-
Yogcra 2003 Lectured by Professor Bhikkhu Dhammajoti
Yogcra
Contents Lecture 2: 5th March 2003 Background of the arising of
Yogcra Lecture 3: 12th March 2003 Hnayna schools that contributed
to the doctrine of Yogcra
Lecture 4: 19th March 2003 Idealistic doctrines of Drntika
Lecture 5: 26th March 2003 Bja theory of Sautrntika
Lecture 6: 2nd April 2003 Bja theory of Sautrntika (II)
Lecture 7: 9th April 2003 The theory of prva-anu-dhtu
Lecture 8: 30th April 2003 The theory of laya-vijna
Lecture 9: 21st May 2003 The theory of laya-vijna
Lecture 10: 28th May 2003 The nature of laya-vijna
Lecture 11: 4th June 2003 Three aspects of laya-vijna and the
theory of bja
Lecture 12: 11th June 2003
The important of sahabh relationship for the establishment
of
vijaptimtrat
Lecture 13: 18th June 2003 Vsan
Lecture 14: 25th June 2003 Vsan and bja
Lecture 15: 2nd July 2003 Six characteristics of the bja
Lecture 16: 9th July 2003 Three levels of Truth in Yogcra
Lecture 17: 6th August 2003 Three svabhva
Lecture 18: 3rd Sept 2003 Three svabhva
Lecture 19: 17th Sept 2003 Bhrnti-vijna as opposed to
amala-vijna
Lecture 20: 24th Sept 2003 Vijaptimtrat
Lecture 21: 1st Oct 2003 Yukti logical proof
Lecture 22: 8th Oct 2003 Epistemological Idealism
Lecture 23: 22nd Oct 2003 Pratyaka and Anumna
Lecture 24: 23rd Oct 2003 Theory of Pratyaka of Sautrntika and
Vaibhika
1
-
Yogcra 2003 Lectured by Professor Bhikkhu Dhammajoti
Lecture 2: 5th March 2003
Background of the arising of Yogcra Yogcra originated from about
3rd or early 4th century AD. Asaga and Maitreya (ntha) are
so-called founders. Scholars are not sure whether this Maitreya
refers to the Maitreya in the Buddhist legend. According to
tradition, Asaga got the teachings of Yogcra from the Maitreya
Buddha in meditation, and then he preached. This tradition is
clearly given in the Chinese tradition. For instance, there is one
stra called *ryadean-vikhypana-stra by Asaga. It says In the past,
I heard the teachings of the Yogcra-bhmi from Meitreya, the
Bhagavat, who is to become the Buddha in the future This is a
tradition, or in a way it really does not matter whether Maitreya
was a real historical figure. What is important is, there is an
early part of Yogcra philosophy which is said to have been
transmitted by a certain people called Maitreya. This is a belief
of a people. The idea of receiving teachings from the Buddha in
meditation is really a very early one. There is another stra that
is translated around the 2nd century AD. That stra is translated by
a certain Central Asian monk called Lokakema. The earliest Chinese
translation can be traced to about 2nd century AD. At that time,
there was a Mahyna Stra. This Stra is restored as
*Pratyutpanna-buddha-samukhvasthit-stra. The idea is, when in
meditation, the Buddha can be appeared in front in the very present
moment. The stra says, when you do meditation, concentrate your
mind, you can see the Buddha. Also you can ask questions from the
Buddha. There is another text, about the early 3rd century AD, [] *
Revata-paripcch-stra [conjectured by Professor]. In this stra, a
certain Arhat went up to Tusita and met Maitreya Buddha, and he
asked question from Meitreya Buddha. This is to show that this idea
of meeting Buddha in meditation. Even more specifically, meeting
Maitreya in Tusita has been around in the very early period. So we
can therefore think of the historical origin of Yogcra in this way
that most slightly, Asaga in his meditation, he has various
problems in his mind. He wanted to solve doctrinal problems, and he
practiced Yogcras tradition. He practiced meditation and with
particular those problems in his mind. He got certain solutions and
inspirations. He interpreted these as the teaching from Maitreya.
That is reasonable to think like this. The background of Asaga time
Asaga was from the Northern India. Tradition says that his brother
was Vasubandhu (author of AKB, and also later on he wrote Yogcra
treatises.) Tradition says that, at first, Vasubandhu belonged to
rvakayna (so-called Hnayna). In fact he started as Sarvstivdin. He
was attracted by the teaching of Sautrntika. So he cited the
interpretation and explanation of the Sautrntika whenever he
discussed a controversy between the Sarvstivda and Sautrntika.
Later on we can see slowly he changed and became Mahynist.
Tradition says that his conversion was due to his brother. In
Northern India, there was already a tradition of Yogcra. We can
call it rvaka-yogcra. It is important to realize that, at a
beginning, Yogcra was not Mahynist. Yogcra was a movement of
meditators (Yogcrin-s).
2
-
Yogcra 2003 Lectured by Professor Bhikkhu Dhammajoti
In the Mahvibh (Great commentary on Jnaprasthna), this book was
completed around early 2nd century AD. There were many valuable
data. In this book already, we were told there was movement of
meditator called Yogcrin. We know, therefore there was a movement
of rvaka-Yogcra. In fact they emphasized the ability of the mind to
transform things. They also spoke of the illusory nature of
external thing. For instance, different people look at a woman can
have a different kind of perception. There is a very definite
quotation which explains the attitude of the rvaka-Yogcra who were
recorded in the early 2nd century AD. So the Mahyna-Yogcrin
formally evolved out of this, or in another word, constituted part
of the sources of the Yogcra. The origin of Mahyna is a very
complex. We cannot think of a particular single line of
development. Certainly this rvaka-yogcra is one of the important
sources, because they emphasize the meditational experience. We
learnt from the tradition that there was in fact a vihra in
Northern India called Revata-vihra. We are told by Xuan Zang that
in this vihra, they propagated the practice of rvaka-yogcra.
[Revata, from the early Theravda Buddhism, was a meditator]. One
more fact, by this time, already the Praj-pramit stra was quite
prevalent. The so-called Hnaynists were struggling to answer many
questions made by the early Mahynists, particularly the concept of
nyat (sarvam nyam). That is certainly contradictory to the
Sarvstivda school which says everything has a svabhva. Even when a
thing has become past (atta) or angata, still a svabhva exists as a
dravya (substance). The only thing is that, it doesnt have
activity. But it doesnt mean that it become past, and become no
more; in future, it has not yet existed. Surely that kind of
doctrine is contradictory to the doctrine of nyat. So the rvakayna
had to face the challenge. Asaga was brought up in that kind of
background. He would have learnt various sources from the Yogcra
teaching who based their teaching on meditation. When you meditate,
you realize that what you experienced in meditation seems to be
more real than what is said to be reality in the waking state. When
in the deep meditation, we experience things which are very real to
us. To us, they are more real than the external thing. So these
meditators have a certain traditional teachings which must have
been around in Northern India during Asaga time. So couple with the
fact that, at that time, there was a Mahyna teaching to say,
everything is empty. So doctrinally, there was a clash. Asaga was
exposed to early tradition. He was faced with these problems. In
this background, Asaga tried to solve these doctrinal problems
resulting from the contradiction between the teachings of the rvaka
tradition on the one hand, and the teaching of sarvam nyam on the
other. So we could imagine that Asaga practicing the rvaka-yogcra
as if in the meditation, and tried to find out the answer to this
contradiction. Actually he solved some problems in the meditation
according to tradition from Maitreya. We know that, in this early
stra, there was a tradition of possibility of meeting the Maitreya.
So he got the inspiration, and he attributed to Maitreya. That is
one possibility of looking at the traditional account of the origin
of Yogcra. Then we could divide into two parts. One part was
teaching that were inherited by Asaga, from various sources. But
all these various sources seem to attribute this teaching to
Maitreya, and he himself, having received this teaching, tried to
systematize them and interpret them. So his own interpreted
tradition was sometimes different from what he actually inherited
from diverse sources.
3
-
Yogcra 2003 Lectured by Professor Bhikkhu Dhammajoti
Two, the systematization and interpretation by Asaga himself.
The fundamental portion called mla-bhmi of the Yogcra-bhmi stra
represents the inherited teaching by Asaga. The very portion that
Asaga received is from Maitreya. In this background, one feature is
the dissatisfaction with the Mahyna teaching at that time that
everything is empty. Therefore we can expect that in this early
Yogcra, one major theme is that the early teaching before 3rd
century AD, we have praj-pramit stra, which preached the doctrine
of sarvam nyam. That teaching is not satisfactory. That teaching
was neyrtha. And the teachings of this period inherited and
synthesized by Asaga are ntrtha. Philosophical speaking, early
Yogcra is a kind of epistemological Idealism. Really speaking,
there are two types of Idealism
1. Epistemological Idealism 2. Metaphysical Idealism
As the name suggests in the first form, it emphasizes the
epistemology. In the second form, it emphasizes the ontology. In
the first form, there is an emphasis that in the knowledge process,
the mind can only grasp the psychic content. In other words, our
knowledge is derived from not exactly from the so-called external
object, but from the representation in the mind. This is opposed to
Realism. Realism says that independent of the mind, external
reality exists and we know reality as it is in the material form.
Epistemological Idealism emphasizes that actually we know the
external reality only through the psychic content via mental
content (/ representation in the mind). This type of position does
not deny the external thing do not exist, and does not assert that
the only reality is the mind. It emphasizes about the knowledge
process. How we know thing? We know thing through the mental
content. It says that all the objects that we perceived are not
apart from the mind. However the intrinsic nature (i.e. svabhva)
which is the basis of this object (dharma) exists separately. The
view that the external object we perceived are not apart from the
mind. We only know the object through the mind. But there is an
intrinsic nature of this thing, which is beyond words, and this
intrinsic nature exists as a plurality or separately. In another
words, it doesnt try to reduce everything that we perceived outside
to a single monistic mind. It doesnt go further to say external
things dont exist. So we can say that this is not proper
vijaptimtrat philosophy. It doesnt go to that extent to say that
everything is merely vijapti (here it means vijna). It just say
that, whatever that we can know is necessarily linked up with the
mental content. But those things that we know, the objects/ dharmas
outside are derived from intrinsic nature, this intrinsic nature is
separate in themselves. But when come to metaphysical Idealism, it
says nothing exists apart from the mind. This mind is the absolute
reality. Here certainly, it denies the separate existence of
intrinsic nature of outside. They are all so-called external
objects merely a projection of a single mind. What exists in
reality is only the mind. This is called metaphysical Idealism. We
could say that epistemological Idealism represents the early
Yogcra; and metaphysical Idealism, the later Yogcra.
