THE SARVASTIVADA SCHOOL AND THE ABHIDHARMAKOSA SASTRA

2.1 Introduction

Several centuries after passing away of the Buddha, Buddhist communities split into a number of distinct schools. These schools attempted to explain the Buddha’s teachings in various manners and established their own methods to clarify the Buddha’s teachings. Their differing philosophical views resulted in the production of the Abhidharma, the part of the Buddhist Tripitaka (that is, the three bodies of teaching of the Buddha) which deals with philosophy in a detailed way. In his Abhidharmakosa Sastra, one of the most famous Abhidharma compositions, Vasubandhu describes the Abhidharma as pure wisdom (prajha) with its accompanying elements. Wisdom is the discernment of dharma. Wisdom, the object of speculation in the Abhidharma, is then expounded as analytical, systematic understanding of all dharmas. Buddhaghosa, the 5th century Theravada master, explains that the Abhidharma is the instruction in the absolute nature of things. Many Theravada schools later produced Abhidharma compositions in order to represent their theoretical understanding of all dharmas. They also attempted to classify their own doctrinal positions. Among these Abhidharmic schools, the Sarvastivada school was the most influential in India.

This is attested by the fact that the Abhidharmakosa, one of the Sarvastivadins' texts, has been studied as a basic text for Buddhist scholars and students in many countries such as Tibet, China, Japan and Vietnam. This text has been one of the most thoroughly examined works in the history of Buddhism. Therefore, it is said that: “The Abhidharmakosa of Vasubandhu (C. 5th century A.D) is a Buddhistic work well-known for its harmonious synthesis of all the great doctrines accepted in general by all the contemporary schools of Buddhism. The text is looked upon as an authoritative treatise of the Vaibhasikas (specially the Vaibhasikas of Kashmir), but the three other principal schools of Buddhism viz., the Sautrantikas, the Yogacaras and the Mcidhyamikas also are agreeable to accept it in spite of the difference in their sectarian viewpoints. In the

Buddhistic circle much importance has been attached to this text because of the fact that it contains not only the fundamental principles of Buddhism, but also gives an exhaustive and systematic exposition of the Abhidharma doctrines of the ancient schools of Buddhism that came into being within a period of eight hundred years after the Mahaparinirvana of Buddha. It is, therefore, cpiite in the fitness of things that it occupies a place of eminence in the whole range of Buddhistic thought and literature. The Sarvastivada split from the Sthavira. As the name indicates (sarva asti: everything exists), the Sarvastivada school established itself as an independent sect with a distinct philosophical view which had a great impact on the development of Mahayana Buddhism. The Sthavira, otherwise known as the Vibhajyavadin, became the Theravada. Paul

Griffiths evaluates the separation of these two schools in the following manner: “It is certainly true, in any case, that the separation of the Sarvastivada from the school which later became the Theravada was effective from the second century B.C onwards. We know this because the Sutra and Vinaya literature of the Wo schools is substantially identical and must have been based on a common original, whereas the Abhidharma literature of the two schools has only identical parallels, and must therefore have developed independently, subsequent to the separation of the schools.”2 When we refer to the Abhidharma, we often refer to some version of the Sarvastivada Abhidharma, usually the Vaibhasika and the Abhidharmakosa, if reference is specific. The Sarvastivada, like the Theravada, has seven canonical Abhidharma texts. As Paul Griffits mentions, the resemblance of the two bodies of literature, however, indicates only incidental parallels.

However, as we know, the rise and development of various Buddhist schools or sects is shrouded by mystery due to lack of historical evidence. The Sarvastivada school is no exception. In spite of this, there have been scholars such as Bhikkhu KL Dhammajoti, E. Conze and N. Dutt who have made progress in clarifying the history of the Sarvastivada school.4 We will make no attempt here to completely review their works, but instead will refer to the sources available which shed light on this school’s the origin and development as well as its treatise, the Abhidharmakosa Sdstra.

2.2 Buddhism and Its Schools

Buddhism is considered as one of the greatest religions in the world, not only in terms of its worldwide existence, but also due to its great and peaceful Samgha. During the last twenry- six centuries, the invaluable and noble teachings of the Buddha have been applied in many human societies as moral lessons that have helped people solve all their suffering and attain real happiness. Therefore, it is necessary for us to know about the history as well as the development of Buddhism through general introduction to Buddhism, the origin and development of different Buddhist schools.

2.2.1 General Introduction to Buddhism

Buddhism was founded, in the sixth century B.C., by Siddattha Gotama, who became known as the Buddha and spent many years proclaiming his insights into the predicament of the cycle of births and deaths and the route to release into Nirvana.

As a secular man in the world, the Buddha prior to become an enlightened person - a Buddha, he was a prince named Siddhattha. His father was King Suddhodana of Khattiya clan, the aristocratic Sakya tribe with its capital at Kapilavastu. His mother, the Queen Mahamaya, died seven days after the birth of the prince.5 After that, he was raised and brought up by her younger sister - his aunt, Mahdprajdpati Gotami. The prince was bom in circa 566 B.C or 563 B.C6 at the Lumbini Park in Kapilavastu of Northern India, what is now called Nepal.

According to the Discourse of Ndlaka of Suttanipata it is recorded that with the birth of Siddhattha, the Gods were delighted: “That Boddhisatta, excellent jew el incomparable, has been born in the world of men for (their) benefit and happiness in the village of the Sdkyans, in the o Lumbimi country. Therefore we are exultant exceedingly happy." At that time, there was a prophetic sage named Asita who accosted the King Suddhodana’’s mansion and said: “This is one, unsurpassed, is supreme among two-legged (men)’’’ He further added that: “This young prince will reach the highest point of enlightenment. Seeing what is supremely purified having sympathy for the benefit of the great majority, he will turn the wheel of the doctrine. His holy living will be widely famed”9 At the age of sixteen, he married Yasodhara, the most beautiful girl at time and they had a son, named Rdhula. One of the most important events made Siddhattha decide to leave the royal household to live a homeless life was that he saw directly static realities of life. One day the prince went out of the palace to see the outside world. It is said that the first sight, he saw an old man; on the second, he saw a diseased man; on the third, he saw a corpse; and on the fourth, he saw a wandering holy hermit. After seeing these four sights, he realized that the truthful essence of life is suffering, and he decided to leave his throne and become a wandering ascetic monk in search of the truth to cease the suffering. At that time, he was twenty-nine years of age.10

First, he came to a famous teacher named Aidka Kalama. The latter taught him how to attain the meditation of nothingness, the third Arupa Jhana. After a short period of time, he also achieved what Aidka Kalama had it.11 However, since he realized that this dharma was not leading to the cessation of suffering and attaining enlightenment, Nibbana, he abandoned it. Thereafter, he went to another well-known teacher named Uddaka Ramaputta who taught him how to attain meditation of neither perception nor non - perception. Nevertheless, he also forsook this dharma, because it is not a path that leading to the absolute - a truth or Nibbana. Finally, when ascetic Siddhattha was not happy with final overcome of the above teaching, he came to Uruvela near Neranjara river, modem Bodh Gaya, six miles south of Gaya town.

Here he spent six years for practicing rigid austerities with five austerities companions.13 At the end of that time, he realized that body torture is not the best way to attain enlightenment, and he decided to change his path and started taking food again as it is said ‘took material nourishment - boiled rice and sour milk.’14 After having food, the five austerities turned on him in disgust and said: “The recluse Gotama lives in abundance, he is wavering in his striving, he has reverted to a life of abundance.'"15 After taking food again, little by little Siddhattha ascetic formally regained his health and he deeply practised meditation of his own unique middle path, and eventually he attained the Four Trances. Basing on the four meditations, he contemplated deeply and attained three visions of knowledge:

First, he remembered many of his previous lives and their details.

Secondly, he noticed differences in human beings as a result of good or bad Karma in their previous existence.

And finally, he attained the highest knowledge of the destruction of defilement. They are the canker of sense-pleasures, the canker of becoming and the canker of ignorance. The ‘Fear and Dread’ Sutta16 describes the three perfect knowledges in which, the third knowledge, he realized the Four Noble Truths: This is anguish, this is the arising of anguish, this is the stopping of anguish and this is the course leading to the stopping of anguish in the last night of third watch. Siddhattha attained enlightenment under the Boddhi tree and became Buddha when he was thirty-five years old.17

After that the Buddha wanted to preach Dharma for benefit of all human being. He thought about the two of his former teachers - Aidka Kalama, Uddaka Rdmapntta, but both of them had passed away by then. He then decided to go to his former five ascetic companions so as to show them dharma, they were staying in deer park at Isipatana (modern Sarnath) near Benares by that time.

When the Buddha came to Isipatana and met the group of five ascetics. He preached the First Sermon to them, namely: Dhammacakkappavattana. It means “The Wheel of Truth", “The Exposition of the Establishment of Wisdom”, or “The Kingdom of Righteousness”19 The Discourse on the Analysis of the Truths (Saccavibhangnsutta), explains the content of the first sermon as below:

“And what, your reverences, is the ariyan truth of anguish? Birth is anguish and ageing is anguish and dying is anguish; and grief, sorrow, suffering, misery and despair are anguish. And not getting what one desires, that too is anguish. In brief, the five groups of grasping are anguish. And what, your reverences, is the ariyan truth of the arising of anguish? Whatever craving is connected with again-becoming, accompanied by delight and attachment, finding delight in this and that, namely the craving for sense-pleasures, the craving for becoming, the craving for annihilation- this, your reverences, is called the ariyan truth of the arising of anguish.

And what, your reverences, is the ariyan truth of the stopping of anguish? Whatever is the stopping, with no attachment remaining, of that self-same craving, the relinquishment of it casting aside of it, release from it, independence of it this, your reverences, is called the ariyan truth of the stopping of anguish.

And what your reverences, is the ariyan truth of the course leading to the stopping of anguish? It is this ariyan Eightfold Way itself, that is to say: right view, right aspiration, right speech, right action, right mode of livelihood, right endeavour, right mindfulness, right concentration.""

Thus, the Buddha preached the Four Noble Truth: birth, age, decay, death, and the Way leading to cessation of suffering, i.e., the Eightfold Way. It is also called The Middle Way, because these Ways avoid two extremes: self-mortification, self-indulgence and lead to knowledge, insight, enlightenment, and Nibbana.

After hearing this dharma, the five ascetics attained ‘The Eye of Truth" (Dhammacakkhu) and became the first disciples of the Buddha. From here onwards Buddhism has The Buddha, Dharma, and Sangha or Triple Gem. The Buddha is a man that attained Truth, enlightenment-WA/G/za The Dharma is the teachings of the Buddha of the Truth including Tipitaka'. Sutta Pitaka, Vinaya Pitaka and Abhidharma Pitaka. The Sutta contains words of the Buddha to monks, nuns and laypersons and so forth. The IAnaya Pitaka is prescribed to monks and nuns as injunctions for the Order. The Abhidharma Pitaka is interpretations of the Sutta and Vinaya with special attention to the classification of ‘Mind’; and Sangha is the renunciated members of the Order who follow and practice the Buddha’s teachings so that they can attain enlightenment like the Buddha and preach to the lay disciples again what the Buddha taught for human being in order to attain liberation in present life or in future as well.

Ever since the Gotama Buddha attained enlightenment as has been described above, was teaching the Dharma during forty-five long years for the welfare, happiness for living beings until he passed away at Kusinara at the age of eighty-years old. Out of the salient theories of the Dharma, the doctrine of Karma of paramount importance which the author will one after the other introduce in due course.

The Buddha taught a system of ideas that was in stark contrast to the earlier orthodox Vedic tradition, rejecting any reliance on those texts, on the priestly caste (the Brahmins), and on the orthodox depiction of salvation. The Buddha’s system is supposedly based upon observation, both of the world outside him and of the inner workings of his mental world. Crucially, he could not observe an eternal Atman. Instead, he reports as his fundamental discovery that all the ingredients observed obey a general principle of “Dependent Co­arising” (Pratitya-samutpdda). Whatever comes into existence is the causal consequence of previous existents. Causal generation has a complex form where a number of such previous existents produce together the new existent. And each and every existent is momentary.

Thus, the Buddhist idea of Causality and Karma is basically theories concerned with the human world. The human experience in the world, for Buddhism, is that of suffering. And the prime focus of the Buddhist causal and Karma theory is the explanation of human suffering, not principally as a social fact but as an existential feature of human life. Fundamentally, this theory is known as the “Theory of Dependent Co-arising” and it asserts that “any object of experience depends for its existence or occurrence on the necessary and sufficient presence of its cause” 22

The principle of Dependent Co-arising is only one part of the truth (Dharma) which Buddha is said to have discovered intuitively during his supreme experience of enlightenment. The other aspect of the truth is what is called Nirvana. While Dependent Co­arising elucidates the nature of reality and the fundamental relatedness of things, Nirvana deals with the absence of empirical reality, the realization of which leads to cessation of the stream of consciousness. At this point it becomes very imperative to point out that the doctrines of “impermanence” (Anitya), “no self’ (Andtman), and human suffering (Duhkha) are the central themes of Buddhism. The doctrine involved here is that, everything in life is in perpetual flux and subject to the changes which occur through the cycle of birth, growth, decay and death. Thus, “all things are only processes, not entities. Identities are nothing but analyzable sequences and independence, an illusion" .

Therefore, the Buddhist principle of causality and Karma is quite fundamental to Buddhist philosophy. It could be used to explain everything in the universe - including the evolution and dissolution of the world process, natural phenomena. It could be applied to psychic processes, moral, social and spiritual behaviour.

After the death of the Buddha, some differences arose in Buddhist monastic communities; the first schism was that between the Mahasanghika and the Sthavira. The former, the Mahasanghika (meaning ‘great groupists’) were characterized as rather lax in their discipline, and the later, the Sthaviras (meaning ‘elders’) prided themselves on their seniority and orthodoxy. The Mahasanghika developed as Mahayana Buddhism in the second period. The Sthavira became the Theravada. Each of these two groups experienced further sub-divisions; ultimately resulting in the traditional eighteen or twenty schools of thought came into existence. And tensions developed into doctrinal disputes around the time of King Asoka. According to traditional accounts, King Asoka sent Buddhist missionaries to various regions of India and Ceylon. As a result, many Buddhist monastic communities were established in disparate areas. From the edicts of Asoka we know of the various Buddhist missions he sent to far-off countries in Asia, Africa and Europe. It is to a large extent due to these missionary activities that Buddhism became the ruling religion of a large part of mindkind.

