ORIGIN AND DOCTRINES or EARLY INDIAN BUDDHIST SCHOOLS A TRANSLATION OF THE HSUAN-CHWANG VERSION OF VASUMITRA’S TREATISE RGR Rm ‘TRANSLATED WITH ANNOTATIONS JIRYO MASUDAList of Abbreviations ©. Preface Introductory Vets eee eee Divisions CONTENTS. Section 1 Section IT of carly Budabis: schools 1, The two origiotl divisiows 2 The divisions in the Mabisimgbila sehool sss ts ag 4 Tho divistoos in the Sthavirayada schoot Dl ae Section I Doctrines of early Badihist schools L ‘The Mahasarpghike, Ekavyevanri, Lokottaravada aod Kasbhutike schools A, The criginal doctrines which were belé jo common, B. The Inter diferenined doctines . 2... . 0 beet ML. The Babuirutya school eee ee MM, The Prajdfptivida tebool Ile WW, The Caityadnile, Aparasala and Uuaracaile schools | 1. sy 8 V. ‘Tee Sorvastivade school vy... VE. The Maimavate school ss lee VU. The Vatapotrya school 2 1! VIL ‘The Dharmotariya, Bbadrsyaniye, Scmattys 1X, The Mahtéstala school ‘A, The original doctrines which were held jo common 0 0... . 58 B, The Inter diferentinied doctrines»... es Ot X The Dharmaguptika school om XU, The Kasyapiya school...) fesse tee si 6 XL The Sautrntiva sebool 1) | tees 66 Ph oneedig wre of te org! wx by Midachwang, the Ganslator | | 2 70 edex .LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS After Buddha. u“chir-lun, translated by Paramactha, (Cf. p. 6.) ‘Shi-papu-lun, (CL p. 5.) hilders, Pi-English Dictionary. 4th impression. London 1969. =Eitel, Handbook for the Student of Chinese Buddhism. London 1870. jastings, Encyclopaedia of Religions and Ethics. ERE, ‘Fajén =Lpu-tsung-lunlun-’shu-chi-faiéo. (Cf. p. 10, note 2.) J.R.A.S.=Journat of the Royal Asistic Society, London. Mah v. =Mahavyutpatti, Bibliotheca Buddhiea XIN, Petersburg 1911. Nanjio =Nanjio,B, A Catalogue of the Chinese translation of the Bud- hist Teipitaka. London 1883. SEK.E.=Kyoto supplementary edition of the Chinese Tripitaka (ag05—1912,) 'Shu-chi =T-pu-tsung-lundun-‘shu-chi, (Ch p. 10, note 2.) ‘Trang-lua=l-pu'-tsung-lun-lun, translated by Hslan-chwang. (Ci p. 6) ‘Taranatha=Tarandtha, Geschichte des Buddhismas in Indien, ‘Translated by A. Schiefner. Petersburg 1869. TE, = Tokio edition of the Chinese ‘Tripitaka (1880—1885). Wassiljew= Wassllew, Der Buddhismus, seine Dogmen, Geschichte und Literatur. ‘Translated by A. Schiefner. Petersburg 1860. 4: PREFACE ‘The Chinese has preserved three versions of an important treatise ton the early Indian Buddhist schools which is ascribed to Vasumitra The first version is called the ‘Shi-pa-pu'lun Cf A #f §) or “a treatise on the eighteen schools."* Ry some authorities” the translating of this fist version is ascribed to Kumarajiva (gor—413 A.D) while by others to Paramarths (546—s69 A. D).3 But both asctiptions seem subject to doubt. As pointed out in the Kai-yiian-lut (730 A.D) this version consists of the fifteenth section of the Mafjusripariprocha- sitras which is rendered by Samghapala in 518 A.D. and the so- ealled “collection” of Kumarajiva. This fact assures at once the untenability of ascribing the translating of the first Chinese version to Paramartha, Moreover, when we compare this version with the Puchi-i-tun (CE infra) or the so-called second translation of Para- martha we find considerable differences between them which confitm us the uatenability of ascribing it to Paramartha. Then, is this, (1 am ing of the second part of this version) a translation by Kumérajiva? Chi-ts-ang® (549-623 A.D) and others are inclined to give a positive answer to this question, Our survey, however, of 1 LB XXQYs 4, p 784 Boa 2 cf note 6. 43 fa the Litaiean-paa-cht (Nagi, 1504) which was compiled by Fal Chasg-fang GR Be Bi) io 597 A.D. the first vewsion of cur text is mentioned as among the works of Paramiitha. Ch. T. E, XXXV, 6 p76). a the Tokio Tiion of the Chinese Triptaka the translator of this fist version siveo a5 Parasia 4 TOE XXXVI 4, po ras, 5 Nasjiy 442 4 wellluows “Chicese wter oa the Nadhyanida texts. To one of bis works, daiely the sua-luashstan-i (Cat 8.1. Z, B60) he epeats of Kartrave's treatise ‘on the schools (3 5 as da). ‘treatise whieh is spoken of by Chi-s'ang ix interpreted by « certain authority to mean te first version of Vasumita's treatise prepared by Karabriva “The compiler of the ,Fa-jén is also inclined to believe that the Gest vetslon was sade by Kuntrajoa, Ch Fajen 1, pote6 RYO MASUDA the catalogues of Chinese Buddhist literature fails to afford us any evidence to support this positive answer. ‘Though we have several reasons to believe that the present version was made under the Ch'in dynasty * (351—431 A.D) yet it seems hazardous to ascribe the translatorship to Kumarajiva. On this point the view of the Kai-yilan-lu* seems plausible enough. According to it this version is the first Chinese translation of Vasumitra’s treatise which was made under the Chin dynasty; but the name of the translator is Jost. This version is referred to in the present work as the Ch'in-Iun in accordance with the old usage. The second version is called the Puchi-i-lun (#§ a 5€ #@) or “a treatise on the differences of the views of the schools”) This js a translation which was made by Paramértha (546—s69 A.D) of the Ch'en dynasty (557—568). Paramartha was an Indian who was well-versed the Abhidharma works. Therefore his translation is more accurate than the first. It is a matter of great regret that the commentary which was prepared by him on his translation in ten fasciculi is lost. This second version is referred to in the present work under the old abbreviated title of the Ch‘en-lun, The third version is that which is prepared by Hsiian-chwang in 662 A.D. and which is known under the name of I-pu'-tsung- lun-lun (& #6 GR &@ HA) or “a treatise (called) the wheel of the doctrines of different schools."4 It is this version, the best of all the versions, which is translated here in comparison with the above two versions. Because this version was made under the T'ang dynasty (618-962 A.D) it is spoken of as the Tang-lun, Tt is a matter of congratulation that the Tibetan also has preserved ‘a version. It was translated by Dharmakara and is known under the title of AEST TITS SRA Evidently this is the equivalent of the Sanskrit title samaya-bhedo 'paracana-cakra or “the wheel of statements (lit. arrangement) of the dissensions of doctrines."