Pañcama pariccheda

Tatiyadhammasaṃgīti

Fünftes Kapitel

Das dritte Konzil

Kommentar:

Der Hauptzweck der drei Kapitel zu den ersten drei Konzilen ist, zu zeigen, dass der Theravādabuddhismus Lankās der Bewahrer der reinen Buddhalehre ist.

1. Die Entstehung von Sekten

Ācariyakulavādakathā

1.

Die gemeinsame Rezitation der guten Lehre¹ die anfangs von den großen Theras Mahākassapa² usw. abgehalten wurde, nennt man "die von den Theras^"3.

Kommentar:

¹ gemeinsame Rezitation der guten Lehre = das erste Konzil. Siehe Kapitel 3.

² Mahākassapa: siehe Kapitel 3, zu Vers 4.

³ "die von den Theras" (theriyā): daher Theravāda (s. Vers 2)

2. Eko va theravādo so,
ādivassasate ahu;
aññācariyavādā tu,
tato oraṃ ajāyisuṃ.

^a Geiger: niggahītā

^a Burm.: Mahāsaṃgītināmakā

3.

Die schlechten Mönche, insgesamt 10.000, die von den Theras, die das zweite Konzil abhielten, verurteilt wurde, bildeten eine Lehrerlehre (ācariyavāda) mit Namen "Mahāsanghika^"1.

Kommentar:

¹ Mahāsaṅghika (Mahāsaṅgītika): 大衆部

"Mahāsaṅghikā, Mahāsaṅgītikā One of the Buddhist schools which separated out from the Theravādins at the Second Council. The members rejected the Parivāra, the six sections of the Abhidhamma, the Patisambhidamagga, the Niddesa and some portions of the Jātakas (KvuA. p. 4; Dpv.v.32ff). The school was so called owing to the great number of its followers, which made a great assembly or "Mahāsangitī." They were counted among the Anātmavādins, and later gave rise to the following schools: the Mahāsanghika, Pubbasela, Aparasela, Rājagiriyā, Hemavatas, Cetiyavādins, Sankantivādins and Gokulikas. Originally they had only two divisions   the Ekabbohārikas and Gokulikas (Rockhill, op. cit., 182ff). Their separation from the orthodox school was brought about by the Vajjiputta monks, and was probably due to difference of opinion on the ten points (for these see Vin.ii.294f) held by the Vajjiputta monks. According to Northern sources, however, the split occurred on the five points raised by Mahādeva: (1) An arahant may commit a sin under unconscious temptation; (2) one may be an arahant and unconscious of the fact; (3) an arahant may have doubts on matters of doctrine; (4) one cannot attain arahantship without the help of a teacher; (5) the "Noble Way" may begin with some such exclamation as "How sad!" uttered during meditation (J.R A.S. 1910, p. 416; cf. MT 173). These articles of faith are found in the Kathāvatthu (173ff., 187ff., 194, 197), attributed to the Pubbaselas and the Aparaselas, opponents of the Mahāsanghika school. According to Hiouen Thsang (Beal.ii.164), the Mahāsanghikas divided their canon into five parts: Sūtra, Vinaya, Abhidhamma, Miscellaneous and Dhāranī. Fa Hsien [法顯] took from Pātaliputta to China a complete transcript of the Mahāsanghika Vinaya. (Giles, p. 64, Nañjio's Catalogue mentions a Mahāsanghika Vinaya and a Mahāsanghabhiksunī Vinaya in Chinese translations, Cola. 247, 253. Ms. No.543). The best known work of the Mahāsanghikas is the Mahāvastu. Their headquarters in Ceylon were in Abhayagiri vihāra, and Sena I. is said to have built the Vīrankurārāma for their use. Cv.1.68." [Quelle: Malalasekera, G. P. <1899 - 1973>: Dictionary of Pāli proper names. -- Nachdruck der Ausgabe 1938. -- London : Pali Text Society, 1974. -- 2 vol. -- 1163, 1370 S. -- ISBN 0860132692. -- s. v.]

4b. tato Gokulikā jātā,
Ekabbohārikā^a pi ca.

4.

Daraus entstanden die Gokulika¹ und die Ekabbohārika (Ekavyohārika)².

Kommentar:

¹ Gokulika: 鶏胤部

"GOKULIKA (var. kukkulika, kukkuṭika) is the name of a sect that resulted from the first schism within the Mahāsanghika in the second century after the Buddha's passing away. Two other schools the Pannattivādins and Bāhulikas (or Bahussutikas) are said to have sprung from this (Mhv. V. v.4 f; Dipv. v. 40 f). According to the Kathāvatthu-atthakathā the view that "All conditioned things are absolutely cinderheaps"- a view referred to in the kathāvatthu (p.208) - was held by the Gokulikas. This, the Atthakathā says, is due to their misunderstanding of such suttas as Ādittapariyāya sutta (Vin. I, p. 34; f. S. iv, p. 19) which the Gokulikas considered as teaching that 'All conditioned things are without qualification no better than a welter of embers (kukkula), whence the flames have died out, like an inferno of ashes, (see Kuv. trsl. Points ofControveny, p. 127). The Kathāvatthu (p. 208f.) records how the Theravāda countered this proposition by pointing out various forms of happiness. Kukkulika and Kukkutika are its variant names, and perhaps their view that 'all compounded things are absolutely cinderheaps (kukkula)' is responsible for their name Kukkulika, which may have been misconstrued as Kukkutika. While one of the Chinese rendering of the name 'Ch-in' points to the original Kukkutika, the other version Huei-chan indicate that it could be from Kukkulika. Malalasekera is of the view that Kukkulika could be the original name of which Gokulika was either a corruption or a derivation from the name of one of their teachers (DPPN. p. 783). K'yeu-chi suggests that it might be a brahman clan name and rejects Paramārtha's interpretation, 'those who live on the cinderheap'. The Manjuśri-pariprccha Sutra says that name originated from a famous Vinaya-master. Thus it is not possible to establish the original form of the name. This school maintained that of the three Pitakas only the Abhidharma was important, for that contained the real teaching of the Buddha, whereas the sūtras and the vinaya-rules were more preparatory teachings. Thus they considered themselves not to be bound by any rule of discipline and interpreted the vinaya-rules according to their own particular convenience, professing that the Buddha had allowed their transgression. They fostered only logic, believing that too deep a study of the sutras would lead to pride and become a hindrance in attaining deliverance. They declined to preach in order to devote themselves to meditation. Nothing is known of their residence, nor of their writings. While Vasumitra attributes to them the same theses as those of the Mahāsanghikas, Bhavya makes a distinction without, however, mentioning their specific doctrines. Bhavya also mentions the two schools originated from them, viz., the Bahuśrutiyas and the Prajnaptivādins. They are not heard of after the 9th century A.C. and it is probable that they were completely absorbed into Mahāyāna. Bibliography: A. Bareau, Les Sectes Bauddhiques du petit vebicule (Saigon, 1955); P. Demieville, L'Origine des Sectes buddhiques d'apres Paramartba (Bruselles, 1032); A. Schiefner, Taranathas Geschichte des Buddbismus in Indien (St. Petersburg, 1869)." [Quelle: H. G. A. van Zeyst <1909 - 1989>. -- In: Encyclopaedia of Buddhism. -- Colombo : Government of Sri Lanka. -- Band: 5: Earth - Japan / honorary consultant ed.: Ananda W. P. Guruge. - -1993. -- XIV, 639 S. : Ill. -- S. 357f.]

² Ekabbohārika: Ekavyavahārika (Sanskrit), 説部

"EKABBOHĀRIKA (var. Ekavyohārika, ekabbohāra Skt. Ekavyavahārika Ekottiya).  one of the earliest and short-lived Buddhist sects in India that branched ofl' from the mahāsanghika school (Dhpy. v. 40; Mhv. v. 4; W. W. Rockhill, Life of the Buddha, p. 182; Jiryo Masuda, Origin and Doctrines of Early Indian Buddhist Schools, p. 15). It is short-lived most probably because the differences it had with the other sects of the same school were very insignificant; it could very well have merged with one or the other sect. In fact, Vasumitra in his Nikāyabhedopacaranacakra enumemerates 48 doctrinal points this school held in common with the Mahāsanghikas and the two other branches of the Mahāsanghikas, namely, the Lokottaravāda and the Kaukkutika (Masuda, op. cit. pp. 18 ff.). The Pali literature is not very helpful in forming a satisfactory view of the doctrine of this school; only the vamsatthappakāsinī. the Mahavamsa commentary has made an attempt at giving an explanation, but even that does not throw any light on the matter. It says that the two sects that arose from the Mahāsanghikas, namely, the Ekabbohārika and the Gokulika misunderstood the passages like "all, monks, is ablaze... All conditioned things are full of misery" (sabbam bhikkhave ādittam...sabbe sankhārā dukkhā) and interpreted them, without making any distinction, to mean that all conditioned things are hot ashes (kukkulo) and are like the hell of ambers (Mhvt, I, 173). See also DPPN s. v. Ekabbohāra. According to the Nikāyabheda-vibhanga vyākhyāna of Bhavya and the Nikāyabhedopadarśanasangraha of Vinītadeva (Ten-Gyur, Vol. 90), the Ekavyavahārikas were so named because the members of this sect held that all the doctrines are thoroughly understood by a unique and immediate (ekavyavahāra) wisdom, for all the doctrines of the Buddhas are comprehended by the intellect (Rockhill, op. cit. p. 183). It is, however, Vasumitra who gives a fairly comprehensive account of the doctrine of this sect (Nikāyabhedopacaranacakra, translated from its Chinese and Tibetan versions into English by Jiryo Masuda op. cit. pp. 18 ff.) According to this account, Ekavyavahārikas held 48 views in common with the Mahāsanghikas, the Lokottaravādins and the Kaukkutikas. Vasumitra also gives nine views as the later differentiated views of these four schools; but, of these nine views, he does not mention the particular views held by the divergent sects. The 48 views they held in common are connected with the nature of the Buddha, the bodhisattva, the arahants and the srotāpannas; mind and mental states (citta and caitasika), dormant passions (anusaya) and their outbursts (paryavasthāna), and the unconditioned (asamskrta). They held docetic views about the personality of the Buddha and the bodhisattva which later on developed into the Mahāyāna Trikāya doctrine. Concerning the nature of the arahants they upheld the five points of Mahādeva which declared that the arahants are defective, the germ that gave rise to the Mahāyāna bodhisattva ideal, as opposed to the Theravāda arahant ideal. The srotāpannas, according to them, are not excluded from retrogression, and are liable to commit all sinful acts except the five heinous ones (anantarya). These views, which the Ekavyavahārika sect held together with the Mahāsanghika school and its branches, clearly point to the fact that the tendency towards Mahāyāna was very early and they can properly be called the precursors of Mahāyāna. As far as the mind and mental states are concerned they rejected the view, held by the Theravādins and the Sarvāstivādins, of the existence of indeterminate states (avyakrta-dharma); they accepted only the states which are wholesome (kusala) or unwholesome (akusala). The dormant passions (anusaya) are neither mind (citta-dharma) nor mental (caitasika-dharma); they never become the objects of thought. The dormant passions are different from their outbursts (paryavasthāna) and vice versa. The anusayas do not combine themselves with the citta while paryavasthāna does. This latter view is opposed to the Theravādins and Sarvāstivādins who denied the existence of anusayas apart from paryavasthānas. Regarding the unconditioned (asamskrta-dharma) they advocated nine kinds of it as against the the one in the Theravada and the three in the Sarvastivāda (Masuda. op. cit. pp. 18-32). These, in brief, are the doctrines they held in common with the other sects of the Mahāsanghika school. The nine points enumerated by Vasumitra as the divergent views that arose later on among the four sets include the doctrines that there are things which are caused by the agency of self (svayamkrta) things which are caused by the agency of others (parankrta) and things which are caused by both (ubhayankrta); that two thoughts can arise side by side at one and the same time, etc.. views which are alien to Theravāda." [Quelle: Upali Karunaratne. -- In: Encyclopaedia of Buddhism. -- Colombo : Government of Sri Lanka. -- Band: 5: Earth - Japan / honorary consultant ed.: Ananda W. P. Guruge. - -1993. -- XIV, 639 S. : Ill. -- S. 46f.]

5. Gokulikehi Paṇṇatti-
vādā Bāhulikā^a pi ca;
Cetiyavādā tesv eva,
samahāsaṅghikā cha te.

^a Geiger: Bahulikā

5.

Aus den Gokulika entsanden die Paṇṇattivāda und die Bāhulika, unter diesen die Cetiyavāda. Zusammen mit den Mahāsanghika sind das sechs.

Kommentar:

¹ Paṇṇativāda: Prajñaptivāda (Sanskrit), 説仮部

"Paññattivādā (v.l. Paṇṇatti-) A secondary division of the Gokulikas (Dpv.v.41; Mhv.v.4; Mbv. p. 96). Their main doctrine was that suffering is no skandha, that there are no perfect āyatanas, that the samskāras are all bound together, that suffering is absolute, that what proceeds from the mind is not the way, that there is no untimely death, that there is no human agency, and that all suffering comes from karma. Rockhill: op. cit., 189." [Quelle: Malalasekera, G. P. <1899 - 1973>: Dictionary of Pāli proper names. -- Nachdruck der Ausgabe 1938. -- London : Pali Text Society, 1974. -- 2 vol. -- 1163, 1370 S. -- ISBN 0860132692. -- s. v.]

² Bāhulika: auch: Bahuśrutīya, Bahuśruta, Bahusuttaka, 多聞部

"BĀHULIKĀ (var. Bahulikā), a sect of Buddhist monks which aroso sometime after the second council along with the Paññatti (Pannatti) sect from the Gokulika which itself was an offshoot of the Mahāsanghika sect (Mhv. v, 3 ff.; Mhbv. 96 f ) The Dīpavamsa (v, 41) refers to the adherents of ths sect as Bahussutakā. From the Mahāvamsa and the Dīpavamaa (loc. cit.) it would appear that the Bāhulikā and the Paññatti sects, in turn, gave rise to the Cetiya sect, though the Mahābodhivamsa (loc. cit.) gives the name of the five sects Gokulika, Ekabyohārika, Paññattivāda, Bahulika and Cetiyavāda as having sprung from the Mahāsanghika sect. The Bāhulikā sect is probably indentical with the Bahuśrutīya sect of the northorn tradition. See BAHUSRUTIYA." [Quelle: H. R. Perera. -- In: Encyclopaedia of Buddhism. -- Colombo : Government of Sri Lanka. -- Band: 2, Fascicle 4. -- 1968. -- S. 498f.]

