The self and the person as treated in some Buddhist texts. (part 1)
Mitchiko Ishigami-Iagolnitzer
Asian Philosophy
Vol.7 No.1
March 1997
pp.37-45
COPYRIGHT 1997 Journals Oxford Ltd. 

            I. Primitive Buddhist Texts. Theragatha, Therigatha, Dhammapada, 
            Suttanipata (5th-3rd Centuries BC) 
            The most ancient and basic Buddhist texts were composed in verse or 
            in short sentences so as to be easily memorised. They communicate 
            the vivid and practical teaching of the Buddha, whose aim was above 
            all to help the salvation of men, by avoiding time-consuming 
            metaphysical reflections. 
            These texts state firstly that men cling to what they consider as 
            "I" or "mine", and are troubled by the attachments that the Buddha 
            advises them to abandon. The Suttanipata (collection of sutras) 756 
            observes that men take for self what is not self and cling to "name 
            and form" (namarupa). According to the Theragatha 575 (The Older 
            Monks' verses), "Stupid men consider their body as theirs". The 
            "name and form" and the "body" mentioned here designate a person, an 
            individual being composed of five aggregates: rupa (material form, 
            four elements: earth, water, fire, air, and six organs), vedana 
            (physical and mental sensations), samjna (perceptions), samskara 
            (mental formations) and vijnama (consciousness). 
            In the Samyutta-nikaya I (the grouped short sutras) the nun Vajra 
            refuses to answer ontological questions, as coming from Mara (the 
            Devil) about "being" (sattva), such as: who made him, where his 
            maker is, from where he emerged, where he is going to after his 
            death. 
            'Being'! Why do you harp upon that word? Among 
            false opinions, Mara, have you strayed. Mere bundle 
            of conditioned factors, this! 
            No 'being' can be here discerned to be. For just as, 
            when the parts are rightly set, The word 'chariot' 
            arises, So does our usage agree to say: " 'A being'! 
            when the aggregates are there." [3] 
            Other verses of the Samyutta-nikaya say: 
            Knowing that each of these elements is neither "me", nor "mine", Man 
            
            detaches himself from the clinging. He obtains peace of heart And 
            freedom 
            from bondage. [4] 
            The Therigatha (the verses of older nuns) 101 says: 
            Considering as not Self the formed things, which emerge from a cause 
            
            and perish, 
            I abandoned all desires, and I became pure and calm. [5] 
            The primitive Buddhist texts dissuade men from confusing the self 
            and the phenomenal person. The Buddha himself did not answer the 
            question of Vacchagotta as to whether the atman exists. [6] The 
            primitive Theravada schools interpreted this question in various 
            ways. Some of them (Sautrantikas, Vatsiputriyas and others), in 
            order to explain transmigration (samsara), supposed a temporal 
            existence of pudgala, which they consider as the self. Others, such 
            as the Sautrantikas, denied the existence of the self or atman and 
            at the present time the Theravadins of Sri Lanka follow this 
            traditional line. [7] 
            According to Rahula Walpola, a monk of Sri Lanka and author of 
            L'Enseignement du Bouddha (Paris, Ed. du Seuil, 1961), behind the 
            five aggregates composing an individual there is no substance such 
            as "I", "atman" or the "self". Following the doctrine of "dependent 
            origination", everything is conditioned, relative and 
            interdependent. The famous three verses of the Dhammapada say: 
            All compounded things are impermanent. (Sabbe sankhara anicca.) 
            All compounded things are dukkha. (Sabbe sankhara dukkha.) 
            All dharmas are without Self. (Sabbe dhamma anatta) (in Pali) [8] 
            "That is to say, following the teaching of the Theravada," writes 
            Walpola, "there is no self, either in the individual (puggala), or 
            in the dhamma (things conditioned or not)". [9] For him attan (atta 
            in nominative) in early Buddhist texts means only "oneself" and has 
            no metaphysical meaning of the self. 
            Hajime Nakamura, in his Jiga to muga (The Self and without Self) 
            [10] quotes two groups of verses concerning "oneself". The first 
            group concerns a positive oneself. 
