviii, xxx , xxxii, xxxiv,

50, 90, 97, 99, 1 1 8, 1 5 1 , 154, 178, 1 82, 1 84, 1 86, 1 8 8 , 190, 196, 198, 200, 208, 2 1 2, 214, 2 1 8, 220, 226, 228, 230, 240, 250, 252, 270, 276, 278 , 284, 286, 290, 298, 308, 3 12, 3 14, 3 1 6,

326, 328, 332, 335, 339-340, 370, 372 Sarvastivadin Vinaya 235 siisrava 189, 204, 210, 354 siisrava iiryamiirga 237 sat 282, 3 1 8 Satasiistra xxiv satkiiya 282 satkiiyad!�!i 1 3 1 , 149, 282-283, 290, 292-293 sattvadr�.ti 290 saumanasya 386 S auryodayika xxix S autrantika xi-xii, xxi-xxii, xxiv-xxx,

1 2, 32, 3 6 , 44, 62, 70, 1 14, 1 17, 136, 176, 1 82, 1 84, 1 86 , 1 90, 200, 220, 240, 250, 252, 272, 298, 320, 328, 3 5 8 , 362, 3 64, 374, 3 84, 386 Savitarka Saviciirii Bhiimi xiii Savitarkiidi-bhiimi xiii, xv, xxviii-xxix, xxxiii-xxxv, 29, 6 1 , 1 1 1 , 123, 13 1 , 1 3 3 , 145, 149, 1 5 3 , 1 5 5 , 157, 1 59, 1 6 1 , 163, 1 85, 1 9 1 , 25 1 -252, 267, 273 , 28 1 , 287, 289, 293 , 298, 305, 3 1 5 , 3 17, 3 1 9, 3 2 1 , 323, 327, 329, 333, 361 xxxii, xxxvi,

Schmithausen, Lambert xi-xiii, xv­

2 1 , 29, 67, 1 1 1 , 1 3 1 , 1 3 5 , 145, 149, 203 , 279 , 293 Shastri, Swami Dwarkidas xx, 70 xix, xxiv-xxv, xxix, xxxiv,

Shen-t'ai

1$� xxii

Shih-sung Iii +�ili� 235 Shindojoyuishikiron *JTiIf;Plfolt�ifii 267, 383 Shukla, Karunesha xv, 2 5 , 2 3 7 , 239 sik�ii 245 ifla 242 Sflasa'!'vara 233 iflavratapariimarsa 149, 284, 286-287, 289 Silk, Jonathan xv

skandha xxxv, 12-19, 148, 150- 1 5 1 , 282, 380

415 Skilling, Peter xxv-xxvi

smrti 368 smrtfndriya 37 smrtyupasthiina 353, 380 Sopadhika Bhami x v , 235 srotaapattiphala 39 sraddhii 37, 39, 368 sraddhendriya 37 sramafla 236-237, 242-243 sramaflera 2 1 8 sramaflyaphala 3 9 , 363 sravaka 1 1 1 , 1 96, 221 , 364, 3 8 8-389 Sravakabhami xiii, xv, xvii-xviii, xxxiii-xxxv, 25, 59, 123, 1 9 1 , 1 9 3 , 2 3 3 , 237, 23 9, 357, 359, 363, 369, 379, 3 8 3 , 3 9 1 S rIHita xxvi, xxviii, See also Sthavira srutam 252- 253 srutamayz 346-347 SrutamayzBhami xv, xvii, xxxiii, 137 Sthavira 28, 82, 136, 150, 1 52, 156, 1 62, 300, 334, 3 84, 3 86, See also S rIlata Sthavira Vasubandhu xxiv Sthiramati xxii, xxxi, 374, 384 sthiti 73, 79, 82-83, 86-87, 92 strzndriya 36 styana 372-373 styanamiddha 372 sukha 3 8 6-387 sukhavedana 386 sukhendriya 386 satrakara xxxi-xxxii *Satravastu xvii svabhiiva 145, 1 80, 1 9 1 , 342- 343 svakarmakarafla 123 svalak�wza 1 2 1

tadvi�aya 336 43 , 196, 221 Tathiigatagarbha xiii

Tathagata xxxvi,

Tatia, Nathma1 262

tatsabhagacak�us 294-295 tattvamanasikara 352-353 *Tattvasiddhisastra xxvii, 48, 3 84

tripitaka xvii trisvabhava xxxvii Trisvabhavanirde§a xxiv-xxv TriJ?1sika xii-xiii, xxiv-xxvi TriJ?1sikabhii�ya 3 84 tmla 338 Udanavarga 2 Ui Hakuju xvi

upadana 338-339 upadiiyarapa 45 upade§a 389 upasaka 2 14, 2 1 8 upasaka saJ?1vara 2 1 5 Upasanta xxi, 48 upavasaizga 2 1 2 upek�a 46-47, 3 6 8 vagabhisaJ?1skara 1 8 5 vagvijfiapti 1 84 2, 4, 8 , 10, 12, 1 8 , 22, 32, 34, 3 8 , 44, 46, 1 04, 1 1 0, 126, 128, 1 3 6 , 140, 148, 1 50 , 1 52, 166, 1 6 8 , 1 90 , 1 9 8 , 250, 290, 3 34, 3 3 8 , 346, 3 5 8 , 3 6 2 , 3 64, 368-369, 3 7 2 , 374, 3 7 8 , 3 86- 3 8 7 vairagya 244-245 vaitulika xxvii Vajracchedikaprajiiaparamitasastra Vaibha�ika xxi, xxvi, xxxiv-xxxvii,

