p. 275
In the Mahaa-nidaana-suttanta of the Diigha-Nikaaya, the Buddha reproved AAnanda for saying that while Dependent Origination looks deep it is clear to him. The Buddha announced that it both looks deep and is deep. In this case the Buddha was on the side of the gods, because the B.rhadaara.nyaka-Upani.sad (IV, 2, 2) says, "The gods love that which is hinted at darkly, and hate that which is uttered directly." As William Blake puts it, the "dim Windows of the Soul . . .leads you to Believe a Lie When you see with, not thro', the Eye" -- because Dependent Origination not quite "is" and not quite "isn't".
This signals the difficulties which authors of the past and present have experienced with the Buddhist formula: They considered Dependent Origination as something before their eyes to see in clear relief, as one might see a book. This essay claims that Dependent Origination could not become clear in such a way, since there are two distinct and contrasting interpretations of the series, the first one which I label "discovery and seeing", and the second "lives of a person," and since both interpretations are required for understanding the formula. The first, without concern for particular persons, to develop the Buddhist Doctrine. The second, recognizing individuals, to show the role of defilement and karma in successive lives. In order to demonstrate this in continuance of my previous published materials[1] on the subject, it would lead me too far afield to deal with the multitude of theories advanced by sympathetic authors, or to counter the hostile criticism that the Buddhist formula does not make sense.[2] I shall report the Indian tradition through the well-known Paali or Sanskrit works, and for the Tibetan part especially rely on the Dependent Origination section of Tso^n-kha-pa's Lam rim chen mo.
p. 276
The essential of dependent (pratiitya) origination (samutpaada) is the requirement of a condition (pratyaya) for something to arise.[3] The standard sequence of twelve such conditions in Sanskrit and my English translation is this: 1. nescience (avidyaa), 2. motivations (sa.mskaara), 3. perception (vij~naana), 4. name-and-form (naama-ruupa), 5. six sense bases (.sa.daayatana), 6. sense contact (spar`sa), 7. feelings (vedanaa), 8. craving (t.r.s.naa), 9. indulgence (upaadaana), 10. gestation (bhava), 11. birth (jaati), 12. old age and death (jaraa-mara.na). I stumbled upon a possibility of two kinds by finding in Asanga's Yogaacaarabhuumi that there is a nescience 'unmixed with defilement' and in another place that Dependent Origination can be classified in terms of defilement (kle`sa), karma, and suffering (du.hkha), where nescience is labeled as a defilement.[4] Eventually, I took the first kind as discovered by Gautama Buddha and as unconcerned with particular beings. The second kind is applied to lives of an individual whose karma is differentiated or unshared.
My division also follows the implications of Naagaarjuna's Madhyamaka-kaarikaa XXIV, 40: "The one who sees Dependent Origination, sees this (idam) precisely (caiva) as Suffering and the Source, precisely (eva ca) as Cessation and Path." This verse afforded the commentators a splendid opportunity, which they seem not to have taken, to point out that Naagaarjuna's association of voidness (`suunyataa) with Dependent Origination makes it possible to see Dependent Origination as any one of the four Noble Truths, i.e., one can see it as the 'tree of suffering' (infra.) and as any other one of the four Truths.[5] Since Dependent Origination is not a real thing, seeing it one way does not prevent anyone from seeing it another way. Hence I offer this explanation in terms of the present article: The first two Noble Truths of Suffering and Source are associated with the first kind of Dependent Origination that deals with beings as a whole and not with particular ones. The last two Noble Truths of Cessation and Path are associated with the second kind of Dependent Origination concerned with lives of individuals including the specialized ones who follow the Path. As to the 'seeing' itself, later I cite various passages.
There is a celebrated account in Paali, Sa.myutta-Nikaaya, ii, 25, presenting the twelve members in reverse order: "With the condition of birth, O monks,
p. 277
there is old age and death. With the condition of gestation, O monks, there is birth ..." And then, "Whether Tathaagatas arise or do not arise, there remains this realm (dhaatu), the continuance of dhamma, the rule of dhamma, the having-this for condition. This the Tathaagata has discovered; this he fully understands; and having discovered it and fully understood it, he teaches it,..." And finally, that the AArya disciple, having rightly understood it, does not let his mind run to past time, thinking, "Did I live in the past?" and so on. The important feature of this passage is that the discovery and concordant teaching of Dependent Origination is not concerned with whether Tathaagatas arise or whether sentient beings arise, existed in the past, will exist in the future, etc. As to the meaning of such expressions as "continuance of dhamma," "rule of dhamma," there is also the pithy utterance, "Whoever sees Dependent Origination, sees the Dharma."[6] There is nothing mysterious about this: Once the Tathaagata had discovered Dependent Origination, he taught it, whereupon it became the Dharma. This must be the Dharma among the Three Jewels, so it is the Buddhist Doctrine, or an essential or salient part thereof.
But also the Sa.myutta-Nikaaya, ii, 120, says in the Vakkali-sutta. "Whoever, Vakkali, sees the dhamma, sees me; whoever sees me, sees the dhamma." Since Dependent Origination as set forth above is not concerned with whether Tathaagatas arise or not, it follows that it is not concerned with whether dhamma (singular or plural) arises or not. A similar identification of dharma (the Sanskrit equivalent to the Paali dhamma) with the Tathaagata is made in the Mahaayaana scripture "Meeting of Father and Son" (pitaaputrasamaagama-suutra).[7] Here, after a discussion of Dependent Origination, it teaches: "Therefore, by understanding Dependent Origination, one understands the dharmadhaatu," and "Lord, the Tathaagata is devoid of characteristics (lak.sa.na), ... ; is Dharmadhaatu, Thusness, True End (bhuutako.ti). All dharmas are also bhuutako.ti. Therefore, all dharmas are the Tathaagata." The foregoing suggests that the Buddha's discovery of Dependent Origination involved no perceptual reach of particular sentient beings, ordinary or advanced; or of particular dharmas, ordinary ones like love and hate or supernal ones like Buddha natures. Along the same lines, the discourse to Kaccaayana (Sa.myutta-Nikaaya, iii, 134-135) and Naagaarjuna's use of the discourse (with the Sanskrit name Katyaayana) in his Madhyamaka-kaarikaa, show that the middle doctrine or path of Dependent Origination avoids the attributions of "The world exists" or "The world does not exist," hence also
p. 278
avoids such formulations as "The Tathaagata exists" or "The Tathaagata does not exist," or again, such formulations as "He is happy," or "He is unhappy."
To further clarify this kind of Dependent Origination I shall translate below a Paali Sutta (Sa.myutta-Nikaaya, Nidaana Book, ii, 2) which has no mention of such matters as karma and transmigration. In particular, by explaining nescience as ignorance of any of the four Noble Truths, it avoids any direct implications of defilement (kle`sa). Asa^nga also denies that ignorance of the four Truths is defiled since it does not involve waywardness of thought (citta-viparyaasa).[8] Rather, the ignorance of the four Truths is tantamount to not knowing Dependent Origination. The early nature of this Paali scripture is also confirmed by certain non-standard listings, such as its detailing of "name" in 'name-and-form' and of the member 'feelings'.[9]
When the Buddha was dwelling at Saavatthii, he said: "Monks, I will teach you, I will analyze Dependent Origination.[10] Listen to it, orient your mind well, and I will explain." "Agreed!" those monks responded to the Lord. The Lord spoke as follows:
"Monks, with the condition of nescience, there is motivation. With the condition of motivation, there is perception. With the condition of perception, there is name-and-form. With the condition of name-and-form, there is six sense bases. With the condition of six sense bases, there is sense contact. With the condition of sense contact, there is feeling. With the condition of feeling, there is craving. With the condition of craving, there is indulgence. With the condition of indulgence, there is gestation. With the condition of gestation, there is birth. With the condition of birth, then old age and death, grief, lamentation, suffering, dissatisfaction, perturbation, appear together. Such is the source of this entire mass of suffering.
"And what, monks, is old age and death? Whatever, of this and that sentient being, in this and that group, is aging, decrepitude, falling apart, whiteness of hair, wrinkled skin, affliction of life force, spent sense faculties, this is called old age. Whatever, of this and that sentient being, in this and that group, is falling or passing away, separation or disappearance, death which is concrete death, the appointed time, collapse of personality aggregates, laying down of corpse, severance of life faculty, this is called death. Such is this old age and this death, that is called old age and death.
