You are on page 1of 23

Asian Philosophy

Vol. 19, No. 1, March 2009, pp. 6384


Contaminants and the Path to
Salvation: A Study of the Sarva stiva da
H
_
rdaya Treatises
Bart Dessein
The Sam
_
g tiparyaya is the earliest Sarvastivada philosophical text that enumerates a
series of contaminants (anusaya), i.e. innate proclivities, inherited from former births, to
do something of usually evil nature. This early list comprises seven such contaminants.
As it is the contaminants that lead a worldling (pr
_
thagjana) to doing volitional actions
and thus to forming a karmic result (karmavipaka), these contaminants naturally also
bear on the path to salvation. The gradual development of the peculiar Sarvastivadin
path to salvation necessitated a gradual refinement and reinterpretation of the original
list of seven contaminants. Apart from a mere technical aspect, this reinterpretation also
reflects the viewpoint of the Sautrantika school of Buddhist philosophy on the nature
of contaminants, i.e. their acceptance of a latent and an active state of the defilements,
vis-a` -vis the Vaibhas
_
ika viewpoint according to whom no such difference exists. Within
Sarvastivada literature, the Hr
_
daya treatises illustrate this philosophical development.
Seven, Eleven, Twelve and Ninety-Eight Contaminants
An investigation into the notion of contaminant in Sarvastivada philosophy should
start with the Sam
_
gtiparyaya, one of the six feet of the so-called
S
_
at
_
padabhidharma,
the set of seven authoritative texts of Vaibhas
_
ika Sarvastivada philosophy,
1
and one
of the oldest Sarvastivada Abhidharma works we possess.
2
The text is extant in a
Chinese translation by Xuanzang, produced between AD 660 and 663 (Apidamo
jiyimen zulun, T.1536; see also T.2154, p. 557a1011 and p. 620b89). The text
consists of enumerative lists of elements, generally known as matrkas, an early format
from which the mature Abhidharma works developed (Gethin, 1992). One of these
lists is the enumeration and definition of seven contaminants (anusaya), i.e. innate
Correspondence to: Bart Dessein, Chinese Language and Culture Ghent University, Blandijnberg 2, 9000 Gent,
Belgium. Email: Bart.Dessein@UGent.be
ISSN 0955-2367 print/ISSN 1469-2961 online/09/01006322 2009 Taylor & Francis
DOI: 10.1080/09552360802673906
proclivities, inherited from former births, to do something of usually evil nature
(Edgerton, 1985, p. 35). The seven contaminants listed in the Sam
_
gtiparyaya are:
(1) attachment to sensual pleasure (kamaraga), defined as attachment regarding
sensual pleasure; (2) repugnance (pratigha), defined as the desire to harm living
beings; (3) attachment to existence (bhavaraga), defined as attachment to the
material and the immaterial; (4) pride (mana), defined as clinging to pride;
(5) ignorance (avidya), defined as not knowing the three realms; (6) views (dr
_
s
_
t
_
i), i.e.
five views, viz. 6a: belief in a self (satkayadr
_
s
_
t
_
i); 6b: extreme view (antagrahadr
_
s
_
t
_
i);
6c: false view (mithyadr
_
s
_
t
_
i); 6d: adherence to particular views (dr
_
s
_
t
_
iparamarsa); and
6e: adherence to moral precepts and vows (slavrataparamarsa); and (7) perplexity
(vicikitsa), defined as perplexity concerning the (four) truths (T.1536, p. 439a1829;
see also Stache-Rosen 1968, p. 184).
This list of seven contaminants figures also in the old canon, however without
mentioning the particular bad action towards which each of the contaminants is
inclined, i.e. it occurs in an absolute sense (DN III, 254, 282; AN IV, 9 (Hardy, 1958);
SN V, 60 (Feer, 1960d); see also Frauwallner, 1971a, p. 75). For defilement in the sense
of anusaya, i.e. defilement as used in the Sam
_
gtiparyaya, the old canon uses the term
asrava. More precisely, a series of three defilements (asrava) frequently occurs: the
defilement sensual pleasure (kamasrava), the defilement of the material (bhavasrava),
and the defilement ignorance (avidyasrava) (Frauwallner, 1971a, p. 75). It is not
unlikely that it is the rigidity of this series of three that caused the compiler(s) of the
Sam
_
gtiparyaya to substitute the term asrava with the, at that moment, still flexible
term anusaya. By defining the contaminant views as five views, the Sam
_
gtiparyaya,
actually, expands the seven basic contaminants to a total of eleven contaminants.
Although no series of five views occurs as such in the old canon, some of these five
views do occur with some variation in other series.
3
This list of eleven, i.e. the list of
seven with a subdivision of the contaminant views into five kinds, is the oldest list of
contaminants in the Sarvastivada Abhidharma literature we possess.
The question then remains why the compiler(s) of the Sam
_
gtiparyaya felt the need
to develop this new list of eleven contaminants, with anusaya (contaminant) used in
the sense of the older asrava (defilement). The answer to this question can be
gradually unraveled from works that postdate the Sam
_
gtiparyaya, more precisely
from the Prakaran
_
apada and the Hr
_
daya treatises.
The Prakaran
_
apada is attributed to Vasumitra who, according to Puguang, lived
at the beginning of the 4th century after the demise of the Buddha.
The Prakaran
_
apada is the most recent one of the texts that, in Vaibhas
_
ika orthodoxy,
became recognized as the feet of the
S
_
at
_
padabhidharma.
4
There are two Chinese
versions of this text: one by Gun
_
abhadra and Bodhiyasas (Zhongshifen apitan lun,
T.1541) from AD 435443 (see T.2154, p. 620b2123), and one by Xuanzang
(Apidamo pinlei zulun, T.1542), produced in AD 660 (see T.2154, p. 557a1415 and
p. 620b1723). Apart from the original list of seven contaminants we also found in
the Sam
_
gtiparyaya, both Chinese versions also contain a series of twelve
contaminants and a series of ninety-eight contaminants (T.1541, p. 637a8c7;
T.1542, pp. 702a8703c10). The twelve contaminants are claimed to be
64 B. Dessein
a development from the seven contaminants: by subdividing attachment to existence
(bhavaraga) into two contaminantsattachment to material existence and attach-
ment to immaterial existence, as already suggested in the definition given in the
Sam
_
gtiparyayaand by subdividing the contaminant views into the five views as
we know them from the Sam
_
gtiparyaya, twelve contaminants are formed (T.1541,
p. 637b1622; T.1542, p. 702b2126). The list of the Prakaran
_
apada thus is:
(1) attachment to sensual existence (kamaraga), (2) repugnance (pratigha),
(3) attachment to material existence (ruparaga), (4) attachment to immaterial
existence (arupyaraga), (5) pride (mana), (6) ignorance (avidya), (7) belief in a self
(satkayadr
_
s
_
t
_
i), (8) extreme view (antagrahadr
_
s
_
t
_
i), (9) false view (mithyadr
_
s
_
t
_
i),
(10) adherence to particular views (dr
_
s
_
t
_
iparamarsa), (11) adherence to moral
precepts and vows (slavrataparamarsa), and (12) perplexity (vicikitsa).
The division of attachment into three forms shows the growing tendency among
the Abhidharma masters to bring the newly defined category of contaminants in
parallel with the cosmologicalontological scheme of three realms of existence:
attachment to sensual existence, attachment to material existence and attachment to
immaterial existence parallel the realms of sensual passion (kamadhatu), form
(rupadhatu), and formlessness (arupyadhatu) respectively.
Also the list of ninety-eight contaminants is explained to be a development from
the seven (T.1541, p. 637b2329; T.1542, p. 702b26c2), with respect to the twelve
contaminants (T.1541, p. 637b29c7; T.1542, p. 702c26). To attain the number of
ninety-eight contaminants, the basic contaminants are divided as to realm (dhatu),
and further as to aspects of views (akara), and mode of abandonment (prakara).
Such a division into ninety-eight contaminants is without extant precedent, though
the Chinese catalogues refer to a text called Apitan jiushiba jie jing (Abhidharma
Sutra on the Ninety-eight Bonds), translated by An Shigao (2nd century AD) and lost
already in the 6th century AD (T.2145, p. 6b1, 15a3 ff; see also Willemen, Dessein, &
Cox, 1998, p. 218). Both the division of attachment (raga) to the three realms
of existence, and the differentiation into ninety-eight subcategories bring the concept
of contaminants in relation with the path of religious praxis: It is on the path of
salvation that the ninety-eight subcategories of the contaminants should one by
one be destroyed, thus attaining at the final abandonment of all fluxes, i.e. nirvan
_
a.
This treatment became the standard model in all later Sarvastivada analyses.
The Prakaran
_
apada outlines this in more detail: thirty-six contaminants are
categorized as belonging to the realm of sensual passion (kamadhatu), thirty-one
as belonging to the realm of form (rupadhatu), and thirty-one as belonging to the
realm of formlessness (arupyadhatu), thus forming ninety-eight contaminants
(T.1541, p. 637a811; T.1542, p. 702a810). This confirms the assumption that a
worldling (pr
_
thagjana) has to liberate himself from passions in all three realms.
Another way to divide the ninety-eight contaminants is according to their mode
of annihilation: eighty-eight are said to be abandoned through vision (darsanapra-
hatavya), i.e. through vision of one of the four noble truths, and ten to be abandoned
through spiritual practice (bhavanaprahatavya), i.e. through repeated realization of
the knowledge gained.
5
This means that not all contaminants can be abandoned in
Asian Philosophy 65
the same way. We will return to the importance of this later. When applying the
mode of annihilation to the contaminants as they are divided as to realm, thirty-two
of the thirty-six contaminants that are bound to the realm of sensual passion are said
to be abandoned through vision, and four through spiritual practice; twenty-eight of
the thirty-one contaminants that are bound to the realm of form and to the one of
formlessness are said to be abandoned through vision, and each time three through
spiritual practice (T.1541, p. 637a1316; T.1542, p. 702a1115). The third criterion
that is introduced to subdivide the ninety-eight contaminants is the truth to which
they are connected and through the vision of which they can be annihilated. This
criterion further subdivides the contaminants that are to be abandoned through
vision. Based on this criterion, twenty-eight contaminants are said to be abandoned
through the vision of suffering (duh
_
khadarsanaprahatavya), nineteen through the
vision of the origin (samudayadarsanaprahatavya), nineteen through the vision of
cessation (nirodhadarsanaprahatavya) and twenty-two through the vision of the path
(margadarsanaprahatavya). Adding the ten contaminants to be abandoned through
spiritual practice to these four subcategories, the number of ninety-eight
contaminants is attained (T.1541, p. 637a1012; T.1542, p. 702a1518). When this
criterion is further applied to the contaminants as they are divided over the three
realms, ten of the twenty-eight contaminants to be annihilated through the vision of
suffering are said to be bound to the realm of sensual passion, and each time nine to
the realm of form and to the one of formlessness; seven contaminants to be
abandoned through the vision of the origin and seven through the vision of cessation
are said to be bound to the realm of sensual passion, and each time six of the same
types to the realm of form and to the one of formlessness; eight contaminants to be
abandoned through the vision of the path are said to be bound to the realm of
sensual passion, and each time seven to the realm of form and to the one of
formlessness; of the ten contaminants to be abandoned through spiritual practice,
four are bound to the realm of sensual passion, and each time three to the realm of
form and to the one of formlessness (T.1541, p. 637a2325; T.1542, p. 702a2124).
This analysis is schematized in Table 1.
Notwithstanding the fact that, as it is the purpose of religious praxis that the
worldling annihilates the contaminants, it is necessary to know to which realm a
particular contaminant belongs, and in which way it can be annihilated, the
Prakaran
_
apada does not explain precisely which one of the seven or twelve
Table 1 The ninety-eight contaminants according to the Prakaran
_
apada
kamadhatu rupadhatu arupyadhatu Total
darsanaprahatavya duh
_
khadarsanaprahatavya 10 9 9 28
samudayadarsanaprahatavya 7 6 6 19
nirodhadarsanaprahatavya 7 6 6 19
margadarsanaprahatavya 8 7 7 22
bhavanaprahatavya 4 3 3 10
Total 36 31 31 98
66 B. Dessein
contaminants corresponds to precisely which subcategory of the ninety-eight
contaminants. This problem is addressed in the Hr
_
daya treatises.
The Contaminants According to the Hr
_
daya Treatises
The oldest Hr
_
daya treatise is Dharmasres
_
t
_
hins