* {We End the felloniag aote ia sis versions “Stara means the shoal oF the prope) who st above fs eles i te word of CBia2" TE XXIV, 42-788, 2c ps mae 4 ST. BE HELV, 4 p Bob—82b, + TE XX, gp ro0—7e 5 Baascbeyar QJ v8, 7--176b, 6 CF. Cordier HH, p- are S Wanijere regu sed tadaton of (his ile teem gute Satceute, Ct Wissen ps aes ote ORIGIN AND DOCTRINES OF EARLY INDIAN BUDDHIST SCHOOLS 7 Wassiljew has translated this version into Russian and embodied it in his “Buddhism” as the second appendix." ‘The authorship of our text itself is unanimously, both in the Chinese and Tibetan sources, ascribed to Vasumitra. On this point it seems hardly necessary to raise any doubt. ‘The point which is to be investi- gated in this connection is the date of our author. According to the Fa-jén* there are, as far as the Buddhist Chinese literature is con cerned, five Vasumitras;? viz. 1. The Vasumitra who appeared at the beginning of the third century after the death of the Buddha and who is the author of the prakarana-pida- and dhatu-kiya-padaSdstra.+ 2, The Vasumitra in the fourth century after the Buddha. He avas one of the four great Sthaviras at the tine of tue compilation cof the Mahavibbasi in the reign of King Kanigka 3. The Vasumitra of the Sautrntika school who taught a theory that even in the abstract meditation which is called extinction (nicodhasamApatti) there is a subtle mind. 4, The Vasumitra who appeared a thousand years after the Buddha and whose name is given in the Abhidharmakosa-sastea, 5, The Vasomitra from whom Hstian-chwang has learned the doctrines of the Sarvastivada school in Kashmir Which among these five Vasumitras is the author of our text? Most Chinese scholars, beginning with K'wei-ehis (632682 A.D) "* Waseiljews Der Buddhismus, seine Dogmen, Geschichte und Literatar. Obersetzt von A. Sehefacr, Petersburg 1860, p.244—284, + Facjtn J, p.ab. 1 HMiuayeff alo enumerates fve Vasumiteas bused on Taranatha, ‘They are: ‘he Vusuniua who lived atthe time of Raa 2 the Vasumiva who onigeted 10 a country acighbcurag to Tokhara secon: pavied by Gosake, ‘Mle faous scholar of the Vaibhigha school, 4. the author of the Abhidarmasasiapeabarans 5 The author of the commentary on the Abbidbermaboia aad ato of the work sailed “wheel showing the alferences of the eighteen schools" (Cf. Minayel Recherches sur le Bosddhisme, (Anaales de Merde Guinot, Tome 1V) Fats 1394, P1966 4Ch Tahahase: On the Abbidbasne Literature of the Sarvastivading, Londoa 1905. “The table of the teven books of the sbbidharma, sKewei-ebi writer atthe begining of his commentary a8 fllows:—CThe Zp ‘neng-urtun is tat which is made by Vasemitra Bodhicaua of the Sorvaitonde sho! sires 400 years after the pariiraina of the Butdba:” CC the Shavebi Ty Fa-j80 1, pab.8 RYO MasUDA are convinced that our author is the second in the above list, namely, the Vasumitra in the fourth century after the Buddha, ze, in the first century B.C, But when we turn to the Tibetan source, #.e,, Taranatha’s work, we find that our author is the same Vasumitra who prepared a commentary on the Abhidharmakosa-Sastra.* Now the Abhidharma- koSa-Sistra is a work of Vasubandhe who lived in the fourth century A. D.* If we accept Taranatha’s view, Vasumitra’s date must be located at the end of the fourth century A.D. or at the beginaing of the fifth century. Is such a location possible? We know already that the first translation of our text appeared some time between 351 and 431 A.D. When we take this fact into consideration, Taranatha's view seems in no way tenable, as the date of Vasimitra must have been much earlier than the time when his work was translated into Chinese. Moreover the internal evidence of our text betrays a much earlier date, But it does not justify the Chinese tradition of Jocating Vasumitra in the fourth century after the Buddha, i. ¢, in the first century B.C. This error arises from the wrong notion about the date of King Kanigka, According to modern scientific investigation, Kanigka's date is located in the second century A.D. If we can accept the Chinese identification of our author with the Vasumitra who took part in the compilation of the Mabavibhaga, then his date must be located in the second century A, D. and J am inclined to think this location to be quite reasonable. As a careful investigator may easily observe, we have several reasons to believe that the third of the introductory verses of our text, if not all of them, was not composed by Vasumitra himself. The fact that the third verse was a later addition warrants 4 Tirauatha: Getehiehte des Boddhismus in Indien, Obersetst von A. Schiefner, Petersburg 1869, p. 174. eferdy to Take 420—so0 wile sod to Wogtre spo. CE ‘Wimervite; Geiehichte der Indischen Literatur, Bd. Il, Leipsig 1920, p. 256. 3 For the latest discussion on this problem cf. Walleser: La dst di Nagsyjuna (Alle fonte delle religion’, ano M1, nom. 2, p. 1—15). 4 There ws already a group of scholats at the time of K'w ei-chi (632-882 A. D.) ‘who held a view that the composer of all the intcoductory verses was not Vasumitra (Cf. 