Beruflich Dokumente
Kultur Dokumente
M B Orsborn () 2008-02-01
Though the idea of some absolute starting point for the Mahyna be it
temporal, doctrinal or sociological has now generally been rejected, as well as
several other commonly held notions regards the Mahyna, the inevitably complex
link between it and mainstream (often referred to as Nikya or scholastic) Buddhism is
still not well established. Harrisons research into the oldest strata of Mahyna texts
in Chinese translation provides insights to how these stras may have actually come
about. He theorizes that within mainstream Buddhism, certain practitioners took
up the same [mainstream] practice, but instead of simply following the existing script,
they also modified and subverted it in a creative fashion, and one sees this not only in
their expositions of the smtyupasthnas proper, but in many other contexts as well.
He then mentions that examples can be found in the Ak[obhya] and
B[ha]d[ra]p[la] as well as in the Aa[shasrik], the Kayapaparivarta, and the
Ajtaatru-kauktyavinodan, to name just a few (Harrison:2003 120). Thus, he
indicates several very early Mahyna stras, several of which have known mainstream
predecessors. Harrison goes on to focus on the process of texts used for visualization
in the Pratyutpanna-samdhi, and also claims inspired eloquence (pratibhna) as one
of three sources thereof (Harrison:2003 124). Nattier shows similar reasoning in her
analysis of the Ugraparpccha stra (Nattier:2003 51ff). This term is also used
throughout the opening passages of the Aashasrik-prajpramit when Subhti is
asked to expound the Prajpramit, through the Buddhas might (Conze:1973 83).
Just as Harrison claims for the Pratyutpanna Stra, Yinshun also considers that
originally the Prajpramit was also a practice for forest dwelling bhikus
(Yinshun:1980 633ff, 652, 671, 701).
Thus, the notion that the Prajpramit was initially based on existing stras,
albeit modified in some way by these meditating bhikus, would appear to be an
acceptable working thesis. The question that we shall thus investigate is What were
the existing mainstream scriptures which were modified and subverted by those
forest dwelling bhikus, that subsequently became the earliest Prajpramit stra(s)?
Moreover, in what way where they modified?
1
Brahmacrin reika: Early Stra Sources of the Prajpramit
PRAJPRAMIT:
The process of tracing such source stras is a reverse of how the Pp text may have
historically developed, and we must begin with what Pp texts we have, try to ascertain
the earliest form of that text, and then from that try to work out which mainstream
stra(s) it may have evolved from. Fortunately, considerable work on the notion of
original Pp has already been attempted, and from several somewhat independent
sources, ie. the Sanskrit and Chinese, and we shall thus rely on and synthesize the
essential results from Conze and Yinshun respectively, with some additional points.
Based largely on the presently extant Aa and Ratnagua-samcaya-gth (hereafter
Rgs) texts, Conze considers that the 41 verses of the first two chapters constitute the
original Pp which may well go back to 100 BC, and of which all the others are
elaborations (Conze:1975 x), because these chapters (a) define four new terms, (b)
develop certain ideas about the Hnayna tradition, and (c) indicate the source of the
new teaching (Conze:1967 124).
Working directly with the Chinese translations, (being several centuries earlier
than the Sanskrit), Yinshun also consults Japanese research on the topic, and
concludes that: Although there are some discrepancies in their various theories,
however, we can say that they are alike in considering that the Original
Praj[pramit] Stra can be deduced from the Practice of the Path Chapter ()
(or the equivalent section of the Large Stra). He then uses Kumrajvas translation
T 227 (equivalent but clearer text) of those parts in Lokakemas
earlier translation T 224 , to show which parts he considers to be the earliest
(Yinshun:1980 626ff).
So, how do we decide between these positions, ie. the first two chapters or the
first chapter alone, as to the original Pp? Rudimentary analysis of the structure of
2
Brahmacrin reika: Early Stra Sources of the Prajpramit
the first two chapters through pedimental (or chiasmic) composition theory 1 would
suggest that the first two chapters form a complete text, which opens by establishing
Subhti as an authoritative source of the Pp, and closes with the parallel of akyamuni
Bodhisattvas confirmation to Buddhahood by Dipakra. These, together with the
definition of the terms bodhisattva, mahsattva and mahyna 2 which are the very heart
of both the Pp and the new movement in general, form the three key points of a ring
structure, complete with mutual reference (Douglas:2007 85ff), ie. Buddhas
empowering bodhisattvas to engage in the Mahyna through teaching the Pp.
