The "Ālokā" of Haribhadra and the "Sāratamā" of Ratnākaraśānti: A Comparative Study of the

Two Commentaries of the "Aṣṭasāhasrikā"

Author(s): Padmanabh S. Jaini
Source: Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies, University of London, Vol. 35,
No. 2 (1972), pp. 271-284
Published by: Cambridge University Press on behalf of School of Oriental and African Studies
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/614403 .
Accessed: 05/01/2015 23:18

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of
content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms
of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

Cambridge University Press and School of Oriental and African Studies are collaborating with JSTOR to
digitize, preserve and extend access to Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies, University of
London.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 128.235.251.160 on Mon, 5 Jan 2015 23:18:15 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 THE ALOKAOF HARIBHADRA AND THE SARATAMA
OF RATNAKARAAINTI: A COMPARATIVE STUDY OF
THE TWO COMMENTARIES OF THE ASTASAHASRIKA
1
By PADMANABHS. JAINI

Of the several commentaries on the Astasdhasrikd-prajfid-pdramita-sistra,

the of Haribhadra (ninth century) and the S&ratamm
Abhisamaydlai•skra-dlokd
of Ratnakarasanti (eleventh century) are the only two works that have survived
in the original Sanskrit. The Aloki is well known through the editions of
Tucci and Wogihara, and critical works in this field by Obermiller and Conze.
The Sanskrit text of the Sdratama is now awaiting publication in the Tibetan
Sanskrit Works Series, Patna. It is based on two incomplete MSS photographed
by the late Rahula Samkrtyayana in the year 1937 and preserved in the library
of the Bihar Research Society, Patna.
A brief description of these MSS appears in Rahula's article ' Second search
of Sanskrit palm-leaf MSS in Tibet', JBORS, xxIII, 1, 1937, 24-5. We
may note here a few interesting details. MS No. 201 is in Kutila script.
It bears no date but appears likely to have been written towards the end of
the thirteenth century. The total number of leaves found by Rahula is 103.
The last folio is, however, numbered 85. This is because the numbering is not
continuous. There are signs of fresh numberings at three places at least. From
the uniform writing of all three sections it appears that they originate from
the same scribe. The other MS (No. 200 of Rahula's list) is also in Kutila
script (of an earlier variety) and is incomplete. The first leaf is missing but the
last leaf is preserved and bears the date of the MS. The colophon states that
the MS belongs to one Pandita Jivandhara Sirimhaof the Kayastha family, in
the province of Gundigulma, in the reign of gri Harsadevaraja. The date reads
sanmvatd to 3, which as noted by Rahula stands for 213 of the Nepalese era,
and correspondsto A.D. 1093. The last leaf is numbered 103. As the numbering
is continuous the whole work contained only 103 leaves of which 49 (1-21,
51-55, 57-79) were missing when Rdhula found it in Tibet.
Photographs of both these MSS were made available to me by the Bihar
Research Society as early as 1957, and a brief notice of the Sdratamaiappeared
in the annotated bibliography preparedby Dr. Conze in his The Praj3-iparamita
literature,'s-Gravenhage, 1960, 56. The illegibility of a great many photographs
and the disorderly nature of MS 201 prevented any serious progress in editing
this work. Then in 1966 excellent photographs of a ' new ' MS of the Sdratami
were obtained through the kind courtesy of the Director of the Namgyal
Institute of Tibetan Studies, Sikkim. To my great surprise the 'new' MS

xThis paper was read before the twenty-eighth International Congress of Orientalists,
Canberra, 1971.

This content downloaded from 128.235.251.160 on Mon, 5 Jan 2015 23:18:15 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
272 PADMANABH S. JAINI

happened to be identical with our MS No. 200 which Rahula had photographed
in 1937 and which had now reached Sikkim through the refugees who had
migrated from Tibet into India. The Sikkim MS had 11 more leaves which
were missing in Rahula's collection. Thus only 38 leaves (1-21, 51-55, 57-58,
63-72) were now missing out of a total of the 103 leaves of MS 200. A few of
these missing portions were supplemented from MS 201. As a result, our text
lacks only two entire parivartas (Nos. 13 and 14) and parts of six parivartas
(Nos. 1, 8, 9, 10, 11, and 12) out of the 32 parivartas of the original text.
The name of the work as given in both MSS, at the end of parivartas and
in the colophon, is Sdratama. It is called Sdratardonce in MS 201-at the end
of parivarta 8. This may well have been a scribal error. However, the Tibetan
translation of this work ascribed to Subh-iti'anti (mdo-'grelx, 1-253a, no. 3803
in Hakuju Ui and others (ed.), A completecatalogue of the Tibetan Buddhist
canons, Sendai, 1934) calls it S&rottama.Although Sarottam5 would appear to
be a better title we have followed the evidence of our MSS and have accepted
Siratami as the original title of this work. The full title, however, is Arydsta-
S&ratam5ndma paijika.
as well as the Tibetan translation and the Tibetan historian
The MSSprajnudpdramitdyeh.
sehasrikayh,
Bu-ston 2 (A.D. 1290-1364) ascribe the S&ratamdto Ratnakaradanti. We learn
from the Tibetan historian Taranatha 3 that Ratnakara'inti was a disciple of
N~ropa and a contemporary of such famous ciiryas as Prajiiakaramati and
Vagidvarakirti,and presided over the Vikramasilamonastery. He was succeeded
there by (his disciple ?) the celebrated Atisa, better known as Dipailkara
grijiiana. The date of the latter is A.D. 982-1054. Ratnakara'anti thus lived
in the first half of the eleventh century A.D. Besides the Sdratami he is also
the author of a commentary on the Abhisamayalailkdracalled the Auddhamati
(var. lect. ?uddhimati), and possibly also of the
pradipa,4 now available only in their Tibetan translations.5
PrajSpdaramitd-pind..rtha-
Because of the loss of a large number of commentaries, notably the Tattva-
viniscaya of Asafiga, the Paddhati of Vasubandhu, and the Varttikaof Bhadanta
Vimuktisena (not to speak of the ancient Praj3nparamitS-upadela-s'stra
ascribed to Nagarjuna) in their original Sanskrit, the AlokJ of Haribhadra was
hitherto our only major source for the study of the co-ordinated texts of the

2History of Buddhism, translated by E. E. Obermiller, Heidelberg, 1931-2, I, p. 31 and n. 284.

