avoca /
avtjjdavijjdtidvuso
Sdriputta vuccati.
Abhidharmakosabhasyam-Vol-2-Vasubandhu-Poussin-Pruden-1991
note 100.
205.
Samyutta, ii.
72, iv.
33; Milinda, 56, etc.
206. Samyukta, TD 2, p. 85al4, Majjhima, iii. 63, Mahdvastu, ii. 285, Madhyamakavrtti, 9, Theorie des douze causes, p. 49.
i. First explanation, approved by Vasubandhu. The arguments two to four are (according to P'u-kuang who follows Samghabhadra), those of the SthaviraSisya Bhadanta Rama (/<<? -
^=ti-tzu^^-).
ii. Second explanation, that of the Sthavira Vasuvarman (Vydkhyd); according to Fa-pao, a
divergent explanation of the Sautrantikas (ching-pu i shih &f? |S||fp ) (as is also the fifth explanation); according to P'u-kuang, the "dissident Santrantika master" (ching-pu i-shih
fi? P^SB), the Bhadanta Shih-ts'ao |M:|f (Vasuvarman); according to Samghabhadra, the "Sthavira-t'u- t'ang $|Jj|", (which gives Sthavirapaksika, a follower of the Sthavira).
iii. Heterodox explanation.
iv. Explanation of the ancient masters (Sautrantika).
v. ExplanationofSrllabha(Vydkhyd) (whomSamghabhadraterms,generally,"theSthavira");
Fa-pao: a divergent explanation of the Saua^itikas;Fu-kiiang,''Sthavira-/'*<<g-/>j*fe/& |RI? "; Samghabhadra, "S&ay'u^-t'ung-chien^^ . "
207. The Vydkhyd comments on this paragraph with the words: etat sarvam dcdryamatam.
208. According to the Vydkhyd, an explanation of the Sthavira Vasuvarman, which should be the Shih-ts'ao of P'u-kuang. A Vasuvarman is the author of TD 32, no 1647, Treatise on the Four Truths.
209. Namely, the ancient masters: dcdryd iti purvdcdrydh.
210. aprahanajndpandrtham, utpattijndpandrtham.
211. According to the Vydkhyd, the opinion of Srllabha.
212. According to the Vydkhyd: sa esa Bhadanta $rildbhah. Note of Saeki: the Sthavira.
213. The Sutra says: jdtipratyayd jaramarana^okapafidevadupkhadaurfnanasyopdydsdh sambha- vanti (with variants).
Theterms/oka. . . updydsasareincluded(samgrhitd)mjardmaranaandarenotseparateitems (ndngdntaram). They come from diverse transformations (parindma) of objects (visaya), living beings and non-living beings, and from the person (dtmabhdva).
Theyaredefined:foka=a\mrmanasyasamprayuktavitarka;parideva=fokasamutthitapraldpa; duhkha, as ii. 7a; daurmanasya, as ii. 8b; updydsa = vicchinnavega daurmanasya, or, according to others, iokaparidevapUrvaka frama {Vydkhyd).
? See the definitions of the Sdlistambasutra (Theorie des douze causes, 80); Abhidhammaasan- gaha, 36; sokddivacanam pariettha nissandaphalanidassanam; Visuddhimagga, 503 (grief is th cause of all vyasana); for other references, see Theorie des douze causes, 31-32.
Soka, etc, are representedon the wheel of existence in Ajanta,J. Przyluski,J/4. T. 1920, ii. 313, an article that should be read
214. The Vyakhya explains aprajanan with the words dvenikim avidydm dariiayati: "the author indicates here avidya pure and simple. " See p. 402,419.
215. See iuMOlb.
216. For us, the item vijndna is the whole of the series of vijndnas from the existence at death (maranabhava) until the existence at birth (upapattibhava): in other words, the mental series of the intermediate being since his initial mind (pratisammhicitta) to its end (the existence at birth, the beginning of the realm of rebirth). This series includes mental consciousness (manovijndna), plus the five consciousnesses, visual consciousness, etc We are thus in agreement with the definition of the item vijndna (vijndndnganirdeh): vijftdnam katamat / sad vijndnakdydh.
This definition of the vijndna is from the Madhyama, TD 1, p. 578bl6, Majjhima, i. 53. According to Paramartha, confirmed by the Vyakhya below (see note 217), we should read: "according to the Vijndnavibhanga of the Prat&yasamutpddasMra. "
If the item vijndna is the initial mind of the realm of rebirth, existence at arising (pratisamdhicitta, upapattibhava), the Sutra would say: vijfidnam katamat / manovijndnam. For "it is to the manovijndna alone that the cutting off of the roots belongs . . . " (iii. 42a).
217. Vyakhya: pratftyasamutpddasutre ndmarupavibhanga evarh nirdes*dt / noma katamat. . . On the definition of ndmarupa and its variants, ThSorie des douze causes.
218. Here Vasubandhu gives the Sautrantika explanation of updddna: the Vaibhasika thesis, v. 38.
On the four updddnas, Kathdvatthu, xv. 2, Vibhanga, 145, Nettippakarana, 41, Samyutta, ii. 3, Digha ii. 58, Majjhima, 166.
219. On kukkuravrata, etc. , Majjhima, i. 387, Digha, iii. 6.
The Pandarabhiksus call to mind the Pandararigaparibbajakas who divided, along with the
Brahmins and the brdhmanajdtiyapdsandas, the favors of Bindusara, Samantapdsddikd, 44; Mrs Rhys Davids reconciles this with the Pandara[sa]gotta of the Theragdthd, 949.
Vibhdsd,TD 27, p. 590a26: There are two Tirthakas, Acela Srenika (Acela Seniya Kukkuravatika of the Majjhima, i. 387, compare Nettippakarana, 99) and Parana Kodika (Punna Koliyaputta Govatika). These two Tirthikas, at the same time, went to ask questions of the people seated together, saying, "We two praaice all the difficult practices of this world, we study them, and we accomplish them to perfection. Who can in truth prophesize the retribution that these practices willproduce? . . .