"BAHUŚRUTĪYA, " those who have heard much ", i.e., the learned ones, a school which originated from a schism within the Mahāsanghikas towards the end of the second century of the Buddhist era, according to the traditions of north-west India. According to the traditions of the Theravādins and the Sammatīyas, the Bahussutīyas broke away from the Gokulikas. According to Paramārtha and K'uei-chi, this school was founded by the arahant Yajnavalkya who retired to the Himalayas during the lifetime of the Buddha and remained in a state of concentration (samādhi) for nearly two hundred years. When at the end of this period he arose from his meditation and descended from the mountains, he became aware of the fact that the Mahāsanghikas had developed only the superficial meaning of the Tripitaka, and not the deeper sense thereof. Thereupon he taught the deeper meaning together with the superficial one and formed a new school with the name Bahuśrutīya. According to Paramārtha the deeper meaning of the Tripitaka is found in the Mahāyāna doctrine. The Satyasiddhiśāstra, of which a Chinese translation by Kumārajiva is extant, would appear to belong to this school. Its author, Harivarman, was born in central India and lived in the 3rd century A. C. This work refers several times to an Abhidharmapitaka with six sections (pada), like that of the Sarvāstivādins, and a canon with five collections: Sūtra-pitaka, Vinaya-pitaka, Abhidharma-pitaka, Samyukta-pitaka and Bodhisattva-pitaka (Taisho, p. 352c). Its doctrine holds the middle between Hīnayāna and Mahāyāna, and contains approximately the principal theses attributed to the Bahuśrutīyas by Vasumitra in respect of the supramundane teaching of the Buddha. As Vasumitra hints at a parental relationship in doctrine between the Bahuśrutīyas and the Sarvāstivādins, it is not surprising to find a similarity in their first three collections (pitaka), especially in their Abhidharma-pitaka. One might even ask whether the Bahuśrutīyas have not borrowed the Abhidharma-pitaka from the Sarvāstivādins with certain modifications. Very little is known about their places of residence, but that little is of great interest. Inscriptions at Nagārjunakonda indicate their presence there in the third century A.C. (Sastri : EI. XX, 24; XXI, 62—3). Kharosthi inscriptions prove their existence at Pālātū Dherī Jars, near Peshawar, in the fifth century A.C. Thus the Bahuśrutīyas had their residences in the northwest as well as in the south-east, i.e., in the two main centres of the Mahāsanghikas outside Magadha. Having emerged from the second internal schism of the Mahāsanghikas, they appear to have been a link, both in time and in space, between the two groups of the Mahāsanghikas, viz., the Lokottaravādins and the Ekavyavahārikas in the northwest and the Caityakas, Purvaśailas and Aparaśailas in the south-east. It is through them that contact between these two groups was preserved and a mutual current of influence was established between north-west and south-east. It should also be borne in mind that Vasumitra, who places them among the schools sprung from the Mahāsanghikas, yet notes their doctrinal affinity with the Sarvāstivādins, whereas Vinītadeva makes them the fifth sect among the Sarvāstivādin group. The following are the theses attributed to them by Vasumitra, Bhavya and Vinīadeva : Five dogmas of the teaching of the Buddha are supramundane (lokottara), viz., impermanence (anityata), conflict (duhkha), emptiness (śūnyatā), impersonality (anātmya) and deliverance (nirvāna), and they are helpful (niryānika) on the road to emancipation (vimuktimārga). The five propositions of Mahādeva concerning the nature of an arahant, as held by the Mahāsanghikas, viz., an arahant is liable to seduction (paropahṛta), subject to ignorance (ajnāna), subject to doubt (kanksā), is helped across to salvation by another (paravitīrna) and emits certain words (vacībheda) while on the path. On the path of holiness and emancipation there is no mental reflection (vicāra). Truth (satya) is of three types : there is the practical truth of suffering (duhkha-satya) which concerns the five aggregates of existence (skandha) ; the relative truth (samvrti-satya), which is suffering characterised by hate and violence ; and the noble truth (ārya-satya), which is the one taste of sorrow (ekarasa), inherent in all component things. The attainment (samāpatti) of mental absorption is effected by insight into the conflict of complexes (samskāra-duhkhatā), but not by the sight of conflict in sorrow (duhkha-duhkhatā), nor by the sight of conflict or sorrow in change (parināma-duhkhatā). The order of monks (Sangha) is supramundane (lokottara)." [Quelle: André Bareau <1921 - 1993>. -- In: Encyclopaedia of Buddhism. -- Colombo : Government of Sri Lanka. -- Band: 2, Fascicle 4. -- 1968. -- S. 501f.]

³ Cetiyavāda: Caitika (Sanskrit), 制多山部

"CAITYIKA, (var. Caityakīya, Caitīya, Caitika, Cetiyavāda) name of a school of early Buddhism, an offshoot from the Mahāsanghika, according to Bhavya, parallel to the Pūrvaśaila (Pali: Pubbaseliya) and the Avaraśaila (Pali: Aparaseliya). It is also referred to as Caityaśaila. Vasumitra ranks them as parallel offshoots with the Uttaracetiya and the Aparacetiya. The Sammatīya tradition makes them, a branch of the Gokulika. All these ; Cliff-men' (śailiya) belong to the Andhakas, who have been located about Kāncipura and Amaravātī not far from the south-east coast of India. The date of their origin cannot be fixed precisely, although the north-western tradition places them towards the end of the second century or the beginning of the third century after the Parinibbāna of the Buddha, i.e., about 280 B.C. According to Paramārtha, a certain Mahādeva — not the one whose five propositions on arahantship were rejected by Sthaviravādins at the council of Patāliputta — was the cause of some doubts about the validity of ordination. He was banned and expelled from the Ganges valley, and withdrew with his disciples to the mountains. There he founded the great cultural centre of Buddhism in Andhra. The commentary to the Kathāvatthu, however, does not establish any connection between the Andhakas and the Cetiyavadins. Vasumitra relates the origin of the School as follows : Towards the end of the second century a certain heretic gave up home-life, renounced his heretical views and submitted himself to the rules of discipline. His name was Mahādeva. He received full ordination among the Mahāsanghikas, was learned and zealous in his religious practices, while residing on the 'Temple-mountain' (Caitya-śilā). Together with that community he examined afresh the five propositions (of the earlier Mahādeva) which led to controversies and a split into three sects: Caityaśaila, Aparaśaila and Uttaraśaila. This tradition is followed by the Sammatīyas, as reported by Bhavya. According to Paramārtha, the controversy appears to have centred on the validity of ordination. If the teacher violates the precepts, how can his pupil be virtuous? This would have resulted in a fivefold split, aggravated by the fact that some self-ordained heretics had infiltrated into the community. Rejected by all and excommunicated by the Mahāsanghikas, the new Mahādeva retired with his disciples to the mountains, where they divided themselves into two groups, occupying different cliffs, the Caityaśaila and the Uttaraśaila. K'uei-ehi (Ki) speaks of a king of Magadha named Sumegha (Hao Yun), otherwise unknown, under whose reign some heretics joined the Order without ordination. They seriously impaired the purity of the teaching of the Buddha by putting their erudition to the wrong purpose. Their leader was called Mahādeva, and he resided in a mountain temple. He is said to have re-opened the controversy regarding the five propositions of the earlier Mahādeva, which resulted in the origination of three other sects. This story of a second Mahādeva causing a new split with his controversy over the five propositions of the earlier Mahādeva, seems to be entirely due to a confusion of the two schisms. Moreover, the information of Paramārtha, according to whom the controversy was centred on ' virtue ' (śīla), appears to be based on a mis-spelling of the word śīlā (rock) in the interpretation of the names Purvaśaila and Uttaraśaila. A fragmentary stone inscription in Prakrit of the time of Rāja Vasithiputa-sāmi Siri Pulumāvi, (i.e., of the first half of the second century A.C.) at Amarāvatī records a gift of a Wheel of the Law at the western gate to the Mahācetiya by the householders Kahūtara and Isila and wife, as the special property of the school (nikāya) of the Caityakīyas (EI. X, 1912, No. 1248). This school, therefore, would have been one of the earliest branches of the Mahāsanghika in the south, even though Buddhaghosa does not mention them among the Andhaka schools. It could be inferred, therefore, that this school was responsible for the spread of Buddhism in those districts and that it was this school which founded the important centre of Buddhist culture there, known to us through archaeological and epigraphical discoveries. It would also appear that the other schools, Andhaka, Aparaśaila, Purvaśaila (or Uttaraśaila), Rājagirika and Siddhārthika, were offshoots at different times of the Caitiya school. One would also be justified in drawing conclusions about their connection with the Bahuśrutīyas, whose presence in that region is equally attested by epigraphical records, and in tracing their origin to this latter school, or at least to the Gokulika school, according to the tradition of the Sammatīyas. Nothing is known about their specific literature but if they formed the mother school of the various branches discussed in the Kathāvatthu, it is probable that they subscribed at least to the majority of the 72 theses attributed to the branches by Buddhaghosa. It is only Vasumitra who, without distinguishing them from the Aparaśaila and the Uttaraśaila, gives a few details of their doctrine. A bodhisattva is not exempt from rebirth in an evil destiny (durgati). It is, however, not quite clear in which way this view differs from that of the Theravādins according to whom the bodhisattva was born sometimes in the animal world, as a lion, a snake, etc., unless the entire range of infra-human births, not excluding rebirth in purgatory and hell, was indicated by the Andhakas (Kvu. xxiii, 3). The act of making an offering to a stūpa does not produce much merit. The five propositions of Mahādeva (q.v.). Bibliography : A. Bareau, Les Sectes bouddhiques du petit Véhicule, Saigon, 1955 ; P. Demieville, L'Origine des SecTes bouddhiques d'apres Paramārtha, Bruxeiles, 1932." [Quelle: André Bareau <1921 - 1993>. -- In: Encyclopaedia of Buddhism. -- Colombo : Government of Sri Lanka. -- Band: 3, Fascicle 4. -- 1977. -- S. 566 - 568.]

6. Punāpi theravādehi,
Mahiṃsāsakabhikkhavo;
Vajjīputtakabhikkhū ca,
duve jātā ime khalu.

6.

Aus den Theravāda entstanden weiters diese beiden: die Mahimsāsaka-Mönche¹ und die Vajjīputtaka-Mönche².

Kommentar:

¹  Mahiṃsāsaka: Mahīśāsaka (Sanskrit), 化地部

"Mahiṃsāsaka An heretical sect, which broke off from the Theravādins at the same time as the Vajjiputtakas. The sect was later divided into the Sabbatthivādins and the Dhammaguttikas (Mhv.v. 6, 8; Dpv.v.45, 47; MT. 174f.; Mhv. 96). They held that the truth of nirodha had two aspects (Kvu.ii.11; see also viii.9; xviii.6; xix.8; xx.5; and Rockhill, op. cit., 182-186, 191-192). Buddhadeva Thera, at whose request the Jātakatthakathā was written, belonged to the Mahimsāsaka Vamsa (J.i.1). Fa Hsien [法顯] found a group of monks belonging to this sect in Ceylon. (Giles, op. cit., p. 76.)." [Quelle: Malalasekera, G. P. <1899 - 1973>: Dictionary of Pāli proper names. -- Nachdruck der Ausgabe 1938. -- London : Pali Text Society, 1974. -- 2 vol. -- 1163, 1370 S. -- ISBN 0860132692. -- s. v.]

² Vajjīputtaka: (siehe auch Kapitel 4, Vers 9ff.) Vātsīputrīya (Sanskrit), 犢子部

"Vajjiputtakā, Vajjiputtiyā The name of a large group of monks belonging to the Vajjian clan and dwelling in Vesāli, who, one century after the Buddha's death, brought forward Ten Points (dasa vatthūni) as being permissible for members of the Order. These points are as follows: (1) The storing of salt in a horn (singilonakappa); (2) the eating of food when the shadow of the sun had passed two fingers' breadth beyond noon (duvangulakappa); (3) to eat once and then go again to the village for alms (gāmantarakappa); (4) the holding of the uposatha separately by monks dwelling in the same district (āvāsakappa); (5) the carrying out of an official act when the assembly is incomplete (anumatikappa); (6) the following of a practice because it is so done by one's tutor or teacher (ācinnakappa); (7) the eating of sour milk by one who has already had his midday meal (amathitakappa); (8) the use of strong drink before it has fermented (jalogikappa); (9) the use of a rug which is not of the proper size (nisīdanakappa); (10) the use of gold and silver (jātarūparajatakappa). The orthodox monks refused to agree to these points, and one of their leaders, Yasa Kākandakaputta, publicly condemned the action of the Vajjiputtakas. Yasa then left Kosambī, and, having summoned monks from Pāvā in the west and Avanti in the south, sought Sambhūta Sānavāsi in Ahoganga. On his advice they sought Soreyya-Revata, and together they consulted Sabbakāmi at Vālikārāma. In the Council that followed the Ten Points were declared invalid, and this decision was conveyed to the monks. Soon after was held a recital of the Doctrine in which seven hundred monks took part under the leadership of Soreyya-Revata. The recital lasted eight months. The story of the Vajjiputtaka heresy is given in the twelfth chapter of the Cullavagga (Vin.ii.294ff.); the Mhv.iv.9ff. gives more details in certain respects; see also Dpv.iv.48ff.; v.17ff.; 32ff. It is noteworthy that even during the Buddha's life five hundred monks, described as Vajjiputtakā, seceded from the Order and joined Devadatta though they were later brought back by Sāriputta and Moggallāna (Vin.ii.199f.). Buddhaghosa actually (Sp.i.228) identifies the heretics as belonging to the same party. For the part played by Yasa Thera see Yasa (2). The Vajjiputtakas refused to accept the finding of Revata’s Council and formed a separate sect, the Mahāsanghikas, numbering ten thousand monks, who held a recital of their own." [Quelle: Malalasekera, G. P. <1899 - 1973>: Dictionary of Pāli proper names. -- Nachdruck der Ausgabe 1938. -- London : Pali Text Society, 1974. -- 2 vol. -- 1163, 1370 S. -- ISBN 0860132692. -- s. v.]