3 Geschichtedes Buddhismus in Indien, translated by F. A. von Schiefner, St. Petersburg,
1869.
4E. Conze, The Praji~dpramit5 literature (Indo-Iranian Monographs, vI), 's-Gravenhage,
1960, 113.
5 Several other works on the doctrine of the citta-mdtra,and in the field of Tantra are ascribed
to Ratndkaraginti and survive in the Tibetan translation. Professor Alex Wayman informs me
that the following works are included in the citta-matra section of the Tibetan Tanjur: 'The
Madhyamalkalasikdravrttimadhyamapratipadd8iddhi-n&ma, two little works both entitled Prajiid-
five
pdramitabhavanopadeba,the PrajAiipramitopadela, and the Madhyamakclaihckropadeba,
in all. He has also written three commentaries on the Guhyasamaja-tantraand has composed a
number of lesser Tantric commentaries and works, such as the the
Abhisekanirukti, and a number of s8dhanas '. Khasmn-nmandma-.tka,

This content downloaded from 128.235.251.160 on Mon, 5 Jan 2015 23:18:15 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 THE ALOKA OF HARIBHADRA AND THE SARATAMA OF
RATNAKARIBANTI 273

Prajnapdramitd-sftras and the Abhisamayalak1cra-dastra.6The handy edition

by Dutt of the first parivarta of the Pa cavi?mati-sahasrikd(Abhisamayd-
to conform to the scheme of the Aa.),
lafikdrdnusdrenasalmdodhito-rearranged
and the recent edition by Pensa of the first abhisamaya of Arya-Vimuktisena's
Aa.-vritti have greatly advanced our knowledge in this field. The discovery
of the Sdratami takes us one step further as it is probably the only (and the
last) commentary of both the Sitra and the 9dstra written on the model supplied
by Haribhadra in his Alokd.
As indicated above, the Sdratam5 is a paiijikadwhich analyses and explains
difficult words of the Ast~asihasrikJ.7Haribhadra too calls his Alokd a paiijiki),8
but as a matter of fact it is a great deal more than a mere 'perpetual com-
mentary '. His introductory verses take due notice of the works of the great
masters like Asafiga, Vasubandhu, Arya Vimuktisena, and Bhadanta
Vimuktisena, while the text is replete with copious quotations from these
as well as from the works of NMgdrjuna,Aryadeva, Difinaga, and scores of
other sltras and sdstras including the Pascavi?msatisihasrik5 and the Aa.
He gives a brilliant summary of the entire Aa. in the first adhiklra (W, 1-21)
and treats at length a large number of controversial problems, e.g.
(1) The rebirth of the 9rdvakaand the pratyeka-buddha= triyina -->ekayana
(W, 133-4).
(2) The Buddha's = death of the nirmana-kWyaonly (W,
145-50). parinirvna,
(3) Whether the dariana-mrgqaconsists of 15 or 16 moments (W, 170-1).
(4) The nature of the miyopama-advaya-j3idnaof the Buddha (W, 268-70).
(5) Omniscience and the limits of the jieya (W, 531-6).
(6) The sarva-dharma-abhinna-svabhavatva of Tathate examined in view of
the distinction between a bodhisattvaand a Tathlgata (W, 624-42).
(7) The true nature of samrvaraand asarmvara(W, 730-1).
(8) The nature of ksaya-jnMnaand the anutpida-j~ana (W, 883-5).
(9) The simultaneous appearance of two Tathggatas in one loka-dhatu
(W, 960-61).
(10) Examination of the theory that totality of causes (samaqgry) produces
effect (W, 969-76).
Comparedwith this masterly work, the S&ratamdleaves much to be desired
both in its contents and in its scope. The introductory verses speak only
of Maitreya. Names like Asailga, Vasubandhu, Vimuktisena,9 and even
Haribhadra, and indeed of any other Jcdrya, are conspicuous by their absence
from the text. The work abounds in quotations from the two larger Prajld-

6 Henceforth referred to as Aa. or

Sdstra.
7 We have used Wogihara's edition of this text together with the Alok&(Abhisamayalazmkdr'-
dlok&-prajiiaparamitavydkhyd(Toyo Bunko Publications, Ser. D, nI), 2 vols., Tokyo, 1932-5).
Henceforth indicated by W.
8
tattv'alokca-vidhyyinfviracit&sat-paiijikeyarg mayd// (W, 994.)
9 It should be noted here that Ratndkarabiinti refers to Vimuktisena in the introductory

This content downloaded from 128.235.251.160 on Mon, 5 Jan 2015 23:18:15 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
274 PADMANABH S. JAINI

pdramitd-sAtras,almost invariably referred to as ' Mahatyor bhagcvatyoh', as

if the two were identical in their readings ! The only other quotations are one
each from the following texts (mentioned by their names): (1) Dadabhiimika-
sAitra,(2) SftrlaiAkcra, (3) Arya-Vimalakirtinirdela, (4) Buddhabhiimi-sitra,
(5) Dharmaddna-sitra. As regards the 10 major controversies listed above
where Haribhadra leads a vigorous attack on his opponents, Ratndkarasanti
chooses to make a few casual comments on only two of them: the ' eventual'
attainment of Buddhahood by an arhat (No. 1) ; and the simultaneous appear-
ance of two Buddhas in one loka-dhitu (No. 9). Nor does he appear anxious
to give any information on his date and place; in this respect, as in others,
one cannot but admire Haribhadrafor giving (in the concluding verses) elaborate
descriptions not only of his guru and the king, but also of the vihdra where the
Alokd was composed.
This does not, however, detract from the value of the S&ratamdas a paiijika
of the combined texts of the Astasihasrikd-sitra and the Aa.-dAstra. In this
respect, the Sdratami can certainly be considered an improvement upon the
Aloka. The latter is content to place the karikds of the Aa. at the end of the
parivartas as a mere quotation (tathi coktam) to serve as a conclusion to the
chapter. The &Sratami opens its parivartas with the Aa. text, weaves in with
it the relevant portions of the Astasdhasrika-sfltra,and gives a word for word
explanation not only of the sAtra, but (unlike the Alokd) also of the Aa. text.
It also abounds in etymological and grammatical analyses of unusual words
and forms, understandably omitted by the Tibetan translator.
Since the Aa. was primarily composed with specific reference to the
Pancavimiati-sdhasriki, it is evident that modifications to the former would
be necessary in applying it to a shorter text of the Astasihasrikd. Haribhadra,
whether he was responsible for adapting the Aa. to the Astcasihasrikaor not,
does not show any awareness of this need for modification. On the contrary,
he appears to be indignant at any attempt to tamper with the Aa. text as
can be seen from his concluding remarkstowards the end of the 29th parivarta-
the Anugama 10:
'The meaning of the grantha (i.e. the sAtratext) should be explained in a
manner that corresponds to the order of the abhisamayas on the authority
of the KIrikd-dsstra (and the spirit of the text). A certain commentator,

verses of his ~uddhimatf. I am indebted to Professor Alex Wayman for this information and for
the following translation of the Tibetan verses.
'The Abhisamaydklafkdraof the gentle Mother, was
composed by Arya Maitreya. The uuddhimati
commentary of mine was written by myself, Ratnikara.
Thinking that Vimuktisena had not completely
explicated the meaning of the extended Mother
(= prajfidpdramitd),it was understood by me according
to the in the manner of discourse.'
Prakarana as opposed to the
10 This is the last parivarta of the original version of the
As.tasdha8rikd 15.
32 parivartas of the extant version. See Conze, The Prajifiipramitd literature,

