Sarvastivada Abhidharma - Huifeng

SARVĀSTIVĀDA ABHIDHARMA BSTC6039 – ESSAY 1 M B ORSBORN ( 釋慧峰 ) ID# 2006936639

2006/11/11 “Who has completely destroyed all the forms of darkness, And drawn living beings forth from the mire of birth and death. Venerate and pay obeisance to such a teacher in accord with the truth. The treatise of the Abhidharma Kośa I shall now teach.” – Vasubandhu, Abhidharma Kośa

Sarvastivada Abhidharma

CONTENTS INTRODUCTION.................................................................................................................. 2 SARVĀSTIVĀDA: ...................................................................................................................... 2 ABHIDHARMA: ........................................................................................................................ 4 A BRIEF SURVEY OF SARVĀSTIVĀDA ABHIDHARMA LITERATURE .............. 6 THE TREATISES OF THE EARLIEST PERIOD .............................................................................. 6 Dharma-skandha-śāstra, by Śāriputra / Maudgalyāyana...................................... 6 Saṃgīti-paryāya-śāstra, by Mahākauṣṭhila / Śāriputra......................................... 7 Prajñapti-śāstra, by Maudgalyāyana / Mahākātyāyāna......................................... 8 THE LATER, MORE DEVELOPED TEXTS .................................................................................. 8 Jñānaprasthāna-śāstra, by Kātyāyanīputra ............................................................. 9 Vijñānakāya-śāstra, by Devaśarman........................................................................ 10 Prakaraṇapāda-śāstra, by Vasumitra ..................................................................... 12 Dhātukāya-śāstra, by Pūrṇa / Vasumitra............................................................... 13 THE VIBHĀṣA COMPENDIA ................................................................................................... 13 Abhidharma Mahāvibhāṣā Śāstra, by Katyāyāniputra......................................... 13 DEVELOPMENT OF THE SARVĀSTIVĀDA MANUALS .............................................................. 14 Abhidharmāmṛta(-rasa)-śāstra, by Ghoṣaka ......................................................... 15 Abhidharmahṛdaya, by Dharmaśrī (or Dharmaśreṣṭhī)...................................... 15 Abhidharmahṛdaya-sūtra, by Upaśānta ................................................................. 16 Abhidharmahṛdayavyākhyā, by Dharmatrāta....................................................... 16 THE ABHIDHARMA KOŚA, ITS BHĀṣYA AND COMMENTARIES: ............................................. 16 Abhidharma Kośa-[mūla-]kārikā, by Vasubandhu................................................. 16 Abhidharma Kośa-bhāṣyam, by Vasubandhu........................................................... 17 Abhidharma Kośa-śāstra-tattvārthā-tīkā, by Sthiramati .................................. 17 Abhidharma Nyāyānusārā, by Saṃghabhadra ....................................................... 17 Abhidharma Samayapradīpikā, by Saṃghabhadra ................................................. 18 Abhidharmāvatāra, by Skandhila ........................................................................... 18 Abhidharmadīpa with Vibhāṣāprabhāvṛtti, by Vimalamitra ............................... 18 SUMMARY:........................................................................................................................... 19 SARVĀSTIVĀDA ABHIDHARMA: ............................................................................................ 19 BEYOND: ............................................................................................................................... 20 BIBLIOGRAPHY .................................................................................................................. 21 ORIGINAL TEXTS:.................................................................................................................. 21 SECONDARY SOURCES: ......................................................................................................... 22

1

Sarvastivada Abhidharma

INTRODUCTION This paper is a basic introduction and survey of the large corpus of literature known as the Sarvāstivāda Abhidharma. The Sarvāstivāda is a very important movement in the development of early Buddhist theory and praxis. Many of its doctrines became precursors to the development of later systems of Buddhist though, including the Sautrāntika, and Mahāyāna in both Madhyamaka and Yogācara forms. These doctrines were presented in a number of texts called the Abhidharma. There are many texts in the Sarvāstivāda Abhidharma, which in their entirety were written over the course of many centuries. This paper is only a brief survey on the matter, and the reader is recommended in particular, to refer to: Bhikkhu Kuala Lumpur Dhammajoti’s Sarvāstivāda Abhidharma; Willemen, Dessein & Cox’s Sarvāstivāda Buddhist Scholasiticsm; Venerable Yinshun’s Study of the Abhidharma, Texts and Commentators of the Sarvāstivāda, (說一切有部為主的論書與論師之研究); and Pruden’s English translation of de la Vallee Poussin’s Abhidharma-kośa-bhāṣyām; for a more complete analysis. This paper also serves as an introduction to the author’s second essay for the course BSTC6039: Abhidharma Doctrines and Controversies, entitled ‘Development of Abhidharma Theory of Citta and Caitasika’.

Sarvāstivāda: Sarvāstivāda is a Sanskrit term, meaning literally ‘the theory of all exists’. Although there is some dispute over how the word ‘sarvāstivāda’ is to be analyzed, 1 the general consensus is that it is made of three parts: sarvāstivāda = sarva ‘all’ or ‘every’ + asti ‘exist’ + vāda ‘speak’, ‘say’ or ‘theory’. This equates perfectly with the Chinese term, 說一切有部 shuo1yi1qie4you3 bu4, which is literally ‘the sect that speaks of the existence of everything’, as used by Xuanzang and other translators. Their main thesis can be described as ‘the existence of all dharmas in the past, present and future’. The Abhidharma Kośa-bhāṣya, a later text, retrospectively defines it as: 25c-d. He who affirms the existence of the dharmas of the three time periods [past, present and future] is held to be a Sarvāstivādin. 2

1 2

See Willemen, Dessein & Cox: Sarvāstivāda Buddhist Scholasticism, Brill, 1998. pg. 16. de la Vallee Poussin, Pruden: Abhidharma-kośa-bhāṣyām, Asian Humanities Press, 1988. Pg. 807.