7. Jātātha^a Dhammuttariyā,
Bhadrayānikabhikkhavo;
Channāgārā^b Sammitiyā^b,
Vajjīputtiyabhikkhū^b ti^b.

7.

Die Vajjīputtaka-Mönche wurden dann zu Dhammuttariya¹, Bhadrayānika-Mönchen², Channāgara³ und Sammitiya⁴.

Kommentar:

¹ Dhammuttariya: Dharmottarīya (Sanskrit), 法上部

"DHARMOTTARIYA (Pali Dhammuttara, Dhammuttarika, Dhammuttariya), one of the eighteen schools of Buddhism referred to in Buddhist literature. Tradition in the North West considers this sect to be the first to branch off from the Vatsīputrīyas (Vajjiputtakas) towards the middle of the third century after the parinirvāna of the Buddha. It should be noted that the Kathāvatthu does not make any mention of this school. According to Bhavya (cf. also K'uei-chi III, p. 6) this school was founded by a teacher called Dharmottara and hence its name. This is confirmed by the Manjusriparipṛccha Sūtra (Taisho, No. 468, p. 501). Bhavya mentions also that there are other traditions giving different versions of its origin. Thus, the traditon of Sammitīyas, as quoted by Bhavya, places them together with the Bhadrāyanīyas as a sub-division of the Mahāgiriya which, too, is a major branch of the Vatsīputrīyas. An inscription, dated from the second century A.C. prove their presence at Kārle, Soparala and Junnar, in the mountain ranges near Bombay. According to Paramārtha, the Dharmottariyas were one of the four schools who completed the Abhidharma-Pitaka of the Vatsīputrīyas, also called Sāriputra-Abhidharma or Dharmalaksana-Abhidharma in nine parts, which are commentaries based on the meaning of sūtras (P. Demieville, Origine des Sectes bouddhiques, pp. 23, 58). Little is known of their doctrine. From available sources it appears that a fundamental teaching of this school is that, in birth is ignorance and in arresting of birth is the arresting of ignorance (Rockhill, Life of the Buddha, London, 1907, p. 194). The Dharmottariyas share, with the Mahāsanghikas, the Sthaviras and several other schools in the doctrine of non-existence of the 'soul' or 'self and say that those who teach about the existence of a self are merely heretics preaching views similar to those held by the tīrthakas (Rockhill, op. cit., p. 185). Warder mentions that Dharmottariyas were found in Aparanta on the coast of Mahārāshtra (A. K. Warder, Indian Buddhism, 1970, p. 292). According to him this school branched off from the Vātsīputriyas owing to some difference of opinion they held with regard to the Abhidharma (Warder, op. cit., p. 275)." [Quelle: H. G. A. van Zeyst <1909 - 1989>. -- In: Encyclopaedia of Buddhism. -- Colombo : Government of Sri Lanka. -- Band: 4: Causality - Dvesa. -- 1979 - 1989. -- S. 565.]

² Bhadrayānika: Bhadrāyaṇīya (Sanskrit), 賢冑部

"BHADRĀYAِِِِṆĪYA, the second school which branched off from tho Vatsīputriyas (Vajjiputtakas) after the Dharmottarīyas (Dhammuttariyas). According to tho tradition of north-west India, this school made its apperance towards the middle of the third century after the Buddha's Parinibbāna. Bhavya explains their name as those whose journey (yāna) is auspicious (bhadra) ; but according to K'uoi-chi, Bhadra would have been the name of the teacher of that school, while yāna would signify his following. This latter interpretation is based on the tradition followod by Hsüan-tsang [玄奘] : spiritual descendents of tho arahant Bhadra. Paramārtha relatrs how the Bhadrayanīyas were one of the four schools which completed the Abhidharma-Pitaka of tho Vatsīputriyas which is also called the Sāriputrābhidharma or tho Dharmalaksanābhidharma in nine parts by means of commentarial treatises (śāstra) based on the meaning of the sūtras (seo further, Demieville : Origine des sectes bouddhiques, pp. 23 and 58). The tradition of the Sammatīyas, as quoted by Bhavya, places them along with the Dharmottarīyas in the sub-group of the Mahāgiriyas, i.e., those who resided in the great mountains. Inscriptions of the second century A.C. prove their presence in Nāsik and Kanheri in the mountain ranges of the Bombay region (Hultzsch : EI. VIII, 61-62, 67), which are no doubt the Mahāgiri referred to. Little is known of their specific teaching. According to Bhavya, they maintained the same thesis as the Dharmottarīyas, viz. : In birth (jāti) there is ignorance (avidyā) and the arising thereof; in cessation (nirodha) there is ignorance and the cessation thereof. According to Vasumitra they had an interpretation of their own of the following stanza: " Being already freed, one chooses again. The fall comes from lust; again one returns. To have attained the of joyful calm, that is happiness. If one follows the practices of happiness, that is perfect bliss. " K'uei-chi in his commentary explains the views of the Bhadrayānīyas in this regard as follows : the first two lines apply to tho arhant who, therefore, may fall back ; the third line concerns pratyeka-buddhas; and the last line refers to the Buddhas. The Kathāvatthu attributes to them the thesis that realisation of the Four Truths and of the fruits of sainthood is progressive (anupubbena : Kvu. ii 9). BIBLIOGRAPHY : Andre Bareau, Les sectes bouddhiques du petit Véhicule; Paul Demiéville, Origine des sectes bouddhiques." [Quelle: André Bareau <1921 - 1993>. -- In: Encyclopaedia of Buddhism. -- Colombo : Government of Sri Lanka. -- Band: 2, Fascicle 4. -- 1968. -- S. 644f.]

³ Channāgara: Ṣaṇṇagarika (Sanskrit)

"CHANNĀGARIKA (var. Channagārika. Chandāgarika, Ṣaṇṇāgarika), the name of one of the eighteen schools of Buddhism. The Channāgarikas (lit. The Six Towners) was a sub-division of the Vajjiputtaka school that branched off in the second century B.C. The Kathāvatthu does not record any particular views of this school as they were not participants in any of the controversies recorded therein. When the commentary to the Kathāvatthu was written this school had fallen in to oblivion. Bhavya does not mention them in his list of the eighteen schools, but introduces Vaibhādyavadins instead. Vasumitra mentions Sannāgarikas, and Rockhill says that the Vaibhādyavadins of Bhavya's list is the same as the Sannāgarikas of Vasumitra (Rockhill, The Life of the Buddha, London, 1907, p. 183 n. 1). Bhavya enumerates a different division followed by others, according to whioh the Sannāgarikas are mentioned as a sub-division of the Vatsīputrīya school (Rockhill, op cit. p. 186). Thus, this division makes the Sannāgarikas one of the six divisions that arose out of the Stbavira school. Some say that the Sannāgarika school is a division of the Mahāgiriya; others say that it is a division cf the Sammitīya (Rockhill, op.cit. p. 194). According to Warder, Sannāgarika was one of the four new schools that branched off from Vatsiputrīyas owing to difference of opinion in the interpretation of the Abhidharma of that school (Warder, Indian Buddhism, India, 1970, p. 275)." [Quelle: M. Karaluvinna. -- In: Encyclopaedia of Buddhism. -- Colombo : Government of Sri Lanka. -- Band: 4: Causality - Dvesa. - -1979 - 1989. -- 714 S. : Ill. -- S. 123.]

⁴ Sammitiya: Saṃmatīya (Sanskrit), 正量部

"Sammitī, Sammatiyā A division of the Vajjiputtakā (Dpv.v.46; Mhv.v.7; Mbv. p.96). They held that there is no higher life practised among Devas, that the convert gives up corruption piecemeal, and that the putthujjana renounces, passion and hate (Kvu.i.1, 3, 4, 5). They also held various views in common with other schismatic schools, such as the Andhakas, Pubbaseliyas, etc. In Tibetan sources they are called Sammatiyā, and are described as disciples of a teacher named Sammata. Rockhill, op. cit., 184." [Quelle: Malalasekera, G. P. <1899 - 1973>: Dictionary of Pāli proper names. -- Nachdruck der Ausgabe 1938. -- London : Pali Text Society, 1974. -- 2 vol. -- 1163, 1370 S. -- ISBN 0860132692. -- s. v.]

8. Mahiṃsāsakabhikkhūhi,
bhikkhū Sabbatthavādino;
Dhammaguttiyabhikkhū^a ca,
jātā khalu ime duve.

^a Geiger: Dhammaguttikabhikkhū

8. Aus den Mahṃsāsaka-Mönchen heraus entstanden die Sabbatthivādin¹-Mönche und die Dhammaguttika²-Mönche.

Kommentar:

¹ Sabbatthivādin: Sarvāstivādin (Sanskrit), 説一切有部

"Sabbatthivādī A group of heretical monks (Sarvāstivādins), an offshoot of the Mahimsāsakas. The Kassapiyā were a branch of the same (Mhv.v.8f; Dpv.v.47). They held that everything is, exists, is constantly existing, because it is, was, or will be, matter and mind, and these continually exist (Kvu.i.6, 7); that penetration of truth is won little by little (Kvu.ii.9). They agreed with the Uttarāpathakas that conscious flux may amount to samādhi (Kvu.xi.6), and with the Vajjiputtiyas that an arahant may fall away. Kvu.i.2; see J.R.A.S. 1892, 1ff., 597; 1894, 534; J.P.T.S. 1905, 67f." [Quelle: Malalasekera, G. P. <1899 - 1973>: Dictionary of Pāli proper names. -- Nachdruck der Ausgabe 1938. -- London : Pali Text Society, 1974. -- 2 vol. -- 1163, 1370 S. -- ISBN 0860132692. -- s. v.]

"Sarvastivada ist der Name einer dem Hinayana zugehörigen Schule des frühen Buddhismus, die sich im 3. Jahrhundert v. Chr. aufgrund von Meinungsverschiedenheiten u.a. über den Status des Arhat vom Theravada abspaltete. Der Sarvastivada zählt zu den bedeutendsten Schulen des frühen Buddhismus und war vor allem in Zentral- und Nordwestindien (heute Pakistan) verbreitet, wobei sich seine Wirkung auch auf Indonesien, China, Tibet und Japan erstreckte. Einen wesentlichen Beitrag leistete er auch zur Entstehung und Entwicklung des Mahayana. Die Schule ging mit der islamischen Eroberung Zentralasiens und Indiens im 11. Jahrhundert unter. Literatur des Sarvastivada Die Schule des Sarvastivada verfügte über eine eigene Sanskrit-Fassung des Korbes der Abhandlungen (abhidhamma pitaka), die zwar wie die Theravada-Version ebenfalls aus insgesamt sieben Büchern bestand, dabei jedoch einige inhaltliche Abweichungen von den Originalschriften aufwies. Sie fand ihre endgültige Form im "Abhidharmakosha" ("Schatzkammer des Abhidharma"), ein von Vasubandhu dem Jüngeren im 5. Jh. n. Chr. zusammengestelltes Kompendium, und ist heute nur noch fragmentarisch in Sanskrit erhalten, der größte Teil liegt heute ausschließlich in tibetischer und chinesischer Übersetzung vor. Es existieren zudem zwei um das 1. Jh. v. Chr. entstandene, aus der Sicht des Sarvastivada verfasste Kommentare zum Abhidhammapitaka, die Vasubandhu als Vorlage dienten: das "Vibhasha" (etwa: "ausführliche Erläuterung") und das "Mahavibhasha" ("große ausführliche Erläuterung"), die den Anhängern des Sarvastivada ihren Beinamen "Vaibhashika" einbrachten. Philosophie Im Rahmen ihrer Epistemologie widmeten sich die Sarvastivadin einer umfangreichen Analyse der in der Abhidharma-Literatur dargelegten Grundbausteine der Wirklichkeit, den Daseinsfaktoren (dharmas). Nach ihrer Auffassung war es möglich, alle Daseinsfaktoren unmittelbar und direkt wahrzunehmen (bahya-pratyaksha). Sie verfochten dementsprechend einen pluralistischen Realismus und unterschieden vier Stadien, die jene Faktoren im Prozess der Vergänglichkeit durchlaufen: Entstehung (jati), Dasein (sthiti), Verfall (jarata) und Zerstörung (vyaya). Da die Existenz der Daseinsfaktoren also aufgrund dieser Übergangsphasen mehrere Augenblicke andauerte, mussten diese auch durch Vergangenheit, Gegenwart und Zukunft hinweg existent sein (daher der Name "Sarvastivada": skrt.: sarvam asti = alles existiert). Bestimmte Bedingungen, so argumentierten die Sarvastivadin, die in der Vergangenheit aufgetreten sind, sind Voraussetzungen für den jetzigen Zustand, und die Bedingungen, die in der Gegenwart zusammentreffen, bestimmen den Verlauf der Zukunft. Handlungen (karma) bringen ihre jeweiligen Wirkungen hervor - die Früchte (phala) dieser Handlungen, die ihnen zeitlich vorausgegangen sind. Die Sarvastivadin illustrierten diesen Sachverhalt mit der Metapher eines Steines, der still auf einem Berggipfel ruht. In dieser Position entspricht er einem zukünftigen dharma. Gerät der Stein in Bewegung und rollt den Berg hinab, wird er zu einem gegenwärtigen dharma. Am Fuß des Berges zur Ruhe gekommen, ist er zu einem vergangenen dharma geworden. Es musste nach den Überlegungen der Sarvastivadin eine direkte kausale Verknüpfung zwischen den Daseinsfaktoren der drei Zeitabschnitte geben, und diese Verknüpfung machten sie an der dauerhaften Eigenexistenz (svabhava) fest, die sie den Daseinsfaktoren zusprachen. Die in ihrer Essenz ewig existierenden Faktoren wechseln nach dieser Auffassung durch die jeweils karmisch bedingte Aktivierung aus einem Zustand der Latenz in eine Manifestation über, um in dieser den menschlichen Erfahrungshorizont und die Dinge der Welt zu konstituieren. Nachdem die Bindung, welche die Daseinsfaktoren für eine bestimmte Zeit eingegangen sind, wieder auseinanderfällt, verlöschen die Faktoren nicht vollständig, sondern bleiben stets solange in ihrer Potentialität erhalten, bis sie erneut aktiviert werden. Erlösung bedeutet im Sarvastivada analog dazu, dass keiner der Daseinsfaktoren mehr aktiviert wird - der Lebensstrom (bhavanga) des Erlösten kommt zum Stillstand, wird in einen dauerhaften Ruhezustand überführt. Dieser Zustand entspricht dem "statischen Nirvana", der zu den drei nichtbedingten (asamskrta) Daseinsfaktoren zählt, die im Sarvastivada zusätzlich zu den bedingten Daseinsfaktoren aufgeführt werden: aktives Nirvana (apratishthita-nirvana), statisches Nirvana (pratishthita-nirvana) und Raum (akasha). Jeder Daseinsfaktor verfügt im Sarvastivada über seine ihm jeweils inhärente Eigenschaft (svalakshana), die ihn von anderen Faktoren unterscheidet. Der Same, der zu einem Baum heranwächst, besitzt in seiner Funktion als Ursache ein charakteristisches Merkmal, das ihn mit dieser und nur dieser Wirkung verbindet. Die Fähigkeit, eine bestimmte Wirkung hervorbringen zu können, ist somit bereits in der Ursache angelegt." [Quelle: http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sarvastivada. -- Zugriff am 2006-04-24]