4
-
Yogcra 2003 Lectured by Professor Bhikkhu Dhammajoti
Therefore we can say later Yogcra is the elaboration on early
Yogcra. Any form of Idealism whether early or late would be opposed
to what is Realism. We think table is so real, in fact they really
are not as they appear to us. This is the position of Idealism in
general. If we want to find the early Yogcra doctrine, go to the
works of Asaga. After Asaga, Vasubandhu and others elaborated
further. And we come to a doctrine that is a kind of logical
development of the earlier form (early Yogcra). In the later
Yogcra, there is a proper vijaptimtrat philosophy. So we have
understood the background of the arising of Yogcra. To summarize,
we have said that Yogcra originated partly form the early Yogcrin-s
called rvaka-yogcra. This tradition was inherited by Asaga. This
tradition was prevalent in Northern India. It was a tradition of
meditation. They emphasized the meditational experience. It
emphasized that the reality so-called experience in meditation is
more real than the so-called external reality. However, it was
essentially rvaka-yna. But at that time, we have praj-pramit
tradition that was well-established starting from the 1st century
BC., or 1st century AD. That tradition preached that everything is
empty. So there was a contradiction. Asaga practicing rvaka-Yogcra
was faced with some kind of contradiction between these two
traditions (1). Everything is empty; (2). Not everything is empty,
svabhva exists. He wanted to solve this doctrinal contradiction,
and while practicing the Yogcra, that was focused on the practice
of visualizing the Maitreya, he found certain answers. So he
ascribed this teaching to Maitreya. Additionally all the teachings
at that time came from different sources, ascribed from Maitreta,
were put together as teachings derived from Maitreya. Yogcra was
divided into two parts:- One part are those inherited from
tradition ascribed to Maitreya. The other part consists of those
teachings which were systematized and elaborated by Asaga. Yogcra
emerged in the background of rvakayna. So rvakayna, the so-called
Hnayna school contributed to the Yogcra teachings also. Drntika
There was a group of Buddhists called Drntika. It was a movement of
popular preacher, who was at the same time, interested very much in
meditation. They utilized all kinds of popular means to preach.
Dhammapada and other texts were derived from this tradition. They
had a lot of ideas which we could say Idealistic. They emphasized
even the unreal thing, non-existent object can serve as an object
of perception. They say that when we perceived something, that
something may be real, existent, or non-existent. This is in
contrast to the Sarvstivda position. For Sarvstivda, whatever that
we perceive is real, existent. For example, we can perceive
individual because there are 5 skandha-s. So the individual is an
idea that is super-imposed on the real. The unreal is based on the
real. So what is conceptualized can also be perceived. But there is
an underlying basis of the real. That is the Sarvstivda tradition.
Drntika hold the view that even the unreal thing can give rise to
perception. Think about it. If you have a teaching that even an
unreal thing can be perceived, that comes very close to Idealism.
Most probably, they were encouraged by their meditational
experience I can imagine unicorn, unicorn is something that doesnt
exist. But I can imagine that, it means I have a conscious of that;
or I can
5
-
Yogcra 2003 Lectured by Professor Bhikkhu Dhammajoti
imagine a tortoise hair, or rabbit horn. Isnt that unreal?
Doesnt it prove that even unreal thing can cause consciousness?
What is the answer of Sarvstivda? They say, when you have a
perception in your mind, for instance, rabbit with horn, what
happen is that, you have experience of perception of the horn, and
the perception of the rabbit. You have put them together. So the
consciousness/ awareness of the rabbit with horn, really is the
super-imposition on the real. But without horn and rabbit, there is
no imagination. This is their approach. At that time, there were
certain Buddhists, particularly Drntika, already had the doctrine,
even non-existent object can serve the object of perception, and
this pave the way for the arising of Yogcra. We shall be looking at
others so-called Hnayna schools that contributed to the doctrine of
Yogcra.
*************************************
Lecture 3: 12th March 2003
Hnayna schools that contributed to the doctrine of Yogcra The
early phase of Yogcra is more probably described as an
epistemological Idealism. In other words, it is a teaching which
says that we dont know external reality directly, but only through
the representation in the mind, or through the psychic contents. In
the epistemological Idealism, there is no definite explicit denial
that external things do not exist. Professor remarked in that
sense, Sautrntika for that matter, even in the earlier phase of
Buddhism could be described as a kind of epistemological Idealism.
In the later phase of Yogcra, they really have gone further and
asserted the idea of cittamtra nothing exists apart from the mind.
The mind is the only absolute reality. Then they come to
metaphysical idealism. Yogcra developed from what is called
rvaka-yogcra. At the beginning, the word Yogcra did not refer to
Mahyna. It refers to a movement of practitioners who emphasize
meditation and stress the supremacy of the mind, the validity of
the meditational experience. These people existed in North India,
and it was the background in which Asaga had this training. He was
so-called Hnaynist. He started as Sarvstivda, and got interested in
meditation. He practiced rvaka-yogcra. In fact, more specific than
that, there was a temple called Revata-vihra in Northern India,
which is said to have courses on rvaka-yogcra. In addition to that,
at that time, Mahyna was existed since the first century A.D, and
there was a teaching of nyat (emptiness). Asaga was confronted with
a contradiction, on the one hand, there was this Mahyna teaching
that everything was empty; and on the other hand, the tradition to
which he had been exposed, said that dharmas are real. He tried to
resolve these doctrinal problems. One could speculate that he
probably tries to achieve it through meditation, then he wanted to
practice Yogcra. In the meditational experience, he seems to have
got some inspiration and insight. Also at that time, there was
already this new form of teaching emerging as Yogcra attributed to
different sources, finally, collectively attributed to a person
called Maitreya. All these put together, we have a type of Yogcra
doctrine which was preached by Asaga which we traced to the teacher
Maitreya. It is very difficult to determine whether Maitreya is
existed or not. Maitreya seems to be a family name. Tradition
described all these early teachings to Maitreya. So we can talk
about the early Yogcra that was the teaching ascribed to Maitreya,
but actually perhaps from different sources, plus
6
-
Yogcra 2003 Lectured by Professor Bhikkhu Dhammajoti
the interpretation by Asaga. Subsequent to that, there was a
development called the later phase of Yogcra. Some people also
included Vasubandhu as crya-s of early phase of Yogcra. Asaga lived
in about 4th century AD or the early 5th century AD. Scholars
argued there are more than one Vasubandhu. At least they said one
Vasubandhu was the author of AKB (the so-called Hnaynist
Vasubandhu), another Vasubandhu who was the brother of Asaga who
was Mahynist. Drntika There was a group of Buddhists called Drntika
[from dnta]. Dnta means simile. Most of them were interested in
meditation, and they also interested in preaching. They believed
that the message of the Buddha must be spread to the masses. In
that process, they did not hesitate to use dnta (similes), etc. The
early Yogcrin very likely was one section of Drntika. Drntika was
not the name of the school. It was a movement which emphasized that
the teaching of the Buddha must be spread to the masses, and they
were well known for using dnta. Sautrntika evolves from Drntika.
Yogcra partly comes from Sautrntika. There was no a single source
to say that Yogcra directly comes from Sautrntika. But certainly it
was one of the major sources. It would be good to understand some
doctrines of the so-called Hnayna schools. They continue to
flourish even after the arising of Mahyna. The teaching of Asaga
probably represented some amount of synthesis between the so-called
Hnayna doctrine and the emerging Mahyna doctrine. In Yogcra, they
have their way to understand what is meant by nyat, what is the
middle way? For them, they criticized that the early Buddhists did
not understand them, even the early Mahynists who say everything is
empty, is extreme. In that process, they came up and offered their
own version of middle way and nyat. The background and the
evolution of Yogcra Yogcra doctrine, due to certain ideas, certain
crya-s, certain inter-action, certain reaction, etc., thus we have
a Mahyna. The second phase also, in term of the Buddhas teaching,
it is prattya-samutpanna. The Mahyna doctrine is conditioned by the
early teachings. Sources from Hnayna schools that contributed
towards the Yogcra 1. Sarvstivda. It has a doctrine of svabhva, and
smarthya/ akti. Every dharma a very unique factor of existence that
has a specific characteristic has two aspects: 1. svabhva
(intrinsic nature/ self nature); 2. smarthya (activity). They
believed that if you dont understand like this, there are many
problems cannot be solved. For instance, karma produces effect.
Karma is hetu; effect is vipka, or phala. But we also know that,
according to Buddhist teaching, a karma does not immediately give
rise to effect, it takes some times, what happen even after one
moment. A past thing is not real, how come the past karma gave rise
to certain situation? How can a non-existent thing have causal
efficacy? Thus we cant explain that. They felt that is the correct
understanding. Time was just the illusion of the world. Dharma has
always been there. Even to say, always, we have already imposed the
idea of time. The underlying essence is very important for
Sarvstivda. In the perception process, whatever that is unreal
7
-
Yogcra 2003 Lectured by Professor Bhikkhu Dhammajoti
is based on the real. If you can perceive something, there must
be an underlying substratum / reality which forms the basis of
imagination. The idea of underlying basis has a very powerful
influence that came to influence the development of Buddhist
thoughts even in Mahyna. 2. Pudgalavdin. They are Vtsputrya,
Smitya, etc. There were a lot of Buddhists who were worried about
the problems of continuity in Buddhism. The Buddha has taught
everything is anitya, the Buddha also taught that whenever there is
karma, there is vipka. Buddhism has also shown that there is this
sasric process. At the same time, with the teaching of anityat,
nairtmya, how can you explain this thing who does karma, who ripe
the effect, who goes around in sasra, etc.? That is why, later
Buddhists explained in term of svabhva. One group of Buddhists
proposed the idea of pudgala. This pudgala is ineffable. Ultimately
we cant talk about its nature, in a necessary relation with the 5
skandha-s. So pudgala is a dynamic reality. When you have 5
skandha-s, put the 5 skandha-s, we dont just get the mechanical
sums of 5 skandha-s. the result is something more than 5 skandha-s.
