Sautrantika Voraussentzungen In Vimsatika Und Trimsika - Book Summary

Here's a comprehensive summary of the provided text from "Sautrantika Voraussentzungen In Vimsatika Und Trimsika" by Lambert Schmithausen, focusing on the core arguments and findings:

Schmithausen's core argument is to demonstrate that two key Yogācāra texts, the Vimsatikā (V) and the Trimsikā (Tr), exhibit significant "Sautrāntika prerequisites" (Sautrāntika-Voraussentzungen). This means that these texts, traditionally attributed to Yogācāra masters like Vasubandhu, were developed on a philosophical foundation that still retained important elements from the earlier Sautrāntika school of Buddhism, rather than being purely Yogācāra from the outset.

The paper addresses the general uncertainty surrounding the development and chronology of Yogācāra philosophy, highlighting the difficulties in establishing a definitive literary history due to attribution issues (Maitreya(nātha), Asanga, Vasubandhu) and dating problems. The author notes the ongoing debate about the existence of two Vasubandhus (one the brother of Asanga, another the author of the Abhidharmakosa). Schmithausen proposes that an internal analysis of the doctrines and terminology of these texts is crucial for reconstructing Yogācāra's intellectual history.

The central part of the paper focuses on demonstrating the Sautrāntika underpinnings in the Vimsatikā and then comparing it with the Trimsikā.

Key findings regarding the Vimsatikā (V):

"Mental Series" (Vijnana-samtāna): The Vimsatikā presents the vijñaptimātratā (consciousness-only) doctrine but does so not on the basis of the Yogācāra's complex, multi-layered concept of the ālaya-vijñāna (store-consciousness) and the associated manifold of consciousnesses. Instead, it relies on the Sautrāntika concept of a "one-layered" mental series.
- This is evidenced by the Vimsatikā's reference to the repository of karmic residues (karmaṇo vāsanā) as being contained in a non-specific "mental series" (vijñānasamtāna), rather than explicitly the ālaya-vijñāna. This mirrors Sautrāntika terminology.
Terminological and Conceptual Parallels: Several key terms and concepts in the Vimsatikā reveal Sautrāntika influence:
- Sautrāntika Terminus: The phrase "samtāna-pariņāma-viśeṣaḥ" (special transformation of the mental series), which describes the causal process of karma, is identified as a typical Sautrāntika term. This is also found in Vasubandhu's Abhidharmakośa.
- Sense Faculties (Āyatanāni): The Vimsatikā's explanation of sense faculties, when discussing the manifestation of sensory knowledge, is interpreted as an adaptation to the Sautrāntika "one-layered" mental series. In the absence of an ālaya-vijñāna as a substrate for mental phenomena, the sense faculties themselves are equated with the "seeds" (bīja) that cause knowledge, a move necessitated by the Sautrāntika model.
- Synonymity of Consciousness Terms: The statement in the Vimsatikā that citta, manas, vijñāna, and vijñaptiḥ are synonyms aligns with the Sautrāntika view where these terms refer to a single, empirically accessible consciousness, contrasting with the Yogācāra distinction of these terms to represent different levels of consciousness (e.g., ālaya-vijñāna, manas, and the six sensory consciousnesses).
- Perception vs. Conceptualization: The Vimsatikā's distinction between sensory knowledge (pratyakşam) as direct perception (free from conceptualization) and the subsequent manovijñāna (mind-consciousness) as performing conceptualization (vikalpaḥ) aligns with Sautrāntika (and especially Abhidharmakośa) analysis, where manovijñāna is the locus of conceptualization, and sensory cognition is considered direct and "idea-less." This contrasts with later Yogācāra texts that tend to view all worldly cognition as a form of conceptualization (vikalpaḥ).
Philosophical Justification of Vijñaptimātratā: The Vimsatikā's arguments for vijñaptimātratā are primarily based on philosophical refutations of real objects (using the atom vs. whole dichotomy), rather than the typical Yogācāra approach which often draws from meditative states and soteriological doctrines.

Influence on Dignāga and Dharmakīrti:

Schmithausen argues that this "Sautrāntika-based vijñaptimātratā" found in the Vimsatikā is also evident in the works of Dignāga (Ālambanaparīkṣā) and Dharmakīrti. They also develop an idealism based on the Sautrāntika "one-layered" mental series, with Dignāga's text serving as a link.

Comparison with the Trimsikā (Tr):

Yogācāra Foundation: The Trimsikā, unlike the Vimsatikā, clearly operates within the Yogācāra framework, accepting the multi-layered consciousness system (including the ālaya-vijñāna) and the possibility of simultaneous arising of multiple cognitions. The sense faculties are understood as actual manifestations of the ālaya-vijñāna.
Lingering Sautrāntika Traces: Despite its Yogācāra foundation, the Trimsikā still shows "unmistakable traces of the author's Sautrāntika past." This is particularly seen in:
- The opening statement that the "transformation of consciousness" (vijñāna-pariņāmaḥ) underlies the talk of self and phenomena. This term, as understood from the Vimsatikā, can be interpreted as referring to the transformation of the mental series, consistent with Sautrāntika ideas.
- The Trimsikā's model can be seen as a "multi-layered" mental series where the Sautrāntika "one-layered" stream is an underlying stratum, with the Yogācāra complex being the manifestation of its "seeds" (bīja).

Conclusion on Authorship and Development:

Authorship of V and Tr: The presence of these Sautrāntika elements in both the Vimsatikā and the Trimsikā strongly supports their attribution to the same author.
Vasubandhu's Transition: Schmithausen concludes that the author of the Abhidharmakośa and Karmasiddhiḥ (widely accepted as Vasubandhu) gradually transitioned from his earlier Sarvāstivādin/Sautrāntika views. The Karmasiddhiḥ shows an approximation to Yogācāra, the Vimsatikā adopts vijñaptimātratā on a Sautrāntika foundation, and the Trimsikā fully embraces Yogācāra but retains Sautrāntika influences. This suggests that Vasubandhu, the author of the Abhidharmakośa, eventually became a Yogācārin, and that the Vimsatikā and Trimsikā are works from this later period.
Support for the "Two Vasubandhus" Hypothesis: The absence of these specific Sautrāntika traits in the Yogācāra commentaries attributed to Vasubandhu (commentaries on Maitreyanātha and Asanga's works) might lend support to Frauwallner's "two Vasubandhus" hypothesis, though Schmithausen emphasizes the need for further research to definitively confirm this.

In essence, Schmithausen's detailed textual analysis reveals a significant continuity of Sautrāntika thought within the foundational texts of Yogācāra, illustrating a crucial developmental stage in the evolution of Mahayana Buddhist philosophy.