² Dhammaguttika: Dharmaguptaka (Sanskrit), 法蔵部

"DHARMAGUPTAKA (var. Dharmaguptika; Pali : Dhammaguttika),  one of the eighteen schools of Buddhism. It is believed to have been so named as it was founded by one Dharmagupta. Dharmaguptaka is generally regarded as a subdivision of the Mahīśāsaka school. Bhavya, too, while listing it among the ten Sthavira schools refers to another tradition which grouped it as one of the sub-divisions of the Vibhajyavādins. There is no certainty regarding the date of its origin. The Kathāvatthu makes no reference to the school. The Abhidharmakosa (iv, v. 39) contains a reference wherein it is said that the Dharmaguptakas refused to accept the Prātimoksa rules of the Sarvāstivādins as authoritative. The concensus of opinion among the present day scholars is that the school originated somewhere around the 2nd century B.C. Similarly, there is no inscriptional or textual evidence that enable one to fix the school to any particular location in India. Though Hsüan-tsang [玄奘] and I-tsing [義淨] seem to have found traces of it in the Uddiyāna region in the 7th century, this evidence is insufficient to conclude that it originated in that region. Przyluski is of opinion that the Dharmaguptakas had their centre in the north-west. Warder thinks that it originated in the Aparanta country (Warder, A. K., Indian Buddhism, 1970, p. 289). These scanty evidence,about the school could fortunately be supplemented with further information gleaned from the canonical literature of the school, a considerable portion of which is found extant in the Chinese language. Their earliest canon seems to have consisted of the usual three divisions viz. Vinaya, Sūtra and Abhidharma. The Vinaya Pitaka was in four divisions and hence called the Caturvarga-vinaya. The four divisions were : Bhiksuprātimoksa, Bhiksunī-prāktimoksa, Khandhaka and Ekottara. The Sūtra Pitaka had five divisions : Dīrghāgama, Madhyamāgama, Ekottarāgama Samyuktāgama and Ksudrakāgama. The Abhidharma Pitaka consisted of four divisions : Saprasnaka, Aprasnaka, Samgraha Samyukta and Prasthāna. Paramārtha and K'uci-chi suggest the existence of a canon consisting of five main divisions, with two separate divisions, one containing accounts of the previous births of the Buddha and the other containing dhāranis or mantras added to the usual threefold division. However, if ever such an enlarged canon existed, it would have been a late compilation and mainly due to Mahāyāna influence. A fairly comprehensive idea about the doctrines attributed to the Dharmaguptakas could be gathered from the extant literature, specially from the writings of Vasumitra, Bhavya and Vinītadeva, Some of the basic teachings of the school appear to have been as follows : The Buddha is not included in the Sangha. Hence a gift to the Buddha results in much merit than a gift to the Sangha. Although the emancipation of the Buddha is identical with that of a disciple, their ways of attainment differ. Heretics cannot attain the five kinds of super-knowledge (abhijnā). The body of an arahant is completely pure (anāśrava). Even among the devas the holy life (brahmacariyā) is practised. Much merit is accrued through veneration of stūpas. Realisation of truth (abhisamaya) takes place not gradually but all at once. It is through animitta-samādhi that one becomes established in righteousness. Vasumitra, Bhavya and Vinītadeva themselves are not in agreement with regard to these doctrines. For example, Vasumitra disagrees with the teaching that Buddha is not included in the Sangha. Further, he remarks that Dharmaguptaka teachings bear close resemblance to those of the Mahāsanghikas, a remark that appears noteworthy, due to the fact that the Dharmaguptaka school is generally regarded as being on the side of the Sthavira schools. It appears that though this school had its origin among the Sthavira schools, subsequently it got greatly influenced by the Mahāsanghika ideas. This is further evident from the inclusion of dhāranis in their conon and also from the special importance they attach to the honouring of stūpas. The Dharmaguptaka school did play a major role in the spread of Buddhism. As Warder points out (see op. cit., p. 289) they made greater efforts than any other school in taking Buddhism outside India. And in this they were extremely successful for, besides the "cult" of the stupa, the Dharmaguptakas have devised some other means of popularising Buddhism among those who preferred the mysterious to the philosophical. Dhāranis and mantras may have been of much use and help in this regard. They appear to have carried the message of Buddhism along the trade routes from Aparanta into Iran and at the same time into Uddiyana and after establishing themselves as far west as Parthia, they followed the 'silk route' eastwards across central Asia into China where they became the main and the most influential school during the early period of Chinese Buddhism. BIBLIOGRAPHY Bareau, Andre : Les Sectes Bouddhiques du Petit Vehicule; Dutt, N. : Buddhist Sects in India, 1970, Calcutta; Pachow, A Comparative Study of the Pratimoksa, Santiniketan, India, 1955; Warder, A. K. : Indian Buddhism, India, 1970." [Quelle: M. Karaluvinna. -- In: Encyclopaedia of Buddhism. -- Colombo : Government of Sri Lanka. -- Band: 4: Causality - Dvesa. - -1979 - 1989. -- 714 S. : Ill. -- S. .]

9. Jātā Sabbatthivādīhi,
Kassapiyā tato pana;
jātā Saṅkantikā bhikkhū,
Suttavādā tato pana.

9. Aus den Sabbatthivādins heraus entstanden dann die Kassiyapiya¹, die Saṅkantika²-Mönche und dann die Suttavāda³.

Kommentar:

¹ Kassiyapiya: Kāśyapīya (Sanskrit), 飲光部

"Kassiyapiyā, Kassapikā A division of the Sabbatthivādī sect. The Sankantikas were an offshhot of the Kassapiyā (Mhv. v. 9; Dpv. v. 48; Mbv. 96). The Kathāvatthu Commentary (Points of Controversy, p. 101) states that the Kassapiyā held that the past survives, as presently existing, in part." [Quelle: Malalasekera, G. P. <1899 - 1973>: Dictionary of Pāli proper names. -- Nachdruck der Ausgabe 1938. -- London : Pali Text Society, 1974. -- 2 vol. -- 1163, 1370 S. -- ISBN 0860132692. -- s. v.]

² Saṅkantika: Saṃkrāntivādin (Sanskrit)

"Saṅkantikā. A heretical sect, a division of the Kassapiyā. Mhv.v.9; Dpv.v.48." [Quelle: Malalasekera, G. P. <1899 - 1973>: Dictionary of Pāli proper names. -- Nachdruck der Ausgabe 1938. -- London : Pali Text Society, 1974. -- 2 vol. -- 1163, 1370 S. -- ISBN 0860132692. -- s. v.]

³ Suttavāda: Sautrāntika (Sanskrit), 経量部

"The Sautrāntika school of Buddhism split from the Sarvāstivādins sometime between 50 BCE and c. 100 CE. The Sautrāntikas spurned the Abhidharma literature in favor of the original sutras of the canon; thus their name. The used the concept of an āśraya (substrate, refuge) where the Pudgalavādins and the Vātsiputrīya school posited a pudgala, and where mainstream Indian philosophy typically referred to an ātman. Some of their theories were utilized by the Yogācāra school." [Quelle: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sautrantika. -- Zugriff am 2006-06-02]

10. Theravādena saha te,
honti dvādas' imepi ca;
pubbevuttachavādā^a ca,
iti aṭṭhārasākhilā.

^a Geiger: pubbe vuttā cha vādā

10.

Mit dem Theravāda zusammen sind das zwölf¹. Plus den zuvor genannten² sechs Lehren sind es insgesamt achtzehn³.

Kommentar:

¹ zwölf:

1. Theravāda
2. Mahimsāsaka
3. Vajjīputtaka
4. Dhammuttariya
5. Bhadrayānika
6. Channāgara
7. Sammitiya
8. Sabbatthivādin
9. Dhammaguttika
10. Kassiyapiya
11. Saṅkantika
12. Suttavāda

² zuvor genannten: in Vers 3 - 6.

1. Mahāsanghika (Mahāsangītika)
2. Gokulika
3. Ekabbohārika
4. Pannativāda
5. Bāhulika
6. Cetiyavāda

³ insgesamt achtzehn: die runde, heilige Zahl 18 macht die Historizität der Aufzählung etwas verdächtig.

11. Sattarasāpi dutiye,
jātā vasassate iti;
aññācariyavādā tu,
tato oram ajāyisuṃ.

11.

12. - 13.

Auf der Insel Lankā spalteten sich folgende sechs ab:

• Hemata¹ (Hemavata)
• Rājagiriya²
• Siddhatthika³
• Pubbaseliya-Mönche⁴
• Aparaseliya⁵
• Vājiriya⁶

Auch die Dhammaruci⁷ und Sāgaliya⁸ spalteten sich auf der Insel Lankā ab.

Kommentar:

¹ Hemavata (Hemata): Haimavata (Sanskrit), 雪山部

"HAIMAVATA (Pali: Hemavata), one of the schools of early Buddhism, making its appearance in the third century after the Buddha's parinirvāna. Haimavatas find no mention in the Sāriputra-pariprccha Sūtra which is no doubt one of the earliest sources of information regarding the branching out of the various schools of early Buddhism, while other sources provide no coherent testimony. The Dīpavamsa (V. 54) refers to them as Hemavatika, arising first after the original branching off of seventeen schools (vāda) during the second century after the parinibbāna. And then they are lined up with the Rājagirikas, Siddhatthas, Pubba- and Aparaseliyas, all of them grouped together by Buddhaghosa as Andhakas (Kvu. i. 9). Somewhat later, Vasumitra identifies them with the Sthaviras who remained orthodox after the schism which gave birth to the Sarvāstiv^<dins. According to the tradition of the Sammitiyas the Haimavatas are the first school detaching itself from the Sthaviras. From all this, at least so much will be clear that the Haimavatas are a sub-division, which later on is grouped among the Mahāsanghikas, according to Bhavya and Vinītadeva and more precisely among the Andhakas by Buddhaghosa. Vasumitra attributes to them also the five theses of Mahādeva which formed the basis of the doctrine of the Mahāsanghika. Commenting on Vasumitra, who dates the appearance of the Haimavatas at the beginning of the third century after the Buddha's death, Paramārtha relates that the conservative Sthaviras reacted against the influence of the Kātyāyanīputras, who gave over much importance to the Abhidharma by breaking away on the pretext of a return to the teaching of the sūtras alone, and established themselves in the Himalayan regions from where the name of their school was derived, according to the orthodox tradition (P. Demieville, L' Origine des Sectes bouddhiqucs, pp. 23-3 and 53-4). Przyluski has attempted to identify the Haimavatas with the Kāśyapīyas (Concile de Rājagrha, pp. 317-18), but this is contradicted by the fact that all sources make a clear distinction between these two schools (N. Dutt, Early Monastic Buddhism, II, pp. 170-1). It does not appear, however, that the Haimavatas were considered as a separate school before the end of the fourth century A.C. for even at that time it had been observed that a group of Sthaviras residing in the Himalaya had preserved an archaic form of doctrine, probably owing to their isolated position in the mountains. At least that was the view of Vasumitra and the Sammitiyas. When it was found later, that their doctrine was strongly influenced by the Mahāsanghikas, they were accommodated with them. There is no extant inscription, nor any testimony of the Chinese travellers, regarding the places of residence of the Haimavatas, but their name gives us a sufficiently clear indication thereto. A Chinese translation of the Vinaya-mātrkā, entitled P'i-ni-mu-ching, (Taisho, No. 1463; Nanjio No. 1138), appears to be a text belonging to this school; for, the recital of the Council of Rājagrha terminates with a reference which indicates the origin of this text: 'This is the canon which five hundred monks reassembled in the Himalaya.' In this text special reference is made to the Himalayan region, to the necessity of warm clothing for the monks who dwell there and to Kāśyapa, the apostle of the Himalaya. It contains also a description of the canon of which this text forms part. The canon is here (op. cit. p 818) divided into three collections (pitaka) of five sections each: Vinaya-pitaka: Bhiksu-prātimoksa, Bhiksunī-prātimoksa, Kathina, etc., Mātrkā, Ekottara Sūtra-pitaka: Dirghāgama, Madhyamāgama, Ekottarāgama, Samyuktāgama, Ksudrakāagama (or Samyukta-pitaka) Abhidharma-pitaka: Sapraśnaka-vibhanga, Apraśnaka-vibhanga Sangraha, Samyukta, Prasthāna But elsewhere (op. cit. p. 820) a slight difference can be observed in the division of the Sūtra-pitaka, where not only the order of the first four āgamas varies, but also the Ksudrakāgama is omitted. The reading Samyukta-pitaka (Chinese: Tsa-ts'ang) seems to be preferable to Ksudrakāgama, the restoration of Przyluski who appears to have been guided by a similarity with the Pali Canon. One would do well to remember here, that the Mahāsanghikas and the Bahusrutīyas possessed a fourth collection in their Canon, entitled the Samyukta-pitaka. Further, the scheme of the Abhidhanna-pitaka is identical with that of the Dharmaguptakas and the one mentioned in the Sāriputra-Abhidharma-śāstra, but for the amalgamation there of the third and fourth divisions into a Sangraha-samyukta. The most outstanding points on which they differ from earlier schools are: The bodhisattva is a worldling (prthagjana). (This thesis is mentioned by Vasumitra, but Bhavya mentions the opposite). Heretics cannot attain the five kinds of super-knowledge (abhijnā), according to Vasumitra and Vinītadeva, but Bhavya again mentions the opposite). Among the gods there is no continence (brahmacarya), neither is there the development of the Path mārga-bhāvanā). A bodhisattva enters the mother's womb at the time of his conception without producing any desire (kāma). An Arhat may be seduced by another (paropahrta; he may have ignorance (ajnāna) in some respects, may entertain doubts (kanksā), receive instructions from someone else (paravitīrna) and utter a cry (vacībheda) on entering the Path. he conflict of sorrow (duhkha) is shunned (prajahati) by means of the Path. The individual (pudgala) is distinct from the aggregates (skandha), for, when Nirvāna is attained, the individual subsists, while the aggregates cease (niruddha). This last thesis which is typical of the Pudgalavāda, being attributed to this school by the Sammitiyas who were Pudgalavādins, is for that reason extremely suspicious, especially when Vasumitra notes that the other theses of the Haimavatas are similar to those of the Sarvāstivādins. According to Tāranātha, this school had ceased to exist during the time of Dharmapāla and Dharmakīrti, that is during the seventh century A.C. (Schiefner's translation p. 175). BIBLIOGRAPHY: N. Dutt, Early Monastic Buddhism; Andre Bareau, Les Sectes bouddbiques du petit Vehicule; Przyluski, Le Concile de Rajagrha; P. Demieville, L' origine des Sectes bouddhiqucs. Schiefner, Taranatha's Geschichte des Buddhismus in Indien." [Quelle: H. G. A. van Zeyst <1909 - 1989>. -- In: Encyclopaedia of Buddhism. -- Colombo : Government of Sri Lanka. -- Band: 5: Earth - Japan / honorary consultant ed.: Ananda W. P. Guruge. - -1993. -- XIV, 639 S. : Ill. -- S. 406 - 408.]

