THE PROBLEMS OF THE "AATYANTIKA" IN KUEI-CHI'S PPHV
<>
Prajnaparamita-hrdaya-sutra-vyakhyana
(般若波羅蜜多心經幽贊 )
Ah-yueh Yeh
Chung-Hwa Buddhist Journal
Chung-Hwa Insitute of Buddhist Studies
NO.3 April, 1990
P.381-401
.
P.381
Summary
The Praj~naapaaramitaa-hrdaya-suutra( 般若波羅蜜多心
經 )is not one of the Vij~naanavaada's texts, but
Kuei-chi (窺基 )in his PPHV( 般若波羅蜜多心經幽贊
)explains its meanings with Vij~naanavada's theories
by means of not only borrowing the theories from
LAS( 楞伽經 ), MSA (大乘莊嚴經論 )and YCBH 瑜伽師地
論 )etc., but also reconstructing their theories as
his new theories. Of these the "aatyantika" (阿顛底
伽 )appears in PPHV as the Fifth Nature implicating
three probledms, therefore, I explain in this paper
these three problems as follows:(1) Concering the
First Problem of why Kuei-chi omits the "icchantika"
(一闡提伽 )and "an-icchantika" or "aacchantika (阿闡
提伽 )in PPHV, I deal with the theories of LAS,MAS
and YCBH for the purpose of finding out the reason
which Kuei-chi claims that "agotra" (無種姓 ), the
Fifth Nature, contains three kinds: "icchantika",
"anicchantika" and "atyantika" in his VMSVY [c-k] (
成唯識論掌中樞要 ).(2) The Second Problem is that if
Kuei-chi does not support the theories of
"maahakaru.na-bodhisattva" (大悲菩薩 ), why does he
claim in PPHV that "avalokite'svara-bodhisattva" (觀
自在菩薩 )has completed Enlightment? Regarding this
problem, I deal with the theories of
Saddharmapu.n.darika's Commentary( 法華玄贊 ), PPHV
and YCBh's Commenetary (瑜伽論記 )for the prupose of
proving that Kuei-chi permits the theories of
Mahaakaru.na-bodhisattva. (3) The Third Problem is
that if Kuei-chi holds that "agotra" is only
"atyantaagotra" (畢竟無種姓 ), why does he in PPHV
not only exlpain that both 8th and 7th vij~nanas are
good natures, but also select the "buddha-gotra" (佛
性 )and "tathaagata-garbha" (如來藏 )etc. for the
explanations of the natures of " chien-hsiang-cheng-
hsing" (遣相證性 ), one of the Five Vij~nanavada-
perceptions (五重唯識觀 )? For this problem, I first
make a comparative table and then expain their
meanings for
P.382
the purpose of understaning that Kuei-chi in PPHV
does not hold the Indian"atyantaaparinirvar.na-
dharma" (畢竟無涅槃法 ).
In CONCLUSION, I offer two keys to solve the
above problems: (1) The "atyantika" can connect with
either "agotra" or 'gotra"; the "atyantikaagatra" (
具畢竟無種姓 )and "atyantika-gotra" (具畢竟種姓 ),
The "aatyantika" in PPHV has these two meanings.(2)
The " 顛 " of "aatyantika"( 阿顛底迦 )can be
interpreted as a misprint of the " 顛 "of
"anicchnatika" (阿闡底迦 ). Aside from these two
keys, should it be suggested that "agotra" be
retrieved as the Fifth Naturs, which contains
"icchantika", "anicchantika" and "aatyantika",
claimed by Kuei-chi in his VMSVy [c-k]( 樞要 ).
THE PROBLEMS OF THE " AATYANTIKA" IN KUEI-CHI'S PPHV
(Praj~naapaaramita-hrdaya-suutra-vyakhyaana)
Kuei-chi (窺基 A.D.632-682) and his Great
Teacher Hsuen-tsang (玄奘 A.D.600-64) are the famous
founders of the Chinese Vij~naanavaada's school,
Fa-hsiang tzung) . The VMS [h]
[vij~naptimatratasiddhi, 成唯識論 ] is an important
basic text of this school, which introduced some
special theories of Vasubandhu (世親. A.D. 320-400)
and Dharmapaala (護法 A.D. 530-561) to Chinese
Buddhist scholars as the new Chinese vij~naanavaada
1 in the Tang Dynasty, of these the doctrines of the
three vehicles and the "five distinctive natures"
(FDN, wu-chung-hsing-peih, 五種性別 )are very famous
theories.
The FDN only appears once in VMS [h] 2, but its
five names [bodhisattva( 菩薩 ),pratyeka-buddha (獨
[ 緣 ] 覺 ), sraavaka (聲聞 ), anityata( 不定
),agotra( 無種性 )] are introduced by Kuei-chi in
his VMSVy [s-k]3 (述記 ), vol.1. first, and next in
vol.11, he enumerates the LAS (La.nkavataara-suutra,
入楞伽經 ) vol.2, Wu-shang-I-chin (無上依經 )vol.1,
Suvikraanta- vikramipariprccha-PP( 善勇猛般若經
)vol.1., Mahaapraj~naa-paaramita-suutra( 大般若經 )
vol.593, MSA (Mahaayaanasuutraannkara, 大乘莊嚴經論
) vol.1., and YCBh (Yogaacarabhuumi, 瑜伽師地論
)vol.21.for the purpose of proving that these texts
mentioned the FDN. But he does not explain the
meanings of the FDN, because in his other
P.383
commentary of VMSVy[c-k]( 成唯識論掌中樞要 ),4 he
has already explicated them in all details. In them
we find the Fifth "agotra" (without lineage, 無種姓
) containing (1) " icchantika " ( 一闡提伽 ) (2)
"an-icchantika, or "aacchantika"( 阿闡提伽 ) and
(3)"atyantika"( 阿顛底伽,ah-tien-chi-chia).
Now this "atyantika" appears as the Fifth Nature
("gotra", lineage) with the other three natures of
the three vehicles( 三乘 )and one nature "anityata"
(不定 , undetermined one), in his commentary of
PPHS.5 (Praj~naapaaramitaa-hrdaya-suustra, 般若波羅
蜜多心經),named Pan-jo-po-lo-mito-hsin-chin-yu-tsan,
(般若波羅蜜多心經贊 ). These five names of FDN only
appear as the representotions of the five different
persons in practicing the boddhisattva's path (菩薩
行 )without any explanation of their meanings and
characteristics in PPHV.