"And what, monks, is birth? Whatever, of this and that sentient being, in this and that group, is birth-process, the begetting, the entrance (into life), definition and differentiation, manifestation of personality aggregates, acquisition of sense organs, this is called birth.
"And what, monks, is gestation? There are three gestations: gestation in the realm of desire, gestation in the realm of form, gestation in the formless realm. This is called gestation.
"And what, monks, is indulgence? There are four indulgences: indulgence in desires (kaama), indulgence in (false) views (d.r.s.ti), indulgence in (fruitless) rules and vows (S. `siilavrata), indulgence in the self-theory (S. aatmavaada). This is called indulgence.
"And what, monks, is craving? There are six partite cravings: craving for forms, for sounds, for odors, for tastes, for tangibles, for mental objects (dhamma, S. dharma). This is called craving.
p. 279
"And what, monks, is feeling? There are six partite feelings: feeling born from eye-contact, feeling born from ear-contact, feeling born of nose-contact, feeling born of tongue-contact, feeling born of body-contact, feeling born of mind-contact. This is called feeling.
"And what, monks, is sense contact? There are six partite sense contacts: eye-contact, ear-contact, nose-contact, tongue-contact, body-contact, mind-contact. This is called sense contact.
"And what, monks, is six sense bases? The eye-base, ear-base, nose-base, tongue-base, body-base, mind-base. This is called six sense bases.
"And what, monks, is name-and-form? Feelings (S. vedanaa), ideas (S.samj~naa), volitions (S. cetanaa), sense contacts (S. spar`sa), mental orientations (S. manasikaara) -- this is called name. The four great elements and the forms derived from the four great elements -- this is called form. Such is this name and this form that it is called name-and-form .
"And what, monks, is perception? There are six partite perceptions: perception with eye, perception with ear, perception with nose, perception with tongue, perception with body, perception with mind. This is called perception.
"And what, monks, is motivation? There are three motivations: motivation of body, motivation of speech, motivation of mind. This is called motivation.
"And what, monks, is nescience? Whatever ignorance (S. aj~naana) of Suffering, ignorance of the Source of Suffering, ignorance of the Cessation of Suffering, ignorance of the Path leading to the Cessation of Suffering -- this is called nescience.
"Thus, monks, with the condition of nescience, there is motivation; with the condition of motivations, there is perception; . . . (and so on down to) . . . perturbation. Such is the source of this entire mass of suffering. But with the utter dispassion and cessation of nescience, motivation ceases. With the cessation of motivation, perception ceases . . . (and so on down to) .. .perturbation. Such is the cessation of this entire mass of suffering.
But also, from its inception Buddhism never denied that a Tathaagata arises, or that dharmas arise.[11] It was claimed that anything that arises, arises dependently. Therefore, there must be a usage of Dependent Origination to cover the arising of particular beings or natures. Indeed, some Paali specialists hold that this is what the Buddhist formula amounts to. For example, Jayatilleke asserts that the formula explains rebirth and karma and the arising of suffering while avoiding the extremes of aatman-eternalism and nihilism of Materialism.[12] Now rebirth is necessarily the rebirth of a particular being, and so this is the second kind of Dependent Origination as applied to lives of a particular being. This kind of Dependent Origination has been popularized in the West by reproductions of the "Wheel of Life" especially from its Tibetan version.
To further clarify this kind of Dependent Origination I shall translate below from Sanskrit a passage of the Madhyaantavibhaaga along with
p. 280
Vasubandhu's comment.[13] Defilement is prominently suggested by the verb kli`syate ("is tormented or defiled"). The gloss for 'perception' (vij~naana) renders it "a conducting" (nayana), i.e., to the birthplace, and the comment brings in the "habit-energy of karma." This passage is therefore concerned with the past, present, and future life of some person or being:
The world is tormented by a covering (chaadana), a quickening (ropa.na), a conducting (nayana), a circumscribing (sa.mparigraha), a finishing (puura.na), a trisection (tripariccheda), an experience (upabhoga), an attraction (kar.sa.na), a bondage (nibandhana), a confrontation (aabhimukhya), a sorrowing (du.hkhana). (Madhyaantavibhaaga I, 10).
(Vasubandhu's comment:) The world is tormented (or defiled), among those, by 1. a covering, i.e., by nescience's hindering of the view of how things really are. 2. a quickening, i.e., by motivation's depositing in perception (vij~naana) of the habit-energy (vaasanaa) of karma. 3. a conducting, i.e,, by perception's reaching of the birth-place. 4. a circumscribing, i.e., by name-and-form's embodiment (aatmabhaava), 5. a finishing, i.e., by six sense bases. 6. a trisection, i.e., by sense contact. 7. an experience, i.e., by feeling. 8. an attraction, i.e., by the craving for re-existence (punarbhava) cast by karma. 9. a bondage, i.e., by indulgences in desires, etc., that agree with the occurrence of perception 10. a confrontation, i.e., by gestation's placing-in-front for yielding the maturation in re-existence of the karma previously enacted. 11-12. a sorrowing, i.e., by birth and by old age and death.
This formulation can be traced back to the Mahaa-nidaana-suttanta of the Diigha-Nikaaya, where the Buddha asks AAnanda (Diigha, ii, 63): "If perception would not descend into the mother's womb, would name-and-form become consolidated in the womb?" And AAnanda replied that it would not.
In short, the Buddha discovered the formula of Dependent Origination; and when he taught it, the formula became the Buddhist Dharma or Doctrine. The later disciple can repeat the process -- discover the formula in the reverse order (12-1) and see the Dharma in the direct order (1-12).
Asa^nga alludes to this first kind of Dependent Origination in his Paramaartha-gaathaa along with his own commentary. There are two parts to it: "the dharmas possessed of cause" are the first seven members, from 'nescience' down through 'feelings - here the creatures are caught by delusion. "The suffering possessed of cause" is the last five members, from 'craving' down through 'old age and death' - here the creatures are caught by craving.[14]
p. 281
According to the suggestions of the Paali scripture and later the Lalitavistara, when Gautama was meditating beneath the tree of enlightenment he thought: There is this old age and death and the mass of other suffering. What is its condition for arising? Indeed, it requires birth. And birth requires a gestation (or, a pregnancy), and this requires an indulgence (the taking of it, grasping, and so on), and this requires a craving. Thus, Gautama, working backwards, re-discovered the finding of the Vedic seer who searching with his intelligence (manii.saa) for the original principle, found 'desire' (kaama) as the first-born and as the bond of the existent in the non-existent. Gautama stressed it somewhat differently: It is the first two Noble Truths: the Truth of Suffering, and the Truth of the Cause of Suffering. Here the cause is specified as 'craving' -- t.r.s.naa in Sanskrit, or tanhaa in Paali. Even so, the Vedic account is apparently continued in Buddhist dogmatics by the karma theory, since 'craving' along with the bondage confirmed by indulgence establishes man's free will by permitting a new bondage and so a new karma ("gestation"), and could be said to connect the existent habit with the non-existent future.
But Gautama did not stop there. He thought: What is the condition for the arising of craving? And concluded: It is feelings. And this requires sense contact, and this requires the six sense bases, the five outer ones and the mind (manas) as the sixth. Searching for the condition enabling the six sense bases to arise, he concluded it was 'name-and-form' (naama-ruupa) -- an important term of the old Indian Braahma.nas and Upani.sads. As its condition he assigned 'perceptions' (vij~naana); and for this, 'motivation' (sa.mskaara); and for this, 'nescience' (avidyaa). According to the Paali scripture, the Third Noble Truth of Cessation is applied to nescience in order to undo the whole series that leads to the mass of suffering. It is a curious feature of Dependent Origination that while 'craving' is the source or cause of suffering, once suffering has become the regular thing one can get rid of it only by the cessation of 'nescience'. But this accords with human experience generally: the broken leg is not healed simply by eliminating the cause of the broken leg. Asa^nga's statement helps with this group because he refers to these seven members as "the dharmas possessed of cause". This ties in these members with the Buddhist Abhidharma theory of "all dharmas" as included in the five personality aggregates (skandha) (= 'name-and-form'), twelve sense bases (= 'six sense bases' multiplied for personal and objective bases), and eighteen realms (dhaatu) (= 'contact', the six objects, the six sense organs, and the six
p. 282
perceptions based thereon).[15] Since the dharmas are included by members Nos. 4-6, it follows that members Nos. 1-3 are the 'cause' of the dharmas. Member No. 7, 'feelings', also a dharma as a personality aggregate, is left over to culminate the deterministic series, or the old bondage.