² Rājagiriya: Rājagirinivāsika (Sanskrit)

"Rājagiriyā One of the heterodox Buddhist sects which branched off in the second century after the death of the Buddha (Dpv.v.54; Mhv.v.12). They formed a part of the Andhaka sect. Points of Controversy, p.104." [Quelle: Malalasekera, G. P. <1899 - 1973>: Dictionary of Pāli proper names. -- Nachdruck der Ausgabe 1938. -- London : Pali Text Society, 1974. -- 2 vol. -- 1163, 1370 S. -- ISBN 0860132692. -- s. v.]

"ANDHAKAS, a collective name given by Buddhaghosa to four schools of early Buddhism, comprising the Pubbaseliyas, Aparaseliyas, Rājagiriyas and Siddhatthikas. In the Kathāvatthu he ascribes to them in common 72 theses thereby making this group from a doctrinal point of view the best known one in the Sinhalese tradition. Inscriptions and the testimony of Hsuan-tsang prove that at least the first two of these schools had their residences in the delta of the Kistna, around Amarāvatī, and Nāgārjunakonda, i.e., in the east of Andhra, from where they derived their name. Although neither the Sinhalese tradition as represented in their chronicles, nor the commentary of Buddhaghosa, precisely formulates the relationship between the Andhakas and the main schools, there are other traditions which agree with the general views attributed to the Andhakas by Buddhaghosa and which make them out to be a comparatively late development from, and a subgroup of, the Mahāsahghikas, with a special link with the Cetiyavādins. The fact that the presence of these later ones is shown in inscriptions in Amarāvatī, dated from the second century A.C., and there only, indicates that the four Andhaka schools were most probably offsprings from the Cetiyavādins of this region. It is therefore not surprising that the greater part of the theses attributed by Buddhaghosa to the Andhakas belong equally to the mother-sect of the Cetiyavādins. A number of their tenets were upheld also by the Mahāsahghikas of the north as known to us from non-Sinhalese sources. A. B. [André Bareau <1921 - 1993>] The theses of the Andhakas are recorded and disputed in the Kathāvatthu as follows :— 1. All mental states (sabbe dhammā) are applications of mindfulness (satipatthāna). As mindfulness (sati) is established in respect of anything, any mental state can be an application of mindfulness (Kvu. i, 9). The object of mindfulness being in the mind, they are themselves also the conscious subject of mindfulness. Patthāna signifies the object of mindful application and the subject applying mindfulness. The past, the future and the present, matter and the other aggregates (khandhā) exist. All things exist, in time, by way of material and other qualities, as past, present or future ; they exist only in this manner (h'ev'atthi). But material does not exist as sensation, perception, etc., and thus all things do not exist in this manner (h'eva n'atthi: ibid, i, 10). A single unit of consciousness or one single thought lasts for a day or more, for in a state of absorption there is continuance without interruption (ibid, ii, 7). Realisation (abhisamaya) of the four Paths and the four Noble Truths is a gradual process (anupubba), as the ocean slopes and inclines gradually. There is no sudden discernment of insight (ibid, ii, 9). The Buddha's ordinary speech (vohāra) on common matters was supramundane (lokuttara : ibid, ii, 10). There are two cessations (nirodha) of conflict, i.e., the third Noble Truth is twofold according to the cessation being effected through reasoned reflections (patisankhā-nirodha) or unreasoned reflections about things (appatisankhā-nirodha), and both of them are absolute (asankhāta : ibid, ii, 11). The powers (bala) of the Buddha are common to his disciples. It was the generalisation of this thesis which was objected to by Vibhajjavādins who did not deny that there were some disciples such as Anuruddha (S. V, 304 f.) who also had some of the ten powers of the Buddha (Kvu. iii, 1). The power of the Buddha in discerning reality (yathābhūta-ñāna) is ariyan not only as regards the extinction of mental intoxicants, but also in respect of his other powers of discernment of the decease and rebirth of beings, etc. (ibid, iii, 2). A thought free from passion has attained deliverance (vimuccati) just as a stained cloth when washed is clean. This thesis is obviously based on a misunderstanding of emancipation, which is not a mere absence of lust (ibid, iii, 3). A person in the eighth stage, i.e., on entering the path of sainthood (sotāpattimagga) and before even reaping the fruit of such attainment, has abandoned the obsessions of heretical views and perplexity (ibid, iii, 5). Such a person who has just entered the path is in the process of acquiring, but has not yet attained to, the five spiritual controlling powers of faith, energy, mindfulness, concentration and insight (ibid, iii, 6), although he may have these same virtues. The divine eye (dibbacakkhu) is the physical eye (mamsacakkhu) when it becomes the medium (lit. support: dhammupatthaddha) of an idea (ibid, iii, 7).  Even the inhabitants of the unconscious spheres (asaññasatta) have perception, for it is said that consciousness arises in them at the moment of rebirth and of decease (cutipatisandhikkhane! D. III, 33). But one cannot say that there is consciousness in the sphere of neither perception nor non-perception (nevasaññā-nāsaññāyaatana : Kvu. iii, 12). The Buddha, in so far as in a previous life he had been a disciple of Buddha Kassapa with the name Jotipāla, a brahman youth (M. II, 45-54) and received from him the assurance (nigāma) of attainment, cannot be said to have been self-developed (sayam-bhū : Kvu. iv, 8).  A person who has attained the realisation of arahantship (arahattasacchikiriyā) is endowed with the three fruitions of the lower attainments ; and as he has obviously not renounced them, he possesses them persistently (ibid, iv, 9). Arahantship. consists of the putting away of all fetters (samyojana). This thesis is rejected by their opponents on the ground that the five lower fetters have already been put away by earlier attainments (ibid, iv, 10). He who has the knowledge of emancipation (vimuttññāna,) is emancipated. This statement becomes incorrect because of its lack of qualification. It is only the peace of fruition (phalam patipassaddhi-vimutti) which is unconditioned emancipation (ibid, v, 1). When one attains mental absorption (jhāna) by means of the meditation device of an earthen disc (pathavi-kasina) he suffers from hallucination (viparita-ñānna), for, while looking at material clay, he is conscious of something else, viz., the concept of extension (ibid, v, 3). All knowledge (ñāna) is analytical (patisambhidā), because it is supramundane wisdom (paññā : ibid, v, 5). It is wrong to say that relative knowledge (sammuti-ñāna) has truth as its only object, for there is a relative truth (sammuti-sacca) and the absolute truth (paramattha-sacca : ibid, v, 6). Knowledge of the ways of thinking of someone else (cetopariyāya-ñāna) is limited in its object to bare consciousness, i.e., not including the contents of such thought (ibid, v, 7 ). Knowledge of the future is present (atthi), for in certain suttas the Buddha has predicted the future, thereby proving that at least for him there exists a degree of knowledge of the future (ibid, v, 8). Knowledge of the present exists. But the Andhakas seem to have implied in this thesis that the entire present without distinction is known (ibid, v, 9). Disciples can, like the Buddhas (sāmaññena buddhānam viya), state whether a certain person has won some state of noble fruition (ariyaphala), since both Buddhas and their disciples teach others the doctrine of attainment (ibid, v, 10). Assurance (niyāma) of salvation is unconditioned (asankhāta) in the sense of permanent (niccatthena), for even if the path were to pass away, a person thus assured would not forfeit his salvation (ibid, vi, 1). The attainment of cessation (nirodha-samāpatti), i.e., the suspension of sensation and perception subsequent to the highest stage of mental absorption (jhāna), is unconditioned (asankhāta), as the four mental aggregates (khandha) cease to function and hence do not present the characteristics of conditioning (ibid, vi, 5). Space is visible, because we have cognition of enclosed space, such as keyholes (ibid, vi, 7). The four great elements of extension (pathavī), cohesion (āpo), caloricity (tejo) and vibration (vāyo) are visible (sanidassana), because the soil, water, a flame and the movement of the wind in the branches of a tree can be seen (ibid, vi, 8). Earth is a resultant of karmic action, inasmuch as there is human action directed towards gaining dominion and sovereignty over the soil (ibid, vii, 7). Old age and death are results of karmic action because some action is conducive to deterioration which is decay or old age, and to the curtailing of life (appāyuka-samvattaniya) which is death (ibid, vii, 8). he fruits of the religious life (sāmaññaphala), being negative in so far as they are the abandonment of defilements (kilesappahāna-mattameva) and are neither thoughts (citta) nor mental factors (cetasika-dhamma), are not the results of karmic action (ibid, vii, 9). The result of karmic action (kamma-vipāka) is in itself the cause of other results, because one result of karma stands in relation to another result by way of reciprocity (aññamañña-paccaya : ibid, vii, 10). The Andhakas considered the sphere of the asuras (demons) as a separate destiny of rebirth, apart from the usual five destinies (gati), hell, the animal kingdom, the world of ghosts, the human world, and the heavens of the gods (ibid, viii, 1). The element of matter (rūpadhātu) consists of cognised material qualities (ibid, viii, 5). In the spheres of form (rūpa-loka) the Brahmas and others have sensations of smell, taste and touch, in addition to those of sight, sound and ideas (ibid, viii, 7). Even in the formless spheres of existence (arūpa-loka) there is material form, because " in dependence on consciousness arise mind and matter" (viññāna-paccayā nāma-rūpam : ibid, viii, 8). Anyone who discerns the blessings (ānisamsa) of a virtuous life, thereby puts away the fetters (saññojana : ibid, ix, 1). The latent evil tendencies (anusaya) have no object (anārammana), as they are distinct from the actual mind (ibid, ix, 4). Insight (ñāna) belonging to the highest path of arahantship is sometimes without mental object (anārammana), e.g., when visual consciousness is engaged with the visible object of the sense of sight (ibid, ix, 5). One who has attained insight into the eight liberations (atthavimokkhañāyī) and who can at will (nikāmalābhī) induce the four states of mental absorption (jhāna), is persistently in possession thereof. And thus a past or a future experience is actually his (ibid, ix, 12). The commentator's objection to this thesis is the absence of a distinction to be made between the acquisition of the state (patilābha), which is a potential faculty, and the actual possession (samannāgata) thereof, functioning at that time. The five aggregates of existence (khandha) of a new lifespan arise before the aggregates of the expiring lifespan cease, without which there would be a break in the life-continuum (santativiccheda), and the new being would be totally different from, and unconnected with, the earlier existence (ibid, x. 1). The utterance of the words : This is conflict (idam dukkham) causes the arising of insight (ñāna) into the nature of conflict (ibid, xi, 4). The conditioning factor by which resulting things are established (dhammatthitatā) is predetermined (parinipphanna: ibid, xi, 7). The Andhakas based this thesis on a passage of the suttas : Whether a Tathāgata arises or not, it still holds good that all component things are impermanent, fraught with conflict and without substance, for such is the causal law of nature (dhātu-dhammatthitatā) which invariably fixes things as effects (dhamma-niyāmatā: A. I, 286; S. II, 25). Impermanenee itself, apart from impermanent phenomena, is predetermined (parinipphanna: Kvu. xi, 8). One who has attained mental absorption takes pleasure therein as bis goal (jhānārammana : ibid, xiii, 7). The latent evil tendencies (anusaya) are different from the actual vice manifesting itself as an outburst (pariyutthāna) ; for, an ordinary man while having a latent tendency of hate or lust may yet without openly manifesting such tendency develop a morally good thought (ibid. xiv, 5). Outbursts of corruption (pariyutthāna) take place sometimes unconsciously (cittavippayutta) when the mind is distracted (ibid, xiv, 6). Just as desire of the senses is inherent (anuseti) in the spheres of sense-experience (kāma-dhātu), so desire for things in the spheres of form (rūparāga) is inherent in the worlds of form (rūpa-dhātu-pariyāpanna) and desire for things in formless spheres (arūparāga) is inherent in the formless worlds (arūpadhātu-pariyāpanna : ibid, xiv, 7). Erroneous views (ditthigata) are indeterminate (abyākata), i.e., neither good (kusala), nor bad (akusala). This thesis is based on a too general interpretation of the word abyākata. Speculation has been declared abyākata by the Buddha, as contradictory statements are " not declared " by him as true and false. In the ethical sense the term abyākata has the meaning of neutral when an action is neither morally skilful nor unskilful. The Andhakas applied this ethical meaning to speculative opinions (ibid, xiv, 8). Karmic action is one thing, the accumulation of karma (kammupacaya) is something else, for it goes on unintentionally (citta-vippayutta), it is independent of moral action (abyākata) and has no mental object (anārammana : ibid, xv, 11). Material qualities (rūpa) are resultants of karmic action, just as consciousness and mental factors (cittacetasika : ibid, xvi, 8). There is matter (rūpa) in the material as well as in the immaterial spheres (arūpāvacara). For, inasmuch as an act of lust is material (rūpa) belonging to the sphere of sense desire (kāmāvacara), and a material act is material belonging to the material spheres (rūpāvacara), so an immaterial act is material belonging to the immaterial spheres (arūpāvacara : ibid, xvi, 9). Lust for life in the spheres of form and the formless spheres is inherent (pariyāpanna) to those spheres (ibid, xvi, 10). There is still accumulation of merit (puññupacaya) in the case of an arahant for he can perform good deeds such as the distribution of gifts (ibid : xvii, 1). As a result of excessive devotion (pema-vasena) towards the Buddha, certain Andhakas held that the Buddha's excreta excelled all other perfumes (ibid, xviii, 4). The fourfold fruition of the religious life is realised by one single path (ekamagga), as the Buddha and many arahants did not pass through the preliminary stages of stream-winner, once-returner and non-returner to attain arahantship (ibid, xviii, 5). Progress from one stage of mental absorption (jhāna) to the next stage does not require a reversion to the procedure of advertising, reflection, etc. involved in access (upacāra) concentration (ibid, xviii, 6). Certain Andhakas with the Sammitīyas explained the fivefold division of mental absorption (jhūna), which is not found in the four nikāyas, as initial application (vitakka) being the basis of the first stage, and by holding that sustained thought (vicāra) is not the second stage but only an intermediate (jhānantarika) step to the second stage of absorption based on zest (pīti: ibid, xviii, 7). Without taking into consideration the two kinds of voidness (sunnatā), one concerning the unsubstantiality of the physical and mental aggregates (khandha) and the other concerning Nibbāna, the Andhakas held that the characteristic of emptiness was inherent only in the psychic aggregate of mental factors (sankhārakkhandha-pariyāpanna : ibid, xix, 2). The element of Nibbāna (nibbānadhdtu) is morally good (kusala) because it is faultless (anavajja : ibid, xix, 6). In the underworld (niraya) there are no beings as guards, but those who enter are kept there and punished by their own evil karma (ibid, xx, 3). In the heavenly spheres are found celestially born animals, such as the wondrous elephant Eravana belonging to Indra (ibid, xx, 4). The Buddha and his disciples (sāvaka) possess the power to perform miracles whenever they wish (adhippāya-iddhi : xxi, 4). The Buddhas differ one from another in degrees of superiority (atirekatā) but only in respect of bodily features, duration of life, lustre, etc. (ibid, xxi, 5). All things are fixed (niyata) as to their fundamental nature, for however much matter is subject to change, it is fixed as matter (ibid. xxi, 7). All karmas are fixed (niyata) in so far as they work out their own effects (ibid, xxi, 8).  An arahant attains final deliverance (parinibbāti) without having cast off every fetter (appahīna-saññojana), as he is still limited in his range of omniscience (ibid, xxii, 1).  An arahant at his final deliverance (parinibbāyati) develops a morally good thought (kusala-citta), as he is always lucidly conscious (ibid, xxii, 2). An act of sexual relationship (methuna dhamma) may be entered upon if there is a united resolve (ekādhippāya) to be thus associated in future lives in samsara (ibid, xxiii, 1). A bodhisatta in order to realise his supreme desire (issariya-kāma-kārikā-hetu) will be born in an evil existence, performing hard tasks and acts of penance under unorthodox teachers (ibid, xxiii, 3). There are acts of loving kindness (mett^s), compassion (karunā) and sympathetic joy (muditā) which may resemble the corruptions of lust, hate and delusion (ibid, xxiii, 4). Theses 21, 22, 51 and 61 deserve comparison with the Abhidharmakosa of Vasubandhu (cp. ed. L. de la Vallee Poussin, chap, vii, p. 15 ; iv, pp. 242-4 and iv, pp. 33-4) H. G. A. v. Z. [H. G. A. van Zeyst <1909 - 1989>] [Quelle: André Bareau <1921 - 1993> und H. G. A. van Zeyst <1909 - 1989>. -- In: Encyclopaedia of Buddhism. -- Colombo : Government of Sri Lanka. -- Band: 1, Fascicle 4: Anabhisamaya Sutta - Aoki, Bunkyô. -- 1965. -- S. 602 - 606.]