Abhidharmahr
_
daya (Apitan xin lun,
T.1550). Dharmasres
_
t
_
hins work should be dated around the beginning of the
common era,
6
and predates the major Vaibhas
_
ika compilation

Abhidharmamahavibhas
_
asastra.
7
In the 3rd century AD, Upasanta wrote his

Abhidharmahr
_
daya (Apitan xin lun jing, T.1551), modeled on Dharmasres
_
t
_
hins
work.
8
Dharmatratas work, entitled

Sam
_
yuktabhidharmahr
_
daya (Za apitan xin lun,
T.1552), was compiled at the beginning of the 4th century AD.
9
Both Upasantas and
Dharmatratas work are influenced by Vaibhas
_
ika viewpoints. The Hr
_
daya works can
be defined as pedagogical digests of Sarvastivada philosophy (Cox, 1995, p. 31).
While the

Abhidharmamahavibhas
_
asastra is a Kasm ra work, all the other
above-mentioned works were written in Bactria and Gandhara.
10
In what
follows, the section on contaminants of these Hr
_
daya works, and of the

Abhidharmamahavibhas
_
asastra will be addressed.
Erich Frauwallner has shown that the doctrine of the contaminants in
Dharmasres
_
t
_
hins

Abhidharmahr
_
daya is derived from the Prakaran
_
apada
(Frauwallner, 1971b, p. 124). While, in the Sam
_
gtiparyaya and in the
Prakaran
_
apada, the contaminants were dealt with as an independent category,
i.e. unconnected to any other abhidharmic category, Dharmasres
_
t
_
hins

Abhidharmahr
_
daya makes a connection between the contaminants, their
annihilation, and knowledge and concentration gained when annihilating the
contaminants.
11
In this work, as this is also the case in the other Hr
_
daya treatises and
in the Abhidharmakosa, the chapter on the contaminants, i.e. the cause of
entanglement in the cycle of rebirths, is one of the two core chapters. The second
core chapter deals with the path to liberation and immediately follows the chapter on
the contaminants (Frauwallner, 1971a, p. 73). Dharmasres
_
t
_
hin opens the section on
contaminants with the claim that actions are the root of existence. As existing is
synonymous with suffering (duh
_
kha), and the annihilation of suffering is the aim of
the Buddhist praxis, actions have to be stopped. In order to stop these actions,
Dharmasres
_
t
_
hin claims, one should think about the ninety-eight contaminants, i.e.
those forces that lead a worldling to doing volitional actions (T.1550, p. 815b1618).
Thinking about the contaminants indeed implies that the contaminants are the causal
factor of the actionsif not, thinking about them would be of no avail with respect
to the annihilation of suffering.
Dharmasres
_
t
_
hins