Vibhdsd, TD 27, p. 284al3: SUavratopdddna is twofold, internal and external. The inner persons (or Buddhists) are those who abuse themselves thinking that bathing makes for purity, that the practice of the twelve Dhutas suffices for purity.
220. Atmabhdva, dtmavdda are the five updddnaskandhas, as results from the text: ye ke cic chramand vd brdhnumd vd dtmeti samanupaiyantah samanupas'yanti sarve ta imdn eva pateopdddnaskandhdn. (Samyutta, iii. 46).
221. The "divergent" masters (i-shih H6J] ) of the Sautrantika school (Saeki).
222. Madhyama, TD 1, p. 498bl0. Bdlo bhiksavo'frutavdn prthagjanah prajnaptim anupatitah caksusd rupdni drstva. . . (Madhyamakavrtti, 137 and note).
The bdla, who lacks "innate" (upapattildbhikd) prajnd which comes from the influence of a previous religious praaice (purvdbhydsavdsandnirjdtd); asrutavdn, who is lacking the prajnd which arises from Saipture (dgamajd); the prthagjana, who is lacking the prajnd arisen from adhigama, that is to say from satydbhisamaya (vi. 27).
Prajnaptim anupatitas - yathd samjhH yathd ca vyavahdras tathdnugatah. The expression
Footnotes 517
? 518 Chapter Three
appears to be lacking in Pall
223. "In the Sarva", I understand to be the Sarvavarga, but we do not find anything parallel in the Sabbavagga of the Samyutta, iv. 15. The Lotsava translates as (bams cad las; Hsuan-tsang: chu- cking |? j|g "in all the various Scriptures"; ParamSrtha: i-ch'ieh ch'st'--ty}^ "in all places".
224. Samyukta, TD 2, p. 58a4; Samyutta, iii. 100: "Is updddna the same thing as the updddnaskandhas? It is neither the same thing as the updddnaskandhas, nor different from the updddnaskandhas: chandardga with respect to them is updddna with respect to them {apt cayo tattha chandardgo tamtattha updddnam)"; iii. 167: rupa is an updddntyadhamma (that is the object of updddna, giving rise to updddna); chandardga with respect to it is updddna with respect to rupa (the same for the other skandhas); iv. 89, same text by replacing the skandhas with the six indriyas.
Vydkhyd: aprdptesu visayesuprdrthand chandah; prdptesu rdgah.
225. Vydkhyd: idam atra bhavasya svalaksanam svabhdva sty arthah.
Compare the Sutra quoted vi. 3 (trans, note 27):yad kirn cid veditam idam atra duhkhasya. Visuddhimagga, 575, less precise; Vibhanga, 137, CuUaniddesa, 471.
226. Hsiian-tsang:rifnanasamtanayogena. avakrdnti = Uu $L "to flow", avakkanti of vtiffidna, Samyutta, ii. 91.
227. Compare Majjhima, i. 49, Dtgha, ii. 305, Vibhanga, 99, Dhammasangani, 644.
The word kkalitya, cavity, corresponds to khandicca which is explained as "the state of being broken (of teeth)" (Rhys Davids-Stede) according to the Anguttara, 1138 (khandadanta),
Visuddhimagga, 449.
228. In the word avidyd, the prefix nafi(d-) has the sense of virodha; it creates words which designate the vipaksa (the pratidvandva); it does not indicate simple exclusion (paryuddsamdtra); and it does not indicate simple absence (abhdva).
229. Other examples: ayukti, avyavahdra, amanusya(On amanusya, iv. 58c-d, 97b, and iv. note 348. ) 230. See v. H
231. On dariana, vill.
232. We have seen above (p. 417)^ that fools "do not understand (aprajdnan) the conditioned character of the dharmas": we can draw a definition of avidyd from this passage. This avidyd is anterior to drsti (dtmadfsfi = satkdyadfsfi). Definition of avidyd, p. 411,421.
On the other hand avidyd = moha, ii. 26a, iv. 9c, v. 20a.
Speaking truthfully, if avidyd is not simply "ignorance," the simple absence of correct vidyd or prajnd, one is at a loss to see how it is not a defiled prajfid; if avidyd is anything other than ignorance of the conditioned character of the dharmas, ignorance of the true nature of former existence, etc, how is it not confused with this defiled prajnd which is the bad drspis, "view of self', "view of the former existence of self," etc. ? All the more then one may admit a reasoned "view of the self," such as non-Buddhist scholars can formulate, a natural, innate (sahaja) "view of the self. " Note that the three drstis are defined as moha (mudhi), the root of evil (v. 20a).
233. Samyukta, TD2,p. 190bl5.
On the deliverance of the defiled mind, vi. 77a.
The Abhidhamma (for example the Papisambhiddmagga, i. 21) recognizes the visuddhi of sila,
citta, and ditphi.
234. Vydkhyd: kalpandmdtram etad dgamanirapeksam iti katbayati. Fa-pao and P'u-kuang do not agree whether Vasubandhu here takes the part of the Vaibhasikas against the Sautrantikas. In other words, whether Vasubandhu says, as his personal opinion, "Who can stop a master in his imaginations? ", or if he gives these words to the Vaibhasikas. The Vydkhyd accepts the first hypothesis. But Sarhghabhadra says, "The Sautrantikas say that good prajnd can be mixed. . . ", and
we know that he always mentions and quotes Vasubandhu as "the Sautrantika. " The Chinese
? commentators think that Vasubandhu rejects the theory of the mixing of good prajnd with defiled prajfld; nevertheless, he does not admit that avidyd is a separate dharma.