The following tabulation of the discovery order includes the subdivisions according to Asa^nga's school:
12. old age and death Suffering 11. birth 10. gestation Cause of Suffering 9. indulgence 8. craving 7. feelings Dharmas 6. sense contact 5. six sense bases 4. name-and-form 3. perception Cause of Dharmas 2. motivations 1. nescience
Naturally, the Buddhist works do not refer to the pre-Buddhist religion (the Veda and ancillary works); hence they are sketchy and probably incomplete as regards the 'discovery' of the series. In a partial breakthrough of this discovery, I have already observed that the first four members, starting with 'nescience', curiously match the cosmic development of the B.rhadaara.nyaka-Upani.sad.[16]
Since to see Dependent Origination in this sense of 'seeing' is tantamount to seeing Dharma, the later writers could fill in. This expansion was conservative at the suutra level, as evidenced in the several pratiityasamutpaada-type scriptures available in Sanskrit.[17] Naagaarjuna's works on the subject are just as brief.[18] The Abhidharma schools of course dilated the members. Vasubandhu, whose early years were devoted to the Abhidharma, has a rather large commentary on pratiityasamutpaada, and in the Tibetan Tanjur this is followed by Gu.namati's still larger commentary.[19] These Abhidharma works inevitably introduce differentiated doctrines of Buddhism beyond the primitive Dharma alluded to in the phrase "Whoever sees Dependent Origination, sees the Dharma."
p. 283
However, the foregoing leaves open the question of whether the 'seeing' of dharma or dharmas, when one 'sees' Dependent Origination, is the concrete 'seeing' as done with eyesight, or is a way of speaking tantamount to 'understanding' or is something else again. The teacher Asa^nga has a section about this in his encyclopedic work Yogaacaarabhuumi, in the portion called Vastusa.mgraha.nii, second division devoted to analysis of sense bases (aayatana). After detailing various superlative benefits, such as calming the mind, to be gained by seeing dharmas, Asa^nga explains what is entailed by 'seeing' a dharma:[20]
There are two kinds of seeing dharmas: seeing constructed natures (sa.msk.rta-dharma) and seeing unconstructed natures (asa.msk.rta-dharma). Among them, seeing constructed natures (is as follows:) Just as there is here some place of truth, he rightly knows it as it is, and rightly knows as it is the truth (thereof). What is a place of truth? Name-and-form, called the "own-nature of a man" (*manu.sya-svaruupa). What is truth? Conventional truth (sa.mv.rti-satya) and supreme truth (paramaartha-satya). What is conventional truth? Any idea (sa.mj~naa) regarding that place of truth that it is a self, a sentient being, a living being, or a person. Also, the thesis "I see forms with the eye," . . . (and so on, down to) . . . "I perceive dharmas with the mind". Also, the attribution, "Accordingly, his name is called this," . . . (and so on, down to, as previously) "His measure of life amounts to this." Anything involving the idea of it, the thesis, the attribution, is conventional truth. What is supreme truth? Attaching to that place of truth that it is impermanent,... (and so an, down to, as previously) it arises in dependence. And thinking that according as there is impermanence, so there is suffering. Any monk who, in regard to a place of conventional or absolute truth, rightly knows as it is the conventional truth as conventional truth and the absolute truth as absolute truth, he is worthy of being called one who sees constructed natures. What is seeing unconstructed natures? Any monk who attaches to a place of truth with skill in the two kinds of truth; and taking recourse to that skill, engages his mind with the view that all the personality aggregates (skandha) are exhausted, Nirvaa.na is calm ... (and so on, down to, as previously) there is liberation; and has the thought, "I see unconstructed natures," he is worthy of being called one who sees unconstructed natures. Besides, one should know that there are three kinds of persons who see dharmas: (1) the one who engages dharmas consistent with dharmas of the ordinary person. (2) the one who is skilled in and heedful to equipoise his mind, and methodically courses in dharma(s), and accordingly sees the points of instruction. (3) The one beyond training whose fluxes are exhausted.
Naagaarjuna's equivalent statement for seeing 'unconstructed natures' is in his Yukti.sa.s.tikaa (k. 10-11AB):[21] "Having seen with right knowledge (= clear vision) what has arisen with the condition of 'nescience' [i.e.'motivation'], there is no apprehension at all of either arising or passing away. That very thing is Nirvaa.na as this life (= the dharma seen),[22] and the requirement is done (k.rta-k.rtya)." Here is a version from the Bodhisattvapi.taka-suutra, a Mahaayaana scripture:[23]
p. 284
Whatever is the meaning of Dependent Origination, is the meaning of Dharma; whatever is the meaning of Dharma, is the meaning of Tathaagata. Therefore, whoever sees Dependent Origination, sees Dharma; whoever sees Dharma, sees the Tathaagata. Also, seeing that way, and accordingly fully understanding in the sense of Thusness, still one sees scarcely anything. What is that 'scarcely anything'? It is the Signless and the Non-Apprehension; the one who sees in the manner of the Signless and the Non-Apprehension, sees rightly.
Those passages by Asa^nga, Naagaarjuna, and in the Bodhisattvapi.taka, agree that the 'seeing' is not the ordinary concrete 'seeing'. But also, these works persist in using a word meaning 'seeing'. Sthiramati would explain: because it is without discursive thought (nirvikalpa).[24] In the terminology of 'eyes' it is expressly stated to be the 'eye of insight' in the `Saalistambasuutra.[25] In agreement, Buddhaghosa's Visuddhimagga places the consideration of Dependent Origination in the Instruction of Insight (pa~n~naa); and the bhuumi theory of Mahaayaana Buddhism includes that consideration in the Perfection of Insight (praj~naapaaramitaa) held to predominate in the Sixth Stage (bhuumi). Furthermore, Asa^nga points out that the 'seeing' differs according to the person who 'sees'.
The manner in which a person may 'see' Dependent Origination is set forth in the Sixth Stage of the Da`sabhuumika-suutra. The presentation here is based on Tso^n-kha-pa's citation and discussion of the passage in his Tibetan commentary on Candrakiirti's Madhyamakaavataara.[26]
(The Bodhisattva on the Sixth Stage) reflects on Dependent Origination (pratiityasamutpaada) in the forward direction ... (and so on down to:) Thus he thinks. Only this heap of suffering, this tree of suffering develops, devoid of a creator, a feeler (kaaraka-vedaka). This occurs to him: Because of the clinging to a creator, activities are known; wherever there is no creator, there also activities are not perceptively reached in the absolute sense. This occurs to him: These three realms are this mind-only; whatever those twelve members of generation, all those, while explained by the Tathaagata in multiple aspect (prabheda`sas), in fact depend on a single citta (ekacitta).
In the Suutra itself this passage is embedded in a long exposition of Dependent Origination. The Suutra states that the tree develops devoid of a creator; so Tso^n-kha-pa says, "Having denied an eternal self as the creator, (the Bodhisattva) understands that the creator is just the conventional (sa.mvrti) mind-only." Or, as Asa^nga mentioned in the previous citation, the conventional mind has the idea of it, the thesis, the attribution. The Bodhisattva is said to reflect: "because of the clinging to a creator" -- which is done by 'nescience', "activities" (= 'motivations') "are known," to wit, by 'perceptions', the third member -- thus inaugurating the Dependent Origination
p. 285
in the forward direction. Then, to show how the series is eliminated, so that finally, in the absence of 'nescience', 'perception' does not arise, the Suutra says: "Wherever there is no creator (i.e., as delusively held by the conventional mind), "there also activities" (= those 'motivations') "are not perceptively reached in the absolute sense" (i.e., 'perception' does not perceive them). Naagaarjuna's way of stating the same point in that Yukti.sa.s.tikaa verse is to deny any apprehension of the arising or passing away of that 'motivation', whereupon the Dharma seen is Nirvaa.na.