That something more is pudgala. Mahyna later on talked about the
reality as ineffable. Even one can argue that nirv is also
ineffable. Once they have accepted the idea of pudgala, they can
solve many problems, for instance, pudgala that retains the memory,
pudgala goes around in the sasra, pudgala that does karma and ripes
the vipka, etc. They themselves emphasized the idea of pudgala is
not the same as tman. They dont mean that is a kind of permanent
soul, less still an absolute that is destined by divine source.
This idea of pudgala is especially important for Yogcra, for there
is a doctrine called laya-vijna (store consciousness), it is
consciousness that is more fundamental than the six
consciousnesses. The six form of consciousnesses arise on the basis
of this consciousness I have my own laya-vijna, you have your own
laya-vijna, our consciousness is linked with the universal mind.
Example, like a water, there are islands A,B,C, etc. Individual has
its own consciousness. But underneath is all linked together. So we
can talked about collective laya-vijna. The idea of laya-vijna is
that, the very fundamental consciousness on the basis of which this
so-called visual consciousness, etc arises. It is that fundamental
consciousness which all karma efficacies are stored as bja-s. It is
like a stream, or torrent that goes around in sasra. Your
laya-vijna carries your karma seeds, each is stream, or torrent
goes around in sasra. Think of it, the idea of laya-vijna is like
an individual person which has some relative reality that seems to
be at least in part influenced from the pudgalavda. 3. Sakrntivda
According to Vasumitra, Sakrntivda represents the early phase of
Sautrntika. This school says, there are two types of five
skandha-s. first, there are five skandha-s in a flux. They are
momentary. These five skandha-s never transmigrate because every
moment, they are different. Second, there is another set of five
skandha-s which is more fundamental than the empirical five
skandha-s which forms the basis of these empirical five skandha-s.
That fundamental five skandha-s transmigrate in sasra. The
so-called empirical self of five skandha-s is like the activity
that manifests. Ultimately this idea can be traced back to
Sarvstivda. 4. Sautrntika A lot of doctrines of Sautrntika
contributed to the Yogcras doctrine. What are these doctrines?
8
-
Yogcra 2003 Lectured by Professor Bhikkhu Dhammajoti
1. Meditation:- the so-called rvaka-yogcra most slightly was one
sub-division within Drntika. They emphasized on meditational
experience. 2. Theory of bja and vsan. 3. The concept of seventh
consciousness which is more fundamental than, and forms the basis
for the 6 consciousnesses. 4. Theory of Indirect Perception. 5.
Doctrine that unreal things can serve as object of perception.
They have a doctrine that unreal things can serve as an object
of perception. When you perceive something, that something may be
real or unreal. But for Sarvstivda, whatever that we can perceive
must be real, though they say they perceive pudgala which is not
real, but it is based on the 5 skandha-s which are real. In the
MVS, it says Drntika asserts that the object of perception is
unreal. [In AKB, there is an argument, the object of perception may
be real, may be unreal.] The object of perception
(lambana-pratyaya) is unreal.
MVS (288b). Translation:- The Drntika says it is like the case
of a good-looking woman will variously adorn entering into an
assembly. On seeing her, some give rise to respect; some give rise
to craving; some give rise to hatred; some give rise to jealousy;
some give rise to disgust; some give rise to compassion; some give
rise to equanimity. It should be understood that herein: a son
seeing her give rise to respect, those who are indulgent in
sensuality give rise to craving, those who harbour enmity give rise
to hatred; those who share the same husband, i.e., with her, give
rise to jealousy; those who practice the auci-bhvan give rise to
disgust; those who are vtarga (i-s who are free from attachment)
give rise to compassion; thinking thus: O this beautiful appearance
will soon be destroyed by impermanence; those who are Arhat-s give
rise to indifference. From this one should know that viaya (object
of perception) are not a real entity.
This is a description of epistemological idealism. We know
something through the way that things represented in the mind. The
same woman, when the son sees her, he gave rise to respect; when
Arhat-s see her, gives rise to indifference. The object that is
presented is understood through the mind. This doctrine does not
deny the external reality. It doesnt say that woman is not there,
but as an object of perception, it is unreal. Conclusion says that
object of perception is not real, without going into metaphysical
question as to whether there is substratum of this object of
perception. What is perceived is something that arises in
9
-
Yogcra 2003 Lectured by Professor Bhikkhu Dhammajoti
the mind, this arises differently according to whether you are
i-s, arhat-s, etc. From this, there is no need to have a real thing
for one to perceive, or give rise to awareness.
************************ Lecture 4: 19th March 2003
Idealistic doctrines of Drntika
Yogcra did not derive solely from the Sautrntika. There are
different sources. Sautrntika is one of the major sources. [See the
last lecture.] Another movement called Drntika (illustrator,
allegory master). This is referred to a group of Buddhist monks who
were skillful in popular preaching. They used similes, stories,
etc., they were also meditators. They based themselves on the
stra-s. They were called Stra-dhara. There is a quotation from MVS
in the last lecture which says that the external data is
represented to the perceiver in different ways. The conclusion is
that the external objects are not real. What we see cannot be
separated from the mental contents. This idea came from Sautrntika,
and eventually can be traced to Drntika. Yogcra means the practice
of Yoga. Yoga is generally understood as meditation. But it really
means much more than that. Yoga means not just meditation, it means
also the system of spiritual practice. There are certain groups of
Buddhist masters who emphasize meditation. They emphasize in
practice. Thus they are called Yogcra, and who are most probably
among the Drntika, though they are not confined apparently to
Drntika or to any groups for that matter, they have already this
notion of epistemological Idealism. Sautrntika evolves from
Drntika. To understand the idealistic doctrine of Sautrntika, we
should have some idea of those of Drntika. We have to depend
basically on MVS (Great Commentary by Sarvstivdin-s in Kmir). Here
we also see the doctrine of Drntika. There are few examples of
their Idealistic doctrines. They are not yet idealistic in the
Mahyna sense. They never assert that the external reality does not
exist. But what they assert is that the external reality as we can
understand as perceptible to us, is dependent on the mind. It is
not apart from the mind. That is called epistemological Idealism it
is there, we can infer. For example, if I see a monk in yellow
robe, how do I know that monk exist? Because I see a monk there.
How do I know I see a monk? Are you really seeing monk or dreaming?
There are many questions that can be asked. In the dream also, we
think we are seeing things, but when we wake up, we are not. How
can I be so sure that now I am not dreaming? For the standpoint of
Sautrntika, when I see something, I can infer that something exist,
because that something is the sense datum, the information that I
received. But I would not have the information that is contained in
that sensation unless there is something outside that causes that
sensation. Therefore, through a process of inference, we know
external reality exists. Sautrntika has a doctrine of
bahiranumeyavda (inferability of the external). We have
representation or information in the mind about something outside,
so we can infer that there must be something that causes the
information. So it is through the process of anumna
(inference).
10
-
Yogcra 2003 Lectured by Professor Bhikkhu Dhammajoti
From this description, we can see for that matter, Drntika-s are
not Idealists in the later Mahynic sense. They are called
Representational Realism. Before we talk about the idealistic
tendency we must remember that they are not Idealists in the
full-fledged sense. They are not subjective Idealism. They believed
in objective reality outside. Controversy of rpyadhtu In Buddhism
there is an argument as to whether you can have an existence that
is without rpa (corporeal). In the rpyadhtu, some (Sarvstivdin)
think that definitely there is no material substance in rpyadhtu.
It exists only mentally. Where other Buddhists say rpyadhtu, the
term doesnt refer to an existence where there is totally no matter.
There is some kind of subtle matter. It doesnt mean that really
there is absolutely no rpa. There is a controversy here. Nirodha
sampatti and asaj-sampatti. There is this kind of meditational
attainment called nirodha sampatti and asaj-sampatti. There is a
type of meditational attainment in which there is no thought, the
thinking process has stopped completely. We can get into it by
discarding the saj and vedan. It is said that an rya, when they are
over-burdened by their thoughts and their emotions, they
consciously and willingly get into nirodha-sampatti just for a
rest. Others who are not Buddhists, they get into a similar type of
meditation called asaj-sampatti, where there is no saj, but by a
wrong notion taking that kind of state when there is no thought is
moka itself. Thinking like that, they entered into it. In that
sense, it is a hindrance. In the case of Buddhist rya, they entered
into nirodha-sampatti consciously, for a particular purpose, that
is to say for contemporary resting the mind. This kind of
meditational experience where there is absolutely no mental
activity. Now this raises many questions? How can a person in a
state where there is absolutely no mental activity? Is it possible?
If a person is in that state, what is the difference between that
person and death person? After that meditation, what happen if once
come out of it, for a long time there is no mentation, where does
suddenly a citta come from? It is in this controversy asserted by
Buddhist tradition, as to whether really you can have a sattva
(being) who are completely without thought. MVS says like this:- 1.
There is no sentient being who is without rpa; there is also no
sampatti (meditation) without citta. So the doctrine is very clear
that all the sentient beings in the 3 dhtu-s are in possession of
both the citta and the rpa. From this statement, they are not
subjective Idealistic. They dont think that only the mind exists.