PPHS( 心經 ) , of course, is not the
Vij~naanavaada's text, but Kuei-chi explains the
practicing PP (Praj~napaaramita, 般若波羅蜜多 ), the
Second "cittauttaapana"6 (第二練磨心 ), with the
theories of the vij~naanavaada, in which he
sometimes explains with his own special theories
which are different from not only the texts of
Tri^m'sikaa, VMS, but also the YCBh. If we compare
these theories, we will find that this "aatyantika"
in PPHV has some problems. Therefore, I will attempt
to explain in this paper what the meanings and
problems this "aatyantika" has in the PPHV.
I. The First Problem of "aatyantika"
(A) The "agotra" in LAS & MSA"
Why does Kuei-chi omit "icchantika" and
"an-icchantika" in the PPHV? As concerning this
problem,let us study the theories of VMSVy [c-k],
for the purpose of seeking out why Kuei-chi explains
that the Fifth Nature, named "agotra" comprises the
"icchantika" an-icchantika" and "aatyantika".
Kuei-chi, in his VMSVy [c-k]7, introduces
various theories from some famous texts, of these
the theories of LAS and MSA, I think, will be the
important avenues whereby to work out the above
problem. Therefore, I select the main theories of
the Fifth Nature, the "agotra" in the texts of LAS
and MSA as follows. the main theories of LAS are:8
(1) The one who dejects all good roots
(sarva-ku'salamuulotsarga), not only
P.384
resists the bodhisattva-pi.taka (菩薩藏 ), but
also dislikes the liberation (mok.sa). However,
if he meets the Buddhas, good friends etc., and
generates the bodhicitta (菩提心 ), he finally
can attain the nirvaa.na.
(2) The bodhisattva who, for the beneficence of all
the living bings, makes the following vows from
the biginningless time.
"I will not attain the nirvaana as long as
all the living beings do not attain the nirvaa.na."
Therefore He absolutely does not attain
the nirvaa.na (atyantato na parinirvaati), since
he understands that the characteristics of all
dharmas are originally in nirvaa.na
(aadiparinirv.rtaan sarvadharmaan vidita). In
this case he is named the bodhisattvecchantika (
菩薩闡提 ).
From the above explanations we understand that
the Fifth Nature, "agotra" in LAS has two different
"icchantikas" who own the natures to be the Buddhas.
Therefore, the other meaning of "agotra", the
"without-buddha-gotra" is not explained in LAS.
Next, the main theories of MSA are:9
The dharma of without getting nirvaa.na
(aprinirvaa.na-dharma, 無般涅槃法 )is in the state
of "agotra" which has two-types:
(1) The aparinirvaana-dharma in time 10
(kalaparinirvaa.na-dharma, 時邊無般涅槃法 )wich
again has four kinds;
(a) du'scaritaikaantika (一向行惡行, absolutely
doing the bad deeds).
(b) "samucchinnaku'salamuula" (普斷諸善 ([ 白 ]
根, utterly destroying the good roots)
(c) "amok.sabhaagiiya-ku'salamuula" (無有解脫分
[ 善根 ], without the good root of having to
do with liberation).
(d) "hinaku'salamuulas caparipuur.na-sa^mbhaara.h"
(善 [ 根 ], 少亦無因, the defeated good
roots and unperfect equipment for the
Enlightment).
(2)The dharma of absolutely without getting
nirvaa.na (atyantaaparinirvaa.na-dharma, 畢竟無涅
槃法 )means that the one who is absolutely with
the "hetu" (cause), by which there is no gotra
of attaining nirvaa.na.
Of the above explanations, the first
"kalaparinirvaa.na-dharma" means that the one who is
temporarily without "gotra", but, when he meets the
Buddhas, good friends and good "pratyaya" (a
co-operating cause), he will regain his "gotra" and
become a buddha. Therefore, this "kalaparinirvaa.na-
dharma" is just the same as the two "icchantikas"
of
P.385
the "dejecting the good roots" and the
"bodhisattvecchantika" in LAS as mentioned before.In
this case the later " a tyantaaparinirvaa.na-dharma"
has the real meaning of "agotra". This is why
Kuei-chi selects the above theories of LAS and MSA,
and claims that the Fifth Nature comprises
three-types of (1) "icchantiaka" (2) "anicchantika"
and (3) "aatyantika", which are considered to be the
new theories of Kuei-chi.
For these reasons, Kuei-chi explains that the
"icchantika" means the one who desires the
"sa^msaara" (生死輪迴 ). This explanation is the
same as that the Fu-sin-lung (佛性論, TTP 31, p.797c
)said; and the "an-icchantika" means the one who
undesires the nirvaa.na. From this meanings,these
two, the "icchantika" and the "anicchantika" are
common to the other two: the one who has "breaking
good roots", and the "mahaakaru.na-bodhisattva". In
other words Kuei-chi selects the two "icchantikas"
from LAS for his first two " icchantika " and
"anicchantika", and he finally selects the
"atyantaapari nirvaa.na-dharma" from the MSA for his
third one, the " aatyantika " which means that the
one who is absolutely without getting nirvaa.na.
And Kuei-chi in his conclusion says that the one
who is without the [buddha]gotra, the "agotra", can
also named the first two names, the "icchantika" and
the "an-icchantika", who will attian the enlightment
in a long time; but the last one, the "aatyantika"
can not attain the enlightment. From this statement,
we understant that Kuei-chi claims that the
"agotra", the Fifth Nature, has three tipes of
"icchantika", "anicchantika" and "aatyantika". But
in the same text, he claims that the "icchantika"
has three kind types of (1) :breaking good roots",
(2) "mahaakaruna", (3) "agotra", which tells us that
the "agotra" becomes one of the "icchantika" and
named "agotrecchantika" (無性闡提 ), in which the
cause and result are in-complete in becoming a
buddha.11
Anyway, Kuei-chi selects the theories of LAS and
MSA and accepts that the Fifth Nature is "agotra"
or "icchantika", but he coins the new theories
for claiming that both of "agotra" and "icchantika"
separately have their own three types as meantioned
before, the first two types of them will finally
attain the
nirvaa.nas, but the only last types of the
"aatyantika" of "agotra" and the "agotra" of
"icchantika" absolutely can not attain the
nirvaa.na. In other words, the only "aatyantika" and
"agotrec-chantika" are absolutely without becoming
the buddhas.