This content downloaded from 128.235.251.160 on Mon, 5 Jan 2015 23:18:15 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 THE ALOKA OF HARIBHADRA AND THE SARATAMA OF RATNAKARAAANTI 275

having made numerous changes in the readings of the karikas of the Aa.,
has given irrelevant explanations of this Mother (= the Astasdhasrik) ...
because of an improper understanding of the purport of the partial and the
whole text. We have not undertaken a refutation of this exposition
(vydkhydna)as we leave the judgement in this matter to the wise '."
We will probably never know the name of the commentator who is rebuked
by Haribhadra, nor if Ratndkarasanti had access to the AlokJ. If he did, as
seems likely, he certainly chose not to heed Haribhadra's admonition against
changing the kirika text. The extant &Sratami preserves not less than eight
such instances of deliberate modifications of the Aa. to suit the text of the
Astasihasrika. We may note some of these.
The first instance occurs in the second parivarta and relates to kirikais 3-5
of the Mdrgajnatrd-adhikdra dealing with 'the aids of penetration' (nirodha-
bhdgyyas) of a dravaka:
rfipidi-skandha-d~nyatvicchilnyatTndmabhedatah/
issmano 'nupalambhenatespmmfrdhagatamrmatall// II, 3
ksintayas tesu nitycdiyogasthdnaniedhatah/
dadabhiim~h samarabhyavistrdisthanadedandt//II, 4
proktamdryasravakavartmani/
tat kasya hetor buddhenabuddhvd
agradharmagatam, II, 5
dharmdsamiksan.t//
Haribhadra applies the four terms (issman,milrdhan,ksdnti, and agradharma)
described in these verses to the relevant passages of the Astasdhasrikd, and
quotes these karikds in support (tathi coktamr)of his explanation. Ratnakara-
'dnti's endeavour is directed to the derivation not only of the items iciman, etc.,
but also of the wordings of the karikas from the text of the AstasdhasrikJ. He
therefore finds it necessary to change the above karikJ text to suit this sitra
(tasmid asyim Bhagavatyim anyathaiva dstrapatha unnetavyah) as follows.
asthdnamilsm5 rilpddau, mirdh tad iti hiti yat/
ksintir na nityar, ndnityaTrrlpddity asthitidvaye//
phala[m] punmsamiharyanigrm videsesvasthitis tu yd/
saivagradharmovijfieya aryasravakavartmani//
It will be observed that the modified kdrika text directly corresponds to
the text of the Astasihasrikia:
(1) nacrlpe sthatavyam.... na buddhatve (W, 140) (= asthanam
ripidau) ; sthatavyar.
(2) iti0fs.ma
hi rfipam iti na sthatavyam... iti hi buddhatvamiti na sthatavyatn
(W, 140) (= miirdhdtad iti hiti yat) ;

11evam eva Karika-dsatra-praminyad blhvadhydihMrdipadddibhirabhisamaya-kramanuritpo

granthdrtho vacya4. tatah ca kenacid Abhisamayalaitkdra-ktrikS-p&thanbkhulyendnyathkk.rtv
pratibhMtute Subhfta ity-ddi vdkyam drabhyasy5 Matur yad asambaddham samyak-samuddyd-
vayavdrthdnabhidhdnidvydkhydnam krtatmtat santa eva ji&tum arhantfti nopanyasya nirdkrtarn
(W, 925-6).

This content downloaded from 128.235.251.160 on Mon, 5 Jan 2015 23:18:15 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
276 S. JAINI
PADMANABH

(3) riipaym nityam anityam iti na sthatavyam... vsijnaam suinyam

upalabhyate veti na sthatavyam (W, 141-2) (= ksdntir na nityamr
ninityam rilpddity asthitidvaye);
(4) srotdpattiphalam iti na sthatavyam... pratyeka-
buddho daksiniyaasamsk.rtaprabhavitam
iti na sthitavyam (W, 142-3) (=
phalaym
. . .). pum.sam
iharyn.amm
We may further note that the first three lines of the modified karika text
have a close resemblance to the first three lines of Aa. II, 3-4. The real difference
is seen only between the last line of the modified text and the last three lines
of Aa. 1, 4-5. Since the context is that of the moksabhagiyasof a siravaka
(and not of a bodhisattva),Ratndkarasanti might have judged the last three
lines of Aa. II, 4-5 irrelevant to the topic and not supported by the text of the
Astasihasrikd. The text of the Paiicavims'atiprobably justified the Aa. text;
we have no means of finding out the precise difference between the readings
of these two siitras, as the second book of the has not been
published yet. Paicavims.ati
The second case of modification also occurs in the second parivarta (and
the second adhikdra)in connexion with the first seven ksanas of the darsana-
marga of a bodhisattva. This is given in Aa. II, 12-13:
adhdrddheyatd'bhavat tathatibuddhayormithahl/
mahatta,stpramn atl// II, 12
parydyensananuj3anamy,
parimnyntatd'bhdvo, rlupder avadhdranam/
tasyJdTsthitasya buddhatve,'nugrahdtyagatddayah//II, 13
In karik5 12 the first ksana is explained as 'no consent (to the separate
existence of dharmas), because the foundation (Suchness) and that which is
founded on it (the Buddha) are not (ultimately distinct).., .and because (the
Suchness of the skandhas) and the Buddha are in turn identical '.1 The
particular Astasdhasriki passage to which Haribhadra applies this karik5
lacks the words adhara, adheya, tathatd, etc. Instead it raises the question:
... prajnapiramit .. . . kutogavesitavydand answers: ... na ripdd gavesitavyd,
nanyatra rfipad gavesitavya. . . vij*nand gavesitavyd(W, 173). RatnakaraSdnti
quotes Aa. II, 12-13, but finds it necessary to modify:
tu Bhagavatrm pedatrayam anyathi kartavyam:
imm. r~pidito dherndnanya na canya paramarthatah/
adhikrtyddyam,
tasyd' catustayamyat tu mahattasipramnatll//
parimanntatd'bhdvau riipdderavadhdranam/
The change in the third line is a minor one. The dual form
'bhdvau refers to the following readings of the Astasdhasriki: parimn.ydntatS-
aparimna-
paramiteyam &rya Subhiite... anantapliramiteyam rya Subhiite yad uta
prajgjparamiti/ (W, 174). The modified version of the kirikas truly reflects
the readings of the Astcasihasriki.
12Conze's translation, Abhisamayalaifkara (Serie Orientale Roma, vi), Rome, 1954.

