sautantric and vaibhasika

 

Four schools of Buddhist philosophy

Vaibhasika and Sautrantika schools belong to Hinayana and are the two main schools of Sarvastivada philosophy. Vasubandhu was a great author and commentator of the Vaibhasika school. His Abhidharmakosa karika was the chief work of the Vibhasa school and Commentary of Abhidharma. This work was mainly written from the point of view of Kashmir. The fourth Buddhist Council was held at Purusapur. In the council the great commentaries or the

Vibhasas were written and discussed in order to settle the other schools. The followers of Vibhasa or commentaries are called Vaibhasikas. According to Hsuan Tsang, Vasubandhu was born in a Brahmin family of Peshawar. It is found that there were three brothers in that Brahmin family and Vasubandhu was the second. He had written the famous text ‘Abhidharmakosa’in his earlier part of life. He studied at Sarvastivada school in Kasmir and wrote this famous Abhidharmakosa. His elder brother was Asanga who was a disciple of Maitreyanatha. According to Pali sources, the school of the Sankrantivadins derives from the Kasyapiyas and the school of the Sautrantika derives from the Sankrantivadins. But according to Vasumitra, these two schools are the same and identical. The name Sautrantika is derived from the Sutras, because they regard sutras only as of authority. Kumaralata was the founder of Sautrantika school. Yasomitra and Asanga are the chief exponents of Sautrantika school.

To understand better Buddhist philosophy, Buddhist views and differences between different traditions and first of all between 3 Yānas –

1) Hīnayāna,
2) Mahāyāna
3) Vajrayāna

– we have to speak about their philosophy:

Generally, there could be differentiated 4 schools of philosophy-

1) Vaibhāṣika,
2) Sautrāntika,
3) Yogācāra (Cittamātra in Tibetan sources)
4) Mādhyamika

All of them are based upon Buddha Śākyamuni teachings, Sūtras and Abhidharma, and may share many common terminology and views, but they are quite different how far in their deductions, conclusions, definitions and practice they may go.

Generally, it is considered:

a) Vaibhāṣika and Sautrāntika represent philosophical views of Hīnayāna or Lesser Vehicle,

b) Cittamātra philosophy is the theoretical basis of Mahāyāna Buddhism a

Here for our study, we take up the traditionally accepted four schools in India. They are Vaibhasika, Sautrantika, Madhyamika and Yogacara. Each school claims they hold the ‘middle way’ of Buddha. The first two belong to Hinayana tradition (Early Buddhism, Abhidharma Buddhism, Staviravada, Philosophy of the Elders, Theravada Buddhism, Sarvastivada Buddhism, Southern Buddhism, Exoteric Buddhism – all these names emphasize one or the other aspect of this tradition) and the last two belong to Mahayana tradition (Later Buddhism, Developed Buddhism, Northern Buddhism, Esoteric Buddhism) within Buddhism. We expose the main metaphysical views of these schools and their distinctions.

The philosophy of Staviras or Elders we can call Abhidharma. Abhidharma is actually philosophical reflections by realistic and pluralistic philosophers of Buddhism (Theravada or Hinayana) on the basic teachings of Buddha. The literal meaning of the term ‘Abhi’ is ‘further’ or ‘about’. Thus Abhidharma means the higher, further, or special Dharma, or ‘the discourse on Dharma’. Dharma here refers to all the elements with which everything is made of. If we analyze everything we can reduce the whole of subject and object (whole reality) into 75 dharmas. These realistic philosophers were known as Sarvastivadins. ‘Sarvam asti’ means everything is’ (these are realistic pluralistic philosophers) but only as elements not having a pudgal or soul. This is in fact the first philosophical development in Buddhism.