235. Hsiian-tsang: "There is a separate thing, avidyd, which differs from prajnd, as rdga differs from the mind This master is correct. "
236. BhadantaSrilSbhasays,"Avidydisthegeneraldesignationofallofthekiefas;thereisrioavidyd separate from craving and the other kief as (avidyeti sarvaklefdndm tyarh sdmdnyasarhjnd / na rdgddiklefavyatiriktdvidyd ndmdsti). According to the Sutra, "Oh Mahalcau&hila, he does not rightly discern (na prajdndti), and as a consequence we say avidyd" (Sammyutta, iii. 172: Mahakotthito (or Mahakotthiko). . .
avoca / avtjjdavijjdtidvuso Sdriputta vuccati. . . ). In faa all the kief as are by their nature non-knowledge (ajtidnasvarupa), for they grasp things as they are not (vipaf&agrabanatas).
This is the thesis of Harivarman in TD 32, no 1646. According toSaeki, here Vasubandhu refers to Harivarman.
237. Aboveiii. p. ,Samyukta,TD2,p. 85al6,p. 126c5:purvdnteJndnamapardnte. . . madhydnte. . . (buddbadharmasamgharatnesv. . . duhkbasamudayanirodhamdrgesv. . . kufaldkufaldvydkrtesv. . . ddbydimika. . . bdhye'jndnam /yat kimcidtatra tatrajnanam tama dvaranam. . . ) See Kofa, ii. 26a-c, where we have avidyd, ajnana and "non-clarity. "
Vibhanga, S5:yaman"ttnamadassanamanabhisamayo. . . (asampakkhdna is missing from the bng list of synonyms).
One will find in Rhys Davids-Stede (avijjd) and in Tbeorie des douze causes, 6-9, a good number of references.
238. The Vydkbyd has mayand, mayandndm, and in the Dbdtupdtba, migatau: thus sattvamayand Paramartha has simply leiM (" maya).
Hsiian-tsang: yu cb'ing shib (to depend upon, to support) wo lei hsing ^ffrNfftlStt =
sattva-dtmdifita-maya-td: lei gives maya and bsmg - -to, SH4 .
P'u-kuang explains: lei-bsing (mayatd) = abammdna.
Samghabhadra explains maya in the sense of "to gp (to the realms of rebirth)"; that which is the
nature of maya is mayatd. (We would have sattva mayatd - "the quality of going of beings . . . ").
239. Samyukta, TD 2, p. 245c21.
240. Abamkdramamakdramdndrws'aya, Samyutta, iii. 80, etc; asmimdna, asmUi mana, iii. 155.
241. Nifcbdya corresponds to nicchdta of the Pali sources. On this word, Rhys Davids and Stede. Often accompanying nibbuta, sttibbuta, etc: however see Anguttara, v. 65.
242. Here it would be more fitting to explain the samskdras and vijUdna; see iil36a.
243. Vibbdfd, TD 27, p. 73al8, Tbe*orie des douze causes, p. 16-18. See ii. 47.
244. It is by reason of a name that the non-material skandhas are active (pravartante) with respect to objects not immediately perceived {apratyaksesv arthesu): "Such is the object (or the meaning), artha, of this noun. " By reason of the organs, the non-material skandhas arise (utpadyante) with respect to the objects perceived By reason of the object, the non-material skandhas are active with respect to names: "Such is the name of this object. "
Compare Attbasalim, 392, Expositor, 500-501. Buddhaghosa, on the origin of names; Vibbdsd, TD27,p. 73al8.
245. On this subject the Vydkbyd quotes a Sutra which presents together, with the Mahdndmasutta of the Samyutta, v. 369, some interesting variants: mrtasya khalu kdlagatasya jndtaya imam pUtikakdyam agnind vd dihanti udake vd pldvayanti bbumau vd nikhananti vdtdtapdbhydm vd pariiosam pariksayam pafydddnam gacchati / yat punar idam ucyate cittam iti vd mana iti vd vijiidnam iti vd hadddparibhdvitam sllatydgafrutaprajnaparibbdvitam tad urdhvagdmi bhavati vihsagdmy dyatydm svargopagam.
Footnotes 519
? 520 Chapter Three
In Samyutta, mention only of the body cut to pieces and eaten by animals and birds, etc; as Digha, ii. 295. See Nariman, RHR, 1912, i. 85.
246. On sparia, see Koia, ii. 24, iii. note 160. Theoriedes douze causes, 22, Mrs Rhys Davids, intro. to the trans, of the Dhammasangani, 63, Compendium, 12, 14 (awareness of the objective presentation).
Majjhima, i. 190; Atthasdlmi, 109, 141-2; Visuddhimagga, 46$y 595; Madhyamakavrtti, 554 (important); Vijnanakaya (analyzed in Etudes Asiatiques, 1925, i. 370).
Here the kdrikd defines the position of the Sarvastivadins: whereas, according to the Sautrantikas, spuria is the "coming together of the three", according to the Sarvastivadins (and according to Buddhaghos^Atthasdlinf, 109), sparia is not the "coming together of the three", but the effect of this coming together, a mental {castasika) dharma, Koia, ii. 24.
The "three" are the eye, the object and the vijfidna. The vijHdna is produced by the eye and the object (plus an intellectual element, the samanvdhdra), Majjhima, i. 190, Madhyamakavrtti, 1554. The Sarvastivadin thesis is that the vtjndna (=citta)t "the mind," knows "the thing only" (arthamdtra)t whereas the "mental states" (caitta, castasika) (namely sparia, vedand, etc) know the "particulars of the thing" (arthaviiesa). Th. Stcherbatski {Central Conception, 15,17,55) defines vijHdna as "the mind viewed as a receptive faculty, pure consciousness (which renders well the idea of manodhdtu), pure sensation without any content," and sparia as "sensation," "real sensation". To not depart from the definitions furnished by our texts (Koia, ii. 34, note 178), vtjndna grasps the upalabhyatdrupa: this is the most rudimentary of the "gnosis" (as psychologists say), the idea that one perceives something; but, on the other hand, caksurvijrldnam nilam vijdndti, "the visual consciousness knows the blue" (One should explain that without doubt one should understand by caksurvijfidna the vijfiana with the caktas, sparia, etc, which necessarily accompany it).