³ Siddhatthika

"Siddhatthikā One of the seven heterodox sects which branched off in the second century after the Buddha's death (Mhv.v.12; Dpv.v.54). They belonged to the Andhakas (q.v.) and held the same views. Kvu.104; Introd.xx." [Quelle: Malalasekera, G. P. <1899 - 1973>: Dictionary of Pāli proper names. -- Nachdruck der Ausgabe 1938. -- London : Pali Text Society, 1974. -- 2 vol. -- 1163, 1370 S. -- ISBN 0860132692. -- s. v.]

⁴ Pubbaseliya: Pūrvaśaila (Sanskrit)

"Pubbaseliyā One of the seventeen heterodox sects which arose in Jambudīpa in the second century after the Buddha's death (Mhv.v.12; Dpv.v.55). According to the Kathāvatthu Commentary (see Points of Controversy xli.104, 108, 115) they belonged to the Andhaka school. Their views seem to have been similar to those of the Cetiyavādins (J.R.A.S. 1910, p. 413 ff). According to Tibetan sources (Rockhill: op. cit., 184) they were so called because they lived on the Pūrva Mountain." [Quelle: Malalasekera, G. P. <1899 - 1973>: Dictionary of Pāli proper names. -- Nachdruck der Ausgabe 1938. -- London : Pali Text Society, 1974. -- 2 vol. -- 1163, 1370 S. -- ISBN 0860132692. -- s. v.]

⁵  Aparaseliya: Aparaśaila (Sanskrit), 西山住部

"Aparaseliyā A sub-sect of the Andhakā. Their beliefs seem to have been similar to those of the Pubbaseliyā. KvuA. quoted in Points of Controversy, pp. 5 and 104. See also Dpv.v.54; Mhv.v.12; Mbv.97. For their beliefs see de la Vallee Poussin: J.R.A.S., April, 1910, pp.413ff.   Their centre was Dhanakataka, in the Andhaka country, somewhere near Kañcipura and Amarāvati on the S.E. coast of India (Points of Controversy, xliii; see also Watters: On Yuan Chwang, ii.214ff).   According to one tradition they were connected with the Cetiyavādins. For a discussion of this see Points of Controversy, xliii-iv." [Quelle: Malalasekera, G. P. <1899 - 1973>: Dictionary of Pāli proper names. -- Nachdruck der Ausgabe 1938. -- London : Pali Text Society, 1974. -- 2 vol. -- 1163, 1370 S. -- ISBN 0860132692. -- s. v.]

"APARAŚAILA, one of the schools of early Buddhism. As a sect they were not known to the tradition of the Sammatīyas according to Bhavya, and the Sinhalese chronicles do not count them in the composition and affiliation of early sects but only amongst a group of six schools appearing later. Vasumitra places them side by side with the Caitīyas and the Uttaraśailas among the latest developments of the Mahāsaṅghikas, but Paramārtha does not mention them in his commentary on Vasumitra. The Mahāsaṅghika list as quoted by Bhavya and Vinītadeva places them among the Mahāsaṅghikas side by side with the Purvaśailas. Buddhaghosa mentions them as one of the four Andhaka schools. If they were at all distinguished from the Purvaśailas they were probably one of their schools, for all the theses which are attributed to them by various sources are common to both. Their earliest appearance is in the second half of the third century B.C. Their presence in Nāgārjunakoṇḍa during the Ikṣvāku dynasty (3rd cent. A.C.) is testified by several inscriptions (H. Sastri, EI. XX, 17 ff.). This confirms our knowledge from other sources, where Buddhaghosa, e.g., considers them a sect of Andhaka, in the same region (Kvu. I, 9). Hsüan-tsang [玄奘] found a monastery of the Aparaśailas on a mountain west of Dhaṇyakaṭaka, but at that time it was already deserted for more than a hundred years (Watters, On Yuang Chwang's Travels in India, II, 214-5). Tārānātha (Schiefner Ed. p. 175) mentions that the Aparaśailas had disappeared at the time of Dharmapāla and Dharmakīrti (7th cent. A.C.). An inscription at Nāgārjunakoṇḍa gives us a glimpse of their canonical literature by mentioning against their name the Dīgha-, Majjhima-, and Saṃyutta Nikāya together with five Mātukas (H. Sastri, op. cit. 17 ff.). It is noteworthy that the divisions of the sutta-section are referred to as nikāyas as is done by the Theravādins of Ceylon, and not as āgamas as in north-west India (Kaśmir). N. Dutt is of opinion that the five Mātukas were summaries of the Vinaya Pitaka, as the Vinaya of the Mahāsaṅghikas consists of five parts (Early Monastic Buddhism, II, pp. 55-6}. But it is not likely that in the third century A.C. the Vinaya of this sect would have been not more than five separate tables. It is much more likely that they refer to Abhidhamma summaries, for this collection was developed by all schools but lately, and remained for a very long time in the form of separate mātikas. Vasumitra observes that most of the theses of the Aparaśailas, as those of the Uttaraailas and the Caitīyas, from whom he does not distinguish them, are similar to those of the Mahāsaṅghikas. They are : Bodhisattvas are not free (vimukta) from rebirth in evil states (durgati). Worship at a stūpa or caitya does not produce great results. An arahant may have impure seminal discharge (asucisukkavisaṭṭhi). An arahant has ignorance (ajñāna). An arahant has doubts (kāṅkṣā). An arahant is taken across (paravitāraṇa), i.e., saved by someone else. Although one may have attained the path of holiness (samāpanna) one may yet break the rules as to speech (vacībheda). He who is assured (niyata) as to the future enters the path to the goal (niyāma). The six spheres of the senses are established simultaneously in the mother's womb. Supramundane knowledge (lokuttara-ñāṇa) has twelve objects (dvādasavatthuka). All things (sabbe dhamma) last only one thought-moment (ekacittakkhaṇika)." [Quelle: André Bareau <1921 - 1993>. -- In: Encyclopaedia of Buddhism. -- Colombo : Government of Sri Lanka. -- Volume 2, Fascicle 1: Āpa / asita Devala. -- 1966. -- S. 13f.]

⁶ Vājiriya

Vājirīya. A heretical sect of Buddhists, one of the seventeen schools which branched off one hundred years after the Buddha's death. Mhv.v.13; Mhv. p.97; Dpv.v.54 calls them Apararājagirikā." [Quelle: Malalasekera, G. P. <1899 - 1973>: Dictionary of Pāli proper names. -- Nachdruck der Ausgabe 1938. -- London : Pali Text Society, 1974. -- 2 vol. -- 1163, 1370 S. -- ISBN 0860132692. -- s. v.]