Clearly they say both mind and rpa exist. In spite of that, we can
see many other doctrines which definitely has exhibited their
idealistic tendency. 2. , (MVS, 96) Apart from cetan, there is no
vipka-hetu ; apart from vedan, there is no vipka-phala. Vipka-hetu
is karma in a broad sense, whatever that can contribute to a
retribution.
11
-
Yogcra 2003 Lectured by Professor Bhikkhu Dhammajoti
According to Sarvstivda, karma is not just mental. Karma is also
physical. There is a concept called avijapti-rpa. Sautrntika as
well as Drntika say what is called vipka-hetu is from cetan. It is
like what the Buddha says cetan is kamma. So the emphasis is the
mental aspect of it. It is only cetan. This doctrine is opposed to
Sarvstivda. Vipka-phala in our experience, normally vipka includes
all the things that give rise to experience, whether is desirable
or not desirable. These people are saying, there is no vipka-phala
except vedan. Again vedan is mental. This is a clear doctrine which
is idealistic, which subsumes both karma and retribution within the
mental domain. 3. (MVS, 587) Bodily, vocal and mental karma are non
other than cetan. It means karma is cetan. It is emphasizing the
mental aspect of karmic action. 4. , (MVS, 593) All karma-s are
transformable, even the nantarya-karma also are transformable. 5.
(MVS, 228) asadlambana vijnam perception of unreal or non-existent
object. There is a controversy as to whether we can actually see
something that is non-existent. The Sarvstivdins position is that,
whatever you can perceive, must be real. For Drntika, even things
that are not real can be an object of perception. It means what we
perceive may or may not exist. In another words, we can perceive
things that are non-existent. So what we normally think, or take
for granted to be so real outside because of perception, actually
may or may not exist even. This is certainly idealistic. Given this
kind of doctrine, it is not difficult to have the emergence of
Yogcra doctrine of Idealism. 6. (MVS, 288) sayoga-vastu (object of
attachment) is unreal. Sayoga-vastu means ssrava-dharma
(Impure-dharma, even rpa, etc.) We get attached to a person or a
thing, we think that they are real, something real outside. So
because of that attachment, for instance, rga arises. So we think
that because of that vastu outside is real, it causes arising of
our klea-s. For Drntika, these sayoga-vastu are not real.
Defilements ultimately is an internal process. There is no need to
have a real outside. lambana is not real, they are only a mental
representation. 7. () (MVS, 379b) mrga-satya comprises amatha and
vipayan. When they talked about mrga-satya, it comprises amatha and
vipayan. So this is a clear doctrine which emphasizes inner
meditational experience, that is a path. From these quotations, we
can see Drntika is the forerunner of Sautrntika, already had a
doctrine of idealistic tendency in nature which emphasizes the
mind, meditation and inner experience. Therefore we can understand
how they have helped to pave the way for the emergence of Yogcra
Idealism.
12
-
Yogcra 2003 Lectured by Professor Bhikkhu Dhammajoti
**********************
Lecture 5: 26th March 2003
Bja theory of Sautrntika It is from the school of Drntika, we
have Sautrntika, and it is from the Sautrntika, there is Yogcra. To
understand the emergence of Yogcras thoughts, we should go back to
Drntika. Hence here is another example of the important of
Abhidharmas thought. According to some scholars, Drntika and
Sautrntika refer to the same group of people. But that theory
doesnt seem to be acceptable. At the beginning, these two schools
are not the same. At first, there was Drntika, and slowly it
evolves into the Sautrntika. In the period of MVS (completed by 150
AD), the thoughts of various schools are quoted in MVS. We find the
name of Drntika, not the Sautrntika. It means Sautrntika came into
existence after the compilation of MVS. Likewise, there is no
mention of Ngrjuna in MVS also. We believe that Sautrntika evolves
from Drntika. Sautrntika became very prominent in the process of
challenging the bhidharmika-s. Drantika has several doctrines which
are idealistic [read the last lecture], they emphasized the
supremacy of mind. Sautrntika-s too contribute tremendously to the
emergence of Yogcra, particularly with regard to several doctrines.
The first is bja theory, the second is laya-vijna (=
sarva-bjaka-vijna). Outline of the theory as developed in Yogcra
Yogcra says, there is a stream of consciousness that flows around
in sasra. It is called laya-vijna. Inside the laya-vijna, there are
all kinds of karmic seeds from beginning-less time. This so-called
seeds are potential energy. So laya-vijna is neither different from
the seed nor identical with the seed. This flow consists of karma
bja. This bja in the form of potential energy can be understood as
conditioning forces. Everything is explained in term of bja. Karma
doctrine is explained in term of bja. For example, how we have a
phenomena experience? They say it is all from the bja-s. It is a
very central doctrine of Yogcra. Another name of laya-vijna is
sarva-bjaka-vijna (Vijna comprising all seeds). Bja theory of
Sautrntika This bja theory is at first derived from the observation
of the external world. In a way, we can see how Drntika could have
contributed to it. Drntika-s are the people who established
Buddhist doctrine on the basis of Dnta-s. That is in a way is very
consistent with the Buddhas attitude of empiricism. Drntika and
Sautrntika are the people who based themselves on the stra-s. They
followed that tradition of emphasizing the visible examples and the
actual experience. They say, when you see a growth of a plant, in
the process from seed and finally to a fruit, there is a whole
process of transformation (santati-parima). Santati (=satti)
consists of sprout, stem, leaves, flowers and fruits. From this
example, they say they can explain the whole process of karma.
13
-
Yogcra 2003 Lectured by Professor Bhikkhu Dhammajoti
Karma (bja)
santati-parima
Phala viea
First thing, there is no need to assume the past thing must be
there for it to be able to give fruit at some final point. All you
have is only pratyupanna (present) moment. That present moment, the
previous akti is passed on to the next moment in a series. The
potential energy is stored in the present moment. Then it passes on
to the next moment. So there is a santati (= satti). And because
every moment is different, therefore, there is parima (here it
simply means change). At a specific point, it gives fruit (phala).
Hence this explains the whole process. Does the fruit come directly
from the seed? Answer: No, because the seed doesnt even last one
moment. The moment you put into the soil, it became to decay from
moment to moment. In this theory, few things are to be noted:-
(this is in nutshell the bja theory )
1. Phala does not come or is not produced by bja directly. 2. It
is produced from a santati-parima. 3. However, this santati would
not be projected without the seed.
[Read the handout explanation of bja, parima, viea, santati,
etc] But if one wants to trace the origin of this theory, we can
say that the germ of it already is found in Drntikas doctrine.
Sautrntika comes from Drntika. We dont know exactly when that
happens. When they were still Drntika-s as they seen in the MVS,
they were still Sarvstivdin-s. But when they became Sautrntika,
they changed and became Vibhajyavdin-s. Sarvstivda was a very broad
community. They consist of bhidharmika-s, individual crya-s,
Drntika-s, etc.; but they were united by the doctrine that past,
present and future dharma-s are existent. But they may differ in
many ways. Drntika-s were very radical, this is how they changed
over to another camp called Vibhajyavdin. We dont know when that
happens. According to Chinese sources, their mla-crya-s (original
masters or founder) called Kumralta (late 2nd 3rd AD). He is said
to be one of the 4 suns in the universe. Four suns are Ngrjuna,
Aryadeva, Avaghoa and Kumralta. It must be during this period that
the Drntika evolves finally in the distinct manner into the
Sautrntika, and they changed their standpoint, and became
Vibhajyavdin-s. Thinking this clue, we want to know whether we can
see any trace of bja idea in Kumralta doctrine. Fortunately there
is a work which is ascribed to him that is still extant, called
Strlakra (= Dntapakti). According to Chinese tradition, it is by
Avaghoa. There is a theory by some French scholars, saying that one
of them first composed it, then later was revised by another
person. Or probably Avaghoa composed it, then was revised by
Kumralta, ot another way round also. Whether it was by Kumralta or
by Avaghoa, we can say both of them were Drntika-s. It is important
to see this work whether there is any doctrine that resembles the
bja theory. According to Chinese tradition, Kumralta was a
mla-crya. We were told by the chief disciple of Xuan Zang,
14
-
Yogcra 2003 Lectured by Professor Bhikkhu Dhammajoti
Kwei-chi (). The followers of this master came to be known as
Drntika because this master composed Dntapakti. In this work, he
employed dnta extensively. [Read the Introduction of the Chinese
version of Dharmapada, KL. Dhammajoti] About a century ago, a
manuscript was discovered in Sanskrit. The colophon in that
manuscript says that it was by Kumralta. So we know this work that
existed in Chinese actually is the same as Sutrlakra. We have seen
some kinds of description of bja theory in the Strlakra,. That is
to say, karma came to be described in term of bja (seed), a seed
that is sprouting, and developing into a plant, finally to a fruit
(phala).
Strlakara
Now I would like to give a dnta in order to make its meaning
clear. Just as the seed of a crop, as a result of coming together
of various conditions (pratyaya-s) give rise to the sprout. However
in reality this seed does not produce the sprout. By virtue of the
fact the seed ceases, there is the growth of the sprout; because
the seed ceases, hence there is no fault (doa) of eternalism. By
virtue of the fact that there is a growth of the sprout, there is
no annihilism.
Historically speaking, this bja theory was started by Drntika
even at the stage before they changed to Sautrntika. It was at the
time of Kumralta. Another sources which is around the same period,
we see this theory in Mla-madhyamaka-krika by Ngrjuna (in chapter
17, verses 7 - 10), the gist of the bja theory:-
Just as the series comprising akura-di (sprout, etc) proceeds
from the bja; from this, the fruit is produced. Apart from the
seed, there is no series; from the seed, there is a series. From
the series, there is a fruit. Therefore, a phala which is preceded
by a seed (bja-prva phalam) is neither interrupted nor eternal.
In the same way, from the [initial] citta, the mental dharmas
proceed in a series. From this series, there is a fruit; apart from
the citta, there is no series. From the citta, the series proceed;
from the series, there is a fruit. Therefore, the phala which is
preceded by karma is neither interrupted nor eternal.