Maung Tin recounts the definition of sparia of the Atthasdlins: tikasamnipdtasamkhdtassa pana attano kdranassa vasena paveditattd samnipdtapaccupatphdno (phasso) = Contact has coinciding as its manifestation, because it is revealed through its own cause, known as the coinciding
of the three (i. e. , the basis [that is to say, the organ], the object and consciousness). The meaning of
this appears to be: Contact appears, arises (paccupafphdti) by reason of the conjunction (literally:
has for its immediate cause this conjunction: yasya samnipdtah pratyupasthdnam sa sarhni- pdtapratyupasthdna iti), because it is sensed ("experienced") by reason of (and in conformity with)
its cause, which is what is called the conjunction of the three. " From another point of view phassa is vedandpaccupatthdna (=yo vedandydh pratyupasthdnam sa vedandpratyupasthdna iti) because it causes the vedand or agreeable impression to arise (paccapapfhdpeti = uppddett).
247. Samyukta, TD 2, p. 18al6: in the Pali sources, we need not read tmnam samgatiphasso, as does the Samyutta Index, but like Samyutta, iv. 68, and Majjhima, 1111: yd . . . hnesam tinnarh dhammdnam samgati samnipdto samavdyo ayarh vuccati cakkhusamphasso. Nettippaharana, 28: cakkhurupaviHn^nasamnipdtalakkhano phasso. Theorie des douze causes, p. 20.
248. Atthasdlmi, 109: na samgatimattam eva phasso.
249. fatfatka dharmaparydya, Majjhima, iii. 180 (Chachakkasutta) Digha, iii. 243.
250. See iv. 4a-b.
251. They readya esdm dharmdndm samgateh samnipdtdt samavaydt sa spariah. And not:. . . samgatih samnipdtah samavdyah . . .
252. Classic example: yathd buddhdndm sukha utpaddh (Dhammapada, 194), Visuddhimagga, in Warren, 194, Madhyamakavrtti, 70.
253. This discussion is atibahuvistaraprakdravisdrini.
254. Sparia = samsparia (Vydkhya).
255. Pratighasamsparia, so called because its diraya (the organ) is sapratigha (first opinion of the Vibhdfd, TD 27,p. 760cl3, which follows TD 28, no 1552 and Vasubandhu), because its diraya and
? its object (dlambana) are sapratigha (secondopinion of the Vibbdsd, which follows TD 28, number 1550 and Samghabhadra).
256. Adhwacanasarhphassa, Digha, ii. 62 (Warren, 206, Dialogues, ii. 59, and an attempt at translation in Theorie des dome causes, p. 19, a 2), Vibhanga, 6. Adhivacana in Dhammasangani 1306.
257. Vydkhya: adhyucyate' nenety adhivacanam / van ndmni pravartate ndmdrtham dyotayatity adhwacanam noma.
258. caksurvijfldnena nilam vijdndti no tu nilam iti / manovijndnena nilam nilam iti ca vijdndti (variant: caksurvijnanasamangi. . . manovijndnasamangi. . . ). On this text, which is without doubt excepted from the Abhidharma (Nydyabmdupu'rvapaksasamksepa, Mdo 111, foL 108b), see KoU, Ll4c, Madhyamakavrtti, p. 74, note.
259. This is the opinion of Fa-sheng in the Abhidharmahrdaya (6. 18), TD 28, number 1550. Fa-sheng jgjfjhas been reconstructed as Dharmakirti, Dharmajina (Nanjio), or Dharmottara (Takakusu); Peri, "Datede Vasubandhu," 25, mentions the transcription dha-ma-sli-ti (=? ).
260. Hsiian-tsang translates: with the vacana for its adhipati [pratyaya].
261. Vibbdsd, TD 27, p. 760b25. Two spar/as: sdsrava and andsrava; three sparSas: kuiala, akuial and avydkrta; four spars'as: traidhatuka and adhdtuparydpanna; etc From the point of view of nivarana and of its pratipaksa (the hindrance and its opposition): spar/as of avidyd and vidyd; from the point of view of the same nature of the sparia: spar/a of nebher-vufyd-tior-avidyd; from the point of view of what is pleasing and what is displeasing: sparias of sympathy and antipathy; from the point of view of association (samprayoga): agreeable sparfa, etc; from the point of view of its support: sparias of the eye, of the ear, etc
262. Abhiksnasamuddcdrin = nityasamuddcdrin (Vydkhya).
263. How sparia is vedantya, iv. 49.
Sukhavedya is explained: sukhasya vedah sukbavedab / sukhavede sddhuh sukhavedyah /
sukharh vd vedyam asmmn iti sukhavedyah.
264 Vedand has been explained 114, ii. 24; here the author does not explain the characteristics (laksana) of vedand, but its type (prakdra).
On adukkhdsukhd, Majjhima, i. 397.
265. The Sautrantika does not reply, because the problem of shade has already been discussed ii. 50c
266. Prakarana, TD 26, p. 698cl0.
267. Samyukta, 8. 4. Saeki quotes TD 24, number 1451 (the Vinayaksudrakavastu, see S. Levi, Seize Arhats, p. 37) where the Bhagavat explains to Ananda the four principles of Anguttara, it 167.
268. The Vaibhasika theory of the mahdbhUmikas is presented ii23c and following; one should replace adhimukti with adhimoksa, p. 189,190.
