English
For a long time it was thought x that these 1 See e.g. Kern's Manual of Indian Buddhism, p. 5, n., and Vidyabhusana's Indian Logic; Mediaeval School, pp. 63-4. INTRODUCTION 17 works were but different versions of the Pali Abhidharma Canon, or that if different, the Sarvastivadin works were probably half commentaries or rewritings of the works preserved for us in Ceylon. We now know, however, that there is no connexion between the two sets of works, that the Sarvastivadin writings were composed by persons whom it is scarcely possible to conceive could have seen the PaH works, or even to have heard of their categories. Nor do we find any scholar either inside or outside the Sarvastivadin school who accepted, quoted, or even attacked the Pali Abhidharma works. They were completely ignored as far as we have any record, and though the Sthaviravadins were cited from time to time, there is no place where we can identify their quoted statements in such a way as to prove the possession of a definite Abhidharma Canon. Furthermore, there are several places where the Sautrantikas agree with the Sthaviravadins as opposed to the Sarvastivadins, but in their arguments with the latter they merely say : " We do not accept the Abhidharma Pitaka, but hold only to the Sutras " ; but as in these passages the seven works of the Sarvastivadins are expressly referred to, it is curious that the Sautrantikas do not mention any rival Abhidharma Pitaka, particularly as the existence of such a rival would have been an argument against accepting any Abhidharma Pitaka. In the same way whenever the Madhyamika philosophers refer to the Hinayana Abhidharma works, the Sarvastivadins are the only ones quoted. In fact, among the Madhyamikas the term Abhidharmika is used as a synonym for Sarvastivadin. It is difficult to argue from silence, but in any case it can be seen that the Pali Abhidharma can never have been con sidered the fountain-head of wisdom among the North Indian Buddhists. It was probably composed in South India, where Buddhist philosophy developed on lines of its own.1 1 On the geographical distribution of the Hinayana sects see introduction to Takakusu's translation of the travels of I-tsing (I ching sj/J£ j^). 18 MANUAL OF BUDDHIST PHILOSOPHY Secondly, as regards Buddhaghosa. He can hardly have been a North Indian, because we know that in North India the Sarvastivadin influence was particularly strong, and yet in his Attha Salmi he mentions various opinions concerning the Abhidharma Pitaka, but makes no reference to the Sarvastivadin Abhidharma. Problems concerning the lineage of the Ceylonese school, however, present a special field of research, so that at present we may pause no longer over the matter. (2) The Sarvdstivddins. — Every year the researches of scholars into the recesses of Buddhist history tend to bring out the importance of the part played by the Sarvastivadins. Tradition states that they became a definite sect about three hundred years after the death of the Buddha, but the Sarvastivadins themselves claim that three of their works were composed at the time of the Buddha, one about a hundred years thereafter, and the remaining three about three hundred years after his death. One of these last is the famous Jnana Prasthana, which was regarded as the most important, in fact the keystone of them all, the other six words being known as the six pada or feet. The headquarters of this sect seem to have been in Gandhara and Kasmira, which were then, even more than now, integral parts of India. Originally the sacred language of the Sarvastivadins must have been some form of Prakrit, and the phonetic rendering of certain terms in the earlier Chinese translations would tend to show that the seven Abhidharma works themselves were composed in this style. Later, however, Sanskrit was adopted, and the influence exerted by this school did much to make this language the canonical tongue of Buddhism, though, of course, the Ceylonese re tained a language (Pali) which though composite, literary, and artificial, was nearer the original colloquial than Sanskrit.1 1 Incidentally Pali and Samskrta are more correct forms, but the customary spelling has of course been retained. INTRODUCTION 19 No doubt the conversion of Kaniska to this school, in the first century A.D., was an influential factor in making the Sarvastivadins the predominant school over the whole of India, from whence it spread to Central Asia, Java, and China, etc. It seems to have been regarded in India as the Hmayana school par excellence, and therefore regarded as the object of refutation on the part of those persons who were not Buddhists, or who, though Buddhists, yet belonged to one of the Mahayana schools. Many of the founders of the other Buddhists schools were in fact originally Sarvastivadins, and bore traces of Sarvastivadin influence to the end of their days, however much they might differ on points of detail. The culminating point of the Sarvastivadin philosophy appears to have been between the first and fifth centuries A.D. At the beginning of this period a number of commentaries appeared bearing the name of Vibhasa. Probably about the beginning of the second century A.D. all other such works were cast in the shadow by one such Vibhasa known as the Mahavibhasa. This is an encyclopaedic exposition of Buddhist philosophy in the form of a commentary on the Jnana Prasthana. Tradition says that it was compiled by a council of five hundred Arhats convoked by Kaniska. The time and the " Arhatity " of the compilers may be called into question, but one must pay a word of admiration to the stupendous nature of the work itself. It covers every point of philosophy as that word was understood in Ancient India. The next and final stage in the development of Sarvastivadin philosophy is represented by Vasubandhu and his great opponent Sanghabhadra, whose dates are uncertain, though it is best to assign them to the latter part of the fourth century A.D.1 Though less synthetic they were more critical and systematic, and they may be said to represent the high-water mark of Sarvastivadin philosophy. 1 The date assigned to Vasubandhu by Takakusu in his article in JRAS., 1905, has several times been called into question. In the present instance the matter is of little importance. 20 MANUAL OF BUDDHIST PHILOSOPHY After them the influence of the Sarvastivadins and of all other branches of Hinayana declined, partly due, perhaps, to the conversion of Vasubandhu to the Mahayana fold. In any case no new developments took place, and in due course the Sarvastivadin school entirely disappeared from India along with all other forms of Buddhism. It survives in those Far Eastern countries where Buddhism still prevails, but chiefly as an object of study. In these countries all monks, irrespective of sectarian difference, commence their scholastic career by undertaking a course of Sarvastivadin philosophy, chiefly by means of the Vasubandhu' s Abhidharma Kosa. (3) The Yogacarin Sect.1 — The Yogacarin school presents a very interesting problem to the student of the development of Buddhist philosophy, for not only does it represent the highest point of Mahayana philosophy, but it is also an attempt to synthesize the best elements of both Mahayana and Hinayana ideas. One might be led to suppose that the earlier phases of Mahayana would be the most like Hinayana, but that once having departed from tradition the tendency towards differentiation would become more marked. The facts, however, seem far otherwise, for the Yogacarin school, which was comparatively late, is something of a compromise. Many points on which this assertion is based lie rather within the realm of transcendental than in that of relative philosophy, but the following point deserves attention. The Yogacarins, alone among the Mahayanists, revert to the cosmological position of all the Hinayana sects, and hence, as we have already seen, it is the only Mahayana school to possess a definite cosmological system. Hinayana was largely con cerned with points bearing upon phenomenology, the Madhyamikas and other representatives of early Mahayana idealism were concerned with ontology alone. The Yogacarins, after expressing their opinions on matters ontological, reverted to discussion concerning phenomenology. The most 1 The best summary of the traditional account of Yog. history is to be found in the Pa-tsung, vol. ii, p. 9 ff.