P.386
(B) The "agotra" in YCBh
Now we come back to the PPHV, in which Kuei-chi
mentions the "atyantika" (阿顛底迦 )as the fifth
Nature without explaining not only the other two of
"icchantiaka" and "an-icchantika", but also the
"atyantika" itself. Why does he omit the
"icchantiaka" and "an-icchantik" in this PPHV? As
concerning this problem, in the next step it is
better for us to research the theories of BSBh = =
Bodhisattvabhumi (菩薩地 )of YCBh = Yogaacaarabhuumi
(瑜迦師地論 )to find out its relation with PPHV,
because Kuei-chi borrows many theories of
bodhisattvacaryaa (菩薩行 ) from BSBh for the
explanations of Practicing PP, the Second
"Citta-uttaapana" (第二練磨心 )in PPHV.
It is a well-known fact that the various names
and theories of "gotras" and "pudgalas" are broadly
explicated in YCBh vols. 21,37, 52, 57, 67 without
mentioning the names and theories of the Five
Natures altogether in its one place. But genearlly
speaking, the theories of Five Natures are treated
in YCBh, 12 therefore, I find the four names of
"pudgalas" connecting with three gotras and one
"agotra" in YCBh vol.37 as follows. 13
(1) "'sraavaka-gotra.h 'sraavaka-yane (the one
possessing the "'sraavaka" (listener)'s gotra,
聲聞種姓, in the vehicle of 'sraavaka, [should
be natured as his pudgala]. ( 住聲聞種姓, 於聲聞
乘應可成熟補特伽羅 ).
(2) "pratyeka-buddha-gotra.h pratyekabuddha-yaane"
(the one possessing the "pratyekabuddha"
(self-enlightened one) 's gotra in vehicle of
praty-eka-buddha, [should be matured as his
pudgala] (住獨覺種姓, 於獨覺乘應可成補特伽羅 )
(3) "Buddhagotra mahaayane paripacayitavya.h" (the
one possessing the Buddha's gotra in the
mahaayana, should be matured [as his pudgala] (
住佛種姓, 於發上乘應可成熟補特伽羅 )
(4) "agotrastho 'pi pudgala.h sugati-gamanaaya
paripaacayitavyo bhavati" (and the pudgala who
is occupied with "agotra" for going into the
good path (sugati, 善趣 ), should be matured [as
his pudgala] (住無種姓, 於住善趣應成補特伽羅 )
The above four kinds of pudgalas belong to No.2
"paripaacya [pudgala]" (the matured man) of the Six
"paripaakaa.h", 14 the state of
P.387
matured living bings (sattva-paripaaka-sthaana) ,
which is the No.5 state of the Seven Studing States
15 in the "svaparaartha" (自他利 )'s section of
BSBh. From which Kuei-chi borrows the theories of
bodhisattvacaryaa (菩薩行 ) in PPHV for explaning
the broad practices of the bodhisattvacaryaa, in
which we find that its many theories are
reconstruted by Kuei-chi. For example, the seven
states are contracted into five states: No.5
"sattvaparipaaka" is changed to no.1 state of the
five states, and named " so-hua-chu " ( 所化處, the
state of the men taught). For this Kuei-chi simply
mentions the following statements. 16
"The three vehicles (三乘 ), undetermined one
(anityata, 不定 ) and the absolute one
(aatyantika, 阿顛底迦 ) , should be matured
according to the differences of their "gotras" (
種姓差別如應成熟 )."
The above names of the Five Natures are also
reconstructed names from the four pudgalas of BSBh (
菩薩地 ),according to the Five Natures of LAS and
MSA. That is to say that Kuei-chi put the "anityata"
between No.3 17 "buddha-gotra-pudgala" and No.4
"agotrastha-pudgala", In addition he not only chages
No.4 "agotra" to "aatyantika", but also takes away
the name of No.3, combines it with Nos. 1.2. and
name "three vehicles" without any explanation about
these five natures.
Now let us see the following statements of BSBh
for understanding the meanings of "agotra".
A."agotra-stha.h pudgalo gotre 'sati cittopade'pi
yatna-samaa'sraye satyabhavya's caanuttaraayaa.h
samyaksa^mbodheh paripuuraye." 18 (When the person
existing without "gotra" does not live in the
"gotra", he is unable in the completion of the
unsurpassed and perfect enlightenment, even though
he produces intention and makes the effort as the
support).
B."asati tu gotre sarve.na sarva^m sarvathaa bodher
apraptir eva veditavya" 19 (It should be
understand that if there is no gotra, there will
be always without getting bodhi all entirelly).
The above statements tell us that the "agotra"
in BSBh is only the meaning of
"atyantaaparinirvaa.na-dharma" of MSA without the
meanings of two types of "icchantika" of LAS. This
is why Kuei-chi changes the "agotra" to the
aatyantika", since he likes to accord with the
theories of YCBh. But the problem of why he omits
the explanations of icchamita" and an-icchantimas
(the Mahaakaru.na-bodhisattva) in PPHV in not
P.388
yet resolved.
II. The Second Problem of "aatyantika"
If Kuei-chi forgets the meanings of "icchantika"
and "an-icchantika" (the Mahaakaru.na-bodhisattva),
and does not support the theories of
Bodhisattvecc.hantika (菩薩闡底 ), why does he in
PPHV claim that the "avalokite'svara-bodhisattva"
has completed Enlightenment as follows? 20
"The Avalokite'svara first produces the
intention from the ancient time, and then makes
up the excellent mind in the "avidya" shell
accompanied with defilements (sa^mkle'sa). He
had abandoned his wealth and life for seeking
the Buddha-praj~naa through the highest effort,
and finally he had gotten the perfect
Enlightenment. Therefore, I should encourtage
myself and do more practices., It means that I
should not despite myself and produce the shrunk
mind."