269. The asarhskrtas are unconnected with cause, since they refer to the caittas.
270. Paramartha translates: "in the first three bhUmis"; Hsiian-tsang: "in the first bhUmis"; the
Vydkhya glosses: in the savitarka-savicdra bhUmi.
271.
206. Samyukta, TD 2, p. 85al4, Majjhima, iii. 63, Mahdvastu, ii. 285, Madhyamakavrtti, 9, Theorie des douze causes, p. 49.
i. First explanation, approved by Vasubandhu. The arguments two to four are (according to P'u-kuang who follows Samghabhadra), those of the SthaviraSisya Bhadanta Rama (/<<? -
^=ti-tzu^^-).
ii. Second explanation, that of the Sthavira Vasuvarman (Vydkhyd); according to Fa-pao, a
divergent explanation of the Sautrantikas (ching-pu i shih &f? |S||fp ) (as is also the fifth explanation); according to P'u-kuang, the "dissident Santrantika master" (ching-pu i-shih
fi? P^SB), the Bhadanta Shih-ts'ao |M:|f (Vasuvarman); according to Samghabhadra, the "Sthavira-t'u- t'ang $|Jj|", (which gives Sthavirapaksika, a follower of the Sthavira).
iii. Heterodox explanation.
iv. Explanation of the ancient masters (Sautrantika).
v. ExplanationofSrllabha(Vydkhyd) (whomSamghabhadraterms,generally,"theSthavira");
Fa-pao: a divergent explanation of the Saua^itikas;Fu-kiiang,''Sthavira-/'*<<g-/>j*fe/& |RI? "; Samghabhadra, "S&ay'u^-t'ung-chien^^ . "
207. The Vydkhyd comments on this paragraph with the words: etat sarvam dcdryamatam.
208. According to the Vydkhyd, an explanation of the Sthavira Vasuvarman, which should be the Shih-ts'ao of P'u-kuang. A Vasuvarman is the author of TD 32, no 1647, Treatise on the Four Truths.
209. Namely, the ancient masters: dcdryd iti purvdcdrydh.
210. aprahanajndpandrtham, utpattijndpandrtham.
211. According to the Vydkhyd, the opinion of Srllabha.
212. According to the Vydkhyd: sa esa Bhadanta $rildbhah. Note of Saeki: the Sthavira.
213. The Sutra says: jdtipratyayd jaramarana^okapafidevadupkhadaurfnanasyopdydsdh sambha- vanti (with variants).
Theterms/oka. . . updydsasareincluded(samgrhitd)mjardmaranaandarenotseparateitems (ndngdntaram). They come from diverse transformations (parindma) of objects (visaya), living beings and non-living beings, and from the person (dtmabhdva).
Theyaredefined:foka=a\mrmanasyasamprayuktavitarka;parideva=fokasamutthitapraldpa; duhkha, as ii. 7a; daurmanasya, as ii. 8b; updydsa = vicchinnavega daurmanasya, or, according to others, iokaparidevapUrvaka frama {Vydkhyd).
? See the definitions of the Sdlistambasutra (Theorie des douze causes, 80); Abhidhammaasan- gaha, 36; sokddivacanam pariettha nissandaphalanidassanam; Visuddhimagga, 503 (grief is th cause of all vyasana); for other references, see Theorie des douze causes, 31-32.
Soka, etc, are representedon the wheel of existence in Ajanta,J. Przyluski,J/4. T. 1920, ii. 313, an article that should be read
214. The Vyakhya explains aprajanan with the words dvenikim avidydm dariiayati: "the author indicates here avidya pure and simple. " See p. 402,419.
215. See iuMOlb.
216. For us, the item vijndna is the whole of the series of vijndnas from the existence at death (maranabhava) until the existence at birth (upapattibhava): in other words, the mental series of the intermediate being since his initial mind (pratisammhicitta) to its end (the existence at birth, the beginning of the realm of rebirth). This series includes mental consciousness (manovijndna), plus the five consciousnesses, visual consciousness, etc We are thus in agreement with the definition of the item vijndna (vijndndnganirdeh): vijftdnam katamat / sad vijndnakdydh.
This definition of the vijndna is from the Madhyama, TD 1, p. 578bl6, Majjhima, i. 53. According to Paramartha, confirmed by the Vyakhya below (see note 217), we should read: "according to the Vijndnavibhanga of the Prat&yasamutpddasMra. "
If the item vijndna is the initial mind of the realm of rebirth, existence at arising (pratisamdhicitta, upapattibhava), the Sutra would say: vijfidnam katamat / manovijndnam. For "it is to the manovijndna alone that the cutting off of the roots belongs . . . " (iii. 42a).
217. Vyakhya: pratftyasamutpddasutre ndmarupavibhanga evarh nirdes*dt / noma katamat. . . On the definition of ndmarupa and its variants, ThSorie des douze causes.
218. Here Vasubandhu gives the Sautrantika explanation of updddna: the Vaibhasika thesis, v. 38.
On the four updddnas, Kathdvatthu, xv. 2, Vibhanga, 145, Nettippakarana, 41, Samyutta, ii. 3, Digha ii. 58, Majjhima, 166.
219. On kukkuravrata, etc. , Majjhima, i. 387, Digha, iii. 6.
The Pandarabhiksus call to mind the Pandararigaparibbajakas who divided, along with the
Brahmins and the brdhmanajdtiyapdsandas, the favors of Bindusara, Samantapdsddikd, 44; Mrs Rhys Davids reconciles this with the Pandara[sa]gotta of the Theragdthd, 949.
Vibhdsd,TD 27, p. 590a26: There are two Tirthakas, Acela Srenika (Acela Seniya Kukkuravatika of the Majjhima, i. 387, compare Nettippakarana, 99) and Parana Kodika (Punna Koliyaputta Govatika). These two Tirthikas, at the same time, went to ask questions of the people seated together, saying, "We two praaice all the difficult practices of this world, we study them, and we accomplish them to perfection. Who can in truth prophesize the retribution that these practices willproduce? . . .