'Shu-chi I; Fa-jén [, p. Ba}. The present translatoé also is inclined 10 believe that 4 least the turd of them is a Tater interpolation oa the following grounds: Firstly ft It ‘wantieg in the oldest version, nemely, in the Chin-lun. Secondly no sensible writer ‘will eulogise himself as 4 great Bodhisattva who is endowed with great wisdom etc., and lastly this verse is not quite in harmony with the preceding and succeeding vecses. CE p. 12h, the introductory verses, ORIGIN AND DOCTRINES OF EARLY INDIAN BUDDUIST SCHOOLS 9. the assumption that our text had been current for a considerable length of time in India before it reached the Far East and was rendered into Chinese. It seems to the present translator that Taranatha’s emphatical negation ofthe identification of our author with the Vasumitra in Kanigka’s time* serves only to show us that the tradition which identifies them had been long current even in Tibet ‘The Buddhist jiterature is immensely rich. There is, however, no 50 well-written work on the early Buddhist schools in the Budubise literature, southern and northern, as Vasumitra’s treatise. It deals first with the origin of the Buddhist schools, giving the cause and ap- proximate dates of the schisms, and then it narrates the doctrinal propositions of the schools as held in commun at the time of the divisions and also the so-called differentiated views among the later sectarians. In this respect our text may be Jooked upon as a unique one of its kind, though it represents the ozigin and the docteines of the schools only from the standpoint of the Survastivada. As such ‘this work was considered to be the most important of authorities by the scholars of China, Japan and also Tibet.* Wassijjew must be complimented on his sagacity in seeing the importance of this worl: and in transtating the Tibetan version with notes into Russian. It is to be regretted, however, that he did not make use of K'wei- chi’s learned commentary and also of the super-commentaries which were prepared by several scholars in Japan and that he committed several blunders in translating the Tibetan version. Though Vasumitra’s work is insignificant in its size, yet it enumerates in the shortest possible form the salient doctrines of the early schools, each of which ‘once possessed its own vast literature. Owing to its extreme con ciseness it is not always easy to grasp its meaning. Fortunately, however, Paramartha, a learned Indian Buddhist, wrote a commentary on it. Though this commentary is now lost, yet it was utiheed by Kiwei-chi (d. 682 A.D) who was an assistant of the translator Hstian-chwang and who prepared his own commentary in order In spite of these reasons K'wei-chi is inclined 10 believe that even the thied verse was composed by Vasumitca himself, Ch Sha-ehi Ty Pacjea Tp. yb © Cf. Tarai, p. 68, = Cf Taraoaiba, p. 274, 3 Cf, Sehiefner’s German tanslation: ,.Der Beddhisnas, seiue Dogmen, Gesebiebte und iterator," p. 244—284,10 RYO MASUDA to obviate the defects of Paramartha's commentary." It should be noted here that Kiwei-chi's commentary is sometimes too succinct. Perhaps it was on this ground that the several super-commentaties were written, In translating the Hsilan-chwang version the present translator has chiefly made use of K'wei-chi’s commentary and also of Keaye Oyama’s super-commentary (text in Chinese) which are referred to in the present work under the abbreviated titles of the 'Shu-chi and Fa-jén respectively.” ‘The other Buddhist literature which has important bearing on the schisms and the doctrines of the early schools are Kathavattha, Dipavamsa, Mahavamsa, Sasanavamsa and Milindapaaha in Pali, and nikaya-bheda-vibhasiga-vyakhyana by Bhavya,samaya-bhedo 'paracana- ‘cakre (sic) nikaya-bhedo ‘padarsana-samgraha by Vinitadeva ete. in ‘Tibetans Te goes without saying that all these authorities must be scientifically investigated and compared with Vasumitra in the pre- paration of ideal notes on Vasumitra’s treatise. It was four years ago that the present translator worked out a scheme for the comparative study of these different authorities and began the translation of the Heiian-chwang vession.+ It is a painful recollection to him now that he could not carry out his scheme on account of the death of his beloved fatherinJaw and had to leave Calcutta, the place of his appointment, for home. Though the sincere desire of carrying out his original scheme remained ever strong, yet he could find no opportunity to do s0, as he was engaged in researches in another field. It is not without a sense of regret that he now has to publish a less elaborate work than the original scheme would have called for. 2 cr Shucebi Ty Pacjéa I ps 1 The fl hes of ese worke aes — Te ptm fandom CBR AB STAR Bs Ly or “he ster 09 the yt eng fay” (eat SK 98 7 PP putting bon han hacks fozen SRM HR MA a Hb aD BLD or sag theses of tha ithe eat f the Ep tng sessed, Me Carlee ME, pe ata—ats 2 Ch foanal of fhe depurmest of lear of the Caza Universiy. Caleta 1920 vou ptt A lea odor bas compared asumtta to 6 cee ent withthe Kathe a eee eres mectioned above. Bat che veal of hi comparison wre Tei Dodied in the pectent wore as bie teaches ia hb expect ate iocomlee see tcerairege hat be was obliged to crt te long notes 06 the tor cal nntos of Yaroniegs uanise owing tothe Ved sizeof the preset conibuon ont IGIN AND DOCTRINES OF EARLY INDIAN BUDDHIST SCHOOLS He has been obliged to prep: of time. He trusts, however, pare this fork ia & hited period ‘ it will be a contr scien study of Buddhism in Europe as he has compa re n fly a the versions of Vasumitra’s treatise in Chinese ahd Tibetan and enb ead Jn the notes the results of his research in the Chinese Fare, bearing on the doctrines of the easly Buddhist schools, * vane, eeaaton of the Present rendering the translator has ale ; ascertain what the original it ~ iginal sanskrit form wou! ve been. He has then made his translation di ‘tom tie ae een He rectly from this He has followed this meth : is method because the languag. enpleyed in be Chinese literature on Buddhism is often md the native idiom but an actificially coined me “pot to pati jeans of expression, be understood by the employment of ordinary Chinese schol He tons that by this means he has avoided such fom a direct and literal rendering of the Chinese. In closing this preface the pres : ne i Present translator desires to mention obligation to Professor M. Walleser who was kind enough oe d him the first part of his re-translation of the Tibetan ver h K n ns the Tibetan version which not to larship. blunders as arise _ J. Masuda. 