Early Monastic Buddhism v2.c35.s6.t2: Kośa on the Sautrāntika doctrines
Early Monastic Buddhism v2.c35.s6.t2
- Language
- English
Kośa on the Sautrāntika doctrines
v2.c35.s6.t2.1
Though Vasubandhu belonged to the Sarvāstivāda school, in his writings occasionally he gave preference to the Sautrāntika views. For this, he was severely criticised by Saṃghabhadra, who was a staunch Sarvāstivādin. In the Kośa, Vasubandhu has referred to the Sautrāntika doctrines on several occasions and pointed out the differences between the Sarvāstivāda and Sautrāntika views. Prof. La Vallée Poussin has summed up these references in his introduction to the French translation of the *Kośa*. As these throw welcome light on the Sautrāntika doctrines a gist of the same is given here:—
v2.c35.s6.t2.2
(i) The Sautrāntikas do not accept the *Abhidharmapiṭaka* of the Sarvāstivādins as authoritative (*Kośa*, i. 3). On this point Vasubandhu supports the Sautrāntikas.¹
v2.c35.s6.t2.3
¹ Acc. to the Sautrāntikas, *buddhavacana* is *vāg-vijñapti*, see *Kośa*, i 25; iv. 2.
v2.c35.s6.t2.4
(ii) The *asaṃskṛtas* have no real existence. There is a long controversy in the *Kośa* (ii. 55) between the Sarvāstivādins and the Sautrāntikas as to whether the *asaṃskṛtas* have any cause or fruits.
v2.c35.s6.t2.5
(iii) The Sautrāntikas deny the *citta-viprayuktas* (i.e. *saṃskāras* not associated with mind, e.g. *prāpti*, *sabhāgatā*, *jīvitendriya*, etc.) as real as contended by the Sarvāstivādins (*Kośa*, ii. 35-36).
v2.c35.s6.t2.6
(iv) The Sautrāntikas like all other schools reject the Sarvāstivāda view that past and future exist (*Kośa*, v. 25).
v2.c35.s6.t2.7
(v) By admitting the existence of the past and of *prāpti*, the Sarvāstivādins explained the function of causality. The Sautrāntikas denied both of these and asserted instead the existence of the subtle *citta* or *bīja* or *vāsanā* and explained thereby the working of the formulae of causation (*Kośa*, ii. 36, 50).
v2.c35.s6.t2.8
(vi) The Sautrāntikas carry the *kṣaṇikatva* doctrine to the extreme point, asserting that it almost verges on zero, and as such, objects can have, in fact, no duration (*sthiti*). It further asserts that as destruction of objects takes place almost immediately, there is no necessity of any effective cause.² (vii) The Sautrāntikas deny the existence of *avijñapti* (non-communicating corporeal and vocal acts)¹ as a real (*dravya*). They hold in agreement with the Theravādins that an *avijñapti* act is mental (*cetanā*), a *kāyasamcetanā*.
v2.c35.s6.t2.9
² See *Kośa*, iv 2-3. The *Ṣaddarśanasamuccaya* cites this passage from a sūtra of the Sautrāntikas: पञ्चमानि भिक्षवः संज्ञामात्रं प्रतिज्ञामात्रं संवृतिमात्रं व्यवहारमात्रं । कतमानि पञ्च । अतीतोऽध्वा अनागतोऽध्वा सहितको विनाशः आकाशं
v2.c35.s6.t2.10
¹ For details, see *Kośa*, iv. 3.
v2.c35.s6.t2.11
(viii) According to the commentary of the *Vijñaptimātratāśāstra*, the Sautrāntikas are divided in their opinion relating to the conception of *citta* (mind) and *caittas* (mental states). According to the Dārṣṭāntika-Sautrāntikas, *citta* only exists but not the *caittas*, but according to other Sautrāntikas *caittas* also exist and their number according to some is three, viz., *vedanā*, *samjñā* and *cetanā*, while according to others it is four, ten or fourteen. Some Sautrāntikas admit the existence of all the *caittas* of the Sarvāstivādins (for details, see *Kośa*, transl., ii. 23, fn.).
v2.c35.s6.t2.12
(ix) The Sautrāntikas hold that the body of an arhat is pure, as it is produced by knowledge.²
v2.c35.s6.t2.13
² See above, p. 89 n 164.
v2.c35.s6.t2.14
(x) There may be many Buddhas simultaneously.³
v2.c35.s6.t2.15
³ See above, p. 75.
Linked texts (2)
- ཆོས་མངོན་པའི་མཛོད་ཀྱི་བཤད་པ — Classical Tibetan
- Ṣaḍdarśanasamuccaya — Haribhadra Sūri, Sanskrit