*************************
Lecture 6: 2nd April 2003
Bja theory of Sautrntika (II) Bja theory, most slightly, could
be traced to the Buddhas teaching. In the A.N.III,33, the idea is
that, tah is described as bja; karma is described as khetta
(field). When the tah is not destroyed, like it is sown in the
fertile field, there will be karma. A karma that is alobhajam or
alobhapakatam, it is like a
15
-
Yogcra 2003 Lectured by Professor Bhikkhu Dhammajoti
bja that is not destroyed (akhadabjam). But those not born of
alobha, etc., they are like the bja that had been destroyed. It is
like the akuala mla which is uprooted (ucchinn-mla). So the idea of
mla is like a root. The mla is a potentiality. So this is also the
idea of bja. Definitely in those cases, the word of bja is
mentioned. Some of the characteristics of Drntika:-
1. They are illustrator; 2. They are meditators; 3. They are
stra-dhara-s.
Their bja theory can be traced back to stra-s. They based
themselves on the Buddhas teaching. The Buddha himself has compared
to karma like a bja. So they are those who uphold the authority of
the Buddhas stra-s. Thats why, they came up with the theory of bja.
How do Sautrntika-s explain the bja? First thing, it is a real
entity (dravya). They are just a potentiality. Bja is just a name.
When one asks them, in the continuation of a being (satti), all
bja-s are stored up, what is the relationship between satati and
bja? Their answer is bja-s are neither identical with satti nor
completely different. Satti is nothing but potentiality, or rather
is derived from the potentiality only. The next moment of existence
comes from the potential of the earlier moment, and a being
continues because of the potentiality. They are not a dravya.
Therefore we cant say that they are the same thing or they are the
different things. The idea of neither-nor relationship is also
taken over by Yogcra. Another two names for laya-vijna is
sarvabjaka-vijana and vipka-vijna. Sarvabjaka-vijna is a vijna that
comprises all seeds. The flows are the seeds that are flowing.
These seeds are not dravya. They are distinct forces, thus we
cannot say they are exactly the same nor different from satti.
Beings consist of nma-rpa. Prva-anudhtu doctrine In the time of
Vasubandhu and Saghabhadra, there was a great Sautrntika master
called (sthavira) rilta. He has a theory of prva-anudhtu. In brief,
this doctrine is actually the name of bja doctrine. According to
Samghabhadra, he says once I have refuted the doctrine of bja, I
have also refuted all other doctrines. Those doctrines include
prva-anudhtu, aviprana (doctrine of Smitya). Apparently at that
time, there are various theories which essentially agree with bja
theory. To summarize:-
1. Bja is just a potentiality; 2. It implies something very
subtle, latent, not manifested; 3. It signifies cause efficacy. The
bja is a cause, from bja to phala; 4. It is continuous. It is
accumulated from what preceded. Bja is something that is come from
the
past. Past saskra-s are all stored in the form of energy, we
called them bja, either kuala or akuala bja-s.
The word prva-anudhtu expresses all these significations.
1. Prva means it is something that has been karmically
accumulated from before. 2. Anu means following, continuously. It
has a sense of subtlety. The word paramu, though
there is grammatically differences, but doctrinally, the
Sarvstivda as well as Sautrntika explain paramu as parama+au
(extremely subtle, smallest). Anu though not exactly the same as
au, but they take it to mean subtlety.
16
-
Yogcra 2003 Lectured by Professor Bhikkhu Dhammajoti
3. Dhtu means a source; the idea of root. The Buddha has said
that someone whose karma-s which is born of alobha is like ones
whose karmic seed is totally cut from the mla (ucchinn-mla). The
root is the source. The source means that from which thing arises.
It is a cause.
In the AKB, they explain 18 dhtu-s. In this context, the word
dhtu is also explained as gotra. What is meant by gotra? Gotra
means species. In the sense, there are 18 specific types of
elements in the universe. Example, kara (a mine) can produce
minerals. It is a source. Dhtu in a sense of gotra signifies the
source of arising or the source of all dharma-s. It is a causal
efficacy that give rise to anything. Thats why, bja is also called
dhtu, and hence in riltas version, he uses the word prva-anudhtu.
He says that prva-anudhtu , i.e. bja is ineffable. But all we can
say is that it represents the hetu-pratyayat (the fact of
causality). Causal efficacy is that within the 6 yatana-s. In
summary: prva-anudhtu is wherein all the karmic forces are
subsumed. If one asks about the real nature, it is really
ineffable. All we can say is that it is hetu-pratyayat within or
represented by 6 yatana-s, i.e. mind and body. Hetu-pratyayat
represented by the fact that in the continuity of these 6 yatana-s
(psycho-physical complex), that is to say these satti, one previous
moment is the cause for the next moment. Within that, there is a
causal efficacy for one to continue to exist into the next moment.
That hetu-pratyayat is prva-anudhtu. It is prva, because it comes
from beginning-less time. And it is latent, potential, hence is
called anu, it follows along. And it is causal efficient. Hence is
called dhtu. This is a doctrine of prva-anudhtu. It is just another
name for bja theory. The word dhtu signifies causal efficacy, just
like bja. When Sautrntika-s are asked in the AKB, what is the bja?
For Sautrntika-s, they dont mean a real dravya. It is just a
concept to give to potentiality or potential energy. The concept is
referred to what? Their answer given by Sthavira is that the bja or
the prva-anudhtu are 6 yatana-s, having the causal efficacy.
Sautrntika answer in AKB:-
(AKB (C) p.22c) But what should we understand by seeds [ask the
Sarvstivdins?] By seeds we understand nmarpa (iii.30), that is, the
complex of the five skandha-s,
capable of generating a result, either immediately or mediately,
by means of the parima-viea of its series. The series is the
saskra-s of the past, the present and the future, in relation to
causality, that constitutes an uninterrupted series. The parima, or
the evolution of the series, is the modification of this series:
the fact this series arises differently from itself at each
moment.
The viea, or culmination point of this evolution, is the moment
of this series that possesses the capacity of immediately producing
a result.
This is the explanation of the prvcrya-s respected by
Vasubandhu. The idea is basically the same, nmarpa is
psycho-physical complex. It is that energy within the human being.
It is not a real thing. It is just a name to say that in the
nma-rpa, there is this causal efficacy. If there were no such
efficacy, then all karma-s would be lost. Then we cant continue
into the next moment, or from one life to another life, because
there is a satti (continuation). In that continuation, there is a
karma force which is called bja or prva-anudhtu. In this theory, it
does away with the need of sarvstitvas idea.
17
-
Yogcra 2003 Lectured by Professor Bhikkhu Dhammajoti
Aviprana doctrine This is in brief the bja theory of Sautrntika.
Another name is aviprana doctrine. When you have done karma, there
is a force or vsan, that force is never lost. That karmic force is
not destroyed until the vipka. It is like a deed, when you borrow
money from another person, how can he return his money? It is the
deed itself that guarantees the payment. It is not exactly the same
in everyway as the formulation of bja theory of Sautrntika. But
from the point of view of Saghabhadra, the essential feature are
about the same, that is causal efficacy, latency, continuous,
accumulating from beginningless time, and goes on until the vipka
is produced. So Samghabhadra says once he has refuted the theory of
bja, he has refuted all other theories. Prvcrya Vasubandhu
representing the prva-crya. They are the Sautrntika masters. They
seem to be Yogcrin, the earlier movement of Yogcra. They explained
bja as nma-rpa. This is similar to what rilta says, that is
prva-anudhtu is six yatana-s. These two are basically the same.
They differed in one idea. rilta says if you talk about the basis
of vsan (perfuming), the idea of perfuming is conditioning.
Perfuming is actually a karmic force, whatever we do, that is
deposited in our mind, a conditioning force, when that conditioning
force is strong enough, it becomes a definite force, that definite
force is called bja. Likewise we accumulated so many bja-s from our
karma-s. Vsan Where does this perfuming take place? What is the
basis of conditioning? According to this, there are various
theories.
1. One theory says it is in the citta-santati, that is within
the mental series, that perfumes in the mind.
2. According to Sthavira, he says it is six yatana-s. it is the
basis on which the perfuming takes place.
3. Prvcrya-s say nma and rpa mutually are basis of condition for
each other, or mutually perfume each other. That is to say, they
mutually seed to each other.
In Buddhism, the body-mind cannot be separated. In AKB, when
beings are born in rpyadhtu, where there is no rpa. But when they
reborn in kmadhtu or in rpadhtu, where does the rpa comes from? It
must have come from citta. Conversely, when someone is in
nirodha-sampatti, where there is no citta-caitta. But the person
(i.e. rpa) without nma, when a person comes our from
nirodha-sampatti, where does the thought comes from? The conclusion
is that, the potential energy of the mental aspect can be subsumed
into the physical aspect, and these two are mutually perfuming.
Therefore they are mutually seed to each other.
According to Sautrntikas bja theory, the bja-s continue until a
vipka is produced: This is also implies a theory of the mutual
perfuming of nma and rpa.
AKB (C) p.25c:
In the two sampatti-s, the citta is interrupted for a long time.
How, upon coming out of this sampatti, can a new citta be born from
a citta destroyed for a long times?
18
-
Yogcra 2003 Lectured by Professor Bhikkhu Dhammajoti
The Vaibhika-s find no difficulty in this: past dharma-s exist
(v.25) consequently the citta previous to this sampatti, the citta
in sampatti (sampatticitta) or the citta of entry into the sampatti
is the similar and immediate cause (samanantarapratyaya, ii.62) of
the citta after the sampatti or the citta-of-leaving
(vyut-thnacitta; TD 27, p. )
[The Sautrntika-s reason as follow:] When a person is born in
rpyadhtu, rpa or matter is cut off for a long time (iii.81b): if
this person is then reborn in kmadhtu or in rpadhtu, his new rpa
does not proceed from the series of rpa previously interrupted for
a long time, but rather, from the citta. In the same way, the citta
of leaving the sampatti does not have for its cause the citta
previous to the sampatti: it is born from a body possessing organs.