2 For example JE #8 (AE AE hea been wahre Natar (eiamgea tnd) sich von de (CL Wanton p.ariy note 2) Sees ne call 19 mind the atnak note 3) ca) state aug te tates om ne ia! mach at ne mae eaeSECTION I INTRODUCTORY VERSES* Since the (Pari-)nirvana of the Sakyan sage,* When a hundred years just did pass, Schools different there arose in views divine, And did cause the (decay and) loss. Due to the different views, one from, the othert ‘There did arise then’ many a school. According to my own agama® (pure), (I) explain their views, make (them) disliked. Vasumitra, the great Bodhisattva, endowed With wisdom great, enlightenment and knowledge (pure)? A Bhiksu in reality from the Sakyan race, Looks back to those times and discriminates. 3 tn the original cents there ase neither divisions nor headings. For convenience sake the translator has divided the whole text into three main sections, which re agaia fubdivided foto many parts 2 Lit. the Budd 2 Lit the Noble sexchiogs (ryaitiean) of Buddbica, 4 Paramparabhedubbinivedst? 5 Lit. accordingly © Or *the tradition" which was handed dows in the SarvistivEda schoo, Vasuaitca was a staunch follower of this schoo! 7 Lit. endowed with great wisdom ( $f), colightenmest (ff) and knowledge ($¥)- ‘These three are those attributes which characterize u Bodlisativa, Cf. Shu-ebi; Pax sea, p35. 2 Lin a Sayan race Gakyavansn}, x real Bhikyo.—The Sikven race, however, does not mean that Vasuwiten telonged fo tbe Sthyan races it meas a Sekyaputca, 9 That is (0 aay, be discriminates between the views of the twenty schools, 1ookng, back to those dimes when they arose, ‘The present verse ig andoubiedly a later ialerpolation, because we cannot Deheve fat the author styled himself a great Bodkisattva ete. Cf. p. 8, note 4. J-MASUDA, ORIGIN AND DOCTRINES OF EARLY IND, BUDDH. SCHOOLS 13 When} 1 (did) observe the worlds all around Into diverse views (the peoples) drifted (I found), Split up (the original) words of the Sakyan saint,* (So I'l) explain their docteines (as the people meant them). When the teachings of Buddha closely (1) examine, Fundamental are the truths aryan (I find),* Like (one) who gathers gold from (heaps of) sand (Out of untruths) one should pick up the truths, © in Muci. + Li the doctees of the (four) arya teathe featvary Kryaisntyfai) are to be relied open,SECTION It DIVISIONS OF EARLY BUDDHIST SCHOOLS 1. THE TWO ORIGINAL DIVISIONS ‘Thus Ihave heard: a hundred and odd years after the Park nirvana of Bhagavant Buddha—(alas! that ominous time) being far from the time of the sage, (the age so dark) us if the sun had been setting for a long time—there was a king named Agoka* at Kusu. mapira! in the Magadha kingdom, who ruled over Jambudvipa (nda, as it were, under a (large) white umbrella, and his influence extended tothe gods and men. It was at this time that the great Samgha was split up for the first time. On account of the differences (of opinion) among the four graups of people in discussing the five points (pat cavastini), propounded by it, of) Mahadeva (4 %), (the Badd Samgha) was divided into two schools, viz. the Mahisamghika (4 ® #5) and the Sthaviavada (_f ft M$}. What are the four groups? (They are):— 1. the Naga group (fe), 2 the border country (pratyantika)* group (ii Bb $f), 3. the learned (Bahusrutiya) group (% WW $e) and 4 the venerable (Sthavira) group (ke (& 4p). * Acconlag 10 the tno oer Chine tanaogs & handed and sateen yee A Hat the ‘Sha-chi says tae he gan! maou here at ea “inten” The teatag. ig the Tan oe Ch Whnliew, p28 who i ml, accoiiog to whe Burmese Leadon, to be come to ths tone Au eat afer the death ofthe Dude nd led oer lade tor teat Sieh years weicehi, the ample of he 4Shu-oht wits tet he wast pees at name of Pitulipuire or the modera Fatas, The ‘Shu-chi, bewever, Aeseribes PAtakiputrs ax « clty different from Kusumaptra, sud to the west of tle Ch the, sSburobi I; Fa-j€n, 1, p. 226.5 Si-yu-ki, VIE (Beal, It p. 829), 4 Wassitjew: peteya, J. MASUDA, ORIGIN AND DOCTRINES OF EARLY IND, BUDDH, SCHOOLS. 5 The five points (of Mahadeva) can be leamed from the following verse (lit, aré like his sloka-words): (Amants) are tempted by others and ignorance (they have), Doubt (they have with regard to truths divine); (Arhantship) thro” others’ help they realize and the path ‘Thro’ utterance (they ascertain)—this is Buddhism true.t 2. THE DIVISIONS IN THE MAHASANGHIKA SCHOOL, mmediately) afterwards, during the second century (following the death of the Buddha) three schools arose out of the Maha- samghika: 1. the Ekavyavaharika (— i fh), 2, the Lokottaravada (2% Hi iit 48), 3. the Kaukkutka (36 fl 6). Later on, again, during the second century, one school, the Ba- husrutiya (% 9 #B), issued from the Mahasamghika. Once again, immediately afterwards, during this second century, another school, the Prajfaptivada (3 4% #§) issued from the Ma- hasamghika, Towards the close of the second century, there was a heretic priest (Steyasamvasika) who returned to the right (doctrine), @ ¢, Buddhism) discarding his heretical (views). He, too, was called Mahadeva, Becoming a monk (pravzajita) and receiving his full ordi- nation (upasampada) in the Mahasamghika order, he was learned and diligent. He dwelt on the Caitya hill and discussed again in detail with the priests of his school the five points, {propounded by the first Mahadeva), whereupon, on account of dissencions, (the samgha) was split up into three schools: 1. the Caityasaila (J #5), 2. the Aparasaila (9 it fE ah), 3. the Uttarasatta (46 il) (£ 6). © Lin, t. Temptation by the other, 2. ignorance, 3. doubt, 4. eatrance droog the other, §. the path arises ubraugh utterance. These are called the teal (eachings of Buddha, RAB RH MRA WARK EH OM th CF de ta Vallée Poussin: the “Five Pointe™ of Mahédeva and Kathlvatths, J.R.A.S. 1910, pr. 41342316 JIRYO MASUD Thus the Mahisamghika was divided fque or five times (including the first schism), To reckon the root and branch (schools) separately, it becomes in all nine schools:— 1, the Mahasamghika, the Ekavyavaharita, . the Lokottaravada, the Kaukkutika, . the Bahusrutiya, the Prajnaptivada, the Caityasaila, the Aparasaila, the Uttarasaila Peeep ee 3. THE DIVISIONS IN THE STHAVIRAVADA SCHOOL ‘The Sthaviravada remained in perfect harmony for a number of years. At the beginning of the third century (after the death of the