VAIBHASIKA SCHOOL

The word Vaibhasika has come from the main text Mahavibhasasastra, which was compiled around 2nd-century C.E; its main object was to expose Abhidharma philosophy. Another classical text of this school is Vasabandhu’s (420-500 C.E.) Abhidharma-kosa. Actually, Vaibhasika is the later form of Sarvastivada. These Sarvastivadin philosophers transformed Buddha’s ‘no soul’ into a consistent philosophy of ‘pudgal nairatmaya’ (non-substantiality of everything). Non-substantiality is not only in the case of human beings but is applied to the whole material world. ‘Things are without essence’. If we say they are unsubstantial, then what are they? This group answers that they are a collection of dharmas. In the case of material things, there are four material atoms, and in the case of living beings five skandas. We see exposition of this in both Milinda pancho, a second century C.E. text and Abhidharmakosa of Vasabandhu of 4th century C.E. Another view that is closely connected with this insubstantiality is the idea of momentariness of all entities. Buddha’s ‘anityam’ (impermanence) had a limited application, in the case of morality, but they applied it consistently on everything. Unlike Samkhya, who thought of a permanent thing behind all change, exposed by the image of a lump of clay that turns into a pot still doesn’t lose its ‘clayness’, Vaibhasika clung to Buddhist insubstantiality and impermanence and exposed it with the example of wood being consumed. When wood is consumed by fire, only ashes remain and it is completely different from wood. Still, they accepted three moments in this change; past, present and future; that which causes that which is destroyed and that which endures. They explained the whole universe with 75 dharmas and enumerated them in detail. We see it in Abhidhammakosa. First they divide dharmas into conditioned (samskrta) and unconditioned (asamskrta). 72 are conditioned and 3 are unconditioned. The conditioned are again divided into four classes: I Form (11 dharmas) consisting of the five sense organs, five sense-objects, and form with no manifestations. These are also known as rupa and they form all that we call matter. II Consciousness (1 Dharma) sometimes divided into five dharmas corresponding to the sense-organs. This is also known as citta. III The concomitant mental functions (46 dharmas). They are also known as caitasika. They are subdivided into four groups. i) The general mental elements are 10 universals (sarva-Dharma-sadharana). They are contact, attention, sensation, ideation, will, desire to do, conviction, recollection, concentration and insight. ii) The general good functions are 10 moral universals (kusala-mahabhumika). They are faith, shame, the root of good, absence of greed, absence of hatred, absence of delusion, diligence, harmoniousness, attentiveness, equanimity and non-violence. iii) The general foul functions are 6 defilements of the mind that hinder one from following the path. They are passion, hate, pride, ignorance, erroneous view and doubt. iv) Minor foul functions are altogether 20 mental functions that are minor defilements for the practice of eight fold path. They are anger, resentment, hypocrisy, spitefulness, envy, miserliness, deceitfulness, dissimulation, wantonness, malevolence, unrestraint, shamelessness, rigidity, and agitation, lack of faith, laziness, negligence, forgetfulness, distractedness and thoughtlessness. IV 14 dharmas that have no connection with form or mind (citta-viprayuktasanskara) They are like acquisition, non-acquisition, communionship, effects of meditation, power of longevity (vital power), the waves of becoming, words and sentences related to speech. The remaining three are unconditioned elements. They are Space (akasa), extinction (nirvana) caused by absence of productive cause (apratisamkhyanirodha) and extinction caused by knowledge (pratisamkhyanirodha). That which provides ground to matter is space. In itself, it has no defilement and it is not caused. Again apratisamkhyanirodha is that Dharma, where no type of defilement is present. In pratisamkyanirodha Dharma there is right view that occasions nirvana. If we look into the above list, we see the importance they give to mental activities. In fact, they make a psychological analysis of everything. Their naive realism forced them to dogmatically emphasise everything that are exposed above as existing independent of the subject. The next school that we are going to speak of comes up in the context of logical and rational questioning of the above enumeration of dharmas as independently existing.

SAUTRANTIKA SCHOOL

The word sautrantika comes from ‘sutranta’ (scripture). They base themselves on ‘Sukta pitaka’ of the canon. This group came up against the naive realism and pluralism of Vaibhasikas. Main teachers of this school are Kumaralat, a contemporary of Nagarjuna. Srilabha or Srilata was his disciple. Then comes Yasomitra and Harivarman who wrote the book Tattvasiddhi (Proof of the Truth). Another name notable is Vasubandhu (some say this is the same Vasubandu who wrote Abhidharmakosa and some others say it is another one by the same name). It is a logicoepistemological school. (there is a later logico-epistemological school having characteristics of both Sautrantika and Yogacara. The main personalities are Dignaga and Dharmakirti (5th & 7th century C.E.). The reason for this is universities like Nalanda and Takshashila where issues are followed, not the sectarianism of schools, one becomes acharya, when he is proficient in teachings of all schools, and it was very easy for them to form their own philosophy by taking the logically fitting teachings). They said Abhidharma scholasticism is a deviation from the actual intent of the Master. They rejected independent existence of some of the dharmas and reduced their number into 45 (43 Conditioned and 2 unconditioned). If we ask the question what is it that forced them to reduce the number of dharmas, we must say it has both metaphysical and epistemological reasons. The realism of Vaibhasika forced them to treat Nirvana too as some ‘thing’. Sautrantika said this is against the mind of the master. So they clung to ‘Sukta Pitaka’ and based their interpretation on that and reason (for Buddha said ‘atta dipo bhava’). Logically, they said, the Vaibhasika clinging to three moments is not possible, for if anything changing, it must happen at all moments and one thing will last only a moment, where birth and death happens; so no past, present and future, only present is existing. Past and future are imagination (sankalpas).