This content downloaded from 128.235.251.160 on Mon, 5 Jan 2015 23:18:15 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 THE LOKA OF HARIBHADRA AND THE SARATAMA OF RATNAKARAAANTI 277

The third case of modification relates to Aa. III, 10b, which describes the
tenth ' endeavour' of a bodhisattva:
(aparapratyayoyas'ca) saptadhdkhydtivedakah/13
As noted by Haribhadra, the Paficavimsati mentions all the seven aspects,
but only the last aspect, viz. the pratidrutka, is read in the Astasdhasriki.
Haribhadra is content with the explanation that the latter is a brief text and
also that the mention of the middle aspect (No. 4) indicates the inclusion of
the remaining aspects as well.14 Ratnakaradanti, however, deems it necessary
to change the kdrik5 text: Mahatyor bhagavatyorsaptadha khyitih pathyate/
... sd ekendpi sfaky5 dariayitum/ ...
tasmdd Bhagavatydam
asydrm
pathyate/ ata endm prati sastrapdtho 'nyathi kartavyah:
drs.dntena
pratigrutkopamataiva
yo 'paro khydtivedakah/iti/
The fourth change, also a minor one, relates to the sixth of the 16 marks
(laksanas) of the cognition of sarvajiati. This mark consists of the cognition
of that aspect (dkdra)due to which the thoughts of beings are not extinguished,
as expressed by the words aksaydkdratdayeiin Aa. Iv, 15.15 The wording of the
Astasihasrika is aprameydksayni cittani (W, 541) and not i cittani.
Ratndkara'dnti has noted this change and states that the Aa. reading
aksayS,
is correct for the two larger siltras; but with reference to the Astasdhasrikd
(aksayy.i)
we should read instead ameydksaratydrctas our text reads aprameydksayni
cittcni.16 Haribhadra is aware of the different readings, but does not suggest
any amendments to the Aa.: cittasydksaydkdrajndnamvaktum dha: aprame-
cittdnity adi.17
ydksaydni
The fifth change pertains to the topic of prayoga-samat ' the sameness of
endeavours' as given in Aa. III, 10cd:
caturdhd'manand tasya rfipddausamatd matc/
Ratnakarai'nti explains that the prayoga-samati consists of four kinds of
amanands 'absence of preconceptions', and quotes the following passage
from the ' Larger satras ' (Mahatyoh): rapamcna manyate, na manyate,
riipena
rzipay mameti na manyate, riipe 'pi na manyate, evamyvedanddisv iti. The
corresponding passage of the Astasdhasrikd, however, lists eight kinds of

'
13 (Finally one considers) the one who experiences it in the seven aspects in which (the
dharmas which constitute him and his training) resemble (a dream, a magical illusion, a mirage,
an echo, a reflex, a city of the gandharvas, a fictitious magical creation) ' (Conze, Abhisamaya-
latikara, 46).
14. . . hetuvirahid akdraka-khydtyd... bhav5j~eat bhavantity evarmPai~cavirnsatisahasrikayam
uktar7t.atra tou vivaksitatvktprati8rutkopamOb sarva-dharmaiti vacanenamadhyamasya
sam.ksepasya
nirdeSddady-anta-trika-nirdeha iti pratipattavyamn(W, 431).
15 ca pravistrte/
aksaydkcratkydcm sardagdau
mahadgate 'prama&teca vijiedne cinidarhane// (Aa. Iv, 15.)
'
16 akayakarataydai ca' iti Mahatyau prati. imim tu prati ' ameyaksayataydii
ca' iti pitha4. kscayapd.tho
hi pathyate ' cittani' iti.
17 W, 541. asym, aprameyidksayini

This content downloaded from 128.235.251.160 on Mon, 5 Jan 2015 23:18:15 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
278 PADMANABH S. JAINI

amanands: sa ca tOnna manyatena samanupasyati na jdinti na sa3mjdnitete ca

dharmd na vidyante na samdyryantena samvidyante nopalabhyanteiti viharati
(W, 431). Ratnakarasanti notices this discrepancy and comments that the
AstasihasriMktext has eight kinds of amanands, viz. four pertaining to the
grdhya and four pertaining to the grihaka. He therefore recommends an
amendment to the Aa. text: tu prati ~dstrapdtho'nyathd
kartavyah-- imdm. Bhagavat.m
astadha 'manand tasya rip~dau samatd matd/
It is interesting to note that Haribhadra fails to notice any discrepancy
between the two readings. His interpretation 18 of the Astcashasrik&passage
(quoted above) also differs from that of Ratnakarasdnti (who in addition gives
a paijika on all the eight words of that passage). What is far more intriguing
is that Ratnakarasdnti's quotation from the 'Mahatyoh ' (on which is based
his understanding of the 'four' manands) does not agree with the fourfold
manands (paddrtha, nimitta, prapaiica, adhigama) as laid out by Haribhadra
evidently on the basis of the Pa-cavirmAatisihasrika.19
We may note one more instance of a similar nature where a particular
kirikJ comes to be applied to two different passages of the Astasihasrikd.
This pertains to Aa. 11, 29:
klesaji~eyatrimdrrgasyasisyakha gajinaurasdm/
hinad vi`uddhir, Jtyantiki tu buddhasyasarvathd//
This kirikd describes four forms of' purity ', viz. the purity of the srdvakas,
of the pratyekabuddhas,of the bodhisattvas,and the 'perfect purity' of the
Buddha. Haribhadra derives all these four kinds of 'purities' from a single
line: yd sJ sarvajnatdviuuddhih... (W, 408) by interpreting the
rilpaviduddhih, as tri-sarvajiativiguddhih.20 Ratnakaraanti does
word sarvajiativiguddhih
not quote this karikd in the Sdratame, for, as he explains, 'the fourfold
"purities " are enumerated in the two larger siitras (Mahatyoh) as the latter
are comprehensiveof all three paths ; they are not spoken of in the Astasihasrikd
as it is devoted solely (in this context) to the path of the bodhisattva'. Con-
sequently he understands the word sarvajiatd to mean only the sarvikdrajiiat5
of the Buddha.21