2

Sarvastivada Abhidharma

Although the Sarvāstivāda themselves would state that their teaching of ‘all exists’ is a direct teaching of the Buddha himself, as shown by their attributing the earliest Abhidharma texts to direct disciples of the Buddha, and constant reference to the sūtras throughout, the school in its entirety is more rightly to be considered as part of the age of scholastic Buddhism. In this time frame, they take their name in contradistinction to the Vaibhajyavāda – ‘the theory of distinction’ – ie. the a distinction is to be made as to what dharmas do and do not exist, in the past, present and future. The Abhidharma Kośa-bhāṣya also states: Those who affirm the existence of the present [dharmas] and a part of the past, namely the existence of action which has not given forth its result; and the non-existence of the future and a part of the past, namely the non-existence of action which has given forth its result, are regarded as Vibhajyavādins; [they do not belong to the Sarvāstivādin School]. 3 Although united with regards to their central thesis of sarvāsti, there were different theories on how this was actually to be explained and understood. The Abhidharma Kośa-bhāṣya describes four main theses on sarvāsti: 25d. There are four types of Sarvāstivādins accordingly as they teach a difference in existence (bhāvānyathātva), a difference in characteristic (lakṣaṇānyathātva), a difference in condition (avasthānyathātva), and mutual difference (anyonyathātva). 4 Later Sarvāstivāda takes a combination of the first and third theses as its model, rejecting the others. It was on this basis, that the school’s doctrines were defended in the face of growing external, and sometimes even internal, criticism. There were also many other subsidiary doctinres and issues, all inextricably related, that different Sarvāstivāda leaders and scholars, debated and discussed with earnest intent. Their doctrines were not confined to ‘all exists’, but also include the theory of momentariness (kṣānika), conjoining (saṃprayukta) and simultaneity (sahabhū), conditionality (hetu and pratyaya), the culmination of the spiritual path (marga), and others. These doctrines are all inter-connected however, and it is the principle of ‘all exist’ that is the axial doctrine holding the larger movement together when the precise details of other doctrines are at stake.

3 4

de la Vallee Poussin, Pruden: Abhidharma-kośa-bhāṣyām, Asian Humanities Press, 1988. Pg. 807. de la Vallee Poussin, Pruden: Abhidharma-kośa-bhāṣyām, Asian Humanities Press, 1988. Pg. 808.

3

Sarvastivada Abhidharma

The Sarvāstivāda was also known by other names. 5 In particular, Hetuvāda and Yuktivāda. Hetuvāda comes from hetu – ‘cause’, which indicates their emphasis on causation and conditionality. They proposed their own system of six conditions and five results, which aided their explanation of conjoining and simultaneous causation. Yuktivāda comes yukti – ‘reason’ or even ‘logic’, which shows their use of rational argument, and syllogism. A study of the various texts reveals the development of increasingly sophisticated systems of argument, which in turn became influential on later, formal, Buddhist logic and reasoning. They even take up the name Śūnyavāda when confronting the Pudgalavāda ‘personalists’, which refers to their standpoint of being ‘devoid of a pudgala’, and should not be confused with later Mahāyāna Śūnyavāda.

Abhidharma: The term ‘abhidharma’ is comprised of two terms, each with several meanings: abhi ‘towards’ or ‘higher’ + dharma ‘phenomena’ or ‘truth’. It is translated in Chinese both phonetically and literally, depending on circumstance. Although many defintions are given, two basic meanings are predominant: The first is clear, decisive discernment and ascertainment. The second that of being direct, and face to face, with dharmas (as phenomena) and nirvāṇa (as the truth) in particular. 6 This is expressed clearly in the text known as the Kośa: A dharma is that [phenomena] which is able to sustain its own characteristic. If this dharma is able to face towards, or able to have direct observation of the paramartha-dharma – that is nirvāṇa, the [true] characteristics of dharma, and realization of the four noble truths – this is known as abhidharma. 7 The doctrines and tenets of the Sarvāstivāda school were presented in the Abhidharma literature, which is a separate tradition from the Pali Abhidhamma tradition. From study of those surviving texts, they appear to have been written mainly in Sanskrit. However, the most complete source for the study of this Abhidharma literature at present is those texts that were translated into Chinese. In general, the Sarvāstivāda were considered Ābhidhārmikas, ie. ‘those who uphold the Abhidharma as the criteria [for understanding the sūtras]’, and thus the Buddha

5

6

7

Bhikkhu Kuala Lumpur Dhammajoti: Sarvāstivāda Abhidharma, Center for Buddhist Studies, Śrī Lanka, 2002. pg. 33~35. Bhikkhu Kuala Lumpur Dhammajoti: Sarvāstivāda Abhidharma, Center for Buddhist Studies, Śrī Lanka, 2002. pg. 10. Abhidharma Kośa-bhāśya: T29n1558_p0001b09~b11

4

Sarvastivada Abhidharma

Dharma. However, the Abhidharma text themselves were still considered as a collation of of the words of the Buddha. This is expressed in the Kośa as: Without the exposition of the abhidharma, the pupil is unable to examine the dharma-s. However, it was spoken by the Fortunate One in a scattered manner. The Venerable Kātyāyanīputra and others, having collected it, established it [as the abhidharma] – just as the Venerable Dharmatrāta made the Udāna-varga [by collecting the scattered sayings of the Buddha]. 8 As the Sarvāstivāda and their Abhidharma developed, the reliance on the authority of the Abhidharma over that of sūtra became an important issue. It was this that became the dividing point for the later Sautrāntika movement, ie. ‘those who rely on sūtra as authoritative’. This was firstly a movement within the Sarvāstivāda, and later as distinct from it. Whether based on the sūtras or the Abhidharma, all participants in the discussion recorded within the texts still maintain the basic premises of the Buddha Dharma. Great efforts were made to elucidate without error the doctrines of the middle way, karma as moral cause and its effect, the spiritual path, and so forth. As such, the primary emphasis was soteriological, the holy path leading to liberation and bliss. The actual amount of the Abhidharma literature of the Sarvāstivāda school is quite staggering in size. It contains nearly 600 fascicles in the Taisho, 9 over four volumes – T26b ~ T29. Studies of these texts in English have barely scratched the surface at present. Although this paper makes an attempt to investigate these texts with as much reference to the Chinese translations as possible, it is recognized that a huge amount of material is left uncovered. It is admitted that this is a major short coming of this paper, and conclusions drawn should be considered in this light.

8

9

P Pradhan, ed.: Abhidharmakośabhāśya of Vasubandhu, 2nd Edition, Patna, 1975. As quoted in: Bhikkhu Kuala Lumpur Dhammajoti: Sarvāstivāda Abhidharma, Center for Buddhist Studies, Śrī Lanka, 2002. pg. 6. With approximately 10,000 Chinese characters per fascicle, this is a total of approximately six million characters.