            The Dhammapada advises man to defend and govern himself well (157), 
            to make himself his own master (160) or his "refuge" (236, 238), and 
            to take care of his own duty (166). The Samyutta-nikaya and the 
            Udana claim: 
            By looking around in all directions with my thought, 
            I did not find anything dearer than attan (piyataram attand). 
            Also atta is dear for others. 
            Therefore who loves attan (attana) must not harm others. [11] 
            In the second group the Buddha is said to have controlled, trained 
            and conquered himself. [12] So Nakamura supposes that there are two 
            sorts of selves: the ideal self that the saints realise and the 
            ordinary man's egotistic self, subject to desires and to torments. 
            [13] Candrakirti explained this, in his Prasannapada, by saying that 
            the teaching of the Buddha is gradual and adapted to his audience. 
            That is why the Buddha spoke of "oneself" as a conventional notion 
            to simple men and taught non-existence of the self to men clinging 
            to their ego, and the Middle Way (the truth is between self and 
            non-self) to those capable of penetrating his teaching. [14] 
            II. Dissection of the Person in the Prose Part of Some Sutras: 
            Samyutta-nikaya, Majjhima-nikaya, Milindapanha, Agama and 
            Abhidharma-koshabhasya (3rd Century BC-4th Century AD) 
            The prose part of the Buddhist sutras (composed later to explain the 
            primitive verses) repeats, in order to deliver men from their 
            attachment to any phenomenon, that all things and acts are composed 
            of the five aggregates which emerge and perish and that none of them 
            is the self. [15] 
            To show the inexistence of a phenomenal self (person), they used an 
            analytical method, called "zheqiongguan" in Chinese or "shakukugan" 
            in Japanese, [16] which consists in dissecting a thing into its 
            components, then in showing its lack of identity with each component 
            and in concluding its nominal and unreal existence (vacuity). 
            We can see some examples of this method in some Pali texts. The 
            first set of examples of a lute as well as of an oil lamp and of a 
            Pithy tree are in the Samyutta-nikaya (Grouped short sutras). The 
            example of a cow is in the Majjhima-nikaya (Collection of middle 
            length sutras). The third set of examples are in the Milindapanha 
            (Milinda's questions): the chariot, the flame of an oil-lamp and 
            milk which turns into curds. 
            1. In the Samyutta-nikaya IV (Section 165) the Buddha advises a monk 
            to see the person as impermanent. [17] Then he takes an example of a 
            rajan (raja, nominative, king) who, charmed by the sound of a lute, 
            breaks it into its parts to find it and is disappointed. In the same 
            way a monk who investigates the body, feelings, perceptions, mental 
            formations and the consciousness will not find anything of "I", "I 
            am" or "mine". [18] 
            2. In the chapter Nandakovadasutta of the Majjhima-nikaya [19], the 
            master Nandaka asks nuns if the five senses and the mental organ, 
            their six objects and six corresponding states of consciousness are 
            permanent, as well as the oil, the wick, the flame and the light of 
            an oil-lamp, and the root, the trunk, the branches and the foliage 
            of a Pithy tree. Their answer is in the negative. Finally he quotes 
            a case of a clever cattle butcher who dissects a cow with a sharp 
            knife, without spoiling the flesh inside and the outer hide, and 
            takes out the tendons, sinews and ligaments. He compares the knife 
            to a noble intuitive wisdom which analyses the six internal and the 
            six external sense fields to take away defilements, fetters and 
            bonds. 
            3. In the Milindapanha [20] (Milinda's questions), Nagasena, a 
            Buddhist master, says to the Bactrian king Menandros who reigned 
            during the 2nd century BC, in the North-West of India: "Nagasena is 
            only a name, since no person is found". [21] The king asks him who 
            the agent of actions is. The master asks him if the hair, the head, 
            the hairs of the body, the nails, the teeth, the skin, the flesh, 
            the sinews, the bones, the marrow, the kidneys, the heart, the 
            liver, the membranes, the spleen, the lungs, the intestines, the 
            mesentary, the stomach, the excrement, the bile, the phlegm, the 
            pus, the blood, the sweat, the fat, the tears, the serum, the 
            saliva, the mucus, the synovic fluid, the urine or the brain in the 
            head are Nagasena. Is Nagasena material shape, feeling, perception, 
            the habitual tendencies, or is he separate from these five 
            aggregates? The king says no, but cannot believe that Nagasena does 
            not exist and wonders if he is telling a lie. 