⁷ Dhammaruci

"DHAMMARUCI. One of the heterodox sects of Sri Lanka, which branched off from the Theravāda (Mhv., v, v. 13). According to the Nikāyasangraha (q.v.) this secession took place four hundred and fifty years after the passing away of the Buddha and in the fifteenth year of the reign of Vattagāmani Abhaya (29-17 B.C.). The Nikāyasangraha gives the following account of the origin of the Dhammaruci sect: Once a monk called Mahā Tissa, who had lived earlier in an unimportant, remote place, came to stay at Anurādhapura on the special invitation of the king (Mhv., xxxiii, v. 82), and became the incumbent of the Abhayagiri monastery which the king had specially constructed for him. Later the monks of the Mahāvihara charged Mahā Tissa Thera with having frequented the families of laymen (kulasamsattha) and imposed on him the punishment of expulsion known as pabbājaniyakamma, banishing him from his area of residence (Mhv., xxxiii, v. 95; Nikāyasangraha, p. 10). Mahā Tissa's disciple, Bahalamassu Tissa (big-bearded Tissa), was not in agreement with the findings of the Mahāvihara and raised objections to the charge. Thereupon, the monks of the Mahāvihara charged him also with having sided the "impurs", and imposed upon him the act of ukkhepaniya, according to the Vinaya. This antagonised Bahalamassu Tissa, and he with a large following of monks went to the Abhayagiri, and stayed there, forming a separate faction and refusing to return to the Mahāvihara (Mhv., xxxiii, vv. 96-97). According to Walpola Rahula, "This was the beginning of dissensions in the Sangha which had till then united under the influence of the Mahāvihara. Although the monks of the Abhayagiri lived as a separate group from the Mahāvihara, there was no difference between the two at the beginning either in theory or in practice, except that the Abhayagiri monks did not agree that the charge against Mahā Tissa was justifiable according to the Vinaya" (Walpola Rahula, History of Buddhism in Ceylon, Colombo, 1956, p. 84). They were strengthened as a separate monastic division by the arrival of some monks from Pallarārāma in South India who were descendants of the Vajjiputtakas in India. Their teacher was called Dhammaruci. This group of monks was received at Abhayagiri to reinforce their position. Thenceforward the monks of the Abhayagiri were known as the Dhammaruci sect, after the name of the great teacher in India, Bahalamassu Tissa himself having taken the name Dhammaruci (Nikāyasamgraha, loc. cit.). The Vamsatthappakāsinī says that Dhammarucika was the name given to the monks of Abhayagiri when they broke away fromthe Mahāvihara (MhvA., I, p. 175) and gives the points they differed from the Theravādins (ibid., pp. 676-77). These points concerned minor teachings of the Vinaya. The Dhammarucikas had constant contact with various Buddhist sects and new movements in India from which they derived inspiration and strength. According to Walpola Rahula (op. cit., p.. 85), "They were liberal in their views, and always welcomed new ideas from abroad and tried to be progressive. They studied both Theravāda and Mahāyāna and widely diffused the Tripitika. The Abhayagiri monks, therefore, appeared in the eyes of the Mahāvihara to be unorthodox and heretic." He further observes that, "the Nikāyasangraha says that the monks of the Abhayagiri, who were known as Dhammarucikas, accepted and proclaimed as the teaching of the Buddha the Vaitulya-pitaka composed by the heretic brahmanas called Vaitulyas who had assumed the garb of bhikkhus in order to ruin Buddhism during the time of Asoka; and that the monks of the Theriya-nikāya, having compared their doctrine with the dharma and the vinaya rejected it as false teaching" (Rahula, op. cit., p. 89) Here the reference is to the Mahāyāna sutras, according to Rahula. The Dhammarucikas became active in the time of king Meghavannābhaya, who, after an enquiry into the matter, sent sixty of them into exile. They again became powerful in the time of Mahāsena through the influence of Sanghamitta, and almost succeeded in destroying the Mahāvihara. But disaster was averted by the intervention of the king's friend and counsellor, Meghavannābhaya, and Sanghamitta was killed through the machinations of one of the queens (Mhv., xxxvii, vv. 17, 26-28). When the Dhammarucikas accepted Vaitulyavada, a mahāthera named Ussiliyā Tissa, himself a leading monk at the Abhayagiri, wished to avoid unpleasant consequences of the situation as had happened earlier in the time of Voharika Tissa (see Mhv., xxxvi, v. 91). He, therefore, left the Abhayagiri with about three hundred monks and lived at the Dakkhinagiri, cut off from the Dhammaruci sect. One of this new group, a mahāthera named Sāgala, began to teach religion there; and from that time a new sect, called Sāgaliya, came into existence. (Rahula, op. cit., p. 92)." [Quelle: M. Karaluvinna. -- In: Encyclopaedia of Buddhism. -- Colombo : Government of Sri Lanka. -- Band: 4: Causality - Dvesa. - -1979 - 1989. -- 714 S. : Ill. -- S. 504f.]

⁸ Sāgaliya

"Sāgalikā, Sāgaliyā One of the heterodox sects which branched off from the Theravāda in Ceylon (Mhv.v.13). They formed a part of the Dhammarucikas, and separated from that body three hundred and forty one years after the establishment of Buddhism in Ceylon. They lived at first in the Dakkhina vihāra, but later went to the Jetavana vihāra, built by Mahāsena. They made certain alterations in the Ubhatovibhanga (MT.175, 176; Cf. Sās.p.24; see also Mhv.xxxvii.32 ff., and MT.680). According to the Singhalese Nikāyasangrahaya (Quoted in Geiger's Dīpavamsa and Mahāvamsa, p.90), the Sāgalikas took their name from their leader, Sāgala Thera, and their separation took place seven hundred and ninety five years after the Buddha's death, in the reign of King Gothābhaya. Moggallāna I. gave the vihāras of Dalha and Dāthākondañña, on Sīhagiri, to the Dhammarucikas and the Sāgalikas, while he also gave the Rājinī nunnery for the use of the nuns of the Sāgalika sect (Cv.xxxix.41, 43). Aggabodhi II. gave the Veluvana vihāra, which he had built, to the Sāgalikas (Cv.xlii.43). Kassapa IV. built for them the Kassapasenavihāra. Cv.lii.17." [Quelle: Malalasekera, G. P. <1899 - 1973>: Dictionary of Pāli proper names. -- Nachdruck der Ausgabe 1938. -- London : Pali Text Society, 1974. -- 2 vol. -- 1163, 1370 S. -- ISBN 0860132692. -- s. v.]

Msgr. Etienne Lamotte gibt eine Zusammenstellung der durch Inschriften bezeugten Verteilung der buddhistischen Sekten:

Quelle: Lamotte, Étienne <1903 - 1983>: Histoire du Bouddhisme indien : des origines à l'ère Śaka. -- Louvain : Publ. Univ. [u.a.], 1958. -- XII, 862 S. : Ill.. --  (Bibliothèque du Muséon ; 43.). -- S. 578 - 581.

Ācariyakulavādakathā niṭṭhitā.