Abhidharmahr
_
daya is the first work in which the peculiar
Sarvastivadin path to salvation is documented. This path to liberation, progression
on which implies that a disciple (sravaka) successively takes possession of ten kinds of
knowledge (see T.1550, p. 820b25c18), consists of a path of vision (darsanamarga)
and a path of spiritual practice (bhavanamarga). The distinction between these two
Asian Philosophy 67
kinds of path is based on the way contaminants are annihilated, i.e. vision
and repeated spiritual practice respectively. There is a basic set of ten contaminants
(see below) that, except for the contaminant repugnance (pratigha), are
simultaneously linked to the three realms of existence and are partly to be
annihilated through vision of the four truths and partly through repeated spiritual
practice of the knowledge gained. This means that for the final destruction of all these
contaminants, one has to apply vision and repeated spiritual practice of all four
truths, and throughout the three realms of existence.
12
As the sravaka progresses in
this pursuit, he attains the ten kinds of knowledge as follows: When he primarily
enters the path to liberation, he first develops patience regarding the truth
of suffering, related to those contaminants that belong to the realm of sensual
passion. This moment is called patience regarding the truth with respect to suffering
(duh
_
khe dharmaks
_
anti). In this moment, that part of the ten contaminants that
belongs to the realm of sensual passion and that is to be destroyed by vision of the
truth of suffering, is destroyed. As a sravaka, in this moment, is not yet free from
desire, he acquires conventional knowledge. This moment is followed by a second
moment in which the same truth is fully understood. This moment is called
knowledge of the truth with respect to suffering (duh
_
khe dharmajnana). In this
moment, the sravaka makes sure that that part of the contaminants that was
annihilated in the previous moment does not reoccur. The sravaka now
takes possession of three knowledges: knowledge of the doctrine (dharmajnana),
knowledge of suffering (duh
_
khajnana), and conventional knowledge (sam
_
vr
_
tijnana).
This second moment is followed by a third moment, relating to that part of the
contaminants that is to be destroyed by vision of the truth of suffering that belongs to
the higher two realms. This moment is called subsequent patience regarding the
truth with respect to suffering (duh
_
khenvayaks
_
anti). The final destruction of this
part of the contaminants, i.e. the certitude that also this part of the contaminants will
not reoccur, is called subsequent knowledge regarding the truth with respect to
suffering (duh
_
khenvayajnana). In this fourth moment, the sravaka also takes
possession of subsequent knowledge (anvayajnana). As there are four truths, there
are sixteen moments in this path of vision (darsanamarga). In moment six,
knowledge of the origin (samudayajnana) is further acquired; in moment
ten knowledge of cessation (nirodhajnana) is acquired; and in moment fourteen
knowledge of the path (margajnana) is acquired.
13
With the sixteenth moment, the
sravaka enters the stream towards liberation. He now has to subdue that part of the
same contaminants that is to be annihilated through repeated spiritual practice
(bhavanaprahatavya). While doing so, he continues cultivating the seven kinds of
knowledge he has already attained on the path of vision. He does not cultivate the
knowledge of the thoughts of others (paracittajnana), because he is not fully
liberated from all contaminants belonging to the realm of sensual passion yet,
nor does he cultivate the knowledge of extinction (ks
_
ayajnana) and the knowledge
of nonorigination (anutpadajnana), because these two kinds of knowledge
are the final result of the path of spiritual practice. The obtainment of the
knowledge of extinction and of the knowledge of nonorigination is identical with
68 B. Dessein
obtaining nirvan
_
a. Hence, these two kinds of knowledge pertain to the Tathagata
only (T.1550, p. 821b24c2). Once the sravaka has attained the fruit of nonreturning
(anagamyaphala), i.e. the last of the noble fruits (sramanyaphala) before attaining
arhat-ship, he obtains the knowledge of the thoughts of others, as he is now
completely freed from the realm of sensual passion (T.1550, p. 821c1011). When the
sravaka has accomplished his task of completely destroying all contaminants, he
obtains the last two kinds of knowledge, and enters nirvan
_
a.
14
Addressing the ninety-eight contaminants, Dharmasres
_
t
_
hin primarily divides them
as to their mode of abandonment (T.1550, p. 815b1027). This is shown
schematically in Table 2.
Subsequently, the contaminants are differentiated as to the realms they belong to.
In doing so, Dharmasres
_
t
_
hin restricts himself to those contaminants that are bound
to the realm of sensual passion, i.e. that realm that, with respect to the path to
liberation and the abandonment of contaminants, is of primary concern for a
worldling as it is the realm to which he, as a human being, belongs. For the higher
two realms, Dharmasres
_
t
_
hin suffices with mentioning the total number of
contaminants that belong to these two realms (T.1550, p. 815b28c6). That the
realm of sensual passion is conceived to be of primary concern for the worldling is
corroborated in the terms used for the forms of knowledge that lead to liberating
insight. For the realm of sensual passion, this knowledge is called knowledge of the
doctrine (dharmajnana); for the higher two realms subsequent knowledge
(anvayajnana) (see Cox, 1992, pp. 76 and 99, n. 56). In the old canon, these terms
referred to a disciples cognition in the present, and in the past and future
respectively (Frauwallner, 1971a, p. 87). In the new context, the terms refer to
cognition in the disciples own sphere, and in higher spheres (Frauwallner, 1971a,
pp. 8788). This is shown in Table 3.
An enumeration and definition of all contaminants conclude the section on
contaminants. This list totals ten basic contaminants. This number is attained by
reducing the three types of attachment (attachment to sensual existence, attachment
to material existence, and attachment to immaterial existence) to only one. This one
contaminant is responsible for a worldlings attachment to the three realms of
existence. The list of contaminants in the

Abhidharmahr
_
daya thus is: (1) extreme
view (antagrahadr
_
s
_
t
_
i), (2) false view (mithyadr
_
s
_
t
_
i), (3) belief in a self (satkayadr
_
s
_
t
_
i),
(4) adherence to particular views (dr
_
s
_
t
_
iparamarsa), (5) adherence to moral precepts
Table 2 Division of the ninety-eight contaminants to mode of abandonment
according to Dharmasres
_
t
_
hins

Abhidharmahr
_
daya
darsanaprahatavya duh
_
khadarsanaprahatavya 28
samudayadarsanaprahatavya 19
nirodhadarsanaprahatavya 19
margadarsanaprahatavya 22
bhavanaprahatavya 10
Total 98
Asian Philosophy 69
and vows (slavrataparamarsa), (6) attachment (raga), (7) ignorance (avidya), (8)
repugnance (pratigha), (9) pride (mana), and (10) perplexity (vicikitsa). It appears
that the reduction of the three types of attachment mentioned in the Prakaran
_
apada
to only one type is given in by the necessity to conform the basic types of the
contaminants to ninety-eight subtypes, a number implied by the Sarvastivada path
structure. That Dharmasres
_
t
_
hin basically only addresses the realm of sensual passion,
suggests that all these ten contaminants are bound to the realm of sensual passion.
That all ten contaminants are to be abandoned through vision of the truth of
suffering, i.e. the first of the four noble truths,
15
further, shows that all ten
contaminants are of equal importance and concern for the worldling whoprimarily
being bound to the realm of sensual passionexperiences suffering. We can further
remark that, from Dharmasres
_
t
_
hins treatment of the contaminants, it is clear that
he considers contaminant and defilement as synonyms. This is in line with the
opinion that became peculiar for the Vaibhas
_
ika Sarvastivadins. We will return to
this later in this article.
The chronologically subsequent work is the

Abhidharmamahavibhas
_
asastra.
The treatment of the contaminants in this work, extant in a Chinese translation by
Xuanzangs translation team done between AD 656 and 659 (T.2154, p. 557a1819
and p. 620c1216), starts from the seven contaminants as we found them in the
Sam
_
gtiparyaya: (1) attachment to sensual pleasure (kamaraga), (2) repugnance
(pratigha), (3) attachment to existence (bhavaraga), (4) pride (mana), (5) ignorance
(avidya), (6) views (dr
_
s
_
t
_
i), and (7) perplexity (vicikitsa) (T.1545, p. 257a1819).
Then follows a brief description of how these seven develop into ninety-eight
subcategories. This treatment differs from the one in the Prakaran
_
apada and in
Dharmasres
_
t
_
hins

Abhidharmahr
_
daya in the sense that it enumerates each of the
seven contaminants with respect to the number of modes of abandonment that
pertain to them in each of the three realmssee Table 4 (T.1545, p. 257a1925).
The

Abhidharmamahavibhas
_
asastra thus is the first work that gives us
information on precisely which one of the ninety-eight contaminants belongs to
which one of the three realms. As we have remarked above, that attachment
to sensual pleasure only belongs to the realm of sensual passion, and that attachment
to existence only belongs to the realm of form and to the one of formlessness fits in
the growing tendency to systematize the series of the contaminants into the three
Table 3 The ninety-eight contaminants divided as to mode of abandonment and sphere
of existence according to Dharmasres
_
t
_
hins

Abhidharmahr
_
daya
kamadhatu rupadhatu arupyadhatu
darsanaprahatavya duh
_
khadarsanaprahatavya 10
samudayadarsanaprahatavya 7
nirodhadarsanaprahatavya 7
margadarsanaprahatavya 8
bhavanaprahatavya 4
Total 36 31 31
70 B. Dessein
realms of existence. As there are only five modes of abandonmentvision of the four
truths and repeated spiritual practicethose contaminants that are stated to have to
be abandoned through five modes obviously have to be abandoned through all of
these five. In this work, however, it remains unclear to which of the five views the
number twelve refers, and precisely which four of the five modes of abandonment
pertain to this contaminant views as well as to the contaminant perplexity.
The treatment of the subject in the treatises that follow, i.e. Upasantas

Abhidharmahr
_
daya and Dharmatratas

Sam
_
yuktabhidharmahr
_
daya, combines the
transmitted material: being modeled on Dharmasres
_
t
_
hins work (and thus on
the Prakaran
_
apada), the format of the ninety-eight contaminants provided in
these works is adopted, and the incompletenesses and unclarities present in
Dharmasres
_
t
_
hins

Abhidharmahr
_
daya and in the

Abhidharmamahavibhas
_
asastra are
adjusted to fit in this adopted scheme.
Parallel to his example Dharmasres
_
t
_
hin, Upasanta starts his discussion on the
contaminants with an introductory part in which it is stated that action and
defilement (klesa) proceed in mutual causality, [and] because of action and
the defiling power of this action, all births that are experienced are not free from
defilement (T.1551, p. 843c2425). This is the reason why one should think about
the ninety-eight contaminants (T.1551, p. 843c28). In the explanation that follows,
the contaminants are defined as the companions of actions that can make all kinds of
frustration arise (T.1551, p. 844a12). Hereafter, the seven basic contaminants are
developed to the ten contaminants as we found them in Dharmasres
_
t
_
hins work, and
these ten are then further developed into ninety-eight subcategories, clarifying
the incompletenesses from the