Running either side of the peak are several other parallel structures including:
illusions, going forth, (original) nature, not standing in the skandhas, signs and nyat.
These parallels are most pronounced in the Rgs verses, and the elements are all
present in the early Chinese translations of the Aa. Ironically Conze identifies all
the key points, but does not see the structure (Conze:1967 124ff). 3
Though worth pursuing, such structural analysis is not the main focus scope of
our discussion here, and it is enough to conclude that in general the earliest Pp is
represented in the opening two chapters.
Conze claims to point out several direct quotations from the previous stras.
Perhaps the most important of which is regards reika the brahmacrin, which
appears in I 1 of Conzes translation, near the heart of our original Pp. On
comparing the Aa with verses of the Rgs, only the first sub-section of the second
chapter is absent, and thus the antiquity of reikas presence in the stra is
established (Conze:1967 179ff). Outside of the original Pp, he claims several other
mainstream stra quotations, though they vary somewhat in acting as key links to the
mainstream tradition (Conze:1973 xivff).
Yinshuns comments on reikas presence also indicate that it is a critical point
for the emergence of the Mahyna: In the third paragraph on the Samdhi of
Non-grasping, the realization of reika parivrjaka is raised as an example. The Pp
particular to the bodhisattvas seems to have a part which is in common with the rvaka
disciples. He considers that this samdhi is indeed the core of the early bodhisattva
practice (Yinshun:1980 636), and any link between it and the rvaka / mainstream
tradition is valuable for our aims here.
Lamottes work on the later commentary the Mahprajpramit-stra (hereafter
1 I would like to thank Prof Lancaster for suggesting this idea via personal correspondence.
2 And perhaps also prajavara-pramitya cary in the Rgs, (cf Conze:1967 124).
3 Conzes Rgs: The new key-terms at I 16-23; the issue of the self at I 9 & II 12; aniketacr I 6,10 & II
1,3; anupalabdhi I 5,14,19 & II 5,40; the samdhis at I 9-10 & II 9-10 (Conze:1967 124ff).
3
Brahmacrin reika: Early Stra Sources of the Prajpramit
MppU), which survives only in the Chinese, leads him to the conclusion that reika
appears as the prototype of the Mahynist saint (Lamotte:2001 1760). Following
the MppU, he claims that the discussion on reika is derived from S 105. The
validity of using this later commentary as an accurate tool for understanding the
earliest period of the Pp is an important issue, which we shall examine below.
Despite the above, it is critical to note that in Lokakemas translation, the actual
term used is merely person of heterodox paths (), rather than either the name
reika or Vacchagotta. It is only by Zhiqians (T225 ) and
subsequent translations that we first see the specific name reika (). 4 Could
it be that Lokakemas work refers to heterodox brahmacrins in general? or did he
merely wish to simplify reikas status? Investigating the early sources of reika, it
appears that this matter is less significant than it may appear in this stage.
Let us begin with Lokakemas translation of the passage on reika (T08, 224,
p426b), with the assistance of Kumrajva. Sanskrit terms are merely suggested from
Lokakemas usage (Lancaster:1968 374ff) and the Sanskrit text, but are by no means
certain. 5
Moreover, O riputra!, sarvaj cannot be taken up (). For what reason?
Bodhisattvas should not view ( pa) sarvaj by seizing upon concepts
[=signs] ( nimitta / lakana), as positing concepts [=signs] while viewing is
not ultimate (). Just as the heterodox ramana [reika 6 ] did not have
faith in sarvaj. For what reason? Rather, he claimed an identity [view] (
sakkya[-di]), but [later] this heterdox ramana had faith in the Buddha.
Having faith in the Buddha, maintaining lesser gnosis ( prdeika-j), he
entered into the Buddhas path ( bodhi). Having entered into the Buddhas
path ( bodhi), he did not seize upon () form; and did not seize upon
sensation, perception, volitions or cognition. Having not seized upon [these five
skandhas], he was also yet to comprehend (), or be endowed with (), and
did not see gnosis with insight (); did not see with insight this gnosis in
4
Brahmacrin reika: Early Stra Sources of the Prajpramit
internal [dharmas], nor in external [dharmas], nor in some other basis. [Same
for the remaining four skandhas.] Nor was he freed from some other basis (
). Training in and accomplishing the comprehension (j) of the Buddhas,
he was released from dharmas (); that is, [all] dharmas, up to
nirva (). 7
I have undertaken a cautious cross-comparison with later translations to improve
the accuracy of our English rendering here, avoiding the tendency to allow later
notions creep into the translation. Kumrajva only adds that release ( =
vimukti) was due to the realization of the true nature of all dharmas (dharmat /
tathat) (), and emphasizes reikas conviction ( = adhimukti).