2.2.2 The Origin of Different Schools

There were dissensions in the Samgha at the time of the Buddha. Though they did not last long and were resolved by the Buddha, they were still the germs of arising schools later. So, it is necessary for us to learn about this at the time of the Buddha.

a. At the time of the Buddha

During the life time of Gotama Buddha himself there were indications of the existence of some who would not accept his leadership or obey his instructions. The first dissension occurred in a monastery at Kausambi, where a monk committed a breach of discipline. First he regarded it as a breach (dpatti), while others regarded it as a non-breach (anapatti). After some time, however, the situation suffered a reverse change; the former began to regard it as a non-breach for he committed it through ignorance of the Law, while the latter regarded it as a breach. The monks attached undue gravity to the offence and punished him by excommunication or ukkhepana. The accused, on the other hand, ascribed the breach to his ignorance, which did not make him liable to such a severe punishment. The justifiability of the cause won him several supporters, who tried to have his penalty set aside. This caused a division not only among the monks but also among the laity, which ultimately led to the Buddha’s mediation. At first some monks even refused to accept the mediation of their Master, and although the dissension did not last long owing to the presence of the Buddha, who removed the doubts of both the parties by his lucid exposition of the Vinaya, yet it indicates the presence of the germs of dissensions, which bore fruits of far-reaching consequences in later times.

The second division was brought about by the Buddha’s cousin, Devadatta, who, out of jealousy for the Buddha, conspired with Ajatasatru and made attempts on his life. He also tried to create division in the Sangha by demanding the introduction of stricter conditions of life for the monks. He advocated that the monks should:

1. Live all their life in the forest; 2. Subsist solely on doles collected out-doors (pindapatika\ and the acceptance of an invitation should be regarded as a breach; 3. Dress themselves in rags picked out of the dust-heaps (pdmsukulika), and the use of the robes (chvara) given by thelay-followeis should be regarded as a breach; 4. Dwell always under the trees (rukkha-mula) and never under a roof; and 25 5. Never eat fish or meat.

The Buddha refused to make the observance of these rules obligatory upon all the monks, as in his view it would be more conducive to their welfare to make these rules optional. Devadatta took this opportunity to create a division in the Sangha and with his five hundred followers broke from the Order. It seems that this secession of Devadatta from the Order gave rise to a sect, which existed upto the fourth century A.D., and a remnant of which was still to be found in three Sangharamas of Karnasuvarna in the seventh century A.D. These two instances of division in the Order during the Buddha’s life-time show that the Buddhist Brotherhood could not keep itself intact in spite of his impressive personality and his efforts to prevent the division from finding its way into the Sangha.

These dissentient tendencies became stronger with the death of the Buddha, who, left no one to replace him as the supreme authority and told his personal attendant Ananda that the Dharma and the Vinaya would be the supreme authority in future.26 Different Buddhist Councils were held from time to time to settle the disputes that arose among monks after the demise of Buddha with regard to the interpretation of the principles of the Dharma and Vinaya. These led to the origin of as many as twenty schools or more within a few hundred years of the Parinirvdna of the Buddha, all claiming to have preserved, his original teachings.

b. The First Buddhist Council

The First Council was held at Saptaparni cave in Rajagrha in the second month of the first rainy season, about 90 days after the Parinirvdna of the Buddha and was supported by King Ajatasattu. It is accepted by critical scholarship that the First Council settled the Dharma and the Vinaya and there is no ground for the view that the Abhidharma formed part of the canon adopted at the First Council. It is held that Mahakassapa presided over the assembly in which Upali and Ananda took an important part. There was seldom dissension over doctrinal matters but the Council was necessitated by the pious determination of the disciples of the Lord to preserve the purity of his teaching. It is asserted in the Cullavagga that Mahakassapa was not present at the Mahaparinirvana of the Buddha at Kushinagara. While he was proceeding from Pava to Kushinagara with a large retinue, the news of the decease of the Master was brought to him by a naked ascetic of the Ajivika sect. It is recorded that a Thera called Subhadra, who had joined the Order in old age (Vuddhapabbajita), on hearing of the Buddha’s demise said, "they were well-freed from the Great Ascetic and could now do or not do as they liked;" and exhorted the monks, who were lamenting for their Master, to refrain from expressing grief."

This irreverent remark filled the Venerable Mahakassapa with alarm for the future safety and purity of the Dharma preached by the Master. This remark of Subhadda was a clear indication of the necessity of convening a Council for the fulfillment of this noble objective. It may be observed in this connection that Subhadra was not the only person to have such thoughts. There were many others who felt that with the passing of the Master the Dharma, he had taught, would disappear. The account in the Tibetan Dulva and also that of Yuan Chwang refer to this general feeling of doubt and consternation as having been the

motive for the convocation of the First Council. There is general agreement that the number of the monks selected was five hundred. “The procedure followed at the Council was a simple one. With the permission of the Sangha, the Venerable Mahakassapa asked questions on the Vinaya of the Venerable Updli. All these questions related to the four Parajikas, the matter, the occasion, the individual concerned, the principal rule, the amended rule as well as to the question as to who would be guilty and who innocent of these Parajikas. In this way the Vinaya text was agreed upon at the Council.

The turn of Ananda came next. The subj ect matter of the Sutra-pitaka, in all the five Nikayas, was formulated as questions for Ananda who gave appropriate answers. These questions followed the lines adopted in those on the Vinaya - the occasion of the sermons and the person or persons with reference to whom they were given. The answers given by Ananda settled the corpus of Sutra-pitaka."

We know that Ananda told the Council that before his departure into Nirvana the Buddha had instructed him that if the Sangha so wished, it could abrogate the minor rules. Ananda had however, forgotten to ask the Master what these minor rules were, and as Mahakassapa pointed out that the people would say that the Buddha had laid a code which was followed by the monks so long as the former was alive and discarded as soon as he expired, the Council decided to retain the Vinaya intact.

Thus the proceedings of the First Council achieved the settlement of the Vinaya under the leadership of Upali and the settlement of the texts of the Dharma under the leadership of Ananda. However Prof. Oldenberg is sceptical about the historical authenticity of the First Council. The irreverent remark of Snbhadra is also found in the Mahdparinibbana-sntta, but there is not the slightest allusion to the holding of the Council. This doubt based on omission is at best an argumentum ex silentio. The unanimous tradition among all the schools of Buddhism cannot therefore be brushed aside as a pious fabrication. In spite of the minor discrepancies there is a substantial core of agreement regarding the convention of the First Council, which was a logical and ecclesiastical necessity. It was natural that the creed of the Order should be determined in a systematic way after the passing of the Master. Fortunately, Prof. Oldenberg appears to plough a lonely furrow. Scholars, both Eastern and Western, are all united in their rejection of this scepticism.30

c. The Second Buddhist Council

The Ceylonese Chronicles place the Council at Vaisali in the tenth year of the Saisunaga king Kalasoka, a century after the passing away of the Buddha. The reason for convening the Second Council is stated to lie in the following ten indulgences (Dasavatthuni) which the Vaisalian monks had permitted themselves, but were condemned by Yasas, the son of Kakandaka and other Western and Southern monks:

1. SingHonakappa. or the custom of putting salt in a horn vessel, in order to season unsalted foods, when received, which is contrary to pachittiya 38, prohibiting the storage of food. 2. Dvahgulakappa, or the custom of taking mid-day meal, even after the prescribed time, as long as the sun’s shadow had not passed the meridian by more than two fingers’ breadth. This is againstpachittiya 37. 3. Gamantarakappa, or the practice of going into some other village after meal, and there eating again, if invited, which is opposed topachittiya 35. 4. Avdsakappa. or the practice of holding Uposatha-feast separately by the monks dwelling in the same parish, which contravenes the Vinaya rules of- residence in a parish. 5. Anumatikappa, or carrying out official acts by an incomplete assembly on the supposition that the consent of the absent monks would be obtained afterwards. 6. Achinnakappa, or the practice of doing something because of the preceptor’s practice. 7. Amathitakappa, or taking butter-milk even after meal-time, which is against pachittiya 35 forbidding over-eating. 8. Jalogikappa, or drinking toddy, which is opposed to pachittiya 51 prohibiting the use of intoxicants. 9. Adasakam nisidanam, or the use of mats which are not of prescribed size, if they were without fringe, which contravenes pachittiya 89. \Q.Jdtarilparajatarii, or accepting gold and silver which is against the rule 18 of the Nissaggiyapdchittiya31

According to the orthodox monks these ten points were opposed to the rules of Vinaya. The monks from the Western regions like Pava, Kausambi and Avanti disapproved these practices and brought this matter before the meeting of 700 monks under the presidency of Revata. These ten points for discussion were interpreted differently by different scholars. As it could not be decided in an open meeting the matter came to sub­committee of which four members represented each side. Matter was decided against the Vajjian monks who did not accept the verdict. Thus a very large body of monks seceded from original group and styled themselves as the Mahasamghikas (members of great group) which claimed superiority in numbers or in its keenness in reforming the existing state of affairs and improving upon the conservative attitude exhibited by the orthodox group of monks who came to be called Sthaviravddins or Theravadins from Sthavira or Thera which in Pali means old or senior.

Both the Southern and the Northern traditions agree on the point that the Ten Practices of the Vajjian monks were the starting point of the great movement which in due course divided the Original Sangha into two principal schools - Theravada and Mahdsanghika. these were further sub-divided into numerous sects and sub-sects. In regard to the details, however, there is some discrepancy between different traditions. In the Tibetan tradition only the last four practices agree with those preserved in the Southern tradition.32 Yuan Chwang also mentions the ten points but, differing from the Pali tradition, states that the Vajjian monks renounced all their deviations from the orthodox rules of discipline and followed those that were approved by the Second Council. Together with Bhavya, Vasumitra, Vimtadeva and Tdrdnatha he traces the origin of the Mahdsanghika school to the five points enunciated by Mahcideva, which are as follows:

1. An Arhat may commit a sin by unconscious temptations. 2. One may be an Arhat and not know it. 3. An Arhat may have doubts on matters of doctrine. 4. One cannot attain Arhathood without the help of a preceptor. 5. The noble ways may begin by a shout, i.e. one meditating seriously on religion may make such an exclamation as ‘How sad! How sad! and by so doing attain progress towards the perfection - the path is attained by an exclamation of astonishment.

In short, once the unity and solidarity of the Buddhist Sangha was broken, there set in the process of further sub-divisions. During the 2nd and 3rd centuries after the death of Buddha with the result of different Councils which led to different interpretations of the same rule of Vinaya and Dharma as much as twenty schools appeared from two main subdivisions each school claiming to have preserved original teachings of the master.

d. The Third Buddhist Council

The Third Council was held at Pataliputra under the patronage of the celebrated Buddhist monarch, Priyadarsi Asoka who was won over to the Buddhist faith within a few years of his accession to the throne. The adoption of the faith by Asoka ushered a new era in the fortunes of Buddhism. His lavish patronage and well-planned strenuous missionary activity transformed what was so far a regional sect into an international religion.

We learn from the Pali tradition that in order to enjoy his generous largesse, heretics were in a large number attracted towards the Buddhist Order, with their own doctrines and precepts, which they propagated in the name of the Buddha. The true believers could not prevent them on account of their large number from preaching their false doctrines. The Uposatha and the Pavarana ceremonies also could not be held for seven years. In order to settle the dispute and to bring about a situation in which the Uposatha could be performed, Asoka dispatched a minister to the Sangha. However, he misunderstood the emperor’s intention and beheaded several monks, who were true believers of the doctrine. On hearing of this news, Asoka was much grieved, and he sent for Moggaliputta Tissa, the great Thera of that time, who declared that Asoka was not responsible for the offence.

Under him an assembly was convened at Asokarama, in the 18th regnal year of Asoka (256 B. C.) or 236 years after the Buddha’s death. The Bhikkhus were one by one asked as to what the teachings of the Buddha were. Those who sided with Vibhajyavada were allowed to remain, and those with views contrary to it were driven out after being clad in white robes. Then the Uposatha could be performed. In this very assembly Moggaliputta Tissa is said to have compiled the Kathdvattkuppakarana refuting the doctrines that were, according to him, contrary to the teachings of the Buddha-Theravada.34 Thus ended the Third Council in which a thousand Bhikkhus took part. Although the only source from which our knowledge regarding the Third Council is derived is the Ceylonese Chronicles, yet there is no reason to doubt its historicity, which receives partial confirmation from some inscriptions. One of the momentous results of this Council was the despatch of missionaries to the different countries of the world for

the propagation of the Saddhamma such as in Kashmir and Gandhara, Mahisha-mandala, Vanavasi, Apardntak, Mahctrctshra. Yavana country, Suvarnabhiimi, Himavanta region and Lanka. Mahindra, the son of Asoka, and Satighamitrd, his daughter, were charged with missionary work in the island of Ceylon. We have already mentioned the singular success of this mission in that island. From the edicts of Asoka we know of the various Buddhist missions he sent to far-off countries in Asia, Africa and Europe. It is to a large extent due to

these missionary activities that Buddhism became the ruling religion of a large part of mankind. The Dipavamsa (VIII. 10) gives the names of the five missionaries sent to the Himalayan region as Kassapagota, Majjhima, Dumdubhissara, Sahadeva and Mulakadeva. Two of these missionaries, Kassapagota and Majjhima, are referred to in the short ins­criptions engraved on the caskets containing their bodily relics discovered from the Stupas at Sanchi and Sonari. Kassapagota is styled ‘Saca-Hema- vatachariya’, i. e. teacher of the whole community of the Haimavatas. The Haimavata Schools of Theravada obviously originated in the Himalayan region under the inspiring guidance of the missionaries sent there by the Third Council, especially Kassapagota. The name of the third missionary Dumdubhissara also appears as Dudubhisara in a relic-casket label from Sonari Stupa No. 2. As this Council is not mentioned in the Northern tradition, it seems certain that it was attended by the Theravadins alone.35

In short, at the time of Asoka several schools were existing but the Buddhism in vogue was Theravada though Mahasamghikas also had influence. During his time the Third Council was held. It is said that monks other than Theravadins had to leave Magadha and went to Kashmir-Gandhdra. They occupied a prominent place there and later on came to be known as the Sarvdstivddins. An account of the flight of the Theravadins from Magadha to Kashmir is recorded in Abhidharmamahdvibhdsdsdstra and Hiuen tsangA records of the Western Land. It can be said that the Theravada and the Sarvastivada attained sufficient importance during the days of Asoka and Kaniska. Both of them are of outstanding importance for the history of Buddhism in India and abroad. Adherents of the schools could produce a vast literature and with the royal patronage brought the Buddhism to the forefront of Indian religions. The geographical distribution of the schools also throws light on their development. The Sarvdstivddins were chiefly confined to Northern India their chief seat being Kashmir and the Theravadins to Magadha and Kosala. Dr. N. Datta says, "The Sarvastivada had its sphere of activity in Northern India extending from Kashmir to Mathura and was responsible for the propagation of Hinayana Buddhism in Central Asia from where it was earned to China.”36

2.2.3 The Development of Buddhist Schools

There are differences about the number of schools among Buddhist traditions. So, it is necessary for us to discuss the different traditions of the development of Buddhist schools here.

a. Different Traditions of the Development of Buddhist Schools

Both the Southern and the Northern traditions mention several schools, most of which are stated to have arisen in the second century after the Buddha’s death. Their standard number is eighteen, but many more are referred to and the Ceylonese Chronicles supply the list and a brief account of the rise of the seventeen Buddhist schools from the Theravada. According to the Mahavamsa the origin of the different sects may be shown in a tabular form thus: served in the Bstanhgyur. which contains the work of Bhavya. Vasumitra and Vimtadeva. Bhavya first distinguishes the first two schools: (I) the Sthaviravada and (II) the Mahdsanghika.