Besides, Naagaarjuna's `Suunyataasaptati
(k. 9-10) states:[27] 'When there is neither permanence
nor impermanence, neither self nor non-self, neither purity nor impurity, neither
pleasure nor pain, then there are not the waywardnesses. In their absence, there
is no possibility of the nescience born from the four waywardnesses (viparyaasa).
In its absence, motivations do not occur, and likewise the remaining members."
This agrees with Asa^nga's distinction of 'nescience' as defiled (through waywardness)
and undefiled. There is the striking conclusion that when the Bodhisattva meditates
in the manner prescribed by the Da`sabhuumika-suutra he eliminates the defiled
nescience that heads the second kind of Dependent Origination, but still has
not eliminated the undefiled nescience, wherefore he is still a Bodhisattva[28] and not a Buddha. According to Tso^n-kha-pa's indications,
the Bodhisattva on the Sixth Stage when reviewing the twelve members seriatum
emphasizes the subject mind to the neglect of the objective form; thus he is
awakening from the dream of defiled nescience. In lotus symbolism this is the
budding of the lotus. The Tathaagata, when grasping the whole series with a
single thought (citta), emphasizes the objective form to the neglect of the
subject mind. This is the full-blown state of the lotus. This lotus symbolism
is applied to karma; and we must observe that in the Da`sabhuumika-suutra as
in Naagaarjuna's Dependent Origination commentary, the two karmas are members
No. 2 'motivations' (sa.mskaara) and No. 10 'gestation' (bhava). Tso^n-kha-pa
maintains in the same place that all the diverse realms (the bhaajana-loka)
of the sentient beings are formed by the shared (saadhaara.na) karma accumulated
by the mind itself, which must refer to a group karma. The sentient beings also
have unshared (asaadhaara.na) or individual mental karma. Tso^n-kha-pa employs
the metaphor of the "variegated eye of a peacock's tail" (mecaka in
Sanskrit) for the unshared karma, and the metaphor of "variegated petals
and colors of lotuses" for the shared karma of sentient beings, which generates
the variegated receptacle realms. The metaphoric
p. 286
language agrees with the distinction of two kinds of Dependent Origination, because the lotus symbolism, applying as it does to shared karma and to the process of enlightenment, must be associated with the first kind of Dependent Origination that is not concerned with particular beings and specialized karma. It is the second kind of Dependent Origination whose karma would have the metaphor of the "variegated eye of a peacock's tail."
There remains to be explained the Suutra reference to the development as the "tree of suffering." According to the Arthavini`scayatiikaa[29] the first seven members of Dependent Origination show the development of the tree: 1. 'nescience' is the manure covering, 2. 'motivations' is the field, 3. fluxional 'perceptions', the seed; 4. 'name-and-form', the sprout; 5. 'six sense bases', the leaves and twigs; 6. 'contact', characteristic flowers blooming; 7. 'feelings', characteristic fruit matured. In agreement with Asa^nga's attribution to the last five members of the role, "suffering possessed of cause," the Arthavini`scaya.tiikaa account continues; Someone craves that fruit ('craving'), takes it ('indulgence'), moistens it with water and eats it ('gestation'), whereupon sharp pains arise ('birth'), he shrivels up and dies ('old age and death').[30] The "tree" thus exhibits the two karma members as the 'field' into which the seed is cast, and as the 'eating' or digestion process.
This section is much indebted to Tso^n-kha-pa's Dependent Origination section in his Lam rim chen mo,[31] where he describes the formula as applying to one life, two lives, and three lives of a person. This treatment undoubtedly draws much from Asa^nga's encyclopedic work, the Yogaacaarabhuumi and its summation in Asa^nga's Abhidharmasamuccaya. In particular, there is Asa^nga's grouping of the twelve members as available in Sanskrit from the latter work: "The downcasting members are nescience, motivations, and perceptions. The members cast down are name-and-form, six sense bases, contact, and feelings. The producing members are craving, indulgence, and gestation. The members produced are birth, and old age and death."[32] The expression "downcasting" means casting down into the cyclical flow (sa.msaara). Besides, the Tibetan treatment accepts Naagaarjuna's brief exposition in his Pratiityasamutpaada-h.rdaya-kaarikaa, in part that three defilements -- nescience, craving, and indulgence -- give rise to two karmas -- motivations and gestation -- which in turn give rise to the seven sufferings, namely, the
p. 287
remaining members, and that "thus the wheel of becoming (bhavacakra) itself revolves again and again." Tso^n-kha-pa's treatment introduces the terminology of 2-1/2 and 4-1/2. By 2-1/2 is meant the members 'nescience', 'motivation', and then the visionary half of 'perception' which is called the 'causal vij~naana'. By 4-1/2 is meant the members beginning with the fallen half of 'perceptions' which is called the 'fruitional vij~naana'. One should note about all the above terminology that it agrees with the second kind of Dependent Origination, involving karma and rebirth of the person.
Besides, it is necessary to clarity the member No. 10 'gestation' (bhava) as a karma. The ancient explanation by varieties of three worlds (desire, form, and formless) immediately associates the member with the Buddhist theory of food, and it will be recalled that in the detailing of the 'tree of suffering', the eating of the fruit was credited to this karma member. The Sa.myutta- Nikaaya, ii, 98, sets forth four kinds of food "for maintaining the sentient beings who have been born or for aiding those who wish to come forth." The standard order of the four is morsel food, coarse or subtle; sense contact (spar`sa); volition (mana.hsa.mcetanaa); and perception (vij~naana). The Abhidharmako`sa (Chap. III) explains that the first two foods nourish the being already born -- extend its life -- and that the last two foods enable the being not yet born to come into existence. The kinds of food that are necessary differ according to which one of the three realms the sentient being aspires to or lives in.[33] Hence, the role of this member as the new karma by the act of eating. While I employ the rendition 'gestation', the words 'digestion' and 'brewing' probably also apply. My 'gestation' for bhava agrees with its representation as a pregnant woman in the Tibetan Wheel of Life. There is partial confirmation from a definition in the `Saalistambasuutra suggesting that this bhava is a self-perpetuating entity. According to the Paali Abhidharma it both looks behind (Epimethean) and looks ahead (Promethean). Perhaps this member gives the name bhava-cakra (Wheel of Becoming) to the whole series of twelve members.[34]
The following, based on Tso^n-kha-pa's Dependent Origination section, probably cannot be worked out in the commentarial tradition consistent with the Theravaada. Of course, all these Buddhist schools believed in rebirth.
1. nescience, and 2. motivation, constitute an Intermediate State that forecasts the destiny. Nescience forecasts either a good or bad destiny, to wit, confusion (sa.mmoha) about karma and fruit forecasting an evil destiny,
p. 288
confusion about the meaning of reality (tattva) forecasting a good destiny. Motivations are virtuous, non-virtuous, and indeterminate.
3. Perceptions, 4. name-and-form, 5. six sense bases, 6. sense contact, and 7. feelings, are a set going with the destiny. Perception (vij~naana) is imbued by motivation (sa.mskaara) with habit-energy (vaasanaa) either for good or bad destiny. Good destiny is said to be gods and men; bad destiny, animals, hungry ghosts (preta), and hell beings.
8. craving, and 9. indulgence, again and again foster the habit-energy of the destiny. 10. gestation -- no information, but presumably it would be a repetition of the realm, whether desire, form, or formless, with the same 'food' being eaten over and over.
11. birth, i.e. rebirth, means that again and again one repeats in this one life the same destiny.
12. old age and death; finally one sees the trouble or disadvantage (aadiinava) of the destiny.
This explanation of Dependent Origination seems to go with the 'tree of suffering' previously mentioned to agree with the phases of seven and five members. The first seven are the growth of the tree. The last five reinforce the habit-energy of the destiny and reap the consequence. Finally, 'old age and death' furnishes the realization that the destiny is deplorable, and the being determines to leave it.