Abhidharmamahavibhas
_
asastra just mentioned.
A first adjustment compared to the

Abhidharmamahavibhas
_
asastra consists of
comprising the contaminant attachment to sensual pleasure and the contaminant
attachment to existence (T.1551, p. 844a410), thus forming a list of six basic
contaminants (see Table 5).
A treatment of the contaminant views as to mode of abandonment (prakara) and
subcategory (akara) then follows (T.1551, p. 844a1012)see Table 6.
Upasanta then continues with a detailed attribution of all contaminants to the
realm they belong to, as well as to their mode of annihilationsee Table 7. As his
Table 4 The ninety-eight contaminants divided as to their modes of abandonment
according to the

Abhidharmamahavibhas
_
asastra
kamadhatu rupadhatu arupyadhatu Total
kamaraga 5 5
pratigha 5 5
bhavaraga 5 5 10
mana 5 5 5 15
avidya 5 5 5 15
dr
_
s
_
t
_
i 12 12 12 36
vicikitsa 4 4 4 12
Total 36 31 31 98
Asian Philosophy 71
example Dharmasres
_
t
_
hin, he hereby primarily focuses on the realm of sensual passion
(T.1551, p. 844a13b16). For the realm of form and the realm of formlessness,
Upasanta suffices with mentioning that in these two realms, repugnance should be
excluded, all other contaminants and modes of abandonment being equally present
(T.1551, p. 844b1618).
It is with this work that it becomes clear what the criterion is for the division of
contaminants in those that are to be abandoned through vision only, i.e. by viewing
the four noble truths, and for those that also have to be abandoned through spiritual
practice. To be abandoned through vision are the five views and perplexity, i.e. errors
and doubt. To be abandoned through spiritual practice are passions, viz. attachment,
repugnance, pride, and ignorance. This is in accordance with the theory of early
Buddhism that ascribed liberating qualities to cognition.
16
The importance of the
concept of liberation through cognition may also explain why the contaminant views
from the old canon was expanded to contain five aspects, thus forming five of the ten
contaminants (see on this, Frauwallner, 1971a, p. 77). Already in the old canon,
it was said that liberating cognition brought cognition of the four noble truths and
of the defilements (asrava) (see Frauwallner, 1953, pp. 160 ff.; 1971a, p. 77).
Replacing the concept asrava with the concept anusaya as cause of defilement made a
causal link between the bad actions (invoked by contaminants) and liberating
cognition. In the old canon, mentioning was made of the cognition of the four noble
truths and of the asravas. It remained unclear what the connection between these
two forms of cognition is. This connection was made by claiming that the anusayas
Table 5 The six contaminants divided as to realm, aspect and mode of
abandonment according to Upasantas

Abhidharmahr
_
daya
dhatu prakara dhatu and prakara akara akara and prakara
raga 3 5 15
mana 3 5 15
avidya 3 5 15
pratigha 1 5
vicikitsa 3 4 12
dr
_
s
_
t
_
i 3 4 5 12
Table 6 The contaminant views according to Upasantas

Abhidharmahr
_
daya
duh
_
khadarsana-
prahatavya
samudayadarsana-
prahatavya
nirodhadarsana-
prahatavya
margadarsana-
prahatavya Total
satkayadr
_
s
_
t
_
i 1 1
antagrahadr
_
s
_
t
_
i 1 1
slavrataparamarsa 1 1 2
mithyadr
_
s
_
t
_
i 1 1 1 1 4
dr
_
s
_
t
_
iparamarsa 1 1 1 1 4
Total 5 2 2 3 12
72 B. Dessein
could primarily be broken off through cognition of the four noble truths, after which
there is repeated realization of the knowledge gained on the path of development
(bhavanamarga) (Frauwallner, 1971a, p. 80). This explains why it primarily is the five
views that have to be abandoned through vision. For the abandonment of perplexity
through vision, we can refer to the definition provided for perplexity in the
Sam
_
gtiparyaya, i.e. perplexity concerning the (four) truths. We further need to
mention that, as was the case in Dharmasres
_
t
_
hins work, also Upasanta sees
contaminant and defilement as synonyms.
Dharmatrata starts his analysis of the contaminants with a section that parallels the
first section on this subject in the

Abhidharmamahavibhas
_
asastra: attachment to
sensual pleasure (kamaraga), repugnance (pratigha), attachment to existence
Table 7 The ninety-eight contaminants according to Upasantas

Abhidharmahr
_
daya
duh
_
khadarsana-
prahatavya
samudayadarsana-
prahatavya
nirodhadarsana-
prahatavya
margadarsana-
prahatavya bhavanaprahatavya
K

AMADH

ATU
satkayadr
_
s
_
t
_
i 1
antagrahadr
_
s
_
t
_
i 1
mithyadr
_
s
_
t
_
i 1 1 1 1
dr
_
s
_
t
_
iparamarsa 1 1 1 1
slavrataparamarsa 1 1
raga 1 1 1 1 1
pratigha 1 1 1 1 1
mana 1 1 1 1 1
vicikitsa 1 1 1 1
avidya 1 1 1 1 1
Subtotal 10 7 7 8 4
RU

PADH

ATU
satkayadr
_
s
_
t
_
i 1
antagrahadr
_
s
_
t
_
i 1
mithyadr
_
s
_
t
_
i 1 1 1 1
dr
_
s
_
t
_
iparamarsa 1 1 1 1
slavrataparamarsa 1 1
raga 1 1 1 1 1
mana 1 1 1 1 1
vicikitsa 1 1 1 1
avidya 1 1 1 1 1
Subtotal 9 6 6 7 3

ARU

PYADH

ATU
satkayadr
_
s
_
t
_
i 1
antagrahadr
_
s
_
t
_
i 1
mithyadr
_
s
_
t
_
i 1 1 1 1
dr
_
s
_
t
_
iparamarsa 1 1 1 1
slavrataparamarsa 1 1
raga 1 1 1 1 1
mana 1 1 1 1 1
vicikitsa 1 1 1 1
avidya 1 1 1 1 1
Subtotal 9 6 6 7 3
Total 28 19 19 22 10
Asian Philosophy 73
(bhavaraga), pride (mana), ignorance (avidya), views (dr
_
s
_
t
_
i), and
perplexity (vicikitsa)the seven contaminants as we know them from the
Sam
_
gtiparyaya are divided to mode of abandonment, realm and aspect (T.1552,
pp. 899c18900a3)see Table 8.
In the further analysis, the term attachment to sensual pleasure is replaced with
attachment. In this way, Dharmatrata turns to his example Dharmasres
_
t
_
hin. In the
subsequent analysis, those contaminants that are to be abandoned through spiritual
practice are enumerated: attachment, pride, ignorance, and repugnance. As the first
three of them belong to the three realms, there is a total number of ten contaminants
to be abandoned through spiritual practice (T.1552, p. 900a35). This is followed by
a section that parallels Dharmasres
_
t
_
hins work, i.e. an analysis that focuses on the
contaminants that belong to the realm of sensual passion (T.1552, p. 900a12b6).
This is shown in Table 9.
Following a brief definition of the different contaminants (T.1552, p. 900b625),
the contaminants are discussed as to their mode of abandonment in the different
realms. This discussion parallels the discussion in Upasantas work (T.1552,
p. 900b25c20)see Table 10.
In addition to Upasanta, Dharmatrata provides an explanation why some views are
not to be abandoned through vision of all four truths, and why perplexity is not to be
abandoned through spiritual practice and, in this respect, equals a view: perplexity
Table 8 The seven contaminants divided to aspect, realm, and mode of abandonment
according to Dharmatratas

Sam
_
yuktabhidharmahr
_
dayasastra
prakara dhatu and
prakara
akara akara and
prakara
dhatu, akara
and prakara
Total
kamaraga 5 5
pratigha 5 5
bhavaraga 10 10
mana 15 15
avidya 15 15
dr
_
s
_
t
_
i 5 12 36 36
vicikitsa 12 12
Total 98
Table 9 The ninety-eight contaminants divided to realm and mode of abandonment
according to Dharmatratas

Sam
_
yuktabhidharmahr
_
dayasastra
kamadhatu rupadhatu arupyadhatu
darsanaprahatavya duh
_
khadarsanaprahatavya 10
samudayadarsanaprahatavya 7
nirodhadarsanaprahatavya 7
margadarsanaprahatavya 8
bhavanaprahatavya 4
Total 36 31 31
74 B. Dessein
vanishes as soon as one sees the object concerning which that doubt arose (T.1552,
p. 900c614). This, again, is in line with early Abhidharmic views on cognition and
liberating insight.
Suimian, Shi, and the Relation of the Contaminants to the Life-Stream
(sam
_
tana)
According to Buddhist philosophy, rebirth is determined by the combined karmic
result of all volitional actions a particular worldling (pr
_
thagjana) committed in the
Table 10 The ninety-eight contaminants according to Dharmatratas

Sam
_
yuktabhidharmahr
_
dayasastra
duhkhadarsana-
prahatavya
samudayadarsana-
prahatavya
nirodhadarsana-
prahatavya
margadarsana-
prahatavya bhavanaprahatavya
K

AMADH

ATU
satkayadr
_
s
_
t
_
i 1
antagrahadr
_
s
_
t
_
i 1
mithyadr
_
s
_
t
_
i 1 1 1 1
dr
_
s
_
t
_
iparamarsa 1 1 1 1
slavrataparamarsa 1 1
raga 1 1 1 1 1
pratigha 1 1 1 1 1
mana 1 1 1 1 1
vicikitsa 1 1 1 1
avidya 1 1 1 1 1
Subtotal 10 7 7 8 4
RU

PADH

ATU
satkayadr
_
s
_
t
_
i 1
antagrahadr
_
s
_
t
_
i 1
mithyadr
_
s
_
t
_
i 1 1 1 1
dr
_
s
_
t
_
iparamarsa 1 1 1 1
slavrataparamarsa 1 1
raga 1 1 1 1 1
mana 1 1 1 1 1
vicikitsa 1 1 1 1
avidya 1 1 1 1 1
Subtotal 9 6 6 7 3

ARU

PYADH

ATU
satkayadr
_
s
_
t
_
i 1
antagrahadr
_
s
_
t
_
i 1
mithyadr
_
s
_
t
_
i 1 1 1 1
dr
_
s
_
t
_
iparamarsa 1 1 1 1
slavrataparamarsa 1 1
raga 1 1 1 1 1
mana 1 1 1 1 1
vicikitsa 1 1 1 1
avidya 1 1 1 1 1
Subtotal 9 6 6 7 3
Total 28 19 19 22 10
Asian Philosophy 75
course of the present life-time. As every rebirth is characterized by suffering,
especially those actions that would lead to a bad rebirth state, i.e. bad actions were
accentuated in the description of the path of Buddhist praxis, leading to liberation.
The series of contaminants discussed above, naturally, all are such bad factors
(akusala dharma). These contaminants themselves are rooted in a general mental
state of defilement (klesa). A mental state of defilement thus leads to contaminants
that contaminate the mind, i.e. bring about mental misconduct (manoduscarita) that,
in its turn, leads to the performance of a specific bad action (akusala karman)
(on this causal series, see Hirakawa, Hirai, Takahashi, Hakamaya, & Yoshizu, 1973,
pp. xxxvii ff.).
Within the Sarvastivada school of Buddhist philosophy, different theories
developed on precisely how these contaminants function with respect to the
life-stream (sam
_
tana) of a particular worldling. The question addressed in these
theories is whether the contaminants are bound to the life-stream as much as the
karmic result of the bad actions they invoked themselves, or whether the
contaminants, as contaminants, remain detached from this life-stream. On this
issue, the interpretation of the philosophers of the Vaibhas
_
ika subgroup of the
Sarvastivadins hinges on the notion of possession (prapti). Possession is the binding
factor that binds a bad action to the life-stream of a particular worldling.
This possession arises together with the bad action itself: a worldling, so to speak,
takes possession of this particular kind of bad action. Once he has taken possession of
a particular kind of bad action, this primary possession is followed by a series of
effects of uniform outflow (nis
_
yandaphala). As long as a worldling does not practice
the Buddhist path to liberation, this defiled action remains attached to his
life-stream, i.e. he remains contaminated by this particular action. Therefore, for the
Vaibhas
_
ikas, the general state of defilement (klesa), the contaminants (anusaya)
invoked by it that lead to mental misconduct (manoduscarita), and the actual
bad actions (akusala karman) that proceed herefrom, can be regarded as synonyms.
The contaminants thus are connected to the life-stream as much as the karmic result
of the bad actions they invoked. Given the Sarvastivada claim that all factors exist in
the three time periods (past, present, future), abandonment of a defilement consists
in the attainment of a possession (prapti) of the counteragent that, in its turn, will be
followed by a series of effects of uniform outflow (Cox, 1992, pp. 8789).
The Sautrantikas, most important exponent of whom is Vasubandhu, author
of the Abhidharmakosa, formulated an alternative theory.
17
This theory hinges on the
notion of seed (bja). According to the Sautrantika viewpoint, a passive state of
the contaminants has to be differentiated from an active state. Bad actions are caused
by a contaminant that, essentially, always remains in a seed-state. When the
appropriate causes and conditions combine, a bad action sprouts from this seed.
At that moment, the contaminant becomes an enveloper (paryavasthana). Once the
bad action has been committed, the contaminant returns to its seed-state. While the
karmic result of the bad action remains connected to the life-stream, this is not so for
the contaminant that caused the defiled action. For a more detailed treatment, see
Dessein (2008).
76 B. Dessein
In connection to these theories, we need to address the Abhidharmakosa, a work in
which Vasubandhu criticizes the Vaibhas
_
ika viewpoints, and favors the Sautrantika
positions, in some more depth (see T.2049, p. 190b1516; T.1823, p. 841a2429; also
Yamada, 1959, pp. 110111; Anacker, 1984, p. 17). The Abhidharmakosa is modeled
on the

Sam
_
yuktabhidharmahr
_
daya, and, hence, also on Dharmasres
_
t
_
hins work
(see Dessein, 1999, Vol. 1, pp. livlxix). There are two Chinese versions of this text:
one by Paramartha, produced in AD 565 (Apidamo jushe shi lun T.1559; see also
T.2154, p. 545c1718, p. 620c1718, p. 720b23; T.2157, p. 844a1718, p. 954a1920,
p. 1043c1415), and one by Xuanzang, produced in AD 653 (Apidamo jushe lun
T.1558; see also T.2149, p. 311c12; T.2154, p. 557a2223, p. 620c2223, p. 695c10,
p. 720b6; T.2157, p. 857a67, p. 954a2627, p. 1043c1920). The section on the
contaminants in the Abhidharmakosa starts with the claim that the actions are rooted
in the contaminants (T.1558, p. 98b21; T.1559, p. 252c79; see also La Vallee
Poussin, 1971, Vol. IV, p. 1ff.). This position is similar to Dharmatratas claim that
sensual existence, material existence and immaterial existence are rooted in such
seven contaminants as the attachment to sensual pleasure.
18
The Abhidharmakosa
continues by raising the question why we should not see the contaminants
as synonymous with action or defilement (T.1558, p. 98c1099a26; T.1559,
pp. 252c21253b6; see also La Vallee Poussin, 1971, Vol. IV, pp. 37). That
the contaminants are not synonymous with action or defilement is in line with the
Sautrantika viewpoint mentioned above, and differs from the position of
Dharmasres
_
t
_
hin and Upasanta that contaminant and defilement are synonyms.
19
Vasubandhu bases his further explanation on a set of six contaminants, i.e. the
series in which the contaminants attachment to sensual pleasure and attachment
to existence are contracted to the single contaminant attachment (raga) (T.1558,
p. 98c710; T.1559, p. 252c1421). These six contaminants are then developed in
a way parallel to the treatment we read in Dharmatratas work: first a division
between the views and non-views (T.1558, p. 99a26b6; T.1559, p. 253b612),
followed by a development into ninety-eight subtypes of contaminants (T.1558,
p. 99b6c8; T.1559, p. 253b12c8). Given this parallelism with the work
of Dharmatrata, we might have to label the opening line of this chapter of the

Sam
_
yuktabhidharmahr
_
daya, i.e. the claim that sensual existence, material existence
and immaterial existence are rooted in such seven contaminants as the attachment to
sensual pleasure, as proto-Sautrantika.
In this respect, we need to draw attention to the following. The term anusaya is
derived from the root form anu-
p
s, which means to sleep with, lie along or close,
adhere closely to.
20
This explains the Chinese translation of the term as suimian,
i.e. with sui (Instituts Ricci, 2001, No. 10101), subsequently, for anu-, and with mian
(Instituts Ricci, 2001, No. 7873), sleeping, for -saya. This term suimian is used in all
translations by Xuanzang (Sam
_
gtiparyaya (AD 660663), Prakaran
_
apada (AD 660)
and Abhidharmakosa (AD 653)), as well as in the translation of the Abhidharmakosa
by Paramartha. The other term used to translate anusaya is shi (Instituts Ricci,
2001, No. 9715), i.e. a particle indicating the causative mode. This term is used in
the translation of the Prakaran
_
apada by Gun
_
abhadra and Bodhiyasas (AD 435443),
Asian Philosophy 77
in the translation of Dharmasres
_
t
_
hins