            Then Nagasena asks the king about the chariot in which he came. Is 
            each of its components, the pole, the axle, the wheels, the body, 
            the flag pole, the yoke, the reins, the goad, the chariot? Are all 
            of these parts the chariot? Is the chariot apart from these parts? 
            The king says no. Then Nagasena says: "the chariot is only a sound" 
            and wonders if the king lies. So the king is obliged to admit that 
            "the chariot exists (merely) as a name". Then Nagasena concludes 
            that "according to the highest meaning, the person is not found 
            here" and quotes the verses of the nun Vajra that we have seen 
            already: 
            Just as when the parts are rightly set, 
            The word "chariot" is spoken. 
            So when there are the aggregates, 
            It is the convention to say 'being'. [22] 
            Next day Nagasena refutes the Greek concept of person presented by 
            three Greeks (Antiochos etc.) as the life principle (jiva) or the 
            breath (vata, wind), atman (Skt) or attan (Pali) corresponding to 
            the Greek atmos breath or wind giving life to the body. [23] He 
            refuses also to consider the consciousness (vijnama, Skt) as a 
            unifying principle of the human being, because for him it is only a 
            mental organ which discerns phenomena experimentally. 
            According to the Samyutta-nikaya II, 94-95, [24] the Buddha prefers 
            his disciples to consider the body as himself rather than the mind, 
            because the body persists for one years or a hundred years, but what 
            we call thought, mind or consciousness "arises as one thing, ceases 
            as another, by night or by day" as a monkey seizes one bough after 
            another. This is a viewpoint radically different from the Cartesian 
            cogito, ergo sum (I think, therefore I exist.) 
            The Majjhima-nikaya I notes that the Buddha considered as "lacking 
            in reason" the viewpoint supposing the existence of the atman, 
            because it cannot be found. [25] 
            Concerning the identity of a man whose rebirth takes place after his 
            death, Nagasena says: "he is not the same and he is not another". 
            [26] He is as a baby grown up into an adult, as a flame of an oil 
            lamp in each moment, and as milk turned into curds, then into butter 
            and into ghee. [27] 
            And finally appeared the anatta or anatman thesis, the thesis of the 
            non-existence of the self in Agama in Sanskrit [28], which 
            Vasubandhu will quote later in the Chapter against the thesis of the 
            Self (Atmavadapratisedhaprakarana Skt, Powopin, in Chinese Hagahin, 
            in Japanese) of his Abhidharmakosha bhasya. (ca. AD 4th century). 
            [29] 
            The Buddha is said to have preached as follows for Brahman Badari: 
            Neither sentient being nor atman do exist (nastiha sattva atma ca), 
            Only 
            exists the Law of dependent origination, that is to say the twelve 
            links. When I think in detail of all the world of aggregates, the 
            person 
            doesn't exist. (pudgalo nopalabhyate.) I consider already that their 
            
            inside is void. Their outside is also void. [30] 
            Let us note that Mahayana Buddhists consider that this Law of 
            dependent origination is void of substance, i.e. has no actual 
            existence in itself, even though phenomena take place in accordance 
            with it. 
            III. Mahayana Texts: Vajracchedika prajnaparamita sutra, 
            Madhyamakashastra, Mahaparinirvana sutra (in the South edition in 
            Chinese) 
            The Vajracchedika prajnaparamita sutra (sutra of perfect wisdom 
            which cuts as a thunderbolt or a diamond), called the Diamond sutra, 
            belongs to the group of about forty Prajnaparamita sutras. It 
            insists on the vacuity of all phenomena and is one of the most 
            ancient Mahayana texts. 