This is why the Ancient Masters said, Two dharma-s are the seed one
of the other: these two dharma-s are a citta and a body possessing
organs.
***************************** Lecture 7: 9th April 2003
The theory of prva-anu-dhtu
Bja in brief Bja theory is basically a karma theory of
Sautrntika. The important concept is santati-parima-viea. it is a
transformation of the series, at the specific point, at which karma
is ripe, in a sense that conditions assemble, then the fruit is
given. Otherwise the whole series will keep on going. It doesnt
mean a static thing going. It means, at every present moment, you
have bja of all kinds. This bja is not a real entity. It is just a
concept of karmic force. Thus, there is a problem when you say bja
is just a concept (prajapti). They are against the Sarvstivdas way
of ontologizing entity. How can a thing which is not real has the
causal efficacy? On the one hand, bja is a karmic force which has
causal efficacy, on the other hand, it is not a real thing, but
simply a concept. Here there is a problem. Finally Sautrntika has
to say bja-s are neither completely identical with samtti nor
different from samtti. Vsan in brief What is the basis of vsan
(perfuming, trace)? It means bja must be stored somewhere. Really
vsan is just a bja. This perfuming comes to be potent karmically
efficacious as a continue forces. Then one asks a question the
basis, what are these bja-s form? There are several theories:- 1.
Perfuming unto the citta-caitta santati 2. 6 yatana. It means the
whole being. So those conditioning forces operate or perfuming on
the whole being. But really, though it is 6 yatana, it stress on
the citta. 3. Nma-rpa are mutually bja-s. This theory is hold by
prvcrya. This theory say that the potential forces for the mental
domain comes from the physical aspect. Physical force can come from
mental. [read the last lecture rpyadhtu and nirodha-sampatti].
According to vykhy, prvcrya-s are the Yogcra masters. At this
stage, they are not Mahynists. They are Sautrntika. 4. Perfuming on
the subtle citta. This theory is hold by Mahsaghika. The basis for
perfuming is the sukma-citta for the arising of the other mind. It
is not the mano-vijna. This theory also would have contributed to
the Mahyna idealistic doctrine. Prva-anu-dhtu According to the 6
yatanas theory, the basis for the perfuming are the 6 yatana. This
theory is proposed by (Sthavira) rlta. In a way this theory does
differ very much from the third one. But in
19
-
Yogcra 2003 Lectured by Professor Bhikkhu Dhammajoti
rltas explanation, he explains 6 yatana, i.e. eye, etc.,
constitute the basis for perfuming. So he has a very important
doctrinal term called prvnudhtu. The idea of dhtu is connected with
the idea of bja. In fact, in AKB, where it is explained that there
are 4 mahbhta-s. These 4 are always together. So a question is
asked, supposing I have a solid thing, earth element is a
predominant one. But it doesnt mean the other three are not there.
So a question is asked, in what form do the other three exist? The
answer is the potential form. So in that context, the word is bjata
they exist as seed or potential. In this kind of explanation, the
idea of bja is explained as mahbhta. Dhtu is explained like a mine
in a sense of source of arising. Anu has a sense of going along.
These bja-s are carried along from the previous moment prva. So
prva-anu-dhtu means you have entity which is a force, which is a
potential energy, that potential energy goes on throughout sasra,
as a stream from moment to moment. So rlta says, six yatana
re-arise from moment to moment. So the causal ability of six
yatana-s of a being to re-arise from moment to moment, that causal
ability is called prva-anu-dhtu. Finally he says it is ineffable
(avaktavya, anabhilapya). What you can say is that efficacy within
six yatana-s which enable six yatana-s to renew itself to continue.
In another words, all the karmic forces, memory, etc., are subsumed
in prva-anu-dhtu. From this, you have continue existence, or
experience of the whole world. This theory comes very close to the
Yogcras theory of laya-vijna.
(Look at the sheet) The (prva) anudhtu doctrine of Sthavira rlta
1. Anudhtu has the character of hetu-pratyaya and
samanantara-pratyaya. But unlike in Sarvstivda, the
samanantara-pratyaya is not confined to citta-caitta, it refers to
any anteriorily born dharma which is immediately continued by the
posteriorily born dharma. (Ny. 441c : )
Explanation Anudhtu is something which has the characteristic of
being hetu-pratyaya, this is a potential energy, causal forces.
Everything [including physical and mental] comes from
prva-anu-dhtu. Samanantara-pratyaya, literally means completely
without gap, it means equal and immediate condition. Prefix sa also
means equal, it expresses the idea of same-ness. There is a
homogeneity. That is a kind of pratyaya that obtains in a
homogeneous causal series. For example, kuala thought gives rise to
kuala thought. C1 C2 C3 C1 (preceding one) is the
samanantara-pratyaya for C2 (succeeding one) C2 is the niyanda
(outflowing) of C1. Contrast with vipka-hetu Vipka-hetu cannot be
samanantara, because vipka-hetu is a karma, it must be either kuala
or akuala. But vipka is neutral. It is avyakta; whereas karma is
always either kuala or akuala. Therefore cause is kuala or akuala;
and the result is neutral. They are not the same. So they are not
samanantara.
20
-
Yogcra 2003 Lectured by Professor Bhikkhu Dhammajoti
Controversy Samanantara-pratyaya is certainly obtained in the
mind. There is a controversy as to whether we can talk about
samanantara-pratyaya with regard to non-mental thing. According to
Sthavira, he holds that, in fact, every dharma (mental and
physical) is born of samanantara-pratyaya. The idea of
hetu-pratyaya is to emphasize that it is a causal force. The idea
of samanantara-pratyaya is to emphasize the idea that it is
uninterrupted going on from moment to moment. So the previous
moment being the cause or condition for the next moment.
2. Sthavra denies the sahabh-hetu, and proposes the anudhtu as
the necessary anterior-hetu for the arising of any dharma.
Explanation According to Sarvstivda, there are two types of
causality 1. Prvaja (anteriorily arisen); 2. sahajta
(simultaneously arisen). For prvaja, it is first the cause, and
later the effect. Example, karma as a cause, later we get the
effect. Sarvstivda says there is another type of causality also,
that is sahajta, cause and effect exist together. Example, tripod.
The very existence of one state depends on the other two. They are
mutual cause-effect. They are simultaneous. For them, it is not
necessarily the first type. You can have also cause and effect
arising and existing at the same time. That concept is called
sahabh-hetu. rlta denies sahabh-hetu thoroughly. According to
Sautrntika, they say dharma-mtra nothing but dharma. So they
explained that we experience flashes of dharma. Those dharma-s are
explained in one moment as cause, another moment as effect. They
are all dharma-s. They are not simultaneous, because there is only
one moment. In his doctrine, everything must be subsumed within
that present moment. That present moment would be cause for the
next moment.
3. Anudhtu signifies that a citta is perfumed (bhvita) to
possess many dhtu-s, which include kuala, akuala, as well as
ansrava dhtu-s; these mental as well as material dhtu-s
simultaneously continue as an uninterrupted series.
Explanation: the word dhtu like bja, it has many many dhtu-s.
This dhtu can be kuala, akuala, ansrava, etc. All these potential
energy are stored inside the 6 yatana-s. these mental as well
material dhtu-s simultaneously continue as an uninterrupted
series.
4. Anuaya serves as both the raya and viaya of vijna.
Explanation: For any vijna, for instance cakur-vijna, you need
caku and rpa. In this case, caku and rpa are pratyaya-s for
cakur-vijna.
According to sahabh-hetu of Sarvstivda, they say that these
three exist at the same time. According to Sautrntika, it is not
possible. Because caku and rpa belong to the previous moment at the
moment when cakur-vijna arises. So the caku is the raya (basis) of
indriya. Rpa is the viaya. For Sarvstivda, viaya is something
outside there; caku also is something outside the mind. When these
two things are present, the cakur-vijna arises. But in Sautrntika,
given by rlta,
21
-
Yogcra 2003 Lectured by Professor Bhikkhu Dhammajoti
both these two actually are prva-anu-dhtu. Everything comes from
the same source. That source is the mind. Therefore this teaching
leads to Idealism.
5. Anuaya is the anudhtu of klea. It is different from the klea
which is manifested (paryavasthna) it has the nature of a cause and
constantly follows on latently.
Explanation: Klea is actualization; anuaya is a potentiality.
There is a big controversy as to whether you can make distinction
or not. For Sarvstivda, these words are used interchangeably. For
Sautrntika, definitely they made distinction kleas in the anuaya
form and klea in the paryavasthna form. Anuaya in the potential
form, that is called prva-anu-dhtu. This correspond to the
potential form of klea. The scope of prva-anu-dhtu is much broader.
It is the source of everything. It is not just the source of klea,
it is also the source of kuala.
6. The abandoning (praha) of klea is the destruction of the
anudhtu of klea. As a result, the anudhtu qua hetu does not induce
a subsequent anudhtu.
Explanation: What is meant by klea-praha? It means bja is
destroyed, that bja is prva-anu-dhtu. Normally our senses will go
on from moment to moment. Unless you destroy a subtle potential
forms, there wouldnt have a actual one. When we say we have
destroyed a particular klea, i.e. rga, we have to destroy the root.
In their theory, they say you destroy prva-anu-dhtu. When you
destroy this, since there is no seed-state or no potential form,
then you cannot give rise to the next one. It doesnt continue.
7. The anudhtu having the character of hetu is capable of
effecting fruition on a subsequent birth, having as it does the
function of a vipka-hetu. In this case, this six yatana-s perfumed
by karma/klea is called the anudhtu, which serves to induce the
subsequently arisen six yatana-s.