Abhidharmahr
_
daya by Sam
_
ghadeva and
Huiyuan (AD 391) (see on this date, Willemen, 1975, p. xxxii), in Narendrayasass
translation of Upasantas

Abhidharmahr
_
daya (AD 664),
21
and in Sam
_
ghavarmans
translation of the

Sam
_
yuktabhidharmahr
_
daya (AD 434).
22
Especially the translation
of Upasantas

Abhidharmahr
_
daya is interesting here: this text was translated later
than the translations done by Xuanzang, however does not use suimian, but shi.
As the translation of anusaya as suimian is closer to the Sautrantika interpretation,
and as we endeavored to label the concerned section of Dharmatratas work
as proto-Sautrantika, it is not to be excluded that Xuanzang, when translating
the Sam
_
gtiparyaya, brought the Sautrantika interpretation to the very beginning
of Sarvastivada philosophy. That suimian is also used in Paramarthas translation of
the Abhidharmakosa shows that, indeed, when using either suimian or shi to
translate the term anusaya, a specific doctrinal interpretation was rendered.
Here, we have to draw our attention to the fact that, as shown by Lambert
Schmithausen, basing himself on, among other texts, the Abhidharmakosabhas
_
ya,
the Dharmaskandha, the Sam
_
gtiparyaya, and the Vijnanakaya, there is evidence
that treatises were written or revised by fellow-thinkers affiliated with the
Mulasarvastivada-Nikaya which seems to have superseded or absorbed the
Sarvastivadins in India, whereas the Central Asian Sarvastivadins maintained their
independence andperhaps as a reaction against the advance of the
Mulasarvastivadins in Indiadeveloped a standardized version of their own
(Schmithausen, 1987, pp. 323324 and 380). With respect to the texts discussed,
this would imply that the texts using suimian to translate anusaya were texts
that were influenced (superseded) by the Mulasarvastivada viewpoint.
23
Conclusion
In Sarvastivada Abhidharma literature, the term anusaya, i.e. defilement in the sense
of innate proclivities, inherited from former births, to do something of usually evil
nature, came to replace the older term asrava, used to denote contaminants in the
old canon. This replacement of the term asrava with the term anusaya is connected
to the development of the cosmologicalontological scheme of three realms of
existence and the peculiar Sarvastivadin path to salvation. At the moment the
Sarvastivadin path to salvation was conceived, the term anusaya was still flexible,
and it could be crafted into the newly developed scheme of this path to salvation.
As it is the contaminants that cause a worldling to do evil actions and, hence, make
him suffer in the circle of rebirths, these contaminants have to be eliminated in order
for a worldling to attain liberation. The Sarvastivadin path to salvation serves this
purpose. There are two means by which, on the path to salvation, the contaminants
can be annihilated: vision of the four noble truths and repeated spiritual practice.
To be abandoned by viewing the four noble truths are five views and perplexity, i.e.
perplexity concerning the four noble truths. In this way, six of a total of ten basic
contaminants are to be eliminated through vision. Also in the old canon, liberating
78 B. Dessein
qualities were ascribed to cognition of the four noble truths. The four other basic
contaminants are partly to be abandoned through vision and partly through repeated
spiritual practice of the knowledge gained. This subdivision of the ten basic
contaminants to their mode of existence (dhatu), aspect of views (akara), and mode
of abandonment (prakara) results in ninety-eight subcategories of contaminants.
The Hr
_
daya treatises illustrate how the concept of anusaya was gradually crafted into
the Sarvastivadin path to salvation.
In connection to the development of the concept of contaminants, further, two
important opposing theories developed. According to the Vaibhas
_
ikas, there is no
difference between the contaminants and the actual bad actions they invoked.
Once a bad action has been done, it remains connected to the life-stream of a
particular individual, as much as the contaminant that invoked that bad action
itself. The Sautrantikas, however, differentiate a latent and an active state of the
defilements. When a contaminant becomes active, it develops into an enveloper
(paryavasthana), but, having been active, it returns to its dormant state.
Therefore, the contaminants as such are not connected to a particular life-stream.
This different interpretation of the functioning of a contaminant vis-a`-vis the
life-stream of an individual may explain the two different translations into
Chinese for the term anusaya: shi and suimian. Of these two translations, the
translation as suimian appears to be in accordance with the Sautrantika
interpretation of anusaya. It is in this respect important that the use of these
different terms appears not to be restricted to certain translators or periods of
translation. Therefore, when Xuanzang uses the term suimian to translate
anusaya in his Chinese version of the Sam
_
gtiparyaya, this may be illustrative for
an attempt to project the Sautrantika interpretation of the term anusaya to the
beginnings of Sarvastivada Abhidharma.
Notes
[1] On the
S
_
at
_
padabhidharma as the set of canonical Sarvastivada Abhidharma works: see
Willemen et al. (1998, pp. 160162); Dessein (1999, pp. xxviixxx).
[2] The Sam
_
gtiparyaya is attributed to Mahakaus
_
t
_
hila in the Sanskrit tradition, and to S

ariputra
in the Chinese tradition (Junjiro, Watanabe, & Ono, Taisho Shinshu Daizokyo T.1536).
Together with the Dharmaskandha (T.1537), the Sam
_
gtiparyaya forms the oldest
constituting part of the so-called S
_
at
_
padabhidharma. See on this Cox (1995, p. 30). On
the Sam
_
gtiparyaya and the Dharmaskandha, see also Willemen et al. (1998, pp. 177181 and
181189 respectively).
[3] For the appearance of satkayadr
_
s
_
t
_
i as part of the avarabhagyani sam
_
yojanani in the old
canon: see SN 22,89 Khemakasutta, Feer (1960c, pp. 152155), Woodward and Rhys
Davids (1881, pp. 129131); DN II,19 Mahagovindasutta, Estlin Carpenter (1947,
pp. 251252) T.1, p. 34a2629; MN no. 6

Akankheyyasutta, Trenckner (1964, p. 34),
Horner (1954, pp. 4243) T.26, p. 596a1017; MN no. 34 Culagopalakasutta, Trenckner
(1964, p. 226), Horner (1954, p. 278) T.99, p. 342b21c3; MN no. 68 Nalakapanasutta,
Trenckner (1964, pp. 465468), Horner (1957, pp. 138141) T.26, pp. 545c5546c21, etc.
For mithyadr
_
s
_
t
_
i (micchadit
_
t
_
hi) in the old canon: see DN III,25 Udambarika-Shanadasutta,
Estlin Carpenter (1960, p. 52) T.1, p. 48a28 and b26; AN, Morris (1961, pp. 3032,
Asian Philosophy 79
87, 299), Woodward (1960, pp. 2728, 79, 276), etc. For sandit
_
t
_
hiparamas (as variant of
dr
_
s
_
t
_
iparamarsa) in the old canon: see DN III, 25 Udambarika-Shanadasutta, Estlin
Carpenter (1960, p. 45) etc. See also Frauwallner (1971a, p. 76).
[4] For the Sanskrit and Tibetan tradition, see Wogihara (1971, p. 11.2627); for the Chinese
tradition, see T.1821, p. 8c34; T.2154, p. 557a1415 and p. 620b1723. On the
Prakaran
_
apada: see also Willemen et al. (1998, pp. 212221). On the textual format of
the Prakaran
_
apada: see Cox (1995, pp. 3033).
[5] T.1541, p. 637a1112; T.1542, p. 702a1011. On the origin of the concepts darsanapra-
hatavya and bhavanaprahatavya: see Frauwallner (1971a, p. 78).
[6] See Willemen et al. (1998, p. 174, n. 109). Jiaojing, T.2145, p. 74b2324, informs us that
he wrote his work Between de Qin and the Han. Investigation of the content of the work
made Erich Frauwallner (1971b, p. 86) conclude that the work is probably older than the

As
_
t
_
agranta. The latter workin the Jnanaprasthana versionwas dated by Puguang
(T.1821, p. 8b24 ff.) at the end of the 4th century after the demise of the Buddha.
[7] See Dessein (1996). On the textual format of the Hr
_
daya treatises and of the

Abhidharmamahavibhas
_
asastra: see Cox (1995, pp. 3037).
[8] T.1552, p. 869c1819. See also Watanabe, Mizuno and Oishi (1932, p. 124); Kimura (1974,
p. 230); Ryose (1986, p. 6).
[9] Jiaojing, T.2145, p. 74b25, says that Dharmatrata lived When the Jin were restored.
This happened in AD 317.
[10] For the Prakaran
_
apada: see T.2087, p. 881a1316. For Dharmasres
_
t
_
hin: see Willemen (1975,
pp. ii and xxxi). Upasanta refers to the Kasm ri repeatedly (T.1551, p. 841c17, pp. 885a29
and 885c27), thus suggesting that he was not a Kasm ri himself. For Dharmatrata:
see T.2087, p. 881a1719. For Vasubandhu: see Malalasekera (1961, Vol. 1, p. 58); Hirakawa
et al. (1973, p. iii).
[11] See Cox (1992, p. 66) for the importance of knowledge and concentration as equally
cooperative means to reach the final goal of the abandonment of specific defilements
(klesaprahana) and the ultimate destruction of all fluxes (asravaks
_
aya) in the Sarvastivada
path to salvation.
[12] For parallels in sutra literature: MA T.26, p. 431c15 ff.; MN no. 2 Sabbasavasutta, Trenckner
(1964, pp. 612), Horner (1954, pp. 816); SA T.99 (263), p. 67a23 ff.; SN 22.101
Vasijat
_
asutta, Feer (1960c, pp. 152153), Woodward and Rhys Davids (1881, pp. 129131).
[13] T.1550, p. 821a1424. Notice that it might be that a sravaka, actually, is already free from
desire when entering the path of vision. In that case, he possesses the knowledge of the
thoughts of others from the outset.
[14] For parallels in sutra literature: see MA T.26 (157), p. 679c1213; MA T.26 (184),
p. 729b21ff.; EA T.125, p. 666c15 ff.; MN no. 4. Bhayabheravasutta, Trenckner (1964, p. 23),
Horner (1954, p. 29); Suttanipata, no. 163, Andersen and Smith (1913, p. 29), Chalmers
(1932, p. 41), no. 178, Andersen and Smith (1913, p. 31), Chalmers (1932, p. 44), no. 374,
Andersen and Smith (1913, p. 65), Chalmers (1932, p. 91), no. 539, Andersen and Smith
(1913, p. 100), Chalmers (1932, p. 131), no. 546, Andersen and Smith (1913, p. 101),
Chalmers (1932, p. 133), nos. 10821083, Andersen and Smith (1913, p. 209), Chalmers
(1932, p. 257). See also SA T.99 (579), p. 154a28; SA T.99 (581), p. 154b24 ff.; SN 1.3.5
Arahantasutta, Feer (1960a, pp. 1415), Rhys Davids (1917, pp. 2122); SA T.99 (103),
p. 30a7; SN 22.89 Khemakasutta, Feer (1960c, p. 128), Woodward and Rhys Davids (1881,
pp. 110111); SA T.99 (1199), p. 326b11; SA T.99 (351), p. 98c1 ff.; SN 12.68 Kosambisutta,
Feer (1960b, p. 117), Rhys Davids and Woodward (1927, p. 83).
[15] On the historicity of duh
_
khasatya as the first of the four truths and the standardized formula
of the four truths: see Dessein (2007, p. 21).
[16] See Frauwallner (1971a, pp. 7879) and MN 2, I pp. 1017 MA T.1, pp. 431c13432c29;
cf. AN III, pp. 9699; EA T.2, pp. 740a25741b16; T.1, pp. 813a8814b5. See also
Schmithausen (1981).
80 B. Dessein
[17] For a 4th or 5th century dating of Vasubandhu: see Anacker (1984, pp. 711); Frauwallner
(1951); Hirakawa et al. (1973, pp. iix); Nakamura (1980, p. 109); La Vallee Poussin (1971,
Vol. 1, pp. xxivxxviii); Pradhan (1975, pp. 1314); Mejor (19891990, pp. 175183);
Schmithausen (1992, pp. 396397).
[18] T.1552, p. 899c18. We might even have to translate this section of Dharmatratas work as:
sensual existence, material existence and immaterial existence have such seven
contaminants as the attachment to sensual pleasure as seed (bja).
[19] On the question whether, according to the Sautrantikas, the contaminants are associated
with thought or are dissociated from them: see Cox (1992, pp. 7273).
[20] Monier-Williams (1990, p. 39). Rhys-Davids and Stede (1992, p. 44) explain the term
anusaya as proclivity, the persistence of a dormant or latent disposition, predisposition,
tendency.
[21] Narendrayasas is reported to have worked together with Fazhi. T.1551, p. 833c36; T.2149,
p. 301a2324; T.2157, p. 954b1417.
[22] Baoyun is said to have translated the words and Huiguan is said to have written down the
translation. See T.2145, p. 74b22 ff.
[23] For the relationship between Sarvastivada, Sautrantika and Mulasarvastivada, we refer to
Przyluski (1940) and Willemen et al. (1998, pp. 106110).
References
Anacker, S. (1984). Seven works of Vasubandhuthe Buddhist psychological doctor. Delhi: Motilal
Banarsidass.
Andersen, D. & Smith, H. (Eds.). (1913). Sutta-Nipata. Pali Text Society. London: Oxford
University Press.
Chalmers, L. (Trans.). (1932). Buddhas teachings. Being the Sutta-Nipata or discourse-collection.
Edited in the original Pali Text with an English version facing it. Cambridge, MA: Harvard
University Press.
Cox, C. (1992). Attainment through abandonment: The Sarvastivadin path of removing
defilements. In R. E. Buswell Jr. & R. M. Gimello (Eds.), Paths to liberation. The Marga and
its transformations in Buddhist thought (pp. 63105). Kuroda Institute. Studies in East Asian
Buddhism 7, Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press.
Cox, C. (1995). Disputed dharmas. Early Buddhist theories on existence. An annotated translation
of the section on factors dissociated from thought from Sa_ nghabhadras Nyayanusara. Tokyo:
Studia Philologica Buddhica, Monograph Series XI.
Dessein, B. (1996). Dharmas associated with awarenesses and the dating of the Sarvastivada
Abhidharma works. Asiatische Studien, 50(3), 623651.
Dessein, B. (Trans.) (1999). Heart of scholasticism with miscellaneous additions.

Sam
_
yuktabhidharmahr
_
daya (3 vols.). Buddhist Tradition Series 3335. Delhi: Motilal
Banarsidass.
Dessein, B. (2007). The first turning of the wheel of the doctrine. Sarvastivada and Mahasam
_
ghika
controversy. In A. Heirman & S. Bumbacher (Eds.), The spread of Buddhism (pp. 1548).
Leiden: E. J. Brill.
Dessein, B. (2008). Of seeds and sprouts: Defilement and its attachment to the life-stream in the
Sarvastivada Hr
_
daya treatises. Asian Philosophy, 18(1), 1733.
Edgerton, F. (1985). Buddhist hybrid Sanskrit grammar and dictionary. Vol II. New Haven, CT: Yale
University Press (originally published 1953).
Estlin Carpenter, J. (Ed.). (1947). The Dgha Nikaya. Vol. II. Pali Text Society. London: Oxford
University Press.
Estlin Carpenter, J. (Ed.). (1960). The Dgha Nikaya. Vol. III. Pali Text Society. London: Luzac.
Asian Philosophy 81
Feer, L. (Ed.). (1960a). The Sam
_
yutta-Nikaya of the Sutta-pitaka. Part I. Pali Text Society. London:
Luzac (originally published 1884).
Feer, L. (Ed.). (1960b). Sam
_
yutta-Nikaya. Part II. Nidana-Vagga. Pali Text Society. London:
Luzac (originally published 1888).
Feer, L. (Ed.). (1960c). Sam
_
yutta-Nikaya. Part III. Khandha-Vagga. Pali Text Society. London:
Luzac (originally published 1890).
Feer, L. (Ed.). (1960d). Sam
_
yutta Nikaya. Part V. Maha-vagga. Pali Text Society. London: Luzac
(originally published 1898).
Frauwallner, E. (1951). On the date of the Buddhist master of the law. Serie Orientale Roma, III.
Roma: Istituto Italiano per il Medio ed Estremo Oriente.
Frauwallner, E. (1953). Geschichte der Indischen Philosophie. Salzburg: Otto Muller Verlag.
Frauwallner, E. (1971a). Abhidharma-Studien III. Der Abhisamayavadah. Wiener Zeitschrift fur die
Kunde Sudasiens, 15, 69121.
Frauwallner, E. (1971b). Die Entstehung der buddhistischen Systeme. Gottingen: Vandenhoeck &
Ruprecht.
Gethin, R. (1992). The Matikas: Memorization, mindfulness, and the list. In J. Gyatso (Ed.), In the
mirror of memory. Reflections on mindfulness and remembrance in Indian and Tibetan Buddhism
(pp. 149172). Albany: State University of New York Press.
Hardy, E. (Ed.). (1958). The Anguttara-Nikaya. Vol. IV. Pali Text Society. London: Luzac.
Hirakawa, A., Hirai, S. H., Takahashi, S., Hakamaya, N. & Yoshizu, G. (1973). Index to the
Abhidharmakosabhas
_
ya (P. Pradhan edition). Part I: Sanskrit-Chinese. Tokyo: Daizo
Shuppansha.
Horner, I. B. (Trans.). (1954). The collection of the middle length sayings (Majjhima-Nikaya). Vol. I.
The first fifty discourses (Mulapan
_
n
_
asa). Pali Text Society. London: Luzac.
Horner, I. B. (Trans.). (1957). The collection of the middle length sayings (Majjhima-Nikaya). Vol. II.
The middle fifty discourses (Majjhimapan
_
n
_
asa). Pali Text Society. London: Luzac.
Instituts Ricci. (2001). Grand dictionnaire Ricci de la langue chinoise (7 vols.). ParisTaipei: Desclee
de Brouwer.
Junjiro, T., Watanabe, K. & Ono, G. (Eds./Compilers). (19241935). Taisho Shinshu Daizokyo
(Vols. 1100). Tokyo: Taisho Issaikyo Kankokai.
T.1: Drghagama, Chang ahan jing. Buddhayasas, Zhu Fonian.
T.26: Madhyamagama, Zhong ahan jing. Sam
_
ghadeva.
T.99: Sam
_
yuktagama, Za ahan jing. Gun
_
abhadra.
T.1536: S