Vibhdsd, TD 27, p. 284al3: SUavratopdddna is twofold, internal and external. The inner persons (or Buddhists) are those who abuse themselves thinking that bathing makes for purity, that the practice of the twelve Dhutas suffices for purity.
220. Atmabhdva, dtmavdda are the five updddnaskandhas, as results from the text: ye ke cic chramand vd brdhnumd vd dtmeti samanupaiyantah samanupas'yanti sarve ta imdn eva pateopdddnaskandhdn. (Samyutta, iii. 46).
221. The "divergent" masters (i-shih H6J] ) of the Sautrantika school (Saeki).
222. Madhyama, TD 1, p. 498bl0. Bdlo bhiksavo'frutavdn prthagjanah prajnaptim anupatitah caksusd rupdni drstva. . . (Madhyamakavrtti, 137 and note).
The bdla, who lacks "innate" (upapattildbhikd) prajnd which comes from the influence of a previous religious praaice (purvdbhydsavdsandnirjdtd); asrutavdn, who is lacking the prajnd which arises from Saipture (dgamajd); the prthagjana, who is lacking the prajnd arisen from adhigama, that is to say from satydbhisamaya (vi. 27).
Prajnaptim anupatitas - yathd samjhH yathd ca vyavahdras tathdnugatah. The expression
Footnotes 517
? 518 Chapter Three
appears to be lacking in Pall
223. "In the Sarva", I understand to be the Sarvavarga, but we do not find anything parallel in the Sabbavagga of the Samyutta, iv. 15. The Lotsava translates as (bams cad las; Hsuan-tsang: chu- cking |? j|g "in all the various Scriptures"; ParamSrtha: i-ch'ieh ch'st'--ty}^ "in all places".
224. Samyukta, TD 2, p. 58a4; Samyutta, iii. 100: "Is updddna the same thing as the updddnaskandhas? It is neither the same thing as the updddnaskandhas, nor different from the updddnaskandhas: chandardga with respect to them is updddna with respect to them {apt cayo tattha chandardgo tamtattha updddnam)"; iii. 167: rupa is an updddntyadhamma (that is the object of updddna, giving rise to updddna); chandardga with respect to it is updddna with respect to rupa (the same for the other skandhas); iv. 89, same text by replacing the skandhas with the six indriyas.
Vydkhyd: aprdptesu visayesuprdrthand chandah; prdptesu rdgah.
225. Vydkhyd: idam atra bhavasya svalaksanam svabhdva sty arthah.
Compare the Sutra quoted vi. 3 (trans, note 27):yad kirn cid veditam idam atra duhkhasya. Visuddhimagga, 575, less precise; Vibhanga, 137, CuUaniddesa, 471.
226. Hsiian-tsang:rifnanasamtanayogena. avakrdnti = Uu $L "to flow", avakkanti of vtiffidna, Samyutta, ii. 91.
227. Compare Majjhima, i. 49, Dtgha, ii. 305, Vibhanga, 99, Dhammasangani, 644.
The word kkalitya, cavity, corresponds to khandicca which is explained as "the state of being broken (of teeth)" (Rhys Davids-Stede) according to the Anguttara, 1138 (khandadanta),
Visuddhimagga, 449.
228. In the word avidyd, the prefix nafi(d-) has the sense of virodha; it creates words which designate the vipaksa (the pratidvandva); it does not indicate simple exclusion (paryuddsamdtra); and it does not indicate simple absence (abhdva).
229. Other examples: ayukti, avyavahdra, amanusya(On amanusya, iv. 58c-d, 97b, and iv. note 348. ) 230. See v. H
231. On dariana, vill.
232. We have seen above (p. 417)^ that fools "do not understand (aprajdnan) the conditioned character of the dharmas": we can draw a definition of avidyd from this passage. This avidyd is anterior to drsti (dtmadfsfi = satkdyadfsfi). Definition of avidyd, p. 411,421.
On the other hand avidyd = moha, ii. 26a, iv. 9c, v. 20a.
Speaking truthfully, if avidyd is not simply "ignorance," the simple absence of correct vidyd or prajnd, one is at a loss to see how it is not a defiled prajfid; if avidyd is anything other than ignorance of the conditioned character of the dharmas, ignorance of the true nature of former existence, etc, how is it not confused with this defiled prajnd which is the bad drspis, "view of self', "view of the former existence of self," etc. ? All the more then one may admit a reasoned "view of the self," such as non-Buddhist scholars can formulate, a natural, innate (sahaja) "view of the self. " Note that the three drstis are defined as moha (mudhi), the root of evil (v. 20a).
233. Samyukta, TD2,p. 190bl5.
On the deliverance of the defiled mind, vi. 77a.
The Abhidhamma (for example the Papisambhiddmagga, i. 21) recognizes the visuddhi of sila,
citta, and ditphi.
234. Vydkhyd: kalpandmdtram etad dgamanirapeksam iti katbayati. Fa-pao and P'u-kuang do not agree whether Vasubandhu here takes the part of the Vaibhasikas against the Sautrantikas. In other words, whether Vasubandhu says, as his personal opinion, "Who can stop a master in his imaginations? ", or if he gives these words to the Vaibhasikas. The Vydkhyd accepts the first hypothesis. But Sarhghabhadra says, "The Sautrantikas say that good prajnd can be mixed. . . ", and
we know that he always mentions and quotes Vasubandhu as "the Sautrantika. " The Chinese
? commentators think that Vasubandhu rejects the theory of the mixing of good prajnd with defiled prajfld; nevertheless, he does not admit that avidyd is a separate dharma.
