Pramāṇa · Search · About · API

Early Monastic Buddhism v2.c36.s3: Vibhajyavāda

Early Monastic Buddhism v2.c36.s3

Language
English

Vibhajyavāda

v2.c36.s3.1

This is one of the schools enlisted by Bhavya and Vinītadeva, but not by Vasumitra. It does not also appear in the list of schools of the Ceylonese chronicles. Bhavya and Vinītadeva treat it as an offshoot of the Sarvāstivāda school. Prof. La Vallée Poussin has traced in the Chinese commentary of the Vijñaptimātratā-siddhi a passage in which Vibhajyavādins are identified with the Prajñaptivādins.⁶ This apparently refers to the Bahuśrutīyavibhajyavādins,⁷ by which name the Prajñaptivādins distinguished themselves from the Bahuśrutīyas. Prof. Poussin has shown that the position of the Vibhajyavādins cannot be clearly made out as their doctrines have much in common with the doctrines of the Sarvāstivādins, Mahāsaṅghikas, Sammitīyas and others. To add to this confusion, we have the Ceylonese traditions, in which the Pāli School, i.e. the Theravādins preferred to call themselves, Vibhajyavādins.¹ This anomalous position of the Vibhajyavādins, it seems, may be explained by regarding them not as an independent school, but as a term to denote those who did not accept the doctrines of a particular school in toto.² To wit, it may be shown that those Sarvāstivādins who did not accept the *sarvam asti* thesis in toto and held instead the opinion that the past which has not yet produced its fruits and the future does not exist were known as Vibhajyavādins, i.e. Sarvāstivāda-vibhajyavādin just as we have Bahuśrutīya-vibhajyavādin. On this analogy we may explain that among the Theravādins perhaps, there were some dissenting groups who were distinguished as Theravāda-vibhajyavādins. The Ceylonese monks of Mahāvihāra probably preferred to call themselves Vibhajjavādin as we find it clearly expressed in the versified table of contents of chapter III of the Cullavagga³ and in the colophon of the commentary on the *Tika-paṭṭhāna*,⁴ as also in the *Dīpavaṃsa*, (xviii. 41, 44). In the account of the Third Council, as given in the Ceylonese chronicles¹ as also in Buddhaghosa’s commentaries,² the Vibhajjavādins were declared as orthodox monks.³

v2.c36.s3.2

⁶ Kośa, Intro., p. lv

v2.c36.s3.3

⁷ See above, p. 108.

v2.c36.s3.4

¹ *Mahāvaṃsa*, p. 54.

v2.c36.s3.5

² See *Kośa*, Index, p. lvi; V, p. 23-24 fn. quoting *Arthapradīpa*, p. 48. "Les Vibhajyavādins ou bien sont des maîtres divergents du Grand Véhicule, ou bien toutes les écoles du Petit Véhicule sont nommées Vibhajyavādins: ceux-ci ne sont pas une école déterminée. Par conséquent, dans le *Mahāyānasamgraha* (Nanjio 1183), les Vibhajyavādins sont expliqués comme Mahīśāsakas; dans la *Vibhāṣā*, comme Sāmmutiyas."

v2.c36.s3.6

³ See *Vinaya*, CV, pp. 72, 312: ācariyānaṃ Vibhajjavādānaṃ Tambapaṇṇidīpapasādakānaṃ Mahāvihāravāsīnaṃ vācanā saddhammatthitiyā ti.

v2.c36.s3.7

⁴ *Tika-paṭṭhāna* (Cy), p. 366: ācariyānaṃ vādam avihāya

v2.c36.s3.8

¹ *Mahāvamsa*, V, 271

v2.c36.s3.9

² *Kathāvatthu-aṭṭhakathā*, p. 6

v2.c36.s3.10

³ Before Vibhajjavāda came to refer to a sect, it simply meant one who dealt with the metaphysical problems analytically, from a particular standpoint as opposed to one who solved the problems straight-away (*ekamsavādin*) by a direct answer See *Majjhima*, II, pp 99, 107. cf. EMB., I, p. 124: *Vibhajjavyākaraṇīva* and *Ekamsavyākaraṇīva*. In the *Majjhima*, I, p. 163; *Papañcasūdani*, II, p 171, Buddha declared that he knew *theravāda*, which, according to Buddhaghosa, meant *thirabhāvavāda* (mental steadiness). Though these two terms *Vibhajjavāda* and *Theravāda* were used in the Nikāyas, they did not denote any sect, but we may take them as the source, from which the sectarian name issued later on.