ariputra, [Abhidharma]sam
_
gtiparyaya[padasastra], Apidamo jiyimen zu lun, Xuanzang.
T.1537: Mahamaudgalyayana, [Abhidharma]dharmaskandha[padasastra] Apidamo fayun zulun,
Xuanzang.
T.1541: Gun
_
abhadra, [Abhidharma]prakaran
_
apada[sastra] Zhongshifen apitan lun, Xuanzang.
T.1542: Vasumitra, [Abhidharma]prakaran
_
apada[sastra] Apidamo pinlei zulun, Xuanzang.
T.1545: 500 arhats,

[Abhidharma]mahavibhas
_
a[sastra] Apidamo dapiposha lun, Xuanzang.
T.1550: Dharmasres
_
t
_
hin,

Abhidharmahr
_
daya[sastra] Apitan xin lun, Sam
_
ghadeva.
T.1551: Upasanta,

Abhidharmahr
_
daya Apitan xin lun jing, Narendrayasas.
T.1552: Dharmatrata,

Sam
_
yuktabhidhar
_
mahr
_
daya[sastra] Za apitan xin lun, Sam
_
ghavarman.
T.1558: Vasubandhu, Abhidharmakosasastra Apidamo jushe lun, Xuanzang.
T.1559: Vasubandhu, Abhidharmakosabhas
_
ya Apidamo jushe shi lun, Paramartha.
T.1821: Puguang, Jushe lun ji.
T.1823: Fabao, Jushe lun shu.
T.2049: Paramartha, Posoupandou fashi zhuan.
T.2087: Xuanzang, Da Tang xiyu ji.
T.2145: Sengyou, Chu sanzang ji ji.
T.2149: Daoxuan, Da Tang neidian lu.
82 B. Dessein
T.2154: Zhisheng, Kaiyuan shi jiao lu.
T.2157: Yuanzhao, Zhenyuan xin ding shi jiao mulu.
Kimura, T. (1974). Kimura Taiken Zenshu IV: Abidatsumaron no Kenkyu. Tokyo: Daihorinkaku.
La Vallee Poussin, L. de (Trans.). (1971). LAbhidharmakosa de Vasubandhu (6 vols.). Bruxelles:
Institut Belge des Hautes Etudes Chinoises (originally published 19231931).
Malalasekera, G. P. (1961present). Encyclopedia of Buddhism. Colombo: Government of Sri Lanka.
Mejor, M. (19891990). The problem of two Vasubandhus reconsidered. Indologica Taurinensia,
1516, 175183.
Monier-Williams, M. (1990). A SanskritEnglish dictionary. Etymologically and philologically
arranged with special reference to cognate IndoEuropean Languages. Oxford: Clarendon Press,
(originally published 1899).
Morris, R. (Ed.). (1961). The AnguttaraNikaya. Vol. I. Ekanipata, Dukanipata, and Trikanipata.
Pali Text Society. London: Luzac.
Nakamura, H. (1980). Indian Buddhism. A survey with bibliographical notes. Tokyo: Kufs.
Pradhan, P. (Ed.). (1975). Abhidharmakosabhas
_
yam of Vasubandhu. Tibetan Sanskrit Works
Series 8. Patna: Kashi Prasad Jayaswal Research Institute.
Przyluski, J. (1940). Dars
_
tantika, Sautrantika and Sarvastivada. Indian Historical Quarterly, 16,
246254.
Rhys Davids, C. A. F. (Trans.). (1917). The book of the kindred sayings (Sam
_
yutta-Nikaya)
or grouped suttas. Part I. Kindred sayings with verses (Sagatha-Vagga). Pali Text Society.
London: Oxford University Press.
Rhys Davids, C. A. F. & Woodward, F. H. (Trans.). (1927). The book of the kindred sayings
(Sam
_
yutta-Nikaya) or grouped suttas. Part II. The Nidana book (Nidana-Vagga). Pali Text
Society. London: Oxford University Press.
Rhys Davids, T. W., & Stede, W. (1992). The Pali Text Societys PaliEnglish dictionary. Oxford: Pali
Text Society, (originally published 19211925).
Ryose, W. R. (1986). The position of the Abhidharmahr
_
daya in the historical development of
Sarvastivada thought. Abhidharma Research Institute Kyoto, 5, 116.
Schmithausen, L. (1981). On some aspects of descriptions or theories of liberating insight and
enlightenment in early Buddhism. In K. Bruhn & A. Wezler (Eds.), Studien zum Jainismus und
Buddhismus. Gedenkschrift fur Ludwig Alsdorf (pp. 199255). Alt-un Neu-Indische Studien 23.
Wiesbaden: Franz Steiner Verlag.
Schmithausen, L. (1987). Beitrage zur Schulzugehorigkeit und Textgeschichte kanonischer
und postkanonischer buddhistischen Materialen. In H. Bechert (Ed.), Zur Schulzugehorigkeit
von Werken der Hinayana-Literatur, Symposien zur Buddhismusforschung (pp. 5775).
Gottingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht.
Schmithausen, L. (1992). A note on Vasubandhu and the La_ nkavatarasutra. Asiatische Studien,
46(1), 392397.
Stache-Rosen, V. (1968). Dogmatische Begriffsreihen im alteren Buddhismus II. Das Sa _ ngtisutra und
sein Kommentar Sa _ ngtiparyaya (2 vols.). Berlin: Akademie-Verlag.
Trenckner, V. (Ed.). (1964). The Majjhima-Nikaya. Vol. I. Pali Text Society. London: Luzac.
Watanabe, B., Mizuno, K., & Oishi, H. (Trans.). (1932). Abidonshinronkyo (Vol. 21). Tokyo: Daito
Shuppansha.
Willemen, C. (Trans.). (1975). The essence of metaphysics. Abhidharmahr
_
daya. Publications
de lInstitut Belge des Hautes Etudes Bouddhiques. Serie Etudes et Textes 4. Bruxelles: Institut
Belge des Hautes Etudes Chinoises.
Willemen, C., Dessein, B., & Cox, C. (1998). Sarvastivada Buddhist Scholasticism. Handbuch der
Orientalistik (2. Abteilung: Indien. 11). Leiden: E. J. Brill.
Wogihara, U. (Ed.). (1971). Sphut
_
arthabhidharmakosavyakhya of Yasomitra (2 vols.). Tokyo:
Sankibo Buddhist Book Store.
Asian Philosophy 83
Woodward, F. L. (Trans.). (1960). The book of the gradual sayings (Anguttara-Nikaya) or
more-numbered suttas. Vol. I (ones, twos, threes). Pali Text Society. London: Luzac.
Woodward, F. L. & Rhys Davids, C. A. F. (Trans.). (1881). The book of the kindred sayings
(Sam
_
yutta-Nikaya) or grouped suttas. Part III. Pali Text Society. London: Oxford University
Press.
Yamada, R. (1959). Daijo Bukkyo Seiritsuron Josetsu. Kyoto: Heirakuji Shoten.
84 B. Dessein