235. Hsiian-tsang: "There is a separate thing, avidyd, which differs from prajnd, as rdga differs from the mind This master is correct. "
236. BhadantaSrilSbhasays,"Avidydisthegeneraldesignationofallofthekiefas;thereisrioavidyd separate from craving and the other kief as (avidyeti sarvaklefdndm tyarh sdmdnyasarhjnd / na rdgddiklefavyatiriktdvidyd ndmdsti). According to the Sutra, "Oh Mahalcau&hila, he does not rightly discern (na prajdndti), and as a consequence we say avidyd" (Sammyutta, iii. 172: Mahakotthito (or Mahakotthiko). . .
avoca / avtjjdavijjdtidvuso Sdriputta vuccati. . . ). In faa all the kief as are by their nature non-knowledge (ajtidnasvarupa), for they grasp things as they are not (vipaf&agrabanatas).
This is the thesis of Harivarman in TD 32, no 1646. According toSaeki, here Vasubandhu refers to Harivarman.
237. Aboveiii. p. ,Samyukta,TD2,p. 85al6,p. 126c5:purvdnteJndnamapardnte. . . madhydnte. . . (buddbadharmasamgharatnesv. . . duhkbasamudayanirodhamdrgesv. . . kufaldkufaldvydkrtesv. . . ddbydimika. . . bdhye'jndnam /yat kimcidtatra tatrajnanam tama dvaranam. . . ) See Kofa, ii. 26a-c, where we have avidyd, ajnana and "non-clarity. "
Vibhanga, S5:yaman"ttnamadassanamanabhisamayo. . . (asampakkhdna is missing from the bng list of synonyms).
One will find in Rhys Davids-Stede (avijjd) and in Tbeorie des douze causes, 6-9, a good number of references.
238. The Vydkbyd has mayand, mayandndm, and in the Dbdtupdtba, migatau: thus sattvamayand Paramartha has simply leiM (" maya).
Hsiian-tsang: yu cb'ing shib (to depend upon, to support) wo lei hsing ^ffrNfftlStt =
sattva-dtmdifita-maya-td: lei gives maya and bsmg - -to, SH4 .
P'u-kuang explains: lei-bsing (mayatd) = abammdna.
Samghabhadra explains maya in the sense of "to gp (to the realms of rebirth)"; that which is the
nature of maya is mayatd. (We would have sattva mayatd - "the quality of going of beings . . . ").
239. Samyukta, TD 2, p. 245c21.
240. Abamkdramamakdramdndrws'aya, Samyutta, iii. 80, etc; asmimdna, asmUi mana, iii. 155.
241. Nifcbdya corresponds to nicchdta of the Pali sources. On this word, Rhys Davids and Stede. Often accompanying nibbuta, sttibbuta, etc: however see Anguttara, v. 65.
242. Here it would be more fitting to explain the samskdras and vijUdna; see iil36a.
243. Vibbdfd, TD 27, p. 73al8, Tbe*orie des douze causes, p. 16-18. See ii. 47.
244. It is by reason of a name that the non-material skandhas are active (pravartante) with respect to objects not immediately perceived {apratyaksesv arthesu): "Such is the object (or the meaning), artha, of this noun. " By reason of the organs, the non-material skandhas arise (utpadyante) with respect to the objects perceived By reason of the object, the non-material skandhas are active with respect to names: "Such is the name of this object. "
Compare Attbasalim, 392, Expositor, 500-501. Buddhaghosa, on the origin of names; Vibbdsd, TD27,p. 73al8.
245. On this subject the Vydkbyd quotes a Sutra which presents together, with the Mahdndmasutta of the Samyutta, v. 369, some interesting variants: mrtasya khalu kdlagatasya jndtaya imam pUtikakdyam agnind vd dihanti udake vd pldvayanti bbumau vd nikhananti vdtdtapdbhydm vd pariiosam pariksayam pafydddnam gacchati / yat punar idam ucyate cittam iti vd mana iti vd vijiidnam iti vd hadddparibhdvitam sllatydgafrutaprajnaparibbdvitam tad urdhvagdmi bhavati vihsagdmy dyatydm svargopagam.
Footnotes 519
? 520 Chapter Three
In Samyutta, mention only of the body cut to pieces and eaten by animals and birds, etc; as Digha, ii. 295. See Nariman, RHR, 1912, i. 85.
246. On sparia, see Koia, ii. 24, iii. note 160. Theoriedes douze causes, 22, Mrs Rhys Davids, intro. to the trans, of the Dhammasangani, 63, Compendium, 12, 14 (awareness of the objective presentation).
Majjhima, i. 190; Atthasdlmi, 109, 141-2; Visuddhimagga, 46$y 595; Madhyamakavrtti, 554 (important); Vijnanakaya (analyzed in Etudes Asiatiques, 1925, i. 370).
Here the kdrikd defines the position of the Sarvastivadins: whereas, according to the Sautrantikas, spuria is the "coming together of the three", according to the Sarvastivadins (and according to Buddhaghos^Atthasdlinf, 109), sparia is not the "coming together of the three", but the effect of this coming together, a mental {castasika) dharma, Koia, ii. 24.
The "three" are the eye, the object and the vijfidna. The vijHdna is produced by the eye and the object (plus an intellectual element, the samanvdhdra), Majjhima, i. 190, Madhyamakavrtti, 1554. The Sarvastivadin thesis is that the vtjndna (=citta)t "the mind," knows "the thing only" (arthamdtra)t whereas the "mental states" (caitta, castasika) (namely sparia, vedand, etc) know the "particulars of the thing" (arthaviiesa). Th. Stcherbatski {Central Conception, 15,17,55) defines vijHdna as "the mind viewed as a receptive faculty, pure consciousness (which renders well the idea of manodhdtu), pure sensation without any content," and sparia as "sensation," "real sensation". To not depart from the definitions furnished by our texts (Koia, ii. 34, note 178), vtjndna grasps the upalabhyatdrupa: this is the most rudimentary of the "gnosis" (as psychologists say), the idea that one perceives something; but, on the other hand, caksurvijrldnam nilam vijdndti, "the visual consciousness knows the blue" (One should explain that without doubt one should understand by caksurvijfidna the vijfiana with the caktas, sparia, etc, which necessarily accompany it).