            Starting from the orthodox doctrine of anatta, "the sutra develops 
            the consequence of saying all things are void of self". [31] In this 
            sutra it is said: 
            He is not to be called a Bodhisattva in whom the perception of a see 
            or a 
            being would take place, or the perception of living principle or a 
            person. 
            [32] 
            According to Edward Conze, the "self" (atman) is "the supposed 
            centre around which our own belongings are organised." A "being" 
            (sattva) is a separate individual. The living principle or soul 
            (jiva) is the "vivifying and unifying force within each organism". A 
            "person" (pudgala) is a "being", that is "looked at from the 
            outside, as a social entity". [33] 
            The sutra says also: 
            The Tathagata teaches, "selfless are all dharmas, insubstantial, 
            without 
            a living principle, without personality". [34] 
            Nagarjuna (ca. 150-250 AD [35], who gave a theoretical foundation to 
            Mahayana Buddhism, treated this problem in chapter XVIII Examination 
            of the self(Atmapariksha) and in some other chapters of his 
            Madhyamaka-karika] (The Stanzas of the Middle). [36] 
            At the beginning of the 7th century, Candrakirti comments on it in 
            his Prasannapada Madhyamakavritti (Commentary on the Treatise of the 
            Middle in Clear Terms), [37] quoting the Aryathatagataguhyasutra as 
            words of the Buddha. 
            Not to give birth to the self, the "being", the soul, the individual 
            
            (pudgala) and the false viewpoint, is to understand the false 
            viewpoint on 
            the personality, and this is the vacuity. [38] 
            And he demonstrates, in his commentary to Chapter XXII, The 
            Examination of the Tathagata, that pudgala (person) does not exist 
            even if one examines it in five ways. [39] 
            The theories of atman and anatman are both "skilful ways" (upayah) 
            to save ordinary men from errors. Neither atman nor anatman are the 
            truth. This is the point of view of Kumarajiva, translator of the 
            Madhyamaka-shastra into Chinese, and of Candrakirti, commentator on 
            the Madhyamaka-karika. 
            Guy Bugault explains clearly Nagarjuna's work in his L'Inde 
            pense-t-elle?: 
            Everything that comes into existence results from a combination of 
            conditions and this rule suffers no exception.... Nagarjuna asks 
            only to 
            be shown 'what comes to existence (ch. 1), what transmigrates (ch. 
            16), 
            in short the subject which becomes'. But such an identity, when one 
            searches for it in living beings (sattva) or in things (bhaba and 
            also 
            dharma), is unthinkable or cannot be found. The being in question 
            vanishes under the acuteness of the look. In a sense, is nirvana 
            anything else? His dialectical virtuosity is itself merely 
            upaya-kaushalya, a therapeutic skillfulness. [40] 
            After the Madhyamaka school (Madhyamika), those practicing Yoga 
            (Yogacara, formed the "doctrine of consciousness only' 
            (vijnapti-matrata). [41] Following their experience during 
            concentration (samadhi), their consciousness perceived images 
            without senses. They thought that all experiences came from the 
            inner consciousness which they call alaya-vijnana, receptacle (or 
            grain) which conserves and carries karman, heritage, memory and 
            character, and which are nevertheless void of substance. 
            Vasubandhu accepted this doctrine, and developed the theory of 
            Tathagatagarbha (the womb or embryo of Tathagata = the Buddha) which 
            means the possibility of becoming a "Buddha" (p.p. of budh = to wake 
            up, to understand, therefore the enlightened one) [42] and the 
            theory of the Buddha Nature. (He wrote the Treatise on the Buddha 
            Nature in the 4th century AD.) 
            The Tathagatagarbha theory was developed in the Mahayana Parinirvana 
            sutra relating the death of the Buddha. [43] The South edition of 
            its Chinese translation insists on the permanent and imperishable 
            nature of Tathagata and calls it "the self' causing some confusion 
            with the atman. 