v2.c36.s3.11

As Vasumitra does not count the Vibhajjavādins as one of the sects, he has not mentioned any special doctrines of theirs. It is only in the *Abhidharmakośa* that we come across certain doctrines attributed to this sect. Evidently Vasubandhu had in his mind the Sarvāstivāda-vibhajjavādins. The doctrines as summarised by Prof. La Vallée Poussin are in short as follows:—

v2.c36.s3.12

i Sound is an effect (saddo vipāko, *Kun.* xii. 3; *Kośa*, i. 37)

v2.c36.s3.13

ii The faculties of faith, memory etc. (*Śraddhendriya*, *Smṛtindriya* etc.) are pure (*anāsrava*). (*Kośa*, ii. 9).

v2.c36.s3.14

iii There is no intermediate state of existence (*antarābhava*) (*Kośa*, iii. 10).

v2.c36.s3.15

iv The pratītyasamutpāda is unconstituted (*asaṃskṛta*) (*Kośa*, ii. 28).

v2.c36.s3.16

v Abhidhyā, vyāpāda, mithyādṛṣṭi are physical acts (*kāyika*).

v2.c36.s3.17

Vibhajjavādisissānam etc: p 367 theravamsappadīpanam therānam Mahāvihāravāsinam vamsālaṅkārabhūtena vipula-visuddhabuddhinā Buddhaghoso ti therena katā.

v2.c36.s3.18

vi Bhagavān is always in meditation (*Kośa*. Fr. transl. iv. p. 40 n) and has no *middha* (*Ibid*). vii *Bhavatṛṣṇā* is abandoned by *bhāvanā* (*Kośa*, iv. 10-11). viii Arhats have no fall (*Kośa*. vi. 58). ix There are 41 Bodhipakṣika-dharmas (*Kośa*. vi. p. 281n: the four additional dharmas are the four ārya-vaṃsas . See *Mahāvyutpatti*). x There is *rūpa* (matter) in the Ārūpya-dhātu (*Kośa*. viii. 3. See Fr. transl. p. 135 n.).

v2.c36.s3.19

Some schools like the Andhakas, Mahāsaṅghīkas, Mahīśāsakas point out that *rūpa* exists in arūpyadhātu but in a very subtle state. The contention of the Vibhajyavādins is possibly the same as that of the Tāmraparṇīyas¹ (*Kośa*. i. 39) who state that *mano-dhātu* is a material organ, which they call *hadaya-vatthu* (see *Visuddhimagga*, p. 447). This basis of the *mano-dhātu*, which is material, exists in the Arūpyadhātu.

v2.c36.s3.20

¹ *Vyākhyā*, p. 39: ताम्रपर्णीयापि हृदयवस्तु मनोविज्ञानधातोराश्रयं कल्पयन्ति । तस्माद्रूपधात्वपि विद्यत इति वर्णयन्ति । आरूप्यधात्वपि हि तेषां रूपमभिप्रेतम् ।

v2.c36.s3.21

xi The Ārya of the 4th Ārūpya (i.e. nevasamjñānāsamjñāyatana) obtains arhathood without the aid of the *magga*, This is a doctrine of the Mahīśāsakas. xii There are twelve viparyāsas, (see *Vyākhyā*, p. 454) of which eight are removed by *darśanamārga* and four by *bhāvanāmārga* (*Kośa*. v. p. 23 n.). xiii *Jñāna* is the same as dharmas which are good by nature (*svabhāvataḥ*), while *vijñāna* means those dharmas which are good by association (*samprayogataḥ*), i.e., associated with *jñāna* (*Kośa*. iv. p. 33 n. ix, p. 248 n). xiv Realisation of the four truths takes place all at once and not gradually² (*Kośa*, vi, pp. 185, 123).

v2.c36.s3.22

² See above, pp. 154-6.

Linked texts (6)