A textual introduction to Ācārya Vasuvandhu’s Vijñaptimātratā-siddhi Viṃśatikā
A textual introduction to Ācārya Vasubandhu’s Vijñaptimātratā-siddhi Viṃśatikā
~ Suyog Prajapati, MA semester-system 1st batch
About the writer
Vijñapti-mātratā-siddhi, literally the proof (or validity) of mind and cognition only, is a collection of Sanskrit verses aimed at giving impetus to the “mind-only” philosophy of the Yogācāra School. It was composed by the great Indian teacher, Ācārya Vasuvandhu while at the court of King Vikramāditya of Ayodhyā. Based on various sources and genealogies (lineage histories, rather) the Japanese scholar Takakusu has affixed the period of Ā. Vasuvandhu in between 420-500 CE.
Vasuvandhu was born in Puruṣapur of Gandhāra region to a Kauśika-Gotrīya Brāhmaṇa family. He is the second among three brothers, who were also equally important for the development of the Buddhist philosophical schools. The eldest, Ārya Asaṅga, was a great proponent of Vijñānavāda while the youngest, Viriñcivatsa, was a Sarvāstivādin paṇḍit. Vasuvandhu was originally an exponent of Sarvāstivāda as well. In fact, according to Winternitz, all three brothers
were Sarvāstivādins, but later they were inclined to other aspects of Buddha’s teachings. As per Buston, Vasuvandhu was ordained and trained under Ācārya Saṃghamitra. Other sources say his teacher was Buddhamitra (Paramārtha) or Manoratha (Hieun Tsang). Kumārajīva (383-412 CE) and Paramārtha (499-569 CE) have both written independent biographies on Vasuvandhu; only the latter is found as a Chinese translation.
Preliminary education of Vasuvandhu is said to have taken place in Kāśmīr and as a youth he moved to Ayodhyā, which was then a great Buddhist centre. There he was initiated into “Hinayāna” and later composed the magnum opus Abhidharmakośa along with its commentaries Abhidharmakośa-bhāṣya, in the process strengthening
the VaibhāsikaSarvāstivāda viewpoints. In his later years, due to the influence of his older brother, Asaṅga, he converted to Yogācāra and also wrote compendiums in support of this doctrine. In total, he created at least thirty-two refined texts. Among them the Vijñapti-mātratā-siddhi stands out as a masterpiece, highlighting the citta-mātra way.
About the text
The Vijñapti-mātratā-siddhi comprises two main tomes (or prakaraṇas), namely — the Vimśatikā and the Trimśikā. While Vasuvandhu wrote both these sections, the commentary for the Trimśikā written by Ācārya Sthīramati is the more popular one. In the Vimśatikā, the theory that “only the mind it true” is explained logically while in the Trimśikā various analyses of the mind (vijñāna) are presented.
At the time when there was much activity in the world of philosophy in India, the Vijñānavādins were concerned with differentiating their views from those of the other religious thinkers in India. They had to stand firm on the Buddhist doctrine of the supreme nature of the mind and also on not accepting the Supreme Being (Īśvara). Vasuvandhu, through his text, and especially through the Vimśatikā, attempts to thread his way between dualism, on the one hand, and theistically based idealism, on the other, by appealing to the notion of karma.4
The Vimśatikā (meaning “twenty lines”) has in fact twenty-two verses while the Trimśikā has thirty verses. As the main text for the Yogācāra-Vijñānavāda school Vimśatikā elaborates the illusory nature of the mind through Vasuvandhu’s terse statements as well as his autocommentaries. He deduces the trueness of only the mind by heavily drawing examples from the dream-like state and the non-universality and selflessness (nairatma) of both the object or phenomenon (dharma) and the subject (pudgala).
The Vimśatikā — a short analysis
Vasuvandhu begins the Vimśatikā with the assertion that the mind is real and that the objects we think we see in the external world are unreal. He gives example of a person with defective vision (timira roga) seeing things in ways different than the ordinary.