(1)
The past life = life no.1.
| 1. | nescience | (as defilement) | |||
| 2. | motivation | (as karma) | |||
| 3A. | causal vij~naana | (as suffering = last perception) |
|||
| 8. |  |
craving | (defilement, with object not defined) |  |
(death
and |
| 9. | indulgence | ||||
| 10. | gestation | (as karma) = 'karma-mirror'[35] |
| 3B. | resultant vij~naana |  |
(the seed of later suffering) |
| 4. | name-and-form | ||
| 5. | six sense bases | ||
| 6. | sense contact | ||
| 7. | feelings |
p. 289
| 11. | birth |  |
(the present suffering) |
| 12. | old age and death |
There are various cases in Buddhist theory to which this formulation of the members may apply. For example, there are many popular stories of karma where something happening to a person is explained as due to his previous life.[36] There is also the case of the Arhat, who is in his last life, for which reason his preceding life is called "having one more life." Then there is the theory, so much identified with Tibetan Buddhism, of the incarnate Lamas. It was held that certain high Lamas could be immediately reborn, e.g., the Dalai Lama series; and so it would be pertinent to refer to the last life and the present life. The `Sriimaalaa-suutra has a remarkable specialization of the theory called the "inconceivable transference" of Arhats, Pratyekabuddhas, and Bodhisattvas who have attained power. These beings are held to have a special kind of nescience, presumably undefiled, called the nescience entrenchment (avidyaavaasabhuumi); and a special kind of motivation described as non-fluxional karma (anaasrava-karma). With those two members as conditions, they have a special kind of causal-vij~naana referred to as "bodies made of mind," with which they have the "inconceivable transference" to another life.[37] The formulation of members also seems to accord with a tantric description in which the three members 8, 9, and 10, are called "rebirth consciousness" in the sequence, 'Gandharva consciousness', 'Indulgence-in-desire consciousness', and 'seizing-of-birth consciousness'.[38]
Here there are two solutions.
A. Solution in Tso^n-kha-pa's section, with no Intermediate State explicit.
Life No. 1 = the producing life, the previous life. This consists of 8. craving, 9. indulgence, and 10. gestation.[39]
Life No. 2 = the life produced, the present life. It is possible to have a series of these. Each such life consists of 3B. resultant vij~naana 4. name-and-form, through 7. feelings; and these constitute a set included within 11. birth, and 12. old age and death.
Life No. 3 = the forecast life, the future life. This consists of 1. nescience, 2. motivation, 3A. causal-vij~naana.
This formulation also can be interpreted to go with a number of Buddhist situations. This essay has previously indicated that 8. craving, which is usually
p. 290
of sullied character and conceivably so in the present formulation, has the decisive role of altering destiny because it leads to a new bondage. But also it might be a virtuous craving for the religious life. For example, in the Indian Buddhist tradition there was a disciple phase called "entering the stream," which would be Life No. 1, when a set number of lives, say seven, could be predicted for progress up to the Arhat-fruit, each of which lives could be counted as Life No. 2, with the Arhat-fruit itself counted as Life No. 3, with the 'causal-vij~naana' as the "body-made-of-mind'' already mentioned. Then, Mahaayaana Buddhism sets forth its hero called the Bodhisattva, whose vow and action in faith would be his Life No. 1; the lives necessary for the first seven Bodhisattva Stages could be counted as Life No. 2; and when he attains the status of a Bodhisattva of the Eighth Stage, this could be his Life No. 3, with the "inconceivable transference" mentioned in the `Sriimaalaa-suutra This agrees with the tantric maxim, "By passion the world arises; forecast by passion it goes to its end. By knowledge of the diamond passion, the mind becomes the Diamond Being."[40] Besides, Naagaarjuna concludes his Vigrahavyaavartinii by bowing to the Buddha 'who explained Voidness (`suunyataa), Dependent Origination, and the Middle Path (madhyama-pratipad) in the same sense." And according to the `Saalistamba-suutra, when it was said, 'Whoever sees Dependent Origination, he sees the Dharma," the Dharma which he sees is the Eightfold Noble Path.[41] And this is the Path proclaimed in the Buddha's First Sermon as avoiding the extremes of sense indulgence and flesh mortification. Now, in order to treat Dependent Origination as the Middle Path, it appears that this formulation in three lives of one person works out the best for the reasons given above.
B. Solution of the Theravaada, which denies an Intermediate State.[42]
Past Life:
1. nescience, 2. motivation.
Present Life:
3. perception, down to 7. feeling. This is rebirth process.
8. craving, 9. indulgence, 10. gestation. This is karma process.
Future Life:
11. rebirth, 12. old age and death.
p. 291
The remarkable difference between this solution and the preceding Tibetan solutions, by suggestion of Asa^nga's works, is that while the Theravaada Abhidharma tradition assigns the last two members -- birth, and old age and death -- to the future life, the Tibetan solutions all place these two members in the category of suffering of the present life.
What they all, including the Theravaada, agree upon is that the sequence of twelve conditions does not by virtue of that order constitute a temporal sequence. There is a time factor, and it is stated in terms of 'past life', 'present life', and 'future life'. In Asa^nga's school, as the Dependent Origination section of the Lam rim chen mo puts it, there are "two cycles of cause and fruit." This means that the chief temporal factor of the series is the alternation of cause (hetu) and fruit (phala) in terms of lives, while the sequence of conditions (pratyaya) is the sufficiency causes for the members to arise. The two cycles are Asa^nga's groupings of the members into 'downcasting' (Nos. 1-3A) and 'producing' (Nos. 8-10) as against the members 'cast down' (Nos. 3B-7) and 'produced' (Nos. 11-12).[43] Asa^nga's structuring permits the solutions in the Tibetan tradition to shift blocks of members, differing in this matter from the Theravaada which sticks to the usual order of the twelve terms.
Another difference is that the Theravaada, by not accepting an Intermediate State, was obliged to place nescience and motivation in the past life. A more subtle difference is that the Theravaada had only one solution in comparison with the three from the Tibetan tradition's working over of Asa^nga's teachings. This indicates that the Theravaada insists on a single interpretation of the series, and so followers of that tradition would likely not accept my organization of materials into "two kinds" of Dependent Origination - and in terms of "original Buddhism" they might be right.
The Buddhist doctrine of Dependent Origination can be further clarified by comparison with a non-Buddhist system, the Saa.mkhya. My foregoing materials have presented two kinds of Dependent Origination; and it turns out that the classical Saa.mkhya and even the kind of Saa.mkhya attributed to the teacher Araa.da, the older contemporary of the Buddha, are to be discussed along with the second kind of Dependent Origination, as follows.
p. 292
The initial comparison is with the third member, 'perception' (vij~naana). Previously, it was shown that 'perception' is referred to metaphorically as the 'seed' (biija), So also AAryadeva in his Catu.h`sataka (XIV, 25): "vij~naana is the seed of phenomenal life; the (inner and outer) objects are its field (of apperception). When it sees the object as selfless, the seed of phenomenal life ceases."[44] That this vij~naana is the Buddhist equivalent to the aatman or 'field-knower' of the pre-Buddhist literature is supported by A`svagho.sa's portrayal of the future Buddha's visit to Araa.da (Buddhacarita, Canto XII, 70-73):[45]
For I deem the field-knower even though liberated from primary matter (prak.rti) and secondary characters has the attribute of giving birth and the attribute of being a seed.
For even if the purified soul (aatman) be deemed to be liberated, again it will be bound by reason of the real presence of the conditions.
It is my belief that just as a seed does not spring up through lack of the season, earth, and water; and springs up by reason of these and those conditions, so also does it (the soul).
And what is imagined to be liberation through abandonment of (the three things) act, ignorance, and craving (= Buddhist Dependent Origination Nos. 2, 1, and 8) is ultimately not a complete abandonment of them as long as there is a soul.
Along the lines of the previous finding of this paper, one may infer that when the Buddha denies a true liberation of the purified self it is because the purification is from defilement (kle`sa), so from defiled nescience and from craving as well as from concordant acts; while there is still no liberation from undefiled nescience which, serving as the condition for an appropriate motivation, provides a condition for the seed -- no matter which seed -- to again spring up.