18ssamati-dvarela prayogo bhlvanfya iti samatam dha sa ca tdn na manyata ity idind. tatra
samahitena cittena tin na manyate yato na samanupa8yati. te ca dharmd na vidyante yato na
samdoryante,8amahitena manas&na jiniti yato na te ca dharmis taj-jfiina-gamyd na
salmjarnfte,
safmvidyanteyato nopalabhyanta iti yojyanm(W, 432).
19tad evay rftpadipaddrthamanand-nilddinimittamanand-rftpadvidhavivmatidhetyddipra-
paiicamanand-nirvedhabhigfyddyadhigamamananunam pratisedhena jflt.rjiieyadharmdnupalabdhiA
caturdhokti vijiieyi (W, 432).
20sAmAnyena8uddhim evam abhidhiya vide~sendha:punar aparam ity ddi. sarvaj?ataviiuddhir
iti trisarvajiiatavi8uddhir ity arthaAb... margajigatddhikAreviduddhikathanaprasaaigit dtyantikf
cetardca tathdgatindinm 8rvakdi~ndim ca yathdkramanm viduddhibkathitd (W, 408).
21
vi uddhibhedadcatviro Mahatyor bhagavatyoruktiA sarvasanigrahartham, aasydm tu nokt5
bodhisattvamdrgddhikdrdt . . . arvajiiateti sarvdkdrajiiatd... (parivarta 8).

This content downloaded from 128.235.251.160 on Mon, 5 Jan 2015 23:18:15 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 THE ILOKA OF HARIBHADRA AND THE SBRATAMA OF RATNAKARAAANTI 279

These two different interpretations have a bearing upon the application

of the next karik which describes the nine grades of the viduddhi:

mirgah guddhirnavasu bhimisu/

m.rdumrdv~diko
malasya pratipaksatah// 11,30
adhimatridhimUatrder
The next siitra passage (following the one quoted above with the word
sarvajiatavi~uddhih)has nine words describing the ' purity' of the prajiadpra-
mitd. ~ariputra says that the praj'dpiramiti is gambhircd, avabhisakari, l1okah,
apratisamdhih, asamklesah, aprdptih, anabhisamayah, anabhinirvrttih, and
atyantanupapattih. Haribhadra takes these nine terms to be indicative of the
nine stages described in kIrik 11, 30.22 In doing this he ignores the fact that
the siltra text gives two terms, aprdpti and anabhisamaya, together in one
sentence,23and also that the last word, atyantinupapattih, is followed by the
words kdmadhatu-ruipadhatv-e-drpyadhatusu. Ratnakarasanti is aware of both
these and hence has a different explanation. He derives the first two 24 of the
nine stages from the word sarvajiatdviguddhih appearing in the previous
passage. He therefore needs only seven terms to account for the remaining
seven stages. These he derives from the next passage by counting the two
words (aprdpti and anabhisamaya) as one in conformity with the sfitra text,
and by taking the last word (atyantanupapattih)not to refer to the ninth stage
but to the next kdrikdwhich deals with the tri-dhitu-pratipaksatva,25 and which
corresponds to the sAtra expression: atyantanupapattirBhagavan prajnipira-
mitd kdmadhatu-rfipadhatv-drilpyadhitusu.
It is clear from these examples that Ratnakara'dnti is consistent in his
adherence to the text of the Astasihasrikd in preference to the 'oostra '-
a digest of the two larger sAtras. It is, of course, understood that there are no
doctrinal differences between the three siitras: the larger ones are broader in
their scope, whereas the is essentially a brief text (samksipti
A.tasihasrika
ceyarmBhagavati). None the less, Ratnakaradsnti has no hesitation in pruning
the text of the Astasdhasrikiiif he finds it at variance with the larger siitras.
Fortunately one such example has survived in our extant text, and is singularly
valuable as it also reveals Ratnakarasanti's predilection for the tri-svabhaiva
theory of the Yogacara school.
The passage in dispute, which consists of a single word, is found towards
the end of the first parivarta of the Ast~asahasrik5.It corresponds to the text
of the Paicavimiatisahasriki (ed. Nalinaksha Dutt, Calcutta Oriental Series,

22 gambhird...
atyantinupapattir iti... nava-paddrthini yathdIkramanm mrdumrdvddi nava-
praklra-bhavand-mirgatvena vcydni ... (W, 409).
23dha/ apriptir anabhisamayo Bhagavan
prajiidpdramita/ (W, 409).
24sarvajiiateti sarvaklrajiata. tasyd viduddhir dvividhu.
yd skandhandm eka8o vi84uddhib
ca s8 sarvdakrajiatdviiuddhib. yd ca tasydb sd tesdm ity eki sarvikirajiatdviduddhib.
pdramitidn.m
... sarvam etad abhinnam acchinnam iti dvitiyd sarvakarajiataviudddhib. yad asydimna pathyate
upalakscaeatvittad grihyam iti mrdumrdumirgomadhyamadhya' ca (parivarta 8).
25 tridhatupratipaksatva.m samata minameyayob/ (Aa. II, 31ab).

This content downloaded from 128.235.251.160 on Mon, 5 Jan 2015 23:18:15 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
280 PADMANABH S. JAINI