            One preaches that all the dharmas are without Self, but it doesn't 
            mean no 
            existence of the Self Who is the Self? If a dharma is substantial, 
            true, 
            constant, a chief, a support and if its nature does not change, one 
            names it 
            the Self. [44] 
            "The self" in the heart of living beings is called Tathagatagarbha: 
            The Self is the Tathagata and garbha. All beings have the Buddha 
            Nature. It is 
            the Self This Self is hidden originally, covered always by 
            innumerable 
            desires. That is why they cannot see it. [45] 
            It is the Buddha Nature or Nirvana, "Nirvana being without self and 
            free, one names it the Great Self". In China they call it also "the 
            True Self' and distinguish it from an "illusory self'. [46] 
            It seems to be a return to the atman (or Brahman), but this Great 
            Self, for 
            Mahayana Buddhists, is only a conventional name, given to reality 
            void of 
            substance, which is Vacuity and Nirvana. 
            IV. Confrontation with practice 
            The exercise of Zen consists in sitting as Buddha to discover the 
            Buddha Nature in us, in realising the enlightenment and in deepening 
            this experience. While studying the Shobogenzo zuimonki (notes taken 
            by Ejo while listening to the oral teaching of Dogen) (written in 
            1234/5-8), the Gakudo yojin shu (Pieces of advice for the study of 
            the Way) (1234) and the Shobogenzo of the Zen master Dogen, who read 
            all these Buddhist texts and founded a Zen monks' community, we 
            notice that he practiced and taught to his disciples the fundamental 
            teachings of the Buddha as well as the developed theory of the Self. 
            
            Ejo notes in his Shobogenzo zuimonki that his master repeatedly 
            recommended to disciples to free themselves from their attachment to 
            the idea of "I", "me" or "mine", by contemplating the impermanence 
            of phenomena. [47] Dogen writes in his Gakudoyojinshiu: 
            If this idea of "I" emerges, sit down calmly and observe. Among what 
            we 
            possess inside and outside of our body, what can be considered as 
            originally 
            ours? We receive our body, hair and skin from our parents. Their red 
            and 
            white drops [48] are, from beginning to the end, void of substance. 
            So they 
            are not us. The heart, the volition, the consciousness, the wisdom, 
            the 
            breath which we breathe in and out and which maintains our life, 
            what are 
            they finally? They are not us. [49] 
            He applies thus the method of dissection as in other Buddhist texts. 
            
            In the tome Genjokoan (The truth accomplished now) (1233) of the 
            Shobogenzo, Dogen sums up his teaching in the famous formula: 
            Learning the Buddha's way is learning who is the Self. 
            Learning who is the Self is to forget ourselves. [50] 
            To forget ourselves is to be enlightened by ten thousand dharmas. 
            [51] 
            To be enlightened by ten thousand dharmas means to let our own 
            body and heart and the other's own body and heart get rid of the 
            attachments. [52] 
            His words describe the ethical evolution of the Buddha Nature in us 
            working progressively to realise itself not only for itself but also 
            for others. 
            V. Conclusion 
            We have seen how the self and the person have been treated in some 
            Buddhist texts of different periods and how the notions concerning 
            them have evolved. But we notice two constant tendencies: men's 
            attachment to the individual and egotistic self is always 
            discouraged, while their effort to find out their true self (the 
            Buddha Nature) and to realise it (Nirvana) is encouraged, this self 
            being considered, nevertheless, void of substance. 
            This distinction between two selves is merely a skilful way of 
            leading people to Nirvana. For fifteen centuries innumerable 
            Buddhists have practiced samadhi in this spirit and have realised 
            enlightenment, by sitting as calmly and concentrated as the Buddha. 
            The Buddhists consider the phenomenal and individual person as an 
            illusion and they would have many difficulties in understanding the 
            Platonic and Christian notions of "person". 
            Mitchiko Ishigami-Iagolnitzer, Institut de Recherche et d'Histoire 
            des Textes, Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique, Section de 
            L'Humanisme-40, Avenue d'Iena 75116, Paris, France. 
            NOTES 
            [1] An earlier version of this paper was delivered at the Second 
            Conference of the European Society for Asian Philosophy, held at 
            Exeter University, U.K. in August 1995. 