Buddha) there was a fittte dissension and it was divided into two schools, (viz) 1. the Sarvastivada (i —+ 49 #7 #), otherwise called the He- tuvada (3 Hh), 2. the original (mila) Sthaviravada (HR 8 LE AEB), which changed its name into the Haimavata school (38 Il) #8) Subsequently during the third century, one school named the ‘Vatsiputriya (48 F ah) issued from the Sarvastivida. Immediately afterwards, during this third century, four schools sprang from the Vitsiputriya, (viz) 1. the Dharmottariya (3: E §), 2. the Bhadrayaniya (RE J #8), 3. the Sammatiya (JE 4 #), 4 the Channagirike* (38 $f Il) 4p). Immediately afterwards, during this third centusy, another sckool, the Mabisisaka (4% Ji #}), issued from the Sarvastivada, Immediately afterwards, during the same century, one school named the Dharmaguptika (i & ii) issued from the Mahigisaka. * Lit for some tise, + Ch'in-tuns saynagaita (74 if Bh). The origlal South: in the Chea-lun seer to be the same us that io the T'ang. lun, ORIGIN AND DOCTRINES OF EARLY INDIAN BUDDHIST SCHOOLS 17 (The founder of this school) declares himself that he was the successor of Mavdgalyayana : At the end of the third century one school, the Kasyapiya (Kk 2 8), otherwise called Suvaryaka (Hf BL fH), seceded from the Sarvastivada. At the beginning of the fourth century one school, named the Sautrantika (42 #5), otherwise called the Sambrantivida (3 Rf ®) issued again from the Sarvastivada, (The founder of this school) declares himself: “I take Ananda as my preceptor” ‘Thus the Sthaviravada was divided seven times or eight times (including the original schism). To reckon the root and brancites separately, it becomes eleven schools altogether:— x: the Sarvastivida, 2. the Haimavata, 3. the Vatsiputni 4. the Dharmottariya, 5. the Bhadrayaniya, 6. the Sammatiya, 7. the Channaginka, 8. the Mahisasaka, 9. the Dharmayuptika, 10, the Kagyapiya, 11, the Sautrantika, Asia see Ja. 1905 2SECTION UI DOCTRINES OF EARLY BUDDHIST SCHOOLS Now I shall explain the original doctrines (mdla-samaya) which were held in common (at the tine of schisms) and the later differentiated doctrines (antara-samaya)" of such schools {as those mentioned above). L THE MAHASANGHIKA, KKAVYAVAHAKIKA, LOKOTTARAVADA, AND KAUKKUTIKA SCHOOLS, A, The original doctrines which were huld in common. The original doctrines which were held in common of the Maha: schools we e (by the members) inghika, Ekavyavabarika, Lokottaravada and Kaukkutika ‘The four schools unanimously maintai 1, Buddha: (okottara).* that » the World-honoured (Bhagavant) are all supermundane sng 8 flemig feos tponons ate anew wih de Buhlogy oe ‘of uther sekoals, The following is the table of the propositions ia Vaswmiir’s treaty which are conceroad will the discussions abou the Buddha and Bodhisat a * ve ean arn i psa J. MASUDA, ORIGIN AND DOCTRINES OF EARLY IND, BUDDH.SCHOOLS 19) 2. There are no sisrava dharmas (ff Hi) (or “defiled elements”) in all the Tathagatas.* 3. All the speeches of the Tathagata are (concerned with) the preaching of the righteous law.* 4, The Buddha (can) expound all the doctrines (dharma) with a single atterance (lit, sound)3 5. There is nothing which is not in conformity with the truth (% dn H% ayathartha) in what has been preached by the Werld- honoured On 6. The nipakaya of the Tathagata is indeed limitless.$ 7. The divine power (prabhava or tejas) of the Tathagata is also limitless.¢ 1b, Propotinns concerned sith the personality of the Bolbrsattoa ka avd shee followers ee A 1820 Apueaicla & Ustorusuile a tie Wy The SVBUWAI es wee eY The Hainavata Live eee to V1 1 “The Vibhajyavidiae and Mabisan ghikas bold that the physics) bady of the Yastdha is the snfarava-dtari, because in it all the passions (kle‘a) and vasanas ars, without exception, etervally destroyed, and beeswsc, az ie stated in she sitras, although the ‘Faihyaon is bora ia the world, abides in it aad appesss in i yet be is not steined by the worldly dharmas. Oo these grounds they say chat Uhe body of the Rudha is the antarava body"... Vibbaxs, CLXXIIL The scheol whiel takes the contrary view is the Sarvistivids, Cf, Fa.jée 1, p.12b, The Dharmagoplikas held the save view as the Mahisamghikus uf t0 the body of an Achat. CE X, 5. 2 Lit-all turn the wheel of law (dhanaaeskeapravartana). ‘This is a well-koown phrase and is generally esed of Budias first sermon at Heuares when he imparted lis essential Jocirives to the Give Bralmans. Bur the Sahsaonghike Iealicts and heir followers soem to Lave applied this phrase aot only t the first sermon. fand also the sermont jo the whale period of Butdhe's ainisiy, but even t0 ordinary specches in the every-day life of the Buddha. The Mabavibhist (Chin. . CLXXX) has Thanded down to us au interesting accouat and dispetes about this beueen che Mahisan- ighibas bd she Sarvistvidins, the wo coateading schools, ‘Accotding to the Sarvittvadins the charsacakra or “Wheel of Law" meats the destroyer of passion, That which destsoys passton is the eightfold path oF the texchiog in the frst sermon and nothing else, Bat the Mabasomghikas and ther foiowers contents fat the speesles of the Blessed Ones, whether docirioal discourses oF ordinary speeckes, all are conducive (o enlighleument oa the part of the hearers. All are therefore to be ooked upon at the charmacakre or “Wheel of Law". (CE ‘Sha-chi My Pa-jéu Tf, pe t4a, £) Ax to the Sarvastivide view of V, 47- "DA view, contrary to the Sarvastivadiag, ef Vy 48. 4A view, coutray to the Sarvasivadias, ef V, 43- 5 Bvideady che yt of Tathagata” means here the samt the hody of the bislorcal Buddha, whieh ia astiag but the winnanahays. © Accordiog to the ‘Shu-chi this proposition mesas thatthe divine power of Bulla20 RYO MASUDA, 8. The length of life of the Buddhas is also limitless." 9. The Buddha is never tired of enlightening the sentient beings and awakening pure faith (radha) (in them).* 10. The Buddha has neither sleep nur dream (svapna).> 14. The Tathagata does not pause in answering a question.