28, London, 1934), p. 252, and pertains to the topic of a 26 (sixth

of the eight prdpti-niryn
listed in Aa. I, 72-3.27
nirydnas)
According to Haribhadra, the prdpti-nirydna consists in the rejection of
the prdpya (i.e. the own nature-svabhcva-to be attained), the prdpaka (the
person-a bodhisattva-who attains it), and the relationship between the two,
in conformity with the law that no dharmaexists apart from the Dharmadhatu.282
This definition correspondsto the scheme adopted in the Paicavirmsatisihasriki,
where the section on the prdpti-niryna (p. 244) is followed by three more
sections: iti 247), .. . prdpaka-pratisedhah
prdpti-nirydneprdpyapratisedhah(p.
(p. 250), and ... prdpya-pripaka-sambandha-pratisedhah(p. 256). In the
the prdpti-nirydnaoccupies only 12 small paragraphs(W, 109-14).
As.tasdhasrikitreatment of this section is brief and confined to the
Haribhadra's summary
given above. Ratnakarasanti, however, seems to attach great importance to
the analysis of the text on this and avails himself of the opportunity
' nirydna,
'
to expound on the threefold nature (tri-svabhiva)of the prdpya for which he
uses the better-known term grihya. He also points out that the 12 ' sentences '
(vikya) of the Astasihasrika deal with the 12 characteristics of the prdpti-
The first five vdkyas reject (pratisedha)the obtainment (prdpti) of
nirydna.29
the 'imputed' (kalpita) from the point of view of the dharma-nairitmya,
whereas the sixth vikya rejects the pripti of the same from the point of view
of the unreality of the pudgala. The seventh vikya rejects even the obtainment
(pripti) of the 'relative reality' (paratantra-svabhiva). The eighth, ninth, and
tenth vakyas explain the 'absolute reality' viz. the
(parinispanna-svabhava), '
iinyata of both the grihya and the grihaka. The last two establish the non-
duality' (advaidhTbhiva)between the two.30
The controversial reading alluded to occurs in the seventh vikya, which
according to Ratnakarasanti denies the paratantra-svabhiva. This vikya in
Haribhadra'sversion of the Astasdhasrikareads as follows: evamasvabhavainam
katamat tad rlpamy yad agrahyamy katame
te vedanad... vijidna'n yad agrihyam anabhinirvrttaml/
sarva-dharmin.m anabhinirv.rttaml/
Haribhadra's
(W, 112).
26
, the going-forth which has the mark of (leading to) the attainment (of the achievements
open to all the three vehicles) ' (Conze, Abhisamayalaiikdra, 29).
27 udde8e samatayalm ca sattvdrtheyatnavarjane/

atyantaya ca nirydeaa niryiaam (Aa. I, 72.)

praptilaksaana//
sarvakarajihatdayalca niryavatmmargagocaramn/
niry&dapratipajjhey& seyam astavidhatmik1// (Aa. I, 73.)
28 tac ca prapya-pripaka-tadubhaya-sambandha-pratisedhalaksan am ata4
... dha... prdpti-nirydnam
riipaparyantatayety &di.
dharma-dhatu-vinirmuktoyasmnd dharmo na vidyata/
iti nydydd dharmadhatuvattat-svabhdvfbhhitmndm yasmad ri2pddfndm aparyantatayd rfiipdfndm
aparyantatd. tasmid bodhisattvamnopaitfti bhavab(W, 109-10).
29 atra
sikfitvety adind prastauti ... prdpti-nirydEamadhikrtyatasydtr prdptau
prdpti-niry~da.m
dvadasabhir vdkyair 5ha ... (parivarta 1).
30 evaZntavat
dvada4avides.n pai~cabhirvakyair dharma-nairdtmyamukhena ndmadheyamukhenaca kalpitasya
prdptib pratisiddhd. pudgala-nairdtmyamukhendpitat pratisedhdya coktam ... paratantra-
svabhlvam adhikrtya coktarn... astamad iirdhvamn sasthatm
vikyni parinispannarm
svabhavam .
saptamarm trzfni
adhikrtya .. (parivarta 1).

This content downloaded from 128.235.251.160 on Mon, 5 Jan 2015 23:18:15 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 THE ALOKA OF HARIBHADRA AND THE SARATAMIA OF RATNAKARA8ANTI 281

comment on this passage is brief: 'since it is "devoid of own nature "

(asvabhiva), it is not produced (anabhinirvytta); therefore, free from the
nature of being either object or subject, the rfipa is only by
samv.rti
(appearance) '.31
Ratndkarasanti cites a different reading of the above text: ' evam abldva-
svabhdvJhsarvadharmAh'iti. The modification of the text asvabhdvandminto
abhd-va-svabhdvadh and also the change of the case (from the genitive to the
is
nominative) evidently not based on the authority of any variant reading of
the MSS of the Astasahasrika.32 Rather, the change is deliberate as Ratna-
karasdnti himself questions the authenticity of this reading and proceeds to
give a lengthy justification: 'Whence this reading ? This reading is found in
the Paicavims'ati? (lit. the Two larger siitras). In that siltra Subhfiti sets forth
his exposition (of the in 12 vdkyas. There follow 12 corre-
prdpti-nirydna)
sponding questions by 9riputra asking Subhlfti the reason for his statements
[kena ckdranendyuman Subhiite evarm vadasi.. .]. Subhliti answers these
questions in due order. In his reply to the seventh question " for what reason,
O Subhliti, do you say that all dharmas are of the nature of abhava (abhdva-
svabhadvh)", Subhfatithen states his reason and concludes: " in this manner,
O •griputra, are all dharmas of the nature of abhdva (abhMva-svabhavJh sarva-
dharmdh) " '. 33
It must be noted that the text of the shows a great deal of
inconsistency between the uddela, the questions of Sariputra, and the answers
Panicavim.dati?
of Subhfiti at the end. The udde4a-vakya,for instance reads: evam abhdvasva-
bhdveandm katamad yad anabhinirvrttanm? (Dutt, 245). The
full text ofdharmn. riparm
dr.mquestion is lost in the above edition due to the abridge-
ariputra's
ment effected by the editor. But it is repeated again in Subhflti's speech:
punar aparam yad iyuman driputraevam ' sarvadharmd'
iti. The answer by Subhfati shows the source 5ha abhuvasvabhMvdh
of confusion: evam etat. tat
kasya hetoh? tatha hy dyusman &riputra, nisti samyogikah svabhdvah...
anendyusman Ariputra parydyena (ibid., 252). Yet
in answer to a subsequent question asvabhvdh,
of Sariputra, kena kdranendyusmanSubhfite
sarvadharmh.
akzitasth&'vinJdinahsarvadharmih.?,Subhfiti says: rupam ay~sman driputra-
kctiasthamavini . . . anena ... abhdvasvabhavdh sarvadharmah(ibid.,
parydyena
253).
31yady evarmnydyendsvabhavatve katamat tad riipam ity 5daihkycha: yad
ity idi. yasmid anabhinirvrttacmtasmddsarva-dharmn.gim
yad grahya-grthaka-bhava-vigatarmtattvena tad avic&-
raikamanoharamn ri~pam(W, 112).
32 It sanv.rtyd
may be noted that Wogihara's edition (both of the Astasdhasrikc and of the Aloki)
does not report a variant reading for the word asvabhavdnam.
33paratantra-svabhavamadhikrtya saptamam coktayz: evam
abhava-8vabhavibsarvadharma4
iti. kuta etat? yato Mahatyor bhagavatyordvidasabhir vakyair uddehahSubhiftind krte tata esdm
dvddabanndsabhidha-rankra a-praAnesu iriputreza krtesu sthavira-Subhitih kramena
Iikraonni
saptama-sthSnakena kdranena 'abhhva-svabhdv&4sarvadharmVlz'iti prainam anudyd-
bruvnah.
bhdva-svabhkvatdydm kcranam uktvi 'anena parydyena 9riputra, abhiva-svabhavbh sarva-
'
dharmOh ity upasanhiratm krtavdn. tata esa pdthah pratfyate. (parivarta 1). Cf. Pahicavimsati?,
p. 252.