5

Sarvastivada Abhidharma

A BRIEF SURVEY OF SARVĀSTIVĀDA ABHIDHARMA LITERATURE The Treatises of the Earliest Period The first three texts are traditionally regarded as being composed by direct disciples of the Buddha. The specific authors are different for the various traditions in which these texts survive, but through their contents and format, they are seen to be the oldest of the Abhidharma scriptures. They deal mainly with spiritual practice, with explanations of excerpts from the sūtras. Before these are discussed, it is worthwhile mentioning the Śāriputra Abhidharma, (T28, No. 1548, 舍利弗阿毘曇論, of 30 fascicles in Chinese translation). Although not included as part of the Sarvāstivāda Abhidharma per se, this text is considered as a kind of model text, which has exerted considerable influence over both the Sanskrit Abhidharma and Pali Abhidhamma traditions, in terms of structure and content. 10

Dharma-skandha-śāstra, by Śāriputra / Maudgalyāyana The ‘collection of dharmas’, composed by Śāriputra – according to the Sanskrit and Tibetan, or Maudgalyāyana – according to Chinese sources. The Chinese edition was translated by Xuanzang, and appears as: T26, No. 1537, 阿毘達磨法蘊足論, 尊者 大目乾連造, 三藏法師玄奘奉 詔譯, in 12 fascicles. It begins with a mātṛkā as a summary of the topics, showing its antiquity, as these were supposedly only assigned by the Buddha himself. It presents 21 subjects, the first 15 of which concern the practice of the spiritual path, and the realization of its fruits. The 16th deals with ‘various issues’. Subjects 17 to 20 deal with the enumeration of the āyatanas, dhātus and skandhas as encompassing ‘all dharmas’. The 21st is regards dependent origination. Frauwallner concludes that the Dhātuskandha is from a period before then split between the Sanskrit and Pāli Abhidharma traditions, based on its correlation with the Pāli Vibhaṅga. He thus dates it to pre-Aśoka Buddhism. 11 Venerable Yinshun

10

11

Venerable Yinshun: Study of the Abhidharma, Texts and Commentators of the Sarvāstivāda, (說一切有部 為主的論書與論師之研究), Zhengwen Publishing, 1968. pg. 66. According to Willemen, Dessein & Cox: Sarvāstivāda Buddhist Scholasticism, Brill, 1998. pg. 69.

6

Sarvastivada Abhidharma

notes it being mentioned in the Mūlasarvāstivāda Vinaya-vyākaraṇa, 12 indicating its early inclusion in the Sarvāstivāda canon. These two combined, would suggest the Mūlasarvāstivāda having its own canon at quite an early date. Venerable Yinshun also cites three points for considering this text to be sourced in a pre-sectarian Abhidharma: 1. It similar analysis of rūpa to the Śāriputta Abhidhamma and the Dhammapariyāya (considered to be the oldest Abhidharma texts of any tradition); 2. No mention of avijñapti-rūpa, as per the Śāriputta Abhidhamma; and 3. The emphasis on the five indriya and five bāla, as paramount in the spiritual path. 13

Saṃgīti-paryāya-śāstra, by Mahākauṣṭhila / Śāriputra The ‘recitation together’, composed by Mahākauṣṭhila – according to the Sanskrit and Tibetan, or Śāriputra – according to the Chinese sources. The Chinese recension was translated by Xuanzang: T26, No. 1536, 阿毘達磨集異門足論, 尊者舍利子說, 三 藏法師玄奘奉 詔譯, in 20 fascicles. Structurally, the Saṃgīti-paryāya is similar to the Dharma-skandha, though earlier, as the latter is mentioned in the former. It is basically a mātṛkā on the early teachings, arranged in groups of dharmas by number, similar to the Ekottarikāgama. This text, as the name implies, is essentially a commentary on the Saṃgīti-sūtra (T 9, Digha-nikāya no. 33). This also indicates that the contents are more a gathering together and assemblage of the Buddha’s Dharma, than any new theory or discussion. The background to the first recital of the Saṃgīti-sūtra, as the Jainas fell into disarray after the death of the Mahāvīra, and the Buddhist Saṃgha gathered together to recite the core teachings of the Dharma to prevent such a split in their own religion, perhaps indicates the fear of present or impending schism arising in the Saṃgha on the part of those who compiled this Abhidharma work, some time later. The Saṃgīti-sūtra is also the basis of a commentarial work, in the later Yogācara-bhūmi-śāstra, some several hundred years later. Venerable Yinshun notes it being mentioned in the Mūlasarvāstivāda Vinaya-vyākaraṇa, indicating its early inclusion in the Sarvāstivāda canon. As this text has some 14 references to the Dhātu-skandha, “as the Dhātu-skandha states…”,

12

13

Mūlasarvāstivāda Vinaya-vyākhya: T24n1451_p0408b03, as indicated by Venerable Yinshun: Study of the Abhidharma, Texts and Commentators of the Sarvāstivāda, (說一切有部為主的論書與論師之研究), Zhengwen Publishing, 1968. pg. 124. Venerable Yinshun: Study of the Abhidharma, Texts and Commentators of the Sarvāstivāda, (說一切有部 為主的論書與論師之研究), Zhengwen Publishing, 1968. pg. 131.

7

Sarvastivada Abhidharma

it is also clear that this is post-Dhātu-skandha in composition. The Chinese Taisho reverses the order of the two. Obviously they are very closely related. 14

Prajñapti-śāstra, by Maudgalyāyana / Mahākātyāyāna The ‘designation [of dharmas]’ by Maudgalyāyana – according to the Sanskrit, Tibetan and MPPU, or Mahākātyāyāna – according to Puguang. The Chinese translation is by Dharma-rakṣita: T26, No. 1538, 施設論, 西天譯經三藏朝散大夫, 試光祿卿傳梵大 師賜紫, 沙門臣法護等奉 詔譯, in a somewhat shorter 7 fascicles. The importance of this text is shown in its being quoted 135 times by the MVS, 15 though these references are not exclusively Sarvāstivāda in nature. The format is of mātṛkā, followed by question and answer explanations, with references to the sūtras for orthodoxy. Venerable Yin Shun relates the name prajñapti through the Chinese 施設 and 假 to the Śāriputra Abhidharma in regards the ‘false designation’ of the bonds (saṃyojana), contact (sparśa) and mind (citta), 16 thus indicating that it is a very early text. Willemen, Dessein & Cox assign this text to the next period, 17 based on its “abstract principles of organization” and “complexity of doctrinal analysis”. However, though the content is different from the Saṃgīti and Dharma-skandha, one could scarcely consider it more abstract in nature. It simply reflects the nature of the sūtras upon which it is based. In fact, it has relatively more direct references to the sūtras for its overall size than many of the developed texts, and a similar use of questions and answers as the Saṃgīta.