The much later Sanskrit version, perhaps mistaking vimukti for adhimukti, has instead
that: due to conviction he was a called a follower by faith (raddhnusrin).
Conze considers that the lesser gnosis was originally a mainstream method of
realization, eg. pudgala-nairtmya, as opposed to the bodhisattvas gnosis of
dharma-nairtmya via tathat, which the Pp composers wished to emphasize
(Conze:1967 126).
reika in the Aa thus goes through several stages: 1. Lack of faith due to
identity views. 2. Arising of faith towards the Buddha and sarvaj. 3. Cultivation
of the Dharma, but with limited knowledge. 4. Non-grasping at any of the
skandhas. 5. Non-comprehension etc. of the skandhas. 6. Release from dharmas which
he did not grasp at or comprehend, including nirva. Thus, the criteria for possible
source stras for this passage should include these six points and structure. The
above translation is how Lokakemas translation appears to us at present, though we
shall find some other possibilities as we search for early sources of this material.
Regards possible textual sources, we shall begin from the Nikyas and gamas
which are presently extant. By investigating such a range of available texts, we hope
to discover not only the relevant suttas / stras of the mainstream tradition in general,
but also to see if we can further point the source to a particular mainstream group.
These include the Theravda MN and SN, Sarvstivdin M and S, and Kayapya
AltS, as the primary sources, based on a general consensus regards the compilation
7 Lokakema 11
[6]
(CBETA, T08, no. 224,
p. 426, b3-12) [6]
5
Brahmacrin reika: Early Stra Sources of the Prajpramit
8 Yinshun:2002 98 attributes AltS to the Kyapya rather than either the Mahka or Dharmagupta,
though all three are Sthaviravda Vibhajyavdin, as opposed to Sthaviravda Sarvstivda.
6
Brahmacrin reika: Early Stra Sources of the Prajpramit
Abhykhata (SN 44) with two suttas (8 Vacchagotta & 9 The Debating Hall), all state
that heterodox samaas raise the undeclared questions because they posit an tman
based on the kandhas. This furthers criteria #1 on identity views, and also how the
Buddha would teach them detachment from the kandhas to reach release, criteria #4
and #5. Given that SN 44 contains references to various samaas other than reika,
even if Lokakemas original text did not refer to reika specifically, this is still an
appropriate place to look for a mainstream source.
The Chinese sources provide a different perspective of possible sources. Where
the Pli separates the above mentioned suttas into MN and separate Sayuttas in SN,
S collates all these, (together with related issues in the Anamatagga, Without
Discoverable Beginning) into a single group: S 957-964 (= AltS 190-198), 9 though
MN 71 is absent. This in itself indicates that here, S puts more emphasis on reika
the person, one of a number of heterodox samaas with their philosophical questions,
whereas the Pli classifies by topic. Again, if Lokakemas original was regards
ramaas in general, they are largely included here (see also Yinshun:2002 675).
9 All within those texts taught by the disciples and the Tathgatas, (Yinshun:2002 773 ff).
10 S 936 33 [9]
(CBETA, T02, no. 99, p. 239, c24-26) [9]
7
Brahmacrin reika: Early Stra Sources of the Prajpramit
dukha. Though lacking in MN 73, the Pli equivalents SN 55:4, 7, 10 also use a
similar term, with enlightenment as their destination (sambodhi-paryati;
Bodhi:2002 1788ff). As noted above, Lokakemas use of both and are
quite suggestive of the notion of bodhi (Lancaster:1968 Appendix B), and although our
later Sanskrit text gives us sarva-j and prdeika-jna respectively (Vaidya:1960),
these may originally be merely terms for sabodhi (as arhatv) and srotpannatv,
rather than indicating a distinction between a mahyna / bodhisattva and rvaka goals
as the later Pp stras may have us believe. 11 Nattier also indicates the synonymous
nature of bodhi-citta and sarvaj-citta in the translations of Ugraparipccha
(Nattier:2003 148).