+ 32. At no time does the Buddha preach (after the arrangement of) nouns (nama) and so un, because he is always in samadhi, but the sentient beings rejoice, considering that the Buddha preaches (after the arrangement of) nouns and so on.s 23, (The Blessed One) understands all things (harma) with a “moment's mind” (ckakganikacitta).§ pervades all the work’ in all dizectons ia 4 siomeat, even withool Ruddbs's exeresing bis mind. Against this the other schools ate said to hve iassted that Rucdhe's power pervades diem only when he exercises his mio (Ch. ‘Sha-chi; Wa-jén TI, p- 183) 2 Ley the Ie of sambhogakiya vootinees 40 exit 60 long as the eentent being contiwes to exist. Ch Shucehis Jfacjen Ul, po iSb. 2 The compassion of the Buddha is limitless, s0 alo bis fife. He is never tired of salvation, Therefore he cever euler into uirviia, Against this other sehocls, such 43 the Sarvdstvala ete. ainiained thst the Budéha enters into ‘cerns! citvana after the sccomplishimest of the work of salvation, Pa:jéu Tl, p. 19 3 Recuuse he is always ia the steie of Halatract meditation” Gamadhi. Against this the Satvautivaiixs contended that the Buddha sieeps though he does ‘ot dream, Drcams arse out of delusion aud desire. Woda las aciter af these therefore he has no dreams. But he sleeps because he as @ physienl body. (Cf. Shu. ehi Fa-jée ff, p. 190, F} 4 That is to $49, ansmers flow of sheir own accord. (See the next proposition and fhe note on it) The Tibeton version js somewhat difeect aod rues as follows: yAut Fragen geben sie sinogemiss Auskuni." Ch Die Sekien des alten Muddbisui by Professor Walleser. ¢This work is wot yet pushed 5 Not ouly do the speeches of Buddha flow froin his Ygoklew mouth” of thels own coord, but they form at once, as it weie, wrens of pearls and gems, But tgaorant audiences repiee, considering that the Buddha preaches afer the arate ateangement of words, clauses and senlevces cle. ad ghildens thein by his eloguence. The contrary view of other sekools is that, thovgh the Buddba ueeds wo special ‘effort Sa replies, yet be does answer or preach after areengement of is specebes, (Ch Pe-jéw Hp. 20a) The ‘Sha-chi liecprets the preseat proposition as follows:—"The Buddha taias bis ssid for a oumber of halyas, There is none sho eau surpass the Hadha in unde. staoding all binge (hacma). (Ia the este vita this bs evdenily the mitemnscripion of Abarma) Therefore the “moment mau” of the Budsha ean ondersand the diferences ‘nd the substance (avabbiva) of all things and caw realiee (ies), (According to} other febools the aied ef the Buia cannot understand all things in = moment: tLe sesbhiva ithe perceiving, mind—so interpreted ip the supercommentery), samprayukta (estiska) snd sabsbbu (de sense-cryans?) are not to Le uaierstood fit. ate excepted (when the mind perceives other things). oni iN AND DOCTKINES OF EAKLY INDIAN HUDDItt rScHUOLS 21 14. (The Blessed One) knows all things (dharma) with the wisdom befitting a “moment's mind” (ekak: 15. The ksayajnina (B42) or “imowiedye of extinction” and the dnutpadajhana (4 4 9) or “knowledge of nun-rebirth" are ab ways present in Buddhas, Ue workd-hunoured, and they continue to be so till their parinir 16, Nowe of the Hodhisattvas, when they enter (heir) mothers wombs, form their own bodies by passing through (Ut. receive) (the four embryonic stages), Kalala, arbuda, pesi and ghana (which or dinwy people pass through.) 17. AU the Bodhisattvas assume Git, make} the forms of white clephants when they enter their mothers’ wombs. 18. All the Bodhisattvas ae bor fron the right side when they come out of their mothers’ wombs, 19, None of the Bodbisativas entertuin thoogghts of greed (kant sumjia), of anger (vyapidasanjAa) or of harming others (vihime sisamjia. 20. For the benefit of sentient beings (sattva) Hodhisattyas are bom into bad states (gati) at will ang cam be born () of them) as they like. 21. Through the possession of the “afler-kuowledge” which follows the comprehension (Of the truths} for one moment (ckaksunikabhisa- mayantikajiina) ene perceives, in their él significance (ht, al rounds the four truths with their specie differences. apikacittasamprayulstaprajiia).* x0) Gnto any to the Fasjdn the Dhurmagypttkas and Mabisisakas also shared the view af die Mahasnighikas, The Mahisamghikas ace said so Us the oaly people wha iasisied Wt te subjective inind could perceive its svabhava, while others especially the SareBativsdies, Chosght thatthe atind eoshl not peresive its iad, just a3 a sword enaat cut tse. (Cf, W, 29 and p. 8, note 5.) This siew is sei forte inv che Vibhaga TX in the following way: "Because a svord cansot eat ielf and because Vasumivta says dat it fs not the object of thong (vgaya} (ihe mind) eannot know iis vablrdva.” Ju coauection with this proposition we are required to take notice of the fallomag passage ia the Ab armakesa sites, XXVEMMAL the time of meditation en all things et gonege the setasiving mind Gvabhia) is excepted.” Cf. Fajen ID, po 2tb f © A siuitie proposition 12 the peeceding one. The omly diflerence is thai the resent proposition is held of a cailasika, namely praji or wisdon, + CL, 9 and p42, note 2, 3 The following five propositions are exelesively concersedl with Rodhisatvss. CE p18, mole 2 AS 10 the embryonic sages of Mah. v. 44 proposition concerned with a mode of wiedilion upon the four arysn teuths, The four aryan trots have sisteen diferent aspects ( + ZX 47 Hl yolasibann, samely22, The five consciousnesses! (palcavijiinaktya), the eye and so forth (conduce both to) passion (saraga) and to freedom from passion (viraga). 