The above statement in the PPHV belongs to the
First "cittauttaapana" (第一練磨心 ), one of the
Three "citta-uttaapanaas" (三練磨心 ) , whose
technical terms are borrowed by Kuei-chi from MS
Mahaayaanasa^mgraha (攝大乘論 ),21 but he also has
reconstructed its theories in the PPHV. Therefore
the "avalokite'svara-bodhisattva" in the above First
"citta-uttaapana" represents not only the living
being (有情眾生 )mentioning in MS, but also the
"purusa-[damya-saarathi]" ([ 調御丈夫 ])mentioning
in VMSVy [s-k]22. It means that the
"avalokite'svara-bodhisattva not only has already
attained the perfect enlightenment as the
"puru.sa-damya-saarathi", one of the Ten Buddha'
Synonyms, 23 but also always lives in this evil
world to carry out the welfare works for all the
living beings by the power of his vow stemming from
his great compassion. These theories are mentioned
in his commentary of Saddharma-p.u.n.dariikaa-suutra
(法華玄贊 ), 24 in which Samantabhadra-[bodhisattva]
(普賢 [ 菩薩 ])also is mentioned. And the other
famous Mu~nju'srii-bodhisattva (文殊菩薩 )'s
theories are introduced in Tun-lun (遁倫 ) 's
commentary of YCBh (瑜伽論記 ).25
Anyway according to the theories of LAS, the
above "avalokite'svara", "Samantabhadra" and
"Mu~nju'sri" can be called the
P.389
same name "Bodhisattvecchantika" (菩薩闡提 )26 or
"mahaakaru.na-bodhisattva"or"Mahaa-karu.necchantika"
(大悲闡提 )27 named by Kuei-chi. In this case, we
can call that the "Avalokite'svara-bodhisattva" is
the "Mahaakaru.na-bodhisattva" (大悲闡提 ). But can
we say that this "Avalokite'svara-bodhisattva"
belongs to the Fifth Nature, the "aatyantika"? I
think, not only Kuei-chi, but also we will say "No"
for its answer, because Kuei-chi in VMSVy [c-k]
claims that the Fifth Nature, the "agotra" or
"icchantika" has its own three kind-natures, in
which the "Mahaakaru.necchantika" and "atyantika"
are involved. Therefore, it can be said that the
only "maha-karu.na-bodhisattva" does not belong to
"aatyantika", and only "aatyantika" also can not
represent the Fifth Nature, as according to the
theories of Kuei-chi's VMSVy [c-k].
III. The Third Problem of "aatyantika"
If Kuei-chi holds that the "agotra" is only the
"aatyantika"(阿顛底迦)or the"pi-ching-wu-chung-hsing"
(畢竟無種姓, "atyantagotra", or "aatyantikaagotra"),
why does he in PPHV Not only explains that the both
Eighth Vij~naana and Seventh Vij~naana are good
natures, but also selects the theories of
"tathagata-garbha" (如來藏 )and "Buddha-gotra" (佛性
)for the explanation of the nature of "Chien-hsing
cheng-hsing" (遣相證性 ) , one of the Five
Vij~naanavaada-perceptions (五重唯識觀 )?
As concerning the above problem, let us see the
following table which contains Kuei-chi's
explanations of both vij~naanas. (Please see the
next paper.
The new important theories in above table are as
follows:
(1) Both "citta" (心 )= Eighth vij~naana and "manas"
(意 )= Seventh vij~naana are possessing the good
characters or natures, which are different from
the indeterminate (avyak.rta, 無記 ) natures
mentioning in Tri^m'sikaa and VMS etc. 28
(2) Both vij~nanas, though separately having their
won three vij~naanas in three states, have close
relationship.
(3) The "aadaanavij~naana" in the thired state is
not only higher and longer in activities than
"aalayavij~naana" and "vipaakavij~naana", but
also the object of the "manas" in the third
state, which is different from the impure mind
(kli.s.ta-manas, 染污意 )mentioning in the texts
of
P.390
P.391
MSVy[v-p], 29 轉識論 translated by Paramaartha.
At any rate Kuei-chi claims that both Eighth
Vij~naana an Seventh Vij~naana in the state of
supreme truth (paramaartha-satya, 勝義諦 )are good
and pure natures. This is why Kuei-chi selects the
theories of the pure mind "suunyataa", "tathataa",
"tathaagata-garbha." and "buddha-gotra" etc. for the
explanation of the nature of "chien-hsiang-chen-
hsing" (遣相證性 ), one of the Five vij~naanavaada-
perceptions( 五重唯識觀 ) .In this case, it is
necessary to study the meanings of "gotra" because
it has connection with "agotra".
It is a well-known fact that the dictionaries of
Sanskrit tell us that "gotra" has such various
meanings of "protection for cows", "cow-shed",
"family", "race", "lineage", "gesns", "basis",
"species", "cause" and "seed" etc.30 Among them we
find the term "gotra-bhuu" (man of lineage) is first
introduced in the Early buddhist Canon. The "gotraa"
has the same meanings of "va^m'sa" (系統 )and "kula"
(家 ), and then this "gotra" is used as the
"aaryagotra" (聖人家系 ) in the general Indian
society, but in the Mahaayaana Buddhism, it is used
as "gotrastha", "gotra-bhuumi" or "tathaagata-gotra"
mentioned by Prof. Takasaki Jikido.31
Generally speaking this "gotra" is treated in
almost all of the mahaayaana-suutras32 with various
meanings. Kuei-chi seems to respect the theories of
YCBh, from which he quotes the famous two kind
gotras of "prak.rtistha" (being in the original
state, 本性住 )and "samudaaniita" (acquired, or
brought together [by perfuming], 習所成 )in PPHV for
explaining that the one who owns these two
mahaayaana "gotras"can practice the five staged of
the Yogaacaara-vij~naanavaada's path.33
These two famous "gotras" are already quoted in
VMS. If we compare the explanations of VMS34 with
VMSVy [s-k] and PPHV, we can find that Kuei-Chi in
PPHV explains the "prak.rtistha-gotra" (本性住種性 )
to mean that the "prak.rti" (本性 )dwelling in the
Muulavij~naana ( 位本識 ) can produce the undefiled
[dharma] (無漏[法]).In other words this "undefiled
[dharma] (無漏 [ 法 ]) . In other words this
"undefiled [dharma] (無漏 [ 法 ] is produced by
"prakrti", the undefiled bija ( 無漏種 ), which
dwells in the Muulavij~naana ( 住本識 [ 第八識 ]).