The Later, More Developed Texts It is at this point that more specifically Sarvāstivāda doctrines appear, demonstrated by the composers themselves, and also their references to their contemporaries. The structure of the texts moves away from the mātṛkā format above, and tends to follow systematized but non-sūtric classifications.

14

15

16

17

“…the collated dharmas of the Dharma-skandha…” in Mūlasarvāstivāda Vinaya-vyākhya: T24n1451_p0408b11 as indicated by Venerable Yinshun: Study of the Abhidharma, Texts and Commentators of the Sarvāstivāda, (說一切有部為主的論書與論師之研究), Zhengwen Publishing, 1968. pg. 134. Bhikkhu Kuala Lumpur Dhammajoti: Sarvāstivāda Abhidharma, Center for Buddhist Studies, Śrī Lanka, 2002. pg. 59. Venerable Yinshun: Study of the Abhidharma, Texts and Commentators of the Sarvāstivāda, (說一切有部 為主的論書與論師之研究), Zhengwen Publishing, 1968. pg. 136. Willemen, Dessein & Cox: Sarvāstivāda Buddhist Scholasticism, Brill, 1998. pg. 18 & 70.

8

Sarvastivada Abhidharma

Jñānaprasthāna-śāstra, by Kātyāyanīputra The ‘establishment of knowledge’, composed by Kātyāyanīputra, with the Chinese translated by Xuanzang, T26, No. 1544, 阿毘達磨發智論, 尊者迦多衍尼子造, 三藏法 師玄奘奉 詔譯, in 20 fascicles. It also appears under the name Aṣṭaskandha-śāstra in the Taisho, with the translation by Saṃghadeva, Zhu-fo—nian and Dharmapriya: T26, No. 1543 阿毘曇八犍度論, 迦旃延子造, 符秦罽賓三藏僧伽提婆, 共竺佛念譯, in a slightly larger 30 fascicles. There is a slight difference in format of the two, perhaps indicating that they are different recensions from various sub-schools of the Sarvāstivāda. 18 The tradition of the Mahāvibhāṣā states that it was taught by the Buddha himself, but differs as to the circumstances. It was later Kātyāyanīputra who was responsible for the compilation thereof. The Mahāprajñāpāramitopadeśa (which actually refers to the Aṣṭaskandha) states that a 100 years after the Buddha’s demise, there arose doctrinal disputes among the great masters giving rise to distinctly named schools. 19 Xuanzang maintains that it was written some three centuries after the Buddha, which would be c. 150 BCE. The orthodox Vibhāṣa takes this as the ‘root’ Abhidharma, though references are sometimes made to the Prakaraṇapāda in the same terms. It became known as the ‘body’ of the Abhidharma, with the six remaining texts of the early period known as the ‘legs’ or ‘supports’. This is based on textual authority, and not a temporal defintion, given the respective historical order of these seven treatises. Ie. the Jñānaprasthāna is not sourced from the six legs, but neither is it directly sourced from the sūtras. This is also a reminder that these texts were all probably in a state of constant revision and update, for possibly several hundred years. There are thus mutual reference and borrowing of format and content, that cannot be summarily described by a simply sequential order. The outline of the text more closely approximates that earliest of models, the Śāriputra Abhidharma, than those specifically Sarvāstivāda treatises. This is evidenced in its use of the saṃyojanas, prajñā, karma, indrīya, mahābhūta, dhyāna and dṛṣṭi as main divisions. A similar system is later continued through into the Kośa,

18

19

See Willemen, Dessein & Cox: Sarvāstivāda Buddhist Scholasticism, Brill, 1998. pg. 155~158, for more on this debate. Mahāprajñāpāramitopadeśa: T25n1509_p0070a06

9

Sarvastivada Abhidharma

and Hṛdaya texts. Prior to this is a division of ‘assorted issues’. The analysis is of three main types, according to Venerable Yinshun: 20 1. Analysis of the sūtras themselves – in order to find the actual underlying principle, rather than acceptance of the content at face value, which could lead to apparent contradiction. This indicates the Ābhidhārmika standpoint of taking the Abhidharma as pramana in understanding the doctrine. 2. Analysis of the nature, or characteristics, of individual dharmas. Rather than the use of sūtra categories pertaining to spiritual praxis, the tendency here is to group by type. Thus, dharmas are assigned as either rūpa, citta, caitasika or citta-viprayukta – the conditioned dharmas, and also the unconditioned dharmas. Specifics as to each type are given, as well as detailed discussions of related dharmas. These are then again categorized according to their being with or without outflows; visible or non-visible; past, present or future; as to realm; and so forth. 3. Analysis of the relationship between various dharmas. As the preceding analysis lends itself to plurality, and the possibility of falling into independent Saṃkhya-type realities, this analysis completes the Buddhist teaching of dependent origination, preventing such an error. Using kṣanika theory, it establishes the six-fold conditionality theory, that would later be a special feature of the Sarvāstivāda. 21 This is the earliest text in which the theory appears. It also includes some detail on citta-viprayukta-dharmas. The influence of the Vijñānaprasthāna is seen strongly in the Vibhāṣa, and this influenced the subsequent Hṛdaya texts, and also the Kośa and commentaries. More about this below.

Vijñānakāya-śāstra, by Devaśarman This is the ‘group of consciousness’ was composed by Devaśarman – according to both Sanskrit and Chinese sources, with the Chinese translated by Xuanzang: T26, No. 1539, 阿毘達磨識身足論, 提婆設摩阿羅漢造, 三藏法師玄奘奉 詔譯, in 16 fascicles. This is the first Abhidharma text that is not attritubted to a direct disciple of the Buddha, but written some 100 years after the Buddha’s parinirvāṇa, according to Xuanzang’s disciple Puguang. Venerable Yinshun however, concludes it was

20

21

Venerable Yinshun: Study of the Abhidharma, Texts and Commentators of the Sarvāstivāda, (說一切有部 為主的論書與論師之研究), Zhengwen Publishing, 1968. pg. 184. Jñānaprasthāna Śāstra: T26n1544_p0920c06

10

Sarvastivada Abhidharma

composed around the first century CE, and was influenced by the Jñānaprasthāna, though differs in several aspects. In this regard, he likens it to the Prakaraṇapāda, which is also a different position on the Sarvāstivāda as a whole. This is an esteemed Sarvāstivāda text wherein the Sarvāstivāda is upheld against Vibhajyavāda objections, in the first of its six sections. It is here that the theory of sarvāstivāda, the existence of all dharmas through past, present and future, is first presented. 22 Interestingly, the issue is only brought up when Moggaliputta-tissa makes the standard claim of the Vibhajyavāda, “past and future [dharmas] do not exist, [only] present and unconditioned [dharmas] do exist”. The Vijñāna-kāya has four main theses to refute this: 1. The impossibility of two simultaneous cittas; 2. The impossibility of karma and vipāka being simultaneous; 3. That vijñāna only arises with an object; and 4. Attainments are not necessarily present. In addition to refuting the Vibhajyavāda view, the second section is a refutation of the Vatsiputriya Pudgalavāda claim of: “the paramartha of the ārya [truths] can be attained, can be realized by the ‘pudgala’, present and complete, therefore it is certainly [the case] that the ‘pudgala’ exists”. 23 The Sarvāstivāda take the title ‘Śūnyavāda’ in order to refute this claim, though this is obviously meaning ‘empty of pudgala’, rather than the later Śūnyavāda of the Mahāyāna, ie. the Madhyamaka. The first refutation centers around the two extremes of ‘absolute identity’ and ‘absolute difference’. The second hinges on the continuity of the existence of the skandhas in the past, present and future – sarvāstivāda – proper. 24 The third and fourth sections concern the causal condition, and the conditioning object of vijñāna respectively. The fifth includes the two other conditions, the immediate condition and predominant condition. These conditions are discussed in terms of their realm, nature, temporal location, etc. in a format that came to be standard for the Sarvāstivāda Abhidharma. Such a system also appears in Abhidharma type analysis of dharmas in the Mahā-prajñāpāramitā-sūtra and its Upadeśa. 25 The remaining five sections are doctrinal elaborations of the Sarvāstivāda school, including issues regarding perception, dependent origination and conditionality.

22 23 24

25

Vijñāna-kāya Śāstra: T26n1539_p0531a27 Vijñāna-kāya Śāstra: T26n1539_p0537b03 Venerable Yinshun: Study of the Abhidharma, Texts and Commentators of the Sarvāstivāda, (說一切有部 為主的論書與論師之研究), Zhengwen Publishing, 1968. pg. 168. See Mahāprajñāpāramitopadeśa: T25n1509_p0493a~b.

11

Sarvastivada Abhidharma

Prakaraṇapāda-śāstra, by Vasumitra All traditions agree on Vasumitra being the composer of this text, the ‘classified by group’. The Chinese was translated by Xuanzang as: T26, No. 1542, 阿毘達磨品類足 論 , 尊 者 世 友 造 , 三 藏 法 師 玄 奘 奉 詔 譯 , in 18 fascicles; with another partial translation by Guṇabhadra and Bodhiyaśa: T26, No. 1541, 眾事分阿毘曇論, 尊者世友 造, 宋天竺三藏求那跋陀羅, 共菩提耶舍譯, in 12 fascicles. Its commentary the Pañca- vastu- vibhāṣā (五事毘婆沙論 T 1555) by Dharmatrāta, was also translated by Xuanzang. This is the major text of the central Abhidharma period. It influenced other non-Sarvāstivāda schools, though not in the polarizing manner that the later Jñānaprasthāna and Vibhāṣa texts did. Its format for dharma analysis is used, for example, by the Mahāprajñānpāramitopadeśa, which also states that the first four chapters where composed by Vasumitra, with the other four chapters by Kāśmīra arhats. 26 Yinshun considers this Vasumitra to be the same Vasumitra who appears in the Mahāvibhāṣā later. 27 This seems to indicate that before the later formalization of Sarvāstivāda doctrines, the Vijñāna-kāya and Prakaraṇapāda were perhaps representative of several differing lines of thought, though were only later over-shadowed by the Vibhāṣa and its orthodoxy. It would be interesting to perhaps trace some of these differences through the likes of Buddhadeva and Dharmatrāta, as they are presented in the Vibhāṣa. It contains two systems of dharma classification, one five-fold, the other seven-fold. It was the former five-fold system that later became the standard format, and was important for the establishment of the respective characteristics, nature and functions of the various dharmas, especially the caitasika and citta-viprayukta-dharmas. The seven-fold system bears some similarities to Pāli Abhidhamma, and seems to made of categories of dharmas that are all sūtra based. It also expands on the traditional four-fold theory of conditionality, by introducing some 20 types of condition, in paired dharmas. Although these are not the later six-fold classification, this may have opened the door for later innovation.

26 27

Mahāprajñāpāramitopadeśa: T25n1509_p0070a16~19. Venerable Yinshun: Study of the Abhidharma, Texts and Commentators of the Sarvāstivāda, (說一切有部 為主的論書與論師之研究), Zhengwen Publishing, 1968. pg. 148.

12

Sarvastivada Abhidharma

Dhātukāya-śāstra, by Pūrṇa / Vasumitra The ‘group of elements’, was written by Pūrṇa – according to Sanskrit and Tibetan sources, or Vasumitra – according to Chinese sources. Again, the Chinese translated by Xuanzang: T26, No. 1540, 阿毘達磨界身足論, 尊者世友造, 三藏法師玄 奘奉 詔譯, in a short 3 fascicles. This comparatively short text bears similarities with the Pāli Sthaviravāda text, the Dhātu-kathā, in style and format, though it uses a different mātṛkā. It also bears a close connection with the Prakaraṇapāda, through several items common to both. In its seven-fold division of dharmas in particular, it does provide, a closer look at the various divisions of dharmas, in particular citta and caitasika, with its conjoined and non-conjoined aspects. As it is not mentioned in the Mahāvibhāṣā, this also suggests it is either a later text, or originally a fragment removed from an earlier text. 28 The above seven texts comprise the seven-fold Sarvāstivāda Abhidharma proper, in its ‘body’ and ‘six legs’. The texts and development of thought do not end here, however, but continue to grow and expand.

The Vibhāṣa Compendia Vibhāṣā is a term meaning ‘compendium’, ‘treatise’ or simply ‘explanation’, derived from vi + √bhaṣ, ‘to speak’ or ‘to explain’. Evidence strongly indicates that there were originally many different Vibhāṣa texts, mainly commenting on the Jñānaprasthāna, but also commenting on other Abhidharma texts too. The relationship between all these texts is very complex, as there is mutual influence, and the texts underwent some development from initial inception to completion. The Taisho has three, however, which are compendiums on the Jñānaprasthāna, and its six legs: the Abhidharma Mahāvibhāṣā Śāstra (T1545), the Abhidharma Vibhāṣā Śāstra (T1546) and the Vibhāṣā Śāstra (T1547).