Maung Tin recounts the definition of sparia of the Atthasdlins: tikasamnipdtasamkhdtassa pana attano kdranassa vasena paveditattd samnipdtapaccupatphdno (phasso) = Contact has coinciding as its manifestation, because it is revealed through its own cause, known as the coinciding
of the three (i. e. , the basis [that is to say, the organ], the object and consciousness). The meaning of
this appears to be: Contact appears, arises (paccupafphdti) by reason of the conjunction (literally:
has for its immediate cause this conjunction: yasya samnipdtah pratyupasthdnam sa sarhni- pdtapratyupasthdna iti), because it is sensed ("experienced") by reason of (and in conformity with)
its cause, which is what is called the conjunction of the three. " From another point of view phassa is vedandpaccupatthdna (=yo vedandydh pratyupasthdnam sa vedandpratyupasthdna iti) because it causes the vedand or agreeable impression to arise (paccapapfhdpeti = uppddett).
247. Samyukta, TD 2, p. 18al6: in the Pali sources, we need not read tmnam samgatiphasso, as does the Samyutta Index, but like Samyutta, iv. 68, and Majjhima, 1111: yd . . . hnesam tinnarh dhammdnam samgati samnipdto samavdyo ayarh vuccati cakkhusamphasso. Nettippaharana, 28: cakkhurupaviHn^nasamnipdtalakkhano phasso. Theorie des douze causes, p. 20.
248. Atthasdlmi, 109: na samgatimattam eva phasso.
249. fatfatka dharmaparydya, Majjhima, iii. 180 (Chachakkasutta) Digha, iii. 243.
250. See iv. 4a-b.
251. They readya esdm dharmdndm samgateh samnipdtdt samavaydt sa spariah. And not:. . . samgatih samnipdtah samavdyah . . .
252. Classic example: yathd buddhdndm sukha utpaddh (Dhammapada, 194), Visuddhimagga, in Warren, 194, Madhyamakavrtti, 70.
253. This discussion is atibahuvistaraprakdravisdrini.
254. Sparia = samsparia (Vydkhya).
255. Pratighasamsparia, so called because its diraya (the organ) is sapratigha (first opinion of the Vibhdfd, TD 27,p. 760cl3, which follows TD 28, no 1552 and Vasubandhu), because its diraya and
? its object (dlambana) are sapratigha (secondopinion of the Vibbdsd, which follows TD 28, number 1550 and Samghabhadra).
256. Adhwacanasarhphassa, Digha, ii. 62 (Warren, 206, Dialogues, ii. 59, and an attempt at translation in Theorie des dome causes, p. 19, a 2), Vibhanga, 6. Adhivacana in Dhammasangani 1306.
257. Vydkhya: adhyucyate' nenety adhivacanam / van ndmni pravartate ndmdrtham dyotayatity adhwacanam noma.
258. caksurvijfldnena nilam vijdndti no tu nilam iti / manovijndnena nilam nilam iti ca vijdndti (variant: caksurvijnanasamangi. . . manovijndnasamangi. . . ). On this text, which is without doubt excepted from the Abhidharma (Nydyabmdupu'rvapaksasamksepa, Mdo 111, foL 108b), see KoU, Ll4c, Madhyamakavrtti, p. 74, note.
259. This is the opinion of Fa-sheng in the Abhidharmahrdaya (6. 18), TD 28, number 1550. Fa-sheng jgjfjhas been reconstructed as Dharmakirti, Dharmajina (Nanjio), or Dharmottara (Takakusu); Peri, "Datede Vasubandhu," 25, mentions the transcription dha-ma-sli-ti (=? ).
260. Hsiian-tsang translates: with the vacana for its adhipati [pratyaya].
261. Vibbdsd, TD 27, p. 760b25. Two spar/as: sdsrava and andsrava; three sparSas: kuiala, akuial and avydkrta; four spars'as: traidhatuka and adhdtuparydpanna; etc From the point of view of nivarana and of its pratipaksa (the hindrance and its opposition): spar/as of avidyd and vidyd; from the point of view of the same nature of the sparia: spar/a of nebher-vufyd-tior-avidyd; from the point of view of what is pleasing and what is displeasing: sparias of sympathy and antipathy; from the point of view of association (samprayoga): agreeable sparfa, etc; from the point of view of its support: sparias of the eye, of the ear, etc
262. Abhiksnasamuddcdrin = nityasamuddcdrin (Vydkhya).
263. How sparia is vedantya, iv. 49.
Sukhavedya is explained: sukhasya vedah sukbavedab / sukhavede sddhuh sukhavedyah /
sukharh vd vedyam asmmn iti sukhavedyah.
264 Vedand has been explained 114, ii. 24; here the author does not explain the characteristics (laksana) of vedand, but its type (prakdra).
On adukkhdsukhd, Majjhima, i. 397.
265. The Sautrantika does not reply, because the problem of shade has already been discussed ii. 50c
266. Prakarana, TD 26, p. 698cl0.
267. Samyukta, 8. 4. Saeki quotes TD 24, number 1451 (the Vinayaksudrakavastu, see S. Levi, Seize Arhats, p. 37) where the Bhagavat explains to Ananda the four principles of Anguttara, it 167.
268. The Vaibhasika theory of the mahdbhUmikas is presented ii23c and following; one should replace adhimukti with adhimoksa, p. 189,190.
269. The asarhskrtas are unconnected with cause, since they refer to the caittas.
270. Paramartha translates: "in the first three bhUmis"; Hsiian-tsang: "in the first bhUmis"; the
Vydkhya glosses: in the savitarka-savicdra bhUmi.
271.