Moreover, although Lokakema uses , and Conze concurs by translating
prdeika-jnena as entered on a cognition with a limited scope (Conze:1975 85),
Monier Williams dictionary also notes that prdea or pradea may merely mean
destined or determined, which could equate with the Pli notion of paryati.
The Pli canon also uses the term buddhnu buddho for an arahant enlightened in
succession to the Buddha (SN 8:9; Bodhi:2000 290), which appears as a sthavira ()
in the Sayukta (S 1209; AltS 225), reminding us to be aware of the usage of terms
from budh as epithets for arhats and not just Buddhas alone.
There are several other points further suggestive of a relation between these
particular S passages and the Aa. Immediately before reikas appearance in the
Aa, there is the description of the bodhisattvas samdhi of non-grasping at any
dharma, which is vast, great, infinite unable to be overcome by the rvakas or
pratyekabuddhas. 12 The citation of reika seems to be a doctrinal support of this,
and appears paralleled in the pedimental structure of the stra, both here in I 2 and in
II 2, either side of the core of original Pp at I 4~5, according to Conzes format
(Conze:1973 83ff).
Firstly, the content of this samdhi is expressed in almost exactly the same terms
S 947 34 [4]
(CBETA, T02, no. 99, p. 242, b4-7) [4]
S 964 34
(CBETA, T02, no. 99, p. 242, b5-7)
11 Subhti here takes as his witness the Little Vehicle where it speaks of the emptiness of dharmas,
How could those who practice the great vehicle not believe in it? cf Conze:1975 12, 101ff.
12 Lokakema 11
(CBETA, T08, no. 224, p. 426, a29-b2)
Kumrajva 11
(CBETA, T08, no. 227, p. 537, c12-13)
8
Brahmacrin reika: Early Stra Sources of the Prajpramit
9
Brahmacrin reika: Early Stra Sources of the Prajpramit
Additionally, Lamotte notes that the various gama texts (including S 105) all
have reika in Rjagha where the Pp is traditionally said to be taught, whereas the
Pli assigns the Vacchagotta suttas to Vaial, rvast and Rjagha (Lamotte:1945 162).
Favoring of Rjagha thus also weakly supports the S in general as a Pp source.
Though a later text, it is still worthwhile investigating what the MppU says on the
matter, to compare with our findings above. Lamotte identifies the MppU gloss 18 of
reikas presence as being a free paraphrase of S 105 reika-parivrjaka-tra, which
is located in a quite different section of S, 19 and absent from the Pli (Lamotte:2001
1759). S 105 appears to be something of an amalgam of S 958-964, (~ SN 44:9 plus
MN 72-73), and is located in S between the equivalents of SN 22:85 & 86
(Khandha-sayutta), the former dealing with Yamakas pernicious views on the
annihilation of the Tathgata after death, the latter with Anurdhas discussions with
heterodox ramaas about the state of the Tathgata after death (cf Bodhi:2002 931ff).
Here, S arranges S 105 by subject, ie. the avyktas, quite different from the S
940-964 arrangement by interlocutor, under the general ramaa heading.
Furthermore, S 105 refers to reika () as per the Aa translations after
Lokakema, whereas the other stras all use Vatsa[-gotra] / Vaccha[-gotta] ([-
]) as per the Pli. 20 However, as noted above, given that Lokakema merely refers
to our protagonist as someone of a heterodox path, this may be explained by the
simple fact that he was well known as both Vacchagotta and reika, and is
insufficient to prove that S 105 is thus a closer model to the Aa. Or in other words,
MppU here only corresponds to later versions of the Aa, and not necessarily its
sources.
S 105 begins as per SN 44:9 (which adds the fire simile), with reikas doubts
about the declaration and non-declaration of disciples rebirth after death, to which
the Buddha states that his confusion is due to various (identity) views. Then, as per
MN 72, the Tathgata (read: arhat) is analyzed in terms of each of the skandhas, wherein
he is not apprehended when each of the skandhas is analyzed in terms of anicca,
dukha and antman. The Buddha explains that a disciples presence or absence of
self-conceit (asmimna) is the determining factor in their respective further rebirth
18 MppU 429 (CBETA, T25, no. 1509, p. 368, a16-p. 369, b17)
19 Under the subject of skandha in the first section of stra, according to Yinshuns analysis
(Yinshun:2002 666).