Next, he presents three objections and also gives a commentary. The first is regarding the indeterminacy of time and place in real-world observation. The second is regarding how the eye-disorder can be explained and the third regarding the functionality of ones perception. If only the mind is true then anything arising in the mind should manifest itself anywhere. Vasuvandhu explains this paradoxical situation by saying that the rule for time and place is proven to be
like a dream. In a dream we can see objects in a definite place (and time). But they are not real at all. We “see” in a dream in spite of our eyes remaining shut and in spite of remaining in our bed we experience visiting other places. They are all just the results of our mind. The same can be said about the so-
called real world. What we see and experience as good or bad, happiness or sadness in the outer-world are the “dream-like” states resulting from the defilements in our mind. An object is considered real only if it performs a certain task. If our home and the imaginary Gandharvanagara are considered the same, the results of our mind, they differ in the fact that the latter cannot perform the task of providing us refuge, while the former can. But both are byproducts of the mind.
From the eighth verse to the tenth Vasuvandhu discusses why the Buddha then sometimes explains the external world as real. He adjudicated that the Buddha did so only as per the context. If no expositions were made on the phenomenon (dhātu, dharma, skandha etc) then people would not make efforts to do good karma. They would lean towards nihilism. The Buddha discoursed about the process of cognition and the sense-objects/senses and their correlations despite them being unreal, so as to make a bridge towards the understanding of pudgala-nairātma (non-existence of ātman) and dharma-nairātma (non-existence of objects).
In the sixteenth verse he explains that when our sense organs perceive the outer-world, our mind analyses instantaneously and when that happens the sensed object becomes the past. The interval is infinitesimally transient, so what our mind cognates and what we think of as the present (live) object has in fact changed in that very instance. So moment-by-moment, the reality (as seen or sensed) is not real. Further, he objects the direct evidence and its validity
asking if our first-hand observations are in fact just illusions of the mind. He answers this discrepancy by again giving the example of dream. In a dream we “see” and “feel” an object for “real”, but it is not so, although they constitute direct evidence (pratyakṣa pramāṇa). When we wake up, we realize that they were all through the mind. In fact all of our observations in day-to-day life and the state we are in are all dream-like. The defilements and afflictions we possess are keeping us from being fully awake and comprehending the true nature i.e. attaining samyak-sambodhī.
In the last five verses, Vasuvandhu talks about the Yogi-pratyakṣa, the direct evidence from the point of view of an exalted practitioner (one doing yoga-sadhana i.e. Yogi). He justifies that if the mind works well, no sensual perceptions are needed. Whether asleep or in an awakened state the mind and mind alone is prominent. All other āyatanas (sense spheres) have to work in unison with the mind for their proper functioning. He also explains how the Buddha,
kalyāṇamitra, family, enemies etc. function, despite being unreal. In the dream our tasks (karma) have no results (phala). But in the awakened state they do. In dream and all the dream-like states, all consciousness (vijñapti) arises due to middhā (sloth) and ignorance. They arise in a susupta (latent) manner. In the real world all our tasks are guided solely by vijñapti. So while in dream out interaction with the world may not produce any result, the interactions guided by consciousness in the real world do produce genuine results.
Vasuvandhu concludes by stating that he tried proving the “mind-only” through logic alone. But in order to fully comprehend this, words and thoughts are not enough. Yoga (practice) is needed. When this reality is fully understood and realized then one in fact becomes the Buddha.
Conclusion
Here, in brief, the general introduction to the contents and structure of the main Vijñānavādin text, Vijñapti-mātratā-siddhi, by Ācārya Vasuvandhu has been presented along with his short biography. Through twenty-two succinct statements, he has given validity to the mind-only philosophy. By comparing our day-to-day activities with the tasks we perform in our dream he has tried to explain about the illusory nature of this world. Our perception of what we consider the real world has been equated to the sight of a person with visual defects. According to him, ultimately it comes down not to the functionality of the sense faculties but to the nature of the mind. A distinction between the real and unreal has also been given through the usage of karma. That which generates karma is real and has a genuine control of the mind. One can experience actual reality only when one is fully awakened leaving out all mental defilements and ignorance. This is possible only sincere practice. As per Vasuvandhu, only through habitual practice can the true nature of the world be perceived by the mind and once that stage is reached the practitioner becomes a Buddha.