The Sthaviravada school gradually divided itself into twelve fractions which are as follows: (1) The Sthavira proper, also known as the Haimavata, (2) the Sarvastivddina (3) the Vaibhajyavddina, (4) the Hetuvidya or Muduntaka or Maruntaka, (5) Vatslputrlya, (6) the Dharmottariya, (7) the Bhadrdyanlya, (8) the Sammatiya, which is also known as Avantaka or Kurukullaka, (9) the Mahlsdsaka, (10) the Dharmaguptaka, (11) the Saddharmavarshaka, or Suvar shaka, or Kdsyaplya, and (12) the Uttariya or the Sahkrdntivddina.

The Mahdsdnghika school was gradually divided into eight fractions:

(1) the Mahdsdnghika proper, (2) the Ekavyavaharika, (3) the Lokottaravadina, (4) the Bahusrutlya, (5) the Prajnaptivddind (Pradshnaptivddind), (6) the Tchaityika, (7) the Purvasasaila, and (8) the Avarasaila;

Two main groups as said above split into twenty sects as Yuan Chwang’s translation of Vasumitra’s book indicates the emergence of schools approximately a century after the death of Buddha.

Mahdsdnghika was divided into 9 more schools:

(1) Ekavyavahdrikas, (2) Lokottaravadins, (3) Kukkutiyas, (4) Bahusrutlyas, (5) Prajhaptivddins, (6) Mula- Mahdsdmghikas, (7) Caitya-Sailas, (8) Apara-Sailas, and (9) Ullara-Sadas,

Sthctviravddiris split up into two main schools, Haimavata and Sarvastivadin, in third century and then at the end of third and in fourth century 9 more schools were sprang up:

(1) Vdtslputrlyas, (2) Dharmottariyas, (3) Bhadrdyanlkas, (4) Sammltiyas, (5) Sannagdrikas, (6) the Mahlsasakas, (7) Dharmaguptas, (8) Kdsyapiyas also called Srdvakas, (9) Sautratikas.

Some other versions of Vasumitra’s work do not agree with the above and we find difference in the development of schools.38

According to Mahayana scriptures in Chinese twenty schools were developed as follows: Sthaviravada (_EllEn|5) was split into 11 sects. These were: Sarvastivadin (I^EMhE), Haimavata (KlW), Vatslputrlya (WtFM Dharmottara (1£±§|5), Bhadrayanlya (RWh^), Sammitlya (jEit§P), Channagirika (^#U1 §|5), Mahisasaka (<E±fi§|5), Dharmaguptaka (^O§|5), Kdsyaplya (I^tW), Sautrdntika (^fi§|5). Mahdsamghika (bka^§|5) was split into 9 sects. There were: Ekavyaharika (^§|5), Lokottaravddin (BfEtt^), Gokulika (BJ#L§P), Bahusrutlya (^-^§|5), Prajhaptivada (lilt fE p|S), Caitika ($!|111 §|5), Aparasaila (® |T|{i§|5), and Uttarasaila (-IL111 El i EE).39

Hindu and Jaina philosophical works mention only four schools from two main branches Hinayana and Mahayana namely the former is divided into Vaibhasika and Sautrantika and later into Madhyamika and Yogacara. In Buddhist tradition the Vaibhasikas were so called on account of their dependence on Vibhasa (Commentary on the Abhidharma). They attached themselves exclusively to the Abhidharmapitaka and refused to accept the authority of the Sutrapitaka and Vinciyapitaka, as Santrdnlikas for recognizing the Sutras, the Madhyamikas for laying emphasis on Madhyama Pratipada only as authoritative, The Yogacara were known as the Vijnanavadins on account of their holding Vijhana as ultimate reality. Vaibhasika school was at first known as the Sarvastivada, The Vaibhasikas were considered to be continuators of the earlier Sarvastivadins. “In later times the so-called Vaibhasikas came to be identified with the Sarvastivadins, the two names became interchangeable although properly speaking the Sarvastivadins originally formed a section of the Vaibhasika ”40

According to Ceylonese tradition Buddhism was divided into two primitive schools. Theravada and Mahdsamghika while according to Bhikshuvara Sagraprccha and records of I- tsing there were four original schools (1) Arya-Mulasarvastivada, (2) Arya-Mahdsamghika, (3) Arya-Sammitiya and (4) Arya-Sthavira. Traditions differ with regard to origin and development of schools but history tells us that except Vaibhasika, Sautrantika, Madhyamika and Yogacara all disappeared shortly after their appearance. These schools have their adherents in large numbers.41

b. The Account of the Different Schools

It is not possible to give an account of all the different schools. Only a few important ones among these will therefore be considered as follows:

The Sthaviravada School=

The Sthaviravada School is the most orthodox school of Buddhism. The earliest available teaching of the Buddha to be found in Pali literature belongs to this school which admits the human character of the Buddha and he is often represented as having human foibles, though he is recognized as possessing certain superhuman qualities. The life of an Arhat is the ideal of the followers of this school, a life where all (future) birth is at an end, where the holy life is fully achieved, where all that had to be done has been done, and there is no more return to worldly life.

Following this school we are taught to abstain from all kinds of evil, to accumulate all that is good and to purify our mind. These things can be accomplished by the practice of what are called Sila, Samadhi, and Prajha. Moreover, we are also taught the Four Noble Truths and the Law of Dependent Co-arising, which tries to explain the phenomenon of life by showing the interrelation of causal relation. Karma, the actions of an individual, regulates all life, and the whole universe is bound by it, so that Karma is like the axle of a rolling chariot.

According to this school all worldly phenomena are subject to three characteristics: Anitya (impermanent); Duhkha (sufferings); and Anatma (no-self). All compound things are made up of two elements: Nama (the non-material part) and Rupa (the material part). They are further described as consisting of nothing but five constituent groups (skandhas), namely, Rupa (the material quality), and four non-material qualities - sensation (Vedana), perception (Samjha), mental formatives (Samskara), and lastly consciousness (Vijnana). These elements are also classified into twelve organs and objects of sense (Ayalana) and eighteen Dhatus. The twelve sense (Ayatana) consist of the six internal organs of sense - the eye, the ear, the nose, the tongue, the body and the mind corresponding six objects of sense, namely, material objects, sounds, smells, tastes, tangibles and those things that can be apprehended only by the mind (dharmayatana). The eighteen Dhatus include six consciousnesses and twelve Ayatanas i.e. eye-consciousness, ear-consciousness, nose­consciousness, tongue-consciousness, body-consciousness and mind-consciousness.

Thus, this school has a pluralistic conception of the constituent elements of the universe. The number of the constituents increases gradually from two to five, then to twelve, and finally to eighteen. This number increases still further in the case of other schools. According to Pali sources, at the Council of Pataliputra, the teachings of this school were certified to be those of the Vibhajyavada school.

The Mahtsasaka School

According to Pali sources, this school branched off from the Sthaviravada school and gave rise to the Sarvastivada school while Vasumitra tells that this school was derived from the Sarvastivada school. Like the Theravada, the earlier Mahlsdsaka school believed in the simultaneous comprehension of truths and thought that the past and the future did not exist, while the present and the nine Asamskrta Dharmas did.

These nine Asamskrta Dharmas were “

(1) Pratisankhya-Nirodha, cessation through knowledge; (2) Apratisankhya- Nirodha, cessation without knowledge, i.e. through the natural cessation of the causes; (3) Akasa, space; (4) Anenjata, immovability; (5) Kusala-dharma-lalhald: (6) Akusala- dharma-lalhalct. and (7) Avyakrla-dharma-tathatd. that is, suchness of the dharmas that are meritorious, unmeritorious and neither the one nor the other; (8) Margaringa-tathatcy and (9) Pratitya-samutpada-tathata, or suchness of the factors of the Path and suchness of the Law of Dependent Co-arising. The last corresponds to that in the list of the Mahasanghikas

The Mahtsasakas also believed that “the Arhats were not subject to retrogression. However, they held that those who were in the first stage, srotapannas, were subject to such retrogression. No deva or god could lead a holy life, nor a heretic attain miraculous powers. There was no antard-bhdva. or interim existence between this life and the next. The Sangha included the Buddha and therefore charities given to the former were more meritorious than those given to the Buddha only. Of the eight factors of the Noble Eightfold Path, Right Speech, Right Action and Right Livelihood were not to be considered real factors since they were not mental actions. These were therefore to be excluded from the factors of the Noble Path.”43

Like the Sarvastivada school, they believed in the existence of the past, the future and Anlard-Bhdva. and held that the Skandhas. the Ayatanas and the Dhatus always existed in the form of seeds.

The Haimavata School

The very name suggests that the Haimavata school was originally located in the Himalayan regions. In his book on the Eighteen Sects, Vasumitra calls the Haimavatas the inheritors of the Sthaviravadins, but Bhavya and Vimtadeva look upon this school as a branch of the Mahasanghikas. The Haimavatas believed that the Bodhisattvas had no special eminence, the gods could not live the holy life of Brahmacharya and heretics could not have miraculous powers.

The Dharmaguptika School

The Dharmaguptika school broke away from the Mahisasaka school. This school proffered gifts to the Buddha and greatly revered the Stupas of the Buddha as is clear from their rules of the Vinaya. Like the Mahisasakas, they believed that an Arhat was free from passion and heretics could not gain supernatural powers. This school was popular in Central Asia and China, and had its own Sutra, Vinaya and Abhidharma literature.

The Kasyapiya School

According to the Ceylonese chronicles this school branched off from the Sarvastivada school before the time of Asoka while the Tibetan tradition informs us that the school derived from its founder KaiyapaAA The Kasyapiyas differed on minor points from the Sarvastivadins and the Dharmaguptikas and were closer to the Sthaviravddins. Therefore, they are also called the Sthavariyas. The Kasyapiyas believed that “the past which has borne fruit ceases to exist, but that which has not yet ripened continues to exist, thus partially modifying the position of the Sarvastivadins, for whom the past also exists like the present. The Kasyapiyas are sometimes represented as having effected a compromise between the Sarvastivadins and the Vibhajyavadins and also claim a Tripitaka of their own.”45

The Sautrantika School

According to Pali sources the school of the Sankrantivada school is derived from the Kasyapiya school and the Sautrantikas school from that of the Sankrantivada school, while according to Vasumitra the two are identical. This school believed in sankranti or the transmigration of a substance from one life to another. Among the five skandhas of an individual, this school believed that there is only one subtle skandha which transmigrates, as against the whole of the pudgala of the Sammitiyas. This subtle skandha according to the Kasyapiya school is the real pudgala. The latter is the same as the subtle consciousness which permeates the whole body according to the Mahasanghikas, and is identical with the dlaya- vijhana of the Yogacarins. It is possible that this school borrowed its doctrine of subtle consciousness from the Mahasanghikas and lent it to the Yogacara school. It also believed that every man had in him the potentiality of becoming a Buddha, a doctrine of the Mahayanists. On account of such views his school is considered to be a bridge between the Sravakayana often, though not justifiably, called the Hinayana and the Mahayana ”46

The Mahasanghika School

The Mahasafighikas were the earliest seceders, and the forerunners of the Mahayana. This had a complete canon of their own which they divided into five parts, viz. the Sutra, the Vinaya, the Abhidharma. the Dharanis and Miscellaneous. The Vinaya of the Mahasafighikas is the same as that compiled at MahdkassapaA Council. The original work of the Mahasanghika sect available to us is the Mahavastu, which is written partly in Sanskrit and partly in Prakrit or mixed Indian dialect allied to Sanskrit. The work was probably composed between the 2nd century B.C. and the 4th century A.D.

During the second century after the Buddha’s passing away, the Mahasanghika school was split up into Ekayvaharika, Lokottaravada, Kukkuhika (Gokulika), Bahusrutlya and Prajhaptivada and shortly afterwards appeared the Saila schools. The general doctrines of the Mahasafighikas with all their branches are contained in the Kathavatthu, the Mahavastu and the works of Vasumilra, Bhavya and Vimtadeva. The Bahusrutiyas and the Caityakas were later offshoots of the Mahasanghika school and differed somewhat from the original Mahasafighikas in their views.

The Mahdsanghikas, like the Theravadins, accepted the cardinal principles of Buddhism such as the Four Noble Truths, the Eightfold Path, the non-existence of the soul, the theory of Karma, the theory of Pratitya samutpada, the thirty-seven Bodhipaksiya- dharmas, and the gradual stages of spiritual advancement. Both Mahasanghika and Theravada accepted that “the Buddhas are Lokottara (supramundane); they have no Sasrava Dharmas (defiled elements); their bodies, their length of life and their powers are unlimited; they neither sleep nor dream; they are self-possessed and always in a state of Samadhi (meditation); they do not preach by name; they understand everything in a moment (Ekaksanika-Citta)-, until they attain Parinirvdna, the Buddhas possess Ksayajhana (knowledge of decay) and Anutpadajhdna (knowledge of non-origination). In short, everything concerning the

Buddhas is transcendental.”47 The Mahasanghika conception of the Buddhas contributed to the growth of the later Trikdya theory in Mahayana and gave rise to the conception of the Bodhisattvas. According to them, the Bodhisattvas are also supramundane, and do not pass through the four embryonic stages of ordinary beings. They enter their mother’s wombs in the form of white elephants and come out of the wombs on the right side. They never experience feelings of lust (Kama), malevolence (Vyapada) or injury (Vihimsa). For the benefit of all classes of sentient beings, they are born of their own free will in any form of existence they choose.48 We can see that all these conceptions led to the deification of the Buddhas and Bodhisattvas. This school also maintains that “Arhats also have frailties; that they can be taught by others; that they still have a degree of ignorance, and a degree of doubt; and that they can acquire knowledge only with the help of others. Thus, Arhathood is not the final stage ofsanctification.^

The Bahusrutiya School

The Bahusrutiya school is later branch of the Mahasanghikas. It owes its origin to a teacher who was very learned in Buddhist lore (Bahusrutla). This school believed that “the teachings of the Buddha concerning Anityata (impermanence), Duhkha (suffering), Sunya (the absence of all attributes), Anatman (the non-existence of the soul), and Nirvana (the final bliss) were Lokottara (transcendental), since they led to emancipation. His other teachings were Laukika (mundane).”50 And they also accepted the five propositions of Mahadeva as their views. From this conception the Bahusrutiyas may be regarded as the precursors of the later Mahayana teachers.