Abhidharma Mahāvibhāṣā Śāstra, by Katyāyāniputra Of these three, the Abhidharma Mahāvibhāṣa Śāstra is considered prominent. Its authorship is traditionally attributed to five hundred arhats, some 600 years after the parinirvāṇa of the Buddha. 29 It’s compilation, however, is attributed to a certain Katyāyāniputra. This date and authorship is based on the Chinese translation, also

28

29

Venerable Yinshun: Study of the Abhidharma, Texts and Commentators of the Sarvāstivāda, (說一切有部 為主的論書與論師之研究), Zhengwen Publishing, 1968. pg. 162 Abhidharma Mahāvibhāṣa: T27n1545_p0001a12 and Abhidharma Vibhāṣa: T25n1546_p0001a9~b11

13

Sarvastivada Abhidharma

of Xuanzang, and also other historical considerations. 30 It appears in the Taisho in its own volume, due to its huge size: T27, No. 1545, 阿毘達磨大毘婆沙論, 五百大阿 羅漢等造, 三藏法師玄奘奉 詔譯, in a massive 200 fasc. which is larger the the previous Abhidharma texts combined, and a third of the total Abhidharma literature! The Vibhāṣa Śāstra is an older translation, translated by Buddhavarman and Daotai: T28, No. 1546, 阿毘達磨毘婆沙論, 迦旃延子造, 五百羅漢釋, 北涼天竺沙門浮陀跋摩 共道泰等譯. As such an immense text, it contains a huge array of material. This includes the discussion of basically every doctrinal issue of the day, as presented by not only non-Sarvāstivāda views, such as the Vaibhajyavāda, Pudgalavāda, Mahāsaṃghika, and others; but also non-Buddhist systems, such as the Saṃkhya, the Vaiśeṣika, and others; and finally of the Sarvāstivāda itself, as represented by its various learned and venerable leaders. With regards the former two, their ‘unorthodox’ and ‘incorrect’ doctrines are taken to task from the perspective of the Buddhist Sarvāstivāda. With regards the latter, several views are often expressed as more detailed descriptions of Sarvāstivāda doctrines. These are often open ended, with no particular explanation favored over another, though sometimes a particular explanation is extolled as being particularly clear and in harmony with the teachings. Due to both of the above reasons, the Vibhāṣa literature is particularly useful in not only understanding this school, but in also getting a good perspective on the general state of the Buddha Dharma, and other other non-Buddhist religions at the time. The Sarvāstivāda of Kāśmīra held the Mahāvibhāṣā as authoritative, and thus were given the moniker of being Vaibhāṣikas – ‘those [upholders] of the Vibhāṣa’. Some scholars feel that some of the Vibhāṣa texts that are now lost, possibly represented a similar authoritative text as held by the Gandhāra Sarvāstivāda, or other centers of orthodoxy. 31 It was due to the predominance of this text and its teachings at the time, that Vasubandhu engaged in the study thereof, as a compendium that encompassed all the essential teachings.

Development of the Sarvāstivāda Manuals Following the Vibhāṣa were a series of smaller manual, or summary digests, from various authors. With the tenets of the school being set out clearly, it now became a

30

31

Venerable Yinshun: Study of the Abhidharma, Texts and Commentators of the Sarvāstivāda, (說一切有部 為主的論書與論師之研究), Zhengwen Publishing, 1968. pg. 212. Willemen, Dessein & Cox: Sarvāstivāda Buddhist Scholasticism, Brill, 1998. pg. 236.

14

Sarvastivada Abhidharma

priority to present the key points in a way suitable for ease of study and practice. It is interesting that the trend of texts of ever increasing size, followed by a series of shorter, more concise texts, also appeared later in the Prajñāpāramitā Sūtras of the Mahāyāna. 32 Although the later Abhidharma Kośa and its commentaries include active discussion, elaboration, and polemics, the shorter Hṛdaya texts and the like, tend to be more in the way of summaries. The texts themselves are:

Abhidharmāmṛta(-rasa)-śāstra, by Ghoṣaka The Chinese translation is 阿 毘 曇 甘 露 味 論 , T28, T1553, 2 folios, of unknown translator. Bhikkhu Dhammajoti considers this is an introduction to the Jñānaprasthāna and the Mahāvibhāṣā, though Venerable Yinshun places it before these. In doctrinal matters, it inclines towards the Prakaraṇa and Gāndhāra schools, which were less conservative. The author Ghoṣaka is not the Ghoṣaka mentioned in the Mahāvibhāṣā and the Kośā. The sequence of the contents indicates a return to the progressive dharmas of the spiritual path, rather than elucidation of dharmas by category. Such a method is also used in the Satya-siddhi-śāstra, and other later non-Sarvāstivāda treatises that have Abhidharma style formats. Progressing through the practices of merit, to the process of saṃsaric existence, it ends with meditative absorption, wisdom and the fruits of the path.

Abhidharmahṛdaya, by Dharmaśrī (or Dharmaśreṣṭhī) The Chinese translation is 阿毘曇心論, T28, T1550, 4 folios, translated by Saṅgadeva and others. This is a short set of summary verses, and thus a popular ‘beginners’ manual. Its content is sympathetic to Gāndhāra, Sarvāstivāda and even some Vibhajyavāda notions. Using verses followed by a brief commentary, it harkens back to earlier use of maṛṭka in the earliest Abhidharma texts. This is also seen in the categories of each chapter , which are only slightly adjusted from the Amṛta-rasa. The ten chapters can be viewed in two parts: The first seven chapters cover the Four Noble Truths – dhātu and saṃskāra being the Truth of Suffering; karma and saṃyojana being the Truth of the Origin; ārya-pudgala and jñāna being the Truth of Cessation; and dhyāna the Truth of the Path. The last three chapters cover sundry issues, the sūtras, and points of

32

Conze: The Perfection of Wisdom in Eight Thousand Lines & Its Verse Summary, San Francisco: Four Seasons Foundation, 1973. pg. iv.

15

Sarvastivada Abhidharma

discussion. This is much more systematic than the larger Abhidharma texts, with much bulk arranged around doctrine rather than praxis. The Hṛdaya is considered to be a predecessor of the Kośa, due to its general similarity of layout and presentation. Perhaps it was only due to being contemporary with the orthodox Vibhāṣa, that this text did not enjoy greater fame and use.

Abhidharmahṛdaya-sūtra, by Upaśānta The Chinese translation is 阿 毘 曇 心 論 經 , T28, T1551, 6 folios, translated by Narendrayaśas. This text is very similar in layout and content to the Hṛdaya, in use of verse and commentary. It has exactly the same chapter headings, both regards the Noble Truths, and also the three miscellaneous chapters.