This explanation is different from that explanation
of " 依附本識 " (depending on the Muula-vij~naana )
meantioned in VMS. Therefore Kuichi in his VMSVy
[s-k] only explains that " 無漏種無始自成 " (the
undefiled biija has completed itself from the
beginningless-time) without commen-
P.392
ting on the " 依附本識 ", But in his explanations of
the "samudaaniita-gotra" (習所成種性 ), we find " 令
無漏舊種增長 " (to cause the old undefiled biija to
grow). If the old undefiled biija of them means both
the primary undefiled biija of the "prak.rtistha"
and secondary underfiled biija of the
"samudaaniita", then it may be said the good
theories for the people to be buddhas, because they
can naturally possess the pure biija, and in
addition they always practice the bodhisattva's path
which causes their pure biijas to grow. This is why
the "gotra" is called "biija", "dhaatu" and
"prakrti" in BSbh and 'Sraavaka-bhuumi. 35
In this case, the opposite name of "agotra"
means "without-bija", or without-dhatu" etc.,
therefore the people live in "agotra" means that
they absolutly can not become buddhas. These
"agotra"'s theories of Indian vij~naanavaada were
not easily accepted by the Chinese buddhist during
the Tang Dynasty. It is a well-known fact that
before Hsuen-tsang (玄奘 ) went to India for
researching Buddhsim, there were many buddhist texts
holding the theories of the "ekayaana",
" buddha-dhaatu ( or Gotra ) " (佛 性), "tathaagata-
garbha" (如來藏 ), "amala-vij~naana" (阿摩羅識 ),
such as Mahaaparinirva.na-suutra (大般涅槃經 )and
saddhar-mapu.ndariika-suutra ( 妙法蓮華經 ) ,
Avata^msaka-suutra (華嚴經 )Ta-cheng-chi-hsin-lun (
大乘起信論 )etc are translated and studied by Indian
and Chinese buddhist scholars. Therefore, after
Hsuen-tsang had completed his studies in India, and
before he returned to China, he wished to delete the
theory of "agotra" from MAS etc., but his Great
Teach 'Silabhadra ( 戒賢, A.D.529-645 ) would not
permit this. This episode was mentioned by Tun-lun(
遁倫 )in his commentary of YCBH.36
From the above statements,I think that not only
Hsuen-tsang, but also Kuei-chi, the Chinese Buddhist
Scholars, understand that Chinese buddhists wish to
become the buddhas, and like to research the
buddhist suutras or 'saastras which teach the people
how to become the Buddhas. Therefore, Kuei-chi in
PPHV has his special theories of not noly the
Avalokite'svara-bodhisattva appearing as the
Mahaakaru.na-bodhisattva, but also both Eighth
Vij~naana and Seventh Vij~naana possessing good
natures, which are different from YCBh and
Tri^m'sika etc. For these reasons, I would like to
say that it is a problem for Kuei-ch ino put the
"atyantika" as the Fifth Nature in PPH stead of the
Fourth Pudgala "agotra" in YCBh.
P.393
IV Conclusion
The PPH (心經 )is not the Vij~naanakaana's text,
but Kuei-chi in his PPHV explains its meanings with
the Vij~naanavaada's theories by means of borrowing
the theories from YCBh and MSA et., He also
reconstructs their theories as his new theories, in
which the "aatyantika" appesrs in PPHVas the Fifth
Nature implicating three problems.
As concering the First Prolem of why" Kuei-chi
omits the "icchantika" and "an-icchantid,LA in PPHV,
I deal with the theories of "agotra" in LAS and MSA
for the purpose of proving that Kuei-chei selects
not only the two "icchantikas" of LAS for this
"icchantika" and "anicchantika", but also the
"atyntaaparinirvaa.na-dharma" (畢竟無涅槃法 )of MSA
for his "aatyantika", the Fifth Nature.Although he
selects the above three to make his new theories of
"agotra", he on the other hand, in his
VMSVY[c-k]mentions that "icchantiio" als has three
kinds of (1) "breaking good roots" (2)
"Mahaakaru.necchantika" (大悲闡提 )and (3) "agotra",
of these the first two will finally attain the
nirvaa.na, but only the third "aattyantika" of
"agotra" or "agotra" of "icchantika" absolutely can
not attain nirvaana.
Because of the "aatyantika", the Fares Nature,
and the other four natures (three vehicles and one
"anityata") appearing in PPHV have connections with
YCBH, therefore I deal with the theories of four
"gotras' in the BSBh, the YCBH VOL.37. Which are
reconstructed by Kuei-chi, in which I find that, in
PPHV, not only the "anityata" is an adittion, but
also the "aatyantika" is a substitution for
"agotra",the true meaning of "atyantaaparinirvaa.na-
dharma". Anyway the problem of why Kuei-chi omits
the other two "icchantikas"(impling the Mahaakaruna-
bodhisattva) in PPHV is not yet resolvd.
The Sekand problem is that, if Kuei-chi does not
support the theories of "Mahaakaru.na-bodhisattva",
why does he claim in PPHV that
"Avalokite'svara-bodhisattva" has completed
Enlightenment? Regarding this problem, I deal with
the theories of Mahaakaru.na-bodhisattvas, the
Avalokite'svara, Samantabhadra and Munju'si from
PPHV and Saddharmapu.ndariika's commentary (法華玄贊
)etc....Therefore it can be said that Kuei-chi has
the theories of "mahaakaru.na-bodhisattva". In this
P.394
case, the only "mahaakaruna-bodhi-satttr"a may not
belong to the "aatyantika", and only " atyantika"
also cannot represent the fifth Nature, the "agotra"
of "icchantika".
The Third Problem is that, if Kuei-chi holds
that "agotra" is only the "atyantaagotra" (畢竟無種
姓 ), why does he in PPHV, not only explain that
both 8th and 7th vij~naanas are good natures, but
also select the "buddhagotra" and
"tathaagata-garbha" for the explantions of the
nature of "chien-hsiang-cheng-hsing" (遣相證性) ? To
this problem, I frist make a comparative table for
undersanding that both 8th Vij~naanas and 7th
Vij~naana have good natures in PPHV.
Next compare the meanings of two famous gotras
of "prakrtistha" and "samudaaniita", quoted from
YCBH in the texts of PPHV, VMS, and VMSVy. From
which I find that Kuei-chi in PPHV permits the pure
biija of "prak.rtistha" to dwell in muulavij~naana.
And this theory, perhaps, can prove tha Kuei-chi in
PPHV does not hold the Indian
"atyantaaparinirvaa.na-dharma", therefore I would
consider it a problem for Kuei-chi puts the
"aatyantika" as the Fifth Nature in PPHV.