Now, I have elsewhere discussed the terminology of 2-1/2 and 4-1/2 members and concluded that the first 1/2 of 'perception' is the equivalent to the Saa.mkhya buddhi and that the second 1/2 of 'perception' is the equivalent to the Saa.mkhya aha.mkaara. They roughly correspond to the two selves, supreme and individual, of the early Upani.sads, which stem from the .Rg-veda; although Buddhism does not call those halves of 'perception' "selves" or a higher and a lower self, and in fact only counts 'perception' (vij~naana) once to be the third member of Dependent Origination.[46]
To carry the comparison further, just as 'perception' in Buddhism was shown above to be the seed of phenomenal life, in the Saa.mkhya system it is buddhi or Mahat that is the initial evolve, inaugurating the phenomenal series. In Buddhism, the 'reconnecting perception' (pratisa.mdhi-vij~naana of the
p. 293
Abhidharma tradition) first arises as the 'appropriating consciousness' (aadaana-vij~naana of the aalayavij~naana tradition), i.e., the vision of the phenomenal abode (the future parents); this is rather close to the Saa.mkhya Mahat as a field knower (k.setraj~na) -- the first creation (sarga) of the Anugiitaa (of the Mahaabhaarata). Thus the first half of 'perception' has the role in Buddhism of establishing the initial division into subject-object by perceiving an object, as does the Saa.mkhya buddhi which cognizes 'thatness' and which in Saa.mkhya-kaarikaa No. 23 has the function of 'ascertainment' (adhyavasaaya).
The reconnecting 'perception' then falls into the womb as the fruitional consciousness (vipaakavij~naana or jiivitendriya), rather close to the Saa.mkhya aha.mkaara -- the second creation of the Anugiitaa. The second-half vij~naana is followed by name-and-form and the six sense bases, just as in Saa.mkhya the aha.mkaara, according to Saa.mkhya-kaarikaa No. 24, through its function of conation (abhimaana) gives rise to the various organs and elements constituting the body. According to the Vij~naptimaatrataasiddhi the beings take the aalayavij~naana ('store consciousness') as their 'I' (svam abhyantaram aatmaanam or sva adhyaatmika aatman) because of its continuity and homogeneity, but one should not take it as a 'self'.[47] This text of Yogaacaara Buddhism thus makes it equivalent to 'calling "I"' (aha.mkaara), but insists that one should not call it that way.
Now reverting to the first two members of Dependent Origination I shall continue the comparison with the Saa.mkhya in a manner employed some years ago, while interpreting the celebrated Yogaacaara work Madhyaantavibhaaga to have two realities: "Thus, the Buddhist text replaces the Saa.mkhya puru.sa with the 'imagination of unreality' (abhuutaparikalpa) and replaces prak.rti with 'voidness' (`suunyataa). In this Buddhist system, both the 'imagination of unreality' and 'voidness' are real, co-exist, and are yet distinct."[48] Enforcing my theory, 'nescience' and 'motivation' are added to the replacement correspondences :
Dependent Origination Madhyaantavibhaaga Saa.mkhya
terminology terminology terminology
__________________ __________________ ______________
nescience imagination of puru.sa
unreality
motivations voidness prak.rti
The Buddhist formula starts with 'nescience' (avidyaa); Saa.mkhya holds that the puru.sas emerge in the new development each with their specific avidyaa.[49]
p. 294
Next Buddhism places 'motivations' (sa.mskaara), the karma of body, speech, and mind; here Saa.mkhya has its prak.rti (also with three strands, the gu.nas). Prak.rti and sa.mskaara have the same verbal root, and in both systems have the role of causing a development -- in the Saa.mkhya, prak.rti as the original cause (pradhaana); in Buddhism, sa.mskaara as the efficacy of former karma to attain a fruit. Moreover, the Saa.mkhya sets forth an irreducible duality of Puru.sa (pure consciousness, not the agent) and Prak.rti (pure matter, the impersonal agent); while Buddhism sets forth a primeval duality of avidyaa (nescience, not the agent, but metaphorically the manure) and sa.mskaara (motivations, the impersonal agent, but metaphorically the ground).
As to the 'voidness', Tso^n-kha-pa's great commentary on the Abhisamayaala.mkaara helps, because of his section "the subjective knowledge (yul can ye `ses) and the objective voidness (yul sto^n ~nid)," showing that no matter how many the voidnesses, e.g., the list of twenty, they are all objective. the object of the knowledge or insight that discerns them.[50] Thus, the 'Imagination of Unreality' has only voidness (= the void Dharmadhaatu) as its object, just as Puru.sa has only Prak.rti as its object.
The 'Imagination of Unreality' is definitely a form of nescience; and the way the Madhyaantavibhaaga (I, 11)states it, is that from this 'imagination' proceed the twelve members of Dependent Origination beginning with 'nescience'. The 'Imagination of Unreality' may therefore be this Yogaacaara text's expression for what Asa^nga calls the unmixed nescience, or undefiled nescience. This text, as previously pointed out, counts the series as 'defiled' or 'afflicted', and Vasubandhu in his comment accordingly explains 'nescience' as the first member to be the positive impediment to the view of reality.
In summary, the Madhyaantavibhaaga agrees with the Saa.mkhya in positing two preexistent realities that are on an equal footing. In contrast, the Buddhist Dependent Origination has the first and subjective member, nescience, serving as the condition for the arising of the second and objective member, motivations. And in any case, it was never my position that correlation and replacement of terms meant identification. One should grant that the Buddhist series, no matter of which Buddhist sect's interpretation, develops quite differently from the Saa.mkhya evolutes, even though there are some striking parallels.
There is another way I compared Dependent Origination with the Saa.mkhya in an early and admittedly speculative effort.[51] Here, partly by
p. 295
suggestion of the Kaalacakra and other Buddhist Tantric material, I set the first three members of Dependent Origination, namely, nescience, motivations, and perception, in correspondence respectively with the three kinds of Aha.mkaara of the classical Saa.mkhya system, namely taamasika-, raajasika-, and saattvika-aha.mkaara. This is tantamount to saying that if one succeeded in abolishing the twelvefold Dependent Origination, one would be at the level of Mahat, the cosmic intellectual substance. I do not deny a possible merit of a comparison involving even late works like the Buddhist Tantras, but there is no point to following up this kind of comparison in the present essay.
Certainly much more is written about the formula of Dependent Origination in the Buddhist canon and commentarial traditions than can possibly be conveyed within the limits of this paper. In the application of writings from a long time span, it was inevitable that the 'discovery' and 'seeing' of the series would be intertwined. It could also be argued about the two kinds of Dependent Origination that if one can 'see' Dependent Origination, one can see both kinds in the form here organized, or perhaps 'see' just one kind. But if what I have tried to show is indeed the case, much of the past argumentation misses the mark. Those theories were not based on 'seeing' Dependent Origination, but rather on the premise that if one theory about the series is right, the others must be wrong.
1. Cf. the articles referred to below in notes 38 or 46, and 51; and the work in Note 37.
2. Among the many treatments, I mention here A. B. Keith, Buddhist Philosophy in India and Ceylon (India reprint), pp. 105-109, for some of the older European theories. Edward J. Thomas, The History of Buddhist Thought (1933, with reprints), the Causation chapter, for a number of views from Buddhist texts. Shotoru Iida, in a mimeographed paper entitled 'Re-turning Gautama's Wheel of Causation -- an Interpretation of the dvaada`sanidaana', for the Paanadura debate of 1873, and for a number of views of Japanese scholars. L. de La Vallee Poussin, Theorie des douze causes (Gand, 1913), for a still valuable survey of the scholastic theories of the causal chain. K. N. Jayatilleke, Early Buddhist Theory of Knowledge (London, 1963), esp. pp. 445-457, for a Paali specialist's evaluation of the theories.
p. 296
3. Cf. Jayatilleke, Early Buddhist Theory, p. 449, for the basic statements and canonical references: "whenever A is present, B is present" (imasmi.m sati ida.m hoti), and whenever A is absent, B is absent" (imasmi.m asati ida.m na hoti).
4.
Asa^nga expounds two kinds of nescience (avidyaa) in the part of his Yogaacaarabhuumi
called Vini`scaya-sa.mgraha.nii, Japanese photo edition of the Tibetan canon,
Vol. 110, p. 28-1-5, ff. I gathered materials from many places of his Yogaacaarabhuumi
and organized them in a paper 'Nescience and Insight According to Asa^nga's
Yogaacaarabhuumi', for the
volume Buddhist Studies in Honour of the Venerable Walpola Sri Rahula (Gordon
Frazer, London, 1980), cf. esp. pp. 254-255, and n.11.