xxiv

vajropamasamadhi 311-39 yak 1 8 5 vakkarma 1 85 vaTfla 178, 1 80, 1 82, 1 8 8 Var�agaI.1ya 326-327 vasitva 56 *vasitvasamanvagama 57 vastu 332 VastusaJ?1grahm:zz xvi-xviii, xxxiiixxxv, 1 3 , 1 5 , 19, 27, 75, 85 , 1 1 7 , 1 1 9, 1 2 1 , 1 3 1 , 1 3 5 , 1 3 9 , 1 5 3 , 1 6 1 , 209, 24 1 , 277, 305, 339, 353, 357, 365, 367 Vasubandhu xi-xii, xx-xxii, xxiv-xxxii,

416 xxxiv-xxxvii Vasubandhu the elder xxiv

XIX, xxvi abhidharma teacher) 1 54, 294 vedana 166, 380 Vibha�a xx-xxii, xxvii-xxviii, 10, 14, 1 8 , 20, 22, 28, 32, 36, 42, 44, 48, 1 02, 1 40, 154, 204, 235 , 237, 240, 262, 346, 380, 3 8 8 vicara 24-25 vicikitsa 1 49 vijfiana 65, 1 3 8 , 1 3 9 Vijfianakaya xx vijfianaskandha 1 3 8 vijfianasthiti 136, 1 3 8 - 1 39 vijfiapti 8, 95, 1 96, 206, 208, 256 vijfiaptikarma 204, 206 vijfiaptimatra xviii, xxxvii vijfiaptirilpa xxvii, 8 vijfiatam 252-254 vikalpita satkayadr�!i 292 Vil]'lsatika xii, xxiv-xxvi, xxix, 34 vimukti 357, 370 vimuktimarga 3 8 , 356-357 Vinaya 230, 233 *Vinayasal]'lgraha!/f xvi-xvii *Vinayavastu xvii viniscaya xvi Viniscayasal]'lgraha!/f xiii--xiv, xvi­ xix, xxvii-xxviii, xxxiii-xxxvi, 5 , 1 3 , 1 5 , 1 9 , 2 1 , 23, 33 , 3 5 , 3 7 , 3 9 , 43 , 45, 47, 49 , 5 1 , 5 3 , 57, 59, 6 3 , 6 5 , 67, 69, 7 1 , 7 3 , 75, 8 3 , 87, 9 3 , 9 5 , 1 0 1 , 1 0 3 , 1 1 1 , 1 17 , 1 2 1 , 1 2 3 , 1 29 , 1 3 1 , 1 3 3 , 143, 145, 147, 155, 1 6 5 , 1 6 9 , 175, 177, 1 8 1 , 1 85 , 1 87 , 1 8 9 , 1 9 9 , 203 , 2 1 1 , 2 1 5 , 22 1 , 227, 245, 25 1 , 263, 267, 273 , 279, 28 1 , 287, 289, 293 , 295, 297 -299, 303, 3 0 5 , 309, 3 1 5 , 32 1 , 3 3 3 , 3 3 5 , 343, 357, 3 6 1 , 3 6 3 , 379, 383 vipaka xxxvi, 42-43, 1 1 0 vipakahetu 108, 1 1 0 vipakaja citta 204 Vasumitra xi,

Vasumitra (traditional

vipakaphala 1 1 1 vipakavijfiana 1 1 1 viparyasa 149 viparyasamLlla 149 . viparyasani�yanda 149 virodhahetu 267 vfrya 46-47, 368 visal]'lyogaprapti 3 8 , 356, 362 vi�aya 28 vise�a 190 viSi�!a sal]'lskarasantati/:l pravartate 6 1 , 191 vitarka 24-27, 1 85 *Vivara!/asal]'lgraha!/fxvi, xxxiii, 3, 95, 389 Vyakhyayukti xii, xxiv-xxvi vyafijana 94, 100, 102 Vyafijanakaya 103 vyafijanakaya 95 vyapada 250-25 1 vyaya 82, 86-87, 169, 297 Vrddhacarya Vasubandhu xxiv

vfrendriya 37 wai-kuo chu shih )rt��� gl!i 240 Waldron, William xix Wayman, Alex xiii, xv-xix, xxiv-xxv,

25, 33, 123, 193, 369 Willemen, Charles 48 Willemen, Dessein, and Cox xx-xxii

wo-kuo chu shih

���gl!i 240

Yamabe Nobuyoshi xi, xix, xxvii, xxix,

xxxiv, 59, 6 1 , 65 , 1 17, 214, 2 17 , 230, 252 Yamaguchi Susumu xx

44, 70, 1 26, 1 64, 250, 304, 336, 374, 386 yoga 1 86, 1 8 8 , 3 3 8-339 Yasomitra xxi,

Yogacara xi-xii, xviii-xix, xxii, xxiv, xxvi-xxx, xxxii, xxxvii, 47, 1 90, 379 yogacara 188, 353 yogacara/:l 1 8 6 Yogacarabhumi vii, xii-xx, xxvi-xxxvii yoniso manasikara 353

417

Yii-ch 'ieh shih-ti lun shih fifri fvo gjjj :tt!!, �iiB �i xvi yii-ch 'ieh lun fifri{vo�iiB 252 Yii-chieh-lun chi fifri1vo�iiB �c xxix