The Bahusrutiyas are often described as A bridge between the orthodox and the Mahayana school’, as they tried to combine the teachings of both. Like the followers of the orthodox schools, he believed in the plurality of the universe which, according to him, contained eigthy-four elements. Like the Mahayanists, he maintained that there were two kinds of truth - conventional (samvrti) and absolute (paramdrtha). He believed in the theory of Buddha-kdya as well as of Dharma-kdya, which he explains as consisting of good conduct (Sila), concentration (Samadhi), insight (Prajna), deliverance (Vimukti) and knowledge of and insight into deliverance (Vimukti Jhdna-Darsana). Although he did not recognize the absolute transcendental nature of the Buddha, he still believed in the special powers of the Buddha, such as the ten powers (Dasa Baldni) and the four kinds of confidence (Vaisaradya) which are admitted even by the Sthaviravddins. He believed that only the present was real, while the past and the future had no existence.51

The Caityavada School

The Caityavada school originated with the teacher Mahadeva towards the close of the second century after the passing away of the Buddha. Mahadeva was a learned and diligent ascetic who received his ordination in the Mahasanghika Sangha. He professed the five points of the Mahasaaghikas, and started a new Sangha. Since he dwelt on the mountain where there was a Caitya, the name Caityaka was given to his adherents. Furthermore, this name is also mentioned in the Amaravati and Nagarjunakonda inscriptions. It may be noted here that Caityavada was the source of the Saila schools.

Generally speaking, the Caityavada school shared the fundamental doctrines of the original Mahasanghika school, but differed somewhat from Mahasanghika in their views. Specially, the doctrines attributed to the Caityavada school are as follows:

(i) . One can acquire great merit by the creation, decoration, and worship of Caityas, even a circumambulation of Caityas engenders merit. (ii) . Offerings of flowers, garlands and scents to Caityas are likewise meritorious. (iii) . By making gifts one can acquire religious merit, and can also transfer such merit to one’s friends and relatives for their happiness - a conception quite unknown in primitive Buddhism but, common in Mahayanism. These articles of faith made Buddhism popular among the laity. (iv) . The Buddhas are free from attachment, ill-will and delusion (jita-raga-dosa- moha), and possessed of finer elements (dhatuvara- parigahita). They are superior to Arhats by virtue of the acquisition of ten powers (balas). (v) . A person having samyak-drsti (the right view) is not free from hatred (dvesa) and, as such, not free from the danger of committing the sin of murder. (vi) . Nirvana is positive, faultless state (amaiadhaiuj

The Madhyamika School

The Madhyamika school is said to have originated with the teacher, Arya Nagarjuna (2nd century A.D.) who was followed by a galaxy of Madhyamika thinkers, such as Aryadeva (3rd century), Buddhapalita (5th century), Bhavaviveka (5th century), Candrakirti (6th century) and Santideva (7th century). The term Madhyamika was so called because it emphasis on madhyama-pratipat (the middle view). Nagarjuna wrote a number of works of which the Madhyamika-karika is regarded as his masterpiece. It presents in a systematic manner the philosophy of the Madhyamika school. It teaches that Sunyatd (the indescribable absolute) is the absolute. There is no difference between Samsara (phenomenal world) and Nirvana or Sunyatd (reality). The Madhyamika view holds Sunyatd to be the central idea of its philosophy and is therefore designated the Sunyavada.

The Madhyamika was divided into two schools of thought towards the beginning of the 5th century A.D. They are: the Prasahgika school and the Svatantra school. “The Prasahgika school uses the method of reductio ad absurdum to establish its thesis, while the Svatantra school employs independent reasoning. The former was founded by Buddhapalita and the latter by Bhavaviveka” The Madhyamika philospphy spread in China and Japan. T’ien-t’ai and San-lun sects of China advocated the doctrine of Sunyata and were thus a continuation of the Indian Madhyamika system. The Sanron sect in Japan also followed this system.

The Yogacara School

The Yogacara school is an important branch of the Mahayana, and was founded by Maitreya, or Maitreyanatha (3rd century A.D.). The teachers of this school were Asahga (4th century), Vasubandhu (4th century), Sthiramti (5th century), Dinnaga (5th century), Dharmapdla (7th century), Dharmakirti (7th century), Sdntaraksita (8th century) and Kamalasila (8th century) who continued the work of the founder by their writings and raised the school to a high level. The school reached the acme of its power and influence in the days of Asahga and his brother, Vasubandhu. The appellation Yogacara was given by Asahga because it emphasized the practice of Yoga (meditation) as the most effective method for the attainment of the highest truth (Bodhi). All the ten stages of spiritual progress (dasabhumi) of Bodhisattvahood had to be passed through before Bodhi could be attained. The term Vijhanavdda was used by Vasubandhu on account of the fact that it holds Vijhaptimatra (nothing but consciousness) to be the ultimate reality. The Lahkavatdra-sutra, an important work of this school, maintains that only the mind (Cittamatra) is real, while external objects are not. Vasubandhu’s Vijnaptimatrata-siddhi is the basic work of this system. It repudiates all belief in the reality of the objective world, maintaining that Citta (Cittamatra) or vijhana (Vijhdnamatra) is the only reality, while the Alayavijhdna contains the seeds of phenomena, both subjective and objective.

The Yogacara recognizes three degrees of knowledge: parikalpita (illusory), paratantra (empirical), and parinispanna (absolute). Parikalpita is the false attribution of an imaginary idea to an object produced by its cause and conditions. It exists only in one’s imagination and does not correspond to reality. Paratantra is the knowledge of an object produced by its cause and conditions. This is relative knowledge and serves the practical purposes of life. Parinispanna is the highest truth or tathata, the absolute. Parikalpita and paratantra correspond to samvrti- satya (relative truth), and parinispanna to paramartha- satya (highest truth) of the Madhyamika system. Thus the Yogdcara has three varieties of knowledge for two of the Madhyamika.

The Yogacara differs from the Madhyamika only in that it attributes qualities to reality. The former holds that reality is pure consciousness (Vijhdnamatra) while the latter believes it is Sunyata

2.3 The Sarvastivada School

The Sarvastivada school was one of the so-called Eighteen Schools of early Buddhism. The term Sarvastivada is also used to designate the body of doctrine and literature associated with this community. The Sarvastivada was the only school besides the Theravada that was known to have had a complete canon of their own in Sanskrit in three divisions: Sutra, Vinaya and Abhidharma. This body of literature is an important source for the study of the so-called Hlnaydna schools, eclipsed in this respect only by that of the Theravada tradition. In order to understand the Sarvastivada school clearly, we will present general history, the explanation of the name and the Abhidharma literature of this school in turn.

2.3.1 General History

In the history of the secession of schools the Sarvastivada branched off from the Theravada, the most orthodox school of Buddhism. The Dipavamsa records that the Sarvastivada branched off from the Mahisasaka, a branch of orthodox group, the Theravada. It was also known as the Vaibhasika on account of its relying on the Vibhasas (commentaries) - the fundamental works of the Sarvastivada school and specially the Mahavibhdsdsdstra, an encyclopaedia of Buddhist philosophy. Yamakami Sogen writes that: later times the so-called Vaibhasikas came to be identified with the Sarvastivadins; and the two names became mutually interchangeable although, properly speaking, the Sarvastivadins originally formed a section of the Vaibhashikas ,”55

There is, however, a tradition that the Sarvastivada school was divided into seven sects Millasarvastivada, Kasyapiya, Mahisasaka, Dharmagupta, Bahusrutiya, Tdmrasatiya and Vibhajjavada.

The Sanskrit tradition speaks of King Asoka’s support to the Sarvastivada school towards the later part of his life. Asoka, apprehending that the Theravada school might be supplanted by the new sects which had seceded from it, convened a Council under the guidance of Moggaliputta Tissa, the leader of the orthodox school (Theravada). The monks, who subscribed to the views of the Theravada, were recognised as orthodox and the rest as unorthodox. The unorthodox monks left Magadha and went to Kashmir-Gandhara. They occupied a conspicuous position there and subsequently came to be known as Sarvastivadins. The Abhidharmamahdvibhasasastra56 and Hiuen-tsang’ s Records of the Western World furnish us with an account of the flight of the Theravadins from Magadha to Kashmir. From them we also learn that the monks who fled to Kashmir from Magadha were no other than Sarvastivadins and, through their activities, Kashmir became the centre of Buddhist philosophical studies in Northern India.

The Sarvastivadins also claimed king Kaniska as their great patron. He was as great a patron of Buddhism as king Asoka and his name is familiar to the Buddhists as that of Asoka. He used to read Buddhist scriptures with a monk but was much puzzled at the conflicting interpretations of the different sects. He convened a Council to reconcile the varying opinions of the different sects and ‘To restore Buddhism to eminence and to have the Tripitaka explained according to the tenets of the various schools’. Monks of different sects participated in the Council - the Sarvastivadins, of course, forming the majority. Monks assembled there settled the texts of the Canonical literature and also composed extensive commentaries on the Sutra, Vinaya and Abbhidharma texts. They are known as the Upadesasastra, Vinayavibhasasastra and Ahhidharmavibhasasastra respectively.57 It is said that the texts were engraved on copper-plates and deposited inside a tope. These plates have, however, not yet been traced. Thus the main object of the Council was to prepare commentaries on the Canons with a view to reconciling the varying interpretations of the different sects. It also bears witness to the literary and religious activities of the Sarvastivada school and is of great value from the point of view of the history of religion and literature.58

The Sarvastivada group of schools shows features identical to those of Theravadins. Its Canon is essentially the same as Pali Canon. Initially it was in a form of Prakrit and when written down, was partly into Sanskrit. It is from the finding of manuscripts and also from the quotations in the different Buddhist Sanskrit texts such as Lalitavistara, Divyavadana, etc., it appears that the Sarvastivi cidins divided their Canon like the Theravadins into three Pitakas59 However, in the Sarvastivada Canon the ‘Agamas’ had replaced the ‘Nikayas’ of Theravadin.

Though the Canon of the Sarvdstivadins was written in Sanskrit but the texts such as the Pratimoksasutra, the Lalitavistara and other fragments of Agamas shows that the language of the Sarvdstivada Canon did not conform to the rules of the Sanskrit grammar and hence Senart chose to call this language of the Canon as Mixed Sanskrit, while it was described as Gathd dialect by R.L. Mitra though M. Winternitz60 has his reservations regarding the term Gdtha dialect.

The belief that all things exist, sarvam asti, advocated by this school perhaps goes back to the Sariiyutta-nikaya where the expression, sabbham allhi, occurs. It is this belief that has given the school its name. Like the Sthaviravadins, the Sarvdstivadins were the realists among the Buddhists. They believed that it was not only the things in the present that existed, but also the things in the past and future which were in continuity with the present. Like the Vdtsiputriyas, the Sammitiyas and some of the Mahasafighikas, they revolted against the dominance of the Arhats who had attained a position of unsurpassed eminence among the Sthaviravadins. They maintained that an Arhat was subject to fall or retrogression, while, curiously enough, they maintained at the same time that a srotapanna, or an individual in the first stage, was not liable to such retrogression. They also said that a continuous flow of mind might amount to concentration (samadhi) of mind. This school, like the Sthaviravadins, denied the transcendent powers ascribed to the Buddha and the Bodhisattva by the Mahasafighikas. It was their faith that holy life was possible for gods and that even heretics could have supernatural powers. They believed in antara-bhava, an interim existence between this life and the next. They maintained that the Bodhisattvas were still ordinary people (prthag-jana) and that even the Arhats were not free from the effects of past actions and still had something to learn.

They believed in nairatmya, the absence of any permanent substance in an individual, though they admitted the permanent reality of all things. Like the Sthaviravadins, they believed in the plurality of elements in the universe. According to them, there were seventy- five elements, seventy-two of them samskrta, compounded, and three asamskrta, uncompounded, which were akasa or space, pratisafikhya-nirodha, or cessation through knowledge, and apratisafikhyd-nirodha, or cessation, not through knowledge, but through the natural process of the absence of required conditions. The seventy-two samskrta dharmas were divided into four groups: rupa, or matter which was held to be of eleven kinds, including one called avijhapti-rilpa, unmanifested action in the form of a mental impress; citta, mind, forty-six mental concomitants (citta-samprayukta dharmas) and fourteen

dharmas which were not connected with mind (cittaviprayuktaf the last being a new class of forces which were not classed as mental or material, although they could not be active without a mental or material basis. These seventy-five elements were linked together by causal relations, six of which were dominant (hetu) and four subsidiary (pratyaya)61 The Sarvastivada school was the most widely extended group of schools in India. It was the school that continued to flourish widely-long after the Theravada school had been cut off from its Indian home. It had also to bear the brunt of battle against the Mahayana school. Nagarjuna, the founder of the Madhyamika system, made the main target of attack of the Sarvastivada view in propounding his subtle philosophy of Sunyata. It flourished in Northern India stretching from Kashmir to Mathura. It was the school which was mainly responsible for the propagation of Buddhist doctrines in Central Asia whence they were subsequently preached in China. A few inscriptions (2nd - 4th century A.D.) as also the Travel-accounts of Chinese pilgrims, such as Fa-hien, Hiuen- tsang and I-tsing testify to the wide popularity of this school all over Northern India and outside India. Thus it is seen that it held the most important position in popularity, expansion and philosophical views in the schools of Buddhist thought.

2.3.2 The Explanation of the Name of the School

The term Sarvastivada, Sarva (all) + asti (exist) + Vada (doctrine) means all exists. In other words, it is a doctrine advocating that all, external and internal, things are real.62 Thus Sarvastivadin means one who upholds the doctrine that all things exist. According to Wintemitz’s view, the literal meaning of Sarvastivada is that everything exists permanently.63 It is often rendered in English as “Realists”. Realism in the Buddhist Philosophy maintains that “the substance of all things has a permanent existence throughout the three divisions of time, the present, the pasl, and the future This term, as understood, in the Buddhist Philosophy, conveys a sense different from its ordinary one, as usually found in the English Philosophy. It is used as opposed to Idealism and Nominalism65.

The earlier Chinese term to designate the school is invariably pH [sa-p ’o-to\,

M.C. \sal-ba-la\, term used by Fa-hsien (399-414), Paramdrtha (499-569) and sometimes by Hsuan-tsang (629-645) and I-ching (635-713). This term most likely is a transliteration of ‘sa (-rvasti-) vada\ Junjiro Takakusu explains RH as rendering the Pali 'sabbathi (vadaf. This is little convincing, since §1 is the common translation of ‘-vadaf and [to] is difficult to be interpreted as transliterating L-ti- . Also a hypothesis of a double use of the syllable W i.e. for both [/?a] and [vd] in ‘sabba(-thi-)vddci’ is not completely satisfactory, since this would leave [thi] untranslated. It is also possible that pH §1 stands for ‘sarva(- astiva-)da", or is, in fact, a rendering of a Prakrit term, a Prakrit used in Mathura, a Sarvdstivdda place of origin. We also find the Chinese terms — W W n|3 and 1ft — UJ W to render the Sanskrit ‘’Sarvdstivdda". These terms mean ‘the school that proclaims the existence of everything.,66

The Sarvdstivdda is represented by Vasubandhu as defining their position as follows: "Those who hold ‘all exists' the past, the present and the future - belong to the Sarvdstivdda"61.