            [2] Tedesci, P. (1947) Journal of the American Oriental Society, 67, 
            pp. 172-177. 
            [3] Pali Text Society (Eds) (1950) Samyutta-nikaya I, p. 135, 
            Davids, Rhys (Transl.) P.T.S. partly modernised. Series: The Book of 
            the Kindred Sayings. SN I, p. 170. For Pali texts quoted in this 
            article, references are to texts edited and translated by the Pali 
            Text Society of London. 
            [4] SN I, p.112,G. 
            [5] Oldenberg, Hermann and Pischel, Richard (Eds) (1966) The Thera- 
            and Therigatha London, P.T.S.) p. 133. 
            [6] SN IV, pp. 400-401. 
            [7] Nakamura, Hajime Jiga to muga (see below note 10) pp. 1 16 117. 
            Other schools deriving from Vatsiputriya are Dharmottaria, 
            Bhadrataniya, Sammatiya and Sannagarika. 
            [8] P.T.S., Ddhammapada 277, 278, 279 (No. 5, 6, 7 of the ch. XX 
            Maggavaggo), edited by Suriyagoda Sumangala Thera 1914, p. 40. 
            Majjhima-nikaya, I, p. 228. SN II, III, p. 132, XXII, Section 90. 
            Translation, SN III, p. 112, sankhara = all things which have been 
            made by pre-existing causes. Pali Text Society (1979) Pali-English 
            Dictionary (London) P.T.S. p. 665. 
            [9] Walpola R., p. 85, translated here from the French edition. 
            [10] Nakamura, H. (Ed.) (1986) Introduction, The Idea of Anattan, 
            (Kyoto, Heiraku-Shoteru). 
            [11] SN I, text edited by Feer, Leon (1960) t. I, III, 1-8, p. 75 
            G./Udana, text edited by Woodward, F. L. (1977), Vol. 1, p. 275. 
            [12] Dhammapada, 80, 145, 305, 322; Digha-nikaya, III, p. 275, 
            Theragatha, 1098, Thera and Therigatha, p. 98, Dhammapada, 103, 104, 
            105. 
            [13] Nakamura, p. 34. 
            [14] Candrakirti: Prasannapada, ch. XVIII, 11. Jong, J. W. (Transl.) 
            (1949) Cinq chapitre de la Prasannapada (Paris, Lib. Orientale Paul 
            Geuthner), pp. 15-21. 
            [15] For example the Vinayapitaka des Theravadin, Siamese edition, 
            Vol. IV, p. 28; A. Bareau, Bouddha, p. 114; Majjhima-nikaya I. 
            135-136; BUGAULT, G. (1994) L'Inde pense-t-elle; ch. IX; Logique et 
            dialectique chez Aristotie et chez Nagarjuna (Paris, PUF) p. 266. 
            [16] Nakamura, p. 76. 
            [17] SN IV, Section 165. Translation (series: The Books of the 
            Kindred Sayings) SN IV, p. 93. 
            [18] IV, 195, XXXV, iv, 5, Section 205 (9). Translation by P. L. 
            Woodward (series: The Book of the Kindred Sayings) SN IV, The 
            Salayatana Book, pp. 128-130. 
            [19] MN III, No. 146, Nandakovadasutta, pp. 272-275. Horner, I. B. 
            (Transl.) (1954) An Exhortation from Nandaka, pp. 324-327. 
            [20] In Pali, Milindapanha (feminine), title adopted in Burma and 
            Thailand. In Sri Lanka it is in the masculine: Milindapanho, cf. 
            Hayashima, Kyosei, Discussed points on Self and non-Self in 
            Milindapanha in Nakamura: Jiga to muga, p. 425. The Pali text was 
            edited by V. Trenckner in London in 1880. This dialogue was composed 
            roughly between 1st century BC and 1st. century AD in the North-West 
            of India, in the region governed by King Menandros in cat 2nd 
            century BC then was translated later into Pali. 