5. Among the commentaries that do not face up to the issue is Candrakiirti's Prasannapadaa, the Chap. XXIV of which is translated into French by Jacques May (Paris, 1959); Bhaavaviveka's Praj~naapradiipa, the Chap. XXIV of which is available in a draft translation into English by Ryushin Uryuzu, locally distributed in Madison, Wisc., Nov. 1966, for a seminar in Maadhyamika philosophy; Abhayaakaragupta's Munimataala.mkaara, photo ed. of Tibetan canon, Vol. 101, pp. 220-223.
6. Cf. `Saalistambasuutra in La Vallee Poussin, Theorie des douze causes, p. 70: yo, bhik.sava.h, pratiityasamutpaada.m pa`syati sa dharma.m pa`syati; while in the Paali version (Majjhima-Niikaaya, I, 191) it is in a discourse by `Saariputra attributed to Buddha.
7. Photo edition of Tibetan Canon, Vol. 23, chapter on 'Instruction of the B.rhatphala Deities', p. 181-1, ff.
8. This is in the Yogaacaarabhuumi in the same passage referred to above, Note 4. Here Asa^nga gives two kinds of 'unmixed nescience' (i.e., not mixed with defilement), "the confusion of not comprehending" and the "undefiled confusion". He expressly mentions the failure of attention to the Truth of Suffering, etc. under the heading of the 'unmixed nescience', and gives the term cittaviparyaasa.
9. That is, this Sutta has for 'name' the five items, 'feelings', 'ideas', 'volitions', 'sense contacts', and 'mental orientations'. It is usual to have, as does the `Saalistambasuutra, the four 'formless' aggregates, of which 'feelings' and 'ideas' are the first two, followed by 'motivations' and 'perceptions', More rarely, as in the Dependent Origination section of Buddhaghosa's Visuddhimagga, 'name' includes only the three middle aggregates, leaving out 'perceptions'. Again, the detailing of feelings as born from the six sense bases is not standard. It is usual to have three kinds, painful (du.hkha), pleasant (sukha), and neither painful nor pleasant.
10. It is of interest that the Buddha's analysis sets forth the last two members, birth, and old age and death, by sets of terms that are near-synonyms (S. paryaaya), and the remaining ten members by varieties (S. prabheda).
11. And see Jikido Takasaki, A Study on the Ratnagotravibhaaga (Rome, 1966), p. 35, for the information that a chapter of the Mahaayaana scripture Avata.msaka with title Tathaagatotpattisa.mbhavanirde`sa ("Dealing with the Arising of the Tathaagata") was translated into Chinese as an independent Suutra in the 3rd century, A.D.
12. Jayatilleke, Early Buddhist Theory, p. 450.
13. Cf. Gadjin M. Nagao, Madhyaantavibhaaga-bhaa.sya (Tokyo, 1964), p. 21.
14. Cf. Alex Wayman, Analysis of the `Sraavakabhuumi Manuscript (Berkeley, 1961), p. 181.
15. Cf. Naarada, A Manual of Abhidhamma (Kandy, 1968), pp. 348-350, for the comprisal of "all" (sabba) in the personality aggregates, the sense bases, and the elements, with the usual translations followed by modern translators from Paali. Of course, the "all" is the abbreviation for "all dhamma" in Sanskrit sarvadharmaa.h.
p. 297
16. Alex Wayman, 'The Intermediate-State Dispute in Buddhism', Buddhist Studies in Honour of I. B. Horner, eds. L. Cousins et al. (Dordrecht, 1974), p. 230.
17. These are now conveniently collected in P. L. Vaidya, Mahaayaana-Suutra-Sa^mgraha, Part I (Darbhanga, 1961), namely, two version of the `Saalistambasuutra and two versions of the Pratiityasamutpaada suutras.
18. La Vallee Poussin presents the Tibetan version with a French translation of Naagaarjuna's Pratiityasamutpaadah.rdayakaarikaa in Theorie des douze causes, pp. 122-124. Naagaarjuna briefly expands upon those seven verses in his Pratiityasamutpaadah.rdayavyaakhyaana, preserved in the Tibetan Tanjur. And just preceding those two works in the Tanjur is his AArya-`saalistambaka-kaarikaa. Besides, he devotes twelve verses to the topic as Chap. XXVI of his Madhyamaka-kaarikaa.
19. Giuseppe Tucci, 'A Fragment from the Pratitya-samutpada-vyakhya of Vasubandhu', Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society, July, 1930, pp. 611-623, presents some Sanskrit fragments of Vasubandhu's comments on members 1. 'nescience', 7. 'feelings', 8. 'craving', 9. 'indulgence', and 10. 'gestation'.
20. Photo edition of Tibetan Tanjur, Vol. III, p. 175-3-8, ff. The equivalent Chinese is in Taisho Vol. 30, p. 824-C-2, ff. Tibetan and Chinese agree on the term 'name-and-form' (naama-ruupa); but where Tibetan continues "called the 'own-nature of a man'" prior to the question "What is truth" the Chinese text has a series of several words beginning with 'man'.
21. The 1-1/2 verses are translated from the Tibetan version in the Darjeeling publication, Four Minor Madhyamaka Texts in Tibetan Translation. Also I have taken into account the context in which this is cited in Abhayaakaragupta's Munimataala.mkaara, op. cit., p. 220-2-2.
22. Naagaarjuna apparently used in the original Sanskrit the term d.r.s.tadharma, which is well known to signify in Buddhist texts "this life". However, since he associated it with the preceding verse which employs the verbal form "having seen," it may be concluded that he intended a double meaning for the term, so d.r.s.tadharma also means 'the dharma that is seen," or "the visible dharma." Thus, Naagaarjuna implies the seeing (which amounts to not seeing) of the unconstructed dharma Nirvaa.na. But since this is the Nirvaa.na of this very life, this Yukti.sa.s.tikaa passage helps explain Naagaarjuna's famous verse in the Nirvaa.na chapter of the Madhyamaka-kaarikaa (XXV, 19): "There is no difference between Nirvaa.na and Sa.msaara; there is no difference between Sa.msaara and Nirvaa.na."
23. Photo edition of Tibetan Kanjur, Vol. 23, chapter on "Inconceivability of the Tathaagata," p. 19-5-2, ff.
24. Sthiramati's Abhidharmako`sabhaa.sya.tiikaa-tattvaartha-naama, Photo edition of Tibetan Tanjur, Vol. 147, commentary on Samaapatti chapter of the Abhidharmako`sa, p. 274-2-1, in the course of explaining the j~naana-dar`sana, comments on the word dar`sana ('vision'): "Vision bears comparison with eye-perception (cak.sur-vij~naana), because it is without discursive thought" (mtho^n ba ni mig gi rnam par `ses pa da^n mtshu^ns par ldan pa ste / rnam par mi rtog pa phyir ro).
25. La Vallee Poussin, Theorie des douze causes, p. 72. However here it is the Buddha using the praj~naa-eye that is mentioned.
26. The passage cited is in Sanskrit original in J. Rahder, ed., Da`sabhuumikasuutra et Bodhisattvabhuumi, p. 48 and p. 49; Ryuukoo Kondoo, ed., Da`sabhuumii`svaro naama Mahaayaanasuutra.m, p. 97.13 and p. 98.6-10: (eva.m hi bodhisattvo) 'nulomaakaara.m pratiityasamutpaada.m pratyavek.sate/ .../ evam aya.m kevalo (and so on, down to)
p. 298
sarvaa.ny ekacittasamaa`sritaani/. Tso^n-kha-pa's discussion is in Photo edition of Tibetan canons, extra volumes, Vol. 154, p. 71-4 to 72-1.
27. The two verses are translated from the Tibetan version in Four Minor Madhyamaka Texts in Tibetan Translation (op cit.).
28. La Vallee Poussin, Theorie des douze causes, p. v, note, mentions that according to certain sources, which he does not name, the meditation on the twelve causes is reserved to Pratyekabuddhas. Indeed, the attribution of a Bodhisattva meditation in the Da`sabhuumikasuutra seems to be simply due to this text being a Mahaayaana scripture that expounds the stages of the Bodhisattva. But as far as the exposition of Dependent Origination is concerned, the meditation on it does not seem to require a Bodhisattva. Tso^n-kha-pa places his Dependent Origination section in the portion of his Lam rim chen mo devoted to the training of the middling person, according to the description in Atii`sa Bodhipatha-pradiipa: "Whoever, turning his back on the pleasures of phenomenal existence, and averting himself from sinful actions, pursues only his own quiescence, he is known as the middling person." This is the second kind of person, and the Bodhisattva is the third kind and called the superior person.