In the end of this conclution, I offer the
following two keys for us to solve the above
problems:
(1) The"aatyantika"can connect with either "agotra"
or "gotra". The first term "aatyantikaagotra" (
畢竟無種姓 ) , representing the third name
"aatyantika" of the three "icchantikas" or
"agotras", means that the one who absolutely has
no nature to be a Buddha; the latter term
"aatyantika-gotra" (畢竟種姓 ), representing the
second name "an-icchantika" (or Mahaakaru.necch-
antika, 大悲闡提 ) of three " agotras " or
"icchantikas", means that the one who absolutely
has nature to be a Buddha. Therefore, the
"aatyantika" in the PPHV has above two meanings.
(2) The " 顛 " of " aatyantika " ( 阿顛底迦 ) can be
interpreted as a misprint of the " 闡 " of
"an-icchantika" (阿闡提迦 ), because both the "(
阿顛底迦 )" and " 阿闡提迦 " belong to the Fifth
Nature of FND in VMSVy [c-k] (樞要), the later
term " 阿闡提迦 ", especially not only"means the
Mahaakaru.nabodhisattva, but also represents
the Avalokite'svara-bodhisattva (觀自在菩薩) in
PPHV.
Aside from these two keys, should it be
suggested that the "agotra" be retrieved as the
Fifth nature, I, of course, would also accept
this suggestion, because the "agotra" contains
"icchantika","an-icchantikahicl and "aatyantika",
caimed by Kuei-chi in his VMSVY [c-k].
P.395
(This pape was read at the Ninth Conference of
the International Association of buddhist Studies,
The National Central Library, Taipei, Republic of
China, July 26-28, 1989).
NOTES
1. The theories of Four Aspects (四分說); the Three
Vehicles and Five Dstinctive Natures( 三性, 五種
分別 ); the Theories of Eight Vij~naanas(八識說)
); the Three Categories's Objects (三類境 ); the
Five Vij~naanavada's Perceptions (五重唯識觀).
The above theories are consicered the important
Chinese Vij~naanavadas.
2. VMS [h] Vij~naptimaatrataasiddhi 成唯識論 ),
TTP, 31, p.8a-b.
3. VMSVy [s] (成唯識論述記 ), TTP, fpp.2 230a, Of
them the theories of LAS, MAS and YCBh, I will
explain in the pp.3-7 of this paper. The other
texts are: (1) 無上依經 (TTP.16, pp.470b, 471b)
mentions the Four Persons (icchantika, tiirthaka
(外道 ) , 'sraavaka, pratyekabuddha) and the
bodhisattva who possesses the supreme quality and
practices the Mahaayana.(2) Mahaa-PP (大般若 )
vol. 593( TTP, 7, p.1066a-b), in which the
"agotra" is omitted. These passage of Four
Persons are quoted by Kuei-chi in his VMSVy[c-k](
成唯識論掌中樞要, TTP,.43 p.610b), I-lin-chang (
義林章, TTP, 45, p.264c) and Fa-fua-shin-tsan (法
華玄贊, TTP, 34, p.656b-c ) . (3)
Suvikraanta-vikrami-parip.rccha-PP(SVPPP, 善勇猛
般若經, or 2,500 頌般若經 )ed. By Hikata,Ryusho (
千潟龍祥 ), Committee of Commemoration Program
for Dr.Hikata's Retirement from Professorship,
Kiushu University, Japan, 1958, pp.4-5. According
to the theory of Dr. Hikata, this sanskrit text
of SVPPP are corresponding to the Vols., 593-600(
第 16 會 ) of Mahaa-pp ( TTP, 7, pp.1065-1110).
Therefore I select the passages of Four Persons
from the above two text as follows:
(A) "ye satvkaa niyataa.h 'sravakayaane bhavi.syanti
te 'sruutvaa k.sipram anaasravaam bhuumi^m
saaksaatkarisyanti." (若有情類於聲聞乘性決定者聞
此法已速能證得無漏地 ).
(B) "ye pratyekabuddhayaane niyataa bhavi.syanti,te
ksipra^m pratyeka-buddhayaanena niryaa.syanti."
(若有情類於獨覺乘性決定者, [ 聞此法已 ] 速依自乘
出離 ).
(C) "ye nuttaraa^m samyaksambodhi^m samprasthitaas,
te k.sipram anuttaraa^m samyaksambodhim
abhisambhotsyante." ( 若有情類無上 [ 乘性決定 ]
者, [ 聞此法已 ] 速證無上正等菩提) ( 據上述梵文
是: 趣於無上正覺者 )
(D) "ye caanavakraanta-samyaktva-niyaama antiyataas
tis.rsu bhuumi.su, te'srutva' nut-
P.396
taraayam samyaksambodhau cittam utpaadayisyanti."
(若有情類雖未入正性離生,而於 [三乘]不定者,聞此法
己皆發正等覺心 ")
From the above camparisions, we find that
there is no "gotra"( 性 )in SVPPP, the "sattvas"
(有情類 )in (B), (C), (D) and the "'srutvaa " (聞
[ 此法已 ])in (B), (C) are omitted in the
sanskrit text. And in (C) the "ye'nuttaram
samyaksambodhi^m samprasthitas" mean 趣於無上正等
菩提者 ", and in (D) the "tr.i.s.r.su bhumisu
means" 於三地 ". pl1,
4. VMSVy [c-k],( 樞要 )TTP,43,pp. 610-611, Fukaura,
Seibun ( 深浦正文 ): [ 唯識學研究] 永田文昌堂
Kyoto, 1954, Vol.2. PP.634-646.
5. PPHV (心經幽贊 ), TTP, 33, p.527c. Pesase see the
Appendix of this paper.
6. Kuei-chi explains three "citta-uttaapanas" (三練
磨心 ) , in PPHV, of which the Second " citta-
uttaapana"( 第二練磨心 ) the very important
bodhisattvacaryaa (菩薩行 )of PP are mentioned
for the explanations of Practicing PP in the
PPHV. Please see my articles: " 般若波羅磨多心經
幽贊におけゐ三練磨心について " Indian and
buddhist Studies (Indogaku bukkyogaku-kenkyu. 印
度學佛教學研究 ), Tokyo, 1989, vol. 37, No.2
pp.806-813 and " 如何成佛一以窺基的三練磨心為中心
]- 『方東美先生的哲學』國際方東美哲學研討會執行委
員會、 幼獅公司、 台北、 民國78年7 月 pp. 338,
343....355
7. VMSVY [c-k]( 樞要 ), TTP, 43, pp.610 , and in
p.612, Kuei-chi quotes ten statements from five
texts (1)" 涅槃經 " = TTP.12.pp431b, 518a, 554a-b
569a, 574b-c, 580b.(2). " 菩薩地持經 " or " 菩薩
善戒經 "-- TTP, 30 pp.88a, 962c. (3) " 勝鬘經 " =
TTP, 12. P218b. (4) " 大乘莊嚴經論 " = TTP, 31.