            [21] Milinda I (25). Translation of the Trenckner edition by Horner, 
            I. B. (1963) is available in the series Sacred Books of the 
            Buddhists, (London Luzac) "na h'ettha puggalo upalabhatiti." 
            Upalabhati = upa + labh = obtain to find. Passive, upalabhati = to 
            be found or got = to exist (see Pali Test Society, English 
            Dictionary, p. 146). 
            [22] Milinda I, (25-28), Translation I, p. 34-38. 
            [23] Milinda I, (30 31), Translation I, p. 41. 
            [24] SN II, pp. 94, XII, 7, Section 61, (1); Translation, SN II, pp. 
            65-66, cf SN II, 62. Nidana Section 37 (7). Translation, SN II, p. 
            44. 
            [25] The Alagaddupamasutta quoted in the Majjhima-nikaya I. P.T.S. 
            p. 138. "Oh, monks, when neither atman nor anything belonging to the 
            atman can be truly and really found, this speculative viewpoint: 
            'this universe is the atman; after dying I will become what is 
            permanent, staying, lasting, not liable to change, and I will exist 
            like that for eternity', isn't it, oh, monks, purely and simply 
            lacking in reason?" cf G. Bugault, p. 299. P.T.S., (1954) The Middle 
            Length Sayings. I I. B. Horner (Transl.) p. 177. 
            [26] Milinda, I, (40), Translation, I, p. 54. 
            [27] Milinda, I, (40 41), Translation, I, pp. 55-56. 
            [28] Agama (Skt) means text or scripture and is a collective name 
            given to all the sayings about the acts and teachings of Buddha, 
            summed up in short sentences, memorised and transmitted orally by 
            many primitive Buddhist scholars in either Sanskrit, Prakrit (Indian 
            dialect) or Pali. The five nikayas of Theravfida in Pali are well 
            conserved. Others, translated in Chinese or in Tibetan, are 
            partially conserved. Maeda, Keigaku (1985) in Butten kaidai jiten 
            (2nd edn) (Tokyo, Shunjusha) pp. 60-62. 
            [29] Vasubandhu et Yacomitra, IIIe chapitre de l'Abhidharma 
            koca-karika, bhasya et vyakhya, texte etabli par Louis de la Vallee 
            Poussin. London. Kegan. Trench. Trubner, 1914-1918, p. 137. Abhi, 
            ch. III, 18, pp. 137-138 Valleee Poussin, L. de la (Transl.) (1926) 
            L'Abhidharmakosha de Vasubandhu IIIe chapitre (Paris, P. Geuthner) 
            18a, pp. 56 57. "L'atman auquel vous croyez, une entite qui 
            abandonne les skandhas d'une existence et prend les skandhas d'une 
            autre existence, un agent interieur, un Purusa, cet atman n'existe 
            pas. Bhagavat a dit en effet: "L'acte est (8a), le fruit est; mais 
            il n'est pas d'agent...", Abhidharmakosha-bhasya = Jushilun (in 
            Chinese), Kusharon (in Japanese). 
            [30] Nakumura, pp. 79-80, Sphutartha Abhidharmakoshavyakhya, edited 
            by U. Wogihara, p. 704 (Chinese edition). Kando Abhidharma kusharon 
            Japanese), t. 29, 15 left. The translation is from Chinese text. The 
            lines quoted here are not in the Pali text. 
            [31] Conze, Edward (Ed. and Transl.) (1974) Vajrachedika 
            prajnaparamita. Serie Orientale Roma XIII, (Rome, Istituto Italiano 
            per il Medio ed Estremo Oriente), p. 11. 
            [32] Ibid., 3, pp. 66-67, text in Sanskrit, p. 29. 
            [33] Ibid., p. 10, Conze translates jiva as "living soul". 
            [34] Ibid., 17 f, translation p. 84, p. 49. "Tathagato bhasate: 
            niratmanah sarvbo- dharma nih sattvah nirjiva nispudgalah sarva 
            dharma iti." 
            [35] See Uryuzu, Ryoshin (1985) Nagurjuna kenkyu (Study on 
            Nagarjuna). (Tokyo, Shunjusha) Bugault, Guy L'Inde pense- t-elle? 