23. The world of form and the formless world (rapa and arupa- thaty) (both) possess « complete set (lit. an aggregate) of the six consciousnesses (sadvij 1 duiba (sufering), 2. snityo (uamsoriets), 3. Sinya (voideess), 4. anateaslen (aou- <0), 5. semuiaye (aggregation), 6, prabbava (bin), 7. hela (Eause), 8. pratyaya (eon Avion}, 9. nitodhe (enpihilstos), 20. Santa ¢quitede}, 11, peaytn (ageeenblenese), 12. vile rene (ibeeation) 13. wSega (path), 15, ayzya {finess), 15. pratipatl (procesding), 16. naisyapfln (eternal exsaneipation), (CF Abhi¢hatanakasa-Stsra chep. Vip chins XU, Mah, vi According to the Abhidharnskofe.Giura, an authority of the SéevRalivade school these sateen aspects are to be meditated apom one after avother, “The Servis wading oid not Wick that these sixteen arpesio eau be meditated upon simultencously. On the other hand, however, tho Malssamghikas have jnsised, ax is chown fa the present proposition that they saa be mdliated apon simlnnzonsly whew a Buddhist hat aeqai= ‘ed comprehension of tall ix the daréanarmanga. The dagnasargs i he She poh of siethcaton of « But att the sone being che biivans-insiga. Tr thin fist path a Buddhist stains full earaprohension of the truth by passing through its sisteen sub-stages of meditition. ‘This fall compcshension of the tnt Is teebaleally called abhicamaya ip Stustot, Antksjitea or “aftechnowledge" in this propoeition sigoifies the knowledge whiel seers after the full comprehension of the trwh. It is this afles-knowledge™ whieh, sesording 0 the Mabssumghikas, enables q Buddhist to peresive simultaneously all the diferent aspecss mentioned above. Its, however, interesting to observe, that she view of the Mali@samghikas vas 6on- lnacied by the Jater Maessmghikas(f.7 1) bat sypported hy the Mabisisakas fe 1X 4,2. For the contrary. proposition uf the Servastividine ia Vasumiteets ssenise ef. Vy 5 ‘Those who ace interested in this subject cf. farther the Abhidharmakofa-ciira chay. VE, bin, tr, XATH, where am huteresting discsssion on this problem is preserved + Lit, the body of the five eonsciousnosses,—No coube the body" ere is the translation of Ways in the sense of group. In order te avoig eoafision, however, Uheve ot translated this word purposely. Tye Sarvasivadin mairgined chat the fmt fteen {five indeyas, ive Visayas and fire vijtias) of the eighleea elements (dhstu) were only siitava, ‘Therefore they have so vicage Tough Uhey have rage. ‘The school which has adopted the opposite atdinde 4 W this question is tie Valsipulzys, ‘The Mabasemghikas acknowledged both t&a aed savage. (CFV, 265 VIR $3 1X 4, 10) # he SuovBstividins maintsined hat the wo coasciowesses, namely the nose. consciousness (gbrapavijiiias) amd toogue-conscionsnees {ilwtvjfira) of the so-called six consciousnestes ‘ar> wanting im the devalolas above the second dhyfo. (Ci. the ‘ble in p. 43, nolo 3) Khougi thelr eenso-orgsms (indriya)enist even there ut the BabA sanghikes contended that the existence of sente-organs presuppoces the existence of thie respective conselousnetses ard tho exstenee of the eonisiowsnsssee thee Hobjeetiva covlatives!" Ths tie Mahivamghikas maintained the exisionce.af the elahteen ehatis Ucoughoat the thcee worlds. “This view seems to contradict the general helief of the ORIGIN AND DOCTRINES GF EARLY INDIAN RUDDAIST SCHOOLS 23 24. The sense-organs {nipendriya) of five kinds are nothing but lumgs of Besh (lit. have lumps of flesh as their bodies) ‘The eyes do not see colours; the ears do not hear sounds; the nose does not simell odeurs; the tongue docs not taste favour; the body does not feel touch.* ag. (Even) in the state of the samahita (4% §]) one can utter words (lit there is an utterance of speech): there is also a subdued mind (#8 & ad) and also a quarrelsome nsind (AP AE HI 26. One who has accomplished what ought'to be done (ik 46 & Hf kertakelyah) does not take (da) anything (harms) (to himself). on-existence of supa ig dhe atapsahate, ‘The Malifsamglihas ‘vied te solve this (question by # postslation of Ui existence of subtle rip fe catcemely sale shen compared wilh thoce in the otkes (wo worlds ‘Therclore there is uo absurdly in cilliag she highert group of brzimalokee avapadata. (CE Pa jén U, p30 bo) The questions sense.cogsilon due te the sevse-ongaes (indeiya) or (0 sense= ‘eonssiousnces(viians)?"—was s problem amoagst the early Buddhist scholastiss, The Mantounglikes were Sactined to think that seoseseagten ia due to cense-consclows- esses ‘ihe seesecrgins wbioh orc, asearding to thst, mee furape of Aesh, axe like ‘vindovre dhrongh which the senseconseiousnesses ean acitire their Seuspeogeition, ‘The Sanistvadins postulated, however the cxstenee of subde sense-organs besides he oie pasy sease-oryans, toroigh which mn cna decle Seaiewegeitio. (CE ‘Shu-etis (Fajen Th p30) 2 That is to sey, one can utter words even when in the senha oF dbytns beeaues the wind Iw the stale of diyfa is aot allogether unecusciows of the eatcraal- wor! ‘The stimult which come front the external world are still pevezpible even i the sate of ahs soul allord opportaity lo the Maiad 29 ponder over tes “The state of the suuihite i commonly belived by the sectaiaas of the Sarvs ‘ida snd ofter schools t be total vaconseionmess of the extern! world, the senses being witndsawn sMlogether from the exteraat world, (Ci. V, 66}, Hut the Mabisamghilas devised from this general belle. : "We lave ao account of un fatresting contiavessy with refeenee to this propesition. ‘Once wpoo atin Maudgelyayeua is said to bave satin the AbiRcanydysranesamidhi fr he meGitatSon of the realm of nothingness." As he so sat he heard the bellow of fan elephant ond, on account of this, he emerged from Ue abstict meditation de Me Syevtbhagh, Chi. tc JAXX), “The Nahasezghitas took tis to ean thet Maudgelyayann deard the bellow Sa the slate of samadhi, Lut he Savistvadins eontonded that Ke bsaré the ‘se when he exzve oot frova the samadhi, becanse there is no exr-conseionsness in that Slate, The Kinda eincepion of Cie alste of Voge is that of teal unconsciousness of the extemal world; shot cxiss thers fs only the consclousness of the spsival woes (On this poiat she Hinds view i shia to that of the Seevisivadiue, 13 Kukgiya iso frequent epithet of Adslys signtying lhe yetson who bas ceached tne goal of perfection by going through the sages of progressive soyetfntios. The hase “oes ‘not accep things” it intecproted Sa the ‘Sha -eli 29 mea “not so have ny attachment to tbings.” “Thereloce this propasiion seems te mens thet those who "The rays ic the acipa dha24 JIKYO MasuDA 27. The citta and caitasika dharmas of Srataapainas are capable of knowing (their) nature (svabbava).