Abhidharmahṛdayavyākhyā, by Dharmatrāta The Chinese translation is 雜 阿 毘 曇 心 論 , T28, T1552, 11 folios, translated by Sanghabūti. The third and last of the Hṛdaya continues similarly in terms of format and presentation, though is somewhat larger. The chapter headings are the same as the earlier two Hṛdaya texts, with the addition of a chapter entitled viniścaya – determinations. It brings back orthodox Kāśmīri Vaibhāṣika views, yet is tolerant of other positions. 33 Many scholars say it is the immediate source of the Kośa.

The Abhidharma Kośa, its Bhāṣya and Commentaries: Abhidharma Kośa-[mūla-]kārikā, by Vasubandhu In Chinese translation as: 阿毘達磨俱舍論本頌, T29, T1560, 1 folio, trans. Xuanzang. It is claimed that these verses (kārikā) from Vasubandhu were originally written in a manner that supported orthodox Vaibhāṣika tenets, and were thus accepted by them. It was only with the subsequent Kośa-bhāṣya that criticism of the school appeared. However, there are various views as to Vasubandhu’s study of the Vibhāṣa, and his position vis-à-vis the Kaśmīra school. The Kośa is the root verses of the Kośa-bhāṣyam, see below.

33

Bhikkhu Kuala Lumpur Dhammajoti: Sarvāstivāda Abhidharma, Center for Buddhist Studies, Śrī Lanka, 2004. pg. 73.

16

Sarvastivada Abhidharma

Abhidharma Kośa-bhāṣyam, by Vasubandhu In Chinese translation as: 阿毘達磨俱舍論, T29, T1558, 30 folios, translated by Xuanzang; and also: 阿 毘 達 磨 俱 舍 釋 論 , T29, T1559, 22 folios, translated by Paramārtha. With the addition of the Bhāṣyam commentary to the original Kārikā verses, Vasubandhu set this text somewhat outside the sphere of orthodoxy, with the addition of what became known as Sautrāntika views, in addition to personal viewpoints. The format is similar to the Hṛdaya texts, and can also be viewed as taking the form of the Four Noble Truths. The miscellany at the end is not-present, and doctrinal discussions are contained within the respective chapter itself. A tenth chapter on ‘refuting the pudgala’, obviously aimed at the Pudgalavāda with its ‘self neither identical with, nor different from, the skandhas’, is appended at the end. Most scholars agree that this is originally a separate work, for several reasons, including its lack of verse outline. This is a very important text, as a culmination of the new development of Abhidharma as presented in the above texts. It is an excellent look into the late Sarvāstivāda through its several sub-schools, at a time when the Sautrāntika was recognized as distinct from the Sarvāstivāda. It contains developed theses of several issues of the Sautrāntika, in opposition to the Sarvāstivāda. These include views on karma, viprayukta-caitasika-dharmas, spiritual attainment, and perception. Known in India as the “Treatise of Intelligence”, it had a profound influence not only at the time, but also in the later Mahāyāna schools which took this text as its own form of Abhidharma, along with Asaṅga’s Abhidharma Samuccaya.

Abhidharma Kośa-śāstra-tattvārthā-tīkā, by Sthiramati Appearing in the Chinese as: 俱舍論實義疏, T29, T1561, 5 folios, translator unknown. This is a later commentary on the Kośa-bhāṣya, which appears in partial translation in the Chinese.

Abhidharma Nyāyānusārā, by Saṃghabhadra Known in Chinese as: 阿毘達磨順正理論, T29, T1562, 80 folios, translator Xuanzang. This text appeared after 12 years preparation by the author – a prominent Vaibhāṣika leader, as a direct response to the Kośa (though it itself is over twice the size of the Kośa-bhāṣya!) Saṃghabhadra takes Vasubandhu to task where he is found to be misrepresenting the orthodox Vaibhāṣa school, using the same Kārikā verses as the Kośa, and parts of the Bhāṣya.

17

Sarvastivada Abhidharma

Abhidharma Samayapradīpikā, by Saṃghabhadra In Chinese as: 阿毘達磨藏顯宗論, T29, T1563, 40 folios, translated by Xuanzang. This is a further defense of the Nyāyānusārā, by the same author, and also uses the Kośa-kārikā. It is a further presentation of orthodox Vaibhāṣika Sarvāstivāda tenets. Both of these two texts by Saṃghabhadra show the Sarvāstivāda doctrine taking dogmatic turns, as more sophisticated arguments are used to maintain the theories of ‘all exists’, momentariness, simultaneous causation and conjoining, and other key doctrines. Strong foundations for Buddhist logic are seen throughout, in every point of discussion.

Abhidharmāvatāra, by Skandhila In Chinese as: 入阿毘達磨論, T28, T1554, 2 folios, translation by Xuanzang. The last of the Sarvāstivāda Abhidharma texts in Chinese. Turning away from large compendia and polemical discussion, this text which is aimed at ‘beginners’, is a summary of all fundamental Sarvāstivāda doctrines. This demonstrates a culmination of these doctrines of the day. The author, Skandhila, was a ‘western’ or ‘foreign’ master, ie. not from Kaśmīr, though with Vaibhāṣika views. As a somewhat less ultra-orthodox Ābhidhārmika, he was not hostile to other Sarvāstivāda positions, though critical of Sautrāntika.

Abhidharmadīpa with Vibhāṣāprabhāvṛtti, by Vimalamitra No Chinese version of this text exists. There are varying opinions as to its authorship, possibly Saṃghabhadra’s pupil, or the śāstri Iśvāra. It generally supports a Vaibhāṣika stance on doctrinal mattes.