P595a. (5)" 金剛般若論 " = TTP, 25,p.794b-c) to
prove that there are the theories of "agota" in
those texts. cf.Fukihara, Siosin (富貴原章信 ):
[ 中國日本, 佛性思想史 ]Kokusio Kankokai ( 國書刊
行會 ), Tokyo, 1988, pp. 184-191
8. LAS = La~nkaavatara-suutra, ed. By Bunyiu Nanjio,
Otani Univ. (大谷大學 ) Koyto, 1956, second
edition. PP 16: (1) LAS [c-b] (入楞伽經十一卷本
) tran. By Bodhiruci (菩提流支 ) p.527b (2)
LAS[c-g] 楞伽阿跋多羅寶經 ) tran. By Guna-bhadra
(求那跋陀羅 ) p.486(3) LAS [c-s] (大乘入楞伽經
)tran. by Siksaananda( 實叉難陀 )p.597c. One
Japanese text is [ 梵文和譯: 入楞伽經 ]tran.by
Yasui, Kosai (安井廣濟 ) Fozuokan ( 波藝 ])
Kyoto, 1976.pp59-60.
9. MSA = Mahaayanasutrala.nkaara, edite par sylvain
levi (Bibiotheque de Ecole des Hautes Etudes, t
159), Paris 1907 pp.12-13 MSA[c-p] ( 大乘莊嚴經論
)tran. by Prabhaakarmita ( 波羅頗迦羅蜜多 )TTP.
31, p.595a. Kue-chi
P.397
only summarizes the main theories of LAS in his
VMSVy [c-k]. Uihakujiu (宇井伯壽 ); 大乘莊嚴經論
研究 lwonami (岩波 )Tokyo, 1961, p.78
10. " kaalaaap arinirvana-dharma", to which Kuei-chi
in his VMSVy [c-k] p.610 meantions:[ 此中時邊廣云
暫時, 梵云涅迦羅阿波利暱縛喃達磨, 涅者暫也 ]. Of
which the [ 暫 ](temporary), its sanskrit is
"alpa" or "acira" cf. DES = Dectionary of English
and Sanskrit. ed. By M. Monier Williams, Motilal
Banarsidass, Delhi, 1964, second ed. p. 797, But
Kuei-chi says:[ 涅者暫也 ], of which [ 涅 ](nir)
does not mean the "temporary". Fukihara 富貴原 in
his 中國日本佛性思想史, p. 189 explains that 恒
(tat 暫 ) etc. The other three (b) (c) and (d)'s
Chinese translations are according to MAS [c-p]
11. VMSVy[c-k] TTP 43, p.611a, in which Kuei-chi
explains:
(1) "Mahaaaprunecchantika" is that in which the
cause is complete, but its result is not
complete (因成果不成謂大悲闡提 )
(2) "Sagotra-ku'salamuulotsargecchantika" is that
in which the result is complate, but its
cause is not complete (果成因不成, 謂有性斷善
闡提 )
(3) "agotrecchantika, nityadviyaana" are that in
which both causes and results are not
complete (因果俱不成謂無性闡提二乘定性)
(4) "Abhiamkabuddha" who possesses the
samaropita-mahaapraj~naa and ku'salamuuaanut-
sarga is that in which both cause and
result are complete.( 因果俱成,謂大智增上,不
斷善根而成佛者 )
12. cf. Fuawra, Seibun (深浦正文): [唯識學研究] vo.2
永田文昌堂 Kyoto, 1954, p.636 VMSVy [s-k] VMSVy
[c-k] TTP 43, PP.304, 610
13. Yogaacaeca-bhuumi (瑜伽師地論, 玄奘譯 100 卷 ),
from its vols.35-50 are named Bodhisattva-bhuumi
section (菩薩地品 ).
BSBh =bodhisattvabhumi,( being the XVth Section
of Asangapada's Yogacaarabhuumi ). Ed. By
Nalinaksha Dutt, K.P.
Jayaswal Research Institute, Patnapr 66. P.55
BSBh [c-h] TTP 30, p.496c
14. BSBh p55 "paripaaka.h samaasatah, sadbhir
aakarair veditavyah svabhavato' pi.." BSBh [c-h]
TTP 30 p.496b ( 當知成熟略有六種:(一) 成熟自性
(2) 所成熟補特伽羅 (3) 成熟差別 (4) 成熟方便 (5)
能成熟補特伽羅 (6) 已成熟補特伽羅
15. BSBh, p.15 "sapta-sthaanaani---, (1) svaartha,
(2) parartha, (3) tattvaartha, (4) prabhava, (5)
sattvaparipaaka,(6)aatmano buddhadharma-paripaaka,
(7) anuttara ca samyaksa^mbodhah.
BSBh [c-h] TTP 30 p.482b 七學處 (1) 自利處 (2)
利他處 (3) 真實義處 (4) 威力處 (5) 成熟有情處
(6) 成熟自佛法處 (7).無上正等菩提處 . Please see
the Appendix of this paper.
P.398
16. PPHV TTP 33, p.527c
17. MPP = Mahaapraj~naaparamita-suutra ( 大般若經 )
TTP 7 p.1066, in which the name of No.3 is
named anuttara-yaana-gotra ( 無上乘性 ) which has
the same meaning of "buddha-gotra"; the name of
No.4 "anityata" (不定 )also appears in MMP.
18. BSBh p.1 L.16-18 BSBh [c-h] TTp30, p.478c
19. BSBh p7. L.23-24 BSBh [c-h] TTP 30, p.480b
20. PPHV TTP 33, p.524b [ 彼觀自在, 昔初發意, 具諸煩
惱, 於無明殼, 建立勝心, 捨身命財, 求佛智慧, 興大
勇猛, 已成等覺, 我亦應爾, 勵已增修, 不應自輕, 而
生退屈 ]
21. MS [c-h1, (攝大乘論 )TTP 31, p.142a. Sasaki,
Getzshio (佐佐木月樵 ); 漢譯四本對照攝大乘論 ]
日本佛書刊行會 Tokyo 昭和 34, p.54
22. VMSVY.[c-k] TTP43, p.564b 彼既丈夫, 我亦爾, 不應
自輕而退屈....