Epistemology (Pramanas) and Acceptance of external objects and mind

Sautrantika developed logic and defended itself against both Buddhistic and non-Buddhistic criticisms. This logic was later developed and crystallized by the Yogacara (vijnanavada) teachers. Dignaga and Dharmakirti are the two towering personalities. First they were Sautrantika (both mind and external objects exist), later they were lenient to Yogacara (mind only exists). Dignaga in his famous work Pramana Samuchaya speak of two valid means of knowledge. They are Perception (pratyaksa) and Inference (anumana). Perception deals with svalaksanas, (that which characterises itself, a unique particular singular and momentary). This is ultimately real (paramarta sat) and inexpressible. To experience them means to experience reality as it is. Inference, the other pramana consists of conceptualizations, verbalizations, reflections and other products of mental constructions. (kalpana, vikalpa) Dignaga calls it Samanyalaksana (a general characteristic applicable to many objects or distributed over many instances). They are endurable and not subject to change, thus they are true only in relational level (asamvrti sat). Epistemologically Sautrantika goes a step further from Vaibhasika to answer the question, what we really know. They say it is not objects that come into our consciousness (naive realism) but an after-image of an object. Thus our knowledge is not through perception, but through inference. Therefore there will be always some mental construction. Thus we call them representative realists or critical realist

Theory of Momentariness

 Vaibhasika developed Buddha’s notion of ‘anitya’ into the universal law of impermanence of everything, but they accepted three moments as “a thing arises, remains constant and ceases to exist”. But being logically minded, Sautrantika raised the question, if changing, how can there be three moments, there can be only one moment. As it arises it must vanish. Thus things never remain constant. What is there is an uninterrupted flow of causally connected momentary entities of the same kind. The cessation takes place without cause. They call it Santana. If it were not so, then the dharmas would remain constant and changeless. They define moment (ksana) as the smallest indivisible unit of time. This is 1/75th of a second. All aggregates of being are repeatedly produced and destroyed in every moment. Since these elements succeed upon each other so fast, as in cinematography were distinct pictures in a rapid projection, evokes illusion of continuous action on the screen, we see them as continuous. Again earlier and later ones within one Santana are almost alike we normally fail to discern the arising and destruction and perceive them like flowing river or flame of a lamp. According to this doctrine, all objects of the world - our bodies, ideas, emotions and all the external objects around us – are destroyed every moment and are replaced by similar things generated at the succeeding moment, which again are replaced by other similar things at the next moment and so on. One important logical consequence of this theory is the rejection of past and future. Everything is happening at the present time, past has ceased and future hasn’t arisen. Past is memory and future is imagination. There is only just origination and cessation. This is the real truth (paramarta sat). The other two are relative truths (samvrti sat). One question that naturally arises is, how we explain ‘the knowing process’ then? They explain it with the theory of svasamvedana (self-apperception). This theory says consciousness is able to be conscious of itself and of other phenomena, just like a lamp is able to illumine clearly both itself as well as other external objects.

Sautrantika classification of Dharma They have a different classification of Dharma from that of Vaibhasika. While Vaibhasika accepts 75 dharmas, Sautrantika reduces that number to 45. This includes 43 samkrta and 2 asmskrta. 43 samskrtas they divide into five skandas. i) Form (rupa): consists of matter in its 4 primary forms (upadana) and 4 derived (upadaya) forms. 4 primary forms are earth, water, fire and air. 4 derived forms are solidity, humidity, heat and motion. ii) Feeling (vedana): consists of 3 types of emotions- pleasure, pain and neutral. iii) Perception (samjna): consists of grasping by 6 senses – five senses and mind. It consists of colours etc by eyes, agreeable, disagreeable, friend, enemy, male female etc. iv) Consciousness (vijnana): consists of 6 sense consciousness. It is “row grasping of visual, auditory, olfactory, taste, touch and mental consciousness. v) Mental formation (samskara): consists of volitional factors that create and determine the five skandas of future existence. Sautrantika speaks of 10 virtuous and 10 nonvirtuous dharmas. vi) Unconditioned (asamskrta): consists of 2 uncaused dharmas - Nirvana and space. Sautrantika is a transition thought on the way to full-fledged