This content downloaded from 128.235.251.160 on Mon, 5 Jan 2015 23:18:15 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
282 PADMANABH 8. JAINI

Curiously enough, Dutt's edition of the Paiicavirmati?reports both readings

-abhava-svabhavinimn in the text and asvabhdvdndmin footnote 3 (based on
the Asiatic Society MS)-in the seventh uddesa-vikya of Subhflti. Probably
RatnakaraBanti's text of the ati? had only the latter reading-
asvabhdvnndm--as can be seen from his
Paicavim. comments: 'It is not the uddes$abut
the questions (of gariputra), and the concluding answers of Subhfiti which
should be considered as authoritative in this context. The uddes$aof the
seventh vakya has suffered corruption. Three errors have in course of time
arisen: first, [a desire to establish] identity with the subsequent text; second,
the adoption of the genitive case in the place of the nominative to achieve this
identity; and third, the removal of [the original reading] abhava-svabhavain
preference to the [new] reading asvabhdva'.34
Whatever the original reading-whether or abhava-svabhavdh
-Haribhadra's brief comment that the dharmas asvabhavanam,
(rripa, etc.) exist only by
samrvrti indicates that as a Madhyamika 35 he probably saw no real difference
between the two expressions. For Ratnakaraianti, however, the two terms
stand respectively for the kalpita (by implication), and the paratantra-svabhavas,
and cannot therefore be treated as synonyms. This is clear from the following
where he seeks to support his interpretation by quoting the text of the
evam iti paratantrena svabhavena. abhava-svabhavaesim ity
Paicavim.dati?:
abhuva-svabhdvJhsarvadharm4h. yad dha: ' nsti sJamyogikahsvabhavah
pratitya-samutpannatvat' 252] iti. He explains further the
siltra term srmnyogika-svabhava:
[Paicavim.atio,
'Coming together of the causes is samyoga. That which comes into existence
only in the presence of this is called The own nature
which is thus samyyogikais non-being as that nature cannot exist
sam.yoga(abhava),sam.yogika.
upon the disappearanceof the causes (that produced it by coming together).
Moreover, that which is produced by the causal dependence (pratitya-
samutpanna), being momentary, is of the nature of "subsequent non-
existence " The latter cannot be the nature of that which
(pac~cd-abhava).
exists, otherwise there will be contradiction. Therefore, that which is of
the nature of being (bhava) in one moment has the nature of non-being
(abhava) in the subsequent moments. Therefore abhdvais the svabhavaof

34Subhiteh praniidnuvddakdraakhydnatadupasarmhurd iha jiipaldi na tiddeah. uddebe 'pi

8aptamavakyasya prdyeza pd.thabhranmcdt.yata4 saptamavdkye trayo viplavbh kdlena jdtdh.
uttarena granthena 8ahikavakyata prathamo viplavah. ekavdkyatdrthepratham&nAvibhaktim
apaniya krteti dvitfyo viplavab. abhdva-svabhdvatdrm capaniya asvabhdvatd
pa.thiteti
artham brimah. . . (parivarta 1).
.sa.th.vibhaktih
trtiyo viplavah.
35Although a M5dhyamika, Haribhadra gives due recognition to the tri-svabhdvadoctrine,
as can be seen from the following comment on the sittra passage: evarmhi ... 5dikarmiko bodhi-
8attvahanupilrveZapraji~apdramitayam avatdrayitavyab: anupiIrvezety ddiv tmidinirdkaravena
bdhye 'rthe traidhituka-
pratis.thdpya,pa8cit kalpita-paratantra-parinispanna-svabhavakathanena
cittamatravagame niyojya, tadanu samyagarthakriydsu yogyam ayogyarm tathydtathyabhedena
saMvrtisatyadvayam avicaraikaramya-purvapurva-8vakaravaddhnamnirdidya, tathya-sanvrtau
8thitva yathddarkanarnmdydpurumesevadinddy dcaritavyam, paramdrthato 'nutpadah ca bhiva-
yitavyah. ity evagm kramenapraj3daparamitayamavatdrayitavyah (W, 594).

This content downloaded from 128.235.251.160 on Mon, 5 Jan 2015 23:18:15 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 THE ALOKA OF HARIBHADRA AND THE SARATAMA OF RATNAKARA~ANTI 283