* 28. a) Arhants (also) can be tempted by others, b) (They) have still ignorance, ©) (They) have still doubt, 4) (They) gain spiritual perception by the help of others, dit, enlightenment through the other), ©) The path is realized by utterances.* 29, Suffering leads a man to the path. 40. The words of suffering can help (the process of realization of the pathy. 31. Through the instrumentality (prayoga) of wisdom ¢prajna) One annihilates suffering and is also capable of obtaining the final beatitudde (sukdha)s, leave reached the gos! of perfection in Rektim are (ree froin ataclmeat t aay thing. ‘This idea of non-attachaveat of an Arhat ix generally teken to be 9 universal bel? of ll Buddbisls, ut the ‘Shu-ehi deserikes the Sarvastividins acd atiere to have mafntaiced that even Astikyas have attachment, Uaforunately, however, the “Sha ‘chi does not give any references to the cetbority on which this ‘The tending of this proposition jp the Ch'in-lun and also io the Cheen-Iua is somewhat difereat, The lat phrase in those versions i: “There is no place.” Docs the word place” siguily the place of altachment or place of reiribution? 1 This is one ef the most ambiguous propositions, “The ‘She-ehi gives ovo iater- retations, According to the fest of these this proposiion meaus: A Srataspanna ora Buddhist sage who bas jest entered upon the stceamn of the aryen path” ia capable of Senowing by himself that le has entered upon itm reali Mhis he does not require ‘snyoue to saform hin of the fact. AE this is: interpretation ean be accepted, we mist translate this propcstion us follows: “The Srotalzanuss are capa fowa aatore (svabhava} through their cit and caitesika Gharmiey le of koowing their as Wassljew has trprsiaion js that a Srotaapsnea is capable of Lnowing by himself the aature of his cits aad catssika io 4 moment. Thea it tiay he atkelz Ate average: mea Gythagjona) and the sages other than the Srotadpanzas goable to kaow the galure of shee minds? According 19 the *Shy-chi and ,Fa-jGn they eannoc kaow the oatare of their minds as clearly ss the Srotaipances wo * The five points of Mahidews. (Cl. p15, note 15 M,2, 1¥,3) Vis) 2° The experiencing of suferiog (lubkba-vedan world is bound to give a fauna feeling of aversion to il, And this feeling, ia is turn, leads hi to reeunvition ud eveateally 10 the acyan path, 4A similar proposition to I 4, 38, «The fregusat utterance of the word “sulle- ing” arouses one’s dislike for this world and thus helps the process of cealiation of fhe path. 5 The present proposition sigsifies that the observances of silt aud dhyfoa do not contribute (0 the annibifation of suffering and the altaigmsit of the eteraal beatitode of ORIGIN AND DOCTRINES OF EARLY INDIAN BUDDHIST SCHOOLS 25 32. Suffering also is (a kind of) food (&hava).* 33. In the eighth stage (astamakabhimi) one can also remain for & Jong time.* 34. From (conversion) onwards to (yavat) (the stage of) the gotru binimidharma (tf fit #£) or “the stage of transformation of personality” there is in all (Stages) (the possibility of) retrogression (for those who are on the path of progressive sanctification).3 nirvinas keowledge is the only mesns through which msn eau obitin fieedom from suffering and can enter into ainviga. |Fa-jé 1, 355, 4 Deest in the Tibetan version and In the Ch'in-lun, ‘sBecuose the beings ia the internat regions Fron, (hut) sclt retain theie tives." Cf, *Sha-ehi Th. ‘The abiia oF “food” is generally described in the Buddhist ltertuce to be of faue kinds (catviea E8054), ve,+ keavadhyshorshara, apardshdra, mancbsemestauabiea and vigaoahara, or “food made ito balls (material food), food of (ouch, f00d of thouhi, food of consciousness." ‘The prevent proposition describes sufering also as a fund Ts this suffering a food other thie Use food of the four kinds? Or does it fall uuder one fof the fuur leads? IF $0, under which? The !Shurehi is altogether sileot as to these yoestions. Perhaps “food of sofering” may fall xnder the eateyery af food of tel Cf Wasjen I, p35) - > Here "the eighth slage” mesns she fist path of stncication of Aryapudgalas for “holy persomges” It careesponds to the darcanssmares or ‘the path where 2 ‘yuddhist ssiot sees the truth which he has wot yet seen.” (As to the iw pels of Aryapudgalas, ie, bafvacamacga and darsana-mirge see p, 21, note 4) Then, why it the first path of sanetifcation of Aryapudgsiay called the eighth sage? According (0 Buddhism the holy persons are eight ia suber and have the following aames: SeoteSpatti- praipaorala, SrowaSpsnns, Sakdagenspratipansaks, Sakqdagimia, Auigdnipratipanuaks, Aaggavcin, Atbatpratipannaka aad Avot, When we couut the above eight persons ia reversed order he Srotuspolvpratipasesis beeomes the eighth. ‘The dardaca-marga entre sponds to the stage where this eighth saiat suays. Hence the darsano-ménga is called here the eighih siage. CE. ‘Shu-ehiy Pa-jée ll, p. 35%, : ‘The problem in this proposition is the question of the sojourn of an Aryan pudgala iu the elghth stage or darianuitrga. According to she Sarvistivadias the coraprelien soa of the truths in this stage does aot reysire more than fifteen momence dhyana, wherens the Mubisuraghikas and others waiarained that it might he extended over a much longer time. To explaie this view she 'Ska-ebi makes a seference to om incident, which is said to have then place when Sedatia wis ditibuting foud among eats. Tis said that, on this cceasion, there was 4 beavanly voice im the sky which, senounced that so and $0 ure ia the Srotaipatinanga ele. (CI. the Malhyamsaguina, IX; agama, IV; Mabtvibiinna CKXX1) Tf x person in this stage is allowed to emerge from the abstract meditation sod partake of food, then the sojouro in that stage musi ‘he Seevastivadion maintained, (Ch 'Shu-chi Ty ,Fa-jée i, said to) cubsist on lumps of Weated 3 As we have aleeady sceo elsewhere (p21, nate 4} sbe paths of progrestve sanecitie cation of & Buddhist salar are neo ia sumber, Are there any regular paths, 20 10 speak, along which a convert hag to wall till he becomes a sain: dStyspadysla)? The Abbidharmas