20 S 95 also features Vacchagotta, but under yet under then name of learned brahmin (),
and the topic of gifts to the sagha indicates an early stage in Vacchagottas relations with the Buddha.
Otherwise it appears to be unrelated to our investigation here.
10
Brahmacrin reika: Early Stra Sources of the Prajpramit
21 Self-conceit being one of the higher fetters abandoned only at arhatv, cf SN 22:89, MN 22.
22 Attaining the dharma eye or vision of dharma is a stock statement for stream-entry, cf SN 13:1.
11
Brahmacrin reika: Early Stra Sources of the Prajpramit
hundred. How could such a condensation of many stras have come about? One
possible answer is that the Pp passage here developed from some type of mtk or
uddna 23 of either the S or AltS stras, in the broad sense of a generic outlay or
index of a series of stras, as opposed to a proto-Abhidharma text.
Some parts of S do include mtk, though this particular section does not. 24
AltS does have a mtk for AltS 190-198 though, which is precisely the stras
which cover our core material here. 25 On inspection however, it certainly bears no
resemblance to anything that could somehow transform into the Aa! Furthermore,
looking at the stras preceding and subsequent to this portion of both S and AltS
beyond the scope and range we have indicate above, there is little other resemblance
to the neighboring portions of Lokakemas Aa. However, given that the mtk
would be composed after the arrangement and ordering of the various stras in a
given gama or Nikya, and that the various schools each had their own different
arrangements, other schools which also split from the broader Sthavira faction would
each have their own different mtk. Perhaps, and we are now diving into deeper
speculation, the Sayukta gama of some other Sthavira tradition, such as the
Mahsaka or Dharmagupta, would shed more insight.
Although this short study may not provide particularly satisfying answers for
either the mainstream stra sources of the Prajpramit, nor how those sources may
have been condensed into the pithy statements of the Prajpramit, I hope I have at
least provided some food for thought regards several related themes and notions, and
some possible avenues for future explorations on this matter.
23 Although it is well known that Prajpramit was considered the mother of the Buddhas on an
epistemic sense, that it may derive from a mtk or mother index, is also suggestive of this notion
on a textual level.
24 Thus, Yinshuns correspondence tables between the mtk of the Yogcra-bhmi-stra and the
sections of S, based on L Chengs studies, are unable to help us here (Yinshun:2002 629ff). As
noted above, S 105 does appear in the S section on skandha, and though this series of stra does
have a (mtk / uddna) index, the content of this mtk in AltS seems an even less likely source
than that below, as the other relevant stras are not present!
25 AltS 10
(CBETA, T02, no. 100, p. 447, b9-11)
[190] Body (sarira) and soul (tman), [191] Maudgalyna; [192] Rare indeed, [193] Ktyyna; [194] Never
before, [195] Existent soul (tman); [196] Vision, [197] Delusion; [198] The renunciate Vatsagotra.
Authors translation, AltS stra number in [#], corresponding to S 957-964.
12
Brahmacrin reika: Early Stra Sources of the Prajpramit
S 926~938: Focus on issues of faith, taught Just as the heterodox ramana [reika]
for the akyan Mahnma. did not have faith in sarvaj.
13
Brahmacrin reika: Early Stra Sources of the Prajpramit
reikas sarana
S 962 (= AltS 196, MN 72): reika takes but [later] this heterdox ramana had adhimoka
refuge after questioning the Buddha. faith in the Buddha. ( raddhnusri in
Kumrajva).
Non-return (angmi)
Having faith in the Buddha, maintaining
S 964 (= AltS 198, MN 73): reika OR destined for arhatv
lesser gnosis ( prdeika-j) he
requests ordination after a teaching, and (sabodhi) gnosis
entered into the Buddhas path (
soon attains non-returning. of lesser scope
bodhi).
(prdeika- j).
External dharmas:
Nor is the Tathgata
[reikas meditation, the content of which is
other than the skandhas
based on his conversations with the Buddha Nor was he freed from some other basis
liberation is not
at: S 958 (= AltS 191); S 959 (= AltS [apart from the skandhas] (
apart from the skandhas
192); also true dhyna as it really is S 926 ).
(and nirva is not a
(= AltS 151).]
dharma outside the
skandhas).
14
Brahmacrin reika: Early Stra Sources of the Prajpramit
SELECT BIBLIOGRAPHY:
15