There were differences of opinion among the Sarvdstivdda teachers on the interpretation of the existence of the objects in regard to the past, present and future. Prominent among those exponents were Dharmalrdla, Ghosaka, Vasumitra and Buddhadeva. The Sarvdstivdda, originated from the Theravada. It had, therefore, a fair agreement with the Theravada in regard to the doctrinal matters. Like the Theravada, it believed in the plurality of elements in the universe. According to it, there were seventy five elements, seventy two of them were divided into rilpa, cilia, cittasampprayuktadharmas and cittaviprayuktadharmas, while asamskrtadharmas were dkdsa, pratisankhyanirodha and apratisankhyanirodha. Lastly, like the Theravada, it believed in doctrine of Karma and Nirvana, a state to be attained by transcendental knowledge through the giving up of lusts (klesd)6i

2.3.3 The Sarvastivada Abhidharma Literature

The differing philosophical views of the Buddhist schools resulted in the production of Abhidharma which are the repository of all Buddhist teachings and provide the theoretical foundation for all Buddhist doctrines. Among those Abhidharma schools, the Sarvdstivdda - Vaibhasika school was the most influential and prolific in India. This school was the only school besides Theravada that was known to have had a complete Abhidharma canon, based upon central text, the Jhdnaprasthdna and its six subsidiary treatises called the Padasastra. The Abhidharma literature of the Sarvdstivdda school can be presented as follows:

a. Abhidharma Literature

The word Abhidharma is firstly known as the third collection of the Buddhist canonical books, it is also a name for the specific method in which all special teaching of the Buddha are set forth in those books, not only highest issue thereof but also the literature connected with it.69 The Abhidharma, that expounds the word of the Buddha in terms of an ethical realism is a philosophy with an essentially religious basis. In Mahayanasutralankara, Abhidharma is considered to be as the special matters of all the Buddha’s teaching which are best understood. In the Abhidharmakosa, having referred to the word of 'abhidharma', Vasubandhu notes that Abhidharma means the pure wisdom (prajha) with its following that is unsullied wisdom which analyzes factors (dharmapravicaya). Hence, it can be said that the dharma presented in Abhidharma surpasses those composed in the Sutras because the various classifications of the elements of existence are listed haphazardly in the Sutras while the Abhidharma mentions them with their definitive forms. Thus, the Sutras are preached from the standpoint of conventional truth according to the specific world circumstances, but the Abhidharma deals with the absolute truth, and is concerned with the analysis of mind and matter (ndma- rupapariccheda).

The characteristics of the Abhidharma are distinguished from those of the other two Pitakas as follows:

"The Sutra-Pitaka is the emanation (nisyanda) of the Buddha's power (balaf for none can refute the doctrines therein. The Vinaya-Pitaka is the emanation of great compassion (mahdkarunct), for it advocates morality (sila) for the salvation of those in the unfortunate planes of existence (durgati).

The Abhidharma is the emanation of fearlessness, for it properly establishes the true characteristics of dharma-s, answering questions and ascertaining fearlessly. The growth of Abhidharma studies and their subsequent incorporation into books can be divided roughly, into three phases:

1. the first covers the period of original or primitive Buddhism and goes back to the time of the Buddha himself. 2. the second is the period during which Abhidharma became an independent collection, detached from the two other collections: Sutra and Vinaya. 3. the third is the period of the compilation of the fundamental texts of the Abhidharma and may be assigned chronologically to extend from the beginning of the first century, this time roughly coincides with the period of the differentiation of the Buddhist schools.

But the Abhidharma texts were the first major extension of the scope of Buddhist literature to take place in India and the approach to legitimization was taken by the Buddhist masters adumbrates that adopted later by the Mahayana school. Three major concerns were apparent in their attempts to establish the authenticity of their new books:

1. Firstly, to prove that the Buddha himself had personally taught the Abhidharma', 2. Secondly, to prove that it had been formally transmitted to eminent disciples of the Buddha by whom it was then collected; and 3. Thirdly, to prove that the Abhidharma works had in fact been recited and codified at the time of the putative first council. In this wise, both Theravadin and Sarvastivadin attempted to justify the inclusion of their Abhidharmas as part of the canon.

According to the Theravada tradition, Sariputra transmitted the Abhidharma to the disciples. All of the seven canonical Abhidharma texts are said to be by the Buddha, the first Abhidhammika. The Buddha first taught it to the Gods in the Thirty-three (tdiva-timsa)- Heaven; and it was studied and transmitted through Sariputra by a succession of teachers. " For the Sarvastivadins, the Abhidharma consisted of a variety of teachings of the Buddha scattered throughout the canon, which were systematized by the elders to whom these treatises were attributed. The Vaibhdsikas maintain that:

"The Abhidharmcipitaka, which deals with the nature and the characteristics of elements and belongs to the Upadesa class, was preached by the Buddha to his disciples and remains scattered here and there. Just as Dharmatrata compiled several Udanas of the Master in the work IJdanavarglya, similarly, the Elders Kdtydyaniputra and others collected the Abhidharma together in these Sastras. ”73

It is very interesting to know that the fortuitous similarity between the name of Kdtydyaniputra the Elder mentioned in Yasomitra’s quote who was considered to be the author of their central Abhidharma book, the Jhanapraslhana and that of the Buddha’s serious disciple, Mahakatydyana, who participated in the Council at Rajagraha, allowed the Sarvastivadins to say further that the Jhanaprasthana, compiled from various teachings of the Buddha, was sanctioned as his own words by the Buddha himself during his own lifetime.74 Moreover, the Sarvastivadins also said finally that this Abhidharmapitaka was recited by Ananda during the first council.

Acctually, the Sarvastivada was the only school besides the Theravada75 that was known to have had a complete Abhidharma canon, based upon central text, the Jhanaprasthana and its six subsidiary treatises called the Padasastra16 A great commentary to the Jhanaprasthana was known as the Mahavibhasa.7 According to Takakusu, the text Vibhasa was compiled on Katyayaniputra's work probably in the second century A.D. The meaning of Vibhasa is an extensive annotation of various opinions. The title Vibhasa indicates that many opinions of that time were gathered and criticized in detail that some opinional ones were selected and recorded. The main object of the Vibhasa commentary was to transmit the correct exposition of the Abhidharma school which have since then come to be called the Vaibhdsika school. Then there appeared a compendium of the Abhidharma doctrine called the Abhidharma-hrdaya written by Dharmollara. who belonged to the Gandhara branch. A commentary on it called Samyukta-abhidharma-hrdaya was compiled by Dharmatrata, a student of Dharmottara. This work became the fundamental text of the Gandhara branch. The Abhidharma literature of the Sarvastivada school can be presented as following part.

b. Seven Abhidharma Texts of the Sarvastivada School

From the Chinese and Tibetan translations as also from the manuscript fragments discovered in Central Asia, Nepal and Gilgit (Pakistan) and from the quotations found in the Lalitavistara, Mahavastu, Divyavaddna, Abhidharmakosa, Madhyamakavrtti and such other works, it appears that the Sarvastivadins had a Canon of their own in Sanskrit (Buddhist Sanskrit) in three divisions - Sutra, Vinaya and Abhidharma. But a complete copy of this Canon is still a desideratum - some of them existing in manuscript fragments and others beyond recall.

Manuscript fragments of the Sutra and Vinaya literature of this school are now available in original Sanskrit, but unfortunately, no fragment of any of the Abhidharma texts in Sanskrit, excepting a small fragment of the Sahgitiparydya has as yet been discovered. Until the discovery of the original Sanskrit works, the Chinese translations are the only source of our information. Yasomitra's Sphutarthabhidarmakosavyakhyd and the French translation with introduction and notes of the Abhidharmakosa by Louis de La Vallee Poussin also supplement greatly our knowledge of the Abhidharma of this school.

The Sutrapitaka of the Sarvastivadins had four divisions: Dirghagama, Madhyamagama, Samyuktagama and Ekottaragama corresponding to the four Pali Nikayas, viz., Dlghanikdya, Majjimanikaya, Samyuttanikaya and Anguttaranikaya. The Sarvastivadins had no fifth Agama answering to the Pali Khuddakanikaya. But the texts such as the Sutranipata, I'dctna, Dharmapada, Sthaviragatha, Therlgdlhd. Vimanavattbu and Buddhavamsa were subsequently collected and designated as the Ksudrakagama. The Chinese Dirghagama contains thirty sutras as against thirty four of the Pali Dlghanikdya. But the order of arrangement of the Sutras differs in the two versions. The manuscript fragments of the Samgitisutra and Atdndtiyasiitra of the Dirghagama have been discovered in Eastern Turkestan. The Madhayamdgama contains two hundred and twenty two Sutras as against one hundred and fifty two of the Pali text, and nineteen of them are wanting in the Chinese version. The fragments of the Updli Sutra, and Suka Sutra of the Madhyamagama have also been discovered in Eastern

Turkestan. The Samyuktagama is divided into fifty chapters as against five Samyuttas or Vaggas of the Pali text. The fragments of the Pravaranasutra, Candropamasutra and Saktisiitra of the Samyuktagama have further been discovered in Eastern Turkestan. The Ekottaragama contains fifty two chapters while the Anguttaranikaya contains eleven Nipdtas containing hundred and sixty nine chapters. There is noticeable disagreement between the Sutras of Ekottaragama and Anguttaranikaya. This is probable because many siitras of the Ekollardgama have been included in the Madhyamagama and Samyuktagama. The Ekottaragama is thus much shorter than the Pali Anguttaranikaya. Anesaki, who has compared the four Agamas of the Sarvastivadins with the corresponding Pali Nikayas, observes that materials of both are much the same but the arrangement is different.

The Vinayapitaka of the Sarvastivada school contains the following four divisions: Vinayavibhanga, Vinayavastu, Vinayaksudrakavastu, and Vinaya-uttaragrantha. The original Sanskrit text of the Sarvastivadins is lost and we have to depend on the Chinese translation for our information, in Chinese, there are four divisions as mentioned above. This order of arrangement is almost identical with that of the Theravada school. This shows that the Sarvastivadins adopted the same general arrangement as the Theravadins. The Vinayavibhanga corresponds to the Suttavibhanga, the Vinayavastu to the Khandakas, i.e., the Mahavagga and portions of Cullavagga, the Vinayaksudrakavastu and Vinayauttaragrantha to the Cullavagga and the Parivarapatha respectively.

The discovery of the manuscript fragments of the Pratimoksasutra, Bhiksunlpratimoksasutra as also other texts in Eastern Turkestan and Nepal has proved the existence of the Sanskrit Vinaya texts similar to the Pali ones. A large number of Vinaya fragments discovered at Gilgit (Pakistan) have also added knowledge to the stock of our Vinaya literature. The fragments of the Vinaya discovered there contain the Vinayavastu, Pratimoksasutra, Karmavdya and the like. Some of the texts have already been published and others await publication. Further the manuscript fragments of the Vinaya-sutra, Vinayasutrafikd, Pratimoksasutratika, Bhiksupraklrnaka, Sramaneratika, Upasampadajnapti and others, copies of which are available in the K.P. Jayaswal Institute, Patna, have been brought down from Tibet Rahul Sankrityayana.

Among other Theravada schools, the Sarvdstivada developed characteristic philosophical ideas in its Abhidharma literature. When we refer to the Abhidharma, we often refer to some version of the Sarvdstivada Abhidharma, usually the Vaibhasika, if reference is specific. The Sarvdstivada, like the Theravada, has seven canonical Abhidharma texts. The seven canonical Sarvdstivada texts are: (i) Jhdnaprasthana-sutra', (ii) Prakaranapada', (iii) Vijhanakdya', (iv) Dharmaskandha', (v) Prajhaptisastra', (vi) Dhatukaya and (vii) Samgitiparyaya

The Jnanaprasthana-sutra is attributed to Arya Katydyamputra. In the Kosa it is stated that the actual author of the work was Buddha but the arrangement of chapters and topics were made by Katydyamputra and so its authorship is attributed to him. It was translated twice into Chinese, by Gotama Samghadeva of Kashmir and Chu Fo-nien, in the 4th century A. D., and by Hiuen-Tsang in the 7th century. It is divided into eight sections.

The Prakaranapada is attributed to Sthavira Vasumitra, who, according to the Chinese tradition, composed it in a monastery at Puskalavati. It was translated into Chinese by Gunabhadra and Bodhiyasas of Central India (435-443 A.D.) and also by Hiuen-Tsang (659 A.D.). The work is divided into eight chapters. The Vijnanakaya is attributed to Devasarma, who, according to Hiuen-Tsang, compiled it at Visoka near Sravasti, about a century after Buddha’s death. It was translated into Chinese by Hiuen-Tsang (649 A.D.). It is divided into six chapters.

The Dharmaskandha is attributed to Sariputra. It was translated into Chinese by Hiuen-Tsang (659 A.D.). In the colophon of the Chinese translation this text is described as "Jhe most important of the Abhidharma works, and the fountain-head of the Sarvastivada system. This book, it seems, appealed to the Chinese not for its subtlety and depth of philosophical discussions as for its comprehensiveness outlining the general course of spiritual training prescribed for a Buddhist monk. This work can also be paralleled to the Visuddhimagga of Buddhaghosa.

The Dhatukaya is attributed to Purna in the Sanskrit and Tibetan texts, and to Vasumitra by the Chinese writers. It was translated into Chinese by Hiuen-Tsang (663 A. D.). The object of the treatise is to enumerate the dharmas, considered as ‘reals’ by the Sarvastivadins. The Prajnaptisastra is attributed to Maudgalydyana. It was translated into Chinese at a very late date (1004- 1055 A. D.) by Dharmapala of Magadha. The Chinese text is incomplete. In the Tibetan version this treatise is divided into three parts, viz. Lokaprajhapti, Karanaprajhapti and Karmaprajhapti. In the Lokaprajhapti the cosmological ideas of the Buddhists are given, in the Karanaprajhapti the characteristics that make a Bodhisattva are discussed, while in the Karmaprajhapti there are enumeration and classification of different kinds of deeds.

The SamgTtiparyaya is attributed to Mahakausthila by Yasomitra and Bu-ston and to Sariputra by the Chinese writers. It was translated into Chinese by Hiuen-Tsang (660-663 A. D.). This text was compiled, according to the introductory remarks, immediately after Buddha’s death to avert disputes among the disciples regarding the Buddhist teachings and disciplinary rules. The scene of this text is laid at Pdva, where dissensions among the Nigantha Nataputtas started after the death of their teacher. It arranges the dharmas, both doctrinal and disciplinary, numerically in the Ekottra style, i.e., gradually increasing the number of dharmas from one to ten. The contents of this text agree to a large extent with those of the Samglti and Dasuttara suttontas of the Dighanikaya.