Explanation: This is talking about the cosmology. It is not just
the explanation of karma. It means the whole being going round and
round the sasra. It is the prva-anu-dhtu. So when your
prva-anu-dhtu is still not destroyed, you give rise to the next jti
(birth) constantly. This is meant by vipka-phala. [vi-pac(to cook),
mean to mature, to ripe]. So every moment you have a new fruit. The
whole of 6 yatana-s is being perfumed by the new forces. We
accumulate new bja-s.
*********************************
Lecture 8: 30th April 2003
The theory of laya-vijna There is a stanza quoted in
*Mahyna-sagraha by Asaga. There is a theory of laya-vijna, theory
of bja, theory of perfuming, and all the major ideas of Yogcra are
found in this stanza. In the earlier text of Yogcra, they talked
about only seven consciousnesses [6 + 1], not the eight. Later on,
the scheme of Yogcra is elaborated into 8 consciousnesses.
Sometimes there are nine.
1st 6th : From visual consciousness mental consciousness 7th :
manas 8th : laya-vijna 9th : amala-vijna
22
-
Yogcra 2003 Lectured by Professor Bhikkhu Dhammajoti
In the earlier text, they talked about seven consciousnesses,
i.e. six normal consciousnesses + one more fundamental, more
subtler, forming the basis of these six. These seventh
consciousness is called by different names. In Mahyna-sagraha, it
is called laya-vijna. Other names are given: dna-vijna, mla-vijna.
laya is a store house, where all the karmic forces in the form of
bja, a potential energy, are stored. Everything arises from the
laya-vijna. dna is from d to take, to grasp. Thus the word is
translated as grasping consciousness or sustaining consciousness.
Because it is this consciousness that sustains all the indriya-s.
They argued that this subtle and fundamental consciousness must be
there, for instance in the state of nirodha-sampatti, where there
is no mental activity, then we would die if there isnt any subtle
consciousness. They developed that there is a subtle consciousness
which is subtler than the first six consciousnesses. Later on, they
elaborated on this scheme and talked about eight consciousnesses.
The seventh one is called manas. Manas is no more synonymous with
vijna and citta. According to the schools of earlier stages, like
Theravda, Sarvstivda, and Abhidharma schools, that is before the
Mahyna, citta, manas and vijna are synonyms. When we looked at
different functional aspects, we use different names. Citta refers
to a mind that has always been [in the future period]; vijna refers
to the mind that is active, that arises; manas refers to the same
mind that has already arisen, that has became past, and forms the
supporting basis for the arising of the next moment of
consciousness. In the Yogcra, these three are no more the same.
Manas is that consciousness that grasps the laya-vijna as if it is
a real tma. The fact why we cannot experience nairtmya is because
of manas. We have tmagraha because of the function of manas. The
laya-vijna is the grand basis of everything. In some schools, they
talked about the ninth. Even the laya-vijna is not an absolute
entity. It is the absolute that is agitated. Example, when the
water is agitated, there is a wave. There is an activity. That is
the laya-vijna when the mind is agitated. So when there is no wind,
there is no wave, but the mass of water exists. That original state
of mind is pure, thus is called amala. The whole idea of Yogcra is
to train ourselves in such a way we realize the so-called external
phenomena, world is nothing, but the mind. When we realized this,
our consciousness is transformed. This is compared to the ceasing
of activity. So we realize the ultimate essence of mind that is
called amala-vijana. Sometimes it is called pariuddha-citta. The
idea is that ultimately the real nature of mind is pure. Compare
this to Theravda in A.N.I.10, pabhassara citta the mind is
transparent, pure. The idea of the original radiant nature of mind
is found in Vibhajyavda lineage. The idea that the original nature
of mind is pabhassara is actually a common idea of Vibhajyavda
lineage. Vibhajyavda lineage is opposed to Sarvstivda lineage.
Historically facts: the Sangha was split into Mahsghika and
Sthaviravda. From Sthaviravda, further split into Sarvstivda and
Vibhajyavda. Theravda comes in Vibhajyavda. According to the
Northern sources, vibhajya has to do with the debate on time, that
only the present is real. In the Theravda texts, there is this idea
the citta is originally by nature shining forth, radiant
(pabhassaram); ta ca kho gantukehi upakkilesehi upakkiliham that
which is defiled by adventitious kilesa-s. The defilements are
considered as something not originally part of the mind, it comes
from outside. Therefore we should abandon, then the original nature
of mind will shine forth.
23
-
Yogcra 2003 Lectured by Professor Bhikkhu Dhammajoti
Within the Vibhajyavda, there are some divisions. For instance,
Mahsghika also is within the fold of Vibhajyavda. They also talked
about the idea of original pure nature of mind. In fact, we see
that when Yogcra developed the idea of laya-vijna, they must get
justification. They quoted the name of few schools. Sources of
their teaching found in *Karmasiddhiprakaraa One text called
*Karmasiddhiprakaraa, by Vasubandhu. It tells about the sources of
the teaching. In that context, they mentioned several schools. One
is the Tmraparya (lit. copper palm) or Tmrathiya (lit. a kind of
robe which is copper/ reddish in color). Theravda is known in the
Northern India, not as Theravda at such. Theravda, in Sanskrit form
is Sthaviravda. Within Sthaviravda, Theravda is considered as only
one branch. Tmraparya is known to Northern India. In this text,
Tmraparya mentions the bhavaga-vijna (). Bhavaga theory, in its
major functions, is to explain karma. Though in earlier texts, we
find via-sota, but they dont speculate at such. For the first time,
the bhavaga idea occurs in the Pahna-pakaraa. Apparently that is
only the canonical reference. Later on, in Abhidharma texts,
bhavaga becomes a familiar term. So the idea of bhavaga,
historically was formulated later in Theravda Buddhism. Thus the
significance of aga according to Northern explanation, aga has the
idea of causal efficacy. Our existence (bhava) is sustained by this
bhavaga. Bhavaga is therefore a neutral state of the mind. It
continues in sasra. Definitely we cannot say bhavaga is the same as
laya-vijna. The last moment that we die, our consciousness enter
into the unconscious state. That is bhavaga. So it is in this
bhavaga, in the moment of cuti, that the karma is stored; when the
consciousness enter into a new womb, that is called patisandhi, at
that time, all the karmic forces from the earlier life is passed
on. So there is a continuation of this. Therefore this is an
attempt to explain the continuation or preservation of karmic
efficacy. As far as that point is concerned, it is very similar to
the idea of laya-vijna. laya-vijna is a concept to account for the
continuation of karma. The only thing, they say, they talked about
bja. The forces is said to be bja, they stored in the stream that
goes on in sasra. The mind that is active is called vthi-citta in
Theravda tradition. The mind that is not active is the bhavaga.
Bhavaga represents the passive state of the mind, that is in the
neutral state. Buddhaghosa says the mind in passive state, bhavaga
or vthimutta. The mind when active is vthi-citta. The state of
bhavaga/ vthimutta is referred to as the natural condition of mind,
pakai-citta, which is pabhassara. In Dhammapadahakath, pakatimano
hi bhavaga-citta ta appaduham the natural mind is the bhavaga-citta
[that is also called vthimutta (free from the mental process)] that
one is not corrupted (pure). Buddhaghosa associating bhavaga as a
pure state of the mind. Here we can see a very similar idea with
amala-vijna. In the same text, other teaching of Vibhajyavdin
lineage is quoted. That is the Mahsghika. It comes under the broad
lineage of Vibhajyavda. They also say only the present is real.
Normally we think that Mahsghika and Theravda are so different. The
idea of the Buddhalogy is very developed in Mahsghika, but
historically, they came from the same lineage. Therefore in the
midst of all these
24
-
Yogcra 2003 Lectured by Professor Bhikkhu Dhammajoti
differences, one find underneath that are common. For instance,
Pa-Chao, a Chinese scholar, he made the comparative study of the
Pli and other schools. Then he found that, of all the other
schools, the basis structure of Mahsghika, in many ways are similar
to Theravda. So this idea of citta that is pabhassara is one of the
strong doctrinal point of Mahsghika. They have inspired by the
Buddha teaching in A.N. They have a doctrine called mla-vijna. They
say mla-vijna is a sukma-citta (subtle mind) that is the basis for
the arising of six consciousnesses. The Karmasiddhiprakaraa quotes
mla-vijna as another source. In the other text of Yogcra like
Sandhi-nirmocana Stra, they say that six consciousnesses evolve
from the mla-vijna. That mla-vijna is an laya-vijna. Another school
quoted in this text as one of the sources for their laya-vijna idea
is Mahsaka. When the MVS mentions Vibhajyavda, whom they referred
to? So Vibhajyavdin in MVS is referred to Mahsaka. They have the
teaching that there are three types of skandha-s.
1. Kaika-skandha : the skandha that last only one moment. 2.
Ekajanmvadhi-skandha : the skandha that stays/ endures one life. 3.
sasrika-skandha :
The first two cannot go beyond one life. The third one,
sasrika-skandha, the skandha that lasting throughout sasra. Here we
see a similar idea that bhavaga that is doesnt stop when one dies.
The only thing is that they dont say skandha, they talked about
citta. Here in Mahsaka, they talked about skandha that goes
throughout sasra until the person gains nirva. The idea of
laya-vijna is like a kind of pudgala. laya-vijna is like a person
in which all the karmic force is stored. But the emphasis is on the
vijna aspect, not the rpa aspect. Read the stanza quoted in
Mahyna-sagraha. [next lesson]
*********************************** Lecture 9: 21st May 2003
The theory of laya-vijna
This text Abhidharma-mahyna-stra says in connection with
laya-vijna.
ukta hi bhagavatbhidharmastre | andikliko dhtu
sarvadharmasamraya | tasmin sati gati sarv nirvdhigamopi ca || Lit.
For it has been said by the Bhagav in the Abhidharma-stra, [it
(laya-vijna) is] the dhtu from beginningless time, which is the
complete basis of all dharmas. That being (existing) the totality
of destiny comes to be; and also the attainment of nirva.
The purpose of writing a treatise Vijaptimtrat-siddhi
tma-dharma-upacra hi ya vividha pravartate | vijna-parimosau |
lit. That manifold metaphorical designation of tma and dharma
operate, this one is vijna-parima.