1A. Exkurs: Die Sektenbildung nach tibetischen Schriften

"The 90th volume of the sūtra of the Bstan-hgyur contains three works on the schismatic schools of Buddhism, one of which, the Samayabheddhoparacancakra, by Vasumitra (f-157-163), has been translated by Professor Wassilief in his work on Buddhism. I have endeavoured in the following pages to condense the information contained in the work of Bhavya, the Nikāyabhedavibhaṅa (I. 163-172), in that of Vinītadeva, the Samayabhedoparacanacakranikāyabhedopadarśanasaṃgraha, and in a curious little work called the Bhikṣuvarṣāgrapṛccha (f. 284-296), the author of which is unknown. The theories of the different schools are unfortunately given by both Vasumitra and Bhavya in about the same words, and so concisely, that it is a very diflieult if not an impossible task, to give a satisfactory translation of them. I have, however, attempted to translate the greater part of Bhavya's remarks, and by means of Vinītadeva's work, which is a compilation of that of Vasumitra, I hope that I have been able to elucidate a few of the latter's observations which I think are rather obscure in Professor Wassilief's translation. I have deemed it prudent to retain in the translation the greater part of the technical Sanskrit terms in their original lorm, for by translatng them mistakes might be made which would entirely alter the sense of the original, whereas the Sanskrit term will enable the reader to reconstrue more easily what may have been the original text. The first twelve pages only of Bhavya's work are translated, for the last five present but little interest, and add nothing to our knowledge of the doctrines of these schools:— Adoration to the triratna! How came about the eighteen schools and their peculiar features ? This is the way in which they are all said to proceed from (the teaching of) the one highest Lord. One hundred and sixty years after the utter passing away of the Blessed Buddha, when King Dharmāśoka (i.e., Kāḷāsoka) was reigning in Kusumapura (Me-tog-gis rgyas-pa, i.e., Pāṭaliputra), there arose a great schism in the congregation on account of some controverted questions, and it divided into two schools, the Mahāsāṃghika and the Sthavira. Of these, the Mahāsāṃghika school gradually divided into eight fractions (to wit), the Mahāsāṃghika school, the Ekavyavahārika, the Lokottaravādin, the Bahuśrutīya, the Prajñaptivādin, the Caityika, the Pūrvaśaila, and the Avaraśaila. The Sthavira school gradually divided into ten fractions — the Sthavira proper, also called the Haimavata; the Sarvāstivādin; the Vaibhajyavādin; the Hetuvidya, which is also called by some persons Muduntaka (or Muruntaka); the Vātsīputrīya; the Dharmottarīya; the Bhadrāyaṇīya; the Saṃmatīya, which is also called by some persons Avantaka, and by others Kurukullaka ; the Mahīśāsaka; the Dharmaguptaka; the Saddhartnavarṣaka (or properly Suvarṣaka), which some persons call the Kāśyapīya; the Uttarīya, called also by some the Saṃkrāntivādin. These are the eighteen Schools. The Mahāsāṃghika received this name on account of the great number of its followers, which made it a great assembly or Mahāsaṃgīti. Some persons contending that all the doctrines are thoroughly understood by an unique and immediate wisdom (skad chig gchig-dany-ldan-pai-shes-rab), for all doctrines of the blessed Buddhas are comprehended by the intellect (thugs-gis instead of thugs-gi), are for this reason called "Disciples of the dispute on one subject," or Ekavyavahāra. Those who say that the blessed Buddhas have passed beyond all worlds (i.e., existences), that the Tathāgata was not subject to worldly laws, are called, " Who has passed beyond all worlds," or Lokottaravādin. Those who were taught by the master Bahuśrutiya are called Bahuśrutīya. Those who contend that misery (duḥkha) is mixed with all compound things arc called Prajñaptivādin. Those who live on the Caitya mountain are called the Caityika. Those who live on the Pūrva mountain (śaila) and or the Avara mountain are respectively called Pūrvaśaila and Avaraśaila. Those who teach that the sthaviras belong to tho body of the elect (ariyas) are called Sthavira. They are also called Haimavatas because (f. l64b) they live on Mount Himavata. Those who say that all exists, the past, the future, and the present, are called in consequence, "They who say that all exists," or Sarvāstivādin. Those who say that some things exist, (such as) past actions of which the result has not matured, and that some do not exist, (such as) those deeds of which the consequences have occurred, and the tilings of the future; making categories (or divisions), they are called in consequence, "They who speak of divisions," or Vaibhajyavādin. They who say that things which have been, which are, and those which will be, have a cause (hetu), are called, " They who speak of a cause," or Hetuvidya. They who live on Mount Muruntaka are for that reason called Muruntaka. They who, teaching of man's birth, say that, womankind being the dwelling-place (vāsa) of the family, man, being born of her, is a son of the dwelling-place or vāsa-putra, are for this reason called Vātsīputriya. Those who were taught by tho master Dharmottara are the Dharmottarīya. The disciples of Bhadrāyana are the Bhadrāyaṇīya. They whose teacher was Sammata are tho Sammatīya. They who congregated in tho city of Avanta were consequently called the Avantaka. They who live on the Kurukula mountain are for that reason (called) Kurukula(ka). They who declaring in their teaching, from the properties of the word "earth," that all the great mass of human beings will have no other existence, are the Mahīśāsaka, or " Those who teach much ". They whose master (founder) was Dharmagupta are the Dharmaguptaka. They who have caused the rain of the law of laudable ideas to fall are called " (The school of) the good rain," of Suvarṣaka. They whose master was Kāśyapa are the Kāśyapīya. In like manner, they whose master was Uttara are the Uttarīya. They who say that tho pudgala (individuality) passes from this world (i.e., life) into another are called, "They who spook of passing," or Saṃkrāntivādin. Of these (f. 165*), the Mahāsāṃghika and seven others, for a priori reasons, and the Sthavira, Sarvāstivādin, Mahīśāsaka, Dharmottarīya, and Kāśyapīya, for a posteriori reasons, are believers in the non-existence of the soul (anātmavādins), and say that all things are without ātman. They say that those who teach of self arr in conformity of views with the tīrthikas, and that all things (dharma) are without ātman. All the other (sects), the Vātsīputrīya, &c, five (in all), believe in (the existence of) the pudgala. They say that when the six senses have discerned that the pudgala (passes) from (one set) of skandhas to another, one is perfectly freed from transmigration. These are the differences of the eighteen schools. Other people say that it is not so. They say that there were three original divisions (lit root-divisions, rtsa-lai dbye-ba), to wit, the Sthavira, the Mahāsāṃghika, and the Vaibhajyavādin. Moreover, there are two subdivisions of the Sthavira—the Sarvāstivādin and the Vātsīputrīya. Again, the Sarvāstivādinare divided into two—the Sarvāstivādin (or Mūla Sarvāstivādin ?) and the Sautrāntika. There are four (sub)divisions of the Vātsīputrīya— the Saṃmatīya, the Dharmottarīya, the Bhadrāyaṇīya, and the Ṣaṇṇagarika. In this way are the Sthavira divided into six schools. Moreover, the Mahāsāṃghika school has eight divisions (according to their theory)—the Mahāsāṃghika, the Pūrvaśaila, the Avaraśaila, the Rājagiriya, the Haimavata, the Caityika, the Saṃkrāntivādin, and the Gokulika, This is the way in which they divide the Mahāsāṃghika. The Vaibhajyavādin (they say) comprise four divisions—the Mahīśāsaka, the Kāśyapīya, the Dharmaguptaka, and the Tāmraśāṭīya (f. 165"). This is the way in which they give the eighteen divisions of the schools of the Ariyas. Again, others say that 137 years after the death of the Blessed One, King Nanda and Mahāpadma convened in the city of Pāṭaliputra all the different Ariyas. Mahākāśyapa, a man who had attained to unassailable composure, and the venerable Mahāloma (spu tchen-po), Mahātyaga (gtang-ha tchen-po), Uttara (bla-ma), &c., arhats, with correct analytical knowledge, there assembled to bring round the wicked to agree with the good. Having settled the habits (? tcha-byad) of the bhikshus (i.e., the ten indulgences ? see p. 171), and having exhibited different miracles, there occurred, on account of five propositions, a great schism in the congregation (saṅgha). The Sthaviras called Nāga, Sthiramati (Yid brtan-pa), and Bahuśrutīya advocated the five propositions and taught accordingly. They said that (the doctrines concerning) answer to another (or advice to another, gdzan-la lan-gdab), ignorance (mi shes-pa), doubt (lit. double-mindedness, yid gnyis-pa), complete demonstration (yong-su btags-pa), restoration of self (bdag-nyid gso-bar byed-pa), were the way, and that they were taught (lit. the doctrine of) by the Buddha. Then they (the congregation) became divided into two schools, the Sthavira and the Mahāsāṃghika, and for sixty-three years after the division of the congregation they obstinately quarrelled (hkhrug long-gio gnas-so). One hundred and two years later, the Sthavira and the Vātsīputrīya rightly collected the doctrine (bstan-jw yang-dag-par badus-so). After they had rightly collected it, there arose two divisions of the  Mahāsāṃghika, the Ekavyavahārika and the Gokulika. The Ekavyavahārika considered as fundamental doctrines that the blessed Buddhaa (f.66*) having passed beyond the world, the Tathāgata is not subject to worldly laws; that the dharmacakras of all the Tathāgatas do not agree ; that the words of all the Tathāgatas are revered in their spirit (snyingpo-la). (They say) that all the Tathāgatas here (in this world) are without longing for rūpa; that the bodhisattva does not pass through the successive stages of embryonic development [lit. does not receive the condition of kalala (nur-nur), arbuda (mer-mcr), peci (nar-nar), and gana (gor-gor)], (but that), after having entered his mother's side as an elephant, he appears (i.e., is born) (by) his own (will ?). (They say) that a bodhisattva has no kāmasaṃjñā (hdod-pai hdu shes); he is born at his will among inferior beings for the salvation of mankind (lit. to bring people to maturity). (They say) that with one wisdom (jñāna, ye shes) the four truths are perfectly understood ; that the six vijñānas are subject to passions (hdodd-tchags-dang-bchas) and free from passions. (According to their theories) the eye sees forms ; arhats acquire the doctrine by others: and, moreover, there is a way to cast off ignorance, uncertainty; complete demonstration, and misery (exist). There are words (spoken while) in a state of perfect abstraction ; there is (such a thing as) to cast off impurity ; he who has perfectly acquired right restraint has cast off all yoga (attachment). Tathāgatas have not the right view (of the rest of) humanity. The mind (sems) being of its nature radiant, it must not be said that anuśayas (bag-la nyal, thoughts) participate of the mind or that they do not participate of it. Anuśayas are one, the completely spread out (kun-nas ldang-ba, i.e., the mind) is another. The past and the future do not exist (in the present). The śrotāpatti (f. i66b) can acquire dhyāna. These are the fundamental doctrines of the Ekavyavahārika. (As to) the (sub)divisions of the Gokulika, the Bahuśrutīya and the Prajñaptivādin, the Bahuśrutīya hold as fundamental doctrines that there is no mode of life leading to real salvation (niryānika) ; that the truth of suffering, subjective truth (? kun rdsob-hyi hden-pa), and the venerable truth (aryasatya, hpaggs-pai bden) (constitute) the truth. To perceive the suffering of the saṃskāra is to enter perfect purity. There is no (way) to see the misery of suffering and the misery of change. The saṅgha has passed beyond the world (i.e., is not subject to worldly laws or conditions). Arhats acquire the doctrine by others. There is a rightly preached way (yang-dag-par bsgrags-pai-lam gang yod-do). There is a right entry into perfect composure (samāpatti). Of this description are the fundamental doctrines of the Bahuśrutīya. The Prajñaptivādin say that suffering is no skandha; that there are no perfect āyatanas; that (all) saṃskāras are bound together; that suffering is absolute (paramārtha, sdug-bsngal-ni don-dam-por-ro); that what proceeds from the mind is not the way; that there is no untimely death (dus-ma yin-par htchi-ba ni medo); that there is no human agency (skycs-bu-byed-pa yang med-do); that all suffering comes from karma (deeds). Of this description are the fundamental doctrines of the Prajñaptivādin. The Sthavira Caityika are yet another division of the Gokulika. A parivrājaka by the name of Mahādeva, who had entered the (Buddhist) order, lived on a mountain with a caitya. He rejected the fundamental laws of the Mahāsāṃghika, and established a school which was called Caityika; and these are the six sects derived from the Mahasanghika, There are two divisions of the Sthavira, the Old Sthavira (sngar-gyi gnas-brtan) (f. 167*) and the Haimavata. The fundamental doctrines of the Old Sthavira are as follows: Arhats are not perfected by the teaching of another, so likewise the remainder of the five propositions are denied; the pudgala exists; there is an intermediary state (between two successive existences); arhatship is parinirvāṇa (dgra-bchom-pa yongsu mya-ngan-las-hdas-pa ni yod-do); the past and the future exist (in the present) ; there is a sense (? don—artha) of nirvāṇa. These are the fundamental doctrines of the (Old) Sthaviras. The fundamental doctrines of the Haimavata are that a bodhisattva is not an ordinary mortal; that even a tīrthika has the five abhijñānas; that the pudgala is separate from the skandhas, because in the (state of) nirvāṇa in which the skandhas are arrested the pudgala exists. Words enter into samāpatti (i.e., words are spoken in that state); suffering is removed by the mārga. These are the fundamental doctrines of the Haimavata Moreover, the first Sthavira (dang -poi gnas - brta.) divided into two sects, the Sarvāstivādin and the Vātsīputrīya. The fundamental doctrines of the Sarvāstivādin are all comprised in two (propositions ?). The compound and the elementary exist. What is the consequence of this (theory) ? That there is no pudgala; therefore if this body without ātman comes into existence, there being no agent (byed-pa med-ching), no right-doer, one consequently drops into the stream of existence. This is the way they speak. These are the fundamental doctrines of the Sarvāstivādin. Their fundamental doctrines are all comprised in nāma-rūpa. The past and the future exist (at the present time); the śrotāpatti is not subject to degeneracy. There are three characteristics (f. 167b) of compound things. The four holy truths are gradually understood. The void, the un-desired, and the uncharacteristic lead to the unblemished (state, skjon-med-pa-la). With fifteen seconds one has attained the fruit of śrotāpanna. The śrotāpatti finds dhyāna. Even the arhat has an imperfect existence. Ordinary mortals can cast off rāga or evil-mindedness. Even a tīrthika has the five abhijñānas. There are means for even a deva to lead a virtuous life (brāhmacarya). All the sūtras have a straight (drang-po, ṛju) sense. He who has entered the unblemished (truth), has (passed) beyond the kāmadhātu. There is a right view of the kāmaloka (i.e., inherent to persons inhabiting the kāmaloka ?). All the five vijñāna are not under the rule of the passions, (but) they are not also free from passions. These are the fundamental doctrines of the Sarvāstivādin. There is, moreover, a sect (bye-brag) of the Sarvastivadina which is the Vaibhajyavādin. The divisions of the Vaibhajyavādin are the Mahīśāsaka, the Dharmaguptaka, the Tāmraśāṭīya, and the Kāśyapīya. The fundamental doctrines of the Mahīśāsaka are: The past and the future do not exist; present compound things exist. To distinguish misery is to see into the parts of the four truths. Anuśayas are one and the evident cause (mngon du rgyu = sems ?) is another (i.e., they must be distinguished). There is no intermediary existence (between two successive regenerations); there is (such a thing as) a life of virtue (brāhmacarya) in the abode of devas ; even an arhat accumulates merit. All the five vjñānas are (subject to) the passions and without passion (rāga). The pudgala pervades all the individual; the śrotāpatti acquires dyāna. Ordinary beings (can) cast off passions and wickedness. The Buddha is comprised in the saṅgha. The emancipation (lit. perfect freedom) of the (or a) Buddha and of the śrāvakas is one. There is no such thing as to perceive (mthong) the pudgala. Neither the mind nor its manifestations, nor anything which participates in the least of the conditions of birth, passes from this life into another. All compound things are momentary. If birth is through an extension of the saṃskāra, the saṃskāra do not (however) exist permanently. Karma is as is the mind. There is no liberty of body or speech ; there is no condition not subject to degeneracy; there is no reward for honouring a caitya. (Any) present event is always an anuśaya (da-ltar byung-ba rtag-tu ni bag-la-nyaal-ba yin-no). ' To distinguish compound tihngs is to enter the unblemished (truth). These are the fundamental doctrines of the Mahīśāsaka. The fundamental doctrines of the Dharmaguptaka are as follows: The Buddha is not comprised in the saṅgha. There is a great reward from (offerings made to) the Buddha, but none from (those made to) the saṅgha. There is (such a thing as) a life of virtue (brāhmacaria) in the abode of the devas. There are worldly laws (hjig-rten-pai-tchos-ni yod-do). These are the fundamental doctrines of the Dharmaguptaka. The fundamental doctrines of the Kāśyapīya are as follows: Requital, and subjection to the laws of requital, as also the law of coming to pass (i.e., the pratītyasamudpāda) exist. To a person who has cast off (all sin ?) is perfect knowledge. All the other assertions (hdod) of the Kāśyapīya are (like) those of the Dharmaguptaka. The fundamental theory of the Tāmraśāṭīya is that there is no pudgala. Furthermore, the fundamental doctrines of the Saṃkrāntivādin, a sect of the Sarvāstivādin (f. 168b), whose chief doctrines are (due to) the master Uttara, are that the five skandhas pass (hpho, saṃkrānti) from this life to another. There is no arresting the skandhas when the way has not been discovered. There is a skandha which has inborn sin (? rtsa-bai ltung-ba, dang-bchas-pai-phung-po yod-do). The pudgala is not to be considered subjectively (don-dam-par). All is impermanent. These are the fundamental doctrines of the Saṃkrānti (school). These are the fundamental doctrines of the seven divisions of  the Sarvāstivādin. The fundamental doctrines of the Vātsīputrīya are: The possession of what one was attached to and upādana are solidary (? nye-bar blangs-pa nye-bar-lenpa dang-ldan-pa ni btags-so). There are no properties (? dharma) which pass from this life into another. When one has been attached to the five skandhas, the pudgala transmigrates. There are compound things (saṃskāra) which are momentary, and also (some) which are not momentary. One must not say that the pudgala is either an upādana-skandha, or that it is not. They do not say that nirvāṇa is in  the unification of all conditions, or that it is in the disruption (of them). They do not say that nirvāṇa is real existence (yod-pa nyid), or that it is not real existence. (They say that) the five vijñānas are not suhject to passions; that there are none without rāga. These are the fundamental doctrines of the Vātsīputrīya. There are yet two divisions of the Vātsīputrīya, the Mahāgirīya and the Saṃmatīya. The fundamental doctrines of the Saṃmatīya aro: (The belief in) the existence of what shall be (i.e., future things), of what is, of what shall be arrested ; (the belief in the existence of) birth and death (as well) as of the thing which shall die, of the agent, of the thing which shall decay (as well as of) decay, of what shall go (as well as) in going, of what must be perceived (as well as) in perception (vijñāna). There are two kinds of Mahāgirīya (ri-tchen-po), the Dharmottarīya and the Bhadrāyaṇīya. (F. 169*.) The fundamental doctrines of tho Dharmottarīya is: In birth is ignorance ; in the arresting of birth is the arresting of ignorance. The Bhadrāyaṇīya are like unto them. Some say that the Ṣaṇṇagarika school is a division of the Mahāgirīya ; others that it is a division of the Saṃmatīya, thus making four divisions of the Vātsīputrīya school. The eighteen divisions (rnam-pa) came into existence gradually through following (the theories of) certain doctors who are the originators of them. There is much more to be said about another separation. Here is how (arose) the diversity of doctrines and the four divisions of the Sarvāstivādin, which was caused by the diversity (of opinions) on substance (bhava, dngos-po), characteristics (lakṣaṇa, mts'an-nyid), condition (gnas-skabs), and change (gdzan gdzan-du hgyur-ba-nyid). Concerning primary substance and its change, the Bhadanta Dharmatrāta said that, according to circumstances (tchos-rnams) and time, there is (no) changing of substance and no transmutation into another substance (bhava). If a gold vase has been destroyed and (afterwards) made into something else, made into another shape, it will not however be another substance (rdsas). Likewise milk, if it become curds, though it has acquired a different taste, property (nus-pa), another shape (smin-pa), (yet) it is the same substance. In like manner, if past conditions (dharma) exist in the present, (they retain) the substance (dngos-po) of the past. There is no destructible matter therefore, he said, if the present (condition) exists in the future; the present substance (dngos-po) is not of a destructible nature (i.e., it will be the same in the future). (The theory of) the change of characteristics is (the work) of the Bhadanta Ghoṣaka. He said that all things under the influence of time cannot but have in the future and in the present the characteristics which they had in the past. The future and the future characteristics of a thing cannot but be the past and present ones. For example, if men loved one woman, they are not without affection for all the rest (of womankind). (The theory of) the change of condition is (the work) of the Bhadanta Vasumitra. He said that things under the influence of time which are said to change do not alter their condition (gnas-skabs). For example, in a single vegetable one speaks of one life, iu a series of an hundred it is an hundred lives, in a thousand it is a thousand existences. That is what he said. (The theory of) passing from one (condition) into another (i.e., of change) is (the work) of the Bhadanta Buddhadeva. He said that when one looks at the remote (sngon) and the proximate (phyi-ma) in the work of time on things, ono says that they (have passed) from one (condition) into another. For example, one speaks of a woman as " ma " (or mother) ; she is also called " bu-mo," (or girl). So it is that these (four) men say that all things exist, and they are Sarvāstivādins. Likewise some (teachers) said that there are seven pratītya (rkyen),—cause (hetu), thought (āambana), proximity (? de-ma-lhag-pa), the ātman (bdag-po), karma, food (zas), dependency (rten). Some said that there being four ways of mental perception, truth was various (bden-pa so-soo). Others say that as there are eight (kinds) of religious knowledge (tchos-shes-pa) and knowledge derived from experience (lit. example, rjcsu shes-pa), there is no analytical knowledge. . . . Here we will leave Bhavya, for the remaining pages of his treatise only recapitulate the opinions of the Sarvāstivādin school, and we know enough of these from Vasumitra." [Quelle: The Life of the Buddha and the early history of his order : derived from Tibetan works in the Bkah-hgyur and Bstan-hgyur followed by notices on the early history of Tibet and Khoten / translated by W. [William] Woodville Rockhill <1854 - 1914>. -- London : K. Paul, Trench, Trübner, 1907.  -- XII, 273 S. ; 22 cm.. -- S. 181 - 196.]