Of them, the Jhanaprasthana-sutra occupies the most prominent place. The great doctrianal house of this school is built upon the Jhanaprasthana-sutra. The greatest contribution of the Jhanaprasthana-sutra is its systematization of the scheme of six causes into what becomes one of the cardinal doctrines of the Sarvastivadins’. efficient cause, simultaneous cause, connected cause, homogeneous cause, cause recurring in every instance, and retributory cause, which are not found anywhere in the Agama and in earlier the Abhidharma texts. This doctrine seems to have been adopted by Katyayamputra in order to account for the law of cause - effect that pertains between the various stages of the path which were his major concern in the Jhanaprasthana. From the text of the Mahdvibhdsd, there seems to have been considerable controversy among the early Vaibhasikas on the

point whether to accept these six causes as an authentic of the Buddha, but it was Katyayamputra who brought to the forefront of Sarvastivddin aetiological investigations81 In his Sphutdrthdbhidharmakosavydkhya, Yasomitra has compared the Jhanaprasthdna-sutra to the body of a being and the other six to its legs. It is thus the principal text of the Sarvastivada school, others are supplements to it. But the seven Abhidharma texts of the Theravada school are all independent works, there being no interdependence between them. It is extremely difficult to fix a date for any of these texts at the present time. About the chronology of these texts, Junjiro Takakusu states in the following manner: “The seven Abhidharma works of the Sarvastivada do not represent one and the same period of Buddhist philosophy, nor do they agree with one another as regards the expositions of categories and nomenclatures in which these books abound. They must have come into existence one after another, in the course of several centuries before they began to be recognized as a body of literature

E. Frauwallner, Taiken Kimura and others, without giving the actual date for the composition of the texts, classify three periods in the evolution of the Sarvastivada Abhidharma texts. The first is the period of the composition the Sahgitiparyaya and the Dharmaskandha, which were composed immediately after the composition of the Nikdya and Agama. The second is the period of the composition of various commentaries including the Vijhdnakdya, the Prakaranapada, the Jndnaprasthdna-sutra and its commentary, the Mahdvibhdsd and so on. The third is the composition of the works which systematized the Sarvastivada doctrines and represented the final stage in the evolution of the Sarvastivada school. The Abhidharmakosa is the most well-known and influential text in this last period.

Thus, the Jhdnaprasthana-sutra, which falls in the second category, was the first work that expounded the specific view of philosophy of the school. It was probably composed around the first century BC. Some commentaries were produced by many scholars in Gandhara and Kashmir. The Jhanaprasthdna-sutra, a systematic work, had a great influence on later texts. The Jnanaprasthdna-sutra, like the other six texts, is extant only in Chinese.

c. Development of Sarvastivada Texts

Besides these seven recognized texts of the Sarvastivadin Abhidharmapitaka, there were a few other digests and commentaries dealing with the topics of the Abhidharma. The other works are briefly discussed below84:

i. Abhidharmakosakarika - By Vasubandhu, an eminent Scholar of Fourth Century A.D. The work is mainly written from the point of view of Kashmir Vibhasa School. There are two translations in Chinese of this work; one of them is by Paramartha and the other by Hiuen Tsang.

ii. AbhidharmakosaBhasyam - By Vasubandhu.

iii. Sphutarthabhidharmakosavyakhya - By Yasomitra. It is a commentary on the Bhasya by Vasubandhu on his Kosa. The Vyakhyd is very valuable for philosophical discussions and well-written psychological materials. The commentary gives us references to the different teachers like Vasumitra, Samghabhadra, Dharmatrdta, Vasubandhu, Srllata and others.

iv. Abhidharmanyaydnusara - By Samghabhadra. This work was written by this old teacher of Kashmir Vibhasa School as a criticism of Vasubandhu’s Kdrika v. Abhidharmasamayapradipika - By Samghabhadra. vi. Abhidharmakosatika Laksananusarim - by Punyavardhana. vi i. A bhidharmakosavrtti Marmapradipa - by Digndga. viii. Abhidharmakosatika Aupayiki - By Santisthiradeva. ix. Sdrasamuccaya Nama Abhidharamavatara - by unknown author. Its Tibetan translation was made by Jinamitra and Danasila. x. Abhidharamavatara Prakarana Nama - by Sugandhara. xi. Abhidharmamrtarasasastra - By Ghosa. xii. Abhidharmahrdaya Sastra -By Dharmottara. xiii. Abhidharmahrdaya Sastra -By Upasanta.

xiv. Samyuktabhidharmahrdayasastra - it is attributed to Dharmatrdta. It is a commentary on Abhidharmahrdaya- sastra. xv. Sariputrabhidharmasastra - Author is unknown. Chinese translation of the text was made by Dharmagupta and Dharmayasa.

The above texts are discussed in detail in the introduction of Abhidharmakosa by Sri Rdhiila Samkritydyana and in the Sarvdstivdda Literature by Dr. A.C. Banerjee. The former mentions 4 more texts which are not mentioned by the latter.

These are85:

i. Abhidkarmakosabhasyatikd by Sthirmati. ii. Lokaprajhdpti Abhidharmasdstra by Annomymous. iii. Abhidharmapravesa by Sugandhara by Skandhila. iv. Laksananusdra by Gunamati.

2.4 The Abhidharmakosa Sastra

The Abhidharmakosa Sastra which was composed by Vasubandhu is a manual or a compendium of the Abhidharma treaties and is a repository of the principal Abhidharma works of the Sarvastivadins. So, in order to understand the Abhidharmakosa Sastra, we have toknow about the life of Vasubandhu first.

2.4.1 The Life of Vasubandhu

Vasubandhu is believed to be the author of the Abhidharmakosa Sastra and many Mahayana-Vijnanavada teachings like his brother Asahga. He was first ordained in the Theravada Sarvdstivdda school but later converted to the Mahayana. However, it is suggested that there were two Vasubandhu and hence two different dates. Thus, we now face with the question of when Vasubandhu lived and with the problem of how many Vasubandhu there were in the history of Indian philosophy. Thererfore, it is necessary for us to learn about the early life, conversion to Mahayana as well as dates of Vasubandhu when we study his life.

a. Early life of Vasubandhu

Vasubandhu was an eminent Indian Buddhist teacher and one of the most prominent figures in the development of Mahayana Buddhism in India. His name can be found in any history of Buddhism or of India in the Gupta period. Said to be a younger brother of the great Mahayana teacher Asahga, Vasubandhu was first ordained in the Theravada Sarvastivada school but later converted to the Mahayana*6 Like his brother Asahga, Vasubandhu became a great exponent of the Yogacara-Vijnanavada teachings. He is believed to be the author of the Abhidharmakosa and many Mahayana treatises. Various problems continue to vex historians concerning the biography of Vasubandhu.

The details of Vasubandhu’s life are known from several biographies available in Chinese and Tibetan, the earliest of which is the Chinese rendering of the life of Vasubandhu by Paramatha (499-569), one of the main exponents of the Yogdcdra doctrine in China, who composed Bosoupandou fashi zhuan (Biography of Vasubandhu). It is preserved in the Chinese Tripitaka and is the only complete biography. Apparently, there was an account by Kumarajiva but it did not survive. Apart from this, fragmentary information is found in various Chinese sources the most important of which are the writings of the great Chinese translator Xuanzang (600-664). Various histories of Buddhism written by Tibetan historians also give accounts of Vasubandhu’s life. The earliest Tibetan biography available is that of Bu-ston (1290-1364). In addition, there are several references to Vasubandhu in the works of Xuanzang, Bana-bhatta, Vamana, and other writers.

But Chinese and Tibetan sources alike disagree with the Biography of Master Vasubandhu in many places. Moreover, two or three persons in Buddhist history bear the same name. According to some texts, Vasubandhu is the twenty-first patriarch in the transmission of the Buddha’s Dharma, elsewhere, Puguang (one of the direct disciples of Xuanzang) refers to an “ancient Vasubandhu” who belonged to the Sarvastivada school; and both Puguang and Yasomitra, a commentator on the Abhidharmakosa, refer to a third, known as Sthavira-Vasubandhu. The identification of and relationship between these three persons is still unclear. We shall attempt to reconstruct the main outlines of Vasubandhu’s life, relying most heavily on Paramaribo, and supplying dates for the main events, so that the dating of Vasubandhu presented here can be put to the test. Some of this material is, no doubt, legendary, but nonetheless interesting as it throws light on how Vasubandhu was viewed by later generations.

Vasubandhu was born at Purusapura (identified with modern Peshawar, capital of North-West Frontier Province of Pakistan) in the state of Gandhara99 According to Taranatha, Vasubandhu was born one year after his older brother Asanga became a Buddhist monk. His father was a Brahmin Kausika. According to Bosoupandou fashi zhuan, his mother’s name was Virihci. But the Tibetan historian Bu-ston and later Taranatha mention the name of the mother of Asanga and Vasubandhu as Prasanasila.

According to these two Tibetan historians, Asanga and Vasubandhu were half­brothers; Asanga's father being a Ksatnya, and Vasubandhu’s a Brahmana. Vasubandhu also had a younger brother called Virincivatsa. Vasubandhu’s father was a court priest, and according to Taranatha was an authority on the Vedas. In all probability, he officiated at the court of the Saka princes of the Silada clan, who at that time ruled from Purusapura. During his formative years, Vasubandhu may have been introduced by his father not only to the Brahmanical tradition but also to the postulates of classical Nyaya and Vaisesika, both of which had influence on his logical thought.91

The name “Vasubandhu”, which he never changed even upon entering the Buddhist priesthood, may perhaps tell us something about the character of its bearer. It means “the Kinsman of Abundance”, in particular the abundance of the Earth, and his retention of this name, in view of his genuine concern for the well-being of others, as well as his love of metaphors from teeming plant-life, rushing streams, and rippling lakes, is probably not entirely coincidental.

As a young student, he amazed his teachers with his brilliance and ready wit. According to Paramdrtha, Vasubandhu’s teacher was called Buddhamitra. ' At Vasubandhu’s time the dominant Buddhist school in Gandhara was the Vaibhdsika (also called Sarvastivada). Vasubandhu entered the Sarvastivada order, and studied primarily the scholastic system of the Vaibhdsikas. Initially, he was quite impressed with the Mahavibhasa. In time, however, Vasubandhu began to have grave doubts about the validity and relevance of Vaibhdsika metaphysics. At this time, perhaps through the brilliant teacher Manoratha, he came into contact with the theories of the Sautrantikas, the group of Buddhists who wished to reject everything that was not the express word of the Buddha, and who held the elaborate constructions of Vibhasa up to ridicule.94 That there was a strong Sautrantika tradition in Purusapura is likely in view of the fact that it was the birthplace of a maverick philosopher of the second century, Dharmatrdta. In fact, the most orthodox Vaibhdsika seat of learning was not in Gandhara, but in Kashmir, whose masters looked down upon the Gandhdrans as quasi-heretics. Therefore, according to Xuanzang's pupil Puguang, Vasubandhu decided to go to Kashmir disguised as a lunatic to investigate the Vaibhasika teachings more deeply. Vasubandhu studied in Kashmir with different teachers for four years, probably from about 342 to 346, then came back to Purusapura95 and began to prepare for an enormous project Abhidharmakosa (The Treasury of Abhidharma).

b. Conversion to Mahayana

In the years directly following the composition of the Abhidharmakosa, Vasubandhu seems to have spent much time in travelling from place to place. Finally, after having spent some time at Sakala' Sdgala (modern Sialkot in Pakistan), he shifted along with his teachers Buddhamitra and Manoralha to Ayodhyd (now located in Uttar Pradesh, northern India), a city far removed from Kashmir

According to Bosoupandou fashi zhuan, Vasubandhu, now proud of the fame he had acquired, clung faithfully to the Theravdda doctrine in which he was well-versed and, having no faith in Mahayana, denied that it was the teaching of the Buddha. Vasubandhu had, up to this time, but little regard for the Yogdcdra treatises of his elder brother. He had perhaps seen the voluminous Yogdcdrabhiimi compiled by Asahga, which may have simply repelled him by its bulk. According to Bu-ston, he is reported to have said, “Alas, Asatiga, residing in the forest, has practiced meditation for twelve years. Without having attained anything by this meditation, he has founded a system, so difficult and burdensome, that it can be carried only by an elephant”91 Asatiga heard about this attitude of his brother and feared that Vasubandhu would use his great intellectual gifts to undermine Mahayana. By feigning illness he was able to summon his younger brother to Purusapura, where he lived.

However, Xuanzang differs with some of these details and the place provided by Paramartha regarding Vasubandhu’s conversion. According to Xiyu yi, the conversion of Vasubandhu took place at Ayodhyd9* At the rendezvous, Vasubandhu asked Asahga to explain the Mahayana teaching to him, whereupon he immediately realized the supremacy of Mahayana thought. According to Paramartha, Bu-ston and Xuanzang, Asahga sent two of his students with Mahayana texts, Aksayamati-nirdesa-sutra and Dasabhumika-sutra, to Vasubandhu. The evening they arrived, they recited the Aksayamati-nirdesa-sutra. In this Sutra, a creature from the higher plane teaches the terrestrial denizens about the absence of own-being, the absence of existing and ceasing, and the absence of any detriment or excellence, in all events and “personalities”. This sutra seems to have greatly appealed to the critical mind of Vasubandhu. He told Asahga’s students that he thought the logical principles of Mahayana were well-founded, but that it seemed to have no practice. The next morning, Asahga’s student recited the Dasabhumika-sutra, which relates to the path of the Bodhisattva, who remains active in the world for the removal of suffering. Hearing this text, Vasubandhu realized that the Mahayana had a well-founded practice, too."

After that, Vasubandhu went to visit Asahga in Purusapura. After further study, we are told, the depth of his realization came to equal that of his brother. Deeply ashamed of his former abuse of the Mahayana, Vasubandhu wanted to cut out his tongue, but refrained from doing so when Asahga told him to use it for the cause of Mahayana. Vasubandhu regarded the study of the enormous Astasahasrikdprajnd-pdramita-sutra as of utmost importance.

In view of the fact that they were the texts that converted him to Mahayana, Vasubandhu’s commentaries on the Aksayamati-nirdesa-sutra and the Dasabhumika-sutra may have been his earliest Mahayana works. These were followed by a series of commentaries on other Mahayana sutras and treatises, including the Avatamsaka-sutra, Nirvdna-sutra, Vimalakirtinir de sa-sutra, and Srimaladevi-sutra. He himself composed a treatise on Vijhaptimatra (cognition only) theory and commented on the Mahdydnasamgraha, Triratna-gotra, Amrta-mukha, and other Mahayana treatises.

According to the Tibetan biographers, his favorite Sutra was either the Astasahasrika-prajha-paramita-sutra or the Astasahasrika. Considering that these texts reveal the most profound insights into Mahayana thinking, it is not surprising that Vasubandhu liked them. Since the output of Vasubandhu’s Mahayana works is huge, he was in all probability writing new treatises every year. So he could have been a very famous Mahayana master by the year 360.

The year 376 brings Candragupta II, Vikramadita, to the throne of the Gupta Empire. As famous for his liberal patronage of learning and arts, as for his successful maintenance of the empire, his reign marks one of the high points in the classical Indian period. And Ayodhya, where Vasubandhu again took up his abode, became for a while the Emperor’s capital-in-residence. It may have been shortly after this date that a great debate occurred, which was to stick in the minds of the Buddhist biographers.

The King himself was often the judge at these debates, and loss to an opponent could have serious consequences. One of the most stirring descriptions of such a debate is found in the account of Paramdrtha, where he describes how the Safikhya philosopher Vindhyavasin challenged the Buddhist masters of Ayodhya, “traveling to other countries”, and only Buddhamitra was left to defend the Dharma. Buddhamitra was defeated, and had to undergo the humiliating and painful punishment of being beaten on the back by the Safikhya master in front of the entire assembly.