29. The passage is taken from the Arthavini`scaya.tiikaa (author unknown) in Derge Tanjur, Sna-tshogs, Vol. No, f. 27b-4, f.
30. In that Dependent Origination section already mentioned, Tso^n-kha-pa refers to the `Saalistambasuutra as "explaining that the seed of 'perception' (vij~naana) is planted in the field of karma which has the manure of 'nescience' (avidyaa); and that is moistened with the water of craving, and then the shoot of 'name-and-form' in the womb proceeds to completion." The Sanskrit passage is in Theorie des douze causes, p. 84, 3rd paragraph. Anyway, this associates the metaphorical water with 'craving'; and this may have also been the intention of the Arthavini`scaya.tiikaa's account of the 10th member 'gestation', to wit, that the fruit's moistening suggests the water of 'craving'.
31. The Lam rim chen mo is Tso^n-kha-pa's encyclopedic exposition of the path to enlightenment for the three orders of persons (cf. n. 28, above). The many quotations in the part containing the Dependent Origination material has numerous quotations from such works as the Lalitavistara emphasizing the sufferings and ills of the world, representing it as a kind of prison. One should understand how all this mass of suffering came about, and how to escape. Accordingly, such teachings as that of Dependent Origination are expounded.
32. Pralhad Pradhan, ed., Abhidharma-samuccaya, text, p. 26, lines 20 ff.
33. The above discussion of the four foods is based on my treatment in Analysis of the `Sraavakabhuumi Manuscript, Chapter V, "Asa^nga's Views on Food," pp. 135, ff.
34. Of course, 'existence' and 'becoming' are established meanings of the term bhava. Still, where Buddhist tradition calls this bhava a karma member of Dependent Origination, one wonders how such renderings as 'existence' convey the connotation of the warned-of hells and glorified-of heavens for good and bad acts (the karma, of course) of laity and monks! A Tibetan work included in the canon, probably of the early ninth century, with reconstructed title Pratiityasamutpaada-ga.nanaanusaare.na cittasthaapanopaaya, Japanese photo edition of the Tibetan Kanjur-Tanjur, Vol. 145, p. 278-2-2, mentions that there are four ways to summarize the series, to wit, by count, nature, denotation, and grouping. Under the category of denotation (S. nirukti, Tib. ^nes pa'i tshig) the unknown author presents the list that happens to be in the `Saalistamba-suutra, Theorie des douze causes, p. 81; N. Aiyaswami Sastri ed., AArya `Saalistamba Suutra (Adyar Library, 1950), p. 11; P. L. Vaidya, Mahaayaana-Suutra-Sa^mgraha, Part I, p. 103.30
p.299
to p.104.2. When the list comes to bhava, it has punarbhavajananaarthena bhava.h "It is bhava because it engenders bhava again." While the term punarbhava is usually rendered 'rebirth', such a rendering in the present case would imply that the definition refers to the following member, 11. 'birth' (jaati), for which the definition should have had instead punarjanma. However, none of the other 'denotation' is in terms of the immediately following member, but is stated in terms of the member itself. Accordingly, this definition of bhava is simply a recognition that the word means 'existence' but that we should regard it here as signifying the promotion of re-existence (hence my translation of the term in Vasubandhu's comment on the Madhyaanta-vibhaaga verse, supra). In short, that bhava is a self-perpetuating entity. It both looks to the past and looks to the future according to C. A. F. Rhys Davids in her Hastings' ERE article, Vol. 9, p. 672, giving the Paali scholastic tradition of two kinds, kamma-bhava "fruition of past actions" and upapatti-bhava "result in future life".
35. For the 'karma-mirror', cf. Alex: Wayman, 'The Mirror as a Pan-Buddhist Metaphor-Simile', History of Religions, XIII: 4, May 1974, pp. 264-265.
36. There is an enormous Buddhist literature of the karma stories. Besides, the numerous Jaataka tales, there is the Karma-`sataka (extant in Tibetan). One may signal also the huge AArya-Saddharmasm.rtyupasthaana-suutra for popular accounts of getting into the heavens and hells. The extensive verse section of this scripture, with numerous karma verses, has been edited in Sanskrit, Chinese, and Tibetan versions, and translated into French with title Dharma-samuccaya by Lin Li-kouang, 1st part (Paris, 1946); 2nd and 3rd parts posthumously with revisions by A. Bareau, J. W. de Jong and P. Demieville (Paris, 1969 and 1973).
37. Cf. Alex Wayman and Hideko Wayman, The Lion's Roar of Queen `Sriimaalaa; a Buddhist Scripture on the Tathaagatagarbha Theory (New York, 1974), pp. 29-31.
38. Alex Wayman, 'Buddhist Dependent Origination', History of Religions, 10:3, Feb., 1971, p. 195, in the Table "An 'Eastern' Tradition".
39. Vasubandhu, in Tucci, "A Fragment," op. cit., p. 621, states that in other suutras the Lord said that bhava ('gestation') is the five 'grasping aggregates' (pa~ncopaadaana-skandha). Naagaarjuna accepts this explanation in his Madhyamaka-kaarikaa XXVI, 8. This interpretation seems to accord rather well with the present solution of Dependent Origination. And it agrees with the 'Promethean' definition of bhava, implying 'new karma'. In contrast, the bhava in the previous solution "Two Lives of a Single Person" should be understood as the 'Epimethean' kind, and agrees with the 'Intermediate-State' (antaraa-bhava), a variety of bhava which Vasubandhu accepts in Tucci, "A Fragment," p. 621, line 6. As the Theravaada denies an Intermediate State, it uses the terminology kamma-bhava rather than antaraa-bhava.
40. The .Daakinii-vajrapa~njara, as cited in the Subhaa.sita-sa.mgraha (Bendall edition).
41. Theorie des douze causes, pp. 71-72.
42. Cf. Nyanatiloka, Buddhist Dictionary (Colombo, 1950), p. 114; and, with more complications, Naarada, A Manual of Abhidhamma, Diagrams XVI and XVII.
43. Thus, Tso^n-kha-pa, in the Dependent Origination Section, mentions from Asa^nga's Bhuumivastu (the first part of the Yogaacaarabhuumi): "The members reaching from vij~naana down to vedanaa have the characteristic of being mixed with the members birth, old age and death; that being so, why does one teach two kinds? For the purpose of teaching the difference of characteristic as the basis of suffering, and for the purpose of teaching the difference between the downcasting members and the producing members." By further citations of Asa^nga, Tso^n-kha-pa shows that the members vij~naana (No. 3B) down to
p. 300
vedanaa (No. 7) are the 'seed' of suffering, while jaati (No. 11) and jaraa-mara.na (No. 12) are the manifest suffering.
44. Translated in the context of its citation in Tso^n-kha-pa's Lam rim chen mo, Lhag mtho^n (vipa`syanaa) section, Cf. V. Bhattacharya, The Catu.h`sataka of AAryadeva, p. 230.
45. E. H. Johnston (ed.), The Buddhacarita, Part I (Calcutta, 1935), p. 137.
46. Wayman, 'Buddhist Dependent Origination', p. 202.
47. Louis de La Vallee Poussin, Vij~naptimaatrataasiddhi, Tome I, pp. 150 and 181.
48. A. Wayman, 'The Yogaacaara Idealism (Review Article)', Philosophy East and West, XV:1, Jan. 1965, p. 66.
49. Surendranath Dasgupta, A History of lndian Philosophy, Vol. I, p. 249.
50. Tso^n-kha-pa, Bstan bcos m^non rtogs rgyan 'grel pa da^n bcas pa'i rgya cher b`sad, "Legs b`sad gser phre^n " (Sarnath, Varanasi, 1970), Vol. I, p. 407.
51. A. Wayman, 'Buddhist Dependent Origination and the Saa^mkhya gu.nas', Ethnos (1962), pp. 14-22.