23. The Ten Buddha'Synonyms are : (1) Tathaagata (如
來 ),(2)arhat( 阿羅漢 ),(3) samyaksa^mbuddha (正
遍知), (4) vidyaa-carana-sa^mpanna (明行足), (5)
sugata (善逝 ), (6) lokavid (世間解),(7) anuttara
(無上師 ),(8) puru.sadamya-sarathi ( 調御丈夫 ),
(9) 'Saast.r( 天人師),(10)buddha-bhagavat (佛世尊
)cf.Mogitzuki, (望月 ). 佛教大辭典) vol.5,Tokyo,
1936, p.4437, [ 雜阿含經 ],vol.2, TTP 2, p.141c
Okihara, unrai( 荻原雲來 ) 漢譯對照梵和大辭典
Suzuki Foundation (鈴木學術財團 ),Tokyo 1979,
p.796.The statements of MS, VMSVy [s-k] , VMSVy
[c-k] and PPHV are mentioned im my article 般若波
羅蜜多心經幽贊におけゐ三練磨心につぃて Journal of
Indian and Buddhist Studies (Indogaku, Bukhyogaku
Kenkyu, 印度學佛教學研究 ) vol.37 Tokyo,
1989,pp.213-4.
24. Fa-fua-shin-tsan (法華玄贊 ),TTP 34,P. 848c 觀音
久已成佛, 不捨菩薩行, 故示為菩薩,which is quoted
in 成唯識論本文抄 TTP 65, p.415b
The statements of Samanbhadra are: 驗此普賢,久己
成佛, 示現為菩薩 TTP 34, p.852c. cf. 楠渟澄: 日
本唯識思想の研究一大悲闡提成, 不成說の展開 -----
山崎教授定年紀念 : 唯識思想の研究 pp. 22-32 百華
苑出版Kyoto, 1987
25. YCBHVy[c-k] (瑜伽論記) TTP, 42, p.615a
26. LAS, p-66, LAS [c-g] TTP, 16, p.487c,LAS [c-b],
p.527b, LAS [c-s], p.597c
27. VMSVy en-k] TTP 43, pp.610-611, Plese see note
11 of this paper.
28. Tri^m'sika, pp.13,23,24, VMS TTP31, pp.7, 9, 60
29. VMSVy [v-p] (攝大乘論識 ) TTP 31, p.158 轉識論
TTP 31.pp. 61c, 62a
30. SED = Sanskrit-English Dictionary, ed. By Sir
Monier Monier-williams, Oxfort, 1960 p.364.
P.399
Buddhist Hybrid Sanskrit Grammar and dictionary,
ed. by F.Edgerton, Motilal Banarsidass, Delhi,
1970, p.216
31. Takasaki Jikido (高崎直道): 如來藏思想歡の形成,
春秋社, Tokyo, pp.751-4. And "An Introduction
to Buddhism", translated by Rolf W.Giebel. The
Toho Gakkai, Tokyo, p.232.
32. Please see the Table [2] [如來藏說關係諸概念展開
表 ] in Takasaki's book: 如來藏思想の形成 p.761
33. PPHV TTP.33, p.525a BSBh p.2 L.4-7 YCBh TTP 30
p.478
34. (A) VMS TTP31, p.48b, (b) VMSVy [s-k] TTP 43,
p.565a, (c) PPHV, TTP 33 p.525a
(A) 無始來依附本識, 法爾所得無漏法因
(B) 未聞正法, 但無漏種無始自成, 不會重習令其增長
名本種姓, 性者體也, 姓者類也
(C) 本性住種姓,謂住本識,能生無漏,本性功能
cf. Fukawa依(深浦) :[唯識學研究]
Vo.2 PP. 658-659.
35. BSBh p.2 L.8-9 BSBh [c-h] TTP 30 p.478c
'Sraavakabhuumi [c-h] 聲聞地 TTP 30. P.395c.
Analysis of the 'Sravakabhuumi Manuscrpt, by
Alex Wayman University of California a Press,
Berkeley, 1961 p.59
36. YCBhVY [c-t] =瑜伽論記 TTP 42. P.615 a-b
P.400
p.401
提要
「心經」雖不是唯識論書之一，但是窺基在「心經幽贊
」中，不但引用「瑜伽師地論」及「大乘莊嚴經論」等唯識
學說來解釋，又改造其學說為他的新學說，其中「阿顛底迦
」當做五種姓別的第五，可認為含有三種問題.因此本論文
如下說明其三問題。關於第一問題 -- 窺基在「心經幽贊」
為何省略「一闡提迦」及「阿闡底迦」 (大悲菩提闡) ? 為
此引述「楞伽經」，「大乘莊嚴經論」及「瑜伽師地論」的
學說，以便找出窺基在「成唯識論掌中樞要」中主張第五「
無種姓」含有三種 (一闡提迦、阿闡提迦、阿顛底迦 )的來
源。關於第二問題 -- 如果窺基不支持大悲菩薩闡提，為何
他在「心經幽贊」主張觀自在菩薩已成等覺?為此再引用「
法華玄贊」及「瑜伽論記」的學說，而證明窺基有承認大悲
菩薩。關於第三問題 -- 如果窺基堅持「無種姓」唯是「阿
顛底迦 (畢竟 )無種姓」，為何他在「心經幽贊」主張第八
識與第七識是善性，又選擇佛性與如來藏等來解釋五重唯識
中的第五遣相證性? 為此做比較表加以解釋等。而了解窺基
於「心經幽贊」中，沒有接收「畢竟無涅槃法」。在結論上
，作者提供兩想法為解決問題的要鍵: (1) 「心經幽贊」中
的「阿顛底迦」含有兩種 "aatyantikagotra" ( 畢竟無種
姓 ) 與 "aatyantikagotra"( 畢竟種姓 )的意思。(2) 「
阿顛底 迦」的顛」是「阿闡底迦」的「闡」的錯字。 除了
以上兩種以外，也可主張「無種姓」應恢復為第五種姓，因
為窺基在 「述記」中主張它含有三種「一闡提迦、 阿闡提
迦、阿顛底迦」。