When Vasubandhu later returned, he was enraged when he heart of the incident. He subsequently succeeded in trouncing the Safikhya, both in debate and in a treatise. Paramarthasaptati. Candragupta II rewarded him with 300,000 pieces of gold for his victory over the Safikhya. These Vasubandhu employed for building three monasteries, one for the Mahdydnists, another for his old colleagues the Sarvastivadins, and the third for the nuns. Refutations of the Vaisesika and Safikhya theories had been presented by

Vasubandhu already in the Kosa, but it was from this point onward that Vasubandhu was regarded as a philosopher whose views could not be lightly challenged.100 Around the year 383, at his eighth birthday, the crown prince Govindagupta Baladitya was placed by the Emperor under the tutelage of Vasubandhu.101 The Empress Dhruvadevi also went to Vasubandhu to receive instruction. It is tempting to speculate on the effect of Vasubandhu’s tutorship on his royal students. He may have done much to alleviate the conditions of the thousands subject to the Guptas. He is known to have founded many hospitals, rest houses, and schools. That his compassion was not theoretical but practical can also be seen by the accounts, which tell us of his helping quench the great fire that broke out in Rdjagrha, and his doing the utmost to help stop the epidemic in Janantapura.

In some Tibetan accounts, Vasubandhu is associated with the University of Nalanda. This may or may not be anachronism. He is known to have passed his technique of no-prop meditation on to his old associate Manoraiha. 102

In his old age, Vasubandhu seems to have taken up the wandering life again. Some of his last works are known to have been written in Sakala and in Kausambl. Around the year 391, the consecration of Govindagupta as “Young King” took place. He and his mother begged Vasubandhu to settle down in Ayodhya and accept life-long royal support. Vasubandhu accepted the offer. The master was creative even at his advanced age, and more than a match for Fasurata, the prince’s grammarian brother-in-law, in his favorite sport of debate. With the sums of money he received as remuneration for his debating victories, he built several rest houses, monasteries, and hospitals in Ayodhya, Gandhara, and Kashmir. But primarily, as Xuanzang tells us, Vasubandhu was going farther with his contemplative exercises. Debate was to him mainly an Updya. if it could lead to no one’s interest in Mahayana, he would not engage in it.

Thus, when Samghabhadra, who had written his two great treatises, one of which is a furious denunciation of the Kosa-bhasya, challenged Vasubandhu to defend the Kosa's statements, and was invited to come to court for a debate by the jealous Fasurata, Vasubandhu told his pupils that he could see no good reason for such a debate, but diplomatically sent the official answer that Samghabhadra would, indeed, be hard to defeat. He probably knew from his student days that Samghabhadra would not be convinced by anything, and, besides, the Kosa itself was probably no longer very important to him at the time. Thus, the debate never took place, but we can almost see the forms it might have taken, by comparing the Kosa, the Abhidharma-nyayanusdra of Samghabhadra, and the Discussion for the Demonstration of Action included here.

Vasubandhu did not long survive Samghabhadra. In the eightieth year of his life, c. 396, he died.104 Tradition is unanimous in saying that he died at eighty, but there are various versions as to the place of his death. Paramartha says that he died in Ayodhya, but Bu-ston may be correct when he says that he died in the Northern frontier countries, which he calls “Nepal”. For Xuanzang corroborates the information that Vasubandhu was in the northern frontier at the time of Samghabhadra’s challenge to debate, which according to all tradition was one of the last events in Vasubandhu’s life.105 He says that Vasubandhu was at that time in Sakata, where the “Teaching of the Three Own-Beings”, possibly Vasubandhu’s last work, was written.

Bu-ston gives an interesting detail about this last journey of the master. He says that while Vasubandhu was in the North, he went to visit a monk named Handu. Handu was inebriated, and carrying an immense pot of wine on his shoulder. Vasubandhu upon seeing this cried, “Alas! The Doctrine will go to ruin", recited the Usmsa-vijaya-dharam in reverse order, and died. According to Taranatha, however, Vasubandhu was prompted to recite the dharani in reverse order when he saw a monk ploughing in his monastic robes. Such is the account of his life, filled with prodigious activity, which can be reconstructed from the copious data of his biographers.

c. Date of Vasubandhu

So much controversy has surrounded the time of Vasubandhu, we now face with not only the question of when Vasubandhu lived, with the problem of how many Vasubandhus there were in the history of Indian philosophy, but also the problem of the date of Abhidharmakosa. According to Paramartha, Vasubandhu lived 900 years after the Mahaparinirvdna of the Buddha.106 At another place, Paramartha also mentions the figure of 1100. Xuanzang and his disciples respectively mention that Vasubandhu lived 1000 and 900 years after the Mahaparinirvdna of the Buddha.107 Now though it is generally believed that the Mahaparinirvdna of the Buddha took place within few years of 400 B.C, some scholars are still hesitant to accept this date. This has led to different scholars proposing different dates for Vasubandhu. Noul Pari and Shio Benkyoo give as Vasubandhu’s dates the years 270 to 350 A.D. Stefan Anacker proposes his date as 316-396 A.D. Ui Hakuju places him in the fourth century (320-400 A.D). Takakusu Junjiro and Kimura Taiken give 420 to 500, Wogihara Unrai gives 390 to 470A.D. Hikata Ryushoo gives 400 to 480 A.D and Le Manh That gives 315 to 395. Erich Frauwallner suggests that there were two Vasubandhus and hence two different dates. According to him, Vasubandhu - the elder lived between about 320 and 380 A.D and Vasubandhu - the younger between around 400 and 480 A.D. However, this hypothesis of two Vasubandhus is no longer tenable in the light of current scholarship as many of the early Chinese documents used by Frauwallner are of spurious nature and thus, their testimony cannot be accepted.

These problems had already been resolved by Peri and have subsequently been thoroughly explained by Le Manh That, 108 as resting on different calculation for the date of the Buddha’s Nirvana accepted at various times by Chinese tradition. By following all that is contained in Chinese tradition regarding the matter, both Peri and Le Manh That arrive at the fourth century A.D. for Vasubandhu’s approximate time.

Their conclusion seems obvious when one considers that Kumarajlva (344-413) knew and translated the works of Vasubandhu, which fact has in turn been the subject of vast and thoroughly sterile investigations as to the authenticity of these ascriptions, whether the “K’ ai-che Vasu" given by Kumarajlva as the author of the Satasastra-bhasya can in fact, be taken as “Vasubandhu”, and so on. Actually, as Peri has already shown, this work in one portion has the complete name, and “K’ ai-che Vasu” is also the only name given to the great master Vasubandhu in the colophon of the Mahayanasamgraha-bhasya, as well as elsewhere in Chinese sources.

From the Chinese side, we also find that Kumarajiva is said to have written a biography of Vasubandhu (unfortunately lost today) in the year 409, and that Hui-yuan (344- 416) quotes a verse of Vasubandhu’s Vimsatika. It should be noted that the Bodhisattva- bhumi of Vasubandhu’s older brother Asahga was already translated into Chinese in the years 414-421.

According to Anacker,109 there is no necessity of going against any tradition whatever. Taking into account the possibility that Vasubandhu may have lived beyond his pupil Govindagupta’s consecration as “Young King”, we may arrive at an arbitrary but plausible date, 316-396 for Vasubandhu. This should be taken as no more than a hypothesis, but it is at least one, which will please all lovers of traditional history. It also places Vasubandhu in one of the most brilliant courts. Among countless other eminent men who may be mentioned as his contemporaries, the great Kalidasa, the lexicographer Amarasimha, and the Mlmdmsd philosopher Sahara were in all probability at the same court that invited Vasubandhu to his most famous debates, and to his most famous tutoring position. Whether his pupil Govindagupta ever fully ascended the throne is doubtful, though there are allusions in Subandhu to troublesome times after the death of Candragupta II, so perhaps a struggle between Govidagupta and his brother Kumaragupta I, in which the later emerged victorious, is to be assumed. On the other hand, Govindagupta may have pre-deceased his father.

2.4.2 The Origin and Development of the Abhidharmakosa Sastra

The Abhidharmakosa, the work of Vasubandhu is a manual or a compendium of the Abhidharma treatises and is a repository of the principal Abhidharma works of the Sarvastivadins. It has systematized and given a definite form to the Sarvastivada Abhidharma Pitaka. There is no denying the fact that the Abhidharmakosa occupies an eminent position in the history of Buddhist thought and literature. It is a treasury of the fundamental doctrines of Buddhism and contains the fullest and systematic exposition of the Abhidharma doctrines of the ancient Buddhist schools that grew within about eight hundred years after the Buddha’s Mahaparinirvana. Further the Abhidharmakosa also occupies an important place in the development of Mahayana thought and principles. There is very close relation between the Abhidharmakosa system and the Vijnaptimdtra philosophy, one of the two main philosophical systems of Mahayana Buddhism. Therefore, very rightly observes that a thorough mastery of the Abhidharmakosa is the only door of entrance to the philosophy of the Mahayana. So, it is necessary for us to learn about the origin and development of the Abhidharmakosa Sastra here.

a. The Origin of the Abhidharmakosa Sastra

As we know, after having returned to his native place (346), Vasubandhu began to prepare for an enormous project that had been in his mind for some time. At this time he was unattached to any particular order, and lived in a small private house in the center of Purusapura. Vasubandhu supported himself by lecturing on Buddhism before the general public, which presumably remunerated him with gifts. According to tradition, during the day he would lecture on Vaibhdsika doctrine and in the evening distill the day’s lectures into a verse. When collected together over six hundred plus verses (karikas), which gave a thorough summary of the entire system, he constituted this work the Abhidharmakosa (Treasury of Abhidharma). According to Paramdrtha, Vasubandhu composed it in Ayodhyd, then the capital of the Gupta dynasty, but according to Xuanzang, it was composed in the suburbs of Purusapura.

The Abhidharmakosa is the highest achievement of Buddhist scholasticism of the Sarvastivada 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 treatises. He specified his own doctrinal standpoint as for the most part being in an agreement with the Kasmira Vaibhdsika school. Besides, Vasubandhu also elaborated upon causal theories, cosmology, practices of meditation, theories of perception, karma, rebirth, and the characteristics of an Enlightened Being in this text.

As the Abhidharmakosa was an eloquent summary of the purport of the Mahdvibhasd, the Kashmir Sarvdstivddins are reported to have rejoiced to see in it all their doctrines so well propounded. 110 Accordingly, they requested Vasubandhu to write a prose commentary (bhasya) on it. However it seems that after having written the Abhidharmakosa, Vasubandhu began to have second thoughts about the Vaibhdsika teachings. As a consequence, it is said, Vasubandhu prepared the Abhidharmakosabhasya. But as it contained a thoroughgoing critique of Vaibhdsika dogmatics from a Sautrantika viewpoint, the Kashmir Sarvdstivddins soon realized, to their great disappointment, that the Abhidharmakosabhasya in fact refuted many Sarvastivada theories and upheld the doctrines of the Sautrantika school.111 One major point that created bad blood between the Vaibhasikas and the Sautrantikas was concerning the status and nature of the dharmas. The Vaibhasikas held that the dharmas exist in the past and future as well as the present. On the other hand, the Sautrantikas held the view that they are discrete, particular moments only existing at the present moment in which they discharge causal efficacy. The Vaibhasikas wrote several treatises attempting to refute Vasubandhu’s critiques.

b. The Development of the Abhidharmakosa Sastra

The Abhidharmakosa, one of the main works written as a critical study of the doctrine of the Sarvastivada school by the great Buddhist master, Vasubandhu, during the earlier period time of his life when he had not yet embraced Mahayana Buddhism, is known as a book of intelligence or a manual the Abhidharma treatises like the Jhdnaprasthana constituted. Not only it has been composed the basic or main source which the Abhidharma treatises like the Jhdnaprasthana constituted; but also the Abhidharmakosa seems to be an encyclopaedia of the essential contents of the Abhidharma Sastra. Though it is written mostly from the point of view of the Vaibhasika of Kasmir, it is an authoritative text for all schools of Buddhist thought.

The Abhidharmakosa consists of nine chapters, made up of a series of verses, the kdrikds, and a prose commentary, or bhasya, to explain them. Both the Abhidharmakosa- karika and the Abhidharmakosa-bhdsya together popularly go by the name of the Abhidharmakosa or Abhidharmakosa Sastra.112 The Abhidharmakosa and its commentary are composed of the following chapters:

Chapter 1: Dhatunirdesa - contains a treatment of the dhatus showing the nature of the substance of all things. It consists of forty-four kdrikds Chapter 2: Indriyanirdesa - contains a treatment of the Indriyas and of the function of things (dharmas'). It consists of seventy-four kdrikds. Chapter 3: Lokanirdesa - contains a treatment of the Loka considered as the outcome of Sasrava or Samsara. It contains ninety-nine kdrikds. Chapter 4: Karmanirdesa - contains a treatment of Karma, considered as the causes of the Sasrava or Samsara. It contains one hundred and thirty-one kdrikds. Chapter 5: Anusayanirdesa - contains a treatment of the Anusayas or ‘latent evils’ considered as a condition (pratyaya) of the Sasrava or Samsara. It contains sixty-nine karikas.

Chapter 6: Pudgalamarganirdesa - contains a treatment of Arhatship considered as an effect of Anasrava or Nirvana. It contains eighty-three karikas. Chapter 7: Jnananirdesa - contains a treatment of knowledge (prajna), considered as the cause (hetu) of Anasrava or Nirvana. It contains sixty-one karikas. Chapter 8: Samadhinirdesa - contains a treatment of Samadhi or Dhydna considered as a condition of Anasrava or Nirvana. It contains thirty-nine karikas. Chapter 9: Pudgalapratisedhanirdesa - contains a refutation of Atman theories of the Sdmkhya.: Vaiseslka and the Vatsiputriya schools. It is in prose.113

The last of these, possibly a later addition to the text, discusses the problem of anctlman. refuting the theories of the self held by the Sankhya, Vaisesika, and Vatsiputriya schools. The other eight chapters may be described as falling into three sections.

The first section is an exposition of the term "dharma1. It consists of the initial two chapters of the text, the first of these analyzing the nature and structure of form, and dividing all elements into the categories ‘defiled’ (sasrava) and ‘undefiled’ (anasrava). The second chapter deals with inner causality and the mental faculties (indriya). The second section, composed of Chapters III-V, is concerned with samsara, and the reasons beings are subject to continuous rebirth. More specifically, Chapter III is concerned with how the world is made out of the various defiled forms. Chapter IV deals with karma. And Chapter V treats the emotions and latent evils that keep the actions going on. The third section, Chapter VI-VIII, is concerned with the path which leads beings out of samsara into enlightenment. Chapter VI describes the way in which the defilements may be removed. Chapter VII gives a detailed account of knowledge (prajna), and the Chapter VIII is on meditation.