18

Sarvastivada Abhidharma

SUMMARY: Sarvāstivāda Abhidharma: From this vast array of texts, one can begin to see the complexity of the Sarvāstivāda as an entire movement within Buddhism, from the early to medieval periods. Closer examination of each text, in terms of its own contents, and relation to the other texts, is required, lest gross generalizations blur correct understanding of the reasons and implications of the movement as a whole. The first Abhidharma texts followed formats similar to the Śāriputra Abhidharma, an ancient root-text that can neither be considered exclusively Sarvāstivāda nor Vibhajyavāda. This, along with the Saṃgīti-pariyāya and Dhātu-skandha-pāda, were rehearsals of key teachings from the sūtras. These teachings were arranged either by number, or by their place within the practice of the Buddhist path to liberation. Following these are texts which begin to arrange by dharma type, and give further categorization of dharmas. Beginnings of different views as to these appear, as do doctrines regarding the existence of dharmas in past, present and future; the pudgala; and whether caitasika and citta-viprayukta dharmas are distinct entities or not. The Sarvāstivāda appears as a loose group based on the common acceptance of the theory of sarvāsti – ‘all [dharmas] exist [in past, present and future]’, as opposed to vibhajja – ‘discrminating [what dharmas exist and do not exist]’. Abhidharma becomes the authority for understanding the Buddha’s Dharma, as a means of explicating the Buddha’s teachings which were strewn throughout the sūtras. Seven texts, the ‘body’ and the ‘six legs’ are the seven key Abhidharma scriptures. Larger texts develop, culminating in the various Vibhāṣa compendia. These contain all the various Sarvāstivāda doctrines within the seven Abhidharma texts, and form basis of Kāśmīri Vaibhāṣika orthodoxy. Various forms of logical argument and reasoning become more formalized, and more widely used, as the school introduces more ideas not seen in the sūtras to support their notions of sarvāsti, momentariness, conditionality, and the like. Well presented smaller texts also begin to appear at this time, refuting some of the orthodox position, or at least more liberal in perspective. These smaller texts involve less polemical discussion and rhetoric, and return to the use of Abhidharma as a guide to spiritual praxis. Taking a format conforming to the Four Noble Truths, key points are presented in a concise verse, followed by commentary. The most acclaimed of these was the Abhidharma Kośa and subsequent Bhāṣya. It drew criticism from the Vaibhāṣika orthodoxy, on the grounds of misrepresentation and upholding Sautrāntika views. Enduring such criticism, this remained as a key text during a very important and exciting time for 19

Sarvastivada Abhidharma

the development of Buddhist thought, for the Sarvāstivāda and other schools besides.

Beyond: Although the above survey focuses on the key texts of Sarvāstivāda Abhidharma throughout several periods, these are by no means the last word on the subject. Such a powerful movement obviously exerted a very strong influence on the Buddhism of the day, and its subsequent development. Later Abhidharma-type texts of other schools, notably the Śūnyavāda and Yogācara Mahāyāna, had to delineate their tenets in terms of these texts. They were particularly influenced by the Kośa-bhāṣya, with its somewhat anti-Abhidharma stand at times. The later writings of Nāgārjuna, Vasubandhu, Asaṅga and others, show many influences. It is only perhaps the Mahāyāna compendia of the Mahāprajñāpāramitopadeśa and Yogācara-bhūmi-śāstra that rival the large Abhidharma works in terms of size and scope, though many smaller texts also became well studied and important doctrinal sources. As studies of Buddhism and the Buddhist scriptures progress in the English language, it may be found that a greater understanding of the Sarvāstivāda Abhidharma is of great help in unlocking hitherto unfathomed ‘secrets’ and ‘mysteries’ within the doctrines and scriptures of later schools.

20

Sarvastivada Abhidharma

BIBLIOGRAPHY Original Texts (Taisho): T24n1451:

根本說一切有部毘奈耶

Mūlasarvāstivāda Vinaya-vyākhya

T25n1509: T25n1536: T25n1537: T25n1538: T25n1539: T25n1540: T25n1541: T25n1542:

大智度論 阿毘達磨集異門足論 阿毘達磨法蘊足論 阿毘達磨施設論 阿毘達磨識身論 阿毘達磨界身論 眾事分阿毘達磨 阿毘達磨品類足論

Mahāprajñāpāramitopadeśa Abhidharma Saṃgītiparyāya Śāstra Abhidharma Dharma-skandha-pāda Śāstra Abhidharma Prajñāpti Śāstra Abhidharma Vijñāna-kāya Śāstra Abhidharma Dhātu-kāya Śāstra Pañca-vastu Abhidharma Abhidharma Prakaraṇa-pāda Śāstra

T26n1543: T26n1544:

阿毘曇八犍度論 阿毘達磨發智論

Abhidharma Astaṇga-khanda Śāstra Abhidharma Jñānaprasthāna Śāstra

T26n1545: T26n1546: T26n1547:

阿毘達磨大毘婆沙論 阿毘曇毘婆沙論 鞞婆沙論

Abhidharma Mahāvibhāṣā Śāstra Abhidharma Vibhāṣā Śāstra Vibhāṣā Śāstra

T26n1548: T26n1550: T26n1551: T26n1552: T26n1553: T26n1554:

舍利弗阿毘曇 阿毘曇心論 阿毘曇心論經 雜阿毘曇心論 阿毘曇甘露味論 入阿毘達磨論

Śāriputra Abhidharma Śāstra Abhidharma Hṛdaya Śāstra Abhidharma Hṛdaya-sūtra Śāstra Abhidharma Hṛdaya-vyākhya Śāstra Abhidharma Amṛta-rasa Śāstra Abhidharma Avatāra Śāstra

T25n1558: T25n1560: T25n1562: T25n1563:

阿毘達磨俱舍論 阿毘達磨俱舍論本頌 阿毘達磨順正理論 阿毘達磨藏顯宗論

Abhidharma Kośa Bhāṣyam Abhidharma Kośa Kārikā Abhidharma Nyānānusārā Śāstra Abhidharma Samayapradīpikā Śāstra

21

Sarvastivada Abhidharma

Secondary Sources: Conze, Eduard: The Perfection of Wisdom in Eight Thousand Lines & Its Verse Summary, San Francisco: Four Seasons Foundation, 1973. Dhammajoti, Bhikkhu Kuala Lumpur: Sarvāstivāda Abhidharma, Center for Buddhist Studies, Śrī Lanka, 2002 & 2004. Abhidharma Doctrine and Controversy on Perception, Center for Buddhist Studies, Śrī Lanka, 2004. “Abhidharma and Upadeśa”, in Journal of Buddhist Studies, Center for Buddhist Studies, Śrī Lanka, Vol. III, August 2005. “Sarvāstivāda, Dāṛṣṭāntika, Sautrāntika and Yogācāra”, in Journal of Buddhist Studies, Center for Buddhist Studies, Śrī Lanka, Vol. IV, August 2006. Pradhan, P. ed.: Abhidharmakośabhāśya of Vasubandhu, 2nd Edition, Patna, 1975. de la Vallee Poussin, Pruden: Abhidharma-kośa-bhāṣyām, Volumes I, II, III & IV, Asian Humanities Press, 1988. Willemen, Dessein & Cox: Sarvāstivāda Buddhist Scholasticism, Brill, 1998. Yinshun, Venerable: Study of the Abhidharma, Texts and Commentators of the Sarvāstivāda, (說一切有部 為主的論書與論師之研究), Zhengwen Publishing, 1968.

22