            (ch. VIII Nagarjuna pp. 213-236). 
            [36] The short pieces of verse of Nagarjuna: (Mula) 
            Madhyamaka-karika was edited and commented by Pingala in the 4th 
            Century AD under the title of Madhyamika'shastra. It was translated 
            into Chinese by Kumaraj in 149 An. Zhongguanlun (in Chinese), 
            Chukanron (in Japanese). (karika = concise statements in verse of 
            doctrines). 
            [37] May, Jacques (Ed. and Transl.) (1959) Candrakirti, Prasannapada 
            Madhyamakavritti (Paris, A. Maisonneuve), pp. 5-22. 
            [38] Translated into English by de Jong, J. W. (1949) Cinq chapitres 
            de la Prasannapada (Pans, P. Geuthner) ch. XVIII, pp. 20-21. 
            [39] de Jong, pp. 73 - 85. 
            [40] G. Bugault, ch. IX, pp. 317, 302 and 318. 
            [41] Madhyamika and Yogacara were two main schools of Mahayana 
            Buddhism. 
            [42] Introduction of Akira Hirakawa. Buttenkaidai jiten, pp. 20-21. 
            cf. Takasaki, Jikido, (1974) The Formation of the Theory of 
            Tathagatagarbha. A Study on the Indian Buddhist Thought of Mahayana. 
            (in Japanese). Tokyo, Shjunjusha, (Doctorate Thesis). 
            [43] The text in Sanskrit was translated into Chinese by Tanwushi. 
            The North edition consists of forty volumes and the South edition of 
            thirty six volumes. It is the equivalent of the 
            Mahaparinibbanasuttanta in Pali of Theravfida, but is not the same. 
            [44] South edition in Chinese, II chapter of Lamentation. 
            [45] Ibid. South edition. VIII on The Nature of Tathagata. 
            [46] Quoted in Chinese by Nakamura p. 141, note 2. 
            [47] Koun, Ejo (1995) Shobgenzo zuimonki, Choenji edition, Mizuno 
            Yahoko (Ed.), Series Nihon Koten Bungaku Taikei 81, (Tokyo, 
            Iwanami-shoten), II, 12, 16; III, 8, 12; IV 2, 3; VI, 10, 21. 
            [48] "The drops of their inseminating liquid", according to Toshio 
            Shinohara's commentary on Gakudo yojinshu; Tokyo, Daito shuppansha, 
            1990, p. 41. 
            [49] Dogen zenji zenshu (The Whole Works of Zen Master Dogen), Okubo 
            Doshu (Ed.) Tokyo, Chikumashobo, 1970, p. 254. 
            [50] Dogen uses the Japanese word "ware" to mean Self and oneself 
            [51] In Bendowa (A Talk on Practising the Way) of his Shobogenzo, 
            Dogen describes a man's enlightenment as a symphony with all the 
            elements of nature. When a man practicing zazen has discovered the 
            Buddha Nature in him and is awakened to the truth (enlightened), all 
            the elements of the Universe (dharma) realise the enlightenment 
            communicate and become one with him. Dogenzenji zenshu, pp.731-732. 
            Nishio, M., Kagamijima, G., Sakai, J. (Eds) Shobogenzo. 
            Nihonkotenbungaku taikei 81. Tokyo. Iwanami- shoten, pp. 74-76. 
            Shosuru Japanese) = satoru Japanese) = badh (Skt) = to wake up, to 
            understand. 
            [52] Dogenzenji zenshu, pp. 7-8. N.K.S. edition mentioned p. 102. 
            Dogen in Hokyoki, recounts his Chinese Zen master Rujing's answer to 
            his question on "shinjin datsuraku" (the heart and body being 
            detached): "It means zazen. When you sit down only for its self, you 
            detach yourself from the five desires (of fortune, lust, eating, 
            renown and sleep) and eliminate the five obstacles (avidity, anger, 
            massive indolence, arrogance evil-doing or repentance and doubt)."