Thus, we can say, the, Abhidharmakosa covers the fundamental principles of Buddhist philosophy in general as a result of which even today it is an indispensable book not only to the Buddhists but also to the students of philosophy in general as well as comparative world religions. nfortunately, the Sanskrit originals of both the Abhidharmakosa-kdrikd and bhasya were long lost in India, the land of their origin. However, two versions of the Abhidharmakosa-sastra exist in Chinese Tripitaka. one translated in the sixth century by Paramdrtha, the other in the seventh by Hsuan-tsang. A translation of the Kdrikd by Hsuan- tsang is also to be found in the Chinese Tripitaka. Paramdrtha attributes both the commentary and the verses to Vasubandhu. Furthermore, the Tibetan Tangyur contains one version each of the Sastra and the Kdrikd. Finally, we may note that, in 1934 and 1936, Sanskrit versions of the Abhidharmakosa-karika and bhasya were discovered in Tibetan monasteries.

2.5 Conclusion

In this chapter, we discussed the origin and development of the Sarvastivada School as well as the Abhidharmakosa Sastra. We found that the existence of the Sarvastivada School can be seen in Indian history from the time of the Buddhist Council held during King Asoka’s reign (240 B.C.) down to the time of I-tsingA travel in India (671-695 A.D.). In the Kathavatthu Controversy compiled in the time of King Asoka, Sarvastivada seems to have occupied a strong position among the disputing parties. The principal seat of this school was in Kashmir where its doctrine was taught in its purity and it was finally developed into an elaborate system known as the Vaibhasika. In time another branch of the Vaibhasikas was established in Gandhara and it seems to have differed from that of Kashmir in its opinion to some extent, for both were often cited side by side in some texts in use.

The geographical extent of this school was much greater than that of any other school as it was found in all India, its Northern frontier, Persia, Central Asia, and also to the South in Sumatra, Java, Cochin-China and all of China.

The Sarvastivada School was closely related to the orthodox Theravada School, from which it was first separated probably before the Council of Asoka. The idea that all things exist may go back even to the time of the Buddha himself, for the word ‘sabban atthi ’ (all things exist) is found already in the Samyuttanikaya.

The principal Abhidharma text of this school was Katyayaniputra’’s Jhana-prasthana (Source of Knowledge), otherwise called the Asta-grantha (Eight Books), probably compiled as early as 200 B.C. The subsequent works of the school seem to have been a special exegesis on the subject-matter contained in it. At least sixpadas (‘Legs’), as they are designated, have come down to us.

Then probably in the second century A.D. whether before or after the Buddhist Council of King Kan i ska’ s reign, we cannot tell - a great and minute commentary named Vibhasa Sastra was compiled on Kalyayanlputra’s work. The word ‘vibhasa’ means an extensive annotation or various opinions, and this title indicates that many opinions of the time were and criticized in detail and that some optional ones were selected and recorded. The chief object of the Vibhasa commentary was to transmit the correct exposition of the Abhidharma School which has since then come to be called the Vaibhasika School.

Then there appeared a compendium of the Abhidharma doctrine called Abhidharma­hrdaya (‘heart of the Higher Dharmas,’ translated into Chinese in 391 A.D.) by Dharmottara who belonged to the Gdndhara branch. A commentary on it called Samyukta-abhidharma- hrdaya was written by Dharmalrala, a pupil of Dharmottara. This work became the fundamental text of the Gandhara branch and subsequently of the Chinese Abhidharma School.115

In writing the Abhidharmakosa, Vasubandhu seems to have followed the work of his predecessor, Dharmatrata, called Samyukta-abhidharma-hrdaya, and this, again, is a commentary on Dharmottara’s Abhidharma-hrdaya. A careful comparison of the three works will indicate that Vasubandhu had before him his predecessor’s works, or else such questions as discussed in these works must have been common topics of the school. The first eight chapters of the work explain special facts or elements of matter and mind, while the ninth and last chapter elucidates the general basic principle of selflessness that should be followed by all Buddhist schools. Especially the ninth chapter seems to originate from Vasubandhu’s own idea, for there is no trace of this subject in the other books.

Though the Kosa thus resembles the Hrdaya in subject-matter, there is no indication that the former is indebted to the latter in forming opinions, for Vasubandhu was very free and thorough in his thinking, and he did not hesitate to take the tenets of any school other than his own when he found excellent reasoning in them.

When Vasubandhu’s Abhidharmakosa was made public in Gandhara, it met with rigorous opposition from within and from without his school. Yet the final victory seems to have been on his side, for his work enjoyed popularity in India; it was taught widely and several annotations of it were made in Nalandd, Valabhi and elsewhere. It was translated into Tibetan by Jinamitra and into Chinese first by Paramartha of Valabhi during 563-567 A .D. and later by Hiuen-tsang who studied at Nalanda University during 651-654 A .D. In China especially serious studies were made, and at least seven elaborate commentaries, each amounting to more than twenty or thirty Chinese volumes, were written on it.116 Thus, the Abhidharmakosa attained the status of a primary textbook to be studied by all students of the tradition in the Northern Buddhist countries, including Tibet, China,

Vietnam, Japan, and Indonesia. As pointed out above, the Abhidharmakosa pictures the Buddhist Path to Enlightenment. We can say, the Abhidharmakosa is a prominent contribution of Vasubandhu to the Sarvdstivada school among 500 works in Theravada tradition. The merits of the work are obvious, and the fact of its only partial preservation in Sanskrit has hampered greatly Buddhist studies. Its covers the whole field of ontology, psychology, cosmology, the doctrine of salvation and of the saints, and a vast proportion of its matter is common to all Buddhist belief. Hence it formed the text-book of Buddhist generally after Vasubandhu’s death, whether they followed the Theravada or the Mahayana, while it contains incidentally much evidence on the early Sanskrit Canon. It is rightly said that the Abhidharmakosa is the door for entrance to the philosophy of Theravada and consequently also to that of the Mahayana.Notes and References

Sukomal Chaudhuri, Analytical Study of the Abhidharmakosa. Calcutta: Firma KLM Private Limited, 1983, p. v.

2 Paul Griffiths, Indian Buddhist Meditation-Theory, Development and Systematization, University of Wasconsin-Madison: Unpublished Ph.D Dissertation, 1983. p. 206.
3 Ibid.
4 Nalinaksha Dutt, Buddhist Sects in India, Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass Publishers Private Limited, 1998; Edward Conze. Buddhist Thought in India, London: George Allen & Unwin, 1983; C. Willemen - B. Dessein - C. Cox. Sarvastivada Buddhist Scholasticism, New York 1998; Bhikkhu KL Dhammajoti, Sarvastivada Abhidharma, 3rd Revised Edition: Hong Kong, 2007, and so on.
5DN. II, pp. 7-11.
6 See TER, Vol. II, p.321; Sec Hirakawa Arika, A History of Indian Buddhism from Sakyamuni to Early Mahayana, Delhi: Motialal Banarsidass, 1998, p. 22; See K.T.S. Sarao. The Origin and Nature of Ancient Indian Buddhism. Delhi: Eastern Book Linkers, 1989, pp. 19-27; And also see E. Lamotte, History of Indian Buddhism, Paris: Peeters Press, Louvain, pp. 13-14.
7EB, Vol. Ill, p. 375.
8 Sn. II, p. 78.
9 Sn. II, p. 79.
10 DN. II, p. 167.
11 MN. I,p. 208.
12 Kanai Lal Hazra, History of Theravada Buddhism in South-East Asia, New Delhi: Mushiram Monoharlal Publishers. Pvt. Ltd. 1996. p. 12.
13 The names of his five austerities companions: Annata-Kondanna. Bhaddiya, Vappa, Mahanama and Assaji.
14 MN. I,p. 301.
15 MN. I, p. 302.
16 MN. I, pp. 27-29.
17 Hans Wolf gang Schumann. Buddhism-An Outline of its Teaching and Schools, London: Rider and Company, 1973, p. 21.
18 MN. I, pp. 213-214.
19 Mahathera Narada. The Buddha and His Teachings, Taiwan: The Corporate Body of the Buddha Educational Foundation Taiphi. 1998. p. 56.
20 MN. Ill, pp. 295-298.
21 DN. II, pp. 167-180.
22 Chris O. Akpan. "A Comparative Analysis of Causality in Buddhism and African philosophy.”

Educational Research (ISSN: 2141-5161), p. 723, 2011 is requoted from
http://www.interesjoumals.org/ER. (Accessed on 12/04/2016)

23 Ibid., p. 723.
24 Dr. Ajay Mitra Shastri, An Outline of Early Buddhism, Varanasi: Indological Book House, 1965, p. 42-43.
25 Nalinaksha Dutt, Early History of the Spread of Buddhism and the Buddhist Schools, New Delhi: Rajesh Publications, 1980, p. 122.
26 Dr. Ajay Mitra Shastri (1965), Op. Cit., pp. 44-45.
27 Ibid., p. 45.
28 P.V. Bapat, 2500 Years of Buddhism, New Delhi: Publication Division. Ministry of Information and Broading, Government of India, 2012, p. 32.
29 Ibid., pp. 33-34.
30 Ibid., p. 36
31 Dr. Ajay Mitra Shastri (1965), Op. Cit., pp. 48-49.
12 Ibid., p. 50.
P.V. Bapat (2012), Op. Cit., pp. 83-84.
34 Dr. Ajay Mitra Shastri (1965), Op. Cit., p. 56.
35 Ibid., pp. 56-58.
36 Ved Seth, "Origin and Development of The Sarvastivada" in Sanghasen Singh (Ed.). Sarvastivada and Its Traditions, Delhi University: Amar Printing press. 1994. p. 159.
37 Dr. Ajay Mitra Shastri (1965), Op. Cit., pp. 65-66.
jS Ved Seth (1994), Op. Cit., pp. 159-160.
j9 Early Buddhist Schools, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Early_Buddhist_schools. (Accessed on 18/04/2016)
40 Yamakami Sogen, Systems of Buddhistic Thought, Delhi: Eastern Book Linkers, 2009, p. 105.
41 Ved Seth (1994), Op. Cit., p. 161.
42 P.V. Bapat (2012), Op. Cit., p. 88
43 Ibid., p. 88.
44 Dr. Ajay Mitra Shastri (1965), Op. Cit., p. 185.
45 P.V. Bapat (2012), Op. Cit., p. 91.
46 Ibid., pp. 91-92.
47 Ibid., p. 96.
48 Ibid., p. 96.
49 Ibid., p. 96.
50 Ibid., p. 98.
51 Ibid., p. 98.
52 Ibid., p. 99.
53 Ibid., p. 102.
54 Ibid., p. 104.
55 Yamakami Sogen (2009), Op. Cit., p. 105.
56 It is now extant in Chinese.
57 These Sastras are preserved in Chinese translations only - originals are lost.
58 A.C. Banerjee. “The Sarvastivada of Buddhist Thought” in Sanghasen Singh (Ed.), Sarvastivada and Its Traditions, Delhi University: Amar Printing press, 1994, pp. 3-5.
59 Maurice Wintemitz, History of Indian Literature, Vol. II, New Delhi: Oriental Books Reprint Corporation, 1977, pp. 232.
60 Ibid., p. 226.
61 P.V. Bapat (2012), Op. Cit., pp. 89-90.
62 Ved Seth (1994), Op. Cit., p. 162.
bJ Maurice Wintemitz (1977), Op. Cit., p. 231.
b4 Yamakami Sogen (2009), Op. Cit., p. 112.
65 Ibid., p. 112.
bb C. Willemen - B. Dessein - C. Cox, Sarvastivada Buddhist Scholasticism, New York, 1998, pp. 16- 17.
b7 Bhikkhu KL Dhammajoti, Sarvastivada Abhidharma, Hong Kong: Centre of Buddhist Studies, The University of Hong Kong, 2007, p. 69.
bS A.C. Baneijee (1994), Op. Cit., p. 11.
69 EB, Vol I, p. 37.
70 Ibid., pp. 37-38.
71 Bhikkhu KL Dhammajoti (2007), Op. Cit., pp. 12-13.
72 Ibid., p. 2.
73 Maurice Wintemitz (1977), Op. Cit., p. 237.
74 EIP, Vol. VII, p. 81.
75 P.V. Bapat (2012), Op. Cit., p. 93.
76 Junjird Takakusu, The Essentials of Buddhist Philosophy, New Delhi: Mushiram Manoharlal Publishers PVT. LTD, 1975, p. 57.
77 Ibid., p. 57.
78 A.C. Baneijee (1994), Op. Cit., pp. 6-8.
79 Bhikkhu KL Dhammajoti (2007), Op. Cit, p. 98.
80 EIP, p. 110.
81 EB, Vol. I, pp. 51-52.
82 A.C. Baneijee (1994), Op. Cit., p. 9.
83 Junjird Takakusu, “On the Abhidharma Literature of the Sarvastivadins”, (Journal of the Pali Text Society, 1904-5, pp. 118-119.
84 P. Pradhan (Ed.), Abhidharmakosabhasyam, Patna: K.P. Jayaswal Research Institute, 1975, pp. 11- 12
85 Ibid., p.12.
86 Vasubandhu, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vasubandhu. (Accessed on 20/04/2016)
87 Stefan Anacker, Seven Works of Vasubandhu, Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass Publishers Private Limited, 2013, p. 11.
88 Hajime Nakamura. Indian Buddhism. Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass. 1987, p. 268.
89 ER, 9526.
911 Stefan Anacker (2013), Op. Cit., p. 11.
91 Vasubhandhu. http://en.wikipedia.Org/wiki/Vasubandhu#Biography. (Accessed on 20/04/2016)
92 Stefan Anacker (2013), Op. Cit., p. 13.
93 Ibid..p. 14.
94 Junjiro Takakusu (1975), Op. Cit., pp. 60-62.
95 Stefan Anacker (2013), Op. Cit., p. 15.
96 Vasubandhu (fl. 4th or 5th cn. C.E.) by K. T. S. Sarao, http://www.iep.utm.edu/vasubandhu/. (Accessed on 21/04/2016)
97 Stefan Anacker (2013), Op. Cit., p. 18.
98 ER, 9526.
99 Stefan Anacker (2013), Op. Cit., p. 18-9.
100 Ibid., p. 20.
101 Ibid., p. 21.
102 Ibid., p. 22.
103 Vasubhandhu. http://en.wikipedia.0rg/wiki/Vasubandhu#Bi0graphy. (Accessed on 22/04/2016)
104 Stefan Anacker (2013), Op. Cit., p. 23.
105 ER, 9256.
106 Le Manh That. The Philosophy of Vasubandhu. Ho Chi Minh City, 2006, p. 41.
107 Ibid., p. 35.
108 Ibid., p. 37.
109 Stefan Anacker (2013), Op. Cit., pp. 7-9.
110 Sukomal Chaudhuri (1983), Op. Cit., p. 5.
111 Vasubandhu, http://en.wikipedia.0rg/wiki/Vasubandhu#And_Buddhist_l0gic. (Accessed on 22/05/2016)
112 Sukomal Chaudhuri (1983), Op. Cit., p. 7.
Yamakami Sogen (2009), Op. Cit., pp. 113-114.
114 Jame Paul McDermott, Development in the Early Buddhist Concept of Karma, New Delhi:
Mushiram Manoharlal Publishers PVT. LTD, 1984, p. 128.
115 Junjiro Takakusu (1975), Op. Cit.. pp. 56-58.
116 Ibid., pp. 60-61.

</poem>