25
-
Yogcra 2003 Lectured by Professor Bhikkhu Dhammajoti
In the world, we have problems because of tma-graha and
dharma-graha. The whole text starts by stating the purpose of
writing the treatise. This shows that Yogcrin-s were practitioners.
They were not interested in pure philosophy. It looks like that
they were very philosophical, that is because, when they began to
analyze, they become very philosophical. But their ultimate purpose
is very soteriology. At the beginning, the purpose of writing
treatise is to help us to understand that we have attachment to tma
and dharma. And two are realized, both are nyat.
tma-graha realizes pudgala-nyat / pudgala-nairtmya. This is
called klea-varaa. Dharma-graha realizes dharma-nyat /
dharma-nairtmya. This is called jeya-varaa.
Why are we in sasra? Because we have hindrances. To summarize,
there are basically two hindrances. One is hindrance with regard to
klea, according to them, even by removing all of klea-s, we cannot
be liberated. We can be an Arhat. But for them, Arhat is not the
same as Buddha-hood. To be a complete Buddha, we have to break the
other type of hindrance called jeya-varaa. Buddha has overcome both
type of hindrances. For Arhat-s though they have overcome klea-s,
but the praj is not perfected. To overcome this, one has to realize
the so-called pudgala or tma is not real. By doing that, one breaks
the tma-graha. To overcome the dharma-graha, one has to further
realize that even the dharma, skandha-s are unreal, the skandha
which the bhidharmika-s called as real dharma, for Yogcrin-s also,
dharmas are nya. The tma and dharma are just idea. They are upacra
(figurative speech). They are just metaphorical expression /
designation. Vikalpa-vsan Vsan means habitual energy. Due to the
perfuming of imagination (vikalpa), we imagine there is tma,
dharma, etc. We have these kinds of ideas. The ideas are
conditioning forces. They are stored in the form of bja-s. Whenever
we see a person, we think that person is so real. We have all these
problems from beginningless time, there is conditioning forces,
this is called vsan. All these take place in the process of the
transformation of laya-vijna. laya-vijna arises due to this
different type of conditioning forces (vsan). What is meant by
parima? It is threefold.
1. Vipka refers to laya-vijna 2. manana (lit. thinking), refers
to manas-vijna. 3. Vijapti (= vijna) refers to six types of
consciousnesses.
First, all these metaphorical expression that we attached to
operate in us is actually coming from consciousness. They are
evolved because of the type of habitual energy/ conditioning forces
that had been in us from beginningless time. It evolves and becomes
threefold.
26
-
Yogcra 2003 Lectured by Professor Bhikkhu Dhammajoti
Why laya-vijna is called vipka? One of the name of laya-vijna is
vipka-vijna. Because each persons laya-vijna, in each case is the
vipka from their own karma. For example, I exist because of my
laya-vijna. This is the effect aspect. So as laya-vijna evolves,
basically diversifies into three aspects. One is the laya-vijna
itself. The second is the manas-vijna. The third is six
consciousnesses. In another word, when our consciousness arises,
first thing is, we have that total basis (i.e. laya-vijna). Another
aspect is manas. The concept of 7th consciousness came a bit little
later. In the historical development of laya-vijna theory, first we
see six ordinary consciousnesses plus the basis. Later on they
sub-divided and added in manas. At that time, manas is given a
special function. Manas attaches itself to the laya-vijna as if a
soul. Because of our conditioning forces, we cannot help grasping
it as if it is the tman. That is why we are not liberated. Thus we
cant experience nairtmya (anatta). That function of consciousness
is called manas. Later on, it is given the place of 7th
consciousness.
(taken from Vijaptimtrat-siddhi by Sthiramati) The layavijna
(Storehouse consciousness) we have briefly explained the names
of the three kinds of consciousness, but have not yet dwelt in
detail upon their characteristics. The first kind, the
consciousness that is retribution (vipka) is called the laya-vijna
(i.e., the eighth consciousness). Now what are the characteristics
of this consciousness? The stanzas say:
2b The first is the laya-vijna (i.e., storehouse or repository
consciousness). It is also called vipka-vijna (retributive
consciousness) and sarvabjaka-vijna (the consciousness that carries
within it all bja-s or seeds). [It brings to fruition all seeds
(effects of good and evil deeds).]
3 It is impossible to comprehend completely (1) What it holds
and receives (updi), (2) Its place or locality (sthana), and (3)
Its power of perception and discrimination (vijapti). It is at all
times associated with five
mental attributes (caitta-s), namely mental contact (spara),
attention (manaskra), sensation (vedan), conception (saj) and
volition (cetan).
But it is always associated only with the sensation of
indifference (upeka).
Threefold characteristics
1. laya-vijna is called vipka-vijna. It is the effect (phala)
aspect.
27
-
Yogcra 2003 Lectured by Professor Bhikkhu Dhammajoti
2. laya-vijna is called sarvabjaka-vijna. It is the cause (hetu)
aspect. It comprises all the seeds. All the karmic-bja-s are stored
inside. laya-vijna is nothing but actually the totality of all
seeds.
3. Intrinsic-nature aspect. It means it is neither identical
with nor different from the bja-s.
To summarize, there are three things we cant pin-point at it, 1.
First laya-vijna is very subtle; 2. Locality 3. The way the
perception takes place as laya-vijna arises bifurcating into the
subject and
object. Vijna refers to the mind that is operating/ arises. The
mind cannot arise by itself. It arises with caitta-s. When the mind
arises, five caitta-s are always together with laya-vijna, that are
mental contact (spara), attention (manaskra), sensation (vedan),
conception (saj) and volition (cetan).
*************************** Lecture 10: 28th May 2003
The nature of laya-vijna
Dhtu means causal-efficacy. It is a theory of Vibhajyavda
lineage, that is to say, a theory that is built on the standpoint
that only the present exists. laya-vijna is existing at all times
only in the series of present (eternal present). From moment to
moment, all the preceding moment of causal-efficacy is subsumed
within laya-vijna. Simultaneous relationship Their relationship is
a simultaneous one. It is a potential force that is continuing in
the mind due to all karmic conditionings. For example, as I see
that thing in a certain way at certain time, my habitual tendency
to see in that way is reinforced. That is a simultaneous
relationship. laya-vijna is a mental event. In Abhidharma, vijna
always signify the mind that is arising. This is in contrast with
citta. When the citta arises, we have laya-vijna. Really laya-vijna
is only a relative reality. When we look at three level of truth,
we would see that it relegated to the domain of the relative. This
is the domain of prattya-samutpda. laya-vijna is where
prattya-samutpda operates, i.e., the phenomena world. laya-vijna is
like the agitated wave. Absolute reality is that calmed down water,
i.e. pure, peaceful, absolute, that is the pariuddha-citta.
laya-vijna is a phenomena that is agitated aspect of it. It is not
pure (klia). The mind contains all kinds of seeds. When one becomes
enlightened, there is no agitation. So the laya-vijna ceases at
that time. When the mind arises, it hasnt arisen by itself. It
arises together with caitta-s. What are the accompanied mental
factors? There are five. It is at all times associated with five
mental attributes (caitta-s), namely mental contact (spara),
attention (manaskra), sensation (vedan), conception (saj) and
volition (cetan). When we look at these five, these are the very
five that we find in the stra-s. In a way, it signifies that Yogcra
actually based themselves on the stra. [For Sarvstivda, there are
ten] From their standpoint of view, they are very faithful to the
Buddhas teaching.
28
-
Yogcra 2003 Lectured by Professor Bhikkhu Dhammajoti
Why it is always associated only with the sensation of
indifference (upeka). Why it is always associated only with the
sensation of indifference? Because laya-vijna is the fundamental
consciousness (mla-vijna). It is from this that there are other
consciousnesses. So when we come to vedan, according to Stra and
Abhidharma, there are three type of vedan, i.e. pleasurable,
un-pleasurable, and neutral. It is said that at all time,
laya-vijna is neutral, because it is a fundamental, it is in a
subtle state. The idea of neutral state signifies that it is a
subtle feeling; but on top of it, we get happy or dejected.
Therefore, that which always connected with vijna, it has got to be
a neutral type. Theravdas notion of bhavaga From their point of
view, they knew that the teaching of bhavaga in Theravda is similar
to their teaching of laya-vijna. Bhavaga represents the mind in a
neutral state. When we die, the cuti-citta and the next moment, the
paisandhi-citta. They are actually bhavaga in a different mode. The
bhavaga that is entered into a womb is the bhavaga in the mode of
paisandhi. Where is the karma at that time? Karma is stored in the
bhavaga. Therefore, in the bhavaga concept, few things are similar.
One is that signifies the subtle neutral continuous state of mind;
that sustains you as a being in sasra. That is also the concept of
laya-vijna.
(taken from Vijaptimtrat-siddhi by Sthiramati) 4
It belongs to the non-defiled-non-defined moral species. The
same is true in the case of mental contact (spara) and so forth. It
is perpetually manifesting itself like a torrent. And is renounced
(i.e., it ceases to be called the laya) in the state of Arhatship
(the state of the saint who enters Nirva).
Non-defiled-non-defined moral species In term of moral species,
there are kuala, akuala and avykta. Avykta in northern tradition is
further divided into nivta and anivta.
Nivta (block, hinder) obstructive to spiritual progress, e.g.
satkyadi. Anivta not obstructive to spiritual progress, e.g. table,
etc.
According to their system, any di is akuala. Satkyadi is not
classified under nivta-avykta. For example, if I have satkyadi, my
soul is real. Because of believing in the soul, you want to purify
the soul. You are not harming others. Another example, if I give
dna, my soul will go to heaven, etc. So according to their
conception, satkyadi is not akuala. It comes under nivta-avykta and
anivta-avykta.
29
-
Yogcra 2003 Lectured by Professor Bhikkhu Dhammajoti
laya-vijna is to be classifi