these [riipa, etc.]. And also: that which is momentary is suffering (duhkha);
suffering is that which should be destroyed. Even for this reason abhava
is the own nature of these '.36
Ratnakaras'nti thus concludes: 'It is the meaning of the seventh vakya
that the bodhisattvais not obtained even by the paratantra-svabhdva '.17
In keeping with this scheme, he takes the term (appearing in
anabhinirv.rtti It is evident
the last three vakyas) as identical with the parinispanna-svabhava.38
from these brief portions of the Siratama that Ratnakarasanti was writing his
paijika in conformity with the tri-svabhlva doctrine of the Yogdcara school.
His affiliation to the Yogacara school is further confirmed by his comments
on yet another sfitra passage which pertains to the next niryana, called the
sarvajniatJ-nirydna.39The sfitra passage introducing this nirydna takes up the
(apparent) contradiction in a previous statement of Subh-iti that all dharmas,
including the bodhisattvaand the sarvajniatd,are anutpdda (unproduced), and
yet the bodhisattvastrives hard to attain the enlightenment of the Buddha.
9ariputra poses a question that if both these are anutpada, surely the bodhisattva
has already attained the sarvaj~atd, and without any effort!40 Subhiiti's
answer to this objection is that there indeed is no attainment (prdpti) of the
[sarvaj~at5 which is] anutpanna by a dharma [= a bodhisattva] which is
anutpanna.41Ratnakarasanti comments on this sitra in the light of the doctrine
of prabhasvara-citta,another major tenet of the Yogacara school:
'It is proper to reject the attainment of anutpanna by anutpanna. The
Dharmadhatu is the true reality of all dharmas. This Dharmadhdtu by
virtue of its being without a beginning and an end, and on account of its
being essentially pure (prakrti-prabhdsvara),is neither to be attained, nor
is attained, but is only to be realized. Its realization itself is the non-
apprehension of all dharmaswhich are imagined (kalpita). That realization
itself is the supreme prajndpdramita... Therefore the Dharmadhdtu
bearing the designation bodhisattva,although essentially pure, is (said to
of
be) soiled by adventitious hindrances. When these adventitious coverings
are destroyed, the resultant purity is (said to be) attained by the bodhisattva.
36 kdravaSamrnidhi4
sarmyogah. tasmin saty eva bhavatiti sdmyogikah. srm.nyogiko
yah svabhavah
so 'bhavah karaaaviyoge saty abhavit. api ca yah pratityasamutpannah so 'nityatvet pa8cad-
abhavah. na ca vidyamrinasya pacdid-abhdvo gha.tatevirodhit. tasmdd ekaksana eva yo bhivah
sa ekaksa~vntaresv abhdvah. tasmid abhava svabhlvab. kifica, yad tat duhkharm,
dukkhamrca prahdtavyam. tato 'py abhdvasvabhiva
egsm, anityam,
37 escm..
tasmit pi svabhdvenabodhisattvona prapnotiti saptamasydrthah(parivarta 1).
38asyyrmparatantren.
tu Bhagavatyam grqhyatipi kalpitasya pratigiddhi bdlagrqhyatvdt tasya. as.tamad
izrdhvarm tri#i vdkydni 8vabhivam adhikrtya evam ity 5di. evam iti kalpitena
parinispannarm
svabhivena. etepsm iti yi asvabhivatdi iinyat sid 'nabhinirvrttiriti sa pari-
paratantrarupaniagmr
ity arthaA (ibid).
nispannasvabhiva
398arvikdrajiiatdySm ca 'the going-forth (which leads to) the
niryzzam.a.../ (Aa. I, 73.)
knowledge of all modes (peculiar to a Buddha) ' (Conze, Abhisamaydla?ikcra,29).
40yady dyusman Subhiite bodhisattvo 'py anutpddo ... sarvajinatd 'py .. nanv
anutpdda,.
dyusman SubhZte anuprdptaivdyatnena bodhisattvena... sarvajinati bhavati ... (W, 120). Cf.
Paficavirmhati",259.
41 napy anutpannena
dharmenanutpanni prdptih prdpyate (W, 121).

This content downloaded from 128.235.251.160 on Mon, 5 Jan 2015 23:18:15 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
284 THE ALOKR OF HARIBHADRA AND THE SARATAMA OF RATNAKARA~ANTI

Like, for instance, space which attains purity when the adventitious
coverings like cloud, smoke, etc., depart from it ...'.42
Haribhadra's comment on the same passage is brief and free from any
reference to the doctrine of the prabhasvara-citta. As a Madhyamika he refers
to the samrti and the paramdrthasatyas and concludes that at the time of
realization (abhisamayakale)that which is realized is devoid of both the sa5vata
and the uccheda.43
Some 40 years ago, Obermiller, on the basis of his observations of the
Tibetan ouddhimati, pointed out that Ratnakarasdnti was a follower of the
Yogacara system although he had supported the Madhyamika opinion on the
gotra being identical with the Absolute (Dharmadhdtu).44Our brief study of
the &Sratamahas confirmed Obermiller's conclusion about Ratnakarasanti's
adherence to the Yogacara school. On the doctrine of the gotra also, the
S&ratamawould seem to support Obermiller. It must, however, be noted
that whereas Haribhadra openly favours the theory of the ekaydna45 and
advocates with great vigour his conviction that there are not three gotras in
reality, Ratndkarasanti appears rather mild in his treatment of the same
problem,46 particularly on the possibility of the attainment of Buddhahood
by the arhat and the pratyekabuddha. This would indicate that the later
Yogacarins were not committed to the dogma of the ekayina but merely
allowed it as an alternative to the triydina concept advocated by earlier
Yogacarins like Asaftga.47
It is hoped that this brief comparison of the two commentaries on the
As~tasdhasrikdwritten by two eminent ica-ryas representing the two rival
schools will open a new avenue for future research on the precise differences
between the Madhyamika and the Yogacara, and also between the manifold
a common heritage of both these schools.
versions of the prajn-dparamitd-sfttras,

42tasmat sadhiTktam napy anutpannena dharmendnutpannd prdpti4 prdpyata iti yukta4

pr&ptivikalpapratisedha4. tasmdt paramdrtho dharmadhdtub. sa ca prakrtipra-
bhksvaratvad anidinidhanatvac casarvadharmii.a.m
na prdpyate ndpi prdpnoti, yat tasya
kevalatmdrastavyab.
darsanagm saiva kalpitinidm sarvadharmini&manupalabdhib. saiva niratibaya prajpiii ramitd
... tata4 prakrtiprabhdsvaro'pi bodhisattvrkhyo dharmadhatur&gantukairdvaragamalair mali-
nfkrtab. tena ksaye sati tatra viduddhir apiirvatv&tprdpyate. tad yathi prakrty&
tesg.m agantukair dhftmidibhir
viduddham kiikiam dvaranamalair malinfkriyate. paciit tad apaye
ksayalaksan.ii
... viduddhis tena prdpyate. sarvavibhramanivrttau ca suviduddhasarvadharmadharmatdjfdina-
sarvdkdrajiat&d yd 'piirvatv&tbodhisattvenalabhyate. saiva tasyd viduddher dtmabhiitdyb4
laksan.i
sa.nvedandprdptyabhisamaya4 sampadyata iti siddhdnta4 (parivarta 1).
43 tattvena prapyaprdpakayor asattvdt kuto 'yatnena prdptib. samvrty5 'pi ... prdpti4
... pratibhdtity apagatas'dvatoccheda-ruipang pratibhdsate (W, 121-3). katham,
'The sublime science of the great vehicle to salvation ', Acta Orientalia, ix, 2-3, 1931,
atyantam,
44
p. 103, n. 4.
5 See W, 133-4.
46 ravakair api samyaklambodhau cittasyotpadan&t. te hi svad- bodhim
bodhiparinatikai4 vaiicitam ivatm nafmmanyamands
adhigamyapi vibhiitim dr.rtv&
buddha-bodhisattvdnz.m nirmitabhir upapatti-
tathigatair adhisthitds tad bodhaucittam lokottar&m,
utpady&calyabhiimikabodhisattvavan
bhir caritv&pardar bodhim adhigacchantitivydptib (parivarta 1).
ndn&-naya-vadinastv drya-Asanega-paddstan matlnusdrinab canyatha vydcaksate . . . (W,
,7bodhicaryam,
134).

This content downloaded from 128.235.251.160 on Mon, 5 Jan 2015 23:18:15 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions