Vasubandhu's Abhidharmakosa and the Commentaries preserved in the Tanjur

Marek Mejor Vasubandhu's Abhidharmakosa and the Commentaries preserved in the Tanjur

Alt- und Neu-Indische Studien herausgegeben

vom

Institut fUr KuItur und Geschichte Indiens und Tibets an der Universitat Hamburg

42

Franz Steiner Verlag Stuttgart

1991

Marek Mejor

VASUB AN DHU'S ABHIDHARMAKOSA AN D THE COMMrnNTARrnS PRESERVED IN THETANmR

Franz Steiner Verlag Stuttgart 1991

CIP-Titelaufnahme der Deutschen Bibliothek

Mejor, Marek: Vasubandhu's Abhidjarmakosa and the commentaries preserved in the Tanjur / Marek Mejor. - Stuttgart:Steiner,

1991.

(Alt- und neu-indische Studien; 42)

ISBN 3-515-05535-5

NE:GT

Jede Verwertung des Werkes auBerhalb der Grenzen des Urheberrechtsgesetzes ist

unzuliissig und strafbar. Die,s gilt insbesondere fUr Ubersetzung, Nachdruck, Mikro­ verfilrnung oder vergleichbare Verfahren sowie fUr die Speicherung in Datenverar­

beitungsanlagen. Gedruckt mit Unterstiitzung der Alexander v. Humboldt-Stiftung.

© 1991 by Franz Steiner Verlag Wiesbaden GmbH, Sitz Stuttgart. Druck: Druckerei Peter Proff, Eurasburg. Printed in the Fed. Rep. of Germany

To the memory of Professor Constantin Regamey (1907-1982)

Preface

This book offers a comparative study of Vasubandhu'sAbhidhannakosa and the commentaries on it which are preserved in the Tanjur. Vasubandhu (5th cent.) is one of the greatest thinkers of Buddhist India and his treatise Abhidhannakosa or· Treasury of Dogmatics has long attracted the attention of scholars, to mention only E. Burnouf, S. Levi, Th. Stcherbatsky, o. Rosenberg. A study of its Chinese and Tibetan versions and the Sanskrit fragments resulted in the magnificent'work by Louis de La Vallee Poussin. His annotated translation: of the Abhidhannakosa in 6 volumes (1923-193 1) became a compendium of the Buddhist doctrine. The discovery of the Sanskrit original of the Abhidhannakosa by Rahula Sliiuqtyayana was a sensational. event. The karikas were published by V. Gokhale in 1946. A new stage in the study of the text was initiated with the edition of the Abhidhannakosa-bhi4Ja by P. Pradhan in 1967. The Abhidhannakosa is a particularly interesting subject for Buddhological research: it has always been regarded as a highly authoritative treatise on Buddhist doctrine and acquired the status of an obligatory handbook in many Buddhist countries; it was translated into many Oriental languages, into Chinese, Tibetan, Mongolian, Uigur, Tokharian, and an abundant exegetical literature on theAbhidhannakosa developed. A group of nine Indian commentaries on theAbhidhannakosa which has been preserved in the Tanjur, volumes 64-70, 129-130 of the Peking edition, has been of particular interest to the present writer. These commentaries have not previously been the subject of a comparative study. Among their authors we find the names of great Buddhist philosophers, Dignaga and Sthiramati. Yasomitra'sAbhidhannakosa-vyiikhyii, a single commentary which has been preserved both in its Sanskrit original and the Tibetan translation, contains abundant details of historical and doctrinal importance. A fully comprehensive treatment of such a bulk of material as that constituted by the set of eleven texts in Sanskrit and in Tibetan is not yet possible. Various problems - historical, doctrinal, textual - have been touched upon. After all, the particular character of each text had dictated that certain problems be studied: e.g. in YaSomitra's commentary it was the problem of two Vasubandhus. The present author is fully aware that in practice the kind of work he has undertaken has no end. Prainiit prainiintaram upajiiyate, repeatedly remarked Vasubandhu in hisAbhidhannakosa (ed. Pradhan, 43.28; 119.26; 164. 12). It was therefore necessary to select a range of problems which would provide a preliminary yet adequate picture of the studied material. Now, it is the academic public which is competent to evaluate this venture. My research on the subject of the present book could not have been carried out without the friendly assistance of many scholars and institutions at home and abroad, to whom lowe a most sincere debt of gratitude. In this place I would like to express my deep gratitude to Prof. Dr. L. Schmithausen, Hamburg University, whose erudite, penetrating, critical yet friendly comments in many points improved an earlier version of this book. I am deeply indebted to Prof. Dr. E. Steinkellner, Vienna University, for his evaluation of the present book as well as his review of my Ph.D. thesis. l owe much gratitude to Professor emeritus J. Chmielewski of Warsaw University for his comments on various aspects of my work and sound advice. My sincere thanks I would like to extend to Prof. M.K Byrski, the Head of. the Indology Department, Warsaw University, for his constant interest and support in my studies. VII

I cannot forget the substantial help which l owe to Prof. Dr. A. Bareau and through his good offices to the late Mgr. Etienne Lamotte, a great authority on Buddhist studies. It is my pleasant duty to acknowledge with warm thanks the assistance I have received from Prof. Dr. K. Sagaster and Dr. H. Eimer, Bonn University. Many thanks are also due to Dr. S. Dietz, Mr. H. Krasser, Prof. Dr. P. Kvaerne, Prof. Dr. J. May, Dr. M.T. Much, Mr. G. Somlai, Dr. M. Van Velthem, Dr. A. Yuyama for their kind assis­ tance in many ways. I would like also to thank Mrs. E. Harris who corrected my English, and Mr. Quessel and Mr. von Rospatt for their help in preparing the final print out. . The essential part of my research was carried out during visits to the libraries of Budapest (January-February 1981, research grant from Warsaw University), Oxford, Cambridge and London (academic year 1981-1982, Michael Coulson Junior Research Fellowship in Wolfson College, Oxford), Bonn (July-August 1985, research grant from the Sonderforschungsbereich 12 "Zentralasien", Bonn University). The final corrections and improvements were made during my stay in Hamburg, as a recipient of the Alexander von Humboldt Fellowship (March 1988September 1989). Last but not least, I would like to express my thanks to the Alexander von Humboldt Foundation for the financial support towards the printing costs of the book and to Prof. Dr. A. Wezler for his recommending it for publication. Marek Mejor Warsaw, September-December 1989

VIII.

TABLE OF CONTENTS Preface

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

Select Bibliography

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

. .

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.-......................

VII

X

I. INTRODUCTION . . .� . . . . . . " 1 1. PROBLEM OF mE DATE OF VASUBANDHU '. . ...... 3 2. BIOGRAPHIES OFVASUBANDHU· " 5 3. VVORKSOFVASUBANDHU 7 4. VASUBANDHU'S TEACHERS, DISCIPLES, COMMENTATORS AND OPPONENTS . . . 13 5. THEABHIDHARMAKOSA. AND mE SARVASTIVADA ABHIDHARMA ........... 1 8 6. THE ABHIDHARMAKOSA. IN DBETAN . . . .. 20 .

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

•

.

.

•

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

•

.

.

.

.

.

•

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

•

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

. .

.

.

.

•

.

.

.

•

.

.

.

•

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

•

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

•

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

•

.

.

•

.

•

.

.

.

•

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

•

.

II. COMMENTARIES ON THE ABHIDHARMAKOSA FROM THE TANJUR . 1. VINITABHADRA'S/SANGHABHADRA'S SUTRANuRUPA . 2. YASOMITRA'S SPHUTARTHA . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.1 Problem of two Vasubandhus . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.2 GU/;tamati and Vasumitra . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.3 Vasubandhu's PaiicaskandhaprakaraJ;ltl . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.4 The Pratftyasamutpiidasutra . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3. Puru:
.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

•

Analytical table o f the Tanjur

.

..

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

•

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

•

•

.

•

• .

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

•

.

. .

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

Abhidharmakosa . .

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

III. CONCLUDING REMARKS

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

• .

.

.

•

.

•

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

•

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

•

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

IX

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

•

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

•

.

.

.

.

.

.

•

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

. .

•

•

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

•

• .

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

•

.

.

.

.

.

. .

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

•

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

27 29 38 42 49 57 59 62 63 65 . 75 78 . 83 84 . 86 90 96 . 96

.

. .

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

•

.

.

•

•

.

.

.

•

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

. . .

and the commentaries preserved .

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

98

.

.

111

.

.

1 12

the

in .

.

.

.

.

.

.

SELECT BIBLIOGRAPHY

Abegg, E., Der PretakaZpa des Garuqa-Puriil;a (Naunidhiriima's Siiroddhara). Eine Darstellung des hinduistischen Totenkultes und Ienseitsglaubens. Berlin-Leipzig 1921. Abhidhannadipa with VibhC4iiprabhiiv[1ti, crit. ed. with notes and introduction by P .S. Jaini. Patna 1977. (Tibetan Sanskrit Works Series IV). Abhidhannasamuccaya of AsaJiga, crit. ed. and studied by P. Pradhan. Santiniketan, Visva­ Bharati 1950. (Visva-Bharati Studies 12). Abhidhannasamuccayabhi4Yam, deciphered and ed. by N. Tatia. Patna 1976. (Tibetan Sanskrit Works Series 17). Abhisamayiilarrzkiiriilokii Prajfliipiiramitiivyiikhyii by Haribhadra, ed. by U. Wogihara. Tokyo 19321935. Abhyankar, K.V., A Dictionary of Sanskrit Grammar. Baroda 196 1. (Gaekward's Oriental Series No. 134). ABORI Annals of the Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute Aiyaswami, N. Shastri, Arya Siilistamba Sutra, Pratftyasamutpiida-vibhanga-nirdeSa-sutra and Pratityasamutpiidagiithii Sutra, ed.. with Tibetan versions, notes and introduction. Madras, Adyar Library 1950. AK Abhidhannakosa AKBh Abhidhannakosa-bhii0ia AKV Abhidhannakosa-vyiikhyii Sphutiirthii Amano, H., A Study on the Abhisamaya-alarrzkiira-kiirikii-siistra-v[1ti. Japan Science Press 1975. Armelin, I., Dhannairi. Abhidhannahrdayaiiistra. Le coeur de la loi supreme. Traite de Fa-cheng. Paris 1978. ArthaviniScaya-sutra and its Commentary (Nibandhana) (Written by Bhik1;u Viryairidatta of Sri­ Niilandiivihiira), crit. ed. and annotated for the first time with Introduction and several Indices by N.H. Samtani. Patna 1971. (Tibetan Sanskrit Works Series 13). AvadiinakaZpalatii of �emendra, ed. by S.Ch. Das and Pandit H.M. Vidyabhusana (from 1906 S.Ch. Vidyabhusana). 2 vols. Calcutta 1888- 19 17. (Bibliotheca Indica). Avadiinaiataka, ed. by J.S. Speyer. St.-Petersbourg 1902-1909. (Bibliotheca Buddhica III) . Bacot, J., "Titres et colophons d'ouvrages non canoniques tibetains", BEFEO XLIV:2, 1954, pp. 275-337. Bagchi, P.Ch., Le canon bouddhique en Chine. Les traducteurs et les traductions. 2 vols. Paris 1927-1938. (Sino-Indica, Publications de l'Universite de Calcutta I,_IV). Bagchi, P.Ch., "A Note on the Pratityasamutpadasutra". Epigraphia Indica XXI, 193 1-32, pp. 199-204. Banerjee, A.C., Sarviistiviida Literature. Calcutta 1979. Bapat, P.V., "Gul).aprabha's Vinaya-sutra and his Own Commentary on the Same", Journal of . International Association of Buddhist Studies 1:2, 1979, pp. 47-51. Bareau, A, "Les sectes bouddhiques du Petit Vehicule et leurs Abhidharmapi�aka", BEFEO XLIV: 1, 1951, pp. 1-1 1 . Bareau, A . , "Trois traites sur les sectes bouddhiques attribues a Vasumitra, Bhavya et VinItadeva", (Part 1:) JA CCXLII:2, 1954, pp. 229-266; (Part II:) JA CCXLIV:2, 1956, pp. 167-200. Bareau, A., Les sectes bouddhiques du Petit Vehicule. Saigon 1955. Bareau, A., Der indische Buddhismus, (in:) Die Religionen [ndiens, ed. by J. Gonda. Stuttgart 1964, vol. III, pp. 1-213. =

=

=

=

x

Beal, S., Si-yu-ki Buddhist Records of the Western World, transL from the Chinese ofHiuen Tsiang (A.D. 629). 2 vols. London 1904-1905. BEFEO Bulletiit de l'Ecole fran�aise d'Extreme Orient BHSD Buddhist Hybrid Sanslait Dictionary, by F. Edgerton. New Haven 1953. Bira, Sh., Mongol'skaja istoriograjia XIII-XVII w. Moskva 1978. Bod rgya tshig mdzod chen mo [A Great Tibetan-Chinese Dictionary]. Gen. ed. Kraft dbyi sun [Zhang Yisun]. 3 vols. Beijing 1985. BSO(A)S Bulletin of the School of Oriental (and African) Studies Burnouf, E., Introduction a l'histoire au boUddhisme indien. Paris 1844, 2nd. ed. 1876. Bu-ston, Chos 'byun. History of Buddhism. L Part: The Jewelry of Scripture. II Part:. The History ofBuddhism in India and Tibet. TransL from Tibetan by E. Obermiller. Heidelberg 193132. (Materialien zur Kunde des Buddhismus 18-19). Bu-ston, Coos 'byufz, (in:) Collected Work!- of Bu-ston, ed. by Lokesh Chandra. Part 24 (YA), pp. 633-1056. New Delhi 1971. (Sata-Pitaka Series 64). Bu-ston, Bstan 'gyur gyi dkar chag Yul biin nor bu dban gi rgyal po 'i phren ba, (in:) Collected Works of Bu-ston, ed. by Lokesh Chandra. Part 26 (LA), pp. 401-644. New Delhi 1971. (Sata-Pitaka Series 66). Candra-vrtfi. Der Original-Kommentar Candragomin 's zu seinem grammatischen Siitra, ed. by B. Liebich. Leipzig 1918. (Abh. rur die Kunde des Morgenlandes 14). Chakravart� N.P., "Two Brick Inscriptions from N3landa", Epigraphia Indica XXI, 1931-32, pp. 193-199. Chattopadhyaya, A., AtiSa and Tibet. Calcutta 1967. Chaudhur� S.,Analytical Study ofthe Abhidhannakosa. Calcutta 1976. (Calcutta Sanskrit College Research Series No. CXIV). Cone Cone Tanjur, microfiche edition of the Institute for Advanced Studies of World Religions, New York Cordier, P., Catalogue du fonds tiMtain de la Bibliotheque Nationale. III Index du Bstan-J:igyur. (TiMtain 180-332). Paris 1915. Dantinne, J., Le traite des cinq agregats (Paiicaskandhaprakaral)a de Vasubandhu) . Bruxelles 1980. (Publications de l'Institut Beige des Hautes Etudes Bouddhiques. Serie 'Etudes et Textes'No 7). Das, S.Ch., A Tibetan-English Dictionary with Sanslait Synonyms. Delhi 1970 (2nd repr.). Das, S.Ch., "Contributions on the Religion, History, etc. of Tibet", JASB vol. L, Part I, Nos. 3-4, 1881, pp. 187-251. Das, S.Ch., "Life of Sum- pa Khan-po, also styled Yeses-Dpal-hbyor, the author of the Rehumig (Chronological Table)", JASB vol. Lvm, Part 1, No. 2, 1889, pp. 37784 (Re 'u mig, pp. 4084). Demieville, P., "Les versions chinoises du Milindapaftha", BEFEO XXIV:1-2, 1924, pp. 1-264. Demieville, P., "La Yogacarabhiimi de Saftgharak�a", BEFEO XLlV:2, 1954, pp. 339-436. Demieville, P., "Un fragment Sanskrit de l'Abhidharma des Sarvastivadin", JA CCXLIX:4, 1961, pp. 461-475. Dietz, S., Die buddhistische Briefliteratur Indiens. 3 vols. Diss. Bonn 1980. Dietz, S., Fragmente des Dhannaskandha. Ein Abhidhanna-Text in Sanslait aus Gilgit. G6ttingen 1984. (Abh. der Ak. der Wiss. iit G6ttingen, Phil.-Hist. Kl., dritte Folge, Nr.142). EB Encyclopaedia of Buddhism, ed. G.P. Malalasekera. Colombo 1961--. ERE Encyclopaedia ofReligion and Ethics, ed. J. Hastings. Edinburgh 1909. =

=

=

=

=

=

XI

Ferrari, A., Mk'yen brtse's Guide to the Holy Places of Central Tibet. Rama 1958. (Serie Orientale Rama XVI). Frauwallner, E., On the Date of the Buddhist Master of the Law Vasubandhu. Rama 1951. (Serie Orientale Rama III) . Frauwailner, E., Die Philosophie des Buddhismus. Berlin 1956. (Philasaphische Studientexte. Texte der indischen Philasaphie, hrsg. van W. Ruben, Bd. 2). Frauwailner, E., "Zu den buddhistischen . Texten in der Zeit Khri-srOIi-lde-btsan's", WZKSO 1, 1957, pp. 95-103. Frauwailner, E., "Vasubandhu's VadavidhiJ.!", WZKSO 1, 1957, pp. 104-146. Frauwailner, E., "Dignaga, sein Werk und seine Entwicklung", WZKS 3, 1959, pp. 83-164. Frauwallner, E., "Landmarks in the Histary af Indian Lagic", WZKS 5, 1961, pp. 125-148. Frauwailner, E., "Abhidharma-Studien, I-V": (I) "Paiicaskandhakam und Paiicavastukam", WZKS 7, 1963, pp. 20-36; (II) "Die kananischen Abhidharma-Werke", WZKS 8, 1964, pp. 59-99; (III) "Der AbhisamayavadaJ:!", WZKS 15, 1971, pp. 69-121; (IV) "Der Abhidharma der anderen Schulen", WZKS 16, 1972, pp. 95-152; (V) "Der SarvastivadaJ:!", WZKS 17, 1973, pp. 97-121. Frauwallner, E., Die Entstehung der buddhistischen Systeme. G6ttingen 1971. (Nachrichten der Ak. der Wiss. in G6ttingen, Phil.-Hist. Klasse, Jg. 1971 Nr. 6). Frauwailner, E., Kleine Schriften. Wiesbaden 1982. ( Glasenapp-Stiftung Bd. 22). Fujieda, A., "Une recanstructian de la 'Bibliatheque' de Tauen-hauang", JA CCLXIX:I-2, 1981, pp. 65-68. Gakhale, V.V., "The Paiicaskandhaka by Vasubandhu and its cammentary by Sthiramati", ABORI XVIII:3, April 1937, pp. 276-286. Gakhale, V.V., "The Text af the Abhidharmakasakarika af Vasubandhu", JBBRAS N.S., 22, 1946, pp. 73-102. Gakhale, V.V., "An Emendatian in the Text af the Abhidharmakasakarika IV.74", JBBRAS N.S., 23, 1947, p. 12. Gakhale, V.v., "A Rare Ms af Asarp.ga's Abhidharmasamuccaya", HJAS 11:1-2, 1948, pp. 207213. Gakhale, V.V., "The Madhyamaka-Salistambasiitra", (edn. in:) Mahiiyiina-SD.tra-Sarrzgraha, ed. by P.L. Vaidya. Part I. Darbhanga 1961. Galzia, K.-H., Kings, Khans and Other Rulers of Early Central Asia. Bann 1984. (Materials far the Studyc af the Histary af. Religions 11); Galzia, K.-H., Regents in Central Asia Since the Mongol Empire. Bann 1985. (Materials far the Study af the Histary af Religians 12). Gr6nbald, G., Der buddhistische Kanon (eine Bibliographie) . Wiesbaden 1984. Hakamaya, N., "Sthiramati and Silabhadra", Indagaku Bukkyogaku Kenkyu XXV:l, Dec. 1976, pp. 490-488. Hattari, M., Digniiga. On Perception, being the Pratyalqapariccheda of Digniiga's PramiilJasa­ muccaya from the Sanskrit fragments and the Tibetan versions. Cambridge, Mass., 1968. (Harvard Oriental Series 47). HBI Lamatte, Histoire du bouddhisme indien Hirakawa, A., Index to the Abhidhannakosabhi4Ja (P. Pradhan edition) . Part I: Sanskrit-Tibetan­ Chinese, Takya 1973; Part III: Tibetan-Sanskrit, Takya 1978. HJAS Harvard Jaurnal af Asiatic Studies H6b6girin, Dictionnaire encyclopMique du bouddhisme d'apres les sources chinoises et japonaises. Tokyo-Paris 1929--, 6 fasc. =

=

XII

H6b6girin, Fascicule annexe: Repertoire au canon bouddhique sino japonais, edition de TaishO (TaishO Shinshil Daiz6ky6), compile par P. Dernieville, H. Durt, A. Seidel. 2e ed. revisee et augmentee. Paris-Tokyo 1978. Honj5, Y., "On the Abhidharrnakosopayika by Sarnathadeva", Indogaku Bukky5gaku Kenkyu XXVIII:1, Dec. 1979, pp. 442-439; XXIX:2, March 1981, pp. 915-912. Honj5, Y.,A Table ofAgama-Citations in the AbhidhannakosabfU4ya and theAbhidhannakosopiiyikii, Part 1. Kyoto 1984. IHQ Indian Historical Quarterly ill Indo-Iranian Journal Imanishi, J., Das Paiicavastu�m und die Paiicavastukavibhiifii. G6ttingen 1969. (Abhidharma­ texte in Sanskrit aus den Turfanfunden I). Imanishi, J., Fragmente des AbhidhannaprakaralJ'lbhiifyam in Text und Ubersetzung. G6ttingen 1975. (Abhidharrnatexte in Sanskrit aus den Turfanfunden II). Index AKBh Hirakawa, Index to the AbhidhannakosabfU4ya L 'Inde Classique, Manuel des etudes indiennes, ed. by L. Renou and J. Filliozat. 2 vols. Paris 1985. (Bibliotheque de l'Ecole Franc;:aise d'Extr�me-Orient, ill). I-tsing Takakusu, A Record of the Buddhist Religion JA Journal Asiatique Jiischke, H.A., A Tibetan-English Dictionary, with special reference to the prevailing dialects. London 1972 (first published 1881) . Jaini, P.S., "On the Theory of Two Vasubandhus", BSOAS XXI:1, 1958, pp. 48-53. JBBRAS Journal of the Bombay Branch of the Royal Asiatic Society Jong, J.W. de, "L'auteur de l'Abhidharrnadipa", TP LII, 1965-66, pp. 305-307. Jong, J.W. de, "Sum-pa rnkhan-po (1704-1788) and his works", HJAS 27, 1967, pp. 208-217. Jong, J.W. de, "A propos du Nidanasalpyukta", Melanges de si[lOlogie offens a M Paul Demieville. Paris 1974, vol. II, pp. 137-149. (Bibliotheque de l'Institut des Hautes Etudes Chinoises, XX). Jong, J.W. de, "La Iegende de Santideva", ill XVI:3, 1975, pp. 161-182. Jong, J.W. de, (Review of:) Walpola Rahula, La compendium de la super-doctrine (Philosophie) (Abhidhannasamuccaya) d�saizga, Paris 1971, (in:) TP LIX, 1973, pp. 339-346. Jong, J.W. de, (Review of:) N.H. Sarntani, The ArthaviniScayasiltra and its Commentary (Nibandhana), Patna 1971, (in:) ill XVII:1-2, 1975, pp. 115-118. JPTS :Journal of the Pall Text Society JRAS Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society Kajiyama, Y., "Bhavaviveka, Sthiramati and DharrnapaIa", WZKS 12-13, 1968-69, pp. 193-203. KiiSyapaparivarta, ed. by A. von Stael-Holstein. Shanghai 1926. Kato, J., "Notes sur les deux maitres bouddhiques Kumaralata et Srilata", Indianisme et bouddhisme. Melanges offens a Mgr Etienne Lamotte. Louvain-la-Neuve 1980, pp. 197-213. Kimura, T., "The Date of Vasubandhu seen from the Abhidharmakosa", Indian Studies in Honour Ch.R Lanman. Cambridge, Mass., 1929, pp. 89-92. Klon rdol bla rna, The Collected Work!- ofLongdol Lama, ed. Lokesh Chandra. New Delhi 1973, vol. 13 (PA), pp. 585-659. (Sata:Pitaka Series 100) . Koia La Vallee Poussin, L�bhidhannakosa Kudara, K., "A Fragment of an Uigur Version of the Abhidharrnakosakarika", JA CCLXIX:1-2, 1981, pp. 325-346. Lalou, M., Repertoire du Tanjur d'apres Ie catalogue de P. Cordier. Paris 1933. =

=

=

=

=

=.

=

=

=

XIII

Lalou, M., Inventaire des Manuscrits tibetains de Touen-houang conserves a la Bibliotheque Nationale (Fonds Pelliot tibetain) . Part I: Nos. 1-849, Paris 1939; Part II: Nos. 850-1282, Paris 1950. Lamotte, E., Salfldhinirmocanasutra. L 'explication des Mysteres, texte tibetain Mite et traduit. Louvain 1935. Lamotte, E., "Le Traite de l'acte de Vasubandhu, Karmasiddhiprakara�a", MCB 4, 1936, pp. 151-288. Lamotte, E., Le Traite de la grande vertu de sagesse de Niigiirjuna (Mahiiprajfiiipiiramitasiistra), (Traduction annotee) . Louvain: Tome 1-2: Chapitres 1 it 30, 1944-49 (reimpr. 1981); Tome 3: Chapitres 31 it 42, Avec une nouvelle introduction, 1970; Tome 4: Chapitres 42 (suite) it 48, 1976; Tome 5: Chapitres 49 it 52, 1980. Lamotte, E., Histoire du bouddhisme indien, des origines a [ 'ere saka. Louvain 1958. (Bibliotheque du Museon, 43) . Lamotte, E., L 'Enseignement de Vimalakfrti (Vimalakfrtinirdesa) . Louvain 1962. (Bibliotheque du Museon, 51) . Lamotte, E., "Trois Sutra de Sarpyukta sur la vacuite", BSOAS XXXVI:2, 1973, pp. 313-323. La Vallee Poussin, L. de, "Pall and Sanskrit", JRAS 1906, pp. 443-451. La Vallee Poussin, L. de, Bouddhisme. Etudes et materiaux. Theorie des douze causes. Gand 1913. La Vallee Poussin, L. de, Cosmologie: Le monde des etres et Ie monde-receptade. Vasubandhu et YaSomitra - troisieme chapitre de l'Abhidharmakosa (kiirikii, bha.yya et vyiikhyii), avec une analyse de fa Lokaprajfiiipti et de la KiiralJaprajfiiipti de Maudgalyiiyana. Versions et textes etablis d'apres les sources sanscrites et tibetaines. Bruxelles 1914-19. (Ac. Royale de la Belgique). La Vallee Poussin, L. de, L'Abhidharmakosa de Vasubandhu, trad. et annote. Paris-Louvain 1923-1931. Tome I: Chapitres 1-2; Tome II: Chapitre 3; Tome III : Chapitre 4; Tome IV: Chapitres 5-6; Tome V: Chapitres 7-9; Tome VI: Introduction, Index general. La Vallee Poussin, L. de, Vijfiaptimiitratiisiddhi. La Siddhi de Hiuan-Tsang. 2 vols. Paris 1928-29. (Buddhica. Memoirs. I, V). La Vallee Poussin, L. de, "Documents d'Abhidharma, traduits et annates": Etudes Asiatiques I, 1925, pp. 343-376; BEFEO 1930, pp. 1-28, 247-298; IHQ 6, 1930, pp. 39-45; MCB 1, 1932, pp. 65-125; MCB 5, 1937, 7-158, 159-187. La Vallee Poussin, L. de, "Le petit traite de Vasubandhu-Nagarjuna sur les trois natures (Trisvabhavanirdesa)", MCB 2, 1933, pp. 147-161. La Vallee Poussin, L. de, Dynasties et Histoire de l'Inde depuis Kanishka jusqu 'aux invasions musulmanes. Paris 1935. (Histoire du Monde, VI.2) . Law, N.N., Sphutiirthii Abhidharmakosa-vyiikhyii of YaSomitra (1-3 Kosasthiina) . London 1949. (Calcutta Oriental Series 31) . Levi, S., "Notes chinoises sur l'Inde. III: La date de Candragomin", BEFEO III, 1903, pp. 38-53. Levi, S., Stcherbatsky, Th., Sphutiirthii Abhidharmakosavyiikhyii, the Work of YaSomitra. First Kosasthiina. Petrograd 1918. (Bibliotheca Buddhica XXI). Levi, S., Vijfiaptimiitratiisiddhi. Deux traites de Vasubandhu, VilflSatikii (La Vingtaine) accompagne d'une explication en prose et TrilflSikii (La Trentaine) avec Ie commentaire de Sthiramati. Paris 1925. (Bibliotheque de l'Ecole des Hautes Etudes, 245). Levi, S., "Le Dr�!antapaIi.kti et son auteur", JA CCXI, 1927, pp. 95-127. Levi, S., "Note surles manuscrits sanscrits provenant de Bamiyan et de Gilgit", JA 1932, pp. 1345.

XIV

Levi, S., Un systeme de philosophie bouddhique. Materiaux pour l'etude du systeme Vijiiaptimiitra. Paris 1932. (Bibliotheque de l'Ecole des Hautes Etudes, 260) . Levi, S., "Les donations religieuses des rois de Valabhi", Memoire Sylvain Levi. Paris 1937, pp. 218-234. Lindtner, Ch., "Apropos Dharmakirti - Two new works and Ii new date", Acta Orientalia 41, 1980, pp. 27-37. Lindtner, Ch., "Adversaria Buddhica'\ WZKS 26, 1982, pp. 167-194. Lindtiler, Ch., Nagarjuniana. Studies in the . Writings and Philosophy of Niigiuirj na. Copenhagen 1982. (Indiske Studier 4) . Lindtner, Ch., "Marginalia to Dharmakirti's Pramal)aviniscaya I-IT", WZKS 28, 1984, pp. 149175. Lin Li-kouang, L�ide-memoire de la Vraie Loi (Saddharma-sm!1Yupasthiina-sutra). Recherches sur un Sutra Developpe du Petit Vehicule. Paris 1949. Lokesh Chandra, ''The Life and Works of Hjam-dbyans-bzhad-pa", Central Asiatic Journal VV:4, 1962, pp. 264-269. LVP La Vallee Poussin, L. de Madhyamakiivatiira de Candrakirti, edition de la version tibetaine, ed. by L. de La Vallee Poussin. St.-Petersbourg 1907-1912. (Bibliotheca Buddhica IX). Madhyiinta-vibhiiga-siistra, containing the Karikii-s of Maitreya, Bhi4Ya of Vasubandhu and Tikii by Sthiramati, crit. ed., by R Pandeya. Delhi 1971. Masuda, J., "Origin and doctrines of early Indian Buddhist Schools. A translation of the Hsiian­ chwang version of Vasumitra's treatise. Transl. with annotations", Asia Major IT, 1925, pp. 1-78. Matsumoto, Sh., "An Outline of the Study of the Kusharon in Japan", The Journal of Intercultural Studies 2, 1975, pp. 123-127. May, J., Candrakirti Prasannapadii Madhyamikavrtti (Commentaire limpide au Traite du Milieu). Douze chapitres, traduits du sanscrits et du tibetain en fram;ais, et accompagnes d;une introduction, de notes et d'une edition critique de la version tibetaine. Paris 1959. May, J., "La philosophie bouddhique idealiste", Asiatische Studien/Etudes Asiatiques XXV, 1971, pp. 265-323. MCB Melanges chinois et bouddhiques McGovern, W.M., A Manual of Buddhist Philosophy. Cosmology. London 1923. Mejor, M., "A Contribution to the Biography ofVasubandhu from Tibetan Sources";" Tibetan and" Buddhist Studies, Commemorating the 200th Anniversary of the Birth ofAlexander Csoma de Koros. Ed. by Louis Ligeti. 2 vols. Budapest 1984, vol. IT, pp. 159-173. (Bibliotheca Orientalis Hungarica XXIX:1-2) . Mejor, M., "Klan rdol bla rna's Explanatory Notes on the Abhidharmakosa of Vasubandhu", Tibetan Studies. Proc. of the 4th Seminar of the International Association for Tibetan Studies, Schlof1 Hohenkammer 1985, ed. by H. Uebach and Jampa L. Panglung. Miinchen 1988, pp. 249-252. MHTL Lokesh Chandra, Materials for a History of Tibetan Literature. 3 Parts. New Delhi 1962. (Sata-Pitaka Series 28-30) . Miller, RA., "Buddhist Hybrid Sanskrit ali, kill as Grammatical Terms in Tibet", H JAS 26, 1966, pp. 125-147. Mirnaki, K., La refutation bouddhique de la permanence des choses (Sthirasiddh�a1)a) et la preuve de la momentaneite des choses (�a1)abhangasiddhi). Paris 1 976. (Publications de· l'Institut de Civilisation Indienne, Serie in-8·, fasc. 41) . =

=

=

XV

Mimaki, K., "Sur Ie role de l'antarasloka ou du saJ1lgrahasloka", Indianisme et bouddhisme. Melanges offerts a Mgr Etienne Lamotte. Louvain-la-Neuve 1980, pp. 233-244. (Publica­ tions de l'Institut Orientaliste de Louvain, 23). Mvy = Mahiivyutpatti, ed. by R. Sakaki. 2 vols. Tokyo 1962. (Suzuki Research Foundation, Reprint Series I). MW = Monier-Williams, M., A Sanskrit-English Dictionary. New edition. Oxford 1974 (first edition 1899). Nagao, G.M., An Index to the Mahiiyiina-Sutriilmikiira. Pt. L Sanskrit-Tibetan-Chinese. Pt. II: Tibetan-Sanskrit and Chinese-Sanskrit. Tokyo 1958-1961. Nakamura, H., "A Survey of Conservative Buddhism in South Asia with Bibliographical Notes", The Journal of Intercultural Studies 2, 1975, pp. 85-122. Nakamura, H., "A Survey of Mahayana Buddhism with Bibliographical Notes. Part IT", The Journal of Intercultural Studies 4, 1977, pp. 77-135. Nanjio, B., A Catalogue of the Chinese translation of the Buddhist Tripitaka. Oxford 1883. Naudou, J., Les bouddhistes kafmfriens au moyen age. Paris 1968. (Annales du Musee Guimet, Bibliotheque d'etudes, 68). Nidiinasa'!lyukta = Tripathi, Ch., Funfundzwanzig Sutras des Nidiinasa'!lyukta. Berlin 1962. (Sanskrittexte aus den Turfanfunden, 8). Nishioka, S., "Index to the catalogue section of Bu-ston's 'History of Buddhism', 1-3", Annual Report of the Institute for the Study of Cultural Exchange, The University of Tokyo. Part I: No. 4, 1980, pp. 61-92; Part IT: No. 5, 1981, pp. 43-94; Part III : No. 6, 1983, pp. 47-201. O'Brien, P.W., "A Chapter on Reality from the Madhyantavibhagasastra, translated and annotated", Monumenta Nipponica IX:1-2, April 1953, pp. 277-303; X:1-2, April 1954, pp. 227-269. P = Peking ed. of the Tibetan Tripitaka Pauly, B., "Fragments sanskrits de Haute Asie", JA CCXLVIII, 1960, pp. 509-519. Pelliot, P., "Les stances d'introduction de l'Abhidharrnahrdayasastra de Dharrnatrata", JA CCXVII, 1930, pp. 267-273. Peri, N., "A propos de la date de Vasubandhu", BEFEO XI, 1911, pp. 339-390. Pradhan, P., AbhidhannakosabhfiD!am of Vasubandhu, deciphered and edited Revised second edition with Introduction and Indices. Patna 1975. (Tibetan Sanskrit Works Series 8). Prasannapadii = Mulamadhyamakakiirikiis (Miidhyamikasutms) de Nagarjuna, avec fa Prasannapadii, commentaire de Candrakirti. Publie par L. de La Vallee Poussin. St­ Petersbourg 1903-1913. (Bibliotheca Buddhica 4). PTS = Pali Text Society Richardson, H.E., "The Karma-pa Sect. A Historical Note. Part I", JRAS 1958:3-4, pp. 139-164. RO Rocznik Orientalistyczny Roerich, G.N., The Blue Annals. The Deb-ther-sflOn-po of 'Gos 10 tsa ba. 2 vols. Calcutta 19491953. Roerich, G.N., Biography of Dhannasvamin (Chag lo tsa-ba Chos-rje-dpal), Tibetan monk pilgrim. Patna 1959. Ruegg, D.S., The life of Bu ston Rin po che. With the Tibetan text of the Bu ston rNam thar. Roma 1966. (Serie Orientale Roma XXXIV). Ruegg, D.S., "Arya and Bhadanta Vimuktisena on the Gotra-theory of the Prajfiaparamita", WZKS 12-13, 1968-69, pp. 303-317. =

XVI

Ruegg, D.S.,The Literature of the Madhyamaka School of Philosophy in India. Wiesbaden 1981. (A History of Indian' Literature, ed. J. Gonda, vol. 7:1). Ruegg, D.S., "Autour du ITa ba'i khyad par de Ye ses sde (Version de Touen-houang, Pelliot tibetain 8 14)", JA CCLXIX: 1-2, 1981, pp. 207-229. Sander, L., "Buddhist Literature in Central Asia", EB IV:1, pp. 52-75. Sail1qtyayana, R., Abhidharma/rosa/;l, iiciirya-Vasubandhu-PraTJita/;l. Vara�asi 1988 ( 193 1). Schayer, S., "Kamaiasilas Kritik des Pudgalavada", RO VIII, 1934, pp. 68-93 ( On Philosophizing of the Hindus. Selected Papers, ed. by M. Mejor. Warsaw 1988,' pp. 433-458). Schiefner, A., Tiiraniithae de doctrinae bUddhicae in India propagatione narratio. Contextum tibeticum e codicibus Petropolitanis edidit ... Petropoli 1868. Schiefner, A; "Uber Vasubandhu's GathiisaIJlgraha", Melanges Asiatiques VIII, 1876-1881, pp. 559-593. Schmithausen, L., "Sautriintika-Voraussetzungen in Vllpsatika und Trllpsika", WZKS 9, 1967, pp. 109-136. Schmithausen, L., Der Nilvii1)a-Abschnitt in der ViniScayasal?1grahal)i derYogiiciirabhilmi/:l. Wien 1969. (Osterreichische Ak. der Wiss., Philos.-hist. Kl., Sitzungsberichte, 264. Bd., 2. Abhandlung). Schmithausen, L., ''The Definition of Pratyalqam in the AbhidharmasamuccayaQ.", WZKS 16, 1972, pp. 153-163. Schmithausen, L., "On some aspects of descriptions or theories of 'Liberating Insight' and 'Enlightenment' in early Buddhism", Studien zum Jainismus und Buddhismus. Gedenk­ schriftjUr LudwigAlsdorf, hrsg. von K Bruhn und A. Wezler. Wiesbaden 1981, pp. 199250. (Alt- und Neu-Indische Studien, 23). Schmithausen, L., Alayavijiiiina. On the Origin and the Early Development of a Central Concept ofYogiiciira Philosophy. Part I: Text; Part II: Notes, Bibliography and Indices. Tokyo 1987. (Studia Philologica Buddhica. Monograph Series IV:a-b). Schmithausen, L., "Beitrage zur Schulzugeh6rigkeit und Textgeschichte kanonischer und postkanonischer buddhistischer Materialien", Zur Schulzugehorigkeit von Werken der I1mayiina-Literatur. Zweiter Teil (Symposien zur Buddhismusforschung, III, 2), hrsg. von Heinz Bechert. G6ttingen 1987. (Abh. der Ak. der Wiss. in G6ttingen, Phil.-hist Kl., Dritte Folge, Nr. 154). Sendai A Catalogue of the Tohoku University Collection of Tibetan Works' on Buddhism, ed. by Y. Kanakura, R. Yamada, T. Tada, H. Hadano. ,Sendai 1953. (Uncanonical works, Nos. 5001-7083). Shastri, Swami Dwarikadas, Abhidharm a/rosa andB�a ofAciirya Vasubandhu, with Sphu.{iirthii commentary of Acarya YaJomitra, cdt. ed. 6 vols. Varanasi 1970-73. (Bauddha Bharati Series, 5, 6, 7, 9). Siks'hiisamuccaya, A Compendium of Buddhistic Teaching compiled by Santideva, ed. by C. Bendall. St.-Petersburg 1897-1902. (Bibliotheca Buddhica I). Simonsson, N., Indo-tibetische Studien. Die Methoden der tibetischen Ubersetzer, untersucht im Hinblick aUf die Bedeutung ihrer Uber.retzungenjUr die Sanskritphilologie 1. Uppsala 1957. Simonsson, N., "Reflections on the Grammatical Tradition in Tibet", Indological and Buddhist Studies in Honour of Prof 1. W. de Jong. Canberra 1982, pp. 53 1-544. Smith, Gene E., Tibetan Catalogue, University o/Washington, Part 1. Seattle 1969. Sphutiirthii Abhidharmakosa-vyikh i yii of YaSomitra =

=

=

=

XVII

Stcherbatsky, Th., Tibetskij perevodAbhidhannakosakiirikiiJ:t iAbhidhannakosabfziiB;am socinenij Vasubandhu. Fasc. 1: Petrograd 1917. Fasc. 2: Leningrad 1930. (Bibliotheca Buddhica

XX).

Stcherbatsky, Th., Levi, S., SphutiirthiiAbhidhannakosavyiikhyii, vide: Levi, S., Stcherbatsky, Th. Stcherbatsky, Th., "The Soul Theory of the Buddhists", Izvestija Rossijskoj Akademii Nauk, 1919, pp. 823-854, 938-958. (Bulletin de l'Academie des Sciences de Russie, 1919 ) . Separatum: Petrograd 1920. Stcherbatsky, Th., The Central Conception of Buddhism and the Meaning of the word "Dhanna ". London 1923. (Prize Publication Fund, VII). Steinkellner, E., Verse-Index of Dhannaldrti 's Works (Tibetan versions) . Wien 1977. (Wiener Studien zur Tibetologie und Buddhismuskunde, 1 ) . Steinkellner, E., "Paralokasiddhi-Texts", Buddhism and Its Relation to Other Religions: Essays in Honour of Dr. Shozen Kumoi on His Seventieth Birthday. Kyoto 1985, pp. 215-224. T Taisho TaishO Issaikyo, The Tripitaka in Chinese, ed. by J. Takakusu and K. Watanabe. Tokyo 1924-35. Takakusu, J., A Record of the Buddhist Religion as practised in India and the Malay Archipelago (A.D. 671-695) by Using. Oxford 1896. Takakusu, J., ''The Life of Vasubandhu by Paramartha (A.D. 499-569 ) ", TP V, 1904, pp. 269-296. Takakusu, J., "K'uei-chi's version of a controversy between the Buddhist and the Sarpkhya philosophers. An appendix to the translation of Paramartha's 'Life of Vasubandhu''', TP V, 1904, pp. 461-466. Takakusu, J., "La Sarpkhyakarika etudiee it la lumiere de sa version chinoise", BEFEO IV, 1904, pp. 1-65 (Introduction), pp. 978-1064 (Traduction franc;aise). Takakusu, J., "A Study of Paramartha's Life of Vasubandhu and the Date of Vasubandhu", JRAS 1905, pp. 33-53. Takakusu, J., "On the Abhidharma Literature of the Sarvastivadins", JPTS 1905, pp. 67-146. Takakusu, J., "The Date of Vasubandhu, the Great Buddhist Philosopher", Indian Studies in Honour Ch.R Lanman. Cambridge, Mass., 1929, pp. 79-88. Taranatha, Rgya gar chos 'byun, vide: Schiefner, A. Tiiraniitha's History of Buddhism in India. Trans!. from the Tibetan by Lama Chimpa and A. Chattopadhyaya, ed. by D. Chattopadhyaya. Simla 1970. Tattvasalflgraha of Siintaralqita, with the commentary of Kamalaiila, ed. by E: Krishnamacharya. 2 vols. Baroda 1926,(Gaekwad's Oriental Series; 30-31); . Taube, M., Tibetische Handschriften und Blockdrucke. Teil 4. Wiesbaden 1966. (Verzeichnis d. orientalischen Handschriften in Deutschland, XI.4) . Tekin, S., Abhidhannakosa-bhii!Ya-pkii tattviirthaniimii. The Uigur translation of Sthiramati's commentary on the Vasubandhu 's Abhidhannakosaiastra: Abidarim kosavardi sastr. Text in facsimile with introduction. New York 1970. (Sources of Oriental Languages and Literature 1. Turcic sources 1 ) . Tg Tanjur (bsTan 'gyur) Thomas, E.J., "The Works of Aryasura, Triratnadasa and Dharmikasubhuti", Album Kern. Leiden 1903, pp. 405-408. Tibetan Tripitaka, Peking edition, compiled and edited by D.T. Suzuki and S. Yamaguchi. Tokyo­ Kyoto 1955-1961. Tohoku A Catalogue of the Tibetan Buddhist Canons (BkaJ:t-J:tgyur and Bstan-J:tgyur) . Tohoku University, Sendai 1934. (Canonical works, Nos. 1-4567) . =

=

=

XVIII

Tola, F., Dragonetti, C., "The Trisvabhavakiirika of Vasubandhu", Journal of Indian Philosophy 1 1, 1983, pp. 225-266. TP T'oung Pao TPS Tucci, G., Tibetan Painted Scrolls. Parts 1-2. Roma 1949. Traite Lamotte, Traite de la grand vertu de sagesse TSD Tibetan-Sanskrit Dictionary" based on a close comparative study of Sanskrit originals and Tibetan translations of several texts by Lokesh Chandra. Reprinted from the First Edition, New Delhi 1961, by the Rinsen Book Company in 2 vols. Kyoto 1976. Tucci, G. , "Buddhist Logic before Diimaga' (AsaIiga, Vasubandhu, Tarka-sastras)", JRAS 1929, pp. 451-488, 870-871. Tucci, G., "A Fragment from the Pratitya-samutpada-vyakhya of Vasubandhu", JRAS 1930, pp. 611-623. Tucci, G. , On Some Aspects of the Doctrines of Maitreya(niitha) and Asanga. Calcutta 1930. Tucci, G. , Indo-tibetica. 2. Rin c'en bzail po e la rinascita del buddhismo nel Tibet intomo al mille. Roma 1933. (Reale Accademia d'ltalia. Studi e documenti, 1 ) . Tucci, G. , "Minor Sanskrit Texts on the Prajiia-paramita. 1. The Prajiia-paramita-piJ:!qartha of Dmnaga", JRAS 1947, pp. 53-75. Tucci, G. , "Tibetan Notes. 1. The Tibetan Tripitaka. 2. The Diffusion of the Yellow Church in Western Tibet and the Kings ofGuge", HJAS XII : 3-4, 1949, pp. 477-496. Tucci, G. , The Tombs of the Tibetan Kings. Roma 1950. (Serie Orientale Roma I). Tucci, G. , Minor Buddhist Texts. Parts 1-2. Roma 1956-58. (Serie Orientale Roma IX, IX.2) . Ui, H., "On the Author of the Mahayanasiitrruarp.kara", ZIT VI:2, 1928, pp. 215-225. Ui, H., "Maitreya as an Historical Personage", Indian Studies in Honour ChR Lanman. Cambridge, Mass., 1929, pp. 95-101. Ui, H., The VaiSe�ka Philosophy according to the DaSapadiirthaSiistra: Chinese text with introduction, translation, and notes. Ed. by F.W. Thomas. London 1917. (Oriental Translation Fund, N.S., XXIV). Vaidya, P.L., Mahiiyana-Siltra-Sarrzgraha. Part 1. Darbhanga 1961. (Buddhist Sanskrit Texts, 17) . Van den Broeck, J., La Saveur de l'lmmortel (A-p 'i-t'an kan lu Wei Lun). La version chinoise de l'Amrtarasa de Gho�aka (T. 1553). Louvain-Ia-Neuve 1977. Van Velthem, M., Le traite de la descente dans la profonde loi de [,arhat Skandhila (Abhidhar­ mQvatiirapraka1'a1)a). Louvain 1977. Vasiliev, V.,Buddlzm, ego dogmaty, istorifa i'literatura. Cast'IIl 'lstorija buddizrnay Indii,., socinenie Daranat'y. Perevod s tibetskago. Sanktpeterburg 1869. Vasu, S.Ch., The Ashradhyiiyi of PalJini, edited and tronslated into English. 2 vols. Delhi 1980 (first published: Allahabad 1891 ) . Vidyabhusana, S.C., A History of Indian Logic. Delhi 1971 (first published: Calcutta 1920) . ' Vogel, c., Vagbhara 's �riiizgahrdaya-sarrzhita. Wiesbaden 1965. (Abhandlungen fiir die Kunde ' des Morgenlandes, 37.2) . Vostrikov, A., Tibetskaja istoriceskaja literatura. Moskva 1962. (Bibliotheca Buddhica XXXII). Waldschmidt, E., Sanskrithandsi::hriften aus den Tuifanfunden. Teil I-III. Wiesbaden 1965-71. ' (Verzeichnis d. orientalischen Handschriften in Deutschland, X). Wa11eser, M., Ga las hjigs med. Die tibetisclie Version von Nagiirjuna 's Kommentar Akutobhaya zur Madhyamaka-karika. Nach der Pekinger Ausgabe des Tanjur. Heidelberg 1923. ' (Materialien zur Kunde des Buddhismus, 2) . Watters, T., On Yuan Chwang's Travels in India (A. D. 629-645) . 2 vols. in one. Delhi 1961 (first published: London 1904-05) . =

=

=

=

,

XIX

Wayman, A,Analysis of the Sriivakabhiimi Manuscript. Berkeley and Los Angeles 1961. Wayman, A, (review of:) Nagao, G.M., Madhyiintavibhiiga-b� a Buddhist Philosophical Treatise, Tokyo 1964, (in:) IIJ XIX: I-2, 1977, pp. 117-120. Weller, F., Tausend Budtlhanamen des Bhadrakalpa, nach einer fUnfsprachiger Polyglotte. Leipzig

1928.

Weller, F., "Das tibetische Brahmajiilasiitra", ZIT 10, 1935-36, pp. 1�61. Weller, F., "Das Brahmajiilasiitra des chinesischen DIrghagama", Etudes Asiatiquesj Asiatische Studien XXV 1971, pp. 202-264. Willemen, Ch., The Essence of Metaphysics. Abhidhannahrdaya. (DhannaSri's A- p'i-t'an Hsin Lun). Brussels 1975. Wogihara, U., "Vasubandhu", ERE XII, p. 595b. . Wogihara, u., Sphutiirtha Abhidhannakosavyiikhyii ofYaiomitra. Tokyo 1932-34. Wylie, T.V., A place name index to George N. Roerich's translation of the Blue Annalr. Roma 1957. (Serie Orientale Roma, XV). WZKS(O) Wiener Zeitschrift fUr die Kunde Siid-(und Ost-)asiens Yoshimoto, Sh., "Textual Notes on the Abhidharmasamuccaya", Indogaku bukkyogaku Kenkyii. XXV:2, March 1977, pp. 983-981. Yuyama, A, "Bu-ston on the Languages Used by Indian Buddhists at the Schismatic Period", Die Sprache deraltesten buddhistischen Oberlieferung (SymposienzurBuddhismus{orschung, II), hrsg. von Heinz Bechert. G6ttingen 1980, pp. 175-181. (Abhandlungen der Ak. der Wiss. in G6ttingen, Phil.-hist. Kl., Dritte Folge Nr. 117) . ZIT Zeitschrift fUr Indologie und Iranistik Ziircher, E., The Buddhist Conquest of China. The spread a1(Il1 adaptation of Buddhism in early medieval China. Leiden 1959. (Sinica Leidensia, XI). Ziircher, E., "The Yiieh-chih and Kani�ka in Chinese Sources", Papers on the Date of Kan�ka, ed. by AL. Basham. Leiden 1968, pp. 346-390. ,

=

=

N.B. In this book the Chinese words are given according to their transcription in the quoted sources (La Vallee Poussin, Peri, Levi, Hob5girin, Watters, Takakusu etc.).

xx

L

INTRODUCTION

1. PROBLEM OF THE DArE OF VASUBANDHU

Vasubandhu, a Buddhist philosopher, is regarded as one of the greatest thinkers of India. The epithet of a "second Buddha" was bestowed on him as homage to his unrivalled knowledge'. During his long life Vasubandhu was active in many fields: he systematized the doctrine of the Sarvastivada school of HInayami,. he elaborated after his conversion to Mahayana a new philosophy of vijiiaptimiitra, he was an influential logician, and is said to have written critical works against the Sarpkhya and the VyakaraI].a. The Buddhist tradition abounds in many details of his life, relates more or less legendary stories. A great number of works ascribed to Vasubandhu exist. Vasubandhu, however, still remains to us "un personnage �nigrnatique" (Lamotte). "The date of the famous Buddhist philosopher Vasubandhu belongs to the most discussed questions of the history of Indian literature and philosophy", wrote E. Frauwallner in his excellent monograph On the Date of the Buddhist Master of the Law Vasubandhu from 1951. The pertinent Sanskrit, Chinese and Tibetan sources have been collected and critically examined by many scholars2• Accordingly two theories have been suggested concerning the date of Vasuban­ dhu. One theory dated him in the fourth century A.D. (N. PeriY, and the other placed Vasubandhu's date in the fifth century A.D. (J. Takakusu)4. Frauwallner's monograph brought a new critical evaluation of the relevant material and put forward a new theory of two Vasubandhus, in order to avoid the discrepancy in the dates. Briefly speaking, Frauwallner's theory of two Vasubandhus takes as its starting point a divergent traditional chronology, viz. that which is found in Paramartha's Life of Vasubandhu and Hsiian-tsang's records of his travels in India. In consequence, in the light of the data contained in Paramartha's account dealing with Vasubandhu, Frauwallner put forward an assumption that "there were two beareFs of the name of Vasubandhu, who were confused only at a later time". Accordingly, Frauwallner suggested the following dates respectively: for

I Cf. YaSomitra's introductory stanza of his Sphutiirthii Abhidhannakosa-vyiikhyii [Wogihara, 1.7; Levi, 1.5; Shastri, . p. 3 stanza 3]: YlU1' buddhimatiim agrylU1' dvitiyam iva buddham ity iihuiJ If. Cf. Digniiga's Mannapradipa, the colophon

[Peking Thu. 286a6-7; Cone Nu. 214a6-7): blo gros phun sum tshogs pa sans rgyas gilis pa Itargyur Dbyig gilen des mdzad chos mdzod If. Further see V. V. Gokhale, "The Text of the Abhidharmakosak3rikii of Vasubandhu", JBBRAS 22, 1946,

p. 75: "He fully deserved the tnbute, paid by Haribhadra to his talent for systematic and lucid expositions, as well as to his fine grasp of subtle metaphysical distinctions, of which he was very proud. (The reference is worth quoting here: bhiivii'bhiivavibhiigapa}qanipU{lajiiiinii'bhimiinonnata/;! I iiciiryo Vasubandhur atthakathane priiptiispada/;! paddhatau 11from Abhlsamay81aypkar81okii Prajiiiiparamitiivyakhyii, ed. by U. Wogihara, TokyO, 1932-34, p. 1, 11. 17-18.)". On the contrary, the author of the Abhidhannadipa, ed. Jain;, p. 128 (Introduction); p. 282.6-7 (Text) [ity ctad aparam adhvaslU1'­ mohiiilkaniisthiinlU1' koJakiirasyehl ''This is one more occassion where the KoSakara shows his ignorance of [the doctrine of] Time". 2

For the bibliography see Frauwallner, op. cit., pp. 67-69.

3 N. Peri, "A propos de la date de Vasubandhu", BEFEO XI, 1911, pp. 339-390. Cf. Frauwallner's opinion, op. cit., p. 2: "the. most complete and painstaking work existing on the subject". • J.

Takakusu, "The Life of Vasubandhu by Paramiirtha (AD. 499-569)",

TP

V, 1904, pp. 269-296; ditto, "A Study

of Paramiirtha's Life of Vasubandhu and the D ate of Vasubandhu", JRAS 1905, pp. 33-53; ditto, 'The Date of Vasubandhu, the Great Buddhist Philosopher", Indian Studies in Honour Ch.R Lanman, 1929, pp. 79-88.

3

Vasubandhu "the elder", who was identified with the brother of AsaIiga and was the head of the Yogacara school, c. 320-380 A.D., and for Vasubandhu "the younger", who was identified with the author of the Abhidharmakasa (i.e. the Kosa-kara), c. 400-480 A.D. The authorship of the Vif!Lfatikii and Trif!Lfikii , two works belonging to the Yogadira school, was, however, ascribed to Vasubandhu the younger. Frauwallner's hypothesis did not meet with complete acceptance among scholars·. It is L. de La Vallee Poussin who has already argued that "c'est une hypothese desesperee d'identifier Ie frere et Ie converti d'AsaIiga avec Vasubandhu l'Ancien", although it is true that "on doit admettre l'existence et l'activite 'abhidharmique' d'un ancien Vasubandhu"7. Still, as yet we do not have a conclusive answer to the problem of Vasubandhu. Paramartha's Life af Vasubandhu, compiled about the middle of the sixth century, became a basic source for Frauwallner's theory: "... of our two chief authorities Paramartha and HSiian-tsang, it is Paramartha who carries the greater weight by far. It is true that both are personally trustworthy. But Hsiian-tsang is later by a century, and we can see at every pace what sort of deformation tradition underwent during these hundred years... In such conditions Paramartha must be accepted as the chief witness"'. However, elsewhere Frauwallner remarked that "The Life of Vasubandhu is no personal work of Paramartha, but has been pieced together by someone among his disciples on the basis of information hailing from him", and therefore, continues Frauwallner, "the confusion of the two Vasubandhus in the Life is not at all to be attributed to Paramartha, but is due to a mistake by his pupils"'. We would however like to point out in the context of these statements by Frauwallner the fact that actually it was Yasomitra, the author of the Abhidharmakasavyakhya, and not Paramartha, who expressis verbis testified to the existence of an elder Vasubandhu. It is tr ue that Frauwallner has taken Yasomitra's testimony into consideration but only as a supplementary witness: "we have another witness, besides Paramartha, who distinguishes between Vasubandhu the brother of AsaIiga, and Vasubandhu the author of the Abhidharmakosa. It is Yasomitra: . . "lO. In my opinion, one should give the priority to Yasomitra for it is his

S E. FrauwalJner, "Landmarks in the history of Indian logic", WZKS 5, 1961, p. 132 (

=

Kl.

Schriften, p. 854); ditto,

Die Philosophie des Buddhismus, Berlin 1956, p. 351; L. Schmithausen, "Sautrantika-Voraussetzungen in ViJ]1satikii und TriJ]1sikii", WZKS 9, 1967, pp. 109-136 (cf. English summary on p. 136: "On account of these Sautriintik�-elements ViJ]1Satika and TriJ]1sikii may be attnbuted to the author of Abhidharmakosal). At the same time it appears that such elements are wanting in the commentaries on the works of Maitreyaniitha and Asailga attnbuted to Vasubandhu, a fact which seems to support the 'two-Vasubandhu-hypothesis' put forward by FrauwalJner"). •

P.S. Jaini, "On the Theory of Two Vasubandhus", BSOAS

XXI:l,

1958, pp. 48-53; Abhidhann adipa, ed. Jaini,

Introduction; A. Hirakawa, IndexAKBh, Part I, Introduction (a good recapitulation of a long discussion with references to the Japanese works on the subject). 7

LVP, Cosmologie, p. viii

•

On the Date, p. 11.

fl.

2; ditto, Kasa, Introduction, p. xxvii.

9 Op. cit., p. 18. Cf. opinion of P. Demievme who says that Paramiirtha's Life of Vasubandhu "est une source de mediocre aloi" ("Un fragment sanskrit de I'Abhidharma des Sarvastiviidin", JA CCXLIX, 1961, p. 473 n. 12).

lO Op. cit., p. 21. LVP, Cosmologie, p.

viii

n. 2 (1).

4

commentary that contains several explicit references to the ancient Vasubandhu and because it is preserved in Sanskrit, a fact which cannot be ignored in a situation where this is the single commentary on the Abhidharmakosa preserved both in its original Sanskrit and in the Tibetan translation. In his monograph Frauwallner expressed his regret that the commentaries on the Abhidharmakosa which are preserved in the Tanjur, were not available to him, although one could surmise that as in Yasomitra'sAbhidharmakosavyiikhyii so also in the other commentaries . "some useful elements" might be foundll. It is hoped that the comparative study of the relevant portions of the commentaries on the Abhidharmakosa which is the purpose of this book will throw fresh light . on the long discussed problem of Vasubandhu. It should be noted however, that a comprehensive study of this problem is not our main task here nor it is possible at the present stage of our research. In the present book, according to generally accepted scholarly opinion, the date 400-480 AD. is admitted for Vasubandhu, the author of the Abhidharmakosa'z. 2. BIOGRAPHIES OF VASUBANDHU

Four main biographies of Vasubandhu are known to us: two in the Chinese, by Paramartha and by Hsiian-tsang, and two in the Tibetan, by Bu-ston and by Taranatha13• Let us examine them briefly. (a) Paramartha (499-569 AD., in China 546-569 AD.)'4 compiled his Life of Vasubandhu most probably at the period of his work on the translation of the Abhidharmakosa, i.e. 563-569 AD. His account is divided into three parts. In the first part Vasubandhu's native town Puru�apura (peshawar) is described; the names of his father, Brahmin Kausika, and two brothers, Asailga and Virificivatsa are mentioned. The second part culminat�s in the story of Vasubandhu's compilation of the Abhidharmakosa-kiirikii, the later addition of the bhii.DJa and

11 12

On the Date, p. 1 n. 1. Cf. Hirakawa, IndexAKBh I, p.

ii-iii:

H. -Ui

E.Frauwallner

R.

Maitreyaniitha

270-350

c. 300

350430

Asaitga

310-390

315-390

395-470

Vasubandhu

320-400

320-380

400-480

Hikata

400-480

Vasubandhu

(KoSakara) L'Inde Classique § 2084 and Demieville ("La Yogiiciirabhiimi de Sailgharak�", BEFEO 1954, p. 397) advocate 4th century A.D. for Vasubandhu. " u. Wogihara in his article "Vasubandhu", ERE vol. XII, p. 595b, .distinguished "three different traditions", without mention of Bu-ston's substantial narrative in his Chos 'byuit. Cf. also my paper "A contnllution to the biography of Vasu­

bandhu from TijJetan sources", Tibetan and Buddhist Studies, ed. Ligeti, Budapest 1984, voL 2, pp. 159-173 . .. L'[nde Classique § 2086; see Takakusu's translation 'The Life of Vasubandhu by Paramiirtha (A.D. 499-569)".

5

a subsequent controversy with a Kashmirian Vaibhii�ika master, Sanghabhadra. The last part contains a narrative about Vasubandhu's conversion to Mahayana by his elder brother Asanga. (b) Hsiian-tsang (602-664 AD.Ys wrote a record of his travels in India in 629-645 AD. It contains a short story about Vasubandhu, split up into two independent parts. The first narrative is concentrated on the composition of the Abhidhannakosa and a subsequent controversy between Vasubandhu and Sanghabhadra. It is stated explicitly that Vasubandhu had composed the Kosa in order to refute the opinions of the Vaibha�ika masters. The other part tells the story of the brothers Asanga and Vasubandhu and the conversion of the latter to Mahayana. Despite its legendary and miraculous character, the episode of Vasubandhu's death and Asanga's ascent to the Tu�ita heaven has been accepted by Frauwallner as a valid argument to corroborate his theory of two Vasubandhus. This episode was supposed to be an element of the biography of Vasubandhu the elder. (c) Bu-ston (1290-1364 AD.) composed his Chos 'byuil in 1322 AD.'· The account of the brothers Asanga and Vasubandhu opens with the legend of their birth: the elder son, Asanga, was born from the union with a lqatriya, and the younger, Vasubandhu, from the union with a brahmar:za. Vasubandhu studied in Kashmir the Vibhiirii and seven Abhidharma treatises under the direction of Sanghabhadra. In Nalanda he met his brother Asanga and was converted by him to Mahayana. It was only after his conversion that Vasubandhu composed the verses of the Abhidhannakosa. Sanghabhadra, having read both the aphorisms and the later commentary, expressed his will to meet Vasubandhu in a dispute, but in the meantime Vasubandhu left for Nepal and shortly died there. The account is followed by an enumeration of the works of Vasubandhu. (d) Taranatha ( 1575-1634 AD.) composed his Rgya gar chos 'byuil in 1608 AD!7 He says that he derived his information on the brothers Asanga and Vasubandhu both from Indian and Tibetan sources. It is said that Vasubandhu was born a year after Asanga's ordination. Vasubandhu was ordained in Nalanda, studied the Abhidharrna with Sanghabhadra in Kashmir, and then, for many years taught the Sravakapitakas in Kashmir and Magadha. In Magadha Vasubandhu met his elder brother Asanga and was converted by him to Mahayana. The story about the composition of the Abhidhannakosa is placed at the very end of Taranatha's account. Taranatha tells us that Vasubandhu was a contemporary of the Tibetan king Lha tho tho ri giian btsan, but the legendary character of the king makes it impossible to ascertain his exact date". In a study of the biographies of Vasubandhu we are faced with a number of doubtful, contradictory and purely legendary elements. It is by no means an easy task to determine which factors among those which we are not at all certain in character are trustworthy. It was already

is

VInde Classique §§ 2057-2060; see S. Beal, Si-yu-ki and T. Watters, On Yuan Chwang's Trovels in India, Indices

s.v .

•6 See Obenniller's translation, vol. II, pp. 142-147. 17

See translation by Lama Chimpa and A. Chattopadhyaya, pp. 167-175.

1 8 A. Chattopadhyaya, Atisa and Tibet, p. 179: 'This much alone can be asserted that Lha-tho-tho-ri is mentioned as the fIfth ancestor of Sron-btsan-sgam-po, who died in A.D. 650". Cf. Goizio, Kings, Khans and other Rule� of Early Centrol Asia, p. 41, 43. Cf. also S.Ch. Das, "Contributions on the Religion, History, etc. of Tibet", JASB vol. L, Part 1, Nos. 3-4, 1881, p. 216f.: Lha-tho-thori Nan-tsan 441-561 A.D. (sic).

6

observed by E. Lamotte that "Vasubandhu a trop vecu, trop pense, trop ecrit; et avant de se prononcer sur sa personalite, il faudrait avoir lu, critique et compare toutes ses oeuvres"" . E. Frauwallner also came to a similar conclusion saying that "there is a large quantity of works, which go under the name of Vasubandhu, and which we have not mentioned in our discussion. It is of the highest importance to determine, who of the two Vasubandhus was the author of each single work becaUl�e among them we find some that were of fundamental importance for the development of Indian philosophy. I shall mention only the Vi1'[1iatikii and Tri1'[1iildi Vijfiaptimtitratiisitidhi. But the accounts of the life of Vasubandhu either do !lot give any information at all about these works, or mention them in passages where the two­ Vasubandhus are confused with each other, as e.g. at the close of Paramartha's biography, so that we cannot draw any conclusion about them. 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 doctrine upheld in them""'. Now, what we can safely ascertain from the large amount of information - which is, to say the least, doubtful - preserved in the Chinese and the Tibetan sources with regard to the life and activities of Vasubandhu, may be summarized in two points: 1° Vasubandhu's composition of the Abhidhannakoia-kiirikii and bh�a and a subsequent controversy with a Kashmirian Vaibha�ika master, Sanghabhadra, 2° Vasubandhu's conversion to Mahayana under the influence of his elder brother Asanga. 3. WORKS OF VASUBANDHU

A large number of works has been attributed to Vasubandhu in the catalogues of the Chinese Tripitaka and of the Tibetan Tanjur2l• (a) Perhaps the earliest document we possess is a list of Vasubandhu's works appended to Paramartha's Life of Vasubandhu, which was compiled probably in 563-569 A.D." T!J.e works are listed under three heads: I. - Paramiirthasaptati, - Abhidharmakoia-kiirikii and bh�a (transl. Paramartha, Nanjio 1269 Taisho 1559), - without title, a refutation of Vasurata's Vyakaraq.a-treatise, II. Commentaries on the Mahayana-siitras: - Avataf!lSaka, - NirvtilJa (Nanjio 1206 Taisho 1527: NirvtilJaitistra; transl. Paramartha: Nanjio 1207 Taisho 1528; Nanjio 1209 Taisho 1529: apocryphal), =

=

=

I. KannasiddhipraJcanv.! a , 20 21

=

MCB 4, 1936, p. 179.

On the Date, p. 56. See Repenoire du canon bouddhique sino-japonais, edition de Taisho (fascicule annexe du HobOgirin), Pari..Tokyo .

1978, p. 275 sub Seshin (Vasubandhu); Nanjio, Catalogue of the Chinese Tmnslation of the Buddhist Tripitaka, Oxford 1883, Appendix i.6; A Catalogue of the Tibetan Buddhist Canons (Bka/;l-iJgyur and Bstan-iJgyur), Tohoku University, Sendai 1934.

22 Transl. by Takakusu, BEFEO 1904, pp. 269-296, 620; d. Bagchi, Le Canon bouddhique en Chine, vol. I, pp. 418431.

7

- SaddharmapUl:u!arika (Nanjio 1232 Taisho 1519, Nanjio 1233 Taisho 1520: · SaddharmapuIJt!arikopadesa ), - Prajnapiiramitii (Nanjio 123 1 Taisho 1513, Nanjio 1 168 Taisho 151 1), - Vunalakirti, - Srimiiliisif!lhaniida, III. Mahiiyana-sastras compiled by Vasubandhu: - Vijiiaptimiitratiisiddhi Vif!'liatikii (transI. Paramartha, Nanjio 1239 Taisho 1589, Nanjio 1215 Taisho 1586, Nanjio 1238 Taisho 1588, Nanjio 1240 1590),. - Mahiiyiinasaf!lparigrahavyiikhyii (transI. Paramartha, Nanjio 1 171 Taisho 1595: Mahiiyiinasaf!lgrahabh�a ), - The Nature of the Ratna-Traya (?), - The Gate to the Nectar (? Nanjio 1205). There are however two other works by Vasubandhu which were translated by Paramartha but are not found on his list, viz. : - BuddhagotraSiistra (Nanjio 1220 Taisho: BudhatvaSiistra), - MadhyiintavibhiigaSiistra (Nanjio 1248 Taisho 1599: Madhyiintavibhangapkii) . =

=

=

=

=

=

=

=

=

=

=

(b) HSiian-tsang's list of Vasubandhu's works which is found in his Buddhist Records of the Westem Countries is much smaller than that of Paramartha23• Only four titles are mentioned, viz. the Abhidharmakosa, the ParamiirthaSiistra, the Vijnaptimiitrasiddhi, the Madhyiintavibhiiga. In the catalogue of the Taisho edition of the Chinese Tripi!aka are found the following translations by Hsiian-tsang of Vasubandhu's works24: No. 1558: Abhidharmakosa-bh�a ( Nanjio 1267), in 651-654 AD., No. 1560: Abhidharmakosa-kiirikii ( Nanjio 1270), in 651 AD., No. 1586: Trif!'liikii ( Nanjio 1215), in 648 AD., No. 1590: Vif!'liatikii ( Nanjio 1240), in 661 AD., No. 1597: Mahiiyiinasaf!lgrahab�a ( Nanjio 1 171), in 648-649 AD., No. 1600: Madhyiintavibhiigapkii ( Nanjio 1244), in 661 AD., No. 1609: KarmasiddhiprakaraIJa ( Nanjio 1221), in 651 AD., No. 1612: Pancaskandhaprakara1}a ( Nanjio 1 176), in 651 AD., No. 1614: MahiiyiinaSatadharmaprakt'iSamukhaSiistra ( Nanjio 1213), in 648 AD. =

=

=

=

=

=

=

=

=

The earliest Tibetan source which enumerates the works of Vasubandhu is the Lhan kar catalogue from the beginning of the ninth century2S. The name of Vasubandhu is not mentioned in the catalogue but one can identify as many as 18 works ascribed to him after the Tohoku catalogue (the Sanskrit titles with the following numbers refer to the Tohoku, the Tibetan titles with the following numbers refer to the Lhan kar dkar chag) : Ary�a1}mukhfdhiira1Jfvyiikhyiina (2694,3989) Sgo drug pa 'i gzuns kyi bSad pa (554), 1. 2. Buddhiinusmrtipkii (3987) 'Phags pa sans rgyas rjes su dran pa'i rgya cher 'grelpa (555), (c)

rna

=

=

Z3

Beal, Si-yu-ki, vol. I, p. 172, 193, 226, 236; Watters, On Yuan Chwang's Travels, vol. I, p. 210, 357, 359, 370.

" Cf. also Nanjio's Catalogue and Bagchi, Le Canon bouddhique en Chine.

25 Ed. and transl. by M. Lalou, "Les textes bouddhiques au temps du roi Khri-sroil-lde-bcan", JA CCXLI, 1953, pp. 313-353. Khri sroil lde btsan ruled 754-797 A.D. (see Golzio, Kings, Khans and otherRulers, p. 43). On the date of the catalogue see infra, p.

8

3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18.

Aryagayaii�aniimasutravyiikhyiina (3991) 'Phags pa ga ya go ri'i mdo 'i mam par bsad pa (542), AryadaSabhumivyiikhyiina (3993) 'Phags pa sa bcu'i mam par bSad pa (537), Aryiilqayamatinirdesafikii (3994) 'Phags pa blo gros mi zad pa bstan pa 'i 'grelpa (536), Pratityasamutpiidiidivibhangabhii.rJ a (3995) Rten ci"h ;brel par 'byun ba 'i rgya cher bSad . pa (653), Sutriila",kiiravyiikhyii (4026) Moo sde rgyan gyi bSad pa (633), Madhyiintavibhangapkii (4027) *Dbus dan mtha ' mam par 'byed pa 'i 'grel pa (636), Mahiiyini asa",grahabhii.rJa (4050) Theg pa chen po bsdus pa 'i bSad sbyar (628), Tri",sikiikiirikii (4055) Sum cu pa'i rab tu byed pa (643), Vi",sakiikiri i kii (4056) Ni su pa'i ra b t u byed p a (646), Vi",sakiivrtfi (4057) Ni Su pa 'i 'grel pa (647), PaiicaskandhaprakarOJ)a (4059) Phun po lna'i rab tu byed pa (638), Vyiikhyayukti (4061) Rnam par bsad pa 'i rigs pa (649), KarmasiddhiprakaralJa (4062) Las bsgrub pa 'i rab tu byed pa (651), Abhidharmakosakiirikii (4089) Chos milOn pa mdzod kyi tshig le'ur byas pa (686), Abhidharmakosabh�a (4090) Mdzod kyi 'grel pa (687), Giithiisa",gi-ahaiiistriirthaniima (4103) Tshigs su bcad pa 'i don btus pa (663). =

=

=

=

=

=

=

=

=

=

=

=

=

=

=

=

(d) A Tibetan historian Bu-ston in his Chos 'byun from 1322 A.D. divided all Vasubandhu's works into the three periods26: I. Hinayanistic period - Abhidharmakosa, II. Middle period - a commentary on the Prajiiiipiiramitiisutra, ill. Idealistic period - the eight treatises (prakaralJa) - TriJrlSikiikiri i kii, - Vlf!'Ilatikiikiirikii, - Vyiikhyiiyukti, - Paiicaskandha, - Karmasiddhi, - a comment. on the Sutriila'!1kiira, . - a coniItlent. on the Pratityasamutpiidasutra; - a comment. on the Madhyiintavibhiiga. According to Bu-ston Vasubandhu was also the author of the commentaries on the following texts: - Daiabhiimikasutra, - Alqayamatinirrieia, - Giiya.ffr�a, - $alJmukhidhiiralJi, - Caturdharmaka, - Dharmadharmatiivibhanga. Taranatha in his Rgya gar chos 'byun from 1608 A.D. objected to Bu-ston's threefold division of Vasubandhu's works arguing that the term prakaralJa can be applied only to short works in

,. See Obermiller's trans1ation, voL I, p. 56f., vol. II, pp. 142-147.

9

which some selected and important problems are explained; it cannot be used with regard to commentaries, as for example the Pratityasamutpiidavyiikhyci, nor to works of a lexicographical character, as for example the Vyiikhyiiyukti27. (e) Finally, for the sake of comparison, I would like to offer two lists of Vasubandhu's works: one drawn by a modern Western scholar following Frauwallner's theory of two Vasubandhus28, and the other drawn up by a modern Japanese scholar following the Buddhist tradition29. (1) Vasubandhu the elder: - a comment. on Aryadeva's SataSiistra, - Madhyiintavibhiigabhii.!Ya, - Saddhannapw:l{!arikopade§a, - a comment. on the Vajracchedikii, - BodhiciffotpiidanaSiistra, - Mahiiyiinasutriilal!lkiirabhii.!Ya, - a comment. on the DaSabhumika. Vasubandhu the younger: - Abhidharmakosa, - Karmasiddhiprakaral}a, - Pancaskandhaka, - Viidavidhi, . - Viidavidhiina, - Viidasiira (lost), - Vif!1Satikii , - Trif!1Sikii .

(2) - AbhidharmakosaSiistra, - Pratityasamutpiidavyiikhyii, - Sllaparikathii, - Giithiisal!lgraha, - Prajiiiipiiramitiivajracchedikiisaptiirthapkii , - Pao ki king sseu fa yeou po t'i cho (Taisho 1526 Nanjio 1241), - Tchouan fa louen king yeou po t'i cho (Taisho 1533 Nanjio 1205), - San kiu tsou king yeou po t'i cho (Taisho 1534 Nanjio 1196), - * V!Se�acintibrahmapariprcchiiSiistra (Taisho 1532 Nanjio 1 193), =

=

=

=

TI

See Lama Chimp a and A. Chattopadhyaya's trans!., p. 172;

" J. May,

"La philosophie bouddhique idealiste", Asiatische

ct.

Vasiliev, Buddizm, Part III, p. 130.

StudienJEtudes Asiatiques XXV, 1971, p. 285 n. 49; 288

n. 63; 295 n. 81; 296 n. 82. . 29

Susumu Yamaguchi's list (Kyoto, 1966) quoted after: Hirakawa, Index AKBh, Part I, Introduction, p.

xi

n. 20.

Further see H. Nakamura, "A Survey of Mahayana Buddhism with Bibliographical Notes. Part II", The Journal of Intercultural Studies, No. 4, 1977, pp. 110-115 (Vasubandhu and his works).

10

- Gayaiir:jasiltra{ikii, - *Saddharmapu1J4arikopadesa, _ * Sukhiivativyilhopadesa, - AryaSiisanaprak:aral;la (a work of Asanga, Taisho 1602 Nanjio 1 177), - Mahiiyanasiltriila'!lkiirabhii:jya , - Madhyantavibhiigapkii, - Dharmadharmatavibhal1gapJai, - Bhariracaryapra'Jidhanapkii, - MahiiyiinaSatadharmaprakiiSamukhaSiistrri, - Paficaskandhaprakara'Ja, - Karmasiddhiprakara'Ja, - Mahiiyanasa'!lgrahabhii:jya , - Vif!lSakakiirikiiv{1ti, - Trif!lSikiikiri ikii , - Trisvabhiivakiirikii , - DaSabhilmivyakhya, - *BuddhatvaSiistra, - *TarkaSdstra, - Tche kouan men louen song (Taisho 1655 Nanjio 1225), - Lieou men !daD cheou si ting louen (ascribed to Asanga and Vasubandhu, Taisho 1607 1230). =

=

=

Nanjio

A glance through the first enumeration of works ascribed to Vasubandhu shows that the list of works ascribed to Vasubandhu the elder is very much similar to Paramartha's list, and the list of works ascribed to Vasubandhu the younger is close to the lists of HSiian-tsang and Bu­ ston. The list compiled by the Japanese scholar covers most of the works which are ascribed to Vasubandhu by the Chinese and Tibetan catalogues of the Buddhist Tripi!aka and contains 30 items. It goes without saying that a mere comparison of different enumerations of works which were ascribed to Vasubandhu over many centuries by the Buddhist tradition cannot be a decisive argument pro or con. The most striking example in the history of Buddhist literature is Nagarjuna - dozens and dozens of various works were ascribed to him and now we know that these works must be "distributed" among three or four different authors of different epochs but bearing the same name"'. In many cases it is oot possible to ascertain the authorship .. O\l� st.u.dy . of the commentaries on the Abhidharmakosa confirms the fact of the existence of an earlier Vasubandhu, different from the author of the Abhidhannakosa31• However, on the basis of the present research I am not in a position to determine his authorship of any particuaIr work. On the other hand, the situation seems to be clearer with regard to the author of the Abhidhanna­ kosa - many cross-references in the numerous texts enable us to draw a list of works which can be ascribed to the Kosakiira-Vasubandhu with high probability. In Yasomitra's Abhidharmakosa-vyakhya there are explicit references to the Vyakhyiiyukti and the Paficaskandhaprakara'Ja, as well as implicit references to the Pratityasamutpiida-vyakhya,

,. Cf. Ch. Lindtner, Nagtujuniana. Studies in the writings and philosophy of Niigmjuna, Copenhagen 1982. 31

Tiiraniitha mentions still another Vasubandhu, vide infra, p. 44.

11

as the works of the Kosakara-Vasubandhu32• A lost work, the Paramiirthasaptati(ka) is mentioned by Kamalasila together with the Abhidhannakosa as works by Vasubandhu33• Probably a stanza from the Paramiirthasaptatika is quoted in Kamalasila's Pafijika34 and in Yasomitra's Vyiikhyii3S• It was determined by La Vallee Poussin that the Giithiisal'flgraha, a short work preserved in the Tibetan translation, shows a direct dependence on theAbhidharma­ kosa36• Sthiramati's Trif?lSika-bhiifya37 contains a reference to the PaficaskandhaprakaralJa, and Haribhadra's Abhisamayiilarrzkariiloka38 refers to the Vyiikhyiiyukti. The latter text is referred to in Vasubandhu's KarmasiddhiprakaralJa39• It was shown that large fragments of the

32

Vide infra, the chapter on YaSomitra's Vyiikhyii.

33 Tattvas",?,graha-paiijikii [ed. Krishnamacharya, p. 134]: evam iiciirya-Vasubandhu-prabhrtibhil;! kosa-paromiilthasapta­ tikiidiev abhiproyiiprakiiSaniit pariikriintam /;. Cf. S. Schayer, "Kamalasllas Kritik des Pudgalaviida", RO VIII, 1934, p. 92f. ( = Selected Papers, p. 458); J. Takakusu, "K'uei-chfs version of a controversy between the Buddhist and the

SiiJ]1khya philosophers", BEFEO

IV.

TP

V, 1904, pp. 461-466; ditto, "La SaJ]1khyakarika etudiee

it

la lumiere de sa version chinoise",

1904.

" According to Schayer, op. cit., p. 93 ( = Selected Papers, p. 458), KamalaSila quotes a stanza which may have been taken from the Paramiilthasaptati: yad eva dadhi tat �iram, yat �ilW!' tad dadhiti ca / vadatii Rudrilenaiva kyiipinii

Vindhyaviisinii [ed. Krsihnamacharya, p. 22] . " Abhidhann akosa-vyiikhyii red. Wogihara, p. 699.25; Shastri, p. 1192.26-27]: v�atapiibhyiitrJ kil!' vyomnaS cann �y asti toyol;! phalam / cannopamaS eet so 'nityal;! khatulyaS ced asatphalal;! /j; Peking Tg, Chu. 381b5:

mkha' la char iiis ci iig bya / de giiis 'bras bu pags la yod / gal Ie pags 'dra de mi nag j gal te mkha' 'dIU 'bras bu med /;. Cf. Frauwallner, "Amalavijiianam und Alayavijiianam", Festschrift Schubring, 1951, p. 151 ( =

Kl.

Schriften, p. 640), with

further references; ditto, "Digniiga, sein Werk und seine Entwicklung", WZKSO 3, 1959, p. 133 ( =

Kl.

Schriften, p. 809).

(I am obliged to Prof. Schmithausen for the references to F.s works.) The ascription of the stanza to Dharmaldrti by LVP, Kosa, IX, p. 233 n. 1 and by Stcherbatsky, The Soul Theory of the Buddhists, Petrograd 1920, p. 952 n. 9, seems to be wrong - the stanza is not found in any of his works (cf. E. Steinkell­ ner, Verse-Index of Dhann akirti's Worns). ,. LVP, Kosa,

IV,

p. 137 Add.: "L'essentiel de la doctrine des dix mauvais chemins de Pacte dans

I�

commentaire

du GiithilsaJ]1graha de Vasubandhu analyse par Schiefner, Melanges Asiatiques, viii, not. p. 574 ou la theorie du meurtre (Objet, motifs, etc.; les Perses tuant pere et mere, etc.) est prise exactement du Kosa"; A. Schiefner, "Vber Vasubandhu's Gathiisa1]1graha', Melanges Asiatiques,

VIII,

1876-1881, pp. 559-593.

" Ed. Levi, p. 39.4. " Ed. Wogihara, p. 15.23-27 ( = Vyiikhyiiyukti, Peking Tg, Si. 33b4-S). ,. Ed. Lamotte, fo!. 166a ( = p. 200 : text, p. 252: translation). The Vyiikhyiiyukti together with its (ikii by GUJ:[amati was extensively used by Bu-ston in his Chos 'byUli (trans!. Obermiller, passim). Obermiller called attention to a passage

12

Prafityasamutpiida-vyiikhyii are quoted in the Karmasiddh iprakara{la"'. Dignaga, one of the com­ mentators of the Abhidharmakosa, in his PramiilJasamuccaya criticizes the logical works of Vasubandhu, the Viidavidhi and the Viidavidhcina41• Only a further comprehensive study of all the works ascribed to Vasubandhu may bring the conclusive ascertainment of their authorship. 4. VASUBANDHU'S TEACHERS, DISCIPLES, COMMENTATORS AND OPPONENTS

Before we approach our main subject, i.e; a comparative study of the commentaries on the AbhidharmakoSa which are preserved in the Tanjur, it seems reasonable to peruse the names ' of the teachers, disciples, commentators and opponents of Vasubandhu which are met in Chinese, Tibetan and Sanskrit sources. It will be shown later that the commentaries on the Kosa provide additional information, e.g. on two early commentators on the Abhidharmakosa, GuI].amati and Vasumitra, on Manoratha, Saitghabhadra, etc. (1) ( a) Paramartha's Life of Vasubandhu" contains the following names: -- Vasurata"", a grammarian versed in the Vyiikara{la in 8 parts and 32 chapters (7 paI].ini's �tiidhyiiyi), composed a critical work against the grammatical construction of the Abhidharma­ kosa; in response Vasubandhu compiled a rejoinder; -- Saitghabhadra44, an orthodox Vaibhii�ika master from Central India, wrote two works against theAbhidharmakoia: the Samayapradipika in 10,000 verses merely explained the doctrines of the Vibh�ii, whereas the Nyiiyiinusiira in 120,000 verses refuted the Kosa in favour of the Vlbh�ii; - Vindhyavasa ("vasin)45, a pupil of a SaIpkhya master, Var�agaI].ya; Vasubandhu wrote the Paramiirthasaptatikii against his SiirrtkhyaSiistra;

which occurs in the Vyiikhyayukti (Tg, mdo lviii, 138al-139b6) and in the commentary on the SiitriilClf11kiira (xii9) ascnbed to Vasubandhu (Chos 'byun,

1,

p. 26 n. 206): Cf. also Lindtner, "Marginalia to Dharmaklrt:i's Pram�aviniScaya I-II",

WZKS 28, 1984, p. 154: " ... the most influential Yogacara philosopher. before Dignaga,

viz.

Vasubandhu, the author of

the VilpSatika, the TriIpSika, Karmasiddhi, Abhidharmakosa and Vyiikhyayukt� etc. The latter text (which, incidentally, has

been unduly neglected by modem Western scholarship) deals with Siitra-exegesis and, inter alia, shows

him as

an

adherent of the Mahayana doctrine of two truths: salJ1VTti being the viSaya of laukikajiiana and paramartha being that . of lokoitarajiiana" . .. G. Muroji, The Tibetan text of the Kann a-siddhi.prakartllJa of Vasubandhu with reference to the Abhidht111l1 a-koia­ bh�a and the Pratitya-samutptida-vyiikhyd, Kyoto 1985.

41 M. Hatto� Digndga. On perception, p. 3 . •1

See Takakusu's translation in TP, 1904.

" According to Frauwallner he lived c. 430-490 A.D., cf. "Landmarks in the historr of Indian logic", WZKSO 5, 1961, p. 134f. ( =

Kl.

Schriften, p. 856f.) .

.. See below. " Frauwalhier, Geschichte der indischen Philosophie, vol. 1, p. 482'n. 212; ditto, "Die Erkenntrrislehte des klassischen S01J1khya-Systems", WZKSO 2, 1958, p. 33f., 49f. ( = io. Schtiften, p. 253f., 269f.).

13

-- Buddhamitra46, a teacher of Vasubandhu, advocated the doctrine of the impermanence of things (anityatii) due to their momentariness (lqal}ikatva); because of his advanced age, he was defeated in a dispute by Vindhyavasin; -- Manoratha, a master of the Law, contemporary with Vasubandhu. (b) Hsilan-tsang's records of his travels in India mention the following names'7: -- Manoratha, a teacher of Vasubandhu, master of the sastras, was defeated by a heretic in a dispute on the subject of fire and smoke; -- Sanghabhadra, a Vaibha�ika master from Kashmir, wrote a book against theAbhidhannakasa; Vasubandhu changed the title of the book "The sastra which destroys the Kosa like hail (karakii) " into the NyiiyiinusiiraSiistra; -- Vimalamitra", a Kashmirian Sarvastivada master, after Vasubandhu's death made a decision to refute the Great Vehicle and destroy Vasubandhu's fame. (c) In the Taisho edition of the Chinese Buddhist canon there are found the works of the following Chinese commentators of the Abhidhannakosa'9: -- P'ou-kouang, worked for 20 years with Hsilan-tsang, active in the 2nd half of the 7th century, compiled Taisho 1821; -- Fa-pao, a pupil of Hsilan-tsang, from 703 A.D. collaborated with Yi-tsing, wrote Taisho 1822; -- Yuan-houei, active 7 13-756 A.D., composed Taisho 1823. (d) K'ouei-k'i mentions ten commentators of the Vijiiaptimiitratiisiddhi50: Bandhusri, contemporary with Vasubandhu, first commentator of the Trirrz.§ikii ; -- Citrabhanu, contemporary with Vasubandhu; -- GUf,lamati, a master of Sthiramati, c. 480-540 A.D. (Frauwallner); -- Sthiramati, commented on theAbhidhannakosa and refuted the NyiiyiinusiiraSiistra of Sanghabhadra, contemporary of Dharmapala, resided in Valabhi, c. 510-570 A.D. (Frauwallner); -- S uddhacandra, contemporary with Sthiramati, commentator on Vasubandhu's Paramiirtha­ saptati (?); -- Dharmapala, teacher of Silabhadra whom Hsilan-tsang met when he was 106 years old (in 633 A.D.), resided in NaIanda, c. 530-56 1 A.D. (Frauwallner); -- Nanda, teacher of Jayasena whom HSilan-tsang met in Magadha (at the age of 100 in 633 A.D.), composed a commentary on the Yogiiciirabhumi; -- Vise�amitra, disciple of Dharmapala; -- Jinaputra, disciple of Dharmapala, wrote a commentary on the YogiiciirabhumiSiistra; -- Jiianacandra, disciple of Dharmapala. --

.. Cf. Repenoire du canon bouddhique sino-japonais (fascicule annexe du HobOgirin) , p. 238 sub Butsudamitta[raJ.

47 Beal, Si-yu-ki and Watters, On Yuan Chwang's Travels in India, cf. indices s.y. .. Cf. P.S. Jaini, Abhidharmadipa, Introduction, p. 132f. " Cf. Repenoire du canon bouddhique sino-japonais (fascicule annexe du HobOgirin), sub Fuko (P'ou kouang), Hobo (Fa pao), Enki (Yuan houei); LVP, Kosa, Introduction, p. xix; l'Inde Classique § 2136. 50

Levi, Materiaux pour I'€tude du systeme vijilaptimdtra, Paris 1932, pp. 18-22; Peri, "A propos de la date de

Vasubandhu", pp. 377-390; Takakusu, 'The Date of Vasubandhu", Indian Studies in Honour Ch.R. Lanman, p. 86ff.; LVP, Dynasties et Histoire de l'Inde depuis Kanishka, p. 347f.

14

(e) Bu-ston in his Chos 'byuh51 mentioned four direct disciples of Vasubandhu and each of them surpassed the master in a particular field: Sthiramati in Abhidharma, wrote the KarakiiSani commentary on the Abhidharmakosa; Dignaga in Logic, wrote the MannapradJpa commentary on the Kosa; Vimuktisena52 in Prajiiaparamita; GUl,laprabha53 in Vinaya. Sanghabhadra, a Kashmirian Vaibha�ika master, was a teacher of Vasubandhu. Sthiramati's pupil was Piirl,lavardhana (his two ,commentaries on the Kosa are preserved in the Tanjur). (1) Taranatha lists the following names54: ' -- Sanghabhadra (167; 93.6), Abhidharma master from Kashmir, teacher of Vasubam!hu; -- GUl,laprabha (179; 100. 10- 1 1), studied under mahiiciirya Vasubandhu; -- Sthiramati ( 179-181; 101. 19-21), "wrote glosses on most of the commentaries composed by iiciirya Vasubandhu and composed many commentaries on his original works. It is said that he also wrote a commentary on the Abhidhannakosa"; -- Dignaga (182; 102. 15-17), studied under Vasubandhu; -- Saqtghadasa (185; 105.1 1), disciple of Vasubandhu, Sarvastivada teacher; -- Dharmadasa (186; 105. 18-20), disciple of Asanga and Vasubandhu; -- Vimuktisena (188-9; 107.18-108.7), last disciple of Vasubandhu; -- Triratnadasa55 (190; 109.7-9), studied Abhidharma under Vasubandhu; -- GUl,lamati (212; 123. 16-18), wrote a gloss on the Abhidhannakosa56; -- Vasumitra (227; 134.2-4), composed a commentary on the Abhidhannakosa57; -- Vasubandhu (271), a master of the Abhidharma who had the same name as his great predecessor'; -- Vagisvarakirti (298; 180.6-1 1), criticized Vasubandhu's use of "corrupt" (apabhrarrz.§a) words.

, 51 Trans!. Obenni1ler, II, pp. 147-149 (Sthirarnati), 149-152 (Dignaga), 155-156 (Vimuktisena), 160-161 (GulJaprabha); cf. also my "Contnbution to the biography of Vasubandhu". 52 Cf.

D.S. Ruegg, "Arya and Bhadanta Vimuktisena on the Gotra-theory of the Prajiiapiiramita", WZKS 12-13, 1968-

69, pp. 303-317. 13

Cf. P.V. Bapat, "GUlJaprabha's Vinaya-siitra and his

Own

54

' In the following list the figures in brackets refer to the translation by Lama Chimpa and A. Chattopadhyaya and

Commentary on the Same", nABS 1:2, 1979, ppA7-51.

to Schiefner's edition respectively. " Cf. EJ. Thomas, ''The Works of AryaSiira, Triratnadasa and Dharrnikasubhiiti",Albwn Kern, pp. 405-408; G. Tucci, . JRAS 1947, p. 54. 56

Vide infra.

,., Vide infra.

" slob dpon Ba su bandhu ies bya ba [5J Dbyig gnen gyi mtshan can iig byon Ie I chos mnon pa'i sde snod man du gsuns so II [ed. Schiefner, p. 164.4-5]. Apparently it has escaped the notice of the scholars that Tiiranatha in his Rgya garchos 'byu;, mentioned another (third?) Vasubandhu, an active propagator of the Abhidharma. Due to a complicated question of Tiiranatha's chronology of the Pala kings (cf. Naudou, us bouddhisles koSmiriens, p. 26f.) it is not pOSSIble to ascertain his date with precision and only very tentatively we can put the presumable date of this Vasubandhu about the middle of the 9th century.

15

(2) Sanghabhadra Sanghabhadra (Tib. 'Dus bzan, Chin. Tchong-hien), an orthodox Kashmirian Vaibha�ika master, is an important figure in the biography of Vasubandhu. as well as in the history of the Sarvastivada Abhidharma exegesis. It is reported that after the compilation of the mnemonic verses (kiirikii) of the Abhidhannakosa, Sanghabhadra and his pupils induced Vasubandhu to prepare an autocommentary (bhi4Ya), in order to elucidate the laconic versified text. Then it appeared that Vasubandhu's opinions expressed in his commentary were sometimes in disagree­ ment with th� Vaibha�ika teachings and contained critical remarks from the standpoint of the Sautrantika doctrine. As it is known, Sanghabhadra wrote two treatises against theAbhidhanna kosa and both are extant in their Chinese translations": -- [Abhidhanna-JNyiiyiinusiiraSiistra, in 80 fascicles, 8 chapters, 1751 pages; it reproduces 600 karikas of the Abhidhannakosa; translated by Hstian-tsang in 653-654 A.D. (Taisho 1562 Nanjio 1265; Bagchi, Canon bowMhique, II, p. 492 No. 69); -- Abhidhannapi{akoprakaralJldiisanaSiistra, also known under the title SamayapradipikaSiistra, in 40 fascicles, 9 chapters, 749 pages; an abridgment of the preceding treatise, with an introductory chapter; translated by Hstian-tsang in 651-652 AD. (Taisho 1563 Nanjio 1266; Bagchi, Canon bouddhique, II, p. 492 No. 70). According to P'ou-kouang (Kiu chO louen si, Taisho 1821) and Fa-pao (Kiu chO louen chou, Taisho 1822), Sanghabhadra was a disciple of the arhat Skandhilaffi, a Kashmirian master of the Sarvastivada, and a contemporary of Vasubandhu61• Besides Sanghabhadra, the author of the Nyiiyiinusiira, the catalogue of the Taisho edition of the Chinese Buddhist canon mentions two other bearers of the same name62: -- Sanghabhadra, an Indian monk from Kashmir, a specialist in theAbhidhanna-vibh�ii, arrived in Tch'ang ngan in 383 AD., recited the Sanskrit text of the Vib�iiSiistra (Taisho 1547 Nanjio 1279; Bagchi, Canon bouddhique, I, p. 160 No. 1); -- Sanghabhadra, an Indian master, active in Canton in 488-489 AD., translated a version of the Pall Samantapiisiidikii into Chinese; his master, a direct depositary of the Vinaya of Upali, gave him the manuscript on which Sanghabhadra made the 975th dot63 on his arrival in China in 488 A.D. (Taisho 1462 Nanjio 1 125; Bagchi, Canon bouddhique, I, p. 408-409). It would be a tempting idea to identify Sanghabhadra, the famous opponent of Vasubandhu, with Sanghabhadra, the reciter of the Vib�iiSiistra from Kashmir, since both were specialists in the Abhidharma of the Kasmira Sarvastivada. It is also known that the latter Sanghabhadra collaborated on a translation into Chinese of Sangharak�a's Yogiiciirabhumi (Taisho 194) and Vasumitra's Sangiti§iistra64• However, it was pointed out by Demieville that ­

=

=

=

=

" Cf. Hirakawa, Index AKBh , Part I, Introduction, p. xxviff.; {'Inde Ctassique § 2136. Further see below the chapter on Vinitabhadra/SaIighabhadra. OJ

See below the chapter on the Abhidhann iivatiiro.

" Cf. K. Mirnaki, La refUtation bouddhique de ta pennanence des choses, p. 6: SaIighabhadra, the author of the

Nyiiyiinusiiro, lived 430-490 A.D. 62

Cf. Fascicule annexo du Hobogirin, p. 281 sub SogyabacchO and Sogyabatsudara.

" Cf. Lamotte, HBI, p. 15 and n. 3 . .. P. Demievme, "La Yogacarabhiimi de SaIigharak�", BEFEO XLIV:2, 1954, p. 364 and n. 8; 365 n. 4; 366 n. 5; E.

16

"Ie nom de Sailghabhadra etait a la mode chez les moines de cette epoque". Both Sanghabhadra, the author of the Nyiiyiinusiira, a:nd Sanghabhadra, the reciter of the Vzb�iiSiistra, were placed by Demieville in the fourth century6S, and it seems that they were two different persons.

(3) Dipakara An anonymous Sanskrit Abhidharma text, the Abhidhannadipa with its commentary Vzbh�iiprabhiivrtti66, is very important on account of its close relationship with theAbhidharma­ leosa. It reproduces most of its karikiis and develops many topics. The Dipakara several times criticizes Vasubandhu's opinions from th e standpoint of the Kasmira Vaibha�ika school. The Kosakiira is even attacked for his Mahayana leanings. According to Jaini, this fact argues the identity of Vasubandhu, the brother of Asailga, and Vasubandhu, the author of the Abhidhanna ­ leosaffl• In spite of some striking correspondences between the Dipakara and Sailghabhadra, their identity seems to be very unlikely, says Jaini; otherwise the Buddhist tradition would have known theAbhidhannadipa as a work of Sanghabhadra, and the text itself nowhere refers to any other treatise of Sanghabhadra. Vimalamitra or Isvarasena were further suggested as the potential authors of the Abhidharmadipa 68• The Abhidhannadipa may have contained very interesting and highly important discussions which could have thrown a new light on. the problem of two Vasubandhus. Unfortunately, a large portion of the first and the third chapters, where in the parallel passages of YaSomitra's Abhidhannakosa-vyiikhyii the references to the elder Vasubandhu are found, is lost. As far as I can see, the commentaries on the Knsa do not contribute anything of importance to the solution of the problem of the authorship of the Abhidhannadipa69• (4) Vrryasridatta The earliest mention of the ArthaviniScaya[-sutraj is found in Yasomit ra's Abhidhanna­ kosa-vyiikhyii70• Vrryasridatta, a monk from Niilandii, the author of the commentary Arthavi­ niScayasutra-nibandhana7l, was probably active in the second half of the 8th century, during the

Zilrcher, Buddhist Conquest of China, p. 202f.; cf. l'Inde Classique § 2134. " Op. cit., p . 364 n. 8 . . .. Ed. by P.S. Jaini, Patna 1977. ., "On the Theory of Two Vasubandhus", BSOAS XXI:1, 1958, pp. 48-53 . .. J.W. de Jong, "L'auteur de I'Abhidhannadipa", .. But vide

infra,

TP LIT,

1965-1966, pp. 305-307.

the notes relating to the problem of Vinitabhadra/Sailghabhadra.

70 Ed Wogihara, 1133-12.1; Levi, 12.8-10; Shastri, 15.21-22: siitraviJqii eva hyArthaviniJcayiidayo 'bhidhann asl1l1'jiiii ye", .dhannalalqtl{ll1l1' vtl1(lyate I etad iiJailkiinii>(1ty anham iihuiJ If. Cf. Peking Tg, Cu. 11a3-4: don dam par gtan la 'bebs pa la sogs pa mdo sde'i khyad par gail dag las chas kyi mtshan iiid btjod pa iiid chos milon pa tes bya'o If. Another reference in Hanbahdra' s Abhisamayiill1l1'kiinilokii (ed. WOgihara, 524.22). Tohoku 317: Don mam par iles pa ies bya ba'i chos Icyi mam grails 0rthaviniJcayaniima-dhann apmyiiya).

71 The ArthaviniJcaya-slltm and its Commentmy (Nibandhana), ed. N.H. Samtani, Patna 1971.

17

reign of Dharmapiila (770-810 A.D.)72. His Nibandhana is closely related to the subject matter ' of theAbhidharmakosa and Yasornitra's Vyiikhyii, however a final proof of its direct dependence on the latter is lacking". On the other hand, it has been proved that Vrryasridatta quotes large portions of Vasubandhu's Pratftyasamutpiida-vyiikhyii and GUItamati's tiM; thanks to the cross­ references it is possible to ascertain his adherence to the Kashmirian Vaibha�ikas74. 5, THE ABHIDHARMAKOSA AND THE SARVASTIVADA ABHIDHARMA

The whole body of the Sarvastivftda Abhidharma exists in Chinese translations75, and only a small portion of it is preserved in the Tibetan Buddhist canon76• Some Sanskrit fragments of the original texts were discovered in Central Asia77, A Sanskrit manuscript fragment of the Abhidharmakosa was identified in .the Turfan collection7'. The Abhidhannakosa of Vasubandhu, dated about the middle of the fifth century, is the highest achievement of Buddhist scholasticism of the Sarvastivftda school. It is a kind of Summa Buddhica, being a new and more systematic exposition of the teachings of the school. Vasubandhu declared openly his dependence on the earlier Abhidharma treatises79• He

72

Samtani, op. cit., p. 133ff.

73

See de Jong's review of Samtaill' s edition of the Arlhavinikaya in IIJ XVII:1-2, 1975, pp. 115-118.

74 The results of my recent research on the Protityasamutpiida-vyiikhyii will be published in a separate book. 75 Cf. Taisho catalogue; Nanjio's Catalogue; Bagchi, Canon bouddhique; [,Inde Classique §§ 2131-36; LVP, Kosa, Introduction, pp. xxix-xlli; LVP, "Documents d'Abhidharma"; Lamotte, HEI, pp. 197-210; Lamotte, Troite, vol III, pp. xix-xxii; Takakusu, "Abhidhanna Literature of the Sarvastivadins"; Bareau, "Les sectes bouddhiques du Petit Vehicule et leurs Abhidharmapi\aka"; Ene. of Buddhism 1:1, pp. 37-90; Frauwallner, "Abhidharma-Studien I-V"; Imanishi, Paiieavastukam & Paii eavastukavibhii.<;ii; ditto, Abhidhannaprokarl1{l abh�am; Willemen, Abhidhann ahrdaya, Introduction; Van den Broeck, Amrtarasa, Introduction; Dietz, Dhannaskandha.

76 Cf. LVP, Cosmologie, (contains an analysis of the Lokaprojiiiipti and the KiirrlIJaprojiiiipti); Dietz, Frogmente des Dhannaskandha, p. 9 n. 1: announcement of an edition of the Lokaprajiiapti SkI. fragm.; Catalogue of the Stog Pdlaee Kanjur (ed. Skorupski), No. 315: Kosalokaprojiiapti. n

Sander, "Buddhist Literature in Central Asia", Ene. of Buddhism IV:1, pp. 52-75; Lev;, "Note sur des manuscrits

sanscrits provenant de Bfuniyan et de Gilgit", JA 1932, pp. 1-13; Pauly, "Fragments sanskrits de Haute Asie", JA CCXLVIII, 1960, pp. 509-519; D emieville, "Un fragment Sanskrit de I'Abhidharma des Sarvastivadin", JA CCXLIX, 1961, pp. 461-475 (identified the Ms. Pelliot from Kuoa led. by Pauly, supra] as the fragment of the Jiiiinaprasthiina: "Ce manuscrit montra une fois de plus I'absurdite des douts eleves par Takakusu sur l'existence d'un original sanskrit de fAbhidharma des Sarvastivadin"); Dietz, Frogmente des Dhann askandha, with further bibliography. '" It corresponds to the AK II, karika 16-25; see Waldschmidt, Sanskrithandschriften aus den Turfanfunden, Teil I, No. 624, Tafel 33. 79 Cf. YaSomitra's Vyiikhya [Wogihara, 10.12; Levi, 10.20; Shastri, 13.25]: so 'bhidhann o Jiiiinaprasthiinadir etasya madiyasya siistrasyiiSrrryabhiitaf:z / tato hy iil;iid abhidhanniid etan madryill?' siisfratrl niriikmam /;. - Peking Tg, Cu. 9b34: yail ni ehos milon pa'i gtsug lag de las bdag eag gi bstan bcos 'di phyun bas ehos milOn pa Ye ses la Jug pa la sogs pa

18

specified his own doctrinal standpoint as for the most part being in an agreement with the Kasmira Vaibhii�ika school"'. Vasubandhu's commentator Yasomitra enumerated seven canonical treatises of the Sarvastivada Abhidharma and the names of their authors". Piin;tavardhana, another commentator on theAbhidharmakosa enumerated only six books of the Abhidharma82. The most important, the Jiiiinaprasthiina of K�tyayaniputra, was regarded as a "body" (sanra) and the other six books as its "feet" (piida)"". In the Abhidharmakosa and in Yasomitra's Vycikhyii some original passages from that celebrated treatise are preserved"'. The ' Jiiiinaprasthiina was translated into Chinese in 383 A.D. by SaIighadeva (Taisho 1543.) and in 657-660 A.D. by Hsiian-tsang (Taish0 1544)85. Three commentaries on it exist, called vib�ii­ s... According to the Buddhist tradition, the Mahiivib�ii or Great Commentary (Taisho 1545) was compiled by 500 arhats at a council held in Kashmir during the reign of Kani�ka. Modern research, however, has demonstrated that at least some parts of the Mahavibha�a are posterior to Kan4ka87• de bdag cag gi bstan bcos 'di'i gnas skabs Ita bu yin Ie If. •• AX: VIII.40a-b [Pradhan, 459.16-17; Shastri, 1186.11-12]: kiiimira-vaibh�ika-nitisiddha/;l priiyo mayaytlll' kathito 'bhidhann a/;l f. - Peking Tg, Nu. 93b1-2: bdag gis mnon pa'i chos 'di phaJ cher na I kha che bye brag smra ba'i tshul thub Mad If.

" Abhidhann akoSa-vyiikhyii [Wogihara, 11.25-29; Levi, 12.2-5; Shastri, 15.13-17]: friiyante hy abhidhann aiiis�iil!I kartiiral;l tadyathii, (1) liiiinaprasthiinasya, iilya-Kiilyayanipuf1"a/;l kartii, (2) PrakarrIlJ apiidasya, sthavira-Vasumif1"a/;l, (3) Vijiiiinakayasya, sthavira-Devaiann a, (4)Dhann askandhasya, iilya-Siiripuf1"a/;l, (5) Prajiiiiptiiiistrasya, iilya-Maudgalyayana/;l, (6) Dhiitukayasya, PiinJa/;I, (7) StlII'gitiparyayasya, Mah�thila/;l If. - Peking Tg, Cu. 10b7-11a2: chos mnon pa byed pa ni mah po zig yod par grogs te I 'di Ita ste I Ye ses la Jug pa ni 'phags pa Ka tya'i bus byas I Rab tu byed pa'i gii ni gnas brtan Dbyig gi bies gnen gyis byas I Rnam par ies pa'i tshogs ni btsun pa Lha skyid kyis byas I Chos kyi phuli po ni 'phags pa Maudgala gyi bus byas I Khams kyi tshogs ni Gah pos byas I Yah dag par 'gro ba'i mam graiIs ni Gsus [xyl.: gsulisJ po ches byas par grog go If. Cf. Lamotte, HEI, p. 203f.; Traite, III, p. xixf. 02 Peking Tg, Iu. 380b4-5 ( = Thu. 298a5-6): chos mlion pa'i bstan bcos ni dltlg ste I Ye fes la Jug pa dah I Rab tu byed pa'i rlcaiI pa dah. ! Rnam par ies pa'i tshogs dah / Yali 4ag par 'gro ba'i mam grails dah I Gdags Ixyl.: btags, !>dagsJ pa'i bs� bco� dah I Ch o; Tcji phuli po'o If. Also the Mahiivyutpatti (1415-1420) mentions only siX bo()ks, but in place of the Vijiiiinakaya has the Dhiitukaya (1418).

" The SUl11l1lary of contents in Takakusu, "Abhidharma Literature of the Sarviistivadins"; cf. Demievme, "Un fragment sanskrit de I'Abhidharma des Sarvastivadin", p. 463f. .. See Hirakawa, Inda AKBh I, s.v., and Wogihara's ed., index. Cf. also the quotations in the Abhidhannadipa. " Cf. Demievme, op. cit., p. 462; Lamotte, Traite, III, p. xxi. " Ibid. rr See Ziircher, 'The Yiieh-chih and Kani�a· in the Chinese sources", pp. 374-387: "B. Passages from Chinese Buddhist sources", and p. 387 where a fragment from Taisho 1545 is quoted: "The story is of no historical value whatsoever, but the first line ['Anciently, king �a of Gandhiira had an eunuch ... '] shows that at least this part of the Mahavibh� is of a later date than Kani�ka"; Lamotte, Traite, III, p .. xxi: "Nous savons seulement que la

19

­ It has been proved that Vasubandhu's Abhidhannakosa is directly dependent on the Abhidharmahrdaya (or Abhidhannasiira, Taisho 1550), an intermediary link between the Mahiivibh�ii and the Kosa itself. According to E. Frauwallner, in a series of systematic presentations of the Sarvastivada doctrine the oldest and, therefore, the basic work is the Abhidhannasiira ( Abhidhannahrdaya) of Dharmasri". There are certain grounds for believing that the Abhidharmasiira of DharmasrI is older than the Jiiiinaprasthiina'9. The latter is the latest among the canonical books of the Sarvastivada Abhidharma. Furthermore, DharmasrI should be regarded as a greater dogmatist of the Sarvastivada school than Vasubandhu; Vasubandhu's Abhidhannakosa is but a new elaboration of DharmasrI's treatise"". The problem of literary development of the Sarvastiviida Abhidharma has also been studied by the Japanese scholars. T. Sakurabe distinguished "three periods in the evolution of the works on Abhidharma, leading to the Kosa", and T. Kimura ''was the first to have established a definite link between the Kosa and the texts of Dharmasri and Dharmatriita"91. A Sanskrit stanza originating from Dharmasri's (Fa-cheng, Pelliotwrongly: Dharmatriita)Abhidhannahrdaya IV.32 is preserved both in the Abhidhannakosa and in Yasomitra's Vyiikhyii'n. In spite of its importance, Vasubandhu's Abhidhannakosa, this Treasury of Dogmatics, was translated into Chinese relatively late: the first translation was made by Paramiirtha in 563567 AD. (Taisho 1559), and the second by Hsiian-tsang in 651-654 AD. (Taisho 1558). There is also a separate translation of the kiirikiis alone by the latter translator (Taisho 1560). =

6. THE ABHIDHARMAKOSA IN TIBETAN

(1) The Abhidhannakosa of Vasubandhu belongs to the group of Sanskrit Buddhist texts which were translated into Tibetan in the first period of the propagation of the Buddha's doctrine in Tibet. In the oldest catalogue of the Buddhist canon in Tibet, the Lhan (d)kar rna (Ldan dkar rna ) catalogue"', which was compiled most probably in 800 or 812 AD."', during

Mahavibh� est posterieure Ii Kani�ka puisqu'elle relate l'historiette bien connue de l'eunuque et des taureaux (T 1545, k. 114, p. 593a) en 1a situant 'autrefois, au Gandhfu'a,

.. Die Entstehwig der buddhistischen Systeme, p.

SOliS

Kani$ka'" .

lOf.

.. Frauw.lIner, "Abhidhanna-Studien ill", WZKS 15, 1971, p. 90

72.

"Abhidhann.-Studien I", WZKS 7, 1963, p. 23ff.

" Quoted after Ch. Willemen, The Essence of Metaphysics. Abhidhann ahrdaya, Brussels, Introduction, p. xxii,

xx,

respectively. On Dhannasri see Willemen's excellent Introduction; on Dharmatrata see Lin Li-kouang, L'aide·memoire

de la vrai. loi, Paris 1949, Appendix ix, pp. 314-351.

92 P. Pelliot, "Les stances d'introduction de I'AbhidharmahrdaYaSastra de Dhannatrata", JA CCXVII, 1930, p. 272f. 93

Ed. by M. Lalou, "Les textes bouddhiques au temps du roi Khri-srOl\-lde-bcan", JA CCXLI:3, 1953, pp. 313-353;

it begins: pho bran stod" thah Idan dkar gyi bka' dah bstan bcos 'gyur ro cog gi dkar chag DpaJ brtsegs dah Nam mkha'i

sfiili pos mdzad do II ("Index of translations of the Agamas and Sastras, [preserved] in the palace Ldan dkar in Stod thai!, compiled by Dpal brtsegs .nd Nam mkha'i siilil po"). The fonn Lhan dkar ma is attested by Ms. Pelliot tibetain 1085, and the fonn Lhan kar rna is confInned by a Ms. from Tun-huang (cf. Steinkellner, Nachweis der Wiede18eburt.

20

the reign of the king Khri srOIi Ide btsan (754-797 A.D.), theAbhidhannako§a-lairilai and bhiiD'a are mentioned among the treatises belonging to the Irmayana·'. The Indian paJ;.lgita Jinamitra and the Tibetan lotsava Dpal brtsegs, the translators of the Abhidhannako§a96, were active at the end of the eighth and the beginning of the ninth centuries, in the period of the so-called "great revision" of the texts of the Tibetan Buddhist canon. AcCordingly, the date of the Tibetan translation of the Abhidhannako.§a must be put at about 800 A.D.!I1 It was pointed out by N. Simonsson that the method of translation of the Abhidhannako§a is characteristic of "logically constructed" texts, especially philosophical texts, and in general, of all systematic texts. in which slavish literality of transration is regarded as a guarantee of their precision and accuracy". In the Chos 'byun of Bu-ston there are interesting remarks on a history of translations of the Buddhist Sanskrit texts and on special rules provided in order to secure the accuracy of a translation". According to Bu-ston it was paI].gita Smrti who introduced a study of the Abhidharmako§a in Tibet1°O. ilion nu dpal in his Deb ther snon po compiled in 1476-78 A.D.

Prajiiiisenas 'Jig rten pha rol sgrub pa. Ein friiher tibetischer Traktat aus Dunhuang, Part II, note 31; see also Steinleellner, "Paralokasiddhi-Texts", p. 221 n. 7, and Tucci, Minor Buddhist Texts, II, p. 46 n. 1). • Prof. Ruegg suggests ston as the correct reading. " Frauwallner, "Zu den buddhistischen Texten in der Zeit Khri-sron-Ide-btsan's', W'ZJ.{S 1, 1957, p. 102f. ( =

Kl.

Schriften, p. 714f.) fixed the date of the catalogue at 800 A.D. but later, in his "Landmarks in the History of Indian Logic", W'ZJ.{S 5, 1961, p. 146 ( = Kl. Schriften, p. 868) wrote that "the list itself dates from the year 800 or 812 A.D.' and referred to a "substantial excursus" of G. Tucci, Minor Buddhist Texts, Part II, p. 46 n. 1 where the year 812 A.D. was proposed. Bu-ston, Chos 'byun, (trans!. Obenniller, II, p. 191 [with minor changes]): "In the year of the dragon the teachers residing in the palace of Ldan-dkar, the translators Ban-de Dpal-brtsegs, the Ban-de Nagendra (Klu'i-dban-po) and others made a list of the titles of the sacred texts that were translated in Tibet, as well as the number of division (bam-po) and Slokas contained in them, and wrote all this down in the form of a catalogue". Cf. also Tucci, Tombs of the Tibetan Kings, p. 14ff. and Minor Buddhist Texts, II, p. 50 . ., Chapter xxvi (theg pa chun nu'i bstan bcos), Nos. 686-687 (ed. Lalou) . 'dzi [sic] na tstsha bti ba ilde dpal brtiegs Io/i bsgyur em iuS te gtan La phab pa'o If. The Kashmirian

.. The colophon reads (peking Tg, Gu. 27b5-6 (lairikal, Nu. 109a7-8 (bhlilYa)]: rgya gar gyi mkhan po

mi

Ira

dan / iu chen gyi

10

master Jinamitra was a disciple of PiiIJ).avardhana, a conunentator on the Abhidhann akoia, and Dpal brtsegs was one of the compilers of the Lhan lear ma catalogue as well as the Mahiivyulpatti; both were efficient translators. See Naudou,

Les bouddhistes kaimiriens, p. 86f., 89; Simonsson, Indo-tibetische Studien, p. 210, 217. ., There may have been another translation which was not later corrected according to revised rules of translation vide infra, the chapter on Vinitabhadra/Sailghabhadra where a number of lexical samples was collected from Ms. 590 of the Stein Collection from Tun-huang. " Op. cit., p. 234 . .. Trans!. by Obenniller, II, p. 196f. 100

Ibid., p. 214f. When the pBl).c)ita Smrti came to Tibet he did not know the Tibetan language; he studied the

Doctrine with Dpyal se rtsab Bsod nams rgyal mtshan in Sman luJi.s, then went to Khams and "established the school , of the Abhidhannakosa at Dan-Ion-than ( Dan klon than)".

21

queries the date of Smrti. He places his Tantra translations (the "New" Tantras) slightly before those made by Rin chen bzan po (958-1055 A.D.) and says that 'Brom ston (1005-1064 A.D.) learnt the art of translation from SmrtilO!. If so this points to the first half of the 1 1th century as a period of Smrti's activity in Tibet. Elsewhere ilion nu dpal remarks that the translation of theAbhidhannakosa and its numerous commentaries is connected with Bo don monastery but the lineage of its transmission is not preserved!02. (2) Several Indian commentaries on the Abhidhannakosa are preserved in Tibetan translation in the Tanjur. Before we start our pre� entation of the individual· studies of the Abhidhannakosa commentaries in the order in which they are found in the Peking and/or Derge Tanjur, other Tibetan sources will be studied briefly. This is to show the texts as they were incorporated into the Tanjur in the historical perspective. (a) The Lhan kar rna catalogue (ed. Lalou) enumerates together with the Abhidhannakosa­ kiirikii (No. 686) and bhii0'a (No. 687) the following texts: No. 688: a commentary on the Abhidhannakosa-bhii0'a by iiciirya Yasomitra, No. 689: a commentary on the Kosa by iiciirya Sanghabhadra!03, No. 690: a commentary on the Kosa by iiciirya S iintisoma!04, No. 691: a commentary on the Kosa, anonymouslOS, 1 01 The Blue Annals, transl. Roerich, p. 204f. On Rin chen bZafl po see Tucci, Rin e'en bzail po e fa rinas_cita del buddhismo nel Tibet intomo al mille, Roma 1933; Naudou, op. cit., chapter 5. 102 The Blue Annals, p. 346. The monastery was described by Tucci, ' Tibetan Painted Scrolls, p. 205: 'The monastery of Po ton belongs to the sect of the same name. Its monks are ser khyim pa, viz. they marry. The temple is much

damaged and of the ancient decoration very little is left. On the great road between Lha rtse and Tashilunpo, in the environs of Zabs dge Idiit, many times disputed on account of its position, it was exposed to frequent spoliations and ruin. There are two temples. The larger one, with traces of paintings of an excellent epoch, is contemporary with those of the Sku 'bum of Gyantse, although some are perhaps superior in refmed execution and grandeur of composition. The frescoes represent the hundred moments of the Buddha's life and the Sails rgyas rabs bdun. The other temple is now transformed in Mgon khail. In the atrium are dimly to be seen traces of badly damaged paintings, representing Sa skya pa lamas, like Khun dga' siilil po". Another description provided with important notes in Ferrari, Mk'yen bl1se's Guide

to the Holy Places of Central Tibet, p. 67: "At about one day's march from P'un ts'ogs gliit there is the temple of Bo don e, founded by the dge ba'i bSes· giien (kalyiil;Ia-mitra) Mudra c'en po and residence of dPan Lotsawa e'en po and his nephew, and of the Bo don Pal). c'en etc. But today it is occupied by married monks (ser k'yin)". Dpail lotsava Blo gros brtan pa (1276-1342 A.D.) is mentioned in the colophon of Sthiramati's Tattviirtha-fikii, vide infra. Bo don Pal). chen

Phyogs las roam rgyal ( 1306-1386 A.D.), the author of the voluminous Encyclopedia Tibetica (ed. New Delhi 1969-1975, in 137 vols.), wrote an exegesis of the Abhidhann akosa (vol. 19) , but cf. Ferrari, op. cit., p. 156 n. 571.

103 A commentary ascribed to Vinltabhadra alias Sanghabhadra will be discussed in detail later. 104 Mdzod kyi 'grel pa (*Kosa-vrtti) by Santisoma is lost. Taranatha (History of Buddhism in India, transl. Lama Chimpa, A. Chattopadhyaya, p. 252; ed. Schiefner, p. 152.2-4) mentioned 5antisoma as a follower of the Vijiianavada; at that time lived the siddha-nija Sahajalalita, the acarya Vinltadeva of Nalanda, a Sautrantika (?) 5ubhamitra and the acarya 5Uapiilita, a disciple of Dharmottara. One cannot greatly rely on this, but taking all the data into consideration (Vinltadeva, c. 710-770 A.D.; Dharmottara, c. 750-810 A.D.), the approximate date of Santisoma may be put in the 8th century.

'" Mdzod kyi thabs bsdus pa (*Ko§opiiyasaJ?tgroha) bears a title similar to 5amathadeva's Upiiyikii-fikii, but the latter

22

No. 692: Abhidharmiivattira, anonymousU)6, No. 693: Abhidhanniivatiira-t1Kii, anonymous101, No. 694: its [commentary] Siirasamuccaya, anonymous. (b) The fourth part of the Chos 'byun of Bu-ston (compiled in 1322 AD.) contains a systematic catalogue of the texts translated into the Tibetan'08. The Abhidharmakosa and its commentar­ ies are mentioned as follows: No. 486: Abhidharmakosa-kiirikii , No. 487: Vasubandhu's bhtifya on the preceding, No. 488: Yasomitra's Sphutiirthii commentary, No. 489: Lalq�nusiiriT;li-commentary by PiirJ:1avardhana, No. 490: Upiiyikii-commentary by S amathadeva, No. 491: SutriinurUpii-commentary by SaJighabhadra, No. 492: Marmapradpa-commentary by Dignaga. The following four texts have been not found by Bu-ston: No. 493 : S antisoma's Kosa-v{tti , No. 494: *Kosopayasaf?'lgraha, No. 495: Abhidharmiivatiira, No. 496: a tikii on the preceding. (c) Bu-ston compiled the catalogue of the Tanjur during his stay in Za-Iu monastery from 1320 AD. It is reported that his edition of the Tanjur was made under the auspices of Kun dga' don grub (1268-1328 AD.). The index was completed in 1335 AD., after the work of collation was finishedlO'. The Za-Iu Tanjur cataloguellO enumerates the Abhidharmakosa and the related texts almost in the same order as they are found in the Peking and Derge Tanjur and therefore reflects a more advanced stage of the compilation of the Tibetan Buddhist canon than the index attached to the Chos 'byun (vide supra). [fo!. 608.2] vols. Gu-Nu: - Abhidharmakosa-kiirikii, A Vasubandhu, T. Jinamitra, Dpal brtsegs rak�ita;

was translated into the Tibetan later and its size is much larger.

'''' This text will be discussed later. '07

Nos. 693-694 seem to refer to one text only, i.e. the ·Siirasamuccaya-abhidharmiivatiira-pka which is preserved

in the Tanjur, see helow. '10

Ed. S. Nishioka, "Index to the catalogue section of Bu-ston's History of Buddhism", Annual Report of the Instit
for the Study of Culture Exchange, Part 2, No. 5, 1981, p. 49. 109

Tucci, "Tibetan Notes", HJAS 12:3-4, 1949, p. 478ff; Ruegg, The Life of Bu stan Rin po che, p. 30 n. 2; Vogel,

Vdgbhata's �tiiiIgahrdayasturlhitd, Introduction, p. 25 and n. 3. 110

Bstan 'gyur f:;i dkar chag Yid btin nor bu dbtvi gi rgyaJ po'i phren ba, ed. by Lokesh Chandra in: Collected Woms

of Bu-ston, Part 26 IA, fol. 401-644.

23

- Abhidharmakoia-bhii!Ja, in 30 bam-po, A. Vasubandhu, T. Jinamitra, Dpal brtsegs rak�ita; - SutriinurUpii Abhidharmakoia-v[ffi, A Sanghabhadra, T. unknown; [fol. 608.4] vols. Cu-Chu: - Sphutiirthii Abhidharmakoia-*pkii [sic xyl.], in 18,000 sloka and 60 bam-po, A. Rajaputra Yasomitra, T. VisuddhasiIp.ha, Dpal [brtsegs]; [foL 608.5] vols. Ju-Nu: - LalqmJiinusiiri1.zf Abhidharmakoia-pkii (major), A pjjnpvardhana, T. Kanakavarman, Pa tshab Ni rna grags; [foL 608.6-609.3] vols. Tu-Thu: - Upiiyikii Abhidharmakoia-pkii , A S amathadeva, from Nepal, T. Jayasri, Khams pa S es rab 'od; - Marmapradipa Abhidharmakoia-v[ffi, A Dignaga, T. Rnal (xyI. : mam) 'byor zla ba, 'Jam dpal gion nu; - Lalqal}iinusiiril}i Abhidharmakoia-pkii (minor), A. pjjnpvardhana, T. Kanakavarman, [pa tshab] Ni rna grags; - Abhidharmiivatiira-siirasamuccaya, A. unknown, T. Jinamitra, Danasila, Ye ses sde; - Abhidharmiivatiira-prakaral}a, A unknown, T. unknown.

(d) Klon rdol bla rna Nag dban blo bzan (1719-1805 AD.), a well-known author of a number of valuable works on Tibetan history, religion and literature, in his Explanatory Netes on the Abhidharmakoia1l1 gave the following list (under the heading "Lower Abhidharma"): 1. Koia-mUla ( Abhidharmakoia-kiirikii) , in 2 bam-po, A Vasubandhu; 2. Abhidharmakoia-bh�a, in 30 bam-po, A. Vasubandhu; 3. Koia-v[ffi, in 60 bam-po, A. Rajaputra Yasomitra; =

III

Nan rig pa milan pa'i sde snod kyi don bsdu ba'i miil gi grohs, ed. by Lokesh Chandra in: Collected Wooo of

Longdol Lama, vol. 13 PA, fol. 585-659. Cf. G. Smith, Univmity of Washington. Tibetan Catalogue, Part I, p. 3lf.; J. Bacot, 'Titres et colophons d'ouvrages non canoniques tibetains", BEFEO XLIV:2, 1954, pp. 300-304 (Klon rdol gsun 'bum gyi dkar chag); M. Taube, Tibetische Handschriften und Blockdrucke, Teil 4, No. 2664; M. Mejor, "Klon fdol bla rna's Explanatory Notes on the Abhidharmakosa", Tibetan Studies, Miinchen 1988, pp. 249-252.

24

4. Kosa-v[1ti, .in 60 barn-po, A Piir�avardhana, from Kiisrnir; 5. lv[annapradipa Kosa-v[1ti, A Digniiga, one of the four disciples of Vasubandhu; 6. KarakiiSani Kosa-v[1ti, A Sthiramati, a diSciple of Vasubandhu; 7. Kosa-v[1ti, A Sanghabhadra; 8. Kosa-v[1ti, A S amatha[-deva], from Nepal. After these Klon rdol bla rna enumerates several Tibetan commentaries on theAbhidhannakosa [fol. 595.4-5] : U[Among the Tibetan commentaries there is a Kosa-yttti [*Abhidhanna-]ala1!lkiira by Mchirns 'jams dbyans of Snar thanll2, a pupil of Mchirns thams cad rnkhyen pa, a Kosa-vrtti *Molqa­ miirgaazpaka by p� chen Dge 'dun grub113, and many Kosa-cornrnentaries by Drun chen Dnos grub pall4, Pa� chen Bsod narns grags pailS, Khri chen Dkon mchog chos 'phel" 6, Rgyal ba lila pa117, 'Jam dbyails bZad pam, and othersll9U.

112 Sendai No. 6854; Smith, Tibetan Catalogue, I, p. 17 (No. ReelA2-4): became abbot of Snar thaiJ. in 1251, d. 1289 A.D.; Golzio, Regents, p. 103 (lived 1250-1288 AD.). '" Sendai No. 5525 (compiled by Blo bzaiJ. bskal bzaiJ. rgya mtsho, i.e. Dalai Lama VIT, 1708-1757 AD., based on teachings of Dge 'dun grub pa, Dalai Lama I, 1391-1475 A.D.); Golzio, Regents, p. 106.

114 Sendai No. 6852 (Dnos grub rgya mtshl'). 1 15 Vostrikov, Tibetskqya istariceskaya literatura, p. 105 (1478-1554 A.D.); Golzio, Regents, p. 105 (abbot of Dga' ldan 1529-1536 AD., abbot of 'Bras spuils [Golzio: spruils]).

11. Golzio, Regents, p. 108 (abbot of Dga' ldan 1626-1637 AD.). 111 Sendai No. 5650; Golzio, Regents, p. 106 (Nag dbaiJ. blo bzaiJ. rgya mtsho, Dalai Lama V, 1617-1682 AD.). 11. Lokesh Chandra, "The llie and Works of Hjam-dbyaiJ.s-bzhad-pa", CAJ VIT:4, 1962, pp. 264-269 (1648-1721 AD.); Lokesh Chandra, MlITL I, p. 45 No. 28; Vostrikov, Tib. istar. liter. , p. 108.

11. Cf. Lokesh Chandra, MlITL I, p. 25ff. (No. 14), 33ff. (No. 24), 35f. (No. 25), 49ff. (No. 29); II, p. 12f. (No. 42), 23f. (No. 52), 47ff. (No. 73); Bacot, 'Titres et colophons", p. 31H. (No. 49). The Vai4iitya g.ya sel of Sde srid Sails rgyas rgya mtsho (compiled between 1687-1693 AD.) Jists the Indian commentators and briefly refers to the Tibetan tradition led. T. Tsepal Taikhang, New Delhi 1971, voL II, fol. 959.6ff.]. A comprehensive list of all Tibetan commentaries on the Kasa is a desideratum.

25

II COMMENTARIES ON THE ABHIDHARMAKOSA FROM THE TANJUR

1. VINiTABHADRA'S/SAl'�"GHABHADRA'S SUTRANuRUPA

This commentary poses a serious problem in identifying its author. The modern scholars tried to identify our commentary (peking 5592 Tohoku 4091) in various ways""'. The Tibetan Buddhist tradition, beginning with the Lhan kar rna catalogue, claims the existence of a commentary on the Kosa written by Sanghabhadra ('Dus bzan). Both Derge and Cone Tanjur have 'Dus bzan as the author of our commentary; it is only Peking Tanjur that introduces a certain iiciirya Vinitabhadra (slob dpon 'Dul bzan) as the author of the text. strangely enough, the incipit reads: "Here begins the Sutrtinurnpti commentary on the Abhidharmakosa composed by Sanghabhadra" 121. As far as I can see this particular confusion of two ll.ames, 'nus bzah/Sailghabhadra and 'nul bzahjVmztabhadra, is a peculiar feature of the Peking Tanjur. The Derge/Cone Tanjur always has 'Dus bzan. To further complicate matters two other commentar­ ies on the Abhidharmakosa, viz. Sthiramati's Tattviirtha and Piil1].avardhana's Lalqtll)ini ustiri1)z minor, mention the name of 'Dul bzan/Vinitabhadra. The occurence of this name cannot a priori be treated as a mere misprint in the Peking Tanjur because in Sthiramati's commentary both teachers, 'Dul bzan/Vinitabhadra and 'Dus bzan/ Saiighabhadra, are mentioned, and in one instance follow one another. Should we then accept the existence ·of a certain master Vinitabhadra, otherwise unknown? A comparative analysis of the relevant texts must be undertaken before we are in a position. to answer this question. =

1'" Cf. A. Bareau, ''Les sectes bouddhlques du Petit Yehicule et leurs Abhidhannapitaka", p. 136: "n faut citer l'abondante litterature qu'elle [i.e. Abhidhann akofa MM.] a provoquee et qui nous a ete conservee en grand partie: commentaires de GUJ;lamati, de Sthiramati, de PiiJ;lyavardhana [sic], de YaSomitra (T.S. 1561; Mdo LXV ·11 LXX), sans oublier Ie vaste Nyayiinusara de Sanghabhadra qui la critique vivement (T.s. 1562 et 1563; Mdo LXIY,2)". [Note that Taisho 1561 Sthiramati's Tattviirtha; Mdo LXY-LXVI YaSomitra's Sphu{iirtha, LXVll-LXVIII PiiTJ;lavardhana's La/qaIJiinusari{li, LXIX-LXX Samathadeva's Upiiyikri, LXX Dignaga's Mann apradipa ; Taisho 1562 NyiiyiinusiirrJ , Taisho 1563 Samayapradipika, Mdo LXIY,2 Peking 5592/Tohoku 4091]. But cf. Bareau, Derindische Buddhismus, p. 87: "Der Kommentar von YaSomitra (7. Jahrhundert) ist in Sanskrit erhalten; Fragmente der Kommentare von GUJ;Iamati (Anfang des 6. Jahrhunderts 1) und von Sthiramati (6. Jahrhundert) sind ins Chinesische iibersetzt worden. Die Kommentare von Yinltabhadra, YaSomitra, Piql;tavardhana, Samathadeva, Digniiga, Sthiramati und zwei anonymen Yerfassern sind ins Tibetische iibersetzt worden". Banerjee, Sarviistivrida literature, pc 72, identified the Abhidhanna­ samayapradipika (Taisho 1563) with our text from the Tanjur (peking 5592/Tohoku 4091). Chaudhuri, Ana/ytica/ Study of the Abhidhannakofa, p. 8, identified the author of the SiitriinuriipaAbhidhannakofa-vrtti (peking 5592/Tohoku 4091) with Yinltadeva [sic]. Yidyabhusana, Histol)' ofIndian Logic, p. 248: "Sali.ghabhadra's Nyiiyiinusara-Siistra (thiS work exists in Chinese and Tibetan, vide Bunyiu Nanjio's Catalogue of the Chinese Tripitaka, No. 1265), otherwiSe called Kosa­ karaka-Siistra, composed about489 A.D. (vide Nanjio, App. n, No. 95; vide also Hwen-thsang's Travel in Bears Buddhist Records of the Western World, voL 1, 193-194), is a most learned work of the Yaibha!;ika philosophy". [Note that Nanjio's Appendix ii.95 refers to a translator who must have been a different person from the opponent of Yasubandhu.] Nakamura, "Survey of Conservative Buddhism", p. 97, infonns that the Abhidhann akofa-samayapradipih; of Sangha­ bhadra exists also in Tibetan translation, "but the Tibetan version looks like a commentaty on the AbhidharmakoSa, its contents being fairly different from the Chinese version" [sic]. Finally, the author of the entty Abhidhann a-samaya­ pradipikri-fristra in the Encyclopedia of Buddhism, 1:1, p. 85, identifies this text with our commentaty from the Tanjur. -

=

=

=

=

=

=

=

=

..

121

-

.

-

Peking Tg, Nu. 109a8: chos nuion pa mdzod Icyi 'grel pa mdo daiJ mthun pa ies bya ba slob dpon 'Dus bzaiJ gis

mdzad pa btugs so II .

29

A. Sthiramati's Tattviirtha, chapter I, contains, among a great number of passages with the opinions of Sanghabhadra/'Dus bzan, five fragments ascribed to Vinitabhadra/'Dus bzan:

Fragm. 1: This is a simple gloss on AK I.2b (tatpriiptaye yiipi ca yac ca siistram), ascribed to bhadanta VinItabhadra'22. Fragm. 2: This is a gloss on the introduction to AK I.3 (kim arthaf(l punar abhidharmopadesal} kena ciiyaf(l prathamata upa�tal}): "Vinitabhadra says: « Since it was said [by the Buddha] : 'Do rely on the Law (dharma), not on person (pudgala)', there is no need of [the author's] resolve upon [doing] this [treatise]». If so, [Vasubandhu's] words 'who has taught this [Abhidharma teaching] for the first time' refer to *pudgaZa-pramiilJaka, and therefore also [the expression] '[it was] said [by the Teacher], is due to a nonrecognition of the sense of the Sutra,,'23. Vinitabhadra's words seem to be a paraphrase of the Buddha's words in the KiiSyapaparivarta: "Kasyapa, do rely on voidness (sunyatii), not on person (pudgaZa)"'24. Fragm. 3 : This is the most interesting gloss (on AK I.10b: sabdas tv �tavidhal}) since both names, 'Dul bzan/Vinitabhadra and 'Dus bzan/Sanghabhadra, follow one another. Surprisingly enough, their opinions seem to speak in favour of the opinion expressed by "the others" (apare) and quoted in the Abhidharmakosa, which is in disagreement with the School, i.e. with the Vibh�ii125. "« Two tetrads of the great elements are mutually co-conditioned», says flcarya VinItabhadra. Therefore there would be a difference in their genus and their collision. ( . ) « The atoms created by two tetrads of the great elements are external; in this case [the expression] 'upiittiinupiitta­ mahiibhuta-hetukii ' is not contradictory» , says acarya Sanghabhadra""". ..

• 22 Peking Tg, To. 24a3: btsun pa 'Dul bzan na re I gan ies bya bas Jig !fen pa'i bsgom pa las byuiJ ba dan Iyan ies bya bas bsam pa las byuiJ ba dan I [4] dan ies bya bas thos pa las byuiJ ba dan I bstan bcos gan dan ies pa 'dir dan gi sgras skye bas thob pa bzwi ;'0 ies zer IV 1/ .23 Peking Tg, To. 25b8: slob dpon 'Dul bzan na re I dlOS la !fon par (xyl.: ba'i) bya'i gan zag la Ina yin no ies gsuns pa'i phyir 'di btsaJ par bya ba rna yin [26a1] no ie na I gan zag "tshad (xyl.: chad) mar byed pa'i dban du byas nas 'di dan po fiid du sus bstan ies de skad bsiiad de I de Itar gsuiJs so ies bya ba de yan mdo'i don yoils su rna ses pas so 1/ •

tshad mar byed

=

pramiil;Jaka (Index AKBh ill .221) .

•24 KiiSyapaparivarta 64: siinyatii* KiiSyapa prolisaratha rnii pudgalam Istan pa iiid la !fon par bya'i gan zag la rna yin no 1/ •

Cf. BHSD sub prolisarali .

•25 LVP, Kosa, I, p. 17, refers to the Vihhiieii 127,8. Cf. the next fragment below. • 26 Peking Tg, To. 55a4: 'byuiJ ba bii tshan (xyl.: chen) gilis ni phan tshun Ihan cig pa'! rgyu iiid do ies slob dpon 'Dul bzan zer ro II de las cir 'gyur na de'i rigs dan tha dad [5] par 'gyur iiil de las kyan thogs pa iiid du 'gyur IV II nanu ca prthivi dhiitor bhii tu nii vi ni bhiigo na ca na sa pra Ii gha tva mi Ii ci ntya me tat I "'byuiJ ba bii tshan (xyl.: chen) giliS" kyis splUl pa'i rout phra rob ni phyi ste I de la zin [6] pa dan rna zin pa'i 'byuiJ ba'i rgyu las byuiJ ba ies bya ba rni 'gal 10 ies slob dpon 'D';" bzan zer IV II

30

Fragm. 4: This is a gloss on AK I.28a-b (chidram tikiiSadhitv i iikhyam iilokatamasi kila). First is quoted the opinion of the Sautrantikas who do not regard the iikiiJa-dhiitu as a real entity (dravyasat)lZ1. Next comes the opinion of Vinitabhadra which is in agreement with the Vib�ii: "Vinitabhadra says: «The iikiiJa-dhiitu is different from the iikiiJa (asal'[lSlqta). The Bhagavat said: 'AkiiJa is immaterial, invisible, non-resistant. . Why it is not based on [another element]? Yet, in the light (iiloke) it is discerned'. On account of these words it is said that both 'being in' and 'different' are very distinct»"I28. Vinitabhadra's opinion has a close parallel in the A bhidharmat!ipa-vrtti I. 14c-d, 15129• ,PurI;lavardhana's larger commentary confirms that Vinitabhadra's opinion is the opinion of a Vaibhii�ika: a Sutra quotation provided by PUfI;lavardhana comes from the Dhannaskandha and has its parallel in the Pitputrasamiigamasutra and in the Pili Vzbhaliga13O•

'byuiJ ba bii /shan gfiis bhiitaea�kadvaya; Index AKBh IIU91 has: 'byuiJ ba bii po gian bhiita-ea�kiintara and 'byuiJ ba 'bii /shan la brten pa bhiita-e�kiiSritatva, whereas the expression 'byuiJ ba bii /shan gfiis is found in the Kosa Gu. 32bl ( Pradhan, 7.1; Shastri, 34.6), and with YaSomitra (Levi, 28.1; Shastri, 34.29). Cf.ArthaviniSeayani­ bandhana (96.1-2) and above all YaSomitra (Levi, 27.5ff.; Shastri, 34.9ff.; Pek. Tg, Cu. 26b7ff.).

• . •

=

=

=

=

177 Peking Tg, To. 102a4: mdo sde pa mums na '" I bstan beos las ni nam mkha'i khams kyi [5J mtshan ;iid nam mkha' las tha dad pa yod pa ma yin iin I nam mkha'i khums dan nam kha'i yan rdzas ma yin pa'i phyir nam mkha'i khums rrizas su med do zes zer ro I/, (''The Sautriintikas say: «According to the Scripture there is no difference between the characteristic of the iikiiSa-dhiitu and the iikiiSa-dhatu, and because of 'nonsubstantiality' (atfravyatva) of the iikiiSa­ dhiitu as well as the iikiiSa, the akiiSa-dhatu does not exist 'substantially' (dravyatas)>>".) I'" Peking Tg, To. 102a5: slob dpon 'nul bzan na '" I nam mkha'i [6J khams ni nam mkha' las tha dad par yod de I beom Idan 'das kyis 'di skad du I nam mkha' ni gzugs med pa bstan du med pa thogs pa med pa ste I de ni ci la yan brten par mi 'gyur ro II 'on kyan "Jig [7J rten na" nam mkhar gdags pa yod do ies gsuns pa'i phyir yod pa liid dan tha dad pa gfiis ka lin tu gsal bar gsuiJs so ies zer ro II • . • Jig rten na = loke, seems to be a mistake for iiloke, cf.Abhidhannadipa 1.15 red. Jaini, 13.10-11]: iikiiSam iiloke sati prajiiiiyate /.

129 Ed. Jaini, p. 13f. Cf. LVP, Kola, I, p. 50 n. 1. 130 Peking Tg, Ju. 67a5: bye brag tu smra ba mums na ' ", I nam mkha'i khams ni nam mkha' las tha dad do-ie'o II gan las Ie na I nan [6J dan phyi'i nam mkha' gsuiJ ba'i phyir te I mdo las I "nan gi nam mkha'i khams" gan ie na I Ius 'di'i nan gi nam mkha' gan zig "nan la brten pa" nam mkhar gyur pa I 'mi gsal ba' I dkhrag dan pags pas" 'ma khyab pa' ste I [7J dper na mig gi bu ga Ita bu ies bya ba la sogs pa dan I phyi rol gyi nam mkha" gan ze na I phyi'i nam mkha' gan zig nam mkhar gyur pa I mi gsal ba I gzugs su gyur pas ma khyab pas bya ba la sogs pa gsuns [8J so II • .•

b

• b

nan gi nam mkha'i khums nan la brten pa

, . , mi gsal ba d • d

, . •

=

=

f ·r phyi

iidhyiitmika iikiiSadhiitu/:l;

asphu(a;

pags pa dan sa dan khrag ma khyab pa

=

''adhyiitmam iiSritam;

=

=

tvan-miiJrtsa-Jo{lita, Index AKBh

IIU64;

'asphartl{la, cf. BHSD sub sphartl{la;

rol gyi nam mkha'(i khams) = biihya iikiiSadhiitu/:l. Cf. Pitrputrasamiigamasutra [Silqiisamueeaya, p. 2493-9): iidhyiitmika iikiiSadhiitu/:l katama/;l I yat!diieid asmin kiiye 'dhyiitmturf praJyiitmam upagatam upiiltam iikiiSagatam ihiibhyantarasturfkhyiibhutam asphu{am asphartl{liyturf tvanmiinsa­

sO{litena I tat puna/;l katamat I yad asmin kiiye ealqu/;l SUfiram iii vii yiivanmukhturf vii mukhadviiraJp vii kQ{l!hturf vii kQ{l(hanii4yii vii yena eiibhyavaharati yatra eiivati�!hate I yena eiisyiiSitapitakhiiditiisviiditam adhastiit pragharali I ayam

31

Fragm. 5: This is a gloss on the word (sa)nidarsana (ad AK 1.29: sa hi sakyate nidarfayitum idam iha, amutreti) 131 . Our analysis of Sthiramati's Tattviirtha shows that "VinItabhadra" must have written a detailed commentary on the Abhidharmakosa, and most probably he must have been a Vaibha�ika; he must at least have been contemporary with Vasubandhu and Sailghabhadra since his arguments are quoted together with the opinions of the latter. On the other hand, "Vinitabhadra's" commentary on the Kosa which is preserved in the Tanjur is a simple abridgement and not an original work; moreover, I could not find any link between it and the words ascribed to "Vinitabhadra" in Sthiramati's Tattviirtha. Therefore, the existence of a certain acarya Vinitabhadra seems to be very unlikely. In the following it will be shown that the two names, 'Dul bzail and 'Dus bzail, can be identified. B. A comparative analysis of the relevant fragments in Piirf,1avardhana's two commentaries proves that in this case the occurence of the name 'Dul bzail/Vinitabhadra should be regarded as a mistake (scribal error) for 'Dus bzail/Sailghabhadra. (a) Lalqa/JiinusiirilJ! major: "Acarya Vinitabhadra says: «[They are] having retribution as their nature»" 132. This is a gloss on AKBh lIlA (tas ca vipiikasvabhiivii evety eke). According to Yasomitra's gloss, this is the opinion of Sailghabhadra133• (b) LalqalJiinusiirilJ! minor contains several passages with the opinions of 'Dul bzail. This is the only name quoted (with one exception: bhadanta Gho�aka) of an Abhidharma-master; besides there are numerous opinions labelled simply "some say" or "others say". A comparison with the parallel passages in Yasomitra'sAbhidharmakosa-vyiikhyii proves that from among nine fragments four can be ascribed to 'Dus bzail/Sailghabhadra with certainty'34. Fragm. 1 [Thu. 292a4-6]: a gloss on AK Il.33a-b; it agrees with Yasomitra. Fragm. 3 [Thu. 292b8-293a4]: a gloss on AK HAl; it agrees with Yasomitra. Fragm. 8 [Thu. 30la6-301b2]: a gloss on AK IY.75; it agrees only in its first part with Yasomitra's quotation (Piirf,1avardhana's text seems to be corrupt). Fragm. 9 [Thu. 3 1 Oa7-8] : a gloss on AK VIlA5; it agrees with Yasomitra.

ucyata iidhyiitmika iikaSadhiitul; / evaJtl biihye 'pi yad asphu{am aspharaJ)iyaJtl riipagaleniipaliguddhaJtl s�irobhiivaS chidram ayam ucyale biihya iikiifadhiitul; /1- Cf. LVP, Kosa, I, p. 49 n. 4: Dhann askandha XX, Vibh�ii 75.8, Vibhailga p. 84. 131

Peking Tg, To. 103b4: slob dpon 'Dul bzail na

re / [5J gnis

bstan par "Ihan cig mlhoh bas" hes pa'i phyir mig dail

gzugs dag gcig car skye'o ies zer TV // •

" Ihan cig rnlhoh ba 131

=

sahadariana, IndexAKBh III314.

Peking Tg, Iu. 3 11aB: slob dpon 'Dul bzail (Cone, Cu. 283b4, reads: 'Dus bzari.) na re ni mam par smin pa'i rail

Min kho na yin no ies zer Ie I'" Abhidhann akosa-vyiikhyii [Shastri, 392.28]: vipiikasvabhiivii evety iiciirya-SailghabhadroiJ piirvam eva palqam icchati / [pek. Tg, Cu. 284M]: slob dpon 'Dus bzail ni mam par smin pa'i rail Min dag kho na yin no // ies bya ba phyogs sha rna jjid 'dod do /1-

C£' LVP, Kola, ill, p. 15 n. 2: "SaJ!lghabhadra adopte l'avis des seconds docteurs" [?]. 13. For the sake

of clarity and convenience all four fragments will be reproduced and annotated elsewhere, vide infra

the chapter on PUr(lavardhana's minor commentary. Here only the references to the Peking Tanjur will be given.

32

C. As we know, Sanghabhadra wrote two works against the Abhidharmakosa; both were translated by Hsiian-tsang ' and are extant in the Chinese Tripi!aka: Nyiiyanusiira (Taisho 1562/Nanjio 1265) and Samayapradipika (Taisho 1563/Nanjio 1266). In spite of their obvious importance in the history of the Sarvastivada Abhidharma, these works have not been studied properly nor have they been translated into any European language (except for some very short passages). We are.therefore bound to base our argument on Takakusu's description in his article "On the Abhidharma Literature of the Sarviistivadins"l3s, and above all, on La Vallee Poussin's Introduction (pp. xxii-xxiii) and notes appended to his translation of the Abhidha�sa (a) The Abhidharma-nyiiyiinusiira-ia;tra (or Nyiiyt'inusiiro niima Abhidharmaiiistra) [henceforth abbreviated: N] is a large commentary in which the karikas of the Abhidharmakosa are reproduced without modifications; only those karikiis which present the Vaibh�ika doctrine introduced by the word kila ("according to", "it is said") are criticized by Sanghabhadra. Moreover, those parts of the Abhidharmakosa-bhii.D'a which present opinions different from those of the Vaibhii�ikas are also criticized, and those opinions which were attributed improperly to the Vaibha�ikas are corrected. (b) The Abhidharma-samayapradipika-siistra (or Samayapradipika) [henceforth abbreviated: S] is a summary of the former text, a simple exposition of the Abhidharma, with all the polemics left behind. This treatise is often identified with our commentary on the Abhidharmakosa from the Tanjur and ascribed to 'Dus bzan/Sanghabhadra and/or 'Oul bzaJi/Vinitabhadra. S opens with a long introduction in verse (7 stanzas) and prosel,,". Contrary to N, S excludes some of the karikas of theAbhidharmakOsa (11.2-4) and corrects some others (1.11,14). S substitutes a new karika for Vasubandhu's original one; it is quoted by Yasomitra ad AI( 1.11137. S reads in 1.14b: fa evoktii, against the Kosa reading: fa evqtii. The karika n.s becomes the karika n.2 in S. The karika ILl in S omits the word kiia, and the kiirikas n.2-4 are omitted altogether. Yasomitra reproduces the karika which in S is superadded to Vasubandhu's kiirikas, but Paramartha and Hsiian-tsang in their translations of the Kosa ascribe it to Vasubandhu .

,,, JYTS '36

1905, pp. 134-139.

Here is its English rendering by Takakusu, op. cit.,: "I have already written a treatise and called it Shun-cheng-li,

'Conformity to the Truth' (Nyiiyiinusiirrz) . Those ,,:ho are fond of philosophical speculation have to study it. With the phrases and sentences so detailed and elaborate, a research into it is a matter of difficulty. One will not be able to understand it unless one works hard. In order to make it easy to be understood by curtailing the elaborate composition, I again compiled an abriged treatise and called it Hsien-tsung, 'Exposition of the Doctrine' (Samaya-pradipika). I embellished and preserved his verses (Vasubandhu's kiirika), and regarded them as the source of reference. I cut short those extensive concluding arguments which are found in the Shun-Ii (Nyiiyiinusiirrz) , and set forth the right expositions against '31

his

proofs (Vasubandhu's wtra) to illustrate the true excellent doctrines to which we adhere".

[Wogihara, 32.21-22; Levi, 33.23-24; Shastri, 41.29-30):

k(1. 'pi visabhage 'pi citt. cittiityay. ca yat / vyiik(1iipratighOlfl riipOlfl

sa

hy avijiiaptir ifyate /f.

Cf. LVP, Kosa, I, p. 20 n. 1.

33

himself'''. Yasomitra reproduces the arya-stanza of Sailghabhadra which is however not found in any of his works13". Both of Sailghabhadra's treatises have the same titles for the first three chapters: (1) mulavastu­ nirdesa, (2) viSe�acnirdeSa, (3)pratiryasamutpiida-nirdesa. Sailghabhadra does not comment on the ninth chapter of the Abhidharmakosa, the PudgalaviniScaya. Now, ifwe compare our Tibetan commentary (Peking 5592/Tohoku 4091) with the above mentioned characteristic features of Sailghabhadra's two treatises, it can clearly be seen that (i) the text from the Tanjur follows the Kosa from the very beginning, i.e. from the karika 1.1, without any introductory part'40; (ii) it reproduces the karikas IT.1-5 in their original order!41,

13'

[Wogihara, 491.8-9; Shastri, 839.22-23]:

alpesakhyiilpabhogakiiraJ.
84

n. 1.

[Wogihara, 30.21-22; Levi, 31.17-18; Shastri, 40.2-3]:

nyiinfllTl siistriipetfllTl hanir atasyiiIJ prasajyate tattvam I apisabdiidhikavacGna/f1 v;se$YaJn avise�jtilJ!'l catra //, Pek. Tg, Cu. 31bS: slob dpon 'Dus bzail ni I

'di 10 ma tshail bstan bcos 'gal I iiams dail de min de iiid thai I yail sgra Ihag brjod khyad par du I bya ba khyad par ma byas so I/, Cf. LVP, Koso, Introduction, p. xxiii n. 1.

140

Peking Tg, Nu. 109bl-3:

gail gi mun po thoms cad gtan beam iin I [2] 'khor ba'i 'dam rrlzab las ni 'gro ba drans I ji biin don stan de 10 phyag 'tshal nas I bstan beos ehos mnon mdzod rob Mad par bya II bstan beos mdzad par bied pas ran gi stan pa'i ehe ba'i bdag iiid [3] fes par bya baY phyir yon tan thog mar smos te de

10 phyag 'tshal ba brtsom rna II gail gis ies bya ba ni sails rgyas beam Idan 'das kyi dbail du byas nas smras pa'o I/, 141

Peking Tg, Nu. 125b8-127a2; Cone Tg, Khu. 112b6-113b6:

(AX ILl): [Nu. 125b8; Khu. 112b6] Ina po moms ni don bii la (Cone: If) dbail byed I [126a3; 113a2] bE mams gIlis dag lao [126a7; 113a4] 'Ina po dag dail brgyad' mams ni I kun nas ilon mons mam byail la II (AX II.2): [Nu. 126a8; Khu. 113a6] ran gi don' thams cad 10 I dmigs par dbail byedd phyir dbail drug [126bJ; 1J3a6] 'pho mo iiid du dbail byed phyir I Ius 10 pho dail mo'i dbail po ' II (AX II3): [Nu. 126b4; Khu. 113b1] ris gnas kun nas ilon mOnS dail (Cone: ilid) I mom par byail 10 dbail byed phyir I

srag dail 'tshor dail dad 10 sags I dbail po dog ni Inar 'ad (Cone: 'dod) dt! II

(AX IIA): [Nu. 126b7; 113b3] mya lian 'das sags g'thob po 10 I gon nas gon du' dbail byed phyir I kun ses byed dail kun ses dail I de biin kun ses Idan dbail po II (AX II.S): [Nu. 127a2; Khu. 113b6] sems kyi rten dail 'de moms dbye' I gnas (Cone: ad. dail/ kun nas iion mons ilid I Ishogs dail mom byaii ji siled po (Cone: do) I dbail po dog kyail de siied do' II The Abhidhann akosa-kiirikii has some different readings (Peking Tg):

34

the kftrik1i 1.11 is not changed, andVasubandhu's original reading is preserved in 1.14. However, much to our surprise there are many instances where the word leila is omitted in the text of a k1irik1i·42, or in the reproduced text of the Abhidharmakosa-bhfiDia'43• Elsewhere, to the contrary, the word leila is duly preserved·44• The fact that this word is so often omitted in our Tibetan commentary (chapters I-ill were perused) is worth special notice because it speaks in favour of Sailghabhadra's authorship of the present commentary. (iii) The titles of the eight chapters correspond to those of the Abhidharmakosa (with the exception of the first chapter)'45. (iv) It does not comment on the ninth chapter, the PudgalaviniScaya. D. In La Vallee Poussin's catalogue of Sir Aurel Stein's collection of Tibetan .manuscripts from Tun-huang there are two items of great consequence. Ms. No. 590 contains the beginning of the Abhidharmakosa (1. 1) which agrees fully with the corresponding part of our Tibetan commentary (Nu. 109b1-3)146. Ms. No. 591 was identified by La Vallee Poussin as a fragment of the Abhidharmakosa-vrtfi siltriinurilpii(-nama) , Tanjur, mdo, LXIV.2 [ = Peking 5592/Tohoku 4091]. It contains the colophon of the fourth chapter and the beginning of the fifth chapter. The reproduced fragment is identical with our Tibetan commentary, Nu. 221a6-8147•

•

gfiis la

10

=

kila [I],

b -b

Ina dail brgyad po de,

•

ad. dail,.

- . mo iiid pho nid la dbail phyir I Ius las mo dail pho'i dbail dag, r - r tshor ba mams dail ni I dad sogs dbail po Iilar .'dod do, - . goil nas goil I '/hob pa la, b - . de'i bye brag, i ad. dail, j byed, k duo • AKBh ad. pa'i,

•

•

.42

Nu. 118a2 (1.28); Nu.

123 a4f.,

"3

Nu. 116b4 (1.7); Nu. 115a5 (1.20); !IIu . 119b6 (133); !IIu. 133b7 (11.24); !IIu . 140b2-5 (II.44).

'44

Nu. 110b3 (13); Nu. 171a3 (ID.62); !IIu . 160 al (III.25).

123b6f. (1.42); Nu. 125b8f. (11.1).

'" (1) gnas dail.po = 'prathamtll!' sthiinam, (2) dbail po bstan pa = indriya-ninieSa, (3) Jig Iten pa bstan pa = loka· ninieia, (4) las bstan pa = kann a-nirdeia, (5) phra rgyas bstan pa = anuiaya-nirdeia, (6) lam dail gail zag bstan pa = miirga-pudgala-ninieia, (7) ye ses bstan pa = jniina-ninieSa, (8) snoms par Jug pa bstan pa = samiipatti-nirdda . • <6

No. 590:

I gail gi(s) mun pa /hams chad gtan beom iin I I 'khor ba'i 'dam rdzab las ni 'grab draiIs I Iji biin don ston de la phyag 'tshal nas I I bstan beos mdzad par bied pas I' rail gi ston pa'i ehe ba'i bdag nid ses par bya ba'i phyir yon tan thog mar smos te II" gail gis ses bya ba ni sails rgyai beom Idan 'das kyi dbail du mdzad" nas smras pa'o I

Note that Nu. 109b3 reads: byas. 'AK om. f. "AK om. // and ins. de la phyag 'tshal ba bltsom mo. Cf. note supra. See R. Ikeda, "On Stein Tibetan No. 193(10) and 590 - AbhidharmakoSa I. kD 1 and its Commentruy" [in Japanese], Komazawa Joshi Tanki Daigaku Kenkyii Kiyo 15, 1981, pp. 1-9. [Not seen].

•

'47

No. 591:

"las las Jig Iten sna tshogs skyes" II ses Mad pa II las de dag kyail phra rgyas kyi dbail gis bstsags" par 'gyurgyi Iphra rgyas

med par ni srid pa milon b'; myi 'grub pas I de'i phyir I 'srid pa'i 11Sa ba phra rgyas" I yin btu' rig par bya'o II de dag kyail mdor bsdu . na I drug' ll drug gail ie na I 'dod chags de biin khon khro dail I • •

- . kannajtll!' loka-vaicitryam (AK IV.la),

b

bsags (Nu. 221a7),

par (Nu. 221a7) , • . • miiltll!' bhavasyiinuiayiil)

(AK V.la), om. (Nu. 221a7). •

35

Full identity of our Tibetan commentary from the Tanjur with both Tun huang manuscript fragments'" is very significant. It seems that we have here an example of an old, anonymous translation of an Indian text of a sastra-commentary type, very early incorporated into the Tanjur and not subj ect to a further revision or correction. The special features of the language of translation call our attention. Below I have collected a number of instances which are intended to show that the language of translation of the commentary investigated here is primitive, not yet fully elaborated to meet the standards of translating highly sophisticated philosophical texts, full of blunders and deviations"·. It is interesting to see that often a corrupt reading in the karika is replaced by a correct or better reading in the reproduced text of theAbhidharmakosa-bhi4)la. One gets the impression that the prose (explanatory) portion of the Siitriinurnpii commentary is closer to the extant text of the Kosa-bhi4)la than to the kiirikii part. (In the left column are given the readings of the Abhidharmakosa, and in the right column the readings of our commentary, according to the Peking Tanjur). (I.1b) 'dam (pailka)

(Nu.109b2) 'dam rdzas (palvala [Index AKBh III. 128])

(I.3 b) gail phyir (yata/})

(Nu.l10b3) gail gir

(1.3d) gsulis so

(Nu.l l0bS) gsulis so II ies grag go

10

(uditalJ kila)

(I.Sb) 'dus ma byas mam gsum yail ste

(Nu. 110b8) 'dus byas mams gsum yail ste [*sarrz­

(trividharrz ciipy asarrzslqtam)

slqtiilJ (!)]

(I.6b) so so so so (Prthak Prthak)

(Nu. 1 1 1a5) so so re re (Prthak, ekaikam [Index AKBh III.298,272])

(1.6c) gtan du (atyanta)

(Nu, 11 1a5) gtam du [gtam AKBh III.90]

(I.6d) 'gog gian so sor brtags min pas (anyo nirodho 'pratisarrzkhyayii)

(Nu. l l 1aS) so sor brtags pas 'gog min gian [*anyo 'nirodhalJ pratisarrzkhyayii ( ! )]

(!. lOa) gzugs mam gfzis (rnparrz dvidhii)

(Nu. 112a6) gzugs mams gfzis

(!. l2b) rlun (viiyu)

(Nu. 113a2) kluil (nadi [Index AKBh rn.4])

(I. l7b) yid (mana/}) [AKBh Gu.36a8: yod ( !)]

(Nu. 114a4) yod (!)

(I. 1Sc) rail gi (sva-)

(Nu. 114b2) gail gi

=

kathii, Index

(1.21b) rim rgyu'i phyir (kramakiiraJ}iit)

(Nu. l 1Sa6) rim gyi phyir

(1.21d) biag (niveiita)

(Nu. l 1Sa6) bstan (*nirdeiita [Index AKBh rn.99: nirldisl)

'"�

In general, the Tibetan manuscripts from Tun-huang are dated from the second half of the 8th century until about

1002 A.D., the date of the closure of the caves. Cf. Fujieda, "Une reconstruction de la 'Bibliotheque' de Touen-houang", p. 65.

'49 Cf. also LVP, Catalogue of the Tibetan Mss from Tun-huang, p. xvii.

36

(I.23c) gtan · ni ches rm. myur Jug phyir , (dilriiSutaravrttYiinyad)

(Nu. 116aS) gtan ni ri daiI rab myur mjug

(1.24a) bye brag (viSefar.za)

(Nu. 116b4) khyadpar (viSefa/r.za [AKBh ill. 1S])

(1.25d)

gzugs

saf!lSkiira-)

daiI ,.

'du byed (rapa-

(1.27d) legs dpyad de (sarrzpradhiirya)

(Nu. 117a3) gzitgs sam

'du

byed

(Nu. 117b2) legs spyad de [Index AKBh ill.2S2: legs par spyad pa sucarita] =

(1.30a) khams (dhiitu)

(Nu. 1 18b8) mkhas

(1.33c) gyen (vyagra) [AKBh Gu.4$b8: gyen ba (mfzam par gtag pa ma yin pa)]

mfzam pa

(1.34b) phyed (ardham)

(Nu. 120a3) phyogs (palqa [Index AKBh ill. 175])

(1.45b) rten (iiJraya), mig (cakfus)

(Nu. 124al) gnas (iiJraya, sthiina [Index AKBh ill. 149]), mi. (!)

(III. 18b) mnon 'dus byas (abhisarrz­

(Nu. 157b6) mnon du byas [(Nu. 157bS) mnon par 'dus byas pal

slq1am)

(ill . 1Sd) mnal du gro (kulqim eti) (ill.l9b) skyes nas (vrddhaJ;) (ill. 20b) cha gsum (trikiiT}4akaJ;)

(Nu. 119b8) rab rna miiam dan [(Nu. 120al) rna mfzam par bzag pa rna yin pa1.

(Nu. 157b7) mnal du mjug [(Nu. 157b7-S) mnal

du gro]

(Nu. I5SaI) 'phel nas [Index AKBh ill . 17S: 'phel

(ba)

=

v'vrdh]

(Nu. I5SaS) rabs gsum [Index AKBh ill.269: rabs =

(ill.22) tshun chad (priik)

=

*janman]

(Nu. 159a2,3,4) sna rol (piiJvam [Index AKBh ill.54])

In conclusion let us briefly review the arguments. It seems that the name 'Dul bzanjVinitabhadra in the Peking Tanjur is a misprint (scnbal error) for 'Dus bzan/Sanghabhadra. E.

In support of this statement one can refer to the sufficiently large number of passages where the opinions ascribed to ;Dul bzan prove to be in fact the opinions of 'Dus bzan, i.e. Sanghabhadra. The Derge/Cone Tanjur reads 'Dus bzaIi. throughout. A comparison with the characteristic features of both Sanghabhadra's treatises preserved in their Chinese translations makes the identification of the Siltrtlnurilpii-vrtti with any of them very unlikely. The commentary from the Tanjur is a simple abridgment of the Abhidharmakoia, without polemics, only half as long, without introduction; it reproduces the karikas ll.2-4 and its chapter titles correspond to those of the KiJia. However, it is very interesting to notice the frequent omission of the word kila with which the opinions of the Vaibha�ikas were often introduced by Vasubandhu in hislreatise. We should recall here that it is reported that Sanghabhadra in his shorter work has made corrections to Vasubandhu's text. On the other side the Siltriinurilpii commentary from the Tanjur agrees word for word with the Tibetan manuscript fragments from Tun-huang (Nos. 590-591 in La . Vallee Poussin's catalogue). The characteristic features of the language prove that most probably this commentary was translated early into the Tibetan and was not subject to a further revision.

37

I would like to put forward the following hypothesis in answer to the question posed at the beginning of this chapter. It seems possible that the SutriinurUpii-v[1ti's (Peking 5592/Tohoku , 4091) author is Sanghabhadra/ Dus bzan, the text itself, however, represents but a recast and abridgment of one of his treatises, perhaps the Samayapradfpika, and is presumably the work of the Tibetan translator(s). This is what can be established on the basis of the Tibetan material only, without a detailed comparison with the Chinese texts.

2. YASOMITRA'S SPHUTARTHA

The SphutiirthiiAbhidhannakosa-vyiikhyii of Yasomitra belongs to the group of Buddhist Sanskrit texts which were discovered by B.H. Hodgson in Nepali"'. E. Burnouf in his epoch-making work Introduction a l'histoire du Bouddhisme indien (Paris, 1844; 2nd ed. 1876) for the first time utilized this important text and appreciated its importance ("cette inepuisable mine de renseigne­ ments precieux sur la partie speculative du Bouddhisme", p. 447)151. The Sphutiirthii is the unique coomentary on the Abhidhannakosa which is preserved wholly in its Sanskrit original1S2. Unfortunately, we know almost nothing about its author. The name of Yaaomitra appears at least four times in the Buddhist tradition: a hero of an avadana1S3, a name of the Buddha1S<, a commentator of the Abhidhannakosa, and a mahapa�9ita from Rajagrha with whom the Tibetan pilgrim Dharmasvamin studied ISS. The earliest mention of Yasomitra, the commentator on the Abhidhannakosa, is found in the Lhan kar ma catalogue (ed. Lalou, No. 688). The date of the catalogue, circa 800-812 A.D., is at the same time a tenninus ante quem of the date of Yasomitra.

15' Cf. J. Filliozat, Catalogue du fonds sallScrit (Departement des Manuscrits, BibliotMque Nationale), Paris 1941, fasc. 1, No. 5-7; C. Bendall, Catalogue of the Buddhist Sanskrit Manuscripts in the University Librruy of Cambridge, Cambridge 1883, No. Add. 1041. On Hodgson see E. Windisch, Geschichte der Sanskrit-Philologie und indischen Altertumskunde, I. Teil, Strassburg 1917, p. 119f.

15 1 Cf. also LVP, Cosmologie, Avant-propos, p. xivf. 15' The Abhidhannadipa is a separate work, although it is very close to the Kosa and it reproduces a great number of its karikas. Cf. the prefaces to the editions of Lev;-Stcherbatsky and Wogihara. '53

Yaiomitrdvadiina in: Avadiinaiataka, chapter ix, No. 85; K:;emendra's Avadiinakapalatii, No. 94. Cf. G. Tucci,

Tibetan Painted Scrolls, pp. 526-528: Avadana No. 94. Story of YaSomitra ("Yasomitra [Grags pa'i bses gfien], the son

of a merchant in STaVaSt!, took vows and soon became an arhat; purest water always flowed from his teeth, so that he never suffered thirst. The monks asked the Buddha the reason of this prodigy and Siikyamuni told Sundaraka's [Mdzes pal story: he had taken vows and became an arhat in KiiSyapa's times and, owing to his past sins, he was always ' tormented by an unquenchable thirst. But as so on as he offered water to the Buddha, the curse was extinguished and, owing to this gift he was born again as YaSomitra"). 15. No. 334 on a list of 1000 Buddhas in theBhadrakalpika-siilro (ed. Weller, Tausend Buddhanamen des Bhadrakalpa, Leipzig 1928).

'" Dharmasvamin (1197-1264 A.D.) studied under YaSomitra at Riijagrha in 1235 A.D., of Dhann asviimin.

38

ct.

G. Roerich, Biography

Taranatha informs us that during the reign of king Sri Har�adeva in Kashmir lived Sakyamati, Sllabhadra, priIi.ce YaSomitra, and pa�gita Prthivibandhul56. This information, however, cannot be accepted uncritically and needs comment. Srihar�adeva of KaSmir ruled 1089-1101 AD. It was shown that Taranatha confused Sriharsadeva with Harsavardhana of Kanauj who reigned .606-647 A.D. IS? Sakyamati is known as a �ommentator on D harmakirti's Prama1JClViirttika and he has been dated in the years c. 660-720 AD. (Frauwallner). Sllabhadra was met by HSiian-tsang during his stay in Niilanda in 633 AD. It is estimated that Sllabhadra lived 529-645 AD. (Frauwallner). Prthivibandhu commented on Vasuban: dhu's Paiicaskandha­ prakara1Jfl; the Tibetan translation of his Paiicaskandha-bh�a (Tohoku 4068) was made by Jinamitra, Danaslla, Ye ses sdels8. This dates him before 800 AD. In the opening verses of his Sphutiirthii Yasomitra mentioned two earlier commentators of the Abhidharmakosa, Gu�amati and his disciple Vasumitra. It is known that Gu�amati was a teacher of Sthiramati (510-570 AD.) and presumably a contemporary of Dignaga (480-540 AD.)IS9. In his commentary Yasomitra quoted the famous first stanza from Dignaga's Pra­ miiI:/asamuccayaloo• Gu�amati's short gloss on the Abhidharmakosa was translated into Chinese by Paramartha about the middle of the 6th century. Frauwallner advanced the opinion that YaSomitra was a ''younger contemporary of Paramartha" and based his argument on the fact that YaSomitra in his commentary did not mention Sthiramati, the "much more important and famous disciple of Gu�amati"I.I. This may be true but one cannot overlook the fact that Y asomitra had many predecessors. He openly declared that he had written his Clear-sense commentary being dissatisfied with the previous commentaries on the Abhidharmakosa. Yasomitra's critical remarks against Gu�arnati and Vasumitra will be studied below. The following are the passages where YaSomitra explicitly refers to the other commentators: ( a) Introductory stanzas 4-8: "I myself composed this commentary on that Jewel of the Treatises taken out of the ocean of expositions of the Abhidharma, appropriately named 'Having a clear sense'. Wherever the explanation of the meaning of the words made by Gu�amat� Vasumitra' and other commentators seemed to me well-done and agreeable, I wrote down according to that sense. But if their commentaries deviated from the sense of the Doctrine, I made this apparent and put properly in order in my commentary. Those who have made great exertions in [their study of] the Commentary on the Abhidharma and of the Abhidharmakosa, let them examine accurately this commentary whether it is right or wrong. If an explanation of this commentary

'56

[Ed. Schiefner, 157.11-13]: sa kya blo gros dan I Nan /Shul bZllli po dan I Rgyal S/TlS Gmgs pa'i hies giien dan I

PtllJ4i ta Sa'i t1sa lag mams bywi tin I kha che'i yuJ du Hri h�a de va ies pa rgyal srid byed do I/, ill J.

Naudou, Les bouddhistes koSmiriens, p. 58ff., 145 n. 2, 167r. cr. LVP, Dynasties et histoire de l'Inde depuJs

Kanishka, p. 73, 83. IS'

cr. V.V. Gokhale, 'The Paiicaskandhaka by Vasubandhu and its commentary by Sthiramati", p. 276 n. 2.

IS'

Frauwallner, "Landmarks in the history or Indian logic", p. 137 ( = Kl. Schriften, p. 859).

'60

[Ed. Wogihara, 7.5-<;; Levi, 7.19-20; Shastri, 930-31]:

prwr'iilJabhiitiiya jagaddhitaifi{le prrJ{lamya siistre sugatiiya tiiyine I/, cr. Hattori, Digniiga. On perception, p. 23, 73 n. i.l; Bu-ston, Chos 'bywi, tr. Obermiller, II, p. 150. 16'

On the Date of the Buddhist Master of the Law Vasubandhu, p. 21 n. 1.

39

is right, let it be accepted; if not, then let it be accomplished in a different manner, for in a difficult matter an intellect like mine cannot remain steadfast"!'2. (b) A gloss on AK 1. 1 (tasmai namaslqtya): "Here many commentators become confused"!63. (c) A gloss on AK I. lOa (mparrz dvidhii) : "This is not discllssed by the commentators"!64. (d) Colophon: "Who having studied all the books [and being] praised for his knowledge [acquired the name] YaSomitra ('Friend of Fame'), he composed this commentary, being dissatisfied with the other commentaries"!65. It is difficult to say whether Yasomitra did make use cif Sthiramati's commentary or not. The indications provided by the pertinent passages are rather indisctinct. The answer is complicated by the fact that the Tibetan translation of Sthiramati's Tattviirtha was based upon an uncertain Sanskrit version and the missing parts were later supplemented from the commentaries of Yasomitra and PUI1).avardhana. The first chapter of Sthiramati�s Tattviirtha, from which the following observations were taken, most probably is free from the above limita­ tions. One can see that both Sthiramati and Yasomitra most often quote the opinions of Sanghabhadra and both mention Srilata. Yet Sthiramati often quotes the opinions of a certain , acarya *Aryadasa ( Phags pa'i 'bans)," and once mentions the name of an acarya GUl).a­ nandin!'7, teachers who are otherwise unknown. A reference to Aryasura's (slob dpon Dba' bo) work Legs pa 'i lam bstan pa('i gtam) [= Supathadesaniiparikathii, Tohoku 4 175] is also found!". The opinion of a certain Bhadanta in the Abhidharmakosa-bhi4Ja , (ad 1.20a-b; IIl.14)!69 was identified by Sthiramati as the opinion of a Dar�tantika sthavira

162

Wogihara, L9-18; Lev;, LB-2.4; Shastri, 3-4; Pek Tg, Cu. 2a5-2b4.

163

[Wogihara, 6.16-17; Lev;, 72-3; Shastri, 9,8]: atra bahavo ryakhyiinakiirri muhyanti / RB. this and the following

discussion is without equivalent

in

the Tibetan (sic). Vide infra pAK

164 [Wogihara, 2522; Lev;, 26,6-7; Shastri, 32.26]: naitad ryakhyiinakiiroir viciiritam I; [pek. Tg, Cu. 25b7]: de ni mam par 'chad par byed pa dag gis rna dpyad do 1/ lOS

[Wogihara, 723,7-8; Shastri, 1234.20-21]:

yo 'dhitya sarvaSiistniJ;Ji vidvadYaSa YaSomitrab I sa imii/r krtaviin ryiikhyii/r ryiikhyiisv anyiisv asaJflt14ra/:l II; [Pek Tg, Chu. 408a5-6]:

gail gi bstan bcos thams cad rtogs gyur (? xyl. illegible) nas I mkhas pa'i grogs thob Grogs pa'i Mes gfien des I mam par Mad pa gian la ma mgu .nas I [6J mam par Mad pa 'di ni byas pa yin 1/ 166

Peking Tg, To. 34b5; 35a4; 43b1;

44a3;

16/

Pek Tg, To. 36a8-36b1: rdzas su sa /Ian upapa/lel;! slob dpon GUI:zanandi na re gcig dail du ma ilid mi srid do ies

58a6; 61a7; 77b8; 86a8.

zer ro 1/ 16.

To. 7b8. Cf. Bu-ston, Za lu Tanjur catalogue, Ne. fol. 617.4; Thomas, Album Kern, p. 406 (No. 2).

169 [pradhan,

13.14; Shastri, 58.4]: Bhadanta aha I; [Pek Tg, Gu. 37b6j: Btsun pa na re / [pradhan, 125.21; Shastri,

425.2]: niisti niyama iti Bhadanta/:l I; [pek Tg, Gu. 139b2]: Btsun pa na

40

re

nes pa med do 1/

Dharmatrata''lO; Yasomitra remarks that it was BhagavadviSe�a who identified Bhadanta with sthavira Dharmatrata171• This remark, however, seems to be too weak to serve as an argument in favour of a possible dependence of YasOi:nitra on Sthiramati's commentary172. A further argument with regard to the date of Yasomitra was advanced by de J ong: "One must add that neither Hsiian-tsang nor I-ching make any mention of Yasomitra. One cannot rely too much on an argumentwn ex silentio but it is at least an indication which favours placing Yasomitra more towards the end of the period 550-750 than at the beginning. It is possible that Vrryasridatta has known Yasomitra's Vy3.khya ( .. ) but I have failed to find imy defmite evidence that Vrryasridatta has quoted the Vyakhya"173. Both teachers, YaSomitra and Vrrya§ridatta, quote G�amati whose date was placed in the first half of the 6th century A.D., bllt according to the indication in the colophon in his ArthaviniScaya-sutra-nibandhana, VuYaSridatta seems to be posterior to Yasomitra'74. Generally it is accepted to put the date of Yasomitra in the 7th century (perhaps the first half of the 7th century)175. The Tanjur, section mdo, contains, besides the Sphutiirthii Abhidharmakosa-vyiikhya, three other commentaries ascribed to Yasomitra: Bodhisattva.filaparivarta-{ikii (Tohoku 4046), Abhidharmasamuccaya-bh�a (Tohoku 4053), Abhidharmasamuccaya-vyiikhyii (Tohoku 4054). Actually, the name of the author is Rgyal ba'i sras, i.e. Jinamitra (cf. Mvy 629), and not YaSomitra, i.e. Grags pa'i Mes gfien. The name of YaSomitra is preceded by the title Rgyal po'i .

�

.70

.

[peking Tg, To. 84a7]: Btsun pa ies bya ba ni dpe ston sde pa'i gnas brtan Chos skyob bo II; [Tho. 29b4j: Btsun

re

pa na

nes pa med do ies bya ba la Btsun pa ni dpe (xyl.: dpes) ston pa'i sde pa Chos skyob bo I;'

, [Wogihara, ,

Bhagavadviiqas

tv

44 . 1 9f. ; Levi, 45.22f.; Shastri, 5822f.j: Bhadanta it sthavirolJ kaieit sauiriinlika/;l tanniimii vii I

aha I sthavira-Dhatmatrrito 'siiv iii II; [pek. Tg, Cu.

46b3-7] :

Btsun pa ies bya ba ni mdo sde pa'i re de ni gnas brt;;' Chos

gnas brtan Xa' tig gam I yan na min de ies bya ba iig yin no II Skal ldan khyad par can na skyob yin no ies zer TO I;' 112

The name of a

certain

Bhagavadvise� appears seven times in Y..somitra's Vyii/chyii. From a passage ad

AI(

Vil.45c it can be surmised that he also should be credited with the authorship of a commentary on the Kosa; his opinions have been .opposed to those of Sailghabhadra, and Sailghabhadra's interpretation

was

approved by YaSomitra

himself

[Wogihara, 657.23ff.; Shastri, 1113.9ff. ; LVP, Kosa, vn, p. 108 n. 2j. 113

Ill, vol. xvii, 1975, p. 117 (review of Samtani, The Arthaviniicaya-si1tra).

114

According to the colophon, Vuyasridatta lived in Niilandii during the time of the king Dharmapiila (c. 770-810

A.D., Majumdar), see Samtani, The Arthaviniicaya-siitra, Introduction, p. 133ff. According to Tiiraniitha'. chronology, YaSomitra should be placed in the fust half of the 7th century, but cf. also Naudou, us bouddhistes kaimiriens, p. 26ff.; 145 n. 2 .

•,5 Cf. Bareau, Der indische Buddhismus, p. 87. In a private communication (dated 25.04.1980) Prof. Bareau expressed the opinion that "YaSomitra est considere comme posterieur a Gm;lamati, lequel a dii vivre dans la premiere moitie du VIe siecle, puisque plusieurs de ses ouvrages ont ete traduits par Paramiirtha en chinois vers Ie milieu de ce marne VIe s.". [In the Taisho there is only one work ascnbed to GUI}Wnatij. Prof. Etienne Lamotte consulted on this matter, in a letter dated 7.05.1980 kindly communicated to me by Prof. Bareau, wrote that "il s'ensuit que YaSomitra est contemporain ou legerement posteneur awe grands commentateurs du KoSa. Je pencherais pour la premiere hypothese,

car

la con­

troverse fur vivre entre les exegetes. De toute fa�on vou. etes tombe assez juste en pla!;ll1t1 YaSomitra au Vile siecle. On pourrait dire a la

fin

du VIe".

41

sras, i.e. Riijaputra (cf. Mvy 1090). According to Tibetan tradition, the author of the commentaries on Asailga's Abhidharmasamuccaya was Rgyal ba'i sras, sometimes identified wrongly with Yasomitra. The Chinese tradition ascribed these texts to Sthiramati (see below).

2. 1 Problem of two Vasubandhus The problem of two Vasubandhus will be reconsidered here in connection with the commentary of Yasomitra. It has already been remarked that it is Yasomitra who explicitly mentions the name of an old Vasubandhus, a person different from the author of the Abhidizarmakosa. It is true that already La Vallee Poussin, Kimura, Frauwallner and other scholars have known this fact176• It will be demonstrated here that new facts have been discovered and the old ones oUght to be reconsidered on the basis of wider textual evidence.�The following fragments will be analysed according to the order of their appearance in Yasomitra's Sphu{iirtJui. Fragm. 1. In the opening verses of his commentary Yasomitra says that the author of the Abhidharmakosa is called Vasubandhu177• Similarly Piir�avardhana mentions the name of Vasubandhu as the author of the Kosa'78• Yasomitra in the text of his Sphu{iirthii usually refers to Vasubandhu the Kosakiira with the words "iiciirya", "this iiciirya" or "siistrakiira". Vasubandhu in his Abhi­ dharmakosa-bhii!Ya once refers to himself with the word "iiciirya", which is glossed by Yasomitra: "ficiirya, i.e. siistrakiira "179. The author of the Abhidharmadlpa refers to Vasubandhu with the word "Kosakiira(ka) " (in one instance the word "Kosalqt" is used)''''. Fragm. 2. , Vasubandhu in the Abhidharmakosa 1.13 says: "The others say [that the avijfzapti ( non­ information') is mpa ('matter')] because of 'materialization' of the [great] elements [which constitute its] point of support"'81. This is the only instance where all the three commentators -

176 LVP, Cosmologie, p. viii n. 2; LVP, Kosa, Introduction, p. xxviif; Kimura, 'The Date of Vasubandhu seen from the Abhidhanna-KoSa';, p. 91; Frauwallner, On the Date of the Buddhist Master of the Law Vasubandhu, pp. 21-23. 171

[Wogihara, 1 .7f. ; Levi, 1 . 6f. ; Shastri, 3.7f.]: tena Vasubandhu-niimnii (. . .) k{to 'yam Abhidhann akosiikhyaJ; I; [pek.

Tg, Cu. 2a2f.]: chos mnon mdzod ces bya ba 'di I Dbyig gnen ies bya des mdzad do I;' '" [Pek. Tg, Iu. 2b3]: de nas nan pa po dran pa dail ses rob ian pa mams mi nnons par bya ba'i phyir slpb dpon Dbyig (xyl.: dbyigs) gnen gyis sbyar ba chos mnon pa'i mdzod kyi Mad pa'i don mam [4J par dbye bar bya'o II ('Therefore, I shall analyze the meaning of the explanation(s) of the Abhidhannakosa, [a work] composed by acary. /"'""Vasubandhu in order to make clear-minded the auditors of weak memory and wisdom").

179 Wogihara, 180

10.23;

Levi,

11.5; Shastri, 14.12; Pek. Tg, Cu. 10a1.

See Iaini, The Abhidhannadipa, Introduction, p.

72f.

(a list of critical references to the KoSakara).

III [pradhan, 9.22; Shastri, 45.6]: iiSrayabhiitariipl1l,liid ity apare I; [pek. Tg, Gu. 34b5]: gian dag na re I rien [6J gyi 'byun ba la gzugs su yod paY phyir IV tes zer IV I;'

42

Yasomitra, Sthiramati and Piin;tavardhana - agree that the word "others" (apare) refers to an old Vasubandhu (vrddhiiciirya-Vasubandhu)102. Yasomitra's gloss is as follows: "The others say: « [The non-informative matter (avijfzapti) is matter (rilpa)] because of 'materialization' (rilpa�) of this [matter, which constitutes its] support (iiSraya)>>, Le. an elder teacher Vasubandhu says so. T)Je term 'element' (bhuta) is to designate the 'elements of support'''. La Vallee Poussin183 informs that the formula iiSrayabhutarilpalJiit refers to the Vibh�ii 75. 14 and ocCurs also in the Mahiivyutpattil84• In a following discussion an adherent of an old Vasubandhu (vrddhiiciirya-Vasubandhu-deSfya/:l kaStit) is accused of his non-Vaibhii�ika interpretations (naitad 1iaib�ikamatamy85. Ultimately it appears that Vasubandhu the Kosakiira agrees with the opinion of an old Vasubandhu: '''rhus, [the explana­ tion that the avijnaptll is rilpa because of 'materialization' is appropriate"186. Sthiramati and Piin;tavardhana give a larger gloss on the passage in question: ''Having their point of support in the elemenfs of the derivative matter, [such as] blue etc., the elements and [ac­ complished ?] pleasure are seen as of one kind; therefore, on account of being � derivative matter, these too, because of materialization [of the matter which constitutes their] support, are subject to materialization. On account of being susceptible to resistance, a quality of materia­ lization in another derivative matter - because of admission [? acceptance] in an object and because of its non-resistance - is subject to materialization due to the point of support"187. This

III YaSomitra [Wogihara, 35.20; Levi, 36.18-19; Shastri, 45.29]: iiirayabhiitarUpaJJ iid ity apara in I vrddhiieiirya­ VasubandhuIJ I bhiitagrahaJJ am iiirayabhiitapradarlantirtham II; [peking Tg, Cu. 37a4-5; Cone Tg, Gu. 29b4-5]: gian dag na re l1en gyi 'byUJi ba la gzugs su yod pa'i phyir IV ies zer IV ies bya ba ni slob dpon Dbyig gnen sna ma'o II 'byun

ba smos pa ni gii'i 'byUJi ba bstan pa'i phyir IV I;' Sthiramati [pek. Tg, To. 71al-2]: gian dag na re l1en gyi 'byUJi ba la gzugs su yod pa'i phyir ies zer IV II ies bya ba ni slob dpon Dbyig gnen sna ma ste ;. Piil1lavardhana [pek. Tg, Ju. 42b1; Cone Tg, Cu. 39a6-7]: gton dag na ies zer IV ies bya ba ni slob dpon Dbyig gnen sna ma ste ;. 183 1M

re

l1en gyi 'byUJi ba la gzugs su yod pa'i phyir IV

LVP, Kosa, I, p. 26 n. 1.

No. 2084 led. Sakaki]: iiiraya-bhiita-riipaJJyiit (tiipaJJyam) I l1en du yod pa'i (l1en du gyur bay gzugs su yod pa'i tu nliL ba'i phyi� II

phyi� rom giig • Sakaki: phir. lIS

I .. •

YaSomitra's Sphutiirtha [Wogihara, 35.23f.; Levi, 36.21f.; Shastri, 46.13; Pek. Tg, Cu. 37a7; Cone Tg, pu. 29b6]. [pradhan, 10.5-6; Shastri, 47.2]: tasmiid asamana/.! prasanga ity ata upapannam etad riiptllJ iid· riipam in I

Pradhan: iiirayatiipaJJiid, against the Tibetan· [pek. Tg, Gu. 35a4]: de Ita bas na 'dra bar thai ba med do II de'i gzugs

su yod pas na gzugs so

ies

bya ba 'di ni 'thad pa yin no (. . .).

IB7 Sthiramati [pek. Tg, To. 71al-4], Piil1lavardhana [pek. Tg, Ju. 42b2-4]: snon po la sogs pa rgyur byas pa'i gzugs sua 'byUJi ba la bl1en pa m� r 'byUJi b et' dan bde ba gcig par mthoil ste I de'i phyir rgyur byas pa'i gzugs yin pas 'di yan l1en gyi 'byUJi ba la gzugs su yod pa'i phyir gzugs su nliL no' II thogs pa dan beas pa'i phyir rgyur byas pa'i gzugs gian la nr gzugs su yod pa dhos su khas blans pa'i phyir la I 'di ni thogs pa med pa'i phyir l1en gyi sgo kho no nos' gzugs su nliL ba'

yin no ies so' II • SthiO om. suo - ' Sthl": na. _ . Piil1lO' om. /. - d Sthi° ad. dan grub pa. sgo kho nas. - ' Piil1lao doubles nliL ba. - i Piil1la': ie 'o.

43

_ .

Sthi':

nliL

ba'o. - f Sthi° om. la ni. - ' StJu�:

is followed by a long discussion in which the opinions of SaIi.ghabhadra are quoted by Sthira­ mati'''. It can be surmised that a solution to the problem of two Vasubandhus may be, perhaps, attained by the way of scrutinizing the doctrinal positions which have been discussed in this passage, however its comprehensive treatment is beyond the scope of the present study. For us it is important to see the name of SaIi.ghabhadra which appears as an opponent of the elder Vasubandhu too. A la rigueur one could assume that here we have an allusion to the earlier doctrinal position of the Kosakiira Vasubandhu since both Vasubandhus appear to be the followers of the Vibhi4iil89• Nota bene the Buddhist tradition claims that there was an interval between the composition of the kiirikiis and the bhii�ya and SaIi.ghabhadra's criticism was directed against the latter part of theAbhidhannakosa. This assumption, however, seems to be invalidated by another reference of Yasomitra where a sthavira Vasubandhu, a preceptor of the iiciirya Manoratha, is mentioned. Fragm. 3 . Vasubandhu in the Abhidhannakosa TIl27 quotes the opinion o f the "others": " It i s said i n the , , other Sutra that avidyii ( ignorance') has as its cause the ayonifo manasikiira ( incorrect judgment'), and, [in the other Sutra it is said that] the incorrect judgment has as its cause ignorance. The others say that it [i.e. the incorrect judgment] was also mentioned in this [Sutra, i.e. in the Prantyasamutpiida-sutra] as being contained in the upiidiin a ('clinging to existence', [the ninth link of the prantyasamutpiida])"1 "'. According to Yasomitra this is the opinion of sthavira­ Vasubandhu, a preceptor of the iiciirya Manorathal91• Sthiramati and Purl)avardhana do not

". Pek. Tg, To. 71a4-73a1 (Sanghabhadra: 71b8f., 72a6ff.). Cf. PUqIavardhana [pek. Tg, Iu. 42b4-43a8]. IS. Cf. C. Vogel, Vagbhara's A.riihgahrdaya-slJl!lhita, Introduction, p. 6: "After the theory of a senior and junior Viigbhata has been deprived of its basis, the question remains to be answered how else the term Vrddha-Viigbhata can be understood. ( ... ) It stands to reason that in these instances (the number of which can probably be increased) the

attnbute vrddha signifies, not a senior writer or an\. older work as oppos�d to a junior writer or a younger work, but rather the author of an enlarged recension as against that of a shorter original or such books themselves". 1 90 [Pradhan, 135.7-8; Shastri, 444.3-5]: ayonisomanaskCirahetuka'vidyokta siitriinlare I avidyahetukaS ciiyonisomanas­ kiiraIJ I sa cehapy upadiiniinltubhiilatvad ukto bhavatity apare I; [pek. Tg, Gu. 147b2-3]: gian dag na '" mdo gian las ma rig pa yah tshul biin ma yin pa yid la byed pa'i rgyu las byah ba yin no II tshul biin ma yin pa yid la byed pa yah ma rig pa'i rgyu las byah ba yin no ies gsahs la I da ni 'dir yah len pa'i nah du 'dus pa'i phyir bSad pa yin no ies zer Ie

f. 1 91

Sphu;iUtha [Wogihara, 289.6]: ity apara iii I slhaviro Vasubandhur aciirya-Manorolhopadhyiiya evam aha I; [pek.

Tg, Cu. 319a6; Cone Tg, Gu. 269a7-269b1]: gian dag na ,.. ies bya ba ni slob dpon Yid 'on gi mkhan po gnas brtan Dbyig gnen de skad zer ba yin no If. NN. Law in his edition of the Abhidhannakosa-vyakhya accepted arbitrarily another / reading [po 43.26]: sthaviro Vasubandhor (sic) aciiryo Manorothopadhyiiya evam aha I, with the following note: "Mss. and To. [ = Tibetan, M. M.] Vasubandhur iiciirya. Ywan Chwang took Manoratha to be a teacher of Vasubandhu. YaSomitra evidently believes in the same tradition and takes the word aparo occuring in the Bh�a to refer to Manoratha. Cf. Kiirikii III.59: aparo iii ..Ihaviro manorolha/:l". Dwarikadas Shastri [po 44431] accepted Law's reading without
44

mention whose opinion it is. An echo of this discussion is found in the Arthaviniicayasutra­ nibandhana of Vrryasridatta who follows Vasubandhu's Pratityasamutpiida-vyiikhyii l'11.. The name of sthavira Vasubandhu is found also in the closing part of Candrakirti's Madhya­ makiivatiira-bfliiD!a where sthavira Vasubandhu, Digniiga, and Dharmapiila are mentioned as the "authors of the siistras"I93. However, in this context it seems very unlikely to take the title sthavira as an indication referring to the elder Vasubandhu. Similarly the name of Manoratha preceded by the title sthavira appears in YaSomitra's Vyiikhyii (ad AK ill. 59) and in PUIl].a­ vardhana's major commentaryl". Sthiramati seems to refer briefly to Manoratha's opinion as to the opinion of the "others"195. It should be added that in Sthiramati's commentary the titles iiciirya and sthavira are used optionally before the name of Sailghabhadra, the most often quoted masterl". Coming back to the passage in question, it should be noted that the opinion ascnbed to the sthavira Vasubandhu introduced a long polemical discussion against the Sautriintika S rilii.ta. Yasomitra, Sthiramati and PiiIl].avardhana comment on it at some length, yet Sthiramati inserts also the opinions of Sailghabhadra197. Since the period of Sriliita's floruit has been put to the period of Vasubandhu the Kosakiira and Sailghabhadral98, this may be at the same time an indication of a presumed date of the elder Vasubandhu, a preceptor of Manoratha.

192 [Samtani, 100.2-5]: ayoniSomanaskiirahetUkii avidyoktii siitnintore I avidyiihetukaS ciiyoniSo manasikiira iii I sa copiidiine 'nttubhiitatviid ukto bhavatity apare I atra ca paiiciihgiini hetubhiitiini I avitiyiist1J1'Skiiratf1lJopiidiinabhaviiilgiini yathiiyogl1J1f kann aklesasvabhiivatviit I sefiitJi saptiiilgiini phalasvabhiiviini ;. The doctrinal and other problems will be discussed in detail in my forthcoming work on Vasubandhu's Pratityasamutpiida-vyiikhyii. '93 [ed. LVP, 407.14-18): gal te gnas brtan Dbyig giien dan IPhyogs kyi glan po dan I Chos skyoit la sogs pa bstan bcos mams kyi mdzad pa po byon zin por gyur pa de dag gyis kyan yi ge tsam thos pas Jigs te I rten cm 'brei por byuit ba'i don

phyin ci log por ston por 'di yons su spaits sam ie na I de skad du smra'o I;' ,94

YaSomitra [Wogihara, 326.28; Shastri, 516.15; Pek. Tg, Cu. 356b3-4), Purt).avardhana [pek. Tg, Ju. 391b2): sthavira­

ManorathaJ.!

=

gnas brtan 17d 'on.

,,, [peking Tg, Tho. lOOb5]: gtan dag na re I dmyal ba'i sdug bsnal las goit mor gyur pa dag gis Joms pa'i phyir /hag pa'o [6J ies zer IV II ('The others say: .Because [they are) oppressed by [the torments which are] higher than the afflictions of the hell, [these are called] 'supplementary [hells]' (utsada)"). Manoratha's opinion, however, has a different form in theAbhidharmakosa [Pradhan, 164.12; Pek. Tg, Gu. 169b2-3]: narakiivarodlriid iirdhvam etqu sjdanty utsadii ity apore I gtan dag na re dmyal ba'i 'chin bu'i 'og tu 'di dag tu 'byin bas na /hag pa'o ies bya'o ies zer IV 1/; but Shastri, 516.3, reads following YaSomitra: ii narakiivarodhiid iirrlhvam etefu sjdanty atas tadutsadii ity apare ;' See LVP, Kosa, p. 152 n. 1. Cf. BHSD s�b utsada.

ill,

,.. E.g. To. 144b1; To. 154b4: gnas brtan 'Dus bzan na re, but in To. 27b2: btsun pa 'Dus bzaii na re (bhadanta) [sic]; slob dpon

=

iiciilya passim.

'97 . YaSomitra

[Wogihara, 289.23ff.; Shastri, 445.23ff.; Pek. Tg, Cu. 320b3ff.], Sthiramati [pek. Tg, Tho. 47b6ff.],

purt).avardhana [pek. Tg, Ju. 344b6ff.]. See my forthcoming study of Vasubandhu's Pratityasamutpiida-vyiikhyii. '91

J. Kato, "Notes sur les deux maitres bouddhiques Kumaraliita, et Srlliita", p. 207ff. ·

45

Fragm. 4. Vasubandhu (AK IV.3) says: "Someone thinks that the flames perish because of absence of a cause of prolongation; this [argument of him] is not appropriate"!99. According to Yasomitra this is the opinion of sthavira-Vasubandhu (gnas brtan Dbyig giien) and others200• Yet the Tibetan translation does not confirm the reading of the Sanskrit text of the Sphuriirthii and has instead sthavira-Vasumitra (gnas brtan Dbyig bSes)"". To our greater confusion, Sthiramati and Piirl).avardhana refer here to a different master, viz. the iiciirya Sriliita (slob dpon Dpal len)202. At the present moment we are not in a position to solve this question and, in consequence, further research on the problem of two Vasubandhus must concentrate on the second and third fragment, with the addition of the fifth fragment. Fragm. 5. Vasubandhu in the Abhidharmakosa III. 15 quotes the opinion of the "teachers of yore" (purviiciiryiiJ; ),,13. According to Yasomitra this is the opinion of the Yogacaras iirya-Aswiga and others2ll4. Sthiramati identifies the "teachers of yore" with the Yogacaras to0205. Piifl).avardhana in both version of his Lalqal}iinusiiril}l commentary identifies the purviiciiryiiJ; with the purva-sautriintikiiJ;2D6. -

199 Abhidhannakoia [Pradhan, 193.23-24; Shastri, 571.4-5J:yo 'py arci,iim avasthiinahetvabhtiviid (... ) vinM"'1' manyate sa ciiyuktaf;la II; [Pek. Tg, Gu. 191b3]: gah yah gnas pa'i ®,U med pa'am I (... ) Jig go sflam du sems pa de yah rigs pa .ma yin te l •

Pradhan: tad apy ayuktaf;l. 200

[Wogihara, 347.8-11; Shastri, 571.14-15]: avasthiinahetvabhtivtid bhiiviiniiJrl vinMa iii sthavira·Vasubandhu­

prabhrtibhir ay"'1' hetur uktaf:z I so ciiyuktaf;l /

201 [Peking Tg, Chu. 4a4; Cone Tg, Nu. 3b4]: gah yah gnas pa'i ®,U med pa'am ies bya ba'i gtan tshigs 'di ni gnas brlan (Pek: brlen) Dbyig bies 10 sogs pas gnas pa'i ®,U med pa'i phyir dnos po mams Jig po yin no II (Cone ad.:) ies smras po yin no II ' Sthiramati [Pek. Tg, Tho. 124a7-8]: gah yah gnas po ®,u med pa ies bya ba ®,as par 'byuh ste I slob dpon Dpal len ni skyes pa mams la gnas pa'i ®,U med pas de'i phyir de flid Jig pa'i ®,U yin no sflam du sems so 1/ Piin:tavardhana [pek. Tg, Nu. 6a7; Cone Tg, Chu. 5b1-2]: gah yah gnas pa ®,U med pa ies bya ba (Cone ad.: ®,U med pa ies bya bay ®,as par 'byuh ste I slob dpon Dpal len ni skyes pa mams 10 gnas pa'i ®,U med pas de'i phyir de flid Jig pa'i ®,u yin no sflam du sems so (Pek.: pa'o) 1/ 202

cr. LVP, Kosa, IV, p. 7 n. 1: "D'apres la Vyiikhyii: sthaviravasubandhuprabhrtibhir ay"'1' hetur uktaf;l. - D'apres la glose de l'editeur japonais: 'D'apres l'Ecole des Sthaviras"'. 2m

Pradhan, 170.20; Shastri, 429.9; Pek. Tg, Gu. 141a8.

2!>1

[Wogihara, 281.27; Shastri, 429.22-23]: piirviiciiryiiJ:z /yogticiirii iirytisahga-prabhrtayaf;l I; [Pek. Tg, Cu. 311a6] snon

gyi slob dpon (dag) ni-mal 'byor spyod pa'i slob dpon Thogs med la sags pa'o 1/

20' [Pek. Tg, Tho. 32a8]: mal 'byor spyod pa'i shan gyi slob dpon dog gis Mad do 1/ 206

[Pek. Tg, Iu. 332b6; Thu. 296b4]: shon gyi slob dpon dog ces bya ba ni shon gyi mdo sde po dog go 1/

46

Frauwallner in his study of the date of Vasubandhu interpreted the passage in question with the following words"": "What Vasubandhu means with the expression purviiciiryiilJ , is another question. The opinions of the commentators widely differ in each case. This does not, however, touch our argument, fo� which the only important thing is that YaSomitra sees in Asanga such an old master". "Asailga - continues Frauwallner ·- was therefore for him [i.e. for Yasomitra - M. M.] an old teacher in comparison with the author of the Abhidharmakosa. This is expressed even more clearly iIi a second passage (p. 140. 1 1 [= ed. Wogihara - M. M.J). Here he characterizes an opinion expressed in the Abhidhannakosa as iiciiryamatam, as opinion of the teacher, i.e. as personal opinion of the author Vasubandhil. Two lines later he cites in S1,lpport the old teachers and quotes a formulation which derives from Asangan• As to the first opinion of Frauwallner, it is to be regretted that he did not give the references to the different opinions o( the commentators on the passage in question. However, the equivalence purviiciiryiilJ = yogiiciiriilJ can be established on the basis of the texts. A perusal of all the relevant passages in Vasubandhu's Abhidhannakosa-bhi4Ja and in YaSomitra's Abhi­ dhannakosa-vyiikhyii indicates that the expressions purviiciiryiilJ and yogiiciiriilJ have been used optionallr'8. Now, Haribhadra (8th century) in hisAbhisamayiilal]lkiirili okii says that his commentary follows the commentary of purviiciirya-Vasubandhu and others209. A few lines later Haribhadra describes the transmission of the Prajiiiipiiramitii texts in a lineage Maitreya-Asanga­ Vasubandhu2lo. He tells the story of Asanga who was unable to grasp the high and deep sense ·

2J17

On the Date of the Buddhist Master of the Law Vasubandhu, p. 21 n. 2; 21f. and n. 1 on p. 22.

"" Abhidhannakosa-bht4ya = AKB [ed. Pradhan; Shastri];Abhidhannakosa-vytlkhya = AKV [ed. Wogihara; Shastri]: [94.13; 137.4]: apara iii pfirvaciiryiil) ; (2) AKV [140.13; 20631]: alro piJrvaciirya dhul;l; cf. Hanbhadra's AbhisamayalOl!'kiWIoka led. Wogihara, 293]; (3) AKB [72.24; 246.4]: iii piJrvaciiryiil) ; (4) AKV [281.27; 429.22-23]: piJrvaciiryiil) fyogaciini iiryiisangaprabhrtayaIJ; (5) MY [298.18; 458.27]: aciirya iii IpiJrvaciiryiil) ; (6) AKB [166.18; 520.1]: iii piJrvaciiryiil) ; AKV [328.6; 520.21]: iii yogaciiriil) ; (7) AKB [197.5,8; 583.9,13]: yogactlriil;o ; AKV [355.20,22; 583.26, 584.12]: yogaciiriil) (.•. ) ta aciirya icchanli; (8) AKB [246.6-7; 691.5]: piJrvaciirya ""am dhul;l ; AKv [407.29; 691.20]: tad ""Ol!' yogacaranayenapi; (9) AKB [266.11; 736.14]: iiipiJrvaciiryiil); (10) AKV [45130; 775.26]: anya dhul;l lyogaciirrun alim ape�aivOl!' krtam; (11) AKB [290.21; 794.11]: :i1i piJrvaciiryiil); (12) AKV {492.1; 840.25]: apare /yogactlriil;o ; (13) AKV [497.27; 853.21]: anye (... ) iii I piJrvaciiryiil) [Shastri: -iiI)]; (14) AKB [334.13; 890.11]: iii piJrvaciiryiil) ; AKV [524.28; 891.16]: trividhOl!' hi yogaciiriil) tiJrI sat; (15) AKB [406.22; 1071.7-8]: yad dhul;l piJrvaciiryiil) I kathOl!' ca piJrvaciirya dhul;l ; (16) AKB [4403-4; 1147.5]: naiva tu piJrvaciirya
MY

209 [Wogihara, 75.8f.]: (...) PaflcavifTIsatisahasrikiinusiire/Ja piJrvaciirya-Vasub�dhu-prabhrtivytlkhytikramam asrity4bhisamayalOl!'ktlraktirikiin urodhena ca (... ) vytlkhyiinam idam /. Cf. Conze, Prajnapiirrun ita Literature, s.v.; Naudou, Les bouddhistes kaSmiriens, p. 72-73 ("a dO mourir quelques annees avant 800''). 210 [Wogihara, 75.17-22]: (...) iiryAsaJigaIJpunaJUktabdhulyenapunaJUktapradde 'piprutyekapadavyavacchedtidarianena giimbhiryac ca prajfiiipiirrunittlrtham unnetum aSakto daurmanasyam anupriiptaIJ I tatas tam uddiiya Maitreye/Ja bhagavata Prujnapiirrun itiisiitrom vytlkhyatam AbhisamayalOl!'kiiraktiriktlSiistrrlfTl ca krtam I tac chrutva punar iiryAsailgenaciirya­ Vasubandhu-prabhrtibhis ca vytlkhyatam ity alOl!' prasailgena I/, Cf. Bu-slon, Chos 'bywi (trans!. Obermiller), II, p. 139;

Taranatha, Rgja gar chos 'bywi (trans!. Lama Chimpa, A. Chattopadhyaya), p. 156ff.

47

of the perfection of wisdom and it was only bhagavat Maitreya himself who explained to him the Prajfll'ipiiramitiisutra and composed theAbhiramayiilaf!lkiirakiirikaSiistra. Then the teachings were transmitted by AsaIiga to Vasubandhu and others. Nota .bene such a succession of the masters has been already given by Sthiramati in his Madhyiintavibhiiga-pkii' l!. Now, according to Frauwallner's interpretation, Haribhadra "opposes AsaIiga and his brother Vasubandhu as purviiciiryii}) to the later representants of the school"'I'. This argument, however, seems to be a contamination of various passages in support of a presupposed thesis. What we can say with certainty is that the expression pilrviiciiryiilJ, is used to mean the followers of a philosophical school or tradition. AsaIiga is called a "purviicarya" by Yasomitra in the senSe of a follower of the Yogiiciiras, whereas Vasubandhu is called a "purviiciiryaH by Haribhadra in the lineage of transmission of the Prajiiiipiiramitii texts. With regard to the second argument of Frauwallner, it can be noticed that the whole Yaso­ mitra's gloss pilrviiciiryiilJ, yogiiciirii iiryiisaizgaprabhrtayalJ, [Wogihara, 281.27] was tacitly substituted for the word purviiciiryiilJ, in another place and in another context in the commentary of Yasomitra [Wogihara, 140. 11,13]. Actually Yasomitra says in the investigated fragment that in the opinion formulated by Vasubandhu (iiciiryamatam) he does not see the fault with which SaIighabhadra has been just reproached. Hence, in order to clear up the terms under discussion, ie. vitarka and viciira, Yasomitra quotes the definitions of the "teachers of yore" (purviicii­ ryiilJ,)213. These definitions show a striking resemblance to that which is found in Vasubandhu's =

21 1

MadhyiintavibhiigaJiistrrz [ed. Pandeya, p. 3.18, 4.1]: ya.syii'.sya kiirikiiSiistrrz.syiilya-MaitreyaIJp�etii1 (. . . ) valdiipunar

atriiciilyii'sailgaIJ tasmiic chlUlviiciilyabhadanta-Vasubandhu/;l tadbhii
On the Date of the Buddhist Master of the Law Vasubandhu, p. 23 n. 1.

21 ' [Wogfuara, 140.13ff.; Shastri, 206.3lf., 207.10f.]: atrrz pilrviiciilyii iihu/;l I vittUka/.l katamaIJ I cetanii/tl vii niSritya prajfiii/tl vii Pf11Yefako manojalpo 'nabhyiihiibhyiihiivasthayor yathiikramQl11 sii co. cit(a.syaudiirikatii II viciirrll) katamaIJ (

cetanii/tl vii niJritya prajfiii/tl vii pratyavelqako manojalpo 'nabhyiihiibhyiihiivasthayor yathiikramQl11 sii ca cittasiilqmatii iii II; [pek. Tg, Cu. 145M]: 'di la s;,on gyi slob dpon na rt: rtog pa gail t. na I sems pa'am ies rab la brten nas go [5J rims Min (xyl.: giin) du gtan la mi 'bebs pa dail gtan la 'bebs pa'i gnas skabs dag na yid Icyi brjod (xyl.: Icyis rjod) pa "kun tu tshol bar byed pa" yin te I de yail sems min ba nid (xyl.: ad. yid) yin no II dpyod pa gail ie na I [6J sems pa'am ies rob la brten nas go rims bim (xyl.: om. btin) du gtan la mi 'bebs pa dail gtan Ia 'bebs pa'i gnas skabs dag na yid kyi brjod . . pa ·so sor rtog par byed pa· yin te I de yail sems tib pa nid [7J yin no ies 'chad de I • .•

kun

• .•

so sor rtog par byed pa

tu tshol bar byed pa =

=

patyqaka,

pratyavelqaka.

48

Paficaskandhaprakara1}a214 and to those found in the Abhidharmasal7U4ccaya-b�a215 and in Sthiramati's TrifriSikii-bliii�ytP·. The data so far collected seem to speak in favour of Frauwallner's hypothesis of two Vasubandhus but, at the same time, his argument offered for the priority of Asailga be�ore the Kosakara Vasubandhu cannot be ,accept 6d because of inadequate interpretation of YaSomitra's testimony. On the basis of the data collected above one can draw the following picture: Vasubartdhu the Kosakara seems to be aware of the philosophical (Abhi�harmic) activity of an elder Vasubandhu; the elder Vasubandhu was a preceptor of acarya Manoratha and ,seems to be an adherent of the Vibhiifii, although his followers' interpretations were subject to criticism as non-Vaibha�ika; the opinion of the elder Vasubandhu was ultimately accepted by the Kosakara; there are certain grounds to assume that the interval between the elder Vasubandhu and the Kosakara Vasubandhu was not very long since in the discussion the commentators quote 'also the opinions of Sailghabhadra and S rilata, two masters contemporary with the Kosakara217; the references to the piirvaciiryas in the AbhidhaT71Ulkosa and in Yasomitra's Vyiikhyii as well as in Sthiramati's Tattviirtha are to the Yogacaras, PiirJ]avardhana refers to the piirva-Sautrantikas, and Haribhadra's reference is to the transmission ' of the Prajfiaparamita tradition.

2.2 GU1}Qmati and Vasumitra It has already been said that Yasomitra mentioned two earlier commentators of the Abhidharmakosa, GUI]amati and his disciple Vasumitra. In the introductory verses of his' Sphutiirthii, Yasomitra confessed tha,t he had followed the commentaries of his predecessors, GUI].amati, Vasumitra and others, but whenever he thOUght their explanations were in disagreement with the Doctrine, he undertook of the problem again, in order to present his own opinion, for regardless the efforts of those commentators to study the Vibhiifii and the Abhidharmakasa, their explanations had to be carefully studied with regard to the correctness of their arguments21 ••

lI4

See below the fragments from Vasubandhu's Paiicaskandhaka (No. 1).

l iS [Tatia, p. Sf.]: cetantittl va niiritya prajiitittl vety anabhyiihiibhyiihavasthiiytittl yathiikramam /POlJ"fl1lJ.ii.kiiriJ. manaso 'bhijalpana vitarkal;l / pratyavelql1lJ.ii.kiiriJ. manaso 'bhijalpana'nuviciira iii / lav eva vilarkaviciirau sa/fIbadhyele audiirikasiilqmavyavaslhanad anayol; j.

"6 [Levi, 32.19,25,26,27]: vilarkal;l pOlJefako manojalpal;l prajnacelaniiviiefal;l / sa eva cittasyaudiirikata / viciira 'pi hi celaniiprajiiaviiefatmakal;l / pratyavelqako manojalpa eva / (.. .) ala eva ca cittasiilqmatety ucyate j. 211 Actually I have an impression that this fact (combined with the preceding observations) seems to put a question ' mark before the hypothesis of two Vasubandhus and to suggest a similar interpretation as in the case of VOgbha\a. 211

Vide supra.

49

GUI;lamatF19 originated from South India. In the beginning of the sixth century he moved from Niilandii to Valabhi: and was a founder of the school in Valabhi. He was a teacher of Sthiramati. TaranathaZ!O informs us that GUI;lamati, having acquired many-sided knowledge, composed a commentary on the Abhidhannakosa and a commentary on the Millamadhyamaka[-karilaiJ, in which he followed Sthiramati and refuted the arguments of Bhavya. Sarppradiita, Bhavya's disciple, was defeated in a dispute by GUI;lamati in the town Balapurl in the East. GUI;Iamati was a disciple of GU1).aprabha221• According to Bu-stonm, GUI;Iaprabha was a direct disciple of Vasubandhu. A commentary on Vasubandhu's Paficaskandhaka composed by GUI;laprabha is found in the Tanjur". In the Chinese sources GUI;lamati, a master of Sthiramati, is mentioned among the ten commentators on the Vijiiaptirniitra224• Hsiian-tsang described GUI;Iamati's victory over a Sarpkhya master, Madhava22S. Madhava was criticized by Dignaga in his Pramal}asamuc­ caya226. According to Hsiian-tsang GUI;Iamati was a contemporary of Sthiramati221• The date of GUI;Iamati depends on the dates of Sthiramati (c. 510-570 A.D.) and DharmapaIa (c. 530-561 A.D.). The date of the Chinese translation of GUI;lamati's work mark out the first half of the sixth century as his floruit. According to Frauwallner and Hattori, GUI;Iamati was a contemporary of Dignaga and lived c. 480-540 A.D.22ll . 219 Mvy 3488: Yon tan blo gros; TaishojNanjio: De hui. Cf. Levi, Matiriaux pour /'etude du systeme Vijiiaptimiilra, p. 18f.; Frauwallner, Philosophie des Buddhismus, p. 394f. According to Hiian-tsang, in Valabill (KiithHiviir) there were

some 100 monasteries with 6000 monks of the SaIJ1l11atlya sect, see Lamotte, Histoire du bouddhisme indien, p. 599. 220 Rgya garchos 'byuh red. Scillefner, 123.16-20]: slob dpon Yon tan blo gros ni rigpa'i [17J gnas thams cad la mkhas pa I milOn pa md20d kyi 'grel Mad byas I dbu ma rtsa ba la [18J Blo brtan gyi ryes 'brails te I Legs {dan 'gog pa'i 'gref pa byas I Legs Idan gyi slob [19J rna S",!, pra du taJ:! yan 'di dan dus miiam du byuh I sar phyogs Bo fa pi1 rir mod pa yun [20J nil du byas pas I Yon tan blo gros rgyal lo ies grogs so I;'

221 Tiiraniitha, op. cit., p. 122.18f. (Yon tan 'ad kyi slob rna milon pa pa Yon tan blo gros). 222 Chos 'byuh red. Lokesh Chandra, 845.6ff.]: slob dpon dda [i.e. Vasubandhu - M. M.] slob ma rail las (xyl.: bas) mkhas pa biirgrogs Ie I (Oo') 'dul ba la mkhas pa'i mchog tu gyur pa slob dpon Yon tan 'od I; cf. transl. by Obermiller,

II, p. 160f. :w

Tohoku 4067: PaiicaskandhavivaraJ}a; cf. Gokhale, 'The Paficaskandhaka by Vasubandhu and its commentary by

Sthiramati", p. 276 n. 2.

22. Vide supra, p.

p.

225

Cf. Hattori, Dignaga. On Perception, p. 4 & n. 19.

226

Hattori, op. cit., p. 5 & n. 28.

221

Cf. Watters, On Yuan Chwang's Travels, II, p. 165, 246; I-tsing, Recorrls, p. lviii, !ix, 181; LVP, Kosa, Introduction,

xxi

n. 1; Peri,

22lI

"A

propos de date de Vasubandhu", p. 379 n. 2.

Frauwallner, "Landmarks in the history of Indian logic", p. 136f. [=

n. 19, p. 5

nn.

28, 29, 30, p. 6.

50

Kl.

Schriften, p. 858f.]; Hattori, op. cit., p. 4

A short treatise by GUl,lamati, the LalqaIJiinusiiraiiistra or LalqalJiinusiirilJi-fikti, is found in the Chinese Buddhist canon (Taisho 1641/Nanjio 1280); it was translated by Paramartha in 557-569 A.D. According to Takakusu229, the LalqaIJiinusiiraiiistra discusses the twelve nidanas and four arya-satyas; the names of the Vibhii.fii masters and of Vasubandhu are quoted. La Vallee Poussin described the LalqaIJiinusiiraiiistra as representing but an extract of GUl,lamati's treatise and ' dealing with the 16 aspects of the f�>ur noble truths (AX vn.13)2:lO. A Japanese scholar H. Ui expressed the opinion that "cet ouvrage dont l'auteur temoigne d'une connaissance approfondie du Kosa et du systeme SiiIp.khya parait-etre en realite un commentaire fragmen�aire de Paramartha au LalqalJiinusiiraiiistra de GUl,lamati"231. Professor E. Lamotte assumed that "Piirl,lavardhana et GUl,lamati, auteurs d'un meme LalqaIJiinusiira sur Ie Ko.§a, ne font sans doute qu'un seul et meme personnage"232. This assumption, however, seems to be very unlikely, as will be seen from the analysis of their arguments. According to the Tibetan tradition, GUl,lamati was a teacher of Sthiramati, and Piirl,lavardhana was a disciple of the latter". Two commentaries of GUl,lamati on the works of Vasubandhu are preserved in the Tanjur: Vyiikhyiiyukti-pkti234 (Tohoku 4061), Prcitityasamutpiidiidivibhal1ganirde.§a-fikiJ23S (Tohoku 3996).

The identification of Vasurnitra, another early commentator on the Abhidhannako.§a, entails some difficulty. Masuda in his preface to his translation of the 'Treatise on the eighteen schools" ascribed to Vasurnitra (Taisho 203 1), listed as many as five (sic) Vasurnitras who are mentioned in the Chinese sources236. Vasumitra, a Sarvastivadin, is mentioned among the Kashmirian masters contemporary with Hsiian-tsang, in his biography"'. Taranatha informs ... "On the Abhldhanna Literature of the SaIViistiviidins", p. 144f. ". LW, Koia, Introduction, pp. xix-xxi.

'" Etudes de philosophie indienne, voL Vijiiaptimiitra, p. 19 n. 1).

1,

Tokyo 1924, p. 382 (quoted after: Levi, Maliriawc pour /'etude du systeme

'" In a private communication through the good offices of Prof. A. Bareau, dated 7.05.1980. 23'

Bu-ston, Chos 'byun led. Lokesh Chandra, 847.3; trans\. Obermil1er, II, p. 148].

'" It contains a quotation from theAbhidhannakoia m.21c [pradhan, 131.26; Shastri, 437.5; Pek. Tg, Gu. 145al]: s"'1'dhiskandhiis tu vijiiiinam I mam iesrmtshams sbyor phw. po yin If. Vyiikhyiiyukti-plai [pek. Tg, Chl. 143b1-3]: gtan dag na ,.. 'du byed kyi Tkyen gyis ni mnal du iiid mtshams sbyor ba'i mam par fes pa yin te Iji skad du chos mnon pa'i mdzod las I mtshams sbyorphw. po'; mam par fes ies smras pa dan / de ' ltar ni rgyu'i mam grails chen po las fes rgyas par 'byw. ste I de ltar ni ies bya ba ni de bas na ies bya ba'i don no (xyl.: to) If. 23'

A part of it

will

be studied in my forthcoming work on Vasubandhu's Pratityasamutpiida-vyiikhyii. Cf. the

references in L. Schmithausen, Alayavijiiiina, Index s.v. ". "Origin and Doctrines of Early Indian Buddhist Schools", p. 7: cf. Imanishi, Das Paiicavastukam und die

Paiicavastukavibh�ii, p. 3, 22. 23'

Naudou, us bouddhistes kaimiriens, p. 42:

"Le

Si-yu-ki s'interesse, non sans me!ancolie, aux souvenirs de la

grandeur passe. du bouddhisme au KaSmir. Hoei-Ii complete heureusement ces indications

51

en

enumerant un certain

us that Vasumitra, a master of the Abhidharma, was venerated by Mahlisakyabala (Sakya stobs chen), a king of Haridvara. This Vasumitra is said to be the author of a commentary on the Abhidharmakosa and a treatise on the schismatic dissensions between the Buddhist sects (Samayabhedoparacanacakra, Tohoku 4138)238. It was shown by Masuda219 that the identifica­ tion of Vasumitra, the author of a commentary on the Abhidhannakosa, with Vasumitra, the author of a treatise on a schism between the Buddhist sects, is very unlikely on account of the date of translation of the latter into Chinese, between 385-43 1 A.D. It is possible but not necessarily correct to try to identify the fifth Vasumitra on Masuda's list, who' was mentioned by Hsiian-tsang, with the Abhidharma master mentioned by Taranatha""". According to Taranatha24l, the king Mahasakyabala who honoured Vasumitra was an ally of Praditya, the king of the Madhyadesa, who, ifl his tum, was an adherent of Dharmakirti (c. 600-660 A.D., Frauwallner). If so, this would extend the span of time between Gu�amati and Vasumitra over r one century. In YaSomitra's commentay, however, some indications can be found which suggest rather a short interval between Gu�amati and his disciple Vasumitra, e.g. there are three instances where it is explicitly said that Vasumitra was a disciple of Gu�amati242. Accordingly, the date of Vasumitra should be placed closer to that of Gu�amati, i.e. about the middle of the sixth century. It is not our aim to give here a detailed and critical analysis of all the arguments of Gu�amati and Vasumitra which are found in Yasomitra's Abhidhannakosa-vyiikhyii. We would however like to draw attention to some of these arguments, for they provide us with important information which can serve as a basis for furt4er determination of their school adherence.

nombre de maitres k.smIriens contemporains de Hiouen-ts'ang et en precisant leur appartenance sectaire. II y avait alors des Sarvastiviidin (Sa-p'o-to): Sou-kia-mi-to-Io [Sugatamitra] et Po-sou-mi-to-Io [Vasumitra] ; des MahiisaJighika (Seng­ k'i): Sou-li-ye-ti-po [Suryadeva] et Chin-na-ta-Io-to [Jinatrata]; et aussi des adeptes du Grand Vehicule: Pi-chou-tho-seng­ ho [ViSuddhasiIpha] et Chin-na-fan-tou [Jinabandhu]".

'" Rgya gar chos 'byun [ed. Schiefner, 132.9-10]: rgyal po Stikya stabs chen gyis mnon pa pa chen po Dbyig gi bies gilen ies bya ba mchod /; [134.2-4J: Dbyig Mes Icyis Icyan milOn pa mdzod la 'grol Mad byas / 'di sde pa bco brgyad Icyi gtun lugs bye brag bkod pa'i 'khor 10 ies bya ba ttsom mkhan de yin no /f. ". Op. cit., p. 8. Cf. Bareau, 'Trois trait ... sur les sectes bouddhiques", Ire partie, JA 1954, p. 231: "Selon Tiiraniitha, au �ontraire, I'auteur serait ce meme Vasumitra qui composa un commentaire de l'Abhidharmakos.sastra de Vasuban­ dhu. Ceci est peu vraisemblable, car la premiere traduction chinoise de notre traite date de la debut de Ve siecle de notre ere". 2<0

lin

du IVe siecle ou du

Cf. Naudou, op. cit., p. 42 n. 3: "Ce Vasumitra est·il Ie meme que celui qu'honorait MahiiSiikyabala, roi de

Haridviira, auquel le K.smlr etait soumis (Tiiraniitha, p. 172)? C'est possible, mais pas du tout certain". ,
52

Fragm. 1 : "«[Having saluted to] hini», by what mark i s the Dative case characterized? Here many commentators are confused. Acirya GUl).amati and his disciple Vasumitra say: «The Dative case is used in relation to the word 'salutation' (namas) , [according to pal).ini's rule ll.3. 16:] "The fourth case is also �sed in connection with the words 'salutation', 'peace', 'sviihii', 'svadhii' [i.e. exclamations used on presenting an oblation], 'a match for/sufficient for', 'v�ar [exclamation at the end of the sacrificial verse]" (namaJ:isvastisviihiisvadhiilaf!lv�a4Yogiic ca). This, however, is not appropriate. The Dative case is used in conjunction with the independent word 'salutation', [whereas] the word 'salutation' is not independent (asvatantra), because of its being an object of an action (kriyiispadibhutatviit). For this very reason the Acarya [i.e. the Kosakara] in [his] Vyiikhyiiyukti used the Accusative case characterized by an object when he said «Having revered, the Muni with a head»243. Others say that the Dative case is used in place of the Accusative. This is merely their wishfull thinking because it has no mark. What is then [the characteristic of] the Dative case? We explain that the Dative is 'characterized by a 'recipient' (saf!lpradtina ) "244. This is followed by a grammatical explanation referring to the rules of pal).ini I.4.32 (karmCUJii yam abhipraiti sa saf!lpradiinam) and IA.49 (kartur ipsitatamaf!l karma). Yasomitra interprets the salutary formula 'tasmai namaslq1ya' in the first stanza of theAbhidhar­ makosa according to the rule of pal).ini ll.3. 13 (caturthl saf!lpradiine)24S. The term sal'{ipradiina 'recipient' means a person" with regard to whom an action of giving is performed" "". " In conclusion Yasomitra says: "When a direct object of an action is meant, then the second case (Accusative) is to be put; when a person for whom anything is done is meant, then we have to put the fourth case (Dative)" (yadii karmavivalqii tadii dvitiyii, yadii saf!lpradiinavivalqii tadii caturthi - ity ubhayam api siddhaf!l bhavati).

It is interesting to see that Sthiramati's and PiifI.1avardhana's explanation seems to occupy a place in between the interpretation of GUl).amati-Vasumitra and that o{ Yasomitra. Sthiramati'47 and PiifI.1avardhana248 explain the salutary formula as follows''' : "The Dative .., Ya§omitra [Wogihara, 6.20f.; LIM, 7.6f.; Shastri, 9.12f.]: ala eva ciinenaivaciiryel)a Vyakhyiiyuktau / namaskflYa munif{l miirdhna iii ( .. .) f. This passage refers to the Vyakhyiiyukti [Pek. Tg, Si. 32a1-2]: Ihub ta spyi bos phyag '/Shat Ie

;. ... The fragment is preserved only in Sanskrit, �thout Tibetan equivalent (sic): Wogihara, 6.17ff.; LiM, 7.2ff. ; Shastri, " . . "

9.4ff.

.., Ya§omitra follows the Pal)inian grammar throughout but here he reads the rule II.3.13 with the eandra-siltra 11.1.73: sQf{lpradiine caturthi (sic) [ef. B. Liebich, Ciindra-VyaklU12l)aJ. The name of PaI)ini occurs only once in Ya§omi\rll's commentaty [Wogihara, 577.24; Shastri, 980.20); ef. also his reference to CilnJikara in the discussion of the term sQf{lpradiina [Wogihara, 6.26; Shastri, 9.19]. See also N. Simonsson, "Reflections on the grammatical tradition in Tibet", pp. 537-544:Abhidhannakoia II.47 with Yasomitra's commentaty thereon. (1 am obliged to Prof. RA. Miller for drawing my attention to this paper.) ,.. O. Bohtlingk, P�ini's Grammatik; S.Ch. Vasu, The�!adhyiiyi ofP�ini; � V. Abhyankar, A Diclionary of SQJlskril Grammar. 241 [Pek. Tg, To. 6b5-6]: de ta phyag 'tshat [6J brtsom mo us pa ta / de ta us pa ni ran gi ston pa la'o IIphyag 'tshal ba'i sgra sbyor ba na mom dbye bii pa sle don gyi dbail gis mom par dbye ba yoils su 'gyur TV I;'

,.. [Pek. Tg, Iu. 5a2-3]: de ta phyag 'tshal brisorn rno ies bya ba ni ran gi slon pa de ta sle Iphyag 'tshal ba dail 'brei

53

case is used in relation to the word 'salutation'; in virtue of an object the case ending is , changed". In their interpretation of the expression 'tasmai namaslq1ya m both commentators do not deny the connection of the Dative case with the word 'namas', according to Piil).ini rr.3. 16, yet they accept that here it is the object of action (scil. of giving), i.e. 'recipient' (saJ?1pradiin a), that possesses a deciding force of changing the case ending, according to Piil).ini II.3. 13. Fragm. 2: Yasomitra quotes a gloss of GUl).amati who explains ad AK 1.4: "« Why [is it so] that from among all the dharmas which are subject to be a point of support of impurities only the determined [dharmas], with the exception of the [element of the] 'path', are called '[in conjunction] with impurities'?» [In consequence of such a question one should assume that] all the dharmas are points of support for the impurities. And this is against the teachings of the A.bhidharmikas", replies Yasomitra, because 'empty space' (iikii.§a ) and 'suppression by means of careful consideration' (pratisaJ?1khyiinirodha) are not subject to be a support for the impurities (iisrava). Therefore the opinion of GUl).amati's is not correct, concludes Yasomitra251• In another place

[3J pas bE pa'o /1 mam par dbye ba bsgyur ba ni don gyi dbaiJ gis so 1/ '49 Actually both glosses refer to the fIrst sentence of the Abhidhannakosa-bhdrya which introduces the salutary

stafi2a: ( .. .) tasmai namaskiirom iirabhate I de la (.. .) phyag 'tshal ba brlsom rna 1/ 25
prafnal; I namaskrtyeti ktviividhel; kriyiintoriipekratviit / samiinakarlrkayor hi piilvakiile ktviividhir Mavati / [·Shastri refers to PiiJ;llni VII.137 whereas one should refer to ill.4.21: samiinakarlrkayoIJ piilvakiile]. Note the abbreviated Tibetan translation [Pek. Tg, Cu. 7b4]: phyag 'tshal nas ies bya ba ni bya ba gian 10 bllos pa yin pa'i phyir ci iig bya ies dris so il 3 lSI [Wogihara, 1: .12ff.; LOvi, 13.16ff.; Shastri, 17.15ff.]: GUJ;Iamatis tv iiciilya iha vyiic�!e I kill' karaJ;lGl?1 yat sarvadhann e$V tisravdJ;Ultn alambanibhavatsu sG.f!1skrtii eva mtirgavaJj,"talJ siisravii ucyanta iti sQlVe dhann ii iisravtiJ;uim iilambanam iti / aniiMidhann ikiyam etat I iikiiSapratisGl?1khyiinirodhayor iisraviiniilambanatviit I �a4 eva hy anuSQ}'ii 'niisraviilambaniii,l pa!hyante I te ca nirodhamiirgiilambanii eva /

mithyiidrgvimati tiiMyiil?' yuktiividyiitha kevalii / nirodhamiirgadrggh eyiii,l �a4 aniisravagocariil; 1/ (AK V.14)

54

in his commentary Yasomitra returns to this question again (ad AK V.3 1) and criticizes the opinion of GUl].amati and Vasumitra2S2• It is interesting to observe that according to Bhavya's NikiiyabhedavibhangavyiikhyiinaZSJ their thesis sarve dhannii tisraviiniim iilambanam shows an affinity vyith a thesis of the Mahisasabs2S4. Fragm. 3 : Yasomitra criticizes the mnemonic summary stanza (saf!lgrahaSloka)"1S5 o f Vasumitra who claims that "According to the tradition, the following eight elements are undetermined (a.niyata): examination (vitarka), reflection (viciira), remorse (kaulq1ya), sleepiness (middha), avp.rsio;1 (pratigha), attachment (sakti), arrogance (mana), and doubt (vicikitsii)". Yasomitra does not agree with the number eight and asks why the views (dml) are not undetermined (aniyata) too: yet in the hostile (sapratigha) and doubting (savicikitsa) thought (citta) does not occur the false view (mithyii-dr�ti). Thus this explanation of Vasumitra we find dubious, concludes Yasomi­ tra256.

iii vacantit I tasman na sulikhitam etad iii paiytimal;J I; [pel<. Tg, Cu. 12b3-6]: slob dpon Yon tan blo gros na '" I chos /hams cad zag pa dag gi dmigs pa yin na ci'i phyir lam ma gtogs pa'i 'dus [4] byas dag kho na zag pa dail bcas pa tes bya ba ies zer ba gail yin pa I chos /hams cad zag pa mams Icyi dmigs pa yin no tes bya ba 'di ni chos miion pa ma yin te I nam mkha' dail so sor bnags pa [5] ma yin pas 'gog pa dag zag pa'i dmigs pa ma yin pa'i phyir ro II phra rgyas thug kho na Zig zag pa la dmigs par 'byuii ba de dag Icyail 'gog pa dail lam mthoii spail bya ba I log Ita the tshom de dag dail 1 [6] Idan dail 'ba' tig mi rags dail I thug ni zag med spyod yul can tes 'byuii ba'i phyir 'gog pa dan lam la dinigs pa kho na yin no II d. Ita bas na 'di ni legs par bris pa ma yin par blta'o I/, :m [Wogihara, 481.6ff.; Shastri, 823.27ff.]: ticiirya-GUI)amali-Vasumitrau tu vyticalqiite I rikiiSapralisOJTlkhyanirodhau bhtivaniiprahtitavyasya kiiftrikliftasyiilambanam iii I tad ayuktam I [quotes AK V.14, as above] I iti niyamtit I ato na kliftacittasya bhavaniilambanam iii sidd.hantal;J /.

253 Trans!. Bareau, JA 1956, pp. 167-191. 254

Thesis no. 19: "n. I)Y a pas de choses (dharma) qui ne puissent etre souillees", op. cit., p. 181 .

.,5 On the role of the sOJTlgraha. or antara-sloka see K. Mimaki, "Sur Ie rtlle de fantaraSloka ou du saIJlgrabaSloka", Indianisme et Bouddhisme, pp. 233-244. Vasumitra's sOJTlgrahaSloka is not mentioned by Mimaki. Cf. LVP, Kosa, IT, p. 165 n. 2. 256

[Wogihara, 132.20ff.; Shastri, 195.14ff.]: atrriciirya-Vasumitral;l sOJTlgrahaSlokam iiha I

vitarkaciirokauk{1yamiddhapralighasaktayal;J I manaS ca vicikitsti cely antiv aniyatiil;t sm {1ii/;1 II iii II tad idam °aftaniyamavacanOJTl na budhytimahe I dmayo 'pi . kasman naniyatti ifyante / na hi sapralighe savicikitse vti citte mithytidmilJ pravwtate / tiveIJike tv akuSai. drniyukte ca vittlSalilJ / kl.saiS catwbhilJ kradhtidyailJ kauk{1yenaikavi".satilJ (AK II.29) 1/ iii vacantit / tasmtid yadvti tadvedam Uktam iii paiytimal;J /, ° Shastri wrongly reads: afta-niyama• . [pel<. Tg, Cu. 137!12-5]: 'dir slob dpon Dbyig bSes Icyi bsdu ba'i tshigs su bcad pa / nag dan spACd dan 'gyod pa dan I giiid [3] dail khon khro chags pa dan /

55

Fragm. 4 : Yasomitra criticizes both GUl,1amati and Vasumitra for their mixing the glosses on two different expressions into one. For us it is important to see that, according to Yasomitra, Vasumitra, a disciple of GUl,1amati, comments on theAbhidharmakosa with the same expressions and literally with the same words as his master257• This seems to suggest a close connection between the commentaries of GUl,1amati and Vasumitra to the effect that the work of the latter might be a subcommentary on that of GUl,1amati's. Fragm. 5: Vasubandhu (AK III. l0-11) does not share the opmlOn of the followers of other schools (nikiiyiintarfya) who assert that the state of birth (upapatti-bhava) is cut off from the state of death (marm::za-bhava). An existence is a becoming, a continuous process, says Vasubandhu25'. In his gloss on this topic Yasomitra declares himself as a follower of the doctrine of 'momentari­ ness' (lqmJikaviida), i.e. a Sautrantika259. According to Yasomitra, GUl,1amati and his disciple Vasumitra belonged to another school (nikiiya ) and were ardent propagators of its teachings: "They are more concerned with the teachings of their own school (svanikiiya ) and with posing the [critical] questions than with commenting on the text [of the Abhidhannakosa]. We take on the hardship of explaining the sense of the treatise - continues Yasomitra - and are not

yid dail the tshom ies bya ba I brgyad ni nes pa yin par Mad I ces bya ba srnras te I brgyad rna fles par bsad pa 'di ni mam par (xyl.: rna bar [?J) rni 'on no II Ita ba dag kyail ci'i phyir rna fles pa [4J yin par rni 'dod de I log par Ita ba ni khon khro ba dail bcas pa 'am the Ishom dah bcas pa'; sems fa nil 'byun ste / mi dge ni rna 'dres dah / Ita dah /dan fa 'ali iii su 'hyun / non mons bil dail khro sogs· [5J dail I 'gyod pa dail (xyl.: ste) ni ni su gcig I ces 'byui! ba'i phyir IV II de Ita bas na 'gyi na iig Mad par yin par blta'o (xyl.: glta'o) I/, •

gyi-na(-ba)

==

laeschke: 'bad, coarse, mean, poor, miserable; unsteady, fickle'.

,,, [Wogihara, 250.1,10; Shastri, 375.7ff.]: atriiciilya-GufJamatir vyiieae!e Isailqe eatul1Jiim I (. . .} taeehi�o 'py iieiilya­ Vasumitras tam eviitth wrt tena viikyena lair eva padavyanjanair likhati I tad etad ayuktam I vyakhyiinwrt na hy evam ekaviikyena vyiikhyiitiitth o gha!ale viikyabhedena ghatate I tasyaiva sailqasya liibha ity etad ekwrt viikywrt I kiimcuiipiiva­ earayos ea yiivat kiimcuiipadhiituvairagya ity apaTwrt viikyam I; [Pek. Tg, Cu. 271a8]: 'di la slob dpon Yon tan blo gros na re I slob pa la bii I (.. .} [271b5] de'; slob rna slob dpon Dbyig bies kyail don de kho na dag de ·dail/tshig dail yi ge dag kho na 'dri bar byed do II Mad pa 'di ni rigs pa rna yin te I [6J de Itar tshig gcig tu bsad na don TUn ba ma yin gyi tshig tha dad par ni lUi! ;1O IIslob pa de ilid ees bya ba ni tshig gcig yin no II 'phags pa'i lam ies bya ba nas 'dod pa dail gzugs na spyod [7J pa'i rna bsgribs la lui! du ma bstan dag ces bya ba'i bar ni tshig gian yin no I/, On the tenns viikya, pada, vyanjana

cr.

N. Simonsson, "Reflections on the grammatical tradition in Tibet", p. 537ff.

'" [pradhan, 120.14-15; Shastri, 405.10-11]: viechinna evopapattibhavo maralJabhaviit swrtbhavatiti nikiiyiintariyiilJ I tad etan ne�ate I; [pek. Tg, Gu. 134b6-7]: sde pa gian dag na re I 'chi ba'i srid pa chad pa kho na las skye ba'i srid pa 'byui! no ies zer te I de ni mi 'dod do I/, Cf. AK III.11a-b: vnllisantiinasiidhannyiid avicchinnabhavodbhava/.l Ij.

,,, [Wogihara, 267.20f.; Shastri, 406.14]: lqaIJikaviidiniiJ?t hy ayam asmiikwrt siddhiinta/.l I; [pek. Tg, Cu. 293b1]: 'di ni kho bo cag skad cig mar smra ba rnams kyi(s) grob pa'i rntha' yin no I/, Cf. elsewhere, [Wogihara, 11.24f.; Levi, 12.1f.; Shastri, 15.12f.]: iibhidhann ikiifJiim etan rnatwrt na tv asmiikwrt sautriin tikiiniim iti bhava/.l I; [pek. Tg, Cu. 10b6-7]: (... ) 'di chos mnon pa pa mams kyi giui! lugs yin gyi mdo sde pa kho bo eag gi ni rna yin no ies (. ..) /.

56

concerned with a mere refutation, because of its worthlessness and out of fear of saying too much""". It is difficult to say whether GUI;lamati and Vasumitra denied the concept of 'intermediary existence' (antarcibhava ) . H they did so they could have belonged to one of the following schools: Mahislisakas, Theravlidins, Mahlisliilghikas, Dharmaguptakas26l• In Yasomitra's Abhidharma­ kosa-vyOkhyci the term nikiiya 'school' occurs several times and it denotes the following four schools: lirya-Saqunatiyas, lirya-Mahislisakas, Mahlisliilghikas, lirya-Dharmagupta(ka) S262. "We do not know to which school the other commentators, Vasurnitra and GUI;lamati, whom Yasomitra mentiones in hiS Vyakhyli, belonged", wrote Takakusu in his article 'on the Abhidharma literature of the Sarvlistivlidins263• It is true that we are not in a position to define on the basis of the collected here material their doctrinal or school adherence with certainty. Our investigation has shown, however, that we are able to delimitate a possible answer with the following facts: GUI;lamati and his disciple Vasumitra commented on the Abhidhannakosa; Vasumitra often followed literally the explanations of his teacher and it can be surmised that . he wrote a subcommentary on GUI;lamati's commentary; GUI;lamati and Vasumitra belonged to a school different from that of Vasubandhu, they contradicted the opinions of the Abhidharmai­ kas, and their opinions were criticized by Yasomitra, a Sautrlintika; they might have belonged to the school of Mahislisakas since one of their thesis is found on the list of the tenets of that school. 2.3 Vasubandhu 's Pancaskandhaprakartl{la

The Paiicaskandhaprakara/Ja264 or Paiicaskandhaka, a short treatise of Vasubandhu, is extant in its Chinese (Taisho 1612, 1613) and Tibetan translations (Tohoku 4059)265. Four original

"" [Wogihara, 267.26ff.; Shastri, 406.14ff.]: atriiemya-GUlJamati� saha sifYet;liiemya-Vasumitret;la svanikiiyiinuriiga­ bhiivitamatir vyiikhyiinavyiipiirom aj,asya plTllyavasthiinapqra eva vartate I vayam iha siistrr'irthavivartlt;lCllf' pratyiidriyiimahe na tadd�Qt;lam I ni/:lsiiratviid bahuvaktavyabhayiie ea I; [pek. Tg, Cu. 293b4-6]: 'di la slob dpon Yon tan blo gros ni slob ma slob dpon Dbyig bies dan beas te I ran gi sde pa la blo ien eiit goms pas mam par 'chad pa'i las btan ste I [5J rgol ba Ihur len pa 'ba' iig la Jug go II bdag ni 'di la bstan beos Icyi don dpyad pa 'ba' tig la 'bad Icyi ehed mi che ba'i phyir dan I tshig mails su dogs pa'i phyir de sun [6J 'byin pa la ni ma yin no 1/ 26' Cf. A. Bareliu, LOs sectes bouddhiques du Petit Vehieule, p. 283. (I am "indebted to Prof. Sehmithausen for calling my attention to this fact.) 261 A d AK II.46: [Wogihara, 179.9; Shastri, 266.15] mya-SCllf'm atiy�; ad AK ill .2B [Wogihara, 294.4; Shastri, 452.29] mya-MahiSiisa/ciil.l (cf. LVP, Kosa, ill, p. 77 n. 1); ad AK ill.96 [Wogihara, 338.22; Shastri, 551.24] Mahiisiiilghika­ pro.bhrtay� (cf. LVP, Kosa, VI, p. 185 n. 2). Cf. also BHSD sub nikiiya (3) "school". "" JPTS

1905, p. 120 n. 3.

"" J. Dantinne, Le traire des cinq agregats (Paiieaskandhapro.karo.t;! a de Vasubandhu). traduit et annot< par. . . Bruxelles 1980. [It contains the Tibetan text (Peking Tanjur, No. 5560) on pp. 129-149 (Romanized), pp. 151-155 (reproduced from the Peking Tg, ed. Suzuki). Dantinne did not collect systematically the Sanskrit fragments.] Cf. V.V. Gokhale, ''The Paiicaskandhaka by Vasubandhu and its commentary by Sthiramati", ABORI xviii:3, 1937, pp. 276-286; cf. numerous important references in L. Schmithausen, Alayaviji!iina, Tokyo 1987, with further bibliography. "" It was executed by the Indian pRQ.cjitas Jinamitra, Snendrabodhl, DanaSil� and the Tibetan lotsiivas Ye res

57

sde

Sanskrit fragments are explicitly quoted by Yasomitra in his Abhidharmakosa-vyiikhyii. These fragments are presented here together with their Tibetan translation and the corresponding passages in the Pancaskandhaka. Noticeable are slight differe!1ces between them266. Fragm. 1 (ad AK 1.33) : tathii hy anena Pancaskandhaka" uktam I vitarka!; katama!; Iparye:jako manojalpaib cetaniipra­ jiziivi§e:job [IJ yii cittasyaudarikatii I viciira!; katama!; I pratyavek:jako manojalpasb tathaiva yii cittasya suk:jmatii I *'anabhyuhiivasthiiyiif!l cetanii 'abhyuhiivasthiiyiif!l prajneti vyavasthiipyate* I [Wogihara, 64.25-28; Levi, 67. 14-16; Shastri, 89.23-26]. Levi: Pancaskandha. b Levi: -a!;. ' Levi: atyuha-. *---* Added by Yasomitra (cf. Frauwallner, On the Date, p. 22 n. 1). (pek. Tg, Cu. 68b2] 'di ltar 'dis [3J phUli po Ina pa las rtog pa gan ie na I kun tu tshol ba yid kyi brjod pa ste sems pa dan ses rab kyi khyad par gan sems min ba 'o II dpyod pa gan ie na I so sor rtog pa yid kyi brjod pa ste sems pa dan ses rab kyi khyad [4] par de hiin du gan sems iib pa'o II ies Mad de I gtan la mi 'bebs pa 'i gnas skabs na ni sems pa 'o II gtan la 'bebs pa 'i gnas skabs na ni ses rab bo ies mam par biag go II Pancaskandhaka (pek. Tg, Si. 16a3_4]21>7: rtog pa gan ie na I kun tu 'tshol ba 'i yid kyi(s)" brjod pa ste I sems pa dan I ses rab kyi bye brag gan sems rtsin ba 'o II dpyod pa (xyl.: spyod) gan ie na I so sor rtog pa'i yid kyi(S)b brjod pa ste I de biin du gan sems iib pa 'o II Dantinne: kyi. b Dantinne: kyis. •

=

•

Fragm. 2 (ad AK 11.24): tathii hy anenaiviiciiryel}a Pancaskandhake likhitam I chanda!; katama!; I abhiprete" vastuny abhilii:ja!; II adhimok:ja!; katama!; I ni§cite vastuni tathaiviivadhiiral}am I ityiidi I [Wogihara, 127.21-23; Shastri, 187.9-1 1]. Shastri: abhipreta-vastuni (sic). (pek. Tg, Cu. 13 1a3] 'di ltar slob dpon 'dis phun po lna'i nan du 'dun pa gan ie na I bsam (xyl. : bsams) pa 'i [4J dizos p o la mnon par 'dod pa'o II mos p a gan ie n a I nes pa'i dizos p o la de biin du nes par 'dzin pa '0 ies bya ba fa sogs pa bris so II Paiicaskandhaka (pek. Tg, Si. 14a3]2<': 'dun pa gan ie na I bsam pa Y dnos po la 'dod pa'o II mas gan ie na I [4J nes pa Y dizos po la de biin du nes par 'dzin pa 'o II •

=

Fragm. 3 (ad AK IlI.32): apare punar evaf!l vyiicak:jate I yathii Pancaskandhake likhitaf!l tathedaf!l grahftavyam iti I tadyathii I chanda!; katama!; I abhiprete vastuny abhilii:ja!; I *anabhiprete niisti chanda iti abhipraya!; * I adhimok:ja!; katama!; I ni§cite vastuni tathaiviivadhiiral}am I sm[ti!; katamii I

et aL 266 YaSomitra's Vyiikhya was translated by VisuddhasiI]1ha and Dpal brtsegs in the same period as the Paiica� skandhaka. 'JG/

Cf. Dantinne,

p.

140 § 21.3-4.; LVP, Kosa, II, p. 175 n.

"" Cf. Dantinne, p. 135 § 17.1-2; p. 71 nn. 101, 102.

58

2

(Sanskrit reconstructed); see above, nn. 215-216.

sal'f1Stute vastuny asampramofaS cetaso 'bhilapanatii I samiidhif;l katamaf;l l upapan7qye vastuni cittasyaikiigratii I prajiiii katamii I tatraiva pravicayo yogayogavihito 'nyathii ca I ity evam iidif;l Paiicaskandhaka-grantho dra.y{avyaf;l l [Wogihara, 309.7-13; Shastri, 477.25-478. 14]. *---* Added by Yasomitra. [pek. Tg, Cu. 346a7] gian dag ni 'di skad du 'di ni phun po Ina las ji skad du bris pa de biin du bzuil bar bya'o ies zer te I 'di Ita ste I [8] 'dun pa gail ie na I bsam pa'i dilos po la 'dod pa ste · / *ma bsam pa la mdun pa med do II siiam du bsam (xyL: bsams) pa yin no · II mos pa gail ie na I iles pa 'i dilos po la de kho na [346b1] bim du nes par 'dzin pa'o II driln pa gail ie na I dris pa 'i dilos po la mi brjed de / sems kyi mn011 par brjod pa iiid do II tin ne 'dzin gail ie niz I brtag par bya ba'i dilos po la [2] sems rtse gcig iiid do IIses rab gan ie na I de iiid la rab. tu mam par 'byed pa ste I rigs pa dan rna rigs pas bskyed pa dan I de la gian pa 'o II ies bya ba de Ita bu la sogs [3] pa phun po ma'i giuil las yin par blta'o II Paiicaskandhaka [pek. Tg, Si 14a3]269: 'dun pa gan ie na I bsam pa'i dilos po la 'dod pa'o II mos pa gail ie na 1 [4] nes pa'i dilos po la de biin du nes par 'dzin pa'o lI dran pa gan ie nti I dris pa'i dilos po iiid rna brjed pa ste I sems kyi milon par brjod pa iiid do II tiil ile 'dzin gail ie na I brtags pa 'i dilos po la sems rtse [5] gcig pa iiid do II ses rab gail ie na I.de dag iiid la rab tu mam par 'byed pa ste I rigs (xyL: rig) pa dan I rigs pa ma yin pas bskyed pa dail l gian pa'o II '

=

'

Fragm. 4 (ad III.32): tatra hy uktam I palica sarvatragii vedaniisa/fljiiiisparsamanaskiiracetaniif;l l paiica pratiniyata­ vi:jayiiS chandadhimolqasm(tisamiidhiprajiiii ity evam iidi I [Wogihara, 309. 13-15; . Shastri, 478.1416]. [pek. Tg, Cu. 346b3] de las ni tshor ba dan / 'du ses dan / reg pa dan / yid la byed pa dan / sems pa dan lila ni lam tu (xyL: du) 'gro ba 'o II 'dun pa dan mos [4] pa dan / dran pa dan tin ne 'dzin dan / ses rab dan lila ni yul so sor iles pa 'o II ies bya ba de Ita bu la sogs pa bsad do /I Paiicaskandhaka [pek. Tg, Si. 14a1]''''' : de mams las I lila ni kun tu 'gro ba'o li ma ·ni yul so sor iles pa'o II =

2.4 The Pratityasamutpiidasutra Ya�Qmitra's AbhidhaJ:rnako!(vvyii.khyii contains some extracts from the Pratit)!asamlftpiitia­ sutra271, a text in which the Buddhist fundamental doctrine of "dependent ·origination" was "" Cf. Dantinne, p." l0 § 17.1-5; pp. 71-74 nn. 101-105. 770

Cf. Dantinne, p. 9 § 15, § 16.1-5, § 17.1-5.

77 1 The Tibetan text of the PratityasamutpiidiidivibhaJiganirdeia ( = Pratityasamutpiidasiitra) was edited by de Jong, "A propos du Nidanas"'11yukta", pp. 146-149; de Jong's references to the page/folio numbering are rather unusual (e.g. on p. 145: "voL 34, 306dl-307b3"), here are the full references to the Peking Tripitaka: (a) Pratityasamutpiidasiitra - Kanjur mdo, Tsu., fol. 131al-132b3 = ed. Suzuki, No. 877, vol. 34, p, 306-4-1 - 307-2-3; (b) 'Pratityasamutpiida(-iidi-vibhaJiga-nirdeJa-)vyiikhyii of Vasubandhu - Tanjur mdo 'grel, Chi. lal-71aB = ed. Suzuki, No. 5496, vol. 104, p. 278-1-1 - 306-4-8. (c) PratityasamutpiidiidivibhaJiganirdeJa-pkii of GUI.lamati - Tanjur mdo 'grel, Chi. 71aB-283b6 = ed. Suzuki, No. 5497, voL 104, p. 306-4-8 -vol. lOS, p. 33-4-6.

59

explained. Yasomitra's quotations from the Pratftyasamutpiidasutra272 are identical with the text which is preserved on the brick inscriptions discovered in Niilanda (ed. by Chakravarty in Epi­ graphia Indica XXI), and with the Sutra No. 16 from the collection of 25 Sutras of the Nidiinasaf!lyutta (ed. by Tripathi)273. Vasubandhu referred to the Pratftyasamutpiidasutra in his Abhidharmakosa (III.28a-b) and wrote a separate commentary on it274• It is interesting to observe that the extracts from the Sahetusapratyayasanidiinasutra (once the title reads: Sahetusa­ pratyayakramasutra )"75 which are quoted by Yasomitra in his Sphuriirthii are identical with Candraldrti's quotations from the Prautyasamutpiidasutra in his Prasannapadii . Actually those fragments which are attributed by Candraldrti to the Pratftyasamutpiidasutra are extracted from the Sahetusapratyayasanidiinasutra, as is proved by the Chinese translation of the latter27". From a long discussion directed against a Sautrantika master Srilata in Vasubandhu's Abhidharmakosa m.27 and Yasomitra's Sphu{iirthii, it results that Srilata seems to refer his argu­ ments to the Sahetusapratyayasanidiinasutra whereas Vasubandhu and Yasomitra accept the Pratftyasamutpiidasutra as ' their authority. Below are reproduced Yasomitra's quotations from the Pratftyasamutpiidasutra with comparative notes. Fragm. 1 : sutre 'py uktam / "avidyii katamii / yat purviinta jiiiinam apariinte jiiiinam iti vistaralJ / [Wogihara, 143.29-30; Shastri, 211. 13-15]. AVinS 5. 15: tatra katamii avidyii. b NidSa § 16.4: ad. tat; AVinS 5.15: yad uta. Cf. LVP, Kosa, III, p. 92 n. 1. a

W e signal the following misprints/misreadings i n de long's edition: (p. 146 n. 1) read: miian-yod; (§1) khyod - B [= GUJ).amati] SOb4: khyed; B om. / after bstan-gyis and after dan; (§2 n. 2) read: B 'breI bar 'byuh baJi; B om. / after 'di-lta-ste, 'di:byun, 'di-lta-ste, 'du-byed, mya-nan dan ; 'ba'-sig ungrammatical, B reads: 'ba'-iig; (§3)read: gan ie-na /; ' (§4) B om. / after 'gog-pa dan [po 147] nan-pa dan; B ins. / after nnons-pa dan ; (p. 147 line 1) B reads: yan-dag-par byuia ba'i; (§5) B reads: ces bya ba la /; (§6) B om. / in ma-ba dan sna etc.; (§7) (gzugs) ies ungrammatical; B orn. / after gzugs 'di dan; B ins. / after bsdus nas; (§S) B reads: ces bya ba fa /; (§9) B reads: ies bya ba fa; B om. / after Ice dan , fus dan; (§10) B ins. / after bde-ba dan ; (p. 148 §12) B has / after ies bya ba fa; read: brtuf-iugr, (§14) insert skye-ba before gan ie-na; B orn. mnon-par byun-ba dan /; B reads: mnon-par 'grub-pa (S1bS); (§15) B ins. / after ies bya ba fa; (§16) reads: gan ie·na; B ins. / after de-dan; B orn. / before iig-pa ('jig-pa) . m

Cf. below Samathadeva's version of the Pratityasamutpiidasiitra.

173 See also the Arthaviniscayasiilra (ed. by Samtani), chapter 5 (dviidafangapratityasamutpiidalJ), and the Dhann askandha, a Sanskrit text from Gilgit (ed. by Dietz). Cf. de Jong, "A propos du NidanasaJ]1yukta", with exhaustive infonnative' notes.

774 See below, fragm. 2. Cf. de long, op. cit., p. 145. See my forthcoming book on Vasubandhu's Pratityasamutpiida­ vyakhya. 77' The text of the Sahetu· is quoted by Samathadeva, vide infra; for the full text and annotated translation see my book quoted supra. 776 See my forthcoming book;

cf.

de Jong, op. cit., p. 144

60

n.

3.

[pek. Tg, Cu , 149a6] mdo las kyan ma rig (xyl.: rigs) pa gail ie na / gail snon gyi mtha ' mi ses pa dail phyi ma Y mtha ' mi ses pa'o ies bya ba rgyas par gsuizs so /1 Fragm. 2:

vijiiiiniiilganirde§e" / vijiiiiniiilgasya trfiyasya nirdese / vijiiiina1?l katama!' / �a4 vijiiiinakiiyii/J / [Wogihara, 299.23-24; Shastri, 46024-25]. AK ill.27 [pradhan, 140.4; Shastri, 460.8]: vijiiiinini ganirdese vijiiiina1?l katamat / �a4 vijiiiinakiiiiy iti I b NidSa § 16.6: katarat. Cf. LVP, Kosa, ill, p. 85 n. 1. [pek. Tg, Cu. 333a7] mam par '[8J ses pa Y yan lag bstan pa ste / gsum pa mam par ses pa'i yan lag bstan pa las / mam par ses pa gan ie na / mam par ses pa 'i tshogs drug go / ies Mad . [333blJ pa de 'thad pa yin no /1 •

Fragm. 3 :

Pratityasamutpiidasutre niimarilpavibhailga eva1?l nirdesiit / aniima katamat / clltviiro 'rUpirJa/;l · skandhii iti / rUpa1?l katamat /yat ki1?lcid rUpam iti vistarelJa yiivad yac ceda1?l rUpa1?l yac ca niima tad ubhaya1?l niimarUpam ity ucyata iti / [Wogihara, 299.32-300. 1; Shastri; 461. 13-16]. NidSa §16.7: niimarUpa1?l katarat / catviiro 'rti.pii}a/;l skandhii/;l /; Niilandii ll. 1 1-12: niima katamat / catviiro 'rUpilJa/;l skandhii/;l / rUpa1?l katamat / yat /drrIcid rUpQl?l sarva1?l tac catviiri mahiibhutiini / catviiri ca mahiibhutiiny upiidiiyetida,j-t ca rUpa1?l pu.rvakaI?t ca nama tad aikadhyam abhisarrz!qipya niimarUpam ity ucyate /; AVinS 8.1: tatra kataman niima / catviiro 'rUpi�a/;l skandhii/;l / ( ...) [9:1-2] rUpa1?l katamat /yat ki1?lcid rUpa1?l sarva1?l tat catviiri mahiibhutiini catviiri ca mahiibhUtiiny upiidiiya / ( ... ) [9.6-7] yad ida1?l rUpa1?l purvaka1?l ca niima tad ubhayam ekatriibhisarrz!qipya niimarUpam ity ucyate / [* The editor's note 11 on p. 8 is wrong: the Skt. reconstructed from the Tib. translation should read: tatra niimarilpa1?l katamat / niima catviiro 'rUpilJa/;I skandhii/;l /, and not as Samtani .has it: niimarUpa1?l catviiro ...]. Cf. de Jong, op. cit., p. 147 §6; LVP, Kosa, p. 85 n. 2. [pek. Tg, Cu. 333b5] rten cm 'brei par 'byun ba 'i mdo las / mm dan gzugs mam par 'byed pa las min gan ie na / gzugs [6J can ma yin pa 'i phuil po bii'o // gzugs gan ie na / gzugs gail ym pa ci yan run ba ies bya ba nas rgyas par gzugs gail yin pa dail / mm gail yin pa de [7J giiis ni min dan gzugs ies bya'o // ies de Itar du bstan pa Y phyir ro /1 •

Fragm . 4 : jariimaralJa1?l yathiinirdi#a1?l sutra iti /jarii katama / yat tat" khiilitya1?lb piilityam iti vistarq/;l / maralJairz katamaf / yiid t�ii1?l tefii1?l sattviinii1?l tasmiit tasmiir; 'cyutiS cyavanam iti vistara/;l / ' [Wogihara, 300.28-30; Shastri, 462.25-27]. . AVinS 13.4: om. tat. b Niilandii 1 18: (kh)iilatya1?l. NidSa §16.15: katarat. d Niilandii 1 20: yii ; NidSa § 16. 16, AVinS 14.1, Dhsk 16v2: yat Niilandii 1. 21, NidSa § 16. 16, AVinS 14.2, Dhsk 16v3 : ad. sattvanikiiyat. Cf. LVP, Kosa, III, p. 88 n. 2. [pek. Tg, Cu. 335a3] rga si 'byuil mdo las ji skad bstan pa Ita bu '0 // ies bya ba ni rga ba gan ie na / mgo sgre bar gyur pa dan / skya bo gail yin pa ies bya ba rgyas par 'byun ba dail / si gail ie na [4J sems can dail de dag gnas de dail de nas si 'pho iiiI 'chi ba gan yin pa ies bya ba rgyas par 'byuil ba yin no /1 •

c

.

•

Fragm. 5:

Pratityasamutpiidasutra uktam / iirUpyaprasiddhilqa1Je vijiiiinapratyayQl?l niimarilpam iti vacaniit / [Wogihara, 668.7; Shastri, 1 133. 13-14]. 61

* Without any equivalent! Cf. LVP, Kosa, VIII, p. 138 n. 2. 3. P�AVARDHANA'S �ANA.NuSARlNi MAJOR

According to the Tibetan tradition271, Piin�avardhana (Gail ba spel ba) was a disciple of Sthiramati and a master of Jinamitra and Silendrabodhi, the famous translators active in the period of "great revision" at the end of the eighth and the beginning of the ninth century278. Jinamitra together with Dpal brtsegs translated the Abhidhannakosa. Taranatha placed PI1I1].avardhana during the reign of the Tibetan king Khri sroil lde btsan (754-797 AD.)279. In the Deb ther silOn po ( 1476-1478 AD.) the following succession of masters who transmitted in Tibet the teachings of Asailga's Abhidhannasamuccaya is recorded: Buddha, Maitreya, Asailga, Vasubandhu, Sthiramati, Pl1rI]avardhana, Jinamitra, Dpal brtsegs, Klu'i rgyal mtshan, Ye ses sde280. It is known from the Annals of Ladakh that Jinamitra, Silendrabodhi, Danasila and other Indian paI]qits were invited by the Tibetan king Ral pa can (ruled 815-838 AD.) to prepare translations of the Buddhist texts into Tibetan2S!. Since both Pl1rI]avardhana's disciples, Jinamitra and Silendrabodhi, were active at the end of the eighth and in the beginning of the ninth century, we can put the date of PiifI�avardhana approximately at the second half of the eighth century. The Indian paI]qit Kanakavarman and the Tibetan lotsava (s)Pa tshab Ni rna grags prepared the translation of PiirI]avardhana's La/qalJiinusiiriJ:zi, major and minor. Ni rna grags is mentioned in the Blue Annals, in the record of transmission of the Madhyamaka texts in Tibet282. It is said that Ni rna grags, a translator from (s)Pa tshab, born 1055 AD., introduced the Madhyamaka system to Tibet. He studied for 23 years in Kashmir and, after his return to Tibet, was asked by the monks from Spu hrans to translate Pl1rI]avardhana's commentary on the Abhidhannakosa. Accordingly, he prepared a translation which has found approval of the monks. Notable are also his translations of the works of Candrakirti: Prasannapadii and Madhyamakiiva-

ZT1

Bu-ston, Chos 'byuh [ed. Lokesh Chandra, fo!. 8473]: de'i slob rna Gail ba spel yin la I de'i slob rna Ji na rni tro

dail Si lendro bo (xyl.: bhoY dhi la sogs yin gsuh ste dpyad par bya'o II; trans!' Obenniller, II, p. 148 & n. 1051a. m

Cf. Naudou, Les bouddhistes ka1miriens, pp. 86-90.

Z/9 Rgya gar chos 'byuh [ed. Schiefner, 166.16-22]: rgyal po 'di'i dus [17J su I rtog ge pa chen po Dge bsrohs" dail I Sen ge bzail po' dail I Mdzes bkod< dail IRgya [18] rntsho sprin d dail I 'Od ze, 'byun gnas< dail I Gail ba spet' dail I roo 1e slob dpon chen [19] po Sans rgyas ye ses tabs' thugs SrrlS dail bcas pa mams dail I Sails rgyas gsail ba' [20] dail I Sans rgyas ii ba' dail I kha che'; yul du slob dpon Padrna 'byuh gnas dbyails' [21] dail I rtog ge pa Chos 'byuh byin t dail

I 'dul 'dzin Sen ge'i gdon canm la sogs pa [22] byuh no II • Subhagupta,

C. 720-780 A.D. (FrauwaIlner). b Haribhadra. Sobhavyiiha, Sundaravyiiha. d Sagaramegha. • Prabhakara. r Pii�avardhana. ' Buddhajfianapada. h Buddhaguhya. i Buddhasiinti. 790 A.D. (FrauwaIlner). m SiiIhamukha. •

'" The Blue Annals, trans!. Roerich, I, p. 344. '81

Cf. Naudou, op. cit., p. 86.

,., Trans!. Roerich, I, p. 341ff.

62

k

Padmakaragho�a.

1

Dharmakaradatta,

C.

730-

tara. In Ra mo che he worked together with Kanakavarman on comparing these translations with the Indian manuscripts. It is recorded in the Blue Annals that Brtson 'grus gion nu, born in 1123 AD., was ordained at the age of 18 by Ni rna grags. This points to a considerable longevity of Ni rna grags whose activity· must therefore have covered the whole first half of the twelfth centurf'". Kanakavarman284 collaborated wit):! many famous translators: Rin chen bzail po (980-1055 AD.), Dad pa'i ses rab (2nd half of the 1 1th century)28S, Chos 'bar (1044-1089 AD.), Ni rna grags (lOSS-d. after 1 141 AD.). Thus the .activity of Kanakavarman covers the seconp half of the eleventh century. Ultimately, we are in a position to accept the year 1 100 AD. as an approximate tiine of completing the translation of PiirI]avardhana's Lalqcn;uinusari1;zi, major and minor. In the colophon we read that the translation was executed in Pu rans, on the Gandhamadana mahagiri, situated south of Manasasaras and the snowy mountain Ti se286. PiirI]avardhana's larger Lalqa1)iinusari1;zi is a huge work in the style of the classical Indian commentaries. It is interesting to note many fragments in common with Sthiramati's Tattviirtha. The question arises then, whether the Lalqa1)iinusaril)i represents a kind of a subcommentary on the work of PiirI.lavardhana's master, Sthiramati. This may be true since, there are so many passages in common. On the other hand, the answer is complicated by the fact that Sthiramati's commentary is but a compilation prepared by its Tibetan translator with the help· of the commentaries of Yasomitra and PiirI.lavardhana. However that may be - a�d at the present moment it would be difficult to give an explicit answer - it will be seen from a comparative study of a piece of text (see below the chapter on Sthiramati) that the affinities of PiirI]avardhana's larger commentary with Sthiramati's work are very close. 4. SAMATHADEVA

We know unfortunately nothing about Samathadeva, the author of the UpiiyikaAbhidharmakosa­ pkii . Some scholars tried to identify the name of Samathadeva (:Zi gnas lha) with the famous Santideva (Zi ba lha)281, but this is very iinprobable since the Tibetan ii gnas regularly translates the Sanskrit sarnatha, and ii ba stands for santa or santi2". On account of the

283

Cf. Naudou, op. cit., p. 172f.

'" Cf. Naudou, op. cit., p. 181f. 283 On their translation of Dignaga's Pramiil)asamuccaya cf. my paper "On the date of Tibetan translations of Dignaga's Pramiil)asamuccaya and Dharmaldrti's 'Pramiil)aviirttika" (to appear in the Proc. of the 2nd International Dharmaldrti Conference, Vienna June 1989).

"" (pek. Tg, Nu. 391a2-3] gails ri chen po ti se dail yid biin gyi mtsho'i tho bur (xyl. bos) ri bo chen po spos Icyi had /dail [3J ba'i 'dab yul pu mirs su ;'

Cf. Naudou, op. cit., p. 181. 71fT Chaudhuri, Analytical study ofthe Abhidharmakosa, p. 8. Cf. Nakamura, "A survey of conservative Buddhism in South Asia with bibliographical notes", p. 96 (obviously a mistake).

'" Tib.-Skt. Dictionary s.v.; Index AKBh

S.v.

63

similar title it would be a tempting idea to identify the Upiiyikii with the Mdzod kyi thabs bsdus pa, in 3000 slokas and 10 bam po, listed in the Lhan kar rna catalogue28 •• The expression thabs bsdus pa may be restored into the Sanskrit *upiiya-sar(zgraha. However, the large size of Samathadeva's Upiiyikii which in the Peking Tanjur counts 880 pages and in the Derge Tanjur 764 pages makes such an identification highly improbable290• Let us then turn to the text itself. According to the colophon, bhik�u Samathadeva, born in Nepal (Bal po'i yul), composed his Upiiyikii commentary on the Abhidhannakosa having found that there were missing parts of the Sutra and/or Agama etc. quotations. Accordingly, Samathadeva completed the text of the Abhidhannakosa with the adequate quotations of the sutras, but wherever he was not able to remember a sutra he did not quote it. So, as a result the present text is a collection of full quotations or extracts from the canonical sutras291• "This Abhidhannakosa-siistra provided with original sutras of a Thousand Sutra [part of the] Holy Scripture, after having been faithfully translated by the teacher from Khams, let all beings recognize as a [true] meaning of the Abhidharma"m. This stanza refers to the translation of the Upiiyikii itself. The Indian paI!qit Jayasri and the Tibetan lotsava from Khams, bhik�u Ses rab 'od zer, completed the translation in the Kashmirian town of Anupamamahapura, in the northern tower (or turret) of the Yamarivihara293. It seems probable that the Indian translator, Jayasri, is the same person as the Kashmirian logician Jayasri who lived in the second half of the eleventh century. This would fit well with the fact that the translation was made in Kashmir, in one of the most important Buddhist centres of the eleventh century2.., Samathadeva's commentary on the Abhidhannakosa offers a special interest for scholars since it has preserved many lost texts, or different versions of the texts already known. It has been shown by L. Schmithausen that Samathadeva's quotations from the Madhyarniigarna do not have their close

,.. No. 691, cd. Lalou. 2'JO One can compare e.g. 4000 slokas of Dignaga's Mannaprodipa with the corresponding 284 pages in the Peking Tanjur. 2" Such a character of this quasi-commentary has lliready been ascertained by Japanese scholars. See the works of H. Sakurabe mentioned in Nakamura, op. cit., p. 96; Y. Honjo, "On the Abbidharmakosopayikii by Samathadeva", IBK XXVllI: 1, Dec 1979, pp. 442-439; XXIX:2, March 1981, pp. 915-912; ditto, A Table of Agama-Citations in the

Abhidhann akosa and the Abhidhann akoiopiiyikii. Part

1.

Kyoto 1984.

292 [Pek. Tg, Thu. 144a5-6]: gsuil rob mdo sde [6J stan gi mdo khuils Icyis I chos mnon mdzod Icyi bstan beos brgyan pa 'di I khams pa stan pas dad pas rob bsgyur las I 'gra lam mnon pa'i chos Icyi don rtogs sag I;' m [Pek. Tg, Thu. 144a6-7] kha che'i gran khyer chen po dpe [7J med Icyi dbus jarame'i glsug lag khan gi byan phyogs Icyi bsi/ khan du I rgya gar gyi mkhan po fii ya iri dan I bod Icyi 10 Isa ba khams pa dge sian Ses rob 'ad zer gyis yan dag

par bsgyur ba II;

d.

Naudou, Us bouddhistes kaSminens, p. 170.

,.. Naudou, op. cit., p. 106, 169f.

64

parallels in the Chinese Madhyamiigama of the Sarvastivadins but in the Chinese SaJ?1yuktiigama of the Millasarvastivadins29s•

4.1 Samathadeva on the pratityasamutpiida In this chapter I would like to offer ,an analysis of the portion of Samathadeva's Upiiyikii (peking Tanjur) which contains his glosses on the pratityasamutpiida exposition in the Abhidharmako§a, covering the karikas m.18-28. Among the others there are found full quotations of the Pa­ ramiirthaJunyatiisiUra, the Sahetusapratyclyasanidiinasutra (vide supra sub Yasomitra), the Bhilqusutra, Or the Pratityasamutpiidasutra, being a different version of the canonical text from the Kanjur'"". Fragm. 1 (Tu. 155b3-156a8): PararniirthaJiin Begins: 'di skad du beom !dan 'lias kyis las ni yod pa mam par smin pa ni yod do ies bya ba la sogs pa la I beom !dan 'lias... This corresponds to AKBh m.18 [pradhan, 129.9ff.; Shastri, 432.12ff.; Pek. Tg, Gu. 142b7ff.]: eval'{l taktal'{l bhagavatii I asti karmiisti vipiikalJ.. .. j. The Sanskrit text of the PararriarthaJunyatiisutra was reconstructed by E. Lamotte (''Trois Sutra du Sa!p.yukta sur la vacuite", pp. 3 13-3 16; ibid. full bibliography). Below is reproduced the Tibetan text of this Sutra according to Samathadeva. The division into paragraphs follows Lamotte's text. 1. [Iu. 155b3] beom !dan 'lias skya bas sen ge gron khyer [4] ka lma sa dam mi na biugs te I 2. de nas beom !dan 'lias kyis dge slon mams la bos te I 3. dge slon dag thog mar dge ba I bar du dge ba I tha mar dge ba I don bzail po I tshig 'bru bzail po I ma 'dres pa I yoils su rdzogs pa I [5] yoils su byail ba tshaizs par spyod pa I gsal bar byed pa I 'di Ita ste I don dam pa I ston pa nid ees bya ba 'i ehos kyi mam graizs bstan par bya yis de legs par iion la yid la gzun tig dan biad par bya 'o II 4. don dam pa ston [6] pa iiid ees bya ba 'i ehos kyi mam grails gail ie na I mig (xyl: mi) skye ba na gan nas kyail mi 'on I 'gag pa gail du mi go ste I 5. dge slon dag 'di ltar mig ni ma byuil ba las byun tin byun nas kyan yoils su Yigs pa ste I (xyl.

om. I) 6. las ni yod do II [7] mam par smin pa ni yod do II ehos su brdar btags pa ma gtogs pa phun po 'di 'dod par byed cin phun po gian iiid mtshams sbyor bar byed pa po ni mi dmigs'so II

7. Tib. omits. 8. de la ehos su brdar btags pa ni 'di yin te I 'di Ita ste I 'di [8] yod pas 'di 'byun I 'di skyes pa'i phyir 'di skye ste I 'di Ita ste I ma rig pa 'i rkyen gyis 'du byed I 'du byed kyi rkyen gyis mam par ses pa I mam par ses pa 'i rkyen gyis min dan gzugs I min dan gzugs kyi rkyen gyis skye mched drug I [156a1] skye mehed drug gi rkyen gyis reg pa I regpa 'i rkyen gyis tshor ba I tshor ba 'i rkyen gyis sred pa I sred pa 'i rkyen gyis len pa I len pa 'i rkyen gyis srid pa I srid pa'i rkyen gyis skye ba I skye ba 'i rkyen gyis rga si dail I [2] mya nan dan I smre snags 'don pa dan I sdug bsnal ba dan I yid mi

.., "Beitrage zur Schulzugehorigkeit und Textgeschichte kanonischer und postkanonischer buddhistischer Materialien", p. 338ff. ". Cf. Honjo, A Table ofAgama-Citations in the AbhidhannakoJa and the Abhidhann akosopiiyika.

65

bde ba dan / 'khrug pa mams 'byun bar 'gyur te / de ltar na sdug bSlial gyi phun po 'di 'ba ' iig 'byun bar 'gyur ro // 9. 'di ltar 'di med pas 'di mi 'byun / 'di [3] ma skyes pas 'di 'gag par 'gyur te / ma rig pa 'gags pas 'du byed 'gag / 'du byed 'gags pas mam par ses pa 'gag / mam par ses pa 'gags pas min dan gzugs 'gag / min dan gzugs 'gags pas [4] skye mched drug 'gag / skye mched drug 'gags pas reg pa 'gag / reg pa 'gags pas tshor ba 'gag / tshor ba 'gags pas .'Ired pa 'gag / .'Ired pa 'gags pas len pa 'gag / len pa 'gags pas srid pa 'gag / srid [5] pa 'gags pas skye ba 'gag / skye ba 'gags pas rga si dan ) mya nan dan / smre snags 'don pa dan / sdug bsnal ba dan /yid mi bde ba dan / 'khrugpa mams 'gag par 'gyur te / de ltar na sdug bsnal gyi phun po chen po [6] 'di 'ba' iig 'gag par 'gyur ro // 10. 'di ni don dam pa stan pa iUd ces bya ba Y chos kyi rnam grails so // dge sIan dag thog rnar dge ba / bar du dge ba / don bzan po / tshig 'bru bzan po / rna 'dres pa /yoils su rdzogs [7] pa /yoils su byan ba / tshails par spyod pa / yoils su gsal bar byed pa 'di lta ste / don dam pa stan pa fiid ces bya ba 'i chos kyi mam grails bSad par bya 'o ies ji skad du bstan pa de rgyas par rab tu bSad do ies bka ' stsal [8] to // Additional notes: Ad §§4-5: cf. AKBh V.27 [Pradhan, 299. 14-16; Shastri, 813.1-3] yat Paramiirthaiunyatiiyiim uktaf!l bhagavatii / calqur utpadyamiinaf!l na kutaicid iigacehati nirudhyamiinaf!l na kvacit saf!lnieayaf!l gaeehati / iti hi bhilqavai ealqur abhutvii bhavati bhutvii ea pratigaeehati /; [pek. Tg, Gu. 282b8] 'di ltar beam ldan 'das kyis don dam pa stan pa iiid kyi mdo las / mig ni skye ba na yan gan nas mi 'on [283al] la / 'gag pa na yan gan du yan sags par mi 'gyur ro // de lta bas na dge sIan dag mig ni ma byun ba las 'byun im byun nas kyan .'lIar Yig par 'gyur ro ies gsuils te / Ad §6: cf. AKBh IX [pradhan, 468.22-24; Shastri, 1208.4-6] sutra eva hi pratilqiptaf!l bhagavatii Paramiirthaiunyatiiyiim / iti hi bhilqavo 'sti karmiiSti vipiikaJ:t kiirakas tu nopalabhyate /ya imiif!li ea skandhiin nilqipaty anyiif!li ca skandhiin pratisaf!ldadhiity anyatra dharmasaf!lketiid iti /; [pek. Tg, Nu. 100b6] beam ldan 'das kyis don dam pa stan pa ftid kyi mdo kho na las / dge sIan dag las ni yod do // mam par smin pa ni yod do // ehos su brdar btags (xyL : brtags) pa ma [7] gtogs pa gan iig phun po 'di mams 'dar bar byed cin phun po gian dag fiid mtshams sbyor bar byed pa 'i byed pa po ni mi dmigs so ies gsuils so // Cf. also Yasomitra ad. loco [Wogihara, 707. 13-16; Shastri, 1208.17-20]; Lamotte's emendation lop. cit, p. 3 14 n. 8] of the last sentence in the Vyiikhyii is corroborated by the Tibetan translation (n.b. here this sentence comes first): anyatra dharmasaf!lketiid itipratityasamutpiidala­ /qm:ziintare{lll * /; [pek. Tg, Chu. 390b5-6] ehos su brdar. btags pa ma.gtogs pa ies bya ba ni rtan eili 'brei par 'byun ba 'i mtshan fiid la rna gtogs pa ste / * Shastri: °antena (sic). Further see Yuktidipika led. Pandeya], 77. 15-16; 82.3-4.

Fragm. 2 (Tu. 156a8-156b7): *Indra[(-ka)-yalqa-niima]-siitra Begins: dan po nur nur po yin no ies bya ba la sags pa la / This corresponds to AKBh lli. 19 [pradhan, 130. 1-4; Shastri, 433.13-16; Pek. Tg, Gu. 143a7ff.]: k.alalaJp prathafruurl bhavati etc. Here is reproduced the whole fragment from Samathadeva; the passages quoted in the Abhidharmakosa are in bold type. [Tu. 156a8] beam ldan 'das ma ga dhar !jails rgyu tin gsegs te gnod sbyin dban po 'i khyim du mtshan mo gnas pa 'i phyir gsegs so // de nas gnod sbyin dban po [156bl] beam ldan 'das gan na 'der fie bar 'oils te / fie bar 'oils nas beam ldan 'das kyi iabs la spyi bas phyag byas te phyogs gcig tu 'dug go //phyogs gcig tu 'dug nas gnod sbyin dban pas tshigs su bead pa [2] 'di skad ees gsol to ll 66

srag gis ei zig mi ses sam / srag gis ci zig mi rtags sam / srog ni gan du beins sin gnas / srag gi 'chin ba ci zig yin // «1» beam !dan 'das kyis bka' stsal pa I srag [3J gis gzugs mams mi ses te / . 'du byed kyan ni rtags ma yin / srag ni Ius 'dir bew (xyL: bem) sin gnas / srag ni 'chin ba sred pa yin // «2» sans rgyas gzugs ni srag min gsun / ji ltar tshan tshm 'dir gnas Sin / [4J ji ltar rim gyis gan bur 'gyur / ji Itar Ius 'di mnan 'phel 'gyur // «3» daii po 1JUT 1JUTpo yin 110 / 1JUT 1JUT po las mer mer skye (xyL : pa) /

mer mer po las nar nar skye / nar nar po las mkhraiJ 'gyur skye // «4» mkhraiJ las (xyL: nas) fkail lag 'gyur (xyL: 'byuh) [5J ba daii / skra spu sen 1TW la sags daii / dbail po gzugs can roams daii iii / mlshan ma (xyL: mtshams mams) rim gyis skye bar 'gyur // «5» gan tshe ma yin bzas pa dan / btun ba gnis ka lans spyad pas / mnal gyi nan na gnas pa 'i mi / [6J des ni gsal tin skye bar 'gyur // «6»

de nas gnad sbyin dban pa beam ldan 'das kyis gsuns pa la mnan par dga ' tin rjes su yi ran nas / beam ldan 'das kyi zabs la spyi bas phyag byas te / beam /dan 'das [7J kyi drun nas san na // In the Abhidharmakosa t�e stanzas 4 and 5 are preserved in Sanskrit: kalalaf!! prathamaf!! bhavati kalalaj jiiyate 'rbudalJ / arbudiij jiiyate pesi pesita jiiyate ghanaIJ // ghanat praSakhii jiiyante ke§aramanakhiidayalJ / indriyal)i ea riipil)i vyanjanany anupurvaSalJ // ity aryalJ // The corresponding Pali passage occurs in the Indako�suttai Saf!!yutta Nikiiya [ed. PTS, I, p. 2061: riiPQf!! na jivan-ti vadanti buddhii / kathaf!! nvayQf!! vindat-imaf!! sariraf!! / kut-assa a{!hiyakapil)qam eti / kathaf!! nvayQf!! sajjati gabbharasmin-ti // pathamaf!! kalalaf!! hati // kalalii hati abbudam // abbudii jiiyate pesi //pesi nibbattati ghano // ghana pasakha jiiyanti // kesa loma nakhiiili ea // yaf!! eassa bhufljati mata // annaf!! panaf!! ea bhajanQf!! // tena sa tattha yiipeti // matukucehzgata nara ti // Cf. also references in LVP, Kasa, ill, p. 58 n. 1; further see Garuqa-puriil)a (Saroddhiira) VI.6f.

Fragm. 3 (Tu. 156b7- 157a6): Mahiinidiinapary Begins: 'di ltar glen gii chen pa 'i mam grans las zes bya ba la /

67

This corresponds to AKBh ill .20 [pradhan, 131.14-16; Shastri, 436.7-8; Pek. Tg, Gu. 144b4-5] : tatluJ. hi MaluJ.nidiinaparyiiyasutre j. Below is reproduced the entire fragment: [Tu. 156b7] mdor bstan pa brjod pa las 'di itar 'don te I lam dga' bo min dan gzugs la rkyen yod dam ies 'dri na I rkyen yod do ies lan gdab par bya'o II kun dga' bo min dan gzugs kyi rkyen gan yin ies 'dri na I mam par ses pa rkyen yin no ies brjod par bya'o II kun dga' bo mam par ses pa 'i rkyen gyis min dan gzugs so ies nas [i57aiJ ji skad du bstan rgyas par rab tu Mad do II kun dga ' bo gal te mam par ses pa ma 'i mnal du iugs par rna gyur na / khu ba dan khrag gi nur nur po 'i nan du mnon par brgyal par 'gyur ram I btsun pa rna lags so II kun dga ' bo gal te mam par ses pa ma Y mlial du iugs par ma gyur tam (sic xyL) I 'phos par rna gyur na mam par ses pa 'di ita bur iie bar 'gro bar 'gyur ram I btsun pa ma lags so II kun dga' bo gal te byis pa dan gion nu dan gion nu rna dan I Zan tshe 'i gnas skabs kyis mam par ses pa dan po nas 'di Itar chad cin ma byun bar gyur na min don gzugs 'di Itar rgyas sin yan brgya chen par 'gyur ram I btsun pa ma lags so II kun dga ' bo gal te mam pa thams cad du mam par ses pa med na min dan gzugs gdags par nus sam I btsun pa ma lags so II (This sentence is repeated) II kun dga' bo deY phyir rgyu mtshan 'di dan I rgyu 'di dan I kun 'byun ba 'di lta ste I mam par ses pa'i rkyen gyis min dan gzugs ies bya 'o II mam par ses pa 'i rkyen gyis min dan gzugs ies nas ji skad du bstan de rgyas par rab tu Mad do Ij. The corresponding Sanskrit passage is found in the Dhannaskandha led. Dietz, 6r5, p. 34f.] : vijiiiinalJ1 ced iinanda miituJ:! kulqau niivalckram4Yad api nu niimampalJ1 kalalatvalJ1 hi salJ1murcch4Yat I no bhadanta j. There are also two quotations from the Mahiinidiinaparyiiyasutra preserved in Yasomitra's Sphu(iirtluJ.: [Wogihara, 284.15-18; Shastri, 436.18-20] Mahiinidiinaparyiiyasutre vijiiiinalJ1 ced Ananda miituJ:! kulqilJ1 niivakriimed api tu tanniimampalJ1 kalalatviiyiibhisalJ1murchen no bhadanta ity iidi tatsutralJ1 pa(hyate j. [W ogihara, 669.1-8; Shastri, 1 134. 15-21] sutralJ1 caitam eviirthalJ1 dyotayatiI vijiiiinalJ1 cedAnando miituJ:! kulqilJ1 niivakriimed api tu tanniimampalJ1 kalalatviiya salJ1murchet I no bhadanta I vijiiiinalJ1 ced Anandiivakriimya lqipram eviipakriimed api tu tanniimampam itthatviiya prajiiiiyeta I no bhadanta I vijiiiinalJ1 ced Anando daharasya kumiirasya kumiirikiiyii vii ucchidyeta vina.§yen na bhaved api tu tanniimampalJ1 vrddhilJ1 vipulatiim iipadyeta I no bhadanta I tad aneniipi paryiiye"(Ul veditavyalJ1 yad vijiiiinasya pratyayalJ1 niimampam I niimampapratyayalJ1 ca vijiiiinam iti vistaraJ:! j. The corresponding Pall text is Digha Nikiiya [pTS ed., II, p. 62f.]. Fragm. 4: (Tu. 157a6-158b5) Begins: 'di ltar mdo de iiid las dge slon dag dge slon gis gan phan chad rten cin 'brei par 'byun ba dan ies bya ba la sags pa la I glen gii ni miian du yod pa na 'o j. This corresponds to AKBh ill .25 [pradhan, 133.26-134.2; Shastri, 441.9-11; Pek. Tg, Gu. 146b3]: tatluJ. hi siltra evokJarrl I yataS ca bhilqavo bhi/qwJii pratftyasamutpiidaS ca prantyasamutpanniiS ca dharma evalJ1 yathiibhutalJ1 samyak prajiiayii dr�(ii bhavanti I sa na purviintalJ1 pratisarati kilJ1 nv aham abhuvam ante 'dhvaniti vistaraJ:! j. Below is reproduced the entire fragment. [Tu. 157a6] dge [7J slon dag rten cin 'breI par 'byun ba dan I rten cin 'brel par 'byun ba 'i chos mams Mad par bya yis de legs par iion la yid la gzun Zig dan Mad par bya 'o II rten cin 'breI par 'byun ba'i chos mams gan ie [8J na I 'di ltar 'di yod pas 'di 'byun I 'di skyes pa 'i phyir 'di skye ste I 'di Itar ma rig pa'i rkyen gyis 'du byed mams ies bya ba nas I 'di 'ba ' iig kun 68

tu 'byun bar 'gyur tes bya ba'i bar du ste I skye ba 'i rkyen gyis rga si {157bl] tes bya ba de btin giegs pa byuil yan run I de bim gsegs pa mams ma byun yan run ba 'di ni ehos iiid do II ehos mams kyi chos iiid 'di ni rtag tu gnas pa'o tes ran iiid kyi milon par ses pas mkhyen cin {2] milon par sails rgyas nas ston par byed I 'ehadpar byed I rab tu 'ehad par byed I mam par 'byed par byed / 'grel par byed I rgyas par byed I ston em yan dag par gsal bar byed de I 'di ltar skye ba 'i rkyen gyis rga {3] si dan. I srid pa dan I len pa daiI I sred pa daiI / tshor ba dan / reg pa dan I skye mehed drug dan Imm dan gzugs dan I mam par ses pa dan I ma rig pa 'i rkyen gyis 'du byed mams te I de bim gsegs pa mams byun {4] nam rna byuil yan run ehos iild de I ehos mams kyi ehos iiid 'di ni rtag tu gnas so tes de btin ·gsegs pas ran iiid kyi mnon par ses pas mkhyen nas mnon par sails rgyas nas ston par byed I 'ehad par byed I rab {5] tu 'ehad par byed I mam par 'byedpar byed I 'grel par byed I rgyas par byed I ston (xyL: bsten) cin yan dag par gsal bar byed de I 'di ltar ma rig pa'i rkyen gyis 'du byed mams tes bya ba 'di ni ehos mams kyi gnas pa / ehos {6] mams kyi nes pa I ehos mams kyi ji Ita ba iiid I de bim iiid I mi 'gyur ba de btin iiid / gtan ma yin pa de bim iiid ji Ita ba I bden pa I de kho na iiid I ji lta ba btin mi 'gyur ba I phyin ci ma log pa I rkyen 'di tsam pa ste I {7] 'di ni rten em 'brei par 'byun ba go rim las zlog pa ste I 'di ni rten cin 'brei par 'byun ba tes bya 'o II rten em 'brei par 'byun ba'i ehos mams gan te na I ma rig pa dan I 'du byed dan I mam par ses pa dan I {B] mm daiI gzugs dan I skye mehed drug daiI I reg pa dan I tshor ba dan I sred pa dan I len pa dan I srid pa dan I skye ba dan I rga si'o II dge slon dag de la skye ba dan rga si ni mi rtag pa 'dus byas bsags {15BaI] pa I rten em 'brei par 'byuil ba I skye ba dan I 'jigpa'i ehos ean I 'dad ehags dan bral ba 'i ehos ean I 'gog (xyL: 'gag) pa 'i ehos ean du de ltar yoils su ses par bya 'o II skye ba dan I srid pa [2] dan / len pa dan I sred pa dan I tshor ba dan I reg pa dan I skye mehed drug dan I min dan gzugs daiI I mam par ses pa dan / 'du byed kyan mi rtag pa I 'du byas pa I bsags pa I rten em 'brei par 'byuil ba I skye {3] ba dan I 'jig pa'i ehos ean I 'dod ehags dan bral ba Y ehos ean I 'gog pa 'i ehos ean du de < ltar> yoils su ses par bya ste I 'di ni rten em 'brei par 'byun ba tes bya � II dge sian dag gan yail 'phags pa iian {4] thos thos pa dan ldan pa / rten cin 'brei par 'byun ba dan I rten ein 'brei par 'byun ba 'i ehos ma,m-yan dag par ses rab kyi ji Ita ba biin ses sin I rab tu mthon tin rab tu rig la I rab tu rten em rab {5] tu yid la byas sin I legs par so sor rtogs na I de ci'i bdag 'das pa 'i dus na byun bar gyur ram 'on te byun bar ma gyur I bdag 'das pa Y dus na ci tig tu byun bar gyur I bdag 'das pa Y dus na ji ltar {6] byun bar gyur tes snon gyi mtha ' rjes su 'bran bar mi 'gyur ro II ci bdag ma 'om pa Y dus na I 'byun bar 'gyur ram I 'on te bdag ma 'oils pa 'i dus na 'byun bar mi 'gyur I bdag ma 'oils pa 'i dUs na ei {7] tig tu 'byun bar 'gyur I bdag ma 'oils pa Y dus na Ji 'ltal' 'byuil bar 'gyur ies phyi rna mtha'irjes su 'bran .bar mi 'gyur ro II 'eli eUig 'dj ji ltqr yod pa ni ci tig 'byuil ba ni ci tig sems ean 'di dag gail {B] nas 'oils sin 'ehi 'pho ba na gail du 'gro bar 'gyur tes nan gi bdag iiid la the tshom za bar mi 'gyur ro II gan yan dge spyon nam bram ze gan kha cig 'jig rten gyi Ita bar gyur pa tha dad pa 'di Ita ste I bdag tu smra ba dan I {15Bbl] yan dag par /dan pa dan I mtshams sbyor ba byed par smra ba daiI I yan dag par ldan pa dan I gso bar smra ba dan yan dag par ldan pa dan I dge mtshan daiI bkra sis su smra ba dan I yan dag par /dan pa dag de 'i tshe na yoils su {2] ses Sin yoils su spails par 'gyur I rna ba bead par 'gyur te I sin ta la rna ba bead pa ltar ma 'oils pa Y skal ba mi skye baY ehos ean du 'gyur te I de ci'i phyir te na I dge slon dag 'di ltar 'phags pa iian thos thos pa {3] dan ldan pa rten cin 'brei par 'byuil ba dan I rten em 'brei par 'byun ba Y ehos mams yail dag pa Y ses rab kyis ji lta ba btin ses sin rab tu mthon tin rab tu rig la rab tu yid la byas sin rab tu rten la [4] legs par so sor rtogs pa'i phyir ro II dge slon dag rten cin 'brei par 'byuil ba dan I rten em 'brei par 'byun ba'i ehos mams bstan par bya 'o tes ji skad du bstan pa de rgyas par rab tu Mad do tes bka ' {5] stsal to If. A parallel Sanskrit passage is found in theNidiinastlf?1)lukta , Siitra No. 14 red. Tripathi, p. 150] : 69

yatai ea srutavatiiryairiivakel}aprantyasamutpiidaS eaprantyasamutpannas ea dharmiiyathiibhutaf!l samyakprajiiiiya sudr:�tii bhavanti I sa na purviintaf!l pratisarati I kin nv aham abhuvam ante 'dhvani I aha svin niiham ante 'dhvani I ko nv aham abhuvam ante 'dhvani I kathaf!l nv aham abhuvam ante 'dhvani IThe passage is quoted also in Vasubandhu's Prafityasamutpiida-vyiikhyii [pek. Tg, Chi. 2b6-7]. Cf. also the Madhyamaka-Siilistambasutra [ed. Gokhale, p. 114. 14-22]. For the corresponding Pali text see Saf!lyutta Nikiiya [PTS ed., II, p. 26]. Further references in LVP, Kosa, III, p. 67 n. 3.

Fragm. 5: (Tu. 158b5-160al) SahetusapratyayasanidiinasUtra Begins: rna rig pa tshul biin rna yin pa yid la byed pa 'i rgyu can du gSW1s ses (xyL: ies) bya ba la IThis corresponds to AKBh III .27 [pradhan, 135.12-13; Shastri, 444.3; Pek. Tg, Gu. 147b2]: ayoniSomanaskiirahetukiividyoktii sutriintare IThere are several Sanskrit fragments of the Sutra preserved in Yasomitra's Vyiikhyii. The corresponding Pali text is Anguttara Nikiiya (PTS ed., V, p. 113). Cf. LVP, Kosa, III, p. 70 n. 3; 71 n. 3. The text of the Sutra (Tibetan, Sanskrit fragments, Chinese version) together with an English translation will be published in my forthcoming book on Vasubandhu's Prafity­ asamutpiida-vyiikhyii.

Fragm. 6: (Tu. 160al-2)

mdo gian las ma rig pa 'i 'dus te reg pa las byun ba'i tshor ba ies bya ba la phun po 'i snon gyi tshigs su bead pa bii pa 'i dan po 'i mdo [2] mdzod kyi gnas giiis par mi ldan pa'i 'du byed kyi 'gog pa 'i sfioms par 'jug pa 'i skabs su bris pa blta bar bya '0 II-

This corresponds to AKBh III.27 [Pradhan, 135.15; Shastri, 445.7f.; Pek. Tg, Gu. 147b7]:

avidyiisaf(lSparsajaf!l veditaf!l prafityotpannii tr!fIJii iti sutriintariit IThe passage is quoted also in Vasubandhu's Prantyasamutpiida-vyiikhyii [pek. Tg, Chi. 7b4] and in the ArthaviniSeayasutra-nibandhana [ed. Samtani, 129.4-5]. For the Pali text see Saf!lyutta Nikiiya [PTS ed., III, p. 96]. Cf. L VP, Kosa, III, p. 71 n. 4.

Fragm. 7: (Tu. 160a2-3)

beom ldan 'das kyis khyed la rten cin 'brei par 'byun ba 'i ehos mams kyan Madpar bya 'o [3] ies bka ' stsal ies bya ba ni sna rna biin du de ma thag kho nar dge slon dag khyed la rten cin 'brel par 'byun ba dan I rten cin 'brei par 'byun ba 'i ehos mam par bsad par bya ies mdo bris pa blta bar bya 'o II-

This corresponds to AKBh III.27 [pradhan, 136.2-3; Shastri, 448.2-3; Pek. Tg, Gu. 148a7] :

uktaf!l bhagavatii I prafityasamutpiidaf!l dharmiin I-

VO

bhi�avo desay�iimi prafityasamutpanniif!1i ea

Fragm. 8: (Tu. 160a3-16 1b5) Prafityasarnutpiidasiitr Begins: 'di ni mdo 'i don rna yin no ies bya ba la sogs pa la glen gii ni mfian du yod pa na 'o II­ This corresponds to AKBh III . 28 [pradhan, 136.18; Shastri, 449.12; Pek. Tg, Gu. 149al] : na�a sutriirthaJ:t IThe following fragment contains the entire text of the Prafityasamutpiidasutra (Prafityasamut­ piidiidivibhanganirdeia) with readings different from the Kanjur version. The canonical version

70

from the Peking Kanjur was edited by de Jong291. The Pratlryasamutpiidasiltra exists in its Sanskrit original29': it is preserved on two Niilandii brick inscriptions (ed. Chakravarti), in a Sanskrit manuscript from Turfan (ed. Tripathi), in the ArthaviniSeayasiltra (ed. Samtani). Some fragments in Sanskrit are preserved in Yasornitra'sAbhidhannakosa vyrlkhyrl (vide supra). Below is reproduced S amathadeva's version of the PratityasamutpiidaSiltra with the comparative notes ' from the Kanjur (Peking ed.). The passages different from the Kanjur version are in bold type. The division into paragraphs is that of Tripathi and de Jong. [Tu. 160a4] de nas beam ldan 'das kyis dge sIan mams fa bas tel / § 1. ' dge swn fklt rten ciiI 'breI par 3'byuil ba 'i thog ma3 dan / mam par dbye ba 'bsad par bya yis' de legs par non fa yid fa la gzun 6 Zig7 dan Mad par bya'o' / / §2. rten cin 'breI par 'byuil ba 'i9 dan po gan ie na /,0 'di yod pasl1 'di 'byuil / 'di skyes pa'i phyir12 'diskye'3 ste / 'di Ita'" ma rig pa 'i rkyen gyis 'du byed dan IS / 'du byed kyi rkyen kyis'6 rnam par ses pa / rnam par ies pa 'i rkyen kyis17 min dan gzugs 1'/ min dan gzugs kyi rkyen gyis skye mehed drug / skye mehed drug gi rkyen gyis reg pa / reg pa 'i rkyen gyis tshor ba / tshor ba 'i rkyen gyis sred pa / sred pa 'i rkyen gyis len pa / len pa Y rkyen gyis srid pa / srid pa'i rkyen gyis skye ba / skye ba 'i rkyen gyis rga §i dan / mya nan dan / smre snags 'don pa dan / sdug bsilal ba dan / yid rni bde ba dan / 'khrug pa rnams kun tu'9 'byun bar 'gyur teW / dge slon dati de Itar na sdug bsnal gyi phun po chen po 22'di 'ba ' Zig kun tu22 'byun bar 'gyur ten / 'di ni rten cin 'breI par ""'byuil ba 'i dilos po"" ies bya 'o // 'J5rnam par dbye ba gan ie na / §3. rna rig pa 'i [16Gb1] rkyen gyis 'du byed ees 'byun ba26 rna rig pa gan ie na / 27SnOn gyi §4. mtha ' mi ses pa dan /phyi ma'i mtha ' rni ies pa dan / snon dan phyi ma'i mtha ' rni ses pa dan / nail ni mi ses pa dan /phyi mi ies pa dan / nan dan phyi raP' mi ses pa dan / las mi ses pa daiI / rnam par smin pa mi ses pa dan / las kyi29 rnam par smin pa mi ses pa daiI / 30rgyu mi ses pa daiI / 31 'bras bu mi ses pa dan / rgyu dan 'bras bu mi ses pa dan31 / sans rgyas mi ses'pa dan / ehos mi ses pa dan / dge 'dun mi ses pa dan / sdug bsnaF dan / kun 'byun dan / 'gog pa dan / lam mi ses pa dan / rgyu las33 byuil ba Y ehos rnams34 mi ies pa dan / dge ba dan mi dge ba rnams34 dan / kha na ma tho ba dan beas pa daiI / kha na rna tho ba med pa rnams34 daiI / brten3S par bya ba dan / brten3S par bya ba ma yin pa mams34 dan / span bya daiI / span bya rna yin pa rnams daiI / dkar po daiI / nag po rna� dan / rnam par dbye ba dan beas pa 'i rten em 'breI par 'byuil ba 'j36 chos mams mi ses pa daiI / 'di 1tq.r reg pa:i skye mehed drug 'di Itar yan dag pa ji Ita ba biin so sor ma rig pa ste / gan yaiI de daiI de fa mi ses pa dail36 / ma mthon ba dan / mnon par ma rtogs pa, dan, / mun pa daiI / rmons pa ma rig paY mun pa" ies bya ba sti" 'di ni ma 'rig pa ies bya 'o // §5. rna rig pa 'i rkyen gyis 'du bye�9 gan ie na / 'du byed ni mam pa gsum ste / 40lus kyi 'du byed dan / nag gi 'du byed daiI / yid kyi 'du byed do // §6. 'du byed kyi rkyen gyis mam par ses pa ies 'byuil ba41 mam par ses pa gan ie na / rnam par ses pa 'i tshogs drug te42 / mig gi inam par ses pa dan / rna ba'3 daiI / sna dan / Ice dan / Ius dan / yid kyi rnam par ies pa '0 // §7. mam par ses pa'i rkyen gyis min dan gzugs ies byun ba" min gan ie na / gzugs can rna yin pa 'i [161a1] phun po bii ste / tshor ba'i phun po dan / 'du ies kyi phuil po daiI / 'du byed kyi phun po dan / mam par ses pa'i phun po '0 // gzugs gan ie na / gzugs gan4S ei yan run ba46 de" -

'191

"A propos du Nidan3S3J!lyukta", pp. 146-149; for corrections vide supra n.271.

"" See full references in de Jong. op. cit.

71

thams cad ni'"' 'byun ba chen po bii dag'9 dan I 'byun ba chen po bii dag rgyur byas pa sle I gzugs 'di dan somar bstan po thams cad gcig tu bsdus te'" min dan gzugs iesS1 bya 'o II §8. min dan gzugs kyi rkyen gyis skye mched drug ces 'bywi baS2 skye mched drug gan ie na I nan gi skye mched drug ste I mig nan gi skye mched dan I rna ba. dan I sna dan I lee dan I Ius dan Iyid nan gi skye mched do II §9. skye mched drug gi rkyen gyis reg pa ies 'byun baS2 I reg pa gan ie na I reg pa 'i tshogs drug ste I mig gi dus te reg pa dan I rna ba dan I sna dan I lee daiz I Ius dan Iyid kyi dus te reg pa'o II § 1O. reg pa Y rkyen gyis tshor ba ies 'byun ba52 tshor ba gan ie na I tshor ba53 gsum ste I bde ba dan I sdug bsnal ba dan I bde ba yan ma yin I sdug bsnal ba yan rna yin pa 'o II § 1 1 . tshor ba 'i rkyen gyis sred pa ies 'byun ba52 sred pa gan ie na I sred paS< gsum pass ste I 'dod pa 'i sred pa dan I gzugs kyi sred pa dan I gzugs med pa 'i sred pa 'o II § 12. sred pa 'i rkyen gyis len pa ies 'byun baS2 len pa gan ie na I fie bar" len pa bZi ste I 'dod pa fie bar len pa dan I Ita ba fie bar len pa dan I tshul khrims dan brtul iugs fie bar len pa dan I bdag tu smra ba fie bar len pa 'o II § 13. len pa Y rkyen gyis srid pa ies 'byun ba52 srid pa gan ie na I srid pa57 rnam pass gsum ste I 'dod pa 'i srid pa59 I gzugs kyi srid pa dan I gzugs med pa 'i srid pa 'o II § 14. srid pa Y rkyen gyis skye ba ies 'bywi ba52 skye ba gan ie na I (/Jsems can de dan de dag" sems can gyi rigs'2 63mtJum po de daiz der skye iii! yaiI dag par skye ba dan I 'jug pa dan I mnon par grub pa dan I rab tu byun ba dan Iphun po thob Gin khams [161bl] dan skye mched thob la I phun po mnon par grub ciiI dhaiz po daiz gron milon par rub tu byuiz ba ste" 'di ni skye'" ies bya 'o II § 15. skye ba 'i rkyen gyis rga si fes" 'byun ba52 rga si gan ie na 1 66gaiz spyi bor skra dkor daiz I 'klwgs iiiI giier rna mail ba dan I rgurpo rgu po gre ba sgra izar izar pos 'gags po I Ius rgu iii! 'kJuu ba la brten po I sme ba 'i thig les Ius iiams po I Ius bciiIs Sift, bcii!s po daiz I dhaiz po mams yoils su iiams iii! yoils su smin po dan I 'jigs daiz 'du byed mams yoils su sniizs iii! rgas par gyurpo66 'di ni rga ba ies bya 'o II § 16. 'chi ba gan ie lIa I sems can'7 gyi skal ba milam ba de daiz de las 'chi 'pho iii! 'jig la nub ciil tshe daiz drod iiams la phui! po 'phos iii! dhaiz po mams 'gags te I Si iii! dus byed par 'gyur ba'7 'di ni 'chi ba" ies bya ba69 ste I 'chi ba" 'di dan70 rga ba giiis ka7l geig tu bsdus nas rga si ies bya 'o72 II § 17. 'di lIi rten ein 'breI par 'byun ba 'j13 rnam par dbye ba ies bya V4 II § 18. dge sZon !lag khyed larten cin 'brel par 'byun ba 'i73 dan pa dan !nampar dbye ba·bSad bya 'o ies 7]i skad du bstan po de 1X)ItlS par rub tu bSad do 1/ '

'

N o t e s: 1 bka ' stsal pa. 2 ad. khyod lao 3 -3 'byun ba dan po. 4 - 4 bstan gyis. 5 ad. rab tu. ' zun. 7 Sig. 8 bSad do. 9 ba. 10 ins. 'di Zta ste. 11 na. 12 skyes pas. 13 ad. ba. 14 'di Ita ste. 15 am. dan. 16 gyis. 17 gyis. 18 both texts a m . /. 19 am. kull tu. 20 'gyur TO . 21 0m . dge slon dag. 22 - 22 'ba ' Zig po 'di. 23 'gyur roo 24 'byun ba dan po. 25 ins. rtell Gin 'breI par 'byun ba 'i. 26 bya ba 'i. 27 ad. gan. 28 am. 29 dan. 30 note the rearrangement of the succeeding definitions. 3I lacking both in the Skt. and in the Kanjur. 32 ins. mi ses pa. 33 ins. yan dag par. 34 am. 35 bsten. 36 · 36 ba dan I reg pa Y skye mched drug yan dag pa ji Ita ba biin khon du mi chud pa dan gan de dan der yan dag pa Ii Ita ba biin du mi ses pa dan. 37 pa Y rnam pa. 38 am. 39 ad. ces bya ba'i 'du byed. 40 ad. gsum gan ie na_ 41 bya baY. 42 ste. 43 ba Y rnam par ses pa. 44 bya ba lao 45 ad. yin pa. 46 am. ba. 47 ad. dag. 48 am. 49 am. 50 - 50 sna ma 'i min gii i ga geig tu mnon par bsdus lias. 51 ses. 52 bya ba 'i. 53 ins. ni. I gi. 62 Tis . S< ins. ni. 55 am. pa. 56 am. fie bar. S7 ins. ni. 58 am. rnam pa. 59 ad. dan. '" ad. gan. 6 72

63 · 63 de dan de dag tu gan skye ba dan I sin tu skye ba dan I 'pho ba dan I mnon par byun ba dan I rab tu byuil ba daiI Iphuil po so sor thob pa dan I khams so sor thob pa dan I skye mched so sor thob pa dan Iphun po mams milon par grub pa dan / srog gi dban po rab tu skyes pa. 64 . ad. ba. os ies. .. . .. gan de 'i spyi ther dan / skra dkar daiI / giier ma !shogs pa dan / riiis pa dan / tum pa daiI I ba /ail chu 'thun ba Itar gug pa dan / Ius nag po 'i thig les gan ba dan / Iud pa lu iin dbugs rgod pa dan I mdun du Ius 'bug pa Itar byedpa dan I khar ba la rten pa dan I blun pas mon rtul ba iiid dan I ian pa iiid dan I iiams pa daiI /yoils su Iiams pa daiI / dbail po rgyud pa daiI I Iiams pa daiI I 'du byed mams riiiils pa dan / sin tu riiiils par gyur pa. 67 · 67 gail yin pa de daiI de dag sems can gyi ris de daiI de dag ntis 'phos pa dan I 'pho ba iiid daiI / iigpa dtin / nan Iiams pa dan I tshe Iiams pa dan I drod yal ba dan / srog gi dban po 'gags pa dan I phun po" mams 'dor ba dan / si ba dan I dus byed pa. 68 si ba. (fJ om. ba. '" ad. sna ma. 71 om. ka. n bya ste. 73 ba. 7' yin no. 7$ bya ba 'i mdo rdzogs so (xyL : sto) .

Fragm. 9: (Th. 161b5-162a2) HastipadopamasiUra Begins: 'di Ita ste glan po 'i rjes Ita bu'i mdo las ies bya ba la IThis corresponds to AKBh ill.28 [pradhan, 136.22-23; Shastri, 450.4-5; Pek. Tg, Gu. 149a3] : . tadyathii Hastipadopame Ip[1hividhiitulJ katamalJ I ity atlhilqtyiiha / keiii romiilJiti I­ S amathadeva's quotation contains the definition of adhyiitmika-p[1hivi-dhiitu, very close to that found in the Pitputrasamiigamasiltra, which in tum is quoted in the Silqiisamuccaya [ed. Bendall, 245.1-3]. Below is reproduced the entire fragment from S amathadeva with an attempt towards a reconstruction of the Sanskrit with the help of the Mahiivyutpatti (sect. CXC), Index AKBh and BHSD. [Tu. 16 1b6] glan po 'i rjes Ita bu'i mdo bar ma 'i bdun po tha ma las bstan pa mdzod kyi gnas daft por blta bar bya 'o II der bstan pa phyogs tsam 'di Itar 'don te I sa'i khains gail ie na / !she dan ldan pa dag sa 'i khams ni mam pa giiis te I nan dan phyi rol gyi'o II nan gi sa'i khams kyan yod do II nan gi sa 'i khams gan ie na I gan yan lus 'di la nail gi bdag iiid kyi sra ba dan I mkhrail ba daiI I zin pa daiI I zin par gyur pa ste I de gail ie na I 'di Ita ste I s/qa daiI spu dan sen mo daiI I so daiI rilul daiI dri ma dan Ipags pa dan sa daiI rus pa dan I rtsa dan rgyus pa dan / siiift dan glo ba dan mchin pa daiI I [162a1] mkhal ma dan I rgyu ma dan giie ma dan / pho ba dan Ion ka daiI / gail rags par gyur pa ste I gan Ius 'di la sra ba daiI / mkhrail ba zin pa daiI / zin par gyur pa 'di ni nail gi bdag iiid kyi sa 'i khams ies bya 'o II* katamai ca p[1hividhiitulJ I p[1hividhiitur iiy�man dvividhalJ I adhyiitmiko biihyai ca I adhyiitmikalJ, prthividhiitus tu I katamo 'dhyiitmika/:l pJ1hividhiitulJ / yat kil?" cid asmin kiiye 'dhyiifmal?" khakkhatal?" kharam upiittam upiittagatam I tat punalJ katamat I tafiyathii I kesiilJ., romiiIJ� . nakhiilJ., dantiilJ, sveda1}, malam, tvak, mii1?"Sam, asthi, sirii, aniiyulJ., hrdayam, klomakalJ., plihalJ, vrkkau, antram, antraguIJalJ, iimiiiayalJ., pakviiSaya1}, ya audiirikal?" gacchati I yat kiI?" cid asmin kiiye khakkhafal?" kharam upiittam upiittagatal?" tad adhyiitmikalJ p[1hivrdhiitur ity ucyate IIFor the Pall see Majjhima Nikiiya [PTS ed., I, p. 185; ill, p. 240]. See references in LVP, Kosa, ill, p. 75 n. 5. Fragm. 10: (Th. 162a2-8) BhiIqusUtra Begins: de biin gsegs pa mams byuil yail run ma byun yan run ies bya ba la IThis corresponds to AKBh ill.28 [pradhan, 137.18; Shastr� 452.9-10; Pek. l'g, Gu. 149b4] : utpiidiid vii tathiigatiiniim anutpiidiid vii tathiigatiiniil?" sthitaiveyal?" dharmatii I iti vacantit I­ The Sanskrit text of the Bhilqusiltra was edited by Tripathi [Nidanasal?"yukta, Sfitra No. 17], and the Chinese version [Taisho 99, No. 299] was confronted with the Sanskrit by Lamotte [Traite, 73

p. 2190 and n. 3]. A Sanskrit passage is quoted by Yasomitra in his Abhidharmakosa-vytikhyti [Wogihara, 293.26-29; Shastri, 452.20-23; Pek. Tg, Cu. 326a8-326b3]: utptidiid vti tathtigattintim anutptidiid vti tathtigattintif!1 sthitaiveyaf!1 dharmatti dharmasthititti dharmaniytimattitathatti'avitathatti'ananyatathattibhutatiisatyattitattvamavipalitatti'aviparyastatety evam tidi bhagavanmaitreyavacanam /j. Below is reproduced S amathadeva's version of the Bhi�usutra in Tibetan (division into the paragraphs follows that of Tripathi) : [Tu. 162a2] glen gii ni moon du yod pa na '0 // § 1. de nas dge slon gian zig bcom ldan 'das gan na ba der fie bar 'ons te / fie bar 'ons nas ses (xyl.: zes) bya ba nas / bcom kian 'das la 'di skad ces gsol to zes bya ba 'i bar du'o // Gi bcom ldan 'das kyis rten Gin 'brei par 'byun ba byas sam / 'on te gian Zig gis byas / §2. dge slon rten Gin 'brei par 'byun ba ni fias kyan ma byas la / gian gyis kyan ma byas §3. kyi / §4. de bZin gsegs pa mams byun yan run ma byun yan run / chos mams kyi chos fiid 'di ni gnas pa / chos kyi dbyins te / de biin gsegs pa ran fiid kyis mkhyen Gin mnon par sans rgyas nas 'chad par byed ston par byed / mam par 'byed par byed / 'breipa dan ston Gin yan dag par gsal bar byed de / §5. 'di Ita ste 'di yod pas 'di 'byun / 'di skyes pas 'di skye ste / ma rig pa 'i rkyen gyis 'du byed / 'du byed kyi rkyen gyis mam par ses pa ies bya ba nas sna ma biin du / 'di 'ba ' iig kun tu 'byun bar 'gyur ra zes bya ba Y bar du'o // 'di Itar 'di med pas 'di mi 'byun / 'di 'gags pas 'di 'gag par 'gyur te / 'di ltar ma rig pa 'gags pas 'du byed 'gag ces bya ba nas skye ba dan rga si 'gag par 'gyur zes bya ba 'i bar du'o ies bka ' stsal to /j. For the Pali see Saf!1yutta Nikiiya [PTS ed., II, p. 25]; cf. also LVP, Kosa, III, p. 77 n. 1; LVP, Theorie des douze causes, pp. 1 1 1- 1 13. v,

Fragm. 1 1 : (Tu. 162a8- 162b6) Begins: dper na gian las ma rigpa yod na 'du byed mams 'byun gis gian du ma rigpa Y rkyen med par 'du byed mams ma yin na ies bya ba la j. This corresponds to AKBh HI.28 [pradhan, 139.2-3; Shastri, 457. 1-2; Pek. Tg, Gu. 150b6-7] : yathtinyatrtiha / avidytiytif!1 satytif!1 saf!1Sktirti bhavanti ntinyatrtividytiytif} saf!1Sktirtif} j. Fragm. 12: (Tu. 162b6ff.) BrahmnjiilasUtra Begins: lta ba dmg cu rtsa gfiis ni tshans ba'i dra ba las jiskad du 'byun ba biin te j. This corresponds to AKBh III.28 [pradhan, 140.1 1 ; Shastri, 461.8; Pek. Tg, Gu. 152a2]: dmayo dvi4�tir yathti Brahmajtilasutre j. From here on follows a long quotation from the Brahmajtilasutra. The Sanskrit fragments in Yasomitra's Abhidharmakosa-vytikhyti were edited by La Vallee Poussin ("Pili and Sanskrit", JRAS 1906, pp. 444-446>;-for the Pali see Dfgha Nikiiya 1.1; for the Tibetan version cf. Weller, "Das tibetische Brahmajiilasiitra", ZII 10, 1935, pp. 1-6 1; for the Chinese version see HOBOGIRIN sub Bosatsukai (fasc. 2, p. 146), and Weller, "Das Brahmajalasiitra des chinesische Dlrghagama", Asiatische Studien XXV, 1971, pp. 202-264.

74

5. DIGNAGA'S MARMAPRADlPA

According to the Tibetan historians Bu-ston and Taranatha, Dignaga (Phyogs kyi glail pO)299 was a personal disciple of Vasubandhu""'. M. Hattori questioned the reliability of the Buddhist tradition on account of the fact that Dignaga was uncertain with regard to Vasubandhu's authorship of the Vadavidhi, a treatise traditionally ascribed to Vasubandhu"lI. According to Hattori, all that ' we can say with 'conviction is that Dignaga had an excellent knowledge of Vasubandhu's works. He wrote commentaries on the Vadavidhiina and the'Abhidharmakosa, and in his other works, e.g. Pramiil)asamuccaya; referred often to the works of Vasubandhu. As was proved by Frauwallner, Dignaga must have lived later than Vasubandhu and before Pharmaprua 'because of his relation to the grammarian Bhartrhari. Accordingly, the approximate date of Dignaga was set at 480-540 A.D.3Cl2 Dignaga's commentary on the Abhidharmakosa called Marmapradipa is preserved, only in its Tibetan translation. It was executed by two translators, Rnal 'byor zla ba (*Yogacandra) and 'Jam dpal gion nu (*Mafijusrikumara). According to Cordier's catalogue of the Peking Tanjur, Rnal 'byor zla ba translated two texts: one accompanied by Vibhiiticandra (Rgyud IV.34: GU1)abhara1)i nama �a4angayogapppa1)t), and the other accompanied by 'Jam dpal gion nu (Mdo LXX.2: Marmapradipa ntima Abhidharmakosav[tii). The colophon of the first work was studied by de Jong"'-'. The interpretation of the colophon is difficult. De Jong came to the conclusion that, presumably, Rnal 'byor zla ba made an oral translation and Vibhiiticandra prepared a translation of the text, and then, on request of Chos grags dpal bzail po, Dpal ldan Blo gros brtan pa from Dpail (1276-1342 A.D.) translated and corrected the text finally. But the�e is also a possibility, says de Jong, that Rnal 'byor zla ba is just another name of Vibhiiticandra. Perhaps de Jong's second hypothesis is supported by information found in Cordier's catalogue that the second translator of the Marmapradip a, 'Jam dpal gion nu, accompanied Vibhiiticandra in a translation of Rgyud XIII.59 (Lu yi pa 'i mnon par nogs pa 'i 'grel pa 'i pkii khyad par gsal byed Luhipiida-abhisamayav[tiipkii viS�adyota) 3CJ4. The Tohoku catalogue (No. 1510) mentions only one translator, Vibhiiticandra. Thus, on account of its cl)nnection - direct or indirect - with Vibhiitican dra, whose activity is connected with the greaf S akyasribhadra (1 1271- 1225 A.D., came to Tibet in 1204 A.D.)"'S, it seems probable that Dignaga's commentary on the Abhidhar=

,., Mvy 3481. ,.. Chos 'byuil, tr. Obermiller, II, p. 149ff.; Rgya gar chos 'byuil, tr. Lama Chimpa and A. Chattopadhyaya, p. 181ff.

"" See the introduction "Dignaga and his works" in his Dignoga. On perception ; cf. also FrauwaI1ner's study "Dignaga, sein Werk und seine Entwicklung", WZKS 3, 1959, pp. 83-164, and his book Die Philosophie des Buddhismus, pp. 390-394. "" "Landmarks in the history of Indian logic", pp. 134-136; cf. Hattori, op. cit., pp. "" "La legende de Santideva", 304

IIJ

�.

XVI:3, 1975, p. 166f.

On Lii'i pa cf. Naudou, Les bouddhistes kaimiriens, p. 78ff.

30J On SiikyaSn'bhadra cf. Naudou, op. cit., pp. 196-200, and D.P. Jackson, The Entrance Gate for the Wise, Wien 1987, I, pp. 107-112; on Vibhiiticandra cf. de Jong, op. cit., p. 164f., and FrauwaIIner, "Devendrabuddhi", WZKS 4, 1960, pp.

119-123.

75

makosa was translated into Tibetan in the 13th century. After all, the Marmapradipa is mentioned for the first time in Eu-ston's Chos 'bywi from 1322 A.D. and this is the terminus ante quem of its translation. Digniiga's Marmapradipa is a concise simple abridgement of theAbhidharmakosa. In this respect it much resembles another commentary, the SiitriinurUpa, presumably a work of Sailghabhadra (see above in this study). It has already been observed by Frauwallner and Hattori that the Marmapradipa lacks originality since its author follows the main arguments of the Abhidharmakosa leaving aside all polemics306• On closer inspection of the text it becomes evident that Digniiga's work in fact reproduces word for word the kiirikiis and the basic explanations of the Abhidharmakosa-bhiiFYa, with the result that almost the entire text can be restored into Sanskrit. In his description of Digniiga's ninth chapter, Hattori writes that "Digniiga omits most of the arguments made by Vasubanrlhu in refutation of the Viitslputrlya doctrine of the Ego, and reproduces only a few unessential discussions"307. Hattori calls attention to the fact that Digniiga, according to Tibetan historians, was ordained by a teacher of the Viitslputrlya sect and only later renounced their doctrine ofpudgala and became a disciple of Vasubandhu. Thus, if we combine the testimony of Tibetan tradition and the absence of the arguments against the ViitslputrIyas in Digniiga's Marmapradipa, then - concludes Hattori - "if Digniiga had belonged to the ViitsiputrIya sect and later renounced its doctrine, he surely would have been more serious in pointing out the defect of the Ego theory of this sect"30'. The following analysis of the ninth chapter of Digniiga's Marmapradipa [abbr. DM] compares it with the ninth chapter (Pudgalavinifcaya) of the Abhidharmakosa [abbr. AKBh] and Yasomitra's Vyiikhyii [abbr. AKY]. Fragm. 1. DM, Thu. 284a2-3 AKBh, Nu. 93b7-94a1 [pradhan, 461. 1-5; Shastri, 1 189. 1-6, 1 190.1]; AKV: niisti KapiloliikiidfniiJ?l molqalJ ;. Cf. LVP, Kosa, IX, p. 23 Of. =

306 Frauwallner, "Dignaga, sein Werk und seine Entwicklung", p. 127: liEs ist ein Werk der Art, wie man es schreibt� wenn man ein neues Stoffgebiet zu durchdringen und es sich in eigener Arbeit anzueignen sucht. Und Dignaga hat auch die Arbeit in dieser Richtung nicht weiter fortgesetzt. Er hat sich begniigt, Anregungen zu iibernehmen, ohne sich in die iibrigen Problerne auf diesein Gebi�t weiter Z\l yertiefen'�; Hattori, op. Qt., p� 2: "In the frr�t eight�cltapters, Dignaga faithfully follows Vasubandhu's main arguments, leaving aside passages which deal with topics incidental to the subject matter, which refer to the theories of others scholars, or which are merely quoted from other texts". Cf. Obermiller, Bu­ ston, Chos 'hyuil, II, p. 150 n. 1053: 'The text in the Tangyur represents nothing but an abridged rendering of Vasuban­ dhu's auto-commentary". Hattori, op. cit., p. 8 n. 43 notes that the text was "studied by H. Sakurabe in 'Jinna ni kiserareta Kusharon no IChik6y6sho [An Abridgment of the Abhidharmakosa ascnbed to Dignaga]', Tokal Bukkyo No. 2, 1956,

pp. 33-36". "" Op. cit., p. 2 n. 7: "Dignaga quotes the passage which discusses the omniscience of the Buddha (AKBh, p. 155a.1-3, 9-11, 5-8; De la Vallee-Poussin, L'Abhidh., pp. 254-255), and the passage which treats the question why the Buddha did not deny the existence ofpudgala (AKBh, p. 155c.29-156a.12-156b.6; L'Abhidh., pp. 264-267). The other arguments which Dignaga copied from AKBh, ch. 9, are those aimed at the refutation of the views of the Vais�ikas and the other schools, and not of the Vatsiputriya doctrine". Cf. Y. Ejima, ''Textcritical Remarks on the Ninth Chapter of the AbhidharmakoSa­ bh�a", Bukkyil Bunka, Tokyo UniversIty, No. 20, 1987, pp. 1-40. "" Ibid., p. 2.

76

Fragm. 2. DM, 11m 284a5-7 = AKBh, Nu. 99b5-7 [pradhan, 467. 14-15; Shastri, 1205.4-5]: yady eva/1l tarhi na buddhaJ:i sarvajiiaJ:i priipnoti. .. Cf. LVP, Kosa, IX, p. 254 & n. 3 : "Le Viitsiputriya". Fragm. 3. DM, 11m 284a6-7 = AKBh, Nu. 100al (sic) [pradhan, 467.19·21; Shastri, 1205.9-11]. Cf. LVP, Kosa, IX, p. 255 n. 2: "Buddhabhumi 14. 12 refute cette stance". Fragm. 4. DM, Thu. 284a7-284bl = AKBh, Nu. 99b7-100al [pradhan, 467. 16-19; Shastri, 1205.7-9] (Tib. translation differs). Cf. LVP, Kosa, p. 254f. (a reply of the Buddhists, but not the Mahiisiinghi­ kas). Fragm. 5. DM, Thu. 284b1 = without parallel in AKBh. Fragm. 6. DM, Thu. 284b1-2 = AKBh, Nu. 101b7-8 [pradhan, 469.25-27; Shastri, 1210. 14-16] : kasmiid bhagavatiip i nokta/1l niistyeveti [scil. ]IVa, pudgala) /. Cf. LVP, Kosa, IX, p. 264: "Le Viitsiputriya". Fragm. 7. DM, Thu. 284b2-285a3 = AKBh, Nu. 102a4-102b3 [pradhan, 470.6-471 .5; Shastri, 1211.1-14, 1212. 1-7]: iiha ciitra . . . = AKV: bhadanta-KumiiraliitaJ:i. Cf. LVP, Kosa, IX, pp. 265-267. Fragm. 8. DM, Thu. 285a3-6 = AKBh, Nu. 105bl-4 [pradhan, 474.9-14; Shastri, 1220.4-10]: yadi vijfiiiniid vijfiiinam utpadyate niitmanaJ:i ... = AKV: vaiSeifikasutriinusiiriid vii. Cf. LVP, Kosa, IX, p. 282: "Le SiiIp.khya (d'apres Kiokuga)". Fragm; 9. DM, Thu. 285a6-285bl = AKBh, Nu. 106al-3 [pradhan, 474.22-26, 475.1-3; Shastri, 1222.3-10] : . . .evam hy iihuJ:i ... ; ...ekiyas tirthikalJ. . . . = AKV (respectively): sthavira-RiihulalJ.; vaiSeifikalJ.. Cf. L VP, Kosa, IX, p. 284. Fragm. l0. DM, Thu. 285bl = AKBh, Nu. 108a2 [prad\!.an, 477.7-8; Shastri, 1229.8-9] (Tib. translation differs). Cf. LVP, Kosa, IX, p. 295: "Le VaiSe�ika". Cf. also AKV. Fragm. l 1 . DM, Thu. 285b2-4 = AKBh, Nu. 108a3-5 [Pradhan, 477.9- 13; Shastri, 1229 . 1 1- 14, 1230.1]. Cf. L VP, Kosa, IX, pp. 295-296 (a reply of the Buddhists). Fragm. 12. . . . . . . . . DM, Thu. 285b4-28 6al = AKBh, Nu. i 08a7-108b5 [pradhan, 47'7. 17:27; sh astri, 1230.6�1 6f . . . yathoktam. . . = AKV: sthavira-RiihulelJ.a. Cf. LVP, Kosa, pp. 296-298. Fragm. 13. DM, Thu. 286al-6 = AKBh, Nu. 109a2�6 [pradhan, 478. 10-479.4; Shastri, 123 1.8-11, 1232. 1-6, 1233.1-4] : ... iiha khalv api ... (with these words are introduced four stanzas finishing AKBh). According to LVP, Kosa, p. 300f., the first stanza comes from a work by sthavira Riihula, quoted already above in the text (cf. p. 297 n. 2). Lindtner"" advanced a hypothesis that the last three stanzas of the PudgalaviniScaya chapter were added by Digniiga. His argument is based on the testimony of Dharmendra who in his Tattvasiirasa/1lgraha attributed the first stanza to Digniiga" o. The same stanza, wit\!. some .

.

·

"" "Adversaria Buddhica ill. Gleanings from TattvasiirasaJ?lgraha", '10

WZKS

XXVI, 1982, pp. 184-194.

Dharmendra's TattvasiirasaJ?lgraha (peking Tg, 4534) is dated in relation to the date of SantaraJqita (c. 725-788

77

different readings, was attributed to Dignaga by Bhavya in the Madhyamakaratnapradfpa3 1l. this is so, one should firstly explain the occurrence of these three stanzas (in the same se­ quence) in the Sanskrit manuscript of the Abhidhannakosa, in its Tibetan translation, in the Chinese translation of Hsiian-tsang, as well as in Yasomitra's Abhidhannakosa-vyiikhyii (both in Sanskrit and Tibetan). More plausible seems the explanation that both Dharmendra and Bhavya quoted the stanza in question from Dignaga's Mannapradipa and subsequently ascribed its authorship to Dignaga himself" 2.

If

6. PORl�AVARDHANA'S MINOR COMMENTARY

Piirry.avardhana is also credited with the authorship of a shorter commentary on theAbhidhanna­ kosa3 13 . It is called LalqalJiinusiirilJi too, and was translated by the same two translators, Kanakavarman and Pa tshab Ni rna grags. The LalqalJiinusiirilJi minor is divided into eight A.D.), whom it quotes, and the date Of its Tibetan translation by Rin chen bzan po (958-1055 AD.). The stanza reads [Nu. 97b7-8): de yan slob dpon Phyogs kyi glan po'i ial sna nas kyis I 'di ni mya nan 'das gron lam gcig pu I bde gsegs iii rna'; gsuiJ 'od snail ba can / bdag med ran biin 'phags pa ston phrag Jug I mam par rgyas pa" blo bdman mig mi mthon b II ies Mad pa ... • ? bkral ba, xyL: rgyal ba (I am indebted to Prof. ScJunithausen for this emendation). b · b dman pa'i mig gis mi mthon = na manda-calqur ... i",ate. N.b. Index AKBh III, p. 174 reads: phye yan dman pa'i mig = manda-calqur-vivrtii, which is against the sense; in Skt. AKBh we have: na manda-calqur vivrtam apf/qate, and it is rendered into Tibetan correctly: phye yan (vivrtiim api) dman pa'i mig gis ('manda-calq14ii) mi mthon no (na i",ate) . 311

Bhavya lived c. 490-570 AD. (Lindtner), or c. 500-570 AD. (Kajiyama). Bhavya's authorship of the Madhyamaka­

rotnapmdipa (Peking Tg, 5254) is questioned by the scholars, see D.S. Ruegg, The Literature of the Madhyamaka School,

p. 66 and n. 214. The stanza reads [Tsa. 343a3-5J: slob dpon Phyogs kyi glan pos kyah I 'di na mya nan 'das lam gron khyer du I de htin gsegs pa'; gs� gi iii ma'i. 'od can gy� / bdag med ses pa'i 'phags pa ston phrag Jug I blo gros ruin pa dag yi yul ma yin II ies gsuns so Ij.

3 12 Marmaprodipa [Thu. 286a4-5): de biin gsegs pa fii ma'i gsuit 'od ky,' I snail ldan mya nan 'das gron lam gcig pa I bdag med 'phags pa ston gis' bgrod pa 'di I phye yan dman pa'i mig gis mi mthon no II

AKBh [Nu. 109a6) reads: • kyis; • gi. Here is the Sanskrit original text [Pradhan, 478.18-21; Shastri, 1233.1-2]: imdJtt hi nirviiJ;Japuroikavartinff!J tathiigatadityavaco ',!,subhasvatim / niriitmatiim iiryasahasraviihitiif!! na mandacalqur vivrtiim api",ate Ij.

=

3J3 The same passages occur both in the LalqQ(liinusiiri(li major and minor, e.g. Ju. 380b4-5 Thu. 296b4.

78

=

Thu. 298a5-6; Ju. 332b6

chapters, which apart from the last one, samiipatti-nirdesa (siioms par 'jug pa bstan pa), bear no titles. It , refers to selected ' topics of the Abhidharmakosa314 and therefore it seems to be an abridgment of the major commentary, polemical in character. There are many references to the opinions of the "others" (gian dag na re, kha cig na re), and among them to those of 'Dul bzail alias Vinitabhadra31'. Nota bene the Cone Tanjur (Nu. 214b1�238a2) reads 'Dus bzail/Sailgha­ bhadra throughout. The problem of identification of 'Dul bzail has been examined above, in the chapter on Vinitabhadra. Below �re presented those passages from PUI1.lavardhana's shorter commentary which refer to 'Dul bzail and were identified as the opinions of 'Dus bzail, i.e. Sailghabhadra. Fragm. 1: rTIIU. 292a4] slob dpon 'Dul bZan316 na re sems gcig la dmigs sin rdzas mnam yan mthu dus gian yin pa 'i phyir 'gal [5] ba med de I tshogs la rtog pa 'i mthu < s > bla lhag na ni dpyod pa 'i mthu iiams pa 'i phyir sems rtsiiI bar 'gyur la I dpyod pa'i mthu bla lhag na ni rtog pa 'i mthu iiams pa 'i phyir iib par wur te I tsha dan chu gran reg biin [6] no II "Acarya Vinitabhadra (Cone: Sailghabhadra) says: «It is not a fault [to accept two kinds of] a thought [eidsting] in one, because of difference in [their] efficacy and ,time [of appearance], notwithstanding [their] common base of support and substance. If vitarka's efficaCy has predominance and vicara's efficacy is diminished, the thought becomes gross; if vicara's efficacy has predominance and vitarka's efficacy is diminished, [the thought] becomes fine; as in the case of a contact of warm and cold water»". This argument is essentially , the same as the opinion of Sailghabhadra which is quoted by Yasomitra in his Sphu{iirthii3l7. Fragm. 2: [Th u . 292a8] slob dpon 'Dul bzan318 ni slar yan sems min ba dan iib pa iiid ni min ba dati iib pa iiid do ies ni mi smra'o II [292b1] '0 na ji ltar ie na / sems min ba ni sems la yod pa 'i rtsin ba 'o II de'i dilOs po ni sems rtsin ba iiid do II sems iib pa yan de dan 'dra 'o us zer TO II "Acarya Vinitabhadra (Cone: Sailghabhadra) says: «And again, I do not say that the 'grossness of thought' and the 'fineness [of thought]' are 'grossness' and 'fineness'. Why? - The 'grossness

, 314

Cf. e.g: AK m:9cd' [pradh.in; 11911ff.;' Sh3Stri, 'W:z..12tf.; Pek. Tg,

[pradhan, 136.2f.; Shastri, 448.2f.; Pek. Tg, Gu. 148a7-148bl]

=

Gu.

133b7-8]

=

'Dlli . 296b1-2; AK ·I11.27

Thu. 289b6.

liS

There are as many as nine passages in which the name of 'Dul bzaitjVinltabhadra is mentioned (all references are to the Peking Tanjur): .(1) Thu. 292a4-6, (2) Thu. 292a3-292bl, (3) Thu. 292b8-293a4, (4) Thu. 293b1-3, (5) Thu. 294a2-5, (6) Thu. 300a2-5, (7) Thu. 300a6-7, (8) Thu. 301a6-301b2, (9) Thu. 310a7..'l. ,,, Cone, Nu. 219a1: 'Dus bzan·. • PC: bzails lI1

Abhidhannakosa-vyiikhyii ad AK II.33a [Wogihara, 140.1ff.; Shastri, 206.19-23; Pek. Tg, Cu. 145a5-8]: atra

SaiJghabhadra iiciilya dha / ekatra ca citte audiirikasiilqmate bhavata/;l / na ca virodha/;l prabhiivakiiliinyatviit / yadii hi cittacaittakaliipe vitarka udbhiitav[1tir bhavati tadii cittam audiirikOJtl bhavali /yadii viciiras tadii siilqmOJtl rrigamohacarita­ vyapadesavat / rrigamohayaugapadye 'pi hi tayor anyatarodbhiitav[1tiyogiid rrigacarito mohacarita iii vii vyapadiiyate / tadvad ihiipi drrlfiavyam iii ;. Cf. LVP, KoJa, II, p. 175 n. 1. '" Cone, Nu. 219a4: 'Dus bzail·.

•

PC: bzaiJs.

79

of thought' it is a grossness which is in thought; [it is said:] 'grossness of thought' [with regard to] its essence. And a similar [explanation is to be applied] foe the 'fineness of thought'»". This is a continuation of the discussion from fragment 1. Fragm. 3 : [Thu. 292b8] slob dpon 'Dul bzan3 19 na re skal b a mnam p a ies [293a1] bya b a n i sems can 'gro ba gcig tu skyes pa mams kyi Ius dan dban po dan dbyibs dan gyo ba dan zas la sogs pa Y rgyur gyur cin phan tshun dga' bar 'breI paY rgyu mtshan yin no II Ums [2] can rna yin pa 'i skal ba mnam (xyL: nams) pa nid kyan d'j phyir mi 'dod32IJ ces gan smras na khyed cag gis 'gro ba dan skye (xyL : skyi) gnas mam pa khas blails pas rtsva (?) dan amra la sogs pa 'i 'gro ba dan I la phug dan mon sran rde 'u skye [3] gnas dag kyan ci ste khas mi len I bcom ldan 'das kyis rna gsuils pa 'i phyir yin na ni sems can rna yin pa 'i skal ba mnam pa yan khas mi len te I bcom ldan 'das kyis rna gsuils pa 'i phyir ro [4] ies zer ro II "Acarya Vinitabhadra (Cone: Sanghabhadra) says: «'Likenessm" i.e. a cause of body, organs of senses, shape, activity, nourishment etc. and reciprocally a mark of relation(s). If someone says why is the likeness of non-living beings not approved, you who acknowledge [two] species, genus and matrix, [reply that] if a genus of a herb and mango etc., and a matrix of radish and peas [etc.], both are not acknowledged, and if it is so because the Bhagavat did not announce [it], [then] the likeness of non-living beings is not acknowledged too. Because the Bhagavat did not announce [it]»". This is the opinion of Sanghabhadra, according to Yasomitra322. Fragm. 8: [Thu. 301a6] slob dpon 'Dul bzan323 ni dran sron dag ni don gyis na mam par rig byed byed (xyL: byid) pa yin [7] te I mi ma yin pa dag gis de dag gi (? sdig pa 'i) bsam pa mnon par (?) tugs pa rtogs nas de dag la dad pa mams gan gis na dran sron de dag la las kyi lam skye ba Ius kyis byed do II gian yan khro ba las ni de'i tshe gdon mi za bar [B] Ius dan nag gi las gyo bar 'gyur bas 'gal ba med do II gso sbyon (xyl.: spyod) la yan ji Itar tshig gi <s > go bar bya ba 'j don la Ius kyis gyo ba la yan las kyi lam skye ba de biin du bdag gis tshe dan ldan pa yoils su [301bl] dag go snam du rig par bya 'o snam du can mi smra bas mi gyo ba la yan yin pas I tshig gi go bar bya ba Y don la can mi smra ba la yan dag gi las kyi lam skye bar 'gyur te de ni yoils su rna dag btin du can mi smra [2] bas bdag Rid dag pa dge bar byad do ies zer ro II

319 Cone, Nu. 219b3:

'Dus bzait'.

•

PC: bzahs.

32' 11tis is a quotation from theAbhidhannakosa-bharya HA1a [pradhan, 68.2; Shastri, 232.1]: api 'ciisattvasabhiigatiipi /d1Jl ne�ate /; [Pek. Tg, Gu. 84a8] gian yah sems can ma yin pa'i skaJ ba mfiam pa fiid kyah ci'i phyir mi 'dod de ;'

,

Pradhan reads: asattva-sattva-sabhiigatii, against the Tibetan. Cf. also Mvy 6456: manUD'iinw,. sabhiigatiiyiim upapannal,l (mi dah skaJ ba mfiam par skyes).

32' skat ba mfiam pa 322

=

sabhiigatii (Mvy 6456); BHSD s.v.

Abhidhann akosa-vyiikhyii ad Ai< II.41a [Wogihara, 159.10ff.; Shastri, 233.16-19; Pek. Tg, Cu. 166bl-2]:

sarirendriyasturJSthiinace.riihiiriidisaubhiigyakiiroJ;am anyonyiibhirabhisambandhanimittlll!l casabhiigatii ity iiciitya-Sahgha­ bhadral,l ;' Cf. also the Abhidhann adipa-v{1ti ad II.134 [Jaini, 89.lff.]. 323

Cone, Nu. 226bl: 'Dus bzahs.

80

"Acarya Vinitabhadra (Cone: Sailghabhadra) says: «In fact the sages do command. The demons'" having known their entering into the [evil] intentions, [as if they were] believing them, act corporally, wherethrough with those sages arises a path of action. Or, out of anger, there is then undoubtedly no violation when [they are] agitated [by] the acts of body and voice. At the confession ceremony"�, as in a matter to be made mown through word(s) as well as in a body movement arises a path qf action (karmapatha), so when [the formula] 'The venerable is pure' is announced, I keep silence and also remain unmoved, [then] in a matter to be made known as well as in [my] keeping silence arises a path of pure action; thiS - like in [on.e who is] ,not pure - by keeping silence 'I am pure', will make merit»". The above fragment refers to the opinion of Sailghabhadra as quoted by Yasornitra'26. The Tibetan text, however, is not a faithful reproduction of the Sanskrit and also shows some differences with the original wording of Sailghabhadra (xxiii. 5, 7a) as translated from the Chinese

'" mi ma yin pa

,25 gso sbyon

=

=

amanlq)/a (Index AKBh IIL206); BHSD S.Y.

po�adha (Index AKBh III306); BHSD s.Y. ('sabbath').

,,.Abhidhannakoia-vyiikhya adAK IV.7S [Wogihara, 408.13ff.; Shastri, 692.18ff.]: atriiciilya-SanghabhadraJ.< samadhim aha / (rayo 'rthata ajfliipayitiiro bhavanti /te$iiJrJ hi sattvaparityagaprav[1tOl!' piiptiiayam avetytimanlq)/iis tadabhipmsanniiIJ kiiyena pariikram ante / yena te$tim f$i{liiJrJ kannapatha utpadyate / katham / parivijflaptyeti / avaiyOl!' lathiividhasya kiiyavagviktinl bhavanti / api ca iapanti Ie tatha / tatra cavaiyOl!' kiiyavacc<$taya bhavitavyam // anye tv ahul) / na ktimadhatav avaiyam avijflapti/;l sarvaiva vijflapty adhina bhavati /phalapraiiptyaiva sahapaflcakadiniiJrJ pnitimo/qasOl!'­ varotpattisambhavat / ity akuialapy
81

by La Vallee Poussin'27. The passage is difficult (corrupt ?) and my translation is tentative only. 'Fragm. 9:

[TIm. 3 1 0a7J slob dpon 'Dul bzw1'21l na re ni 'chi 'pho ba dan skye ba < mnon par> ses pas ni phyi ma 'i mtha ' la kun tu nnons pa bzlog par byed do // zagpa zad pa 'i mnon par ses pas ni bar la kun tu nnons pa [8] bzlog par byed do ies zer ro // "Acarya Vinitabhadra (Cone: Sanghabhadra) says: «One reverses a future confusion by means of intuition'29 of a fall [from one existence] and rebirth [in another]330; one reverses a 'middle' [i.e. present] confusion by means of intuition of destruction of evil influences»". This corresponds to the opinion of Sanghabhadra as quoted by Yasomitra33l• Our analysis has shown that the opinions ascribed to a certain Vinltabhadra can be recognized as the opinions of Sanghabhadra. Thus we can assume that the name 'Dul bzan/Vinltabhadra is a mere scribal mistake for 'Dus bzan/Sanghabhadra.

3Z7 Kosa, IV, p. 163 n. 5: "SaI)lghabhadra explique: En fait (arthatas), les R�is commandent (rijiiripitiiras) Ie meurtre. Des etres demoniaques (amanUD'a), connaissant (avetya) leur intention pecheresse de destruction des etres vivants

(sattvaparityaga-pravrtta papiiSaya), devoues comme ils sont aux R�is, agissent corporellement contre les etres: en raison de cette action corporelle, il y a chemin de l'acte en ce qui conceme les R�is. - Comment les R�is manifestent-ils (vljiiapti) leur intention? - En raison de la colere, il y a certainement chez eux modification du corps et de la voix; s'lls maudissent, il y a certainement mouvement (ce�!a) du corps et de la voix. - D'autres maitres disent que toute av,yiiapti de la sphere du Kama ne depend pas d'une vijiiapti. Par exemple, les Cinq (paii caka) en obtenant un fruit obtiennent du meme coup la diScipline de Pnitimolqa (ci-dessus, p. 60): de meme une mauyaise avijiiapti peut naitre sans qu'il y ait vijiiapti. Dira-t-on que les Cinq avaient fait vijiiapti auparavant? Il en sera de me-me dans d'autres cas. Voila pour Ie cas des �is. Quant au mensonge a la ceremonie de 1a confession (po�adhamr�iivada), Ie fait que Ie moine coupable (aparisuddha) entre dans Ie SaI)lgha, s'assied, s'y tient (svam ityiipathtlJ?1 ka/payati) et tout ce qu'il peut dire, voila pour lui une vijiiapti anterieure (au moment au il acquiesce par Ie silence)". 328

Cone, Nu. 234a4: 'Dus bzans.

329

mnon par ses pa

3]{)

'chi 'pho ba dail skye ba

=

abhijiiri (Index AKBh III.52); BHSD s.y. =

cyutyutprida, cyutyupapatti (Index AKBh III.69); BHSD s. cyutopaprida.

33 1 Abhidhann akosa-vyiikhyri ad AK VIlAS [Wogihara, 657.28ff.; Shastri, 1113.14ff.]: riciirya-Sailghabhadras tu vyiic�!e /piirwintiidau nivartaniit /piirveniviisribhijiiri hi piirviintastlJ?1mohtlJ?1 vyrivartayati / aparrintastlJ?1mohtlJ?1 cyutyupapiidiibhi­ jiiri / madhyastlJ?1moham iisrovalqayrihhijiieti / ataS ca tiSf1:liim eva vidyritvam / piirvayiitmaparavipaddarianrit stlJ?1vegotpattei,l parayii pare�iim eva / tathri stlJ?1vignasya bhiitiirthiivagamrit trfiyeti / kim atra pratipattavyam / iiciirya­ Sailghabhadro-vyiikhyiinam eva yuktarilptlJ?1 paiyri-mai,l ;. Cf. LVP, Kosa, VII, p. 108 n. 2: "Mais Sarpghabhadra explique: Le souvenir des anciennes' existences met un ,tenne a l' erreur relative au passe; la connaissance de la mort et renaissance met un terrne a l'erreur relative au futur; la connaissance de la destruction des asravas met un terme a 1'erreur relative au present; c'est pourquoi ces trois abrujnas sont vidyiis. Par I. premiere, on yoit la souffrance de soi et d'.utrui; par I. seconde, la souffrance d'autrui; on eprouve Ie saJ11vega, Ie degout; ainsi degoute, on produit la troisieme, on voit Ie bonheur du NirviiIJa. C'est pourquoi ces trois abhijnas sont vidyii. YaSomitra demontre que la pensee de Vasubandhu est correctement interpretee par SaIJ1ghabhadra". Cf. also the Abhidhann adipa-v{tti ad VII.522 [Jaini, 397.18-19].

82

7. ABHIDHARMA,VATARAPRAKARAl:'A AND SARAsAMUCCAYA

Two anonymous works which close the volume Thu of the section mnon pa of the Tanjur, the

SiirasamuccayaAbhidhanniivatiira-pkii and theAbhidhannivi atiiraprakarar;uz, are not commentar. ies on the Abhidhannakosa sensu stricto. The AbhidhanniivatiiraprakaralJa, or in short: Abhidhanniivatiira, was composed by the arhat Skandhila, a Sarvastivada master from Kashmir, a teacher of Sanghabhadra and a contemporary of Vasubandhu. All this we know from the Chinese sources which wer � studied by M. Van Velthem'32. Skandhila's work is a concise commentary on the PrakaralJapiida, one of the seven canonical treatises of the Sarvastivada Abhidharma, ascribed to Vasumitra33'. The PrakaralJa was frequently cited by Vasubandhu in his Abhidhannakosa and by Sanghabhadra in the

Nyiiyiinusiira. The Abhidhanniivatiira is extant only in the Chinese translation by HSiian-tsang from 658 A.D. (Taisho 1554), and in the anonymous Tibetan translation dated c. 800 A.D., since it is mentioned in the Lhan kar rna catalogue (ed. Lalou, No. 692). Moreover, some fragments in Tokharian are preserved'34. The Abhidhanniivatiira in Tibetan33S consists of ten sections. It opens with a . formula of salutation to Mafijusrikumara, followed by an explanation of the purpose of the treatise. The treatise begins with the words: "So there are eight subjects of the Sugatas". The subjects, i.e. the sections of the work are as follows (numbers in brackets refer to the chapter order of the Chinese version) : 2 ( 1 ) gzugs kyi dilos po (rilpa-vastu), 3(2) tshor ba 'i dilos po (vedanii-vastu), 4(3) 'du ses kyi dilos po (sal'{ljiiii-vastu), 5(4) 'du byed kyi dilos po (sal'{lSkiira-vastu), 6 (5 ) mam par ses pa 'i dilos po (vijiiin i a-vastu), 7 *on the causal relations and effects (*hetu-pratyaya-phala), 8(6) nam mkha 'i diIos po (iikiiSa-vastu), 9(7) so sor brtags pas 'gog pa'i dilos po (pratisal'{lkhyiinirodha), 10 ( 8 ) so sor brtags pa ma yin pas 'gog pa'i dilos po (apratisal'{lkhyiinirodha). The treatise offers a concise summary of the Sarvastivada teaching of the dharma theory. Firstly, there is a classification schema of the conditioned elements (sal'{lSlq-ta-dhanna) which are distributed into five aggregates (skandha); then follows a separate section on the operations of the causes (hetu) and conditions (pratyaya), and on their effects (phala); and finally an explanation is given of three unconditioned elements (asal'{lSlq-ta-dhanna). The Siirasamuccaya Abhidhanniivatiira-pkii'36 exists only in · the Tibetan translation executed 33l Le trrlire de La descente dans La Pr% nde £oi (Abhidharmiivatarasiistra) de L'arltat Skandhila, Louvain-Ia-Neuve 1977. cr. also Irnonishi, Fragmente des Abhidharmaprokartll;J abh�am in Text UJld Ub ersetzung, Giittingen 1975. m

Cf. Lamotte, HBI, p. 203f.; LVP, Kosa, Introduction, p.

xxxi.ii

See also Irnanishi, Das Paiicavastukam UJld die.

Paiicavastukavibh�ii. ". Van Velthem, op. cit., p.

xviii.

'" Cf. Van Velthem, op. cit., pp. 81-109 contains the Tibetan text (peking Tanjur) in transliteration. 336

Van Velthem has announced (op. cit., p. xiii) that he will publish a critical edition of the Siirasamuccaya, yet he

83

by Jinamitra, Danaslla and Ye ses sde. It is referred to in the Lhan kar rna catalogue as a commentary on the Abhidharmiivatiira (ed. Lalou, Nos. 693-694). The Sarasarnuccaya is composed on the same pattern as the text commented on - it is divided into ten chapters, and it explains in simple words the compact matter of the Abhidharmavatara. A close relation between the Abhidharmavatara and the Abhidharmakosa is a result of their dependence on the Sarvastivada Abhidharma or, more precisely, on the PrakaralJa. It is possible to trace many identical or very similar passages in the treatises of Skandhila and Vasubandhu as well as of Yasomitra, to the extent that some parts of the Abhidharmavatara or the Siira­ sarnuccaya can be restored into Sanskrit. However, one observes also differences, e.g. in the chapter on causal relations and effects (ch. 7) the Sarasarnuccaya presents the explanations which are parallel to those found in Yasomitra's Sphutartha but the definitions of the SL'{ causes are not the same; the definition of the term sal!1jfia both in the Abhidharmiivatiira and in the Sarasarnuccaya (ch. 4) is different from that of Vasubandhu. These instances will be studied below.

7.1 Six hetus Originally the terms hetu and praryaya seemed to be equivalent. Yasomitra in his answer to the question: "What are these causes? What are these conditions? And what difference is between them?" says that there is no difference. It is only later that the question of the number of the hetus and pratyayas has arisen, as well as the problem of whether six hetus are to be included in four pratyayas or not. According to the Vaibha�ikas, continues Yasomitra, the "Sutra" describing six hetus has been lost. However, it happens that there are sutras which teach about six hetus and Yasomitra quotes the extracts containing their definiti� ns337. Now, the Sarasarnuccaya agrees as to the number of six hetus and four pratyayas, referring to the "Sutra". Here is this fragment: [Tim. 385b2] rndo las rkyen bii ste I rgyu 'i rkyen dan I de rna thagpa 'i rkyen dan I dmigs

pa 'i rkyen dan I bdag pa Y rkyen te I rkyen bii ni gsulis [3J kyi I rgyu mams ni rna gsulis pa rna yin narn I 'di ni fies pa rna yin te I drug pa Y skobs su rgyu'i rndo gsun ba las de ni nub par gyur (xyl.: 'gyur) te I lha mams kyis bsfiad do IIyan na rndo gian dag las rgyu mams gsulis te I [4J §1. rntshulis par ldan pa 'i rgyu gsulis pa ni mthon ba 'i rtsa ba las byun ba 'i dad pa ni rtogs nas ses pa daft mtshulis par ldan . no II ies 'byun ba 'f dadpa· ni dogs nas ses pa dan rntshulis par ldan no ies 'byun ba'o II [5J §2. de biin du lhan Gig 'byun ba Y rgyu bstan te I gzugs gan Gi yan run de thams cad 'byuft ba chen po bii dag ces 'byun ba'o II §3. skal ba mfiam pa Y rgyu yan gsulis te I de dge ba Y rtsa ba chun nu tsam (?) dan ldan pa yod de de'i dge [6J ba 'i rtsa ba de las dge ba 'i rtsa ba gian 'byun ies bya ba 'o II §4. kun tu 'gro ba 'i rgyu yan gsulis te I log par Ita ba la sags pa log par rtog pa 'byun no ies bya ba 'o II

eXpressed his uncertainty as to the actual character of the text. 337 Abhidhann akosa-vyiikhyii [Wogihara, 188.13-189.15; Shastri, 278.28-31, 279.3-32; Peking Tg, Cu. 194b1-195b2] (the fragment is too long to be quoted here in extenso). Cf. Van Velthem, op. cit., pp. 71-74; Lamotte, Trait., V, pp. 2164-

2166; LVP, Douze causes, p. 54f.

84

§5. mam par smin pa Y rgyu yan gsuns te I dge slon dag khyed kyis srog [7J gcod pa'i sems can mthon na de la khyed kyis kye rna 'o II sems can dmyal ba 'am sems can dmyal ba gan yail run ba zig mthon no sfiam du sems (;cyL: nes) par ses par bya 'o II dge slon dag khyed kyis srog gcod pa spans pa'i sems can [8J mtholi na I de la khyed kyis lha 'am lha gan yaiz run ba zig mthon no siiam du sems par ses par bya'o zes 'byun ba'o II ' §6. byed pa 'i rgyu yan gsuizs te / mig (xyL: min) dan gzugs la brten nas mig gi [38OO1J mam par ses pa 'byun ste I dge slon dag de ltar na mig ni bdag po '0 II gzugs mams ni dmigs pa'o zes ' 'byun ba 'o Ir' "In the Siitra [are mentioned] four pratyayas, [i.e.] hetu-pratyaya, samanantara-pratyaya, iilambana-pratyaya, and adhipati-pratyaya. Is it not that the four pratyayas have been announced [in the Siitra], whereas [the six] hetus have not? - This is not a fault for in the chapter on hexades a Siitra on the [six] hetus had been proclaimed and only afterwards it got lost; [this] has been related by the gods. Or, the [six] causes are mentioned in other Siitra. §1. With regard to the mention of the sar[lprayuktaka-hetu, it is said: «A belief rooted in perception and associated with cognition [which is resulting from] penetration», i.e. a belief associated with cognition resulting from penetration. §2. Similarly, the sahabhu-hetu is described in these words: «Whatsoever matter, all these, four great elements» . §3. The sabhiiga-hetu is mentioned too. It is said: «The one associated with that who has only (?) a small root of good; from this root of good originates another root of good» . §4. The sarvatraga-hetu is mentioned too. It is said: «There originate false reflections: false views etc.» . The vipiika-hetu is mentioned too. It is said: «If you, monks, see a living being who is §5. taking life, you should make known to bim having thought in mind: 'Alas, I see a hell or whatsoever is fit for a hell'. If you, monks, see a living being who is abstaining from taking life, you should make known to him having thought in mind: 'I see the gods or whatsoever is fit for the gods'». §6. The kiiraIJa-hetu is mentioned too. It is said: «The visual consciousness originates in dependence on the eye and the elements of matter. Thus, monks, the eye is the organ of sense, and the elements of matter are the objects of sense» ". I cannot enter here into the difficult question Cif the origin of the Siitra quotations. With regard to the question of the lost Siitra, it is interesting to see that the Siirasamuccaya refClrs to . the fact of "divine intervention" ("it has been related by the gods"), whereas Yasomitra refers to the opinion of the Vaibhii.�ikas who claim that "the Siitra has been lost": According to La Vallee Poussin, it seems that Yasomitra borrowed the definitions of the six hetus from Sailghab­ hadra339• The parallel definitions in the Siirasamuccaya must derive from another source, except for the salflprayuktaka-hetu and the kiiraIJa-hetu, which agree with those of Ya§omitra.

,,, Cf. YaSomitra: ad § 1. idam ucyate darlanamiilikii sraddhii'vetyajfliinastllflProyuktii / "yad vijiiniili tat prajiiniili' iii StllflproyuktakahetuJ:< / r · · not in the Siirasamuccaya, seems to stem from another Sutra - L.Schmithausen ]; ad §6. calqul;t pratitya riipiil;i cotpadyate calqurvijfliinam iii fairw;lahetuJ:< / [ef. Dhannaskandha, ed. Dietz, p. 90 (5 .1 :4)].

,,, LVP, Kosa,

n,

p. 245 n. 2 (Saitghabhadra III.79b16).

85

7.2 On the tenn saf!ljflli Let us now study another piece of text, this time showing the relation between the three: the Abhidhannakosa, the Abhidhanniivatiira, and the Siirasamuccaya. For this purpose I have selected the fourth chapter, on "apprehension" (sarr1jiiii-vastu, 'du ses kyi diws po}''''. It has already been noted that the definition of the important term "saf!ljilii"341 is different from that of Vasubandhu. Both the Abhidhanniivatiira [TilU. 396b2-6] and especially the Siirasamuccaya [Thu. 331a8-33 1b8] offer interesting explanations. A comparison between these two texts shows that the latter is a commentary on the work of Skandhila. Below is presented the Tibetan text and the annotated translation of the saf!ljilii-vastu. (a) Abhidharmavatara [Thu. 396b2] mtshan rna dan min dan don gyi (xyl.: dan) brda ses pa ni (xyl. : ies pa Y) 'du ses te I snon po dan ser po dan I rin po dan thun nu dan I dun [3J dan rna dan I padma dan I sna ma Y me (xyl.: ma) tog dan I u tpa la Y dri dan I kha ba dan Ian tshva dan I l'am pa dan rtsub pa dan I bud med dan skyes pa la sogs pa 'i mtshan ma dan I min dan don gcig tu ses pa Y chos [4J gan yin pa de ni mam par rtog pa Y rgyu ste 'du ses ies bya 'o II de yan mam par ses pa Y bye brag gis tshor ba Min du mam pa drUg go IIyan chun nu dan chen par gyur pa dan tshad med pa dan mam pa [5J gsum ste I de la yut chun nu la dmigs pa ni chwi nu 'o II ri rab la sags pa la dmigs pa ni chen par gyur pa 'o II nam mkha ' mtha ' yas skye mched la sags pa dag la ni tshad med pa 'o II 'du [6J ses kyi drios po '0 II Translation "Apprehension"342 is a cognition of a conventional designation343 of [the three:] sign344, name34', thin�. The element which cognises as one [entity] the signs, names and things, e.g. blue and yellow, long and short, [a sound of] conch and drum, smell of white lotus, [smell of] jasmin and of blue lotus, [a taste of] bitter and briny, [a touch of] soft and rough, male and female etc., is a cause of discrimination347, and it is called "apprehension""'. This [apprehen-

"" Cf. Van Velthem, op. cit., p. 85.22-53.

34 1 Cf. Schmithausen, "On some aspects of descriptions or the?ries of 'hberating insight' and 'enlightenment' in early Buddhism", p. 215 n. 51; . BHSD s.v. · 342 'du 5es

=

'43

s<JI?1keta (Mvy 2776). BHSD p. 546: "conventional designation (with implication of unreality)".

bnia

=

'44 mtshan

s<Jl?1jiiii. BHSD p. 551f.

ma

=

nimitta (Index AKBh TII.227). Cf.Abhidhannakosa-vyiikhyii [Wogihara, 37.5-6; LiM, 38.10; Shastri,

48.18]: nimitt<Jl?1 vastuno 'vasthiiviSe�o nilatviidi I; [Pek. Tg, Cu. 39al]: mtshan ma ni dnos po'i gnas skabs kyi khyad par te snon po 10 sogs po yin no If. Cf. Schmithausen, Nin>iiJ;a-Abschnitt, p. 120 n. 67; Van Velthem, op. cit., p. 13 n. 1; LVP, Kosa, I, p. 28 n. 1. "3

min

=

niiman, s<JI?1jiiii (Index AKBh III.210).

346

don

=

anha (Index AKBh III.116).

347 mom

par /tog po

=

vitarka, vikalpa(na) (Index AKBh III.156). Cf. Van Velthem, op. cit., p. 13 n. 3; BHSD sub

86

sian] is sixfold, like a feelin!f49, in consequence of the individualization of [sixfold] conscious­ ness'so. Moreover, it is threefold, [with regard to its object, be it] small, great, and unmeasured. Here, it is [called] "small",sl having as an object of sense a small thing; it is [called] "great,,'S2 having as an object of sense [the mount] Sumeru etc.; it is [called] "unmeasured"'S3 having as an object of sense the stage of infinity . of space etc. [The chapter on the] entity of apprehension [is finished]. (b) Sarasamuccaya [Thu. 331a8] mtshan ma dan min [33 1b1] dan don gyi brda ses pa ies bya ba de fa I mtshan ma

dan mnon rtags (xyl.: brtags) daiI mtshan iiid ni mam gram su gtogs pa 'o II miil ni 'du ses so II don ni skye mched bcu giiis so II brda (xyl. : brda') ni gcig tu [2] bsdus pa 'i gnas so II lam tu ses pa ni 'du ses so II 'di'i yul bstan pa'i phyir I man po daiI ser po daiI I riiI po < dan > thun nu < dan > ies bya ba smras te / mig gi mam par ses pa dan ldan pa ni kha dog [3] daiI dbyibs la dmigs par stan to II dun ies bya ba 'dis ni sgra fa dmigs pa 'o II patima'i dri ies bya ba ni dri la dmigs pa'o II kha ba dan Ian tshva ies bya ba ni ro la dmigs pa'o II Jam pa daiI rtsub [4] pa ies bya ba ni reg bya la dmigs pa'o II bud med dan skyes pa la sags pa ies bya ba 'dis ni yid kyi mam par ses pa'i yul rab tu stan to II mam par rtog pa'i rgyu ies bya ba ni mam par rtog pa 'i rgyu'o II [5] mam par ses pa lam fa yan 'du ses yod de I de'i yul ni spyi'i mtshan iiid do II '0 na chos mnon pa las mig gi mam par ses pa dail ldan pas ni snon par ses kyi (xyl.: kyis) man po '0 (xyL: po 'i) ies bya ba ni rna yin no II [6] yid kyi (xyl.: kyis) mam par Ses pa dan ldan pas ni snon par Ses la I snon po '0 ies bya bar yan ses so ies 'byun ba ni ji Ita bu ie na I mam par ses pa Ina ni mam par rtogpa giiis medpas mi gsal ba'i [7] phyir de skad ces bya 'o II mam pa gsum ste I chun nu ni rdul phra rob fa sags pa la dmigs pa 'o II chen par gyur pa ni ri rab la sags pa la dmigs pa'o II sags pa smos pa ni rgya mtsho la sags pa bstan [B] to II tshad med pa ni nam mkha ' mtha'yas skye (xyl.:

viko.lpa. '" The defInition in theAbhidhann akosa L14cd is as follows [Pradhan, 10.16; Shastri, 48.5]: sClJ?1jiiii nimillodgrahtu;l­ iitmikiiI; [Pek. Tg, Gu. 35bl] 'du ses ni ,;,tshan mar 'dzin pa'i bdag iiid do 1/ Cf.Abhidhannakosa-bh�a ll.24 [Pradhan, 54.20-21; Shastri, 1873]: sClJ?1jiiii SClJ?1jiiiinClJ?1 vi�aylUlimillodgraha/;l I; [Gu. 72a7] 'du ses ni 'dus nas ses pa ste I yul la mtshan mar 'dzin pa'o 1/ Cf. also Vasubandhu's Paiicaskandhaka [Pek. Tg, Si. 13b2-3]: 'du ses gailte na Iyul la mtshan mar 'dZ;n pa';' )1 de ni inam pa gsurn ste I chuii ;,U 'dan ! rgya chen por gyur pa ddil l /shad ;"ed pa'd II. The same defInition is found in Sthirarnati's T,;".sikii-bh�a, Vijiiaptimiitratiisiddhi, Althaviniicayasiitra, Dpal brtseg's Dhanna­ pcuyiiyiibhismlll'tu;l a (Tohoku 4363); but see also Paiicavastuka, Asaitga's Abhidhann asamuccaya. Further cf. my paper "Klon rdol bla rna's explanatory notes on the Abhidhannakosa of Vasubandhu".

"" Cf.Abhidhannakosa-bh�a I.14cd [Pradhan, 10.18; Shastri, 48.7]: sa punarbhidyamiina/;l �at sClJ?1jiiiikiiyti vedaniivat / 3,.

mam par ses pa'i bye brag

'" chun ;,U

=

*vijiiiina-vise�a.

alpa, parillO, mrdu (Index AKBh ID.62); BHSD sub parilla ("small, limited, restricted, minor").

'52 chen por gyur pa parittd'. '53 tshad

=

med pa

=

=

mahadgata (Index AKBh ID.63); BHSD p. 421: "great, extensive, lofty - contrasted with

apramiil;aa, apcuimiil;aa (Index AKBh IlI.221); BHSD s.v.

87

skyes) mched la sags pa fa 'a II sags pas smas pas ni mam ses mtha ' yas skye mched fa sags pa bstan to II 'du ses bsad zin to II Translation "Cognition of a conventional designation of sign, name and thing", here - "sign", clear mark'S<, characteristiC"', [is applied] to assign specification3S<;; "name" [means1 notion"7; "thing" [means] the twelve bases of cognition"'. "[Conventional] designation", i.e. a locus of putting together into one [entity the above mentioned three: sign, name and thing]. "Apprehension", i.e. a full comprehension359. In order to make known its object one says "blue", "yellow", "long", "short" [etc.]; [on saying this] one shows that the apprehension associated with visual perception"" has "colour and shape" as its object; [on saying] "conch" [one shows that the element of apprehension associated with auditory perception36l] has "sound" as its object; [on saying] "smell of a lotus" [one shows that the element of apperception associated with olfactory perception36� has "smell" as its object; [on- saying] "bitter, briny" [one shows that the element of apperception associated with taste perception363] has "taste" as its obj ect; [on saying] "soft, rough" [one shows that the element of apperception associated with contact perception364] has "tactile" as its object; [on saying] "male, female" [one shows that the element of apprehension associated with mental perception36'] comes within an object of mental perception. "Cause of discrimination", i.e. a reason of discrimination. "Consciousness everywhere", it is apprehension;

35' mnan nags = cihna (Tib.-Skt. Diet. p. 623); Bod rgya tsrug rndzod chen rno I, p. 687: mnan nags du sar ba'j nags mtshan, tlopenly, outwardly visible sign, mark", 35'

mtshan fiid

35' mam

grans

1ak,aJ)a (Index AKBh III.226); BHSD

=

paryiiya (Index AKBh IIUS3); BHSD s .v.

'du ses

35'

skye mched bcu gfiis

=

sllJ!ljiiii (Index AKBh III.130); BHSD

3" kun tu ses pa par byed pa

=

=

=

mnan sum

S.v.

=

357

=

s.v.

dviidafiiyatana (Index AKBh IlLS).

*iijiiiina; kun ses pa

=

iijiiii (Mvy 7602); kun tu ses par bya ba

iijiiiip aniyii (Mvy 471); Bod rgya tsrug mdzod chen rno I, p.

2S: kun

ses

=

iijiieyii (Mvy 466); kun tu ses

=

(iijniinaI;J) yon tan thams cad

khan du chub pa, "thorough understanding of all qualities"; Dhammasailga1)i 61: sannii safijiinanii sanjiinitattam . 360 361

cak$urvijiiiina. srotravijfuina.

362 ghnil;ravijfuina. 353 jihviivijfliina. 364

sprG.$!avyavijiiiina.

36S

manovijiiiina.

88

its object is
=

siimiinya-Ia/qOlJa (Index AKBh III.168).

Abhidharmakosa-bhii�a III.30cd [pradhan, 144.2-4; Shastri, 471.8-9): yathoktaJTI ca/qurvijiiiinena nilaJTI vijiiniiti

no III nilaJTI manovijiiiinena nilaJTI vijiiniiti nilam iti ca vijiiniititi I; [pek. Tg, Gu. 155a2-3) ji skad du mig gi mam par ses pas ni snon po mam par ies kyi snon po'o tes bya bar ni mam par mi ses so Ilyid kyi mam par ses pas ni snon po yail mam par ses pa la snon po'o tes bya bar yail mam par ses so II tes gsuns pa Ita bu ste f. AbhidharmakoSa-vyiikhya [Wogihara, 305.22-24; Shastri, 471.19-20]: manovijiiiinena nilaJTI vijiiniititi I abhidheyaJTI vijiiniitity arthalJ I nilam iti ca vijiiniititi I asyiiJthasyedaJTI niimeti vijiiniiti I; [pek. Tg, Cu. 341b8-342a2) yid kyi mam par ses pas snon po yail mam par ses <so > ies bya lia ni bljod par bya ba yail mam par ses so II tes bya ba'i Iha tshig go I snon po'o lites bya bar yail mam par ses <so > tes bya ba ni don 'di'i min ni 'di yin no II uS bya bar mam par ses pa'o If. Cf. Prasannapadii led. LVP, 74.7-8); LVP, Kosa, I, p. 2 n. 1; 60 n. 2; II, 177 n. 5; III, 95 n. 2; 99 n. 4. >0, According to the Abhidharmakosa I33a [Pradhan, 22.20ff.; Shastri, 89.7ff.), vikalpa (mam parrtogpa) is threefold: svabhiiva-vika!pa, ninlpOlJa-vikalpa, and anusmartllJ a-vikalpa; the five kinds of sensible consciousness comprise the first

one only. Cf. YaSomitra's Vyiikhyii [Wogihara, 6430f.; Levi, 67,18f.; Shastri, 89.28): svabhiivavikalpo vilmkalJ I sa tqiitp paiiciiniitp vijiiiinakiiyiiniitp saJTIPrayogalo 'sti ;' ,.. AbhidharmakoSa-vyiikhyii [Wogihara, 37.7-10; Levi, 38.11-14; Shastri, 48.20-23): yadi paricchediitmikii saJTIjiiii latsaJTIprayoge nimillam udgrhIJantiti paiiciip i vijiiiinakiiyii vikalpakiiJ.! syu/J. I na syu/J. I na hi paiicavijiiiinasaJTIprayogilJi saJTIjiiii pafVi I manovijiiiinakiiyasaJTIprayogilJi III patviti lad eva vikalpakam uktam I; [pek. Tg, Cu. 39a2-4) gal le 'du ses yons su gcod pa'i bdag iiid yin na go de dail mtshiins par ldan na· riilihan ma lti 'dziit-pds miun piuses p� 'i rshogs" ma-mam par rtog (xyl.: rtogs) pa can du 'gyur ro tes na mi 'gyur le I mam par ses pa Ina dail mtshuils par Idan pa'i 'du ies. ni gsa! ba ma yin no II yid kyi mam par ses pa'i tshogs dail mlshuns par Idan pa ni gsa! ba yin pas de kho na mam par rtog pa dail bcas pa yin par Mad do If. mi gsa! ba = *apa{Vi (sci!. saJTIjiiii); apa(U, asa"tprakhyiina (Index AKBh III.208); BHSD p. 83: asaJTIprakhyiina = "lack of clarity, obscurity, confusion". ,,. rdul phro rob

=

paramiiJ;!u (Index AKBh III.140).

37\ nam mkha' mtha' yas skye mched m

mam ies mlha' yas skye mched

", ci yail med pa'i skye mched

=

=

=

iikiiSiinantyiiyalana (Mvy 3 110); BHSD p. 87.

vijiiiiniinantyiiyatana (Mvy 3111); BHS.D p. 486.

iikil1'canyiiyatana (Mvy 3112); BHSD p. 87.

'" 'du ses med 'du ses med min skye mched

=

naivasaJTIjiiiiniisaJTIjiiiiyatana (Mvy 3113); BHSD p. 313.

89

8. STHIRAMATI'S TATTVARTHA

The Tattviirtha commentary on theAbhidharmakosa by Sthiramati (c. 510-570 A.D., Frauwallner) deserves our special attention for at least two reasons. Firstly, its author was a great Buddhist philosopher who commented also on Vasubandhu's treatises belonging to the Vijiiiinaviida; secondly, its preserved version in the Tibetan translation poses serious problems connected with the history of its transmission.

(1) Information about the life and works of Sthiramati are found in the works of Hsiian­ tsang, K'ouei-ki, Bu-ston. N. Peri and S. Levi collected available data on Sthiramati from Chinese sources375. It is said that Sthiramati originated from Liita country (Gujarat Central and South). He was a disciple of GUl)amati but probably turned away from his teacher as he had established himself in Valabhi It seems that Sthiramati was not always in perfect doctrinal agreement with the school in Niilandii for the Chinese commentators very often point out the differences, if not the open contradictions, with the opinions of Dharmapiila376. He must have succeeded his master in Valabhi: we know from the inscription that the king Guhasena of Valabhi (ruled 558-566 AD.) presented a monastery to Sthiramatim. Jayasena from Surat, a country close to and dependent on Valabhi, came there to. study under Sthiramati but later moved to Niilandii to study under Dharmapiila. Another disciple of Sthiramati in Liita country was the celebrated Prajiiiigupta, converted to Hinayiina, one of the chief personages of the Sarpmitiya school, which in the epoch of HSiian-tsang seems to have been very influential in that region. Hsiian-tsang regarded GUl)amati as a contemporary of Sthiramatp7'. According to K'ouei-ki379, the third author on a list of ten commentators of the Vijiiaptimiitratii was Sthiramati from Liita country; he was perfectly versed in logic and metaphysics; he composed the Abhidharmasamuccaya-vyiikhyii (Nanjio 1 178 Taisho 1606) on the work of Asanga, defended the Abhidharmakosa and refuted the opinions of the Nyiiyiinusiira-siistra of Sanghabhadra. Sthiramati was a contemporary of the master of the siistras, Dharmapiila. According to Bu-ston"O, Sthiramati was a personal disciple of Vasubandhu and surpassed his master in the field of the Abhidharma; he composed a commentary on Asanga's Abhidharma­ samuccaya, a commentary on the Abhidharmakosa and commented on the eight treatises of Vasubandhu. Sthiramati's disciple was Purl)avardhana. =

'" The following is based on Peri's "A propos de Ia date de Vasubandhu", p. 354, 379, and on LiM's Materiawc pour I'hude du systeme vijiiaptimiitra, p. 19f. Cf. Repertoire du Canon bouddhique sino-japonais, ed. de Taisho, fase. annexe du Hobogirin, p. 235 (AnnejNgan houei); Nanjio, Catalogue, Appendix L7.

376 See Frauwallner, Die Philosophie des Buddhismus, p. 394ff. 377

Levi, ilLes donations religieuses des rois de Valabhl", Memoire S. Levi, p. 231f.

37'

Watters, On Yuan Chwang's Travels in India, II, p. 108f., 169; Takakusu, op. cit., p. lviii ,

!ix.

379 Peri, op. cit., p. 379; Levi, Matbiaux, p. 19f.; Lamotte, loco cit. 380 Chos 'byun, trans!' Obenniller, II, pp. 147-149. Tiiraniitha reproduces the same story with some insignificant changes (cf. also Naudou, Les bouddhistes kaimiriens, p. 57 n. 3).

90

The. dating of Sthiramati has been studied by Frauwallner and Kajiyama who agreed to date him in 510-570 A.D."!, Among the works of Sthiramati there are fortunately some preserved in their Sanskrit originals: - TrifriSikii-bhii.DJa, a commentary on the Trif!lSikii-kiirikii of Vasubandhu3l!2, - Madhyiintavibhiiga-(ikii, a subCommentary on Vasubandhu's bhfi.D!a on the kiirikiis of . Maitreyaniitha"', - Abhidhannasamuccaya-bh�a, a commentary on the work of Asailga"4. This text exists also in �he Chinese (Taisho 1606) as well as in the Tibetan (Tohoku 4054) translation. The latter has Jinaputra (Rgyal ba'i sras) as its author; it was executed by Jinamitra and Ye ses sde about 800 A.D. Sometimes its authorship was mistakenly ascribed to Yasomitra (Grags pa Mes gfien) whose name is preceded by the title Riijaputra (Rgyal po'i sras). N. Tatia expressed the opinion based on the Chinese material that it was Buddhasirpha who "had written the Bhii�ya on the Abhidharmasamuccaya of Asailga, and Sthiramati revised it and composed the Abhidharma­ samuccaya-vyiikhyii in which both the Abhidharmasamuccaya and the Abhidharma­ samuccayabhfi.D!a were put together""s. However, it was shown by L. Schmithausen that "the colophon characterizes the joint version of AS [= Abhidharmasamuccaya] and ASBh [ = Abhidharmasamuccayabh�a] (Taisho 1606 = Tohoku 4054) as 'mixed' (not: composed!) by Sthiramati who thus may be responsible for a kind of edition in which the AS and its com­ mentary were interwoven and a few additions made. This means that Sthiramati is not the author of the ASBh as such""". It was demonstrated by P. Pradhan that this text has many passages similar to the TrifriSikii-bh�a'87. Furthermore, it is interesting to observe the occurrence of a passage identical with Yasomitra's Sphutiirthii"8. The following texts exist only in translations:

38 ' Frauwallner, "Landmarks", p. 136f. [= K1. Schriften, p. 8S8f.]; Kajiyama, "Bhiivaviveka, Sthiramati and Dharmapiila", WZKS 12/13, 1968-69, pp. 193-203.

,., Ed. and transl. by S.

LiM.

'" Recently ed. by R.C. Pandeya. ,.. Ed. by N. Tatia, Patna 1976. Cf. de Jong's review of Walpola Rahula, La compendium de La super-doctrine (philosophie) (Abhidhannasamuccaya) d�ai1ga, in: TP UX, 1973, pp. 339-346 (esp. p. 340f.).

'" Op. cit., Introduction, p.

xxii.

"" See Schmithausen, Nirvii{1a-Abschnitt, p. 101 n. y. (I am obliged to Prof. Schmithausen for the private communication quoted above.) "" Abhidhann asamuccaya, Introduction, p. 19.

'" Tatia, op. cit., p. 79: [Wogihara, 676.8-23] ki/fl punaradhikrtYa dhyiine�u vitwfciidaya eva.ngatatvena vyavasthiipitiiIJ. . · cittaikiigratii tadubhaya.ngam iti ;. In his Introduction, p. xxviii, Tatia gives a list of quotations from the Tri/fliikii-bhiiiya , Yogiiciirobhiimi, Abhidhann akoia, SutriiLUlflkiiro etc.

91

- Siltriilarrzkiiravrtti-bhilDJa (Tohoku 4034), a subcommentary on Vasubandhu's commentary on the SiitraJarp.kara of Maitreyanatha389, - PaiicaskandhaprakaralJa-vaibhilDJa (Tohoku 4066; Taisho 16 13), a commentary on the work of Vasubandhu39o, - Ta tch 'eng tchong kouan che louen (Taisho 1567 Nanjio 13 16, *Mahiiyiina-madhyadhyiina­ vyiikhyii-siistra, composed by the Bodhisattva Sthitamati391), � Tattviirtha-pkii (Tohoku 4421; Taisho 156 1), a commentary on the Abhidharmakosa. =

(2) Sthiramati's Tattviirtha-pkii on the Abhidharmakosa is preserved entirely in the Tibetan translation by Dharmapalabhadra. Some fragments of the Chinese and the Uigur translations were discovered in Tun-huang. (a) The collection of the Chinese Buddhist Canon (Taisho 1561) contains a short treatise by Sthiramati, in transcript and translation, which bears the title Kosatattviirtha-pkii or Abhidhar­ makosa-siistra-tattviirtha-pkii . According to L. de La Vallee Poussin392, this is, without doubt, an extract from a larger work with the same title and by the same author and preserved in the Tibetan translation. Sthiramati's commentary on the Abhidharmakosa is often quoted by Chen­ t'ai, P'ou-kouang and Fa-pao in their commentaries on the same treatise. Peri expressed an opinion that their precise quotations and accurate discussions of Sthiramati's arguments suggest that a Chinese version (? by Hsiian-tsang) must have existed and the Chinese commentators could have read it'93.

'" Cf. Nagao, lndex to the Mahiiyana-siitriila!!'k&rz , Pan I, Preface; HOkamaya, "Stlillamati and Silabhadra", IBK, XXV:l, Dec 1976, pp. 490-488 ("TItis paper reports an identity of the two passages on the dharma-kaya or dharmadhatu­ visuddhi - one from Sthiramati's SiitralaJ]1karavrttibhii.�a [= TP No. 5530 Bi. 152b2-6] and the other from Silabhadra's Buddhabhiinlivyiikhyana"). 39' Gokhale, 'The Paiicaskandhaka by Vasubandhu and its commentary by Sthiramati", ABORI, XVIII, April 1937, Part 3, pp. 276-286; Schnlithausen, Alaya-vijiiana, see Index.

39' Cf. Nanjio's Catalogue, Appendix 1.11; Levi in his article in BEFEO III, 1903, pp. 46-49, expressed a view that "iJ

est done necessaire de supposer I'existence d'un prenlier Sthiramati". See Takakusu, I-Ising. Record of the Buddhist

Religion , p. 225f.; Peri, op. cit., pp. 348-355 ("Le Mahayanavatara .,astra et Sthiramati"); Lamotte, VimalakirtinirdeSa, p.

93 note. ,., Kosa, Introduction, p. xxif.

'" "A propos de Ia date de Vasubandhu", p. 379 n. 4; 355 n. 2.

92

(b) The fragments of the Uigur version of the Tattvartha'94 were discovered by Sir Aurel Stein in Tun-huang in 1907. The extant Uigur text was edited in facsimile by S. Tekin'95. This edition contains a complete text of the first chapter and a part of the second of Sthiramati's commentary. Originally, the entire text had 28,000 verses. Sthiramati is mentioned as the author of the commentary: "Honorable master Sthiramati created it". In the formula of veneration Sthiramati paid his ' respects to ' the mountain of merit, the ocean of dharma-ratna and mahaprajfla, the congregation, the master Vasubandhu, and his own master GUI.1amati. The plan of the entire work is given at the beginning; the titles of the eight chapters, with their equiva­ lents in a corrupted Sanskrit, correspond to those of the Tibetan version of Dharmaplilabhadra. (c) Sthiramati's Tattvartha-p7Ca in its Tibetan translation occupies two huge volumes To­ Tho of the Peking Tanjur, and Tho-Do of the Derge; the Cone Tanjur lacks this text. It is contained in the section sna-tshogs ("varia"), being the last but one section of the Tanjur. The Abhidharmakosa, its commentaries and the texts related are grouped together in the section milon-pa (abhidharma). In the Derge Tanjur the Tattvartha is inserted in between two grammatical works, and in the Peking' Tanjur is followed by a medical treatise. The author is called slob dpon Blo gros brtan pa, i.e. acarya Sthiramati'96. The Tibelan translation was made by Za lu lotsava Chos skyon bzan po (Dharmaplilabhadra), a well-known grammarian, who lived 1441-1528 A.D.'97 The commentary bears the title Chos milon pa 'i mdzod /gJi Mad pa'i rgya cher 'grel pa Don gyi de kho na flid ces bya ba, i.e. AbhidharmakosabhiiD'a-pkii Tattviirtha-nama. However, in the colophon it is mentioned that this cOIlU1).entary was originally called in Tibet Gnam lcags thog zer, i.e. KarakiiSani ("Thunderbolt, lightning hail"). Bu-ston testified that "this teacher has composed the commentary on th � Abhidharmakosa called the KarakiiSani"'·'. On the other side, Taranatha has expressed his doubts as to the actual author of the text: "It is said that he

lO' There was an Uigur version of the Abhidhannakosa too. A Japanese scholar Kogi Kudara reports that he "has identified this fragment [i.e. Library of Istanbul University No. 13 verso - MM.] as the Uigur translation of the Chinese version of Apidamojushelun-bensong, which was translated by Xuan-zang in 651 A.D. from its Sanskrit original, the Abhidhann akosakiirika, written by Vasubandhu of the fifth century. The fragment in question is an unmetrical translation of kiirikii 11-20 from the first chapter 'Dhiitu-nirdda'. ( ...) The clue to the identification is the Chinese characters inserted into this fragment. They are the lead words extracted from the lines of the ktirikii in the Chinese version" ("A Fragment of an Uigur Version of the Abhidhannakosaktirikii" , JA 269, 1981, pp. 325-346). lO' AbhidharmakoSabh�a-tikli Tattvlirthanlima. The Uigur translation of Sthiramati's commentary on Vasubandhu's AbhidharmakoSaSastra: Abidarim kosavardi sastr. New York 1970. (Sources of Oriental Languages and Literatures I; Turcic sources 1). What follows is extracted from Tekin's concise introduction.

". Mvy 3484: Blo brtan . Cf. also Tekin, ibid., where the Uigur 'styrm'ty is confronted with the ChineseAn-hui (sthira­ mati). 397

RA. Miller, "Buddhist Hybrid Sanskrit ali, kiili as grammatical terms in Tibet", HJAS 26, 1966, p. 127 [ = Studies

in the Grammatical Tradition in Tibet, Amsterdam 1976, p. 35]. Cf. the Re'u-mig red. by S.Ch. Das, JASB Part 1, 1889

No. 2, p. 66, 70]: 1439-1526 [on p. 70: ''was born" (!)]; Vostrikov, Tibetskaja istoriceskaja literatura, p. 167 n. 91: 1441-1527 A.D. '" Chos 'bywi, tr. Obermiller, n, p. 148; Collected Worlcs, vol. 24 (YA), ed. Lokesh Chandra, fol. 846.6: slob dpon des mdzod kyi 'grel pa gnam Icags thog zer ;.

93

.

also wrote a commentary on the Abhidharmakosa. But I am not sure whether it was done by this acarya"399. Vasiliev"" calle d attention to the fact that, according to Hsiian-tsang, Sangha­ bhadra's work against the Abhidharmakosa had originally had a similar title, the "Bud-hail­ treatise" (Watters). Watters went so far as to advance a hypothesis that "another name for it [i.e. for the Tattvartha - M.M.] is given as 'Thunder-bolt' and it is perhaps not impossible that this may be the 'Bud-hail' treatise ascribed by Yuan-chuang to Sanghabhadra"'''' . Klon rdol bla rna, a well known Tibetan polymath of the 18th century, mentioned Sthiramati's KarakiiSani among the commentaries on the Kosa in his "Explanatory notes on the Abhidharmakosa"=. According to the colophon (Peking Tanjur, Tho. 564b4ff.)"", the Tattvartha of Sthiramati formerly was known in the Land of Snow under the name KarakiiSani, "Thunderbolt", Since it was not accessible to the masters though it was famous among them, its Sanskrit manuscript was obtained by the Master of Law, the All-knowing Gion nu dpal (1392-148 1 AD.)""'. The master, in order to preserve the work since a translation had not been accomplished, asked the fourth hierarch of the Red-Hat-Karrna-pa sect (iva dmar cod pan 'dzin pa bii pa ) , Chos kyi grags pa Ye ses dpal bzan po (1453- 1524 AD.)"" , for permission to complete the translation. Thus, the translation was completed by Za lu lotsiiva, Dharmapiilabhadra ( 1441-1528 AD.). He obtained the Indian manuscript of Gion nu dpal as well as an incomplete (without the last part of the second chapter, the entire third chapter and the beginning of the fourth) Indian manuscript of Dpan lotsiiva, BIo gros brtan pa (1276-1342 AD.)406, from Stag lun. In addition he used an Indian manuscript of the Kosa-bhfi.D!a and previously depreciated Tibetan books. His translation was executed according to the rules, in a comparison with the existing translations of the MUla-kosa, i.e. the Abhidhannakosa-karika, the Kosa-bhfi.D!a, and the commentaries of Yasomitra (Rgyal po sras), Piirl)avardhana (Gan spel), and others. A scribe, the kalyiil)amitra Yoga-pa Sans rgyas 'phe1 (1411-1485 AD.)""7, prepared the manuscript of the Tattvartha in the Miitrkavihiira in Tu�ita, in the eastern country of KOil po. An interesting example of a similar situation, with almost the same personages involved, is quoted by Tucci who refers to the colophon of Vasubandhu's Saptapadartha-pka on the Vajracchedika: "There remaining a little portion unfinished of this new translation made by the 399 Rgya gar chos 'bywi, tr. Lama Chimpa, A. Chattopadhyaya, p. 181; ed. Schiefner, p. 101.20-21: milan pa mdzod la 'an 'gtel pa mdzad zer te / slob dpon 'di nid yin min mi fes so /;. 400

Buddizm, Part HI, p. 137 n. 3.

'IJI

On Yuan Chwang's Travels in India, I, p. 327. Cf. Beal, Si.yu-ki, p. 160 n. 128; 193; 195.

"" Collected Works, ed. Lokesh Chandra, vol. 13 (PA), fol. 595.3: yan

ran

mkhas kyi nan tshan slob dpon Blo gros

brtan pas mdzod 'grel gnam Icags thog zer ;. .." See also Cordier, Catalogue, III, p. 500. "" See Roerich, The Blue Annals, Introduction. ,,)5

H. Richardson, 'The Karma-pa Sect. A Historical Note. Part I", JRAS 1958, p. 150;

406

A. Ferrari, Mkhyen brtse's Guide, p. 156 n. 570; Vostrikov, op. cit., p. 254

.., Ferrari, op. cit., p. 163 n. 635; Re'u-mig, p. 64.

94

n.

393 .

ct.

Roerich, op. cit., II, p. 831.

all-knowing gZon nu dpal, the fourth hierarch (cod pa ads'in pa) of the Zva dmar sect, d�al c'os kyi grags pa ye ses dpal bzan po in order to fulfil the wish of that excellent master (rje), ordered that [that portion] should be translated. Therefore the lotsava of Za lu, C'os skyon of aGos, in the palace of sNeu gdon rtse, - a great meeting place of the two Laws, the religious and the civil; - translated it properly with the support of the powerful king, master of the Law, (C'os kyi rje), a king ruling accordhtg to the Law, ,(Cos kyi rgyal po) dPai nag gi dban p'yug grags pa, the all­ victorious one. The clear commentary, [explaining] the meaning of the Mother of the Buddhas of the three times which possesses the name of the Diamond, was arranged by that car of famous glory that was a second all-knowing (Buddha) Vasubandhu. It was translated by a Tibetan, equally supreme in learning and mystic realizations (mk'as grub) who had .the name of gZon nu dpal; on account of the merit acquired by completing this translation, may the intentions of that supreme leader be fulfille d. Again Cos skyon bzan having found an Indian manuscript of the work and comparing the book with the analogous expressions in the commentary of Kamalasila, endeavoured to correct the irregular forms (t'sig p'rad, nipata) and the disputed sentences or those somehow not perfectly translated""'·; In the opinion of Tucc� "we must conclude that this translation is one of the latest ever made in Tibet" ..... This is equally true for the Tattviirtha which must have been translated into Tibetan in the second half of the 15th century, not a long time before 1485 A.D. The Tibetan version of the Tattviirtha is divided ' into eight chapters, with their titles correspond­ ing to the eight chapters of the Abhidharmakosa, with the exception of the first and the second which are entitled, respectively: gnas daiI po (prathamaf!l sthiinam), mdzod leyi gnas giiis pa (dvitfyaf!l kosasthiinam). The text of the Tattviirtha which is contained in the Peking Tanjur has preserved numerous passages in Sanskrit, written in Tibetan script (very corrupt!). Some of those passages are supplied with interlinear Tibetan glosses. It would be interesting to identify the S anskrit quotations of Sanghabhadra, with the help of his extant works in the Chinese translations. It has already been mentioned that Sthiramati's commentary abundantly quotes the opinions of other masters, and among them particularly from the views of Sanghabhadra. The name of aciirya S rilata, a Sautrantika master contemporary with Sanghabhadra and Vasubandhu, appears very often; the references to an unknown master 'Phags pa'i 'bans (*Arya-dasa) come to our notice: his opinions are quoted eight times in the first chapter of the Tattviirtha4lO• On account of its complicated history, an examination of the Tibetan version of Sthiramati's commentary on the Abhidharmakosa is difficult. Evidently, the Tattviirtha in its present form is a compilation prepared by the Tibetan transla"tor: one can see a close relationship .between Sthiramati's text and Pii�avardhana's Lalga/:ziinusiirilJ.i, to the effect that there exist large portions of the text in common, and many parallels with Yasomitra's Sphu!iirthii. At the present moment it would be difficult to determine the true character of these relations. Moreover, it is by no means an easy task to determine what precisely Sthiramati wrote himself. A comprehen­ sive study of Sthiramati's Tattviirtha, with the help of all existing materials - its Chinese, Vigur, Tibetan versions as well as the commentaries of PiifI.iavardhana and Yasomitra - is a desideratum.

.... Minor Buddhist Texts, Part I, p, 16f.

... Ibid. ". Vasiliev, ibid" mentioned only one instance, foL 34; see the Peking Tg, folios 34b5, 35a4, 43bl, 44a3, 58a6, 61a7, 77b8, 86a8.

95

8.1 Vaib�ikas on the pratityasamutpiida For the present book, as a specimen of Sthiramati's Tattviirtha I b.ave selected a fragment which is a gloss on the Vaibhii.�ikas' theory of the "dependent origination" (pratityasamutpiida, rten ciA 'breipar 'byuiI ba). It is provided with comparative notes from PUIlJavardhana's LalqCllJiinusiiriJ:!i (major) and Yasomitra's Sphutiirthii and a working translation of the most important passages. But before we enter into a comparative study of the specimen, an English translation of the pertinent fragment of the Abhidharmakosa-b�a ad ill.28ab will be given in order to faciliate our understanding of the discussed problems. 8.1.1 ABHIDHARMAKOSA-BHA1;lYA AD ill.28AB.'1I Now, [the author is going to answer the following question:] in what manner "in dependence on ignorance do karmic dispositions arise" etc. up to [the formula] "in dependence on birth do old age and death arise"? We shall show only general connections [between causes and effects]. A fool, [Le. a naive human individual] who does not comprehend that this [world] is a mere [conglomeration of] mutually dependent aggregateS [of the elements of existence], who is intent on a false notion of a "self' and a "self-conceit", performs threefold actions: of the body, of the speech, and of the mind, with the aim [of acquiring] for himself a pleasure or neither­ pleasure-nor-pain. [He performs] a beneficial [deed] if aiming at pleasure in the future life, a quiet [deed] if aiming at pleasure or neither-pleasure-nor-pain [in the future life in the rflpa- and iirflpya-dhiitu], an unbeneficial [deed] if aiming at pleasure in this life. Thus for him the karmic dispositions [arise] in dependence on ignorance. Furthermore, [his] stream of consciousness, due to the projection of [his previous] karma, goes into such and such a destination in the [same] way as a flame [is said] to "move", because [there is] a connection [between this place and the place of rebirth] through the intermediate state. Thus, [in the way described before,] for him consciousness arises in dependence on karmic dispositions. If one explains it like that [what has been stated by the Pratityasamutpiidasiltra] when defining the member "consciousness", [viz.] «What is "consciousness"? - Six kinds of conscious­ ness», [such an explanation] fits well. Then, having consciousness as its preceding [member], there arises - in such and such a destination - "name and form", [i.e.] the five aggregates which follow throughout the life, for in the «Analysis» [of the member "name and form" in the Pratityasamutpiidasiltra] and in the Mahiinidiinaparyaya it [i.e. the name and form] has been defined thus, [i.e. as comprising the five skandhas]. Likewise, through the ripening of name and form [there arise] gradually the six bases [of cognition]. Then, there being an attainment of an object, consciousness arises which means that there is a meeting of the three, [viz. visual consciousness, sense of vision, object of vision etc.], [and this is called] "contact" , [which may be] felt as pleasant etc. Then [arises] a threefold "feeling" . Then [arises a threefold] "craving", [viz.] a craving for klima, [Le. a desire for] pleasant . feelings from the realm of lust, with [the beings] tormented by pain; a craving for subtle matter,


ments.

96

[i.e. a desire for] pleasant [feelings in the three dhyfmas], and neither-pleasant-nor-unpleasant [feelings in the fourth dhyana]; a craving for immaterial, [i.e. a desire for] neither-pleasant-nor­ unpleasant [feelings of the immaterial realm]. Then, from the desires [which are related to] the desired feelings there arises a clinging to lust and others. Here, [with the word] "lust" [are meant] the five objects of lust, [viz. the visible, sound, smell, taste, touch] � , There are sixty two opinions [listed], as in the Brahmajiilasiltra. [By the term] "morality" [is meant] a renouncement of immorality. "Vow", [as e.g. a vow] to live a life of a dog, ,cow etc., and [the observances of people] like the ' Nirgranthas, [expressed in commandments like] "a mendicant is naked"; the BrahaI].as, the Pa8upatas, the Parivrajakas etc. take upon themselves [as a moral or religious duty, respectively,] a stick and skin of antilope, ashes and tuft of twisted hair, trident and shaved head etc� Finally, an "assertion [«this is] a self»", i.e. the "[basis of] personal existence". [!be basis of personal existence] is called iitmaviida because it is the object of the assertion "[this is the] self'. [According to] the others, [the iitmaviida] it is "conception and conceit «I am [this or that]» ". How can these two [notions be characterized by] being the " [basis of] personal existence"? - Because these two, [i.e. iitml1l1ff[i and asmimiina ], formulate [mentally the notion of a] "self'. [!be expression] "clinging to assertion' « I am [this or that]»" (iitmaviidopiidana) [is used] because the iitman itself, [as an entity], does not exist and the act of clinging [has as its object] the mere verbal notion, [and not a real thing]. As it was said [by the Buddha] : "«I [am]» , « myself» , [such is the thinking of] a fool, an ignoramus, an ordinary man who has fallen into the [mere] verbal notions; still there is nothing of <<me», nothing of « mine» ". Clinging to these it is desire and attachment with . regard to these. Accordingly, the Bhagavat has spoken everywhere: "What is clinging? - It is desire and attachment". Next, in dependence on clinging the acts producing a future existence are accumulated. This is existence. It is said in the Siltra: "The act, Ananda, which in the future will produce a new - existence, this is [the nature of] existence". Then, in dependence on existence there is birth, [i.e.] the coming life, by means of descent of consciousness being in its nature the five aggregates. There being birth, there is old age and death. As it was defined in the Siltra: "In this manner there arises this entire, mere mass of suffering". "Mere", [i.e.] without any relation to a "self'. "This entire great mass of suffering", [i.e.] an accumulation of suffering without a commencement and without an end. "There arises", [i.e.] there exists. What was exposed above, [viz. the theory of dependent origination consisting of twelve members, i.e. twelve states constituted by the five aggregates], this is the theory of the Vaibhii.­ �ikas.

97

8.1.2

STIllRAMATI'S GLOSS ON

TIlE

ABHIDHARMAKOSA-BlIA.SYA AD

III . 28AB . 412

1. (ThO. 6 1b4 Ju. 354bl] byis pa ni rten Gin 'brei par 'bYu/1 ba413 ies bya ba rzyas par 'byu/1 ba /a I byis pa4I4 ies bya ba ni bden pa rna mthan ba 'a II "C ... ) A fool, i.e. one who does not see the TruthCs)". =

2. (Tho. 6 1b4 Ju. 354bl-2] 'du byed tsam415 ies bya ba tsam gyi sgra ni 'di na 'du < byed > byed pa po (PUn:zavardhana ad: bdag /a sags pa) yad pa rna yin no ies bstan par bya ba'i phyir ro II "C ... ) The word «mere» is used to explain that here, the karmic dispositions have no agent, [such as] «self» etc.". =

3. (Tho. 6 1b5 Ju. 354b2] m i ses pas4I6 ies bya b a (xyl.: m i ses p a ies bya bas) n i rn a 'dres pa 'i rna rig pa stan to II "«One who does not comprehend», i.e. shows [one who has] an unmixed417 ignorance, [i.e. not associated with defilements]". =

4. (Tho. 61b5 Ju. 354b2-3] bdag tu lta ba dan na 'a siiam pa 'i na rzyal la mnan par ien Gin4I8 ies bya ba ni bdag tu Ita ba dan I iza 'a siiam pa Y iza rzyal dag la rab tu gnas sin ies bya ba Y don =

4 1 2 Tattviirtha, Peking Tg, Tho. 61b4-64b5. Cf. PUqIavardhana's LalqaJ;liinusiili�i, Ju. 354bl-357al, and YaSomitra's Sphu{iirthii (as above, n. 411).

4 13 AKBh [Pradhan, 139.25; Shastri, 460.2; Gu. 151b3]: biilo hi profityasamutpannam. This comes from the Bimbisiiro­ siifro, see AKBh IX [Pradhan, 465.22ff.; Shastri, 1202.14ff.]; for the references see LVP, Kosa, IX, p. 249 n. 1; one can add: Akutobhayii red. Walleser, Tsa. 109a4], Subhagupta's lfvarabhangakiilika [Pek. Tg, Ze. 212a4]. ". Cf. YaSomitra [Wogihara, 299.8; Cu. 332b6]: biilaIJ prfha/ianaIJ / byis pa ni so so'i skye boo

4 1' AKBh [pradhan, 139.26; Shastri, 460.3; Gu. 151b3]: s"'!'skiiro-miitram. Cf. YaSomitra [Wogihara, 299.8-9; Cu. 332b6]: s"'!'skiiromiitram iii / miifrogrohaJ;lam atmaproli�edhiirtham / 'du byed tsam ies bya ba la tsam ies bya ba smos pas ni bdag dgag pa'i don to /;.

.1 6 AKBh [pradhan, 139.26; Shastri, 460.3; Gu. 151b3]: aprajiinan. Cf. Yasomitra [Wogihara, 299.9; Cu. 332b6-?]: aprojiinann ity avelJikim avidyiiJ!! dar1ayali / mi ses pas ies bya ba ni rna rig pa ma 'dres pa stan par byed do. 4 17

Cf. BHSD sub avelJika; LVP, Kosa, V, p. 31 n. 1: "L'avidya independante, iive!)lka, est l'avidya qui n'accompagne

pas d'autres anusayas, raga, etc.". 4 1 8 AKBh [Pradhan, 139.26; Shastri, 460.3; Gu. 151b3-4]: atmadr�!Y asmimiinabhinivi�!aIJ. Cf. YaSomitra [Wogihara, 299.10; Cu. 332b?]: -abhiniviHaIJ prali�!hitaIJ / mnan par ten pa ni gnas pa'a. See BHSD sub abhinivisati, abhinivefa,

asmimtina, dr.�ri.

98

te I 'di ni bdag tu Ita ba dan ita 'o siiam pa'i ita rgyal dan mtshuils par ldan pa 'i ma rig pa bstan to ll "«Intent on a false notion of a self and self-conceit» , Le. standing finnly on a false notion ( ...); this is to show an ignorance connected with a false notion of a self and self-conceit". [Tho. 6 1b6 'byuil no II

=

5. Iu. 354b3-4] Ius Ia sags pa dag gi < s > las mam pa gsum br:tsams te"19 tes bya ba

6. [Tho. 6 1b7 Iu. 354b4] bdag iiid42D ces bya ba ni gan du 'di bdag go siiam du Ita ba dan I gan gis rlom pa de'o II "«For himself» , i.e. one in whom there is a view «I am tills» , and who is proud [of adherence to a view of being this or that]". =

7. [Tho. 6 1b7] bde ba'i don tam I sdug bsnal gyi don tam421 I tes bya ba Ia sags pa la I Ius la sags pa 'i gsum dag gis tes bya ste I Ius kyi <s > mam pa gsum dan I nag dan yid kyi <s > kyan (xyi: kyi yan) mam pa gsum mo II 8. [Tho. 6 1b8 Iu. 354b5-6] tshe phyi ma la bde ba 'i don [62al] du422 tes bya ba ni 'jig Tten gtan du bde ba 'i don du '0 II bsod nams tes bya ba ni 'dod pa na spyod pa (Pu77;lavardhana: pa 'j dge ba) ste I 'di Itar 'jig rten pha rol tu bde ba 'dod pa mams ni sbyin pa dan tshul khrims Ia sags pa mams la 'jug go II =

'" AKBh [pradhan, 139.27; Shastri, 460.4; Gu. 151b4]: kiiyiidibhis trividhlll1' kann iirahhate. Cf. YaSomitra, see below fragm. 7. 420

AKBh [pradhan, 139.27; Shastri, 4603; Gu. 151b4]: iitmana/;l .

'" AKBh [pradhan, 139.27; Shastri, 460.4]: sukhiiltham adu/Jkhiilthlll1' vii /; [Gu.151b4] bde ba'i don tam / bde ba yan ma yin sdug bsnal yan ma yin pa'i don du ;. Accordingly, the Sanskrit should be emended to: °sukhiiJtham adu/Jkhiisukhiilthlll1' vii (cf. Index AKBh 1.429). This reading is confinned by PiiIl).avardhana [Iu. 354b4-S]: bd. ba'i don nam / bd. ba yan ma yin sdug bsnal yan ma yin pa'i don du tes bya ba la sogs pa la / Ius la sogs pa gsum dag gis ses (xyl.: ies) bya ba ni Ius dan nag dan yid dag gis las mam pa gsum ste / bsod noms dan bsod noms ma yin pa dan mi g.yo ba'i mtshan nid can Itsom mo // (Osukhiiltham adu/Jkhiisukhiilthlll1' vii ityiidi. kiiyiidibhis trividham iti. kiiyaviiilmanobhis trividhlll1' kann a pU1!yiipUIJyiininjyalalqtl/Jam iirabhate). YaSomitra almost identical [Wogihara, 299.10-11; Cu. 332b7-8]: kiiyiidibhis kiiya viiilmanobhis trividhlll1' kann a pU1!yiipU1!yiininjyalalqtl/Jam iirahhate / Ius la sogs pa ste / Ius dan nag dan yid dag gis Dsod nOms dan / bsod nams ma yin pa dan mi g.yo ba'i las mam pa gsum brtsom ste ;. <22 AKBh

[Pradhan, 139.27 wrongly: iiyati sukhiilthlll1' pU1!yam; Shastri, 460.4]: iiyatisukhiilthlll1' pU1!yam / (cf. AKBh

1.429). Cf. YaSomitra [Wogihata, 299.12-14; Cu. 333al]: iiyatisukhiilthlll1' pU1!yam iti / aniigatajanmasukhiiltham / kim / kiimiivacarrup kuiallll1' kanna / tshe phyi ma la bde ba'i don du ni bsod noms tes bya ba ni ma 'ons pa'i tshe la bde ba'i don du 'dod pa na spyod pa'i las dge ba'o /;.

99

"<
'" log pa'ijpar Ita ba = mithyiidr,p (Mvy 1957), BHSD S.v. slu ba (pf. bslus pal = vipralambhana (Index AKBh 1II304); Jaschke, "to entice, allure, ensnare, beguide, seduce"; d. BHSD sub vipraiambhayati, "deceives, disappoints",

42. This is evidently PUrI).avardhana's gloss on Sthiramati's commentary, an indication of a subordination of the fonner to the latter. '" AKBh [pradhan, 140.1; Shastri, 460.5; Gu. 151b4-5]: sukhiidu�khiisukhiirtham iininjyam j. Note the close correspondence to YaSomitra [Wogihara, 299.14-15; Cu. 333a1-2]: sukhiidul;!khiisukhiirtham iiniiijyam iti I riipiiriipyiiva­ ctIltlJ!! kuSalam I sukhiirtham ii t{1iyiid dhyiiniit I tasmiid iirdhvam adul;!khiisukhiirtham I bde ba dail bde ba yail ma yin sdug bsilal yail ma yin pa'i don du ni mi g.yo ba ies bya ba ni bsam gtan gsum pa'i bar du ni bde ba'i don du gzugs < "dail gzugs med pa > na spyod pa'i dge ba'o // de yail chad ni bde ba yail rna yin sdug bsilal yail rna yin pa'i don du'o II •

Tib. om. -iiriipya-.

100

1 1. [Tho. 62a4 Iu. 355a2-3] tshe 'di la bde ba 'i don du ni bsod nams ma yin pa rtsom ste425 I zes bya bar sbyar te I Ius kyi sgo nas srog geod pa la sags pa dan I nag gis brdzun smra ba la sogs pa dan I yid kyis bmab sems la sogs pa dag go II "«Performs an unbe!1eficial [deed] if aiming at pleasure in this life», i.e. by body [actions, such as] taking life etc., by speech, [such as] lying etc. ; by thoughts - covetousness etc.". =

12. [Tho. 62a5 Iu. 355a3] las kyi 'phen pa 'i dban gis"'" zes bya ba la I ji skad bstan pa 'i las dag gis 'phans pa ni las kyi 'phel ba'o42A II =

13. [Tho. 62a6 Iu. 355a3-4] de 'i dban gis na deY rgyu mtshan gyis te I rgyu des mam par ses pa'i rgyun srid pa bar rna dan 'brei pas thag Sin tu rin ba yan 'gro ba de dan der 'gro bar 'gyur ro429 II =

14(a). [Tho. 62a6 Iu. 355a4-355b2]4:l" srid pa bar rna yan rnam par ses pa drug cl.alt_ldan pa'i phyir de ltar bSad na I mam par ses pa gaJi ze na I mam par ses pa 'i tshogs drug go I/, zes bSad pa de 'thad pa yin nom II zes smos so II ji ltar ze na I gal te mam par ses pa 'i rgyun las kyis' yons =

.'" AKBh [pradhan, 140.1; Shastri, 460.5; Gu. 151b5]: aihikasukhiiltham apui;tyam [kanniirabhateJ. Cf. YaSoIl'Jtra [Wogihara, 299.15-17; Cu. 333a3]: aihikasukhiiltham *apUlJyam iti/ihasukhiipetqayii tatkrttllT' niiyatisukhiipetqayety artha/J / tshe 'di la bde ba'i don du ni bsod nams ma yin pa ies bya ba ni 'di la bde ba la bltos nas de by� kyi phyi ma la bde ba bltos te ni ma yin no // ies bya baY tha tshig go // * Shastri ed om. apUlJyam (!).

4Z1 AKBh [Pradhan, 140.2; Shastri, 460.6; Gu. 151b5]: kannii1qepavaJiit/. Cf. YaSomitra [Wogihara, 299.17; Cu. 333a34]: kannii1qepavaJiid yathokta*·karmiivedhavaJiit / las kyi 'phen pa'i dbah gis te /ji skad Mad pa'i las kyi 'phen pa'i dbah gis /, * Emended aft�r L. Schmithausen. Wogihara and Shastri read: yathokttllT' karma-. '28 Piin)avardhana: 'phen pa'o. Cf. 'phahs pa = alqepa (Index AKBh m.177); 'phel ba = vrddhi (Index AKBh m.178); 'phen pa = iivedha, BHSD: "continuing force ( .. .) . Tib. 'phen pa, something like 'projection'( . .. ). iivedha/J, Mvy

7535

=

Tib. 'phen pa, or sugs, 'inherent power, energy'(J�). In Mvy 6857 iivedha/J (between ii1qepa/J and prasabham),

physical 'projection, penetration'''. '29 AKBh [Pradhan, 140.2-3; Shastri, 460.6-7; Gu. 151b5-6]: vijiiiinastllT' tatis tiiqt tiiqt gati/fl gacchati jViiliigamana­ yogeniintariibhavasambandhiit /. Cf. YaSomitra [Wogihara, 299.20; Cu. 333a5-6J: ativiprokmadefam api /yut thag rin por

yah /. ,,. <)

Piif1.la' am. / /. b ) Sthira' kyi. ") Sthira' sgos . ") Sthira' bzull .

") Piin)a' pa. � Sthira' rig.

'3 1 AKBh [pradhan, 1403-4; Shastri, 460.7-8; Gu. 151b6-7]: evOlfl ca k{tVii tad upapanntllT' bhavati vijiiiiniiliganinJefe, vijiiiintllT' kalamat? fa4 vijiiiinakiiytiJ;, iti /' Cf. YaSomitra [Wogihara, 299.20-29; Cu. 333a6-333b4]: evtllT' ca k{tVeti /yadi sO/flSkiirprl ratyayam antariibhavapratistllT' dhicittam upiidiiya yiivad upapattilqt1lJa/J sarviisau vijiiiinastllT' tati/; ft1lJ(liiqt vijiiiinakiiyiiniiqt stllT'skiirapratyaytllT' vijiiiinam abhiprettllT' tad upapanntllT' bhavati / vijiiiiniiliganinJeie vijiiiiniiligasya

101

su bsgos' pa thams cad srid pa bar mar nili mtshams sbyor ba Y skad Gig ma nas gzwid ste I skye ba 'i skad Gig gi bar du 'du byed kyi rkyen can mam par ses [62bl] pa 'o II' ies bya ba yin na ni I de'i mam par ses pa mam par dbye ba bstan pa 'i mam par ses pa 'i' tshogs drug go II' ies bya ba rigs'par 'gyur gyi I gian du ni rna yin no II gal te nili mtshams sbyor ba Y mam par ses pa kho na 'du byed kyi rkyen can ies bya ba ni de Ita na mam par ses pa 'i tshogs drug go II' ies mam par ses pa mam par dbye ba dan 'gal bar 'gyur te I gnas skabs deryid kyi mam par ses pa kho na tsam iig tu 'gyur gyi I yid kyi mam par ses pa kho nas nin mtshams sbyor bas gian dag med par 'gyur TO II de'i phyir 'di skad du I mam par ses pa gan ie na IYld kyi mam par sespa'o ies gsuils par 'gyur gyi I mam par ses pa 'i tshogs drug go / ies bya bar 'ni ma yin no II "If one explains [that] because of connection of intermediate existence (antarabhava) with six kinds of consciousness, [in answer to the question:] « What is consciousness? - Six kinds of consciousness» , this explanation fits well. In what manner? - If a stream of consciousness (vijnana-sarrz.tati) completely pervaded with actions (karma-paribhavita), beginning with intermediate existence at the moment of initiating [a new existence] (antariibhava-pratisa1!ulhi4w:zam upiidiiya ) and ending with the moment of rebirth [in such and such destination] (yiivad upapatti-4w:zaJ:!), all this (sarviisau) being called the stream of consciousness conditioned by the karmic dispositions (sarrz.skiira-pratyayarrz. vijniina-sarrz.tatiJ:!), so then its definition of the Vijfiiina­ aIi.ga [of the Pratftyasamutpiida-sutra, viz.] « six kinds of consciousness» , is right, not otherwise. If [one claims that] the pratisarrz.dhi-vijniina only is conditioned by the karmic dispositions, then this [statement] contradicts the definition of the Vijfiiina-section [of the Sutra, viz.] «six kinds of consciousness» . [Thus], in that state there would be the mind-consciousness (manovijniina) only, and, because of pratisaq:tdhi by means of the manivijfiiina only, the other [five kinds of con­ sciousness] would not exist. Therefore it would have been said: « What is consciousness? - Mind­ consciousness», and not «Six kinds of consciousness» ". 14(b). [Tho. 62b4] de yan mam par ses pa'i rgyun kho na de'i tshe 'du byed kyi rkyen gyi mam par ses pa Y yan lag yin gyi / gzugs la sogs pa 'i phun po 'i rgyun gan yin pa der gyur pa ni ma yin no // de Ita ma yin na gnas skabs pa kho na bSad par 'gyur TO // bdag tu Ita ba dan 00 '0 snam pa 'i na rgyal dan mtshuils par ldan pa 'i rna rig pa kho na 'du byed mams kyi rgyu yin gyi I bdag tu Ita ba dan

Irtiyasya nirrMe I vijiiiinaJ]1 kalama! I rat! vijiiiinakiiyd iti I anyalhii hi yadi 'aJJlJiiftt vijiiiinakiiyiiniiftt saJ]1latir ndbhipreld syiil I saJ]1skiin:zpratyayaJ]1 vijiiiinaJ]1 pratisaJ]1dhicittam evdbhiprelaJ]1 syiit I atro rat! vijiiiinakiiyd iti noktaJ]1 syiil I eVaJ]1 tu vaktaVYaJ]1 sydt I vijiiiinaJ]1 katamal I rnanovijiiiinam iti I na hi pratisaJ]1dhi/qaJJe ·paiica-vijiiiinakiiyasaJ]1bhavo 'sti I rnanovijiiiinenaiva pratisaJ]1dhibandhiil I de Itar Mad na ies bya ba ni gal te 'du byed kyi rkyen can gyi (xyl.: gyis) mam par ses pa'i rgyun slid pa bar mar fiih mlshams sbyor haJj sems nas gzuA ste /skye ba'i skad cig ma'; bar 'di thams cad yin Ie I mam par ses pa'i tshogs drng car 'du byed kyi rkyen can gyi mam par ses pa yin par 'dod na Imam par fes pa'i yan lag bSlan pa sle I gsum pa mam par ses pa'i yan lag bSlan pa las I mam par fes pa gail ie na I mam par ses pa'i Ishogs drng go II ies Mad pa de 'Ihad pa yin no II de Ita rna yin Ie Igal Ie 'du byed kyi rkyen can gyi mam par ses pa'i Ishogs drng gi rgyun yin par rni bied kyi iiih mlshams sbyor ba'i sems kho na yin par bied par gyur na ni 'di las mam par ses pa'i Ishogs drng go II ie' Mad par mi 'gyur gyi I 'di skad du mam par fes pa gail ie na / yid kyi mam ses pa'o II ies btjod par bya dgos par 'gyur ro II iiih mtshams sbyor ba'i skad cig ma la ni mam par fes pa lila 'byu;. ba med de / 'chad dail mlshams sbyo.. 'dod chags brat // iiams dail 'chi 'pho skye ba mams II yid kyi mam ses kho nar 'dod II ces 'byu;. bas yid kyi mam par ses pa kho nas iiih mlshams sbyor bar byed pa'i phyir ro II • Shastri reads: prati-vijiiiina- ( ! ) . The Tibetan translation of YaSomit(a's gloss differs from the Sanskrit!

102

na '0 sflllm pa 'i 00 rgyal dag ni rna yin no ies bya ba ni rig <s > par smra ba ma yin no II 'dir lhan cig 'byun ba 'i rgyu'i 'bras bu yin pa 'i phyir bdag tu Ita ba dan na'o sfiam pa 'i fill rgyal ma rigpa dan lhan cig pa dag ni 'du byed mams kyi rgyu yin no II de biin du gzugs la sogs pa 'byun bar 'gyur ro II ies kha cig de la rgol bar byed do II bdag tu Ita ba dan 00 '0 sfiam pa 'i 00 rgyal dag rna rig pa fiid kyi phyir ma rig pa 'i stobs kyi <s > 'du byed skye ba la riJyur 'gyur ba'i phyir ma rig pa fiid 'dir rkyen du brjod [63aJ] de I chos gian ni rna yin no II gzugs la sogs pa mams ni 'brei pa fiid de I 'du byed bskyed pa la byed pa ci yan med do II "Moreover, the stream of consciousness (vijiidna-sa'!ltati) only at that time would be a .member of consciousness conditioned by the karmic dispositions, and not [that one which is connected with] the stream of matter-aggregate (rilpa-skandha) etc. Otherwise one would have spoken of periodical (iivasthika) [stream of consciousness]. [To say that] the ignorance connected with the false notion of a «self» (iitmadr�ti) and the self-conceit (asmimiina) has been a cause of the karmic dispositions while the false notion of a «self» and the self-conceit are not, is not a proper statement. Here in this, the false notion of a «self» and the self-conceit, accompanied with igno­ rance, are the cause of the karmic dispositions, because they are effects of the concomitant cause (sahabhiihetu). «So it is in case of the riipa and other [aggregates] too», say some to make an objection in this matter. Here, it is the -ignorance - not any other dharma - which is said [to be] a 'condition', because both the false notion of a «self» and the self"conceit, due to the ig­ norance itself and by means of ignorance, are the cause of appearance of the karmic dispositions. There is a connection with regard to the riipa and the others and there is no action [with regard to] the appearance of the karmic dispositions". 15. [Tho. 63al Iu. 355b2] min dan gzugs phun po Ina po < gro ba de dan > der skye bar 'gyur tem I 'dir min dan gzugs ni rga si (xyL: ma si) bar du yan lag tu rigpar bya 'i IIji ltar bye brag tu smra ba mams kyi ltar I min dan gzugs ni de phan chad I skye mched drug dod tshun chad dom ies bya ba ni rna yin no II "The name and form, [i.e.] the five aggregates, originate in such and such a destination; here, in this, if the 'name and form' are understood [as extending] up to the [last] member 'old age and death', as for the Vaibhii�ikas «the name and form [extends] from that [moment] up to the [moment of] ·production of six bases», [such an analogy] does not [fit well]". =

16. [Tho. 63a3 Iu. 355b3-6] yan min da1i gzugs phun po Ina po yin no II ies bya ba 'di ji ltar rtogs par bya ie na I de'i phyir mam par 'byed pa las de skad bstan pa'i phyir ro434 II ies bya ba smos te 1m min dan gzugs mam par 'byed pa'i mdo las min gan ie na I gzugs can. rna yin pa'i phun po bii ste I tshor ba 'i phun po nas mam par ses pa'i phun po 'i bar ro IIgzugs gan yin pa ci yan run ste I 'byun ba chen po bii da1i 'byuil ba chen po bii dag rgyur byas pa de =

02 AKBh [Pradhan,

1405; Shastri, 461.1; Gu. 151b7]: lasyliltl lasyliltl galau namariipt117' jiiyale paiicaskandhakam j.

'" AK III .21d-22a [pradhan, 132.1-2; Shastri, 437.7-8]: namariipam alai;! poram / priik "a4iiyalanolpiidiil /j. "" AKBh [Pradhan, 140.5�; Shastri, 461.1-2; Gu. 151b7-8]: namanlpt117' jiiyale paiicaskandhakam (.. .) Vibhailge Mahiinidiinapatyiiye caivt117' nirdeiiil j. cr. YaSomitra [Wogihara, 29932-300.1; Cu. 333b4-5], quoted ·supra. ill

Pun:tavardhana ad.: rten ci;, 'brei par 'byun ba mam par 'byed pa 'am .

103

thams cad de I gzugs dan snar gyi min 'di gii is ni min dan gzugs ies bya ba Y gram su 'gro 'o ies 'byun no II "Again, [if it is asked] in what manner it is to be understood that the 'name and form' are the five aggregates, therefore it is said: «As it was defined in the Vibhanga [part of the Pratityasam­ utpadasutra]». In the Sutra, in the nama-riipa-vibhanga [chapter, it is said:] «What is 'name'? Four non-material aggregates: from the vedana-skandha up to the vijfiana-skandha. What is 'matter'? - Whatsoever matter, the four great elements and their derivatives, all these [are called 'matter']. The matter [thus characterized] and the previously [described] name; these two are . reckoned with the name and form» ". 17. [Tho. 63a5 Iu. 355b6-7] min dan gzugs yom su smin pa436 ies bya ba ni nur nur po dan I mer mer po dan I nar nar po dan I mkhran 'gyur la sags pa'i no bas dban po bskyed par bya la ches dan I sin tu ches fie ba 'i no bos rim pas so II "[Through] the ripening of name and form [gradually there arise six bases of cognition]», i.e. gradually, through the great and very attached in nature [ripening ? (not clear)], towards producing the organs of senses, according to the nature of [the consecutive embryonic stages:] kalala, arbuda, peS!, ghana etc.". =

[Tho. 63a7

=

18(a). Iu. 355b7] 'dod pa 'i sred pa ni437 'dod pa na spyod pa 'i sred pa 'o II

18(b). [Tho. 63a7 Iu. 355b7-8] bde ba dan bde ba yan ma yin I sdug bsnal yan ma yin pa la ni gzugs kyi sred pa 'o438 II ies bya ba la I bsam gtan gsum na ni tshor ba bde ba la gzugs kyi sred pa gzugs na spyod pa 'o II bsam gtan bii pa ni bde ba yan ma yin sdug bsnal yan ma yin pa la gzugs kyi sred pa 'o II =

18(c). [Tho. 63a8 Iu. 355b8-356al] gzugs med pa 'i khams na tshor [63bl] ba gian medpas bde ba yan ma yin sdug bsnal yan ma yin pa fa gzugs med pa Y sred pa ste I thams cad la sdug bsnal gyis gzir ba439 ies bya bar sbyar bar bya 'o II =

436 AKBh [pradhan, 140.6; Shastri, 461.2-3; Gu. 151b8]; tathii niimariipaparipiikiit / Cf. AKBh ad III.19 (Index AKBh III): nur nur po = kalala, mer mer po = arbuda, nar nar po = peSF, mkhrah 'gyw- = ghana. 437 AKBh [Pradhan, 140.9; Shastri, 461.5; Gu. 152al]; kiimatr�l}ii; cf. YaSomitra [Wogihara, 300.1-2; Cu. 333b7]; kiimatr�iieti I kiimiivacari tr�l}ii I 'dod pa'i sred pa'o II ies bya ba ni 'dod pa na spyod pa'i sred pa'o 1/ 438

AKBh [Pradhan, 140.9; Shastri, 461.6; Gu. 152al]; sukhiiyiim adul;khiisukhiiyiiJ?t ca nlpatr�l}ii / Cf. Yasomitra

[Wogihara, 300.2; Cu. 333b7-8]; nlpatr,l}eti Iyii sukhiiyii". triw dhyiine�u I adu/:lkhiisukhiiyiiJ?t catwthe I (. . . ) bde ba fa ni bsam gtan gsum pa dag tu'o II (.. . ) bsam gtan bii par ro 1/ '" AKBh [Pradhan, 140.8; Shastri, 461.5; Gu. 152al]; du/:lkhotpiljitasya / Cf. YaSomitra [Wogihara, 300.3; Cu. 333b8334al]; adul;khiisukhiiyiim iiriipyatr�l)eti I iinlpyiivacari I bde ba yail ma yin sdug bsnaf ba yail ma yin pa fa ni gzugs med pa'i sred pa'o II ies bya, ba ni gzugs med pa na spyod pa'o 1/

104

19. [Tho. 63b1 Ju. 356a1-2] 'dod pa la sags pa fie bar len te440 II ies bya ba la I 'dod pa daiz I Ita ba dan I tshul khrirns dan I brtul tugs dan I bdag tu smra ba marns fie bar len to II =.

20. [Tho. 63b2 Ju. 356a2-3] de la 'dod pa marns ni 'dod pa 'i yon tan ma dag go"] ies bya ba ni gzugs dan sgra daiz dri daiz reg bya ba marns so II 'dod par bya iin I don du gifer bar bya bas na 'dod pa marns te I de fiid kun tu rtog (PuTlJao: rtogs) pa 'i 'dod pas byan bas na yon tan te I gorns ies bya ba'i don to II "«Here, [objects of] 'desires' mean five qualities of desires», i.e. [five objects of desires:] matter, sound, smell, taste, touch. [They are called] 'desires' because are desirable and are earnest exertions [to acquire an object]. They are [called] 'qualities' because are purified (?) by imagined desires, i.e are accustomed (?)". =

21(a). [Tho. 63b4 Ju. 356a3-4] brtul tugs ni khyi dan ba lan gi brtul iugs la sags pa'" ies bya ba la sags pa ies bya ba 'i sgras ni ri dags kyi brtul iugs la sags pa dag bsdu'o IIji skad du geer bu pa la sags pa ni443 l ies bya ba la I 'di yan brtul tugs yin no II =

[Tho. 63b5

=

21(b). Ju. 356a4-5] bram ze'i444 brtul tugs ni dbyug gu dan gyan gii yan dag par len pa 'o

.., AKBh [Pradhan, 140.10; Shastri, 461.7; Gu. 15202): kiimiidfniim 0upiidiinam j. [0 Both Pradhan and Shastri read: utpiidiinam, against the Tib. iie bar len pa (upiidiina), and against YaSomitra (but ed. Shastri, 461.18 has correctly: upiidiina!); cf. Index: AKBh 1.429). Cf. Yasomitra [Wogihara, 300.3-4; Cu. 334a1-2): kiim iidiniim upiidiinam iIi I kiimadr�{iJilavratiitmaviidiiniim upiidiinam ity arrh a/:! I 'dod pa la sogs pa iie bar len te tes bya ba ni 'dad pa dail lta ba (xyl.: ldan pay dail tshu! khrims dail bltUl tugs dail bdag tu smra ba mams iie bar len ces bya ba'i tha tshig go Ij. 44' AKBh [pradhan, 140.10-11; Shastri, 461.8; Gu. 15202): tatra kiimiiIJ paHca kiimag
dkar po

la sogs pa bsdu'o Ij.

44J Loc. cit • ... AKBh [pradhan, 140.13; Shastri, 461.10; Gu. 152a4): BriihmtllJ apiiSupatoparivriijakiidiniim j. Cf. YaSomitra [Wogihara, 300.9-12; Cu. 334a6-8): Briihm tllJetyiidivistt1lr1l} I BriihmtllJ iin iilfl dtllJ 4iijinlll!' PiiSupatiiniUp jatiibhasma I Parivriijakiin iUp tridtllJ 4amawJt!yam I iidiSabdadvayena KDjJii/ikiidiniilfl kopii/adh�iidini grhyante I tatsamiidiinlll!'

105

IIphyugs bdag pa 'i ni ral bu dan thai ba'o II kun tu rgyu 'i ni dbyug gu gsum pa dan sgre ba yan dag par len pa 'o II 22(a). [Tho. 63b6 Iu. 356a6-8] bdag tu smra ba ni lus445 (xyl. ad: lay te l ies bya ba ni gan gi phyir 'di la bdag ees brjod pa 'i phyir te I de la bdag tu smra ba yod pas na I bdag tu smra ba 'o 446 II ies smos te I beom !dan 'das kyis dge sZon nam I bram ze gan su yan run stej bdag go ies yan dag par Tjes su lta bas yan dag par rjes su Ita ba de thams cad ni fie bar Zen pa 'i.phun po Ina po 'di dag la ies bya ba rgyas par ji skad du gsuJis pa ita bu '0 II =

22(b). [Tho. 63b8 Iu. 356a8-356bl] gal te ius bdag yin na I de Zta na bdag fie bar Zen pa ies bya ba brjod par bya 'o II ie na I de 'i phyir bdag med pa'i phyir ies bya ba la [64al} sogs pa smos te I bdag yod na ni < bdag> fie bar len pa ies brjod na I de ni yod pa yan ma yin te I de'i phyir de med par ses <par> bya ba 'i phyir bdag tu smra ba fie bar Zen pa ies Mad do II "« If the body were a 'self, then one would have spoken of a 'clinging to a self» , therefore it is said: 'because of non-[existence of a] self. Although there is an assertion 'if there exists a self, =

silavrotopiidiinam I bram ze dah ies bya ba rgyas par 'byuiJ ba ni bram ze mams ni dbyug gu dah Efjah gii'o II phyugs bdag mams ni rol bu dah thai ba'o II kun tu rgyu mams ni dbyug gu gsum dah sgre ba'o II sogs pa ies bya ba'i sgro gflis Icyi ni thod pa can la sogs pa thod pa thogs pa sdu ste I de dag yah dag par len pa ni thsul khrims dah brtul iugs yah dag par len pa'o Ij. Cf. L VP, Kasa, III , p. 86 n. 3 . .., Ius

=

iitmabhiiva (Index ARBh III.279) .

... ARBh [pradhan, 140.14-15; Shastri, 461.12; Gu. 152aS]: iitmavadaf;l punar atmabhavaf;l I atmeli vado 'sminn ity atmavadaf;l j. Cf. YaSomitra [Wogihara, 300.12-14; Cu. 334a8-334b2]: atmeli vado 'sminn ity atmavadaf;l I yathoktam I ye kecic chnzmw:ui bnihmaJ:ui va titmeti samanupaiyantal) samanupa.fyanti sarve fa imiin eva paiicopiidiinaskandhiin iti vistaraf;l I de la bdag smro ba yad pas na bdag tu smra ba'o II ie. bya ba ni ji skad du dge slon nam bram ze gah la la dag bdag go I sflam du yah dag par ties su Ita ba na I yah dag par ties su Ita ba de dag thams cad ni phuiJ po Ina po 'di dag kho na la ies bya ba rgyas par gsuns pa Ita bu yin no Ij.

106

then there is a clinging to a self, [yet] there is no [self]. Therefore, in order to make known its non-existence one says: «clinging to an assertion '[there is] self»".

23. [Tho. 64al] byis pa thos pa dan mi ldan pa so so 'i skye bo"'7 fes bya ba go rim bfin du lhan cig skyes pa dan I luil dan rtogs pa las skyes pa'i ses rab mams med pa 'i phyir te I gail fig snon gorns pa 'i bag chags las byun ba skye bas ihob pa'i ses rab med pa de ni byis pa'o II gan fig lun las byun ba med pa de ni thos pa dan mi ldan pa'o II gail fig rtogs pa las byun ba bden pa mnon 'par rtogs pa las skyes pa med pa de ni so so 'i skye bo" o 1/,48 "«A fool, an ignoramus, an ordinary man», i.e. [one who] is lacking in wisdom (prajiiii), respectively, natural (sahaja), [acquired by] tradition (iigama), and [corning from] the spiritual attainment (adhigama). A fool, i.e. one who has no wisdom leading to the acquisition of a [new] state of existence (upapatti-liibhika), originating from [evil] impressions (vasanii) of [his] former wonts (p urviibhyasa) . An ignoramus, i.e. one who is lacking in wisdom [acquired by] tradition. An ordinary man, i.e. one who is deprived of spiritUal attainment and spiritUal realization of the Truth(s) (satyiibhisamaya)". 24. [Tho. 64a4] bdag tu Ita ba dag la ste I de la 'dod pa In sogs pa ma thob pa dag la ni 'dun pa ste (xyL : te) I don du giier ba'o II thob pa dag la ni 'dod chags te [I] mnon par fen pa'a II bdag tu smra ba marns la ste (xyL: te) I de la 'dad pa la sogs pa ma thob pa dag la ni 'dun pa ste I don du gii er ba '0 II thob pa dag la ni 'dod chags te [/1 mnon par fen pa '0 IIyul ma thob pa marns la ni 'dun pa ste I dondu gii er ba 'o II thob pa mams la ni 'dod chags te I 'dod pa la sogs pa de marns la 'dun pa dan 'dod chags gail yin pa de fie bar len pa"" yin gyi I ji skad biad iiid ma rig 441

AKBh [Pradhan, 140.17-18; Shastri, 462.3; Gu. 152a6-7]: btllo 'srotavOn prtagjanal;l prajiiaptim anupatital;l I byis

pa so so'i skye bo thos pa dail mi Idan pa btags pa'i ries su Ihun bar (... ) If. Cf. YaSomitra [Wogiham, 300.16-20; Cu.

334b3-6]: btllo 'srotavOn prthagjana iti I yasya pilrviibhyiisaviisanOniriiitopapattiliihhikii prajiiii niisti I so biilal;l I yasyiigamajii niisti I so 'srotavOn I yasyiidhigamajii satyiibhisamayajii niisti I sa prthagjanal;l I prajiiaptim anupatita iti I yathii Sfll/1jiiii yathii ca vyavahiiral;l I tathOnugata ity arthal;l I byis po so so'i skye bo thos pa dail mi Idan pa ies bya ba ni gail 10 s;lOn goms pa'i bag chags las byun ba skye nas thob pa'i ses rab med de ni byis pa'o II gail !JJ rtogs pa la byuil ba ste I bden pa rtogs pa las byun ba med pa de ni so so'i skye bo'o II gait la lun las byun ba ined pa de ni thos pa dail , mi Idan pa'o II btags (xyl.: brtag) pa'i ries su Ihun ba ies bya ba ni min ji Ita ba dail I tha siiad ji Ita ba de biin du ries su son ba ies bya ba'i tho. tshig go If.

... Piifl.lavardhana [Iu. 356bl-3]: byis pa (xyl.: pas) thos pa dait mi Idan pa so so'i skye bo btags pa'i ries su Ihun ba ies bya ba go rim biin Ihan cig skyes pa dail lun dait I rtogs pa las skyes pa'i ses rab mams med pa'i phyir ro II btags , pa'i ries su Ihun ba ies bya ba ni min ji Ita ba dan tha siiad ji Ita ba de Ita bu'i ries su son ies bya ba'i don to If.

... Cf. AKBh [Pradhan, 140.18; Shastri, 462.4-5; Gu. 152a7]: te�iim upiidOnfll/1 te�u yal;l chandariigal;l I de dag iie bar len pa ni de dag la 'dun pa dait I 'dod chags gail yin pa ste f. Cf. YaSomitra [Wogihara, 300.20-25; Cu. 334b6-8]: te�iim it kiimiidiniim I chandariiga iti I apriipt�u vi�aye� priirth anii chandal;l Ipriipte�u riigal;l I te�u kiim iid�u yal;l chandariigal;l .

I tad upiidOnam I na tu 'yathoktii eva siividyii dvidhii dmivivecaniid upiidOnOnity' abhipriiyal;l I paunarbhavikam iti punarbhavaphalam I de dag ces bya ba ni 'dod pa la sogs pa'o II 'dun pa dait 'dod chags ies bya ba ni yul ma thob pa dag la don du giier ba ni 'dun pa'o II thob pa dag la ni 'dod chags te I 'dod pa la sags po de dag la 'dun po. dait 'dod ' chags gait yin po. de iie bar len po. yin gyi I 'ji skad Mad iiid ma rig bcas I iier len mams te Ita mam (xyl.: moms) giiis I

, phye ba'i phyir ro' II ies bya ba ni ma yin no II siiam du bsams po. yin no [I/J yail srid po. ies bya ba ni yait srid pa'i

107

beas I fler len mams (xyl.: bcas) te ita mam (xyl.: mams) gni.l' I phye ba'i phyir ro450 ies bya ba ni fie bar len pa rna yin no sflam du bsams pa yin no II srid pa 'i ies bya ba ni yan srid pa 'i 'bras bu can yin no I/'" Sthiramati's text seems to be in disorder but in essentials it agrees with Yasomitra. The Sanskrit may be thus reconstructed in the following way: * iitmadr�NU, te�u kiimiid� apriipte�u chanda!}, priirthanii I priipte�u riiga!}, abhinivesa!} I iitmaviide�u, tqu kiimiid� apriipte�u chanda!}, priirthanii Ipriipte!fu riiga!}, abhinivesa!} I vi:faye� apriipte!fu chanda!}, priirthanii Ipriipte!fu riiga!} I te�u kiimiidi:fu ya!} chandariiga!}. tad upiidiinam Ina tu yathoktii eva siividyii dvidhii dr!ftivivecaniid upiidiiniinfty abhipriiya!} Ipaunarbhavikam iti punarbhavaphalam 1* 25. [Tho. 64a7 Iu. 356b4-5] de ni 'dir srid pa yin nom ies bya ba ni I 'di ni 'dir srid pa'o ies bya ba 'i tha tshig go II gian dag na re I 'di 'dir srid pa'i tshig bla dags sam I mtshan flid do ies zer ro ll "«This is here [the nature of] existence», i.e. designation or characteristic, say the others" (* idam atra bhavasya, adhivacana1!l lalqalJa1!l vii, ity apare )453. =

'bras bu can no II '" - I. AX V. 38a-b, see next footnote. '" AK V.38a-b [pradhan, 307.13-14; Shastri, 833.2-3; Gu. 289a7]: yalhoktii eva 'siividyii dvidhii dr�!er viveeaniil* I upiidiiniini I ji skad Mad ilid rna rig beas I iler len mams Ie 110 ba mam (xyl.: mams) gilis I phye ba'i phyir IV 1/ • - •

Cf. LVP, Koso, V, p. 76 n. 1: siividyii dvidhii dr�{iviveeaniil. But YaSomitra, ed. Shastri, 462.21: sii vidyii (sic) etc. 451 Cf. PUfI)avardhana [Ju. 356b3-4]: de dog 10 'dun po daft 'dod ehags gaft yin po ste ies bya ba ni 'dod po daft 1 110 ba daft I Ishul khrirns daft brtul iugs daft I bdag tu Ita ba dog 10 sle (xyl.: Ie) I de 10 'dod po lil sags po rna Ihob pa dog 10 ni 'dun po sle [11 don du giler ba'o II Ihob po dag 10 ni 'dod ehags Ie [11 mnon par ien pa'o II srid pa'i ies bya ba ni yaft srid po'; 'bras bu can yin no 1/ Piifl)avardhana omits the quotation of AK V 38ab; the Sanskrit should read

(following Prof. Schmithausen) thus: • yalhoktii eva siividyii dvidhii dmer (dr�#-)viveeaniil I upiidiiniini, i.e. 'The [yogas] as they have [just] been explained, together with ignorance (AKBh: sahiividyayii), are the [four] upadanas; [they are four] because dr�!i is divided into two [groups]". 4S2

AKBh [Pradhan, 140.21; Shastri, 462.8; Gu. 152b1]: idam atra bhavasya / Cf. YaSomitra [Wogihara, 300.21-22;

Cu. 335al]: idam atra bhavasyeti I idam atra bhavasya sval�(lJ:"lJl' svabhiiva ity tuthal; I de ni 'di, srid po yin no ies bya ba ni de ni 'dir srid pa'i rail gi rnlshan ilid de no bo ilid yin no II ies bya ba'i Iha tshig go 1/ '" Is this an indication of Sthiramati's acquaintance with the opinion transmitted by YaSomitra or rather simply contamination of the two texts?

108

26. [Tho. 64a8 Iu. 356b5-6] mam par ses pa 'jug pa 'i tshul du4S4 tes bya ba ni las kyi 'phen pa'i dbun [64bl] gis mum par Ses pa 'i rgyun srid pa bar ma daTi 'brei pa 'i phyir me 'bar ba 'gro ba'i tshul du 'gro ba de dari der 'gro bar 'gyur te / tes sriar ji sTead bSad pa bim no4S5 // =

27. [Tho. 64bl] mdo de las ji sTead bsad pa Ita bU '04S6 // tes bya ba ni rga ba gaTi te na / spyi cer (Pun:zavardhana: cher) daTi mgo skya adaTi giier ma maTi ba daTi riiiils pa dO.Ti rgur ba dari 'khogs pa dan / go bii na sii gyol bo dan dbugs kyi sgra riar riar po 'byuTi ba daTi / Ius mdun du dgu bas Ius mkhar ba la bsten pa daTi Ius .sme ba nag pos khyab pa dari / dha nu dhva manda tvatrl iiams pa daTi dbun po yoils su iiams pa daTi yoils su smin pa dari yoils su bye ba dana 'du byed mums riiiils par gyur pa daTi 'khogs par gyur pa gun yin pa 'eli ni rga ba ies bya 'o // 'chi ba gun te na / sems can gan yin pa de daTi de dag sems can gyi ris de dari de nus 'chi tiri 'pho ba iiid "de tshe dari drod iiams siTi phuri po mams 'dor la srog gi dbaTi po 'gags pab 'chi ba'i dus byed pa gan yin pa 'eli ni 'chi ba tes bya ste / 'chi ba 'di daTi sTiar gyi rga (xyl: dga ') ba 'eli giiis ni rga si ies bya ba 'o //457 Sthiramati quotes the standard definition of 'jarii-mara7;la', the twelfth member of the chain of dependent origination (pratftyasamutpiida), as it is found the Nlilandii text"". Noticeable are the lacunae in PiirI;lavardhana's commentary.

,.. AKBh [pradhan, 140.21-22; Shastri, 462.7-8; Gu. 152bl]: viji'iiiniivakriin liyogena;' Cf. YaSomitra [Wogihara, 300.2628; Cu. 335al-2]: viji'iiiniivakriin liyogeneti I jviiliigamanayogeniintarribhavasambandhiid aniigatCllT' janma jiiti" pai'icaskandhiktl niimariipasvabhiivatviit / mam par ses pa 'jug pa'i tshut du ies bya ba ni srid pa bar ma dan 'brei pa'i phyir me 'bar ba 'gro ba'i tshul du ma 'oils pa'i skje bo ni skje ba st. I min dan gzugs kyi no bo i'iid yin pa'i phyir phuil po lna pa yin no If.

4S' Refers to the fragments 12 and 13 supra. '56

AKBh [pradhan; 140.23; Shastri, 462.10; Gu. J52b1.-2]: yathii n.ird�t"'l' SUIre;' Cf. supra, chapter· on Yasomitra,

The Pratityasamutpiidasiitra, fragm. 4. Vide supra, analysis of Samathadeva's commentary, fragm.

S

§15-16. Further see

the Dhann askandha [ed. Dietz, p. 68]; NidiinasCllT'yukta [ed. Tripathi, Siitra 16.15]; Niilandii- brick inscription [Epigr. Ind. xxi,

p. 199]; Mahiivyutpatti §§4084-4101. '17

Piill;1avardhana, Ju. 356b6-S, with the omission of , . , and b . b.

'" jarii katamii / yat tat khiilatya!Jl1 piilitya!Jl valIpracuratii' jin;tatii bhugnatii' kubja-gopiinasi-vaiikatii tila-kiilakii'-cita­ giitratii khu!a-khu!a'-pr..sviisa-kiiyatii puratal.1 priig-bhiira-kiiyatii dal).Qa-vi�ambhaJ;latii· dhandhatva!Jl mandatva!Jl hiinil;l parihiil}il:t indriyiil}iiql paripiikal.1 paribhedal.1 sa!J1Skiiriil}iiql pur�ohiival.1 jl1Ijanohiival.1 / iyam ucyate jarii // maraJ;la!Jl katamat' / yii' t�iiql te� satviiniiql' tasmiit tasmiit 'satvanikiiyiit cyutlS cyavanatal.1 bhedontara-hiiJ:lil;tI O iiyu�o hiinil;l ii�maJ;lo hiinil;ljivitendriyasya nirodha\t skandhiiniiql �epo ma�a!Jlkiila-kriyii / idam ucyate maraJ).am / / [Epigr. Ind. xxi, p. 199]. The

NidiinasCllT'yukta [ed. Tripathi] has some better readings:

khiilityam ; , valipracUn2tii; , bhagnatii; , lilakii'fara- ; , khUfU.khwu-, (d. BHSD khumkhUn2-); • -viftambhanatii (d. BHSD �kambhat;la); 7 katarat; , yat; , sattva-; 1 0 bhedo 'ntariJiiI;IiI). 1

109

28. [Tho. 64b5 Ju. 356b8-357al] bye brag tu smra ba 'i lugs ni snar Mad pa gem yin pa de kho na yin no'" tes bya ba ni bcu giiis dan !dan pa 'i phun po Ina pa 'i gnas skabs Icyi yan lag bcu giiis dag yin no lites bya ba'o II =

* * *

<S. AKBh [pradhan, 140.25; Shastri, 462.13; Gu. 152b3]: sa eva III Va!bh�ikanyayo yal;1 piirvam uktal;1 /. Cf. YaSomitra [Wogihara, 30032-301.1; Cu. 335a5-6]: sa eva tu Vaibh�ikanyayo ya/;l piirvam ukra iii/ dviidafa paiicaskandhikii avasthii dvtida!ailgiinili / bye brag tu smra ba'i lugs ni snar Mad pa gan yin pa de kho na yin no // tes bya ba ni bcu gnis dan ldan pa'i phun po In,a'i gnas skabs kyi yan lag bcu gnis tes bya ba yin no /j.

1 10

ill. CONCLUDING REMARKS The following concluding remarks will briefly concentrate on the general character of the commentaries in the context of their relationship to the Abhidharmakrua. Thus, first of. all we can ascertain convincingly that not all the nine texts in question deserve the n!lme of a "commentary". The commentaries of Yasomitra, Sthiramati and PiirI.1avardhana form one group and belong to the class of classical Indian philosophical expository treatises. Within this group Yasomitra should be singled out from the other two for his text is preserved in its Sanskrit original and it offers almost inexhaustible wealth of historical, doctrinal and linguistic data. The relation between Sthiramati and PiirI.1avardhana is not clear. After all, one has good reason for believing that PiirI.1avardhana's LalqaIJiinusiiriIJi major is to some extent subordinate to Sthiramati's Tattviirtha. The latter, in its preserved form, is a compilation prepared by its Tibetan translator on the basis of Sthiramati's original (?) Kosa-commentary, the KarakiiSani, and the commentaries of Yasomitra and PiirI.1avardhana. PiirI].avardhana's smaller commentary seems to be an extract from the major commentary, concentrates on selected topics and is polemical in its character. With this first group may be also reckoned two lost commentaries by GUI].amati and his disciple Vasumitra. The quotations in Yasomitra's Sphu!iirthii seem to leave no doubt as to their character. Among the second group of commentaries one can include the works of SaiIghabhadra and Digniiga: both are simple literal apridgements of the Abhidharmakosa, with the difference that the former seems not to have been subject to a further correction and revision of its language (it agrres fully with a Tibetan manuscript fragment of SaiIghabhadra's Sutriinuriipii discovered in Tun-huang). The third group of texts is represented by S amathadeva's Upiiyikii . In fact, this is a collection or anthology of the Agama and Siitra quotations which was compiled in order to supply the incomplete quqtations of Vasubandhu in hisAbhidhanflakosa with the full texts (here mention may be made e.g. of a complete version of the PratityasamutpiidasUtra). The fourth group is constituted by two texts which are related in their contents to the Abhidharmakosa, viz. Skandhila'sAbhidharmiivatiiraprakaraIJa and an anonymousSiirasamuccaya, the former being in fact a commentary on the PrakaraIJa, a canonical Sarviistiviida Abhidharma book, and the latter being a glos on the Abidharmiivatiira. After having studied comparatively the nine texts from the Tanjur, I am inclined to single out from among them the Sphu!iirthiiAbhidharmakosa-vyiikhyii or a commentary of "Clear sense" of Yasomitra which, in my opinion, is to be regarded as the highest achievement of the commentatorial tradition of the Abhidharmakosa. Finally, a few words should be added on the problem of the two Vasubandhus. As I have already said, explicit mentions of an elder Vasubandhu are found in the commentaries of Yasomitra, Sthiramati and PiirI.1avardhana. The problem of ascertainment of the doctrinal positions of the elder Vasubandhu on the basis of preserved fragments, must be left for more comprehensive future research. Thus, Frauwallner's theory of two Vasubandhus seems to be confirmed. On the other hand, however, Frauwallner's arguments for an identification of the elder Vasubandhu with the brother of AsaiIga have been criticized here on account of the misinterpretation of the textual evidence.

111

Analytical table of the Abhidharmaknsa and the commentaries preserved in the Tanjur

1.

Abhidhannakosa-kiirikii . Chas m;lOn pa'i rndzad kyi tshig le'ur bJias pa. Peking 5590; Tg, milOn pa, Gu. 1-27b6. Tohoku 4089; Tg, Ku. 1bl-25a7. Cordier III . 394. Lhan kar catalogue (ed. Lalou), No. 686. Eu-ston, Chos 'byun, Catalogue (ed. Nishioka), No. 486. Za lu Tanjur, voL Gu. 1 . Klon rdol bla rn a (Coil. Works, voL 1 3 FA; foL 595). A: Vasubandhu (Dbyig gfien), c. 400-480 AD. (Frauwallner). T.: Jinamitra, Dpal brtsegs, c. 800 AD.

2.

Abhidhannakasa-bhi4Ya. Chas milan pa 'i rndzad kyi Mad pa. Peking 5591; Tg, mnon pa, Gu. 27b6-302a7; Nu. 1-109a8. Tohoku 4090; Tg, Ku. 26bl-258a7; Khu. 1bl-95a7. Cordier III . 394. Lhan kar catalogue (ed. Lalou), No. 687. Eu-ston, Chos 'byun, Catalogue (ed. Nishioka), No. 487. Za lu Tanjur, vol. Gu-Nu.

Klon rdol bla rna (Coil. Works, vol. 13 PA, fol. 595). A.: Vasubandhu (Dbyig gfien). T.: Jinamitra, Dpal brtsegs. Contents: 1. dhatu-nirdesa (khams bstan pa) 2. indriya-nirdesa (dbail po bstan pa) 3. loka-nirdesa ('jig rten bstan pa) 4. karma-nirdesa (las bstan pa) 5. anusaya-nirdesa (phra rgyas bstan pa) 6. margapudgala-nirdesa (lam dan gail zag bstan pa) 7. jnana-nirdesa (ye ses bstan pa) 8. samapatti-nirdesa (snoms par 'jug pa bstan pa) 9. pudgala-viniscaya (gan zag dgag pa bstan pa)

no. of karikas 48 73 102 127 71 (70) 80(79) 56 43 total:

112

Ookhale

600 598

Commentaries

3.

Abhidharmakosa-siistra-karika-bhi4Ja SutriinurUpii-niima. Chos mnon pa 'i mdzod kyi bstan beos kyi tshig le'ur byas . pa 'i mam par Mad pa Mdo dan mthun pa ie.s bya ba. Peking 5592; Tg, milon pa, Nu. 109a8-304a6. Tohoku 4091; Tg, Khu. 95bl-266a7. Cordier ID.394. Lhan kar catalogue (ed. Lalou), No. 689 (?): Sanghabhadra. Sanghabhadra. Bu-ston, Chos 'byun, Catalogue (ed. Nishioka), No. 491 (?): Za lu Tanjur, vol. Nu.3 (Sanghabhadra). Tun-huang Tib. Mss. (ed. LVP), No. 591. Klon rdol bla rna (ColI. Works, vol. 13 PA, fol. 595): Sanghabhadra. A: [Peking*] 'Dul bzan (Vinitabhadra); [Derge/Cone] 'Dus bzan (Sanghabhadra). [* incipit reads: 'Dus bzan (sic).] T.: anonymous, between ca. 800-1000 AD.

4.

Abhidharmakosa-vyiikhyii Sphutiirthii-niima. Chos mnon paY mdzod kyi 'grel Mad Don gsal ba ies bya ba. Peking 5593; Tg, mnon pa, Cu. 1-383a8; Chu. 1-394a5. Tohoku 4092; Tg, Gu. 1bl-330a7; Nu. 1bl-347a7. Cordier ID.395. Bendall, Catalogue, No. Add. 104l. Lhan kar catalogue (ed. Lalou), No. 688. Bu-ston, Chos 'byun, Catalogue (ed. Nishioka), No. 488. Za lu Tanjur, vol. Cu-Chu. Klon rdol bla rna (ColI. Works, vol. 13 PA, fol. 595). A : Rajaputra Yasomitra (Rgyal po'i sras Grags pa'i bses gfien), ca. 7th cent. AD. T.: Visuddhasiilha, Dpal brtsegs, ca. 800 AD.

5.

Abhidharmakosa-tfka Lalqal)iinusiiril)i-niima. Chos mnon pa'i mdzod kyi 'grel Mad Mtshan iiid kyi ryes su 'bran ba ies bya ba. Peking 5594; Tg, mnon pa, Iu. 1-408a8; Nu. 1-39 1a7. Tohoku 4093; Tg, ·Cu. 1bl-347a7; Chu. 1b1-322a7. Cordier ID.395. Lhan kar catalogue (ed. Lalou), No. ---. Bu-ston, Chos 'byun, Catalogue (ed. Nishioka), No. 489. Za lu Tanjur, vol. Iu-Nu. Klon rdol bla rna (ColI. Works, vol. 13 PA, fol. 595). A: PiirI]avardhana (Gail ba spel ba), ca. 2nd half of the 8th cent. AD. T. : Kanakavarman, Pa tshab Ni rna grags, ca. 1100 AD. 113

6.

Abhidhalmakosa-pkii Upiiyikii-niima. Chos mnon pa 'i mdzod kyi 'grel Mad He bar mkho ba ies bya ba. Peking 5595; Tg, mnon pa, Tu. I-296a3; 11m. 1�144a7. Tohoku 4094; Tg, Iu. Ibl-287a7; Nu. Ibl-95a7. Cordier III.396. Lhan kar catalogue (ed. Lalou), No. ---. [* Cf. No. 691 and Eu-ston, No. 494]. Eu-ston, Chos 'byun, Catalogue (ed. Nishioka), No. 490. Za lu Tanjur, vol. Tu-Thu. I . Klon rdol bla rna (Coll. Works, vol. 1 3 PA, fo1 595). A : S amathadeva (Zi gnas lha). T.: Iayasri, S es rab 'od zer, before 1322 AD. [* perhaps 2nd half of the 1 1th c., provided this Jayasri is identical with a Kashmirian logician bearing the same name].

7.

Abhidhannakosa-l'{1ti Mannapradipa-niima. Chos mnon pa 'i mdzod kyi 'grei pa Gnad kyi sgron ma ies bya ba. Peking 5596; Tg, mnon pa, Thu. I44a8-286bl. Tohoku 4095; Tg, Nu. 95bl-2I4a7. Cordier III.397. Lhan kar catalogue (ed. Lalou), No. ---. Bu-ston, Chos 'byun, Catalogue (ed. Nishioka), No. 492. Za lu Tanjur, vol. Thu.2. Klon rdol bla rna (Coll. Works, vo!' 13 PA, fo!' 595). A: Dignaga (Phyogs kyi glan po), ca. 480-540 AD. (Frauwallner). T.: Rnal 'byor zla ba, 'Jam dpal gion nu, 2nd half of the 13th cent. AD.

8.

Abhidhannakosa-pkii LalqalJiinusiiril}i-niima. Chos mnon pa'i mdzod kyi 'grei Mad Mtshan iUd kyi rjes su 'bran ba ies bya ba. Peking 5597; Tg, mnon pa, Thu. 286bl-315al. Tohoku 4096; Tg, Nu. 2I4bl-237a2. Cordier nI.397. Lhan kar catalogue (ed. Lalou), No. ---. Bu-ston, Chos 'byun, Catalogue (ed. Nishioka), No. ---. Za lu Tanjur, vol. Thu.3. Klon rdol bla rna (Coll. Works, vol. 13 PA, fol. 595), ---. A: Piirl).avardhana (Gan ba spel ba). T.: Kanakavarman, Pa tshab Ni rna grags. [* Dates as No. 5 supra].

9.

Abhidhanniivatiira-tt7di Siirasamuccaya-niima. Chos mnon pa < la > 'jug pa rgya chef 'grel pa SHin po kun las boo pa ies bya ba. Peking 5598; Tg, mnon pa, Thu. 3 I5a2-393a2. 1 14

Tohoku 4097; Tg, Nu. 237a2-302a7. Cordier ill.398. Lhan kar catalogue (ed. Lalou), No. (693-)694. Bu-ston, Chos 'byun, ' Catalogue (ed. Nishioka), No. 496. Za lu Tanjur, voL ThuA. Klon rdol bia rna (CoIl. Works, voL 13 PA, foL 595), ---. A.: anonymous. T. : Jinamitra, Danasila, Ye ses sde, ca. 800 AD. 10.

Abhidharmavatara-prakaraJ)a. Rab tu byed pa chos mnon la 'jug pa ies bya ba. Peking 5599; Tg, mnon pa, Thu. 393a3-417a8. Tohoku 4098; Tg, Nu. 302a7-323a7. Cordier ill.398. Lhan kar catalogue (ed. Lalou), No. 692. Bu-ston, Chos 'byun, Catalogue (ed. Nishioka), No. 495. Za lu Tanjur, voL Thu.5. Klon rdol bla rna (CoIl. Works, vol. 13 PA, fol. 595), ---. A : Skandhila*, 5th cent. AD. [* Author's name known from the Chinese version, T 1554]. T. : anonymous, ca. 800 AD.

11.

Abhidharmakosabhtiyya-pkii Tattvartha-nama. Chos milon pa 'i mdzod kyi bSad pa 'i rgya cher 'grel pa Don gyi de kho na iiid ces bya ba. Peking 5875; Tg, sna tshogs, To. 1-385a8; Tho. 1-565a8. Tohoku 4421; Tg, Tho. 1bl-426a7; Do. 1bl-387a7. Cone Tg, ---. Cordier illA99. Lhan kar catalogue (ed. Lalou), No. ---, Bu-ston, Chos 'byun (CoIl. Works, vol. 24 YA, fol. 846.6) : KarakiiSani. Bu-ston, Catalogue (ed. Nishioka), No. ---. Za lu Tanjur, ---. Klon rdol bla rna (CoIl. Works, vol. 13 PA, fol. 595) : KarakiiSani. A: Sthiramati (Blo gros brtan pa), ca. 510-570 AD. (Frauwallner). T.: DharmapaIabhadra (Chos skyon bzan po), 1441-1528 AD. Protector: Chos kyi grags pa Ye ses dpal bzan po, 1453-1528 AD. Scribe: Sans rgyas 'phel, 141 1-1485 AD. Date of transl.: ca. 1480 AD. [* There was an earlier Tibetan translation made by (?) Dpan lotsava Blo gros brtan pa (1276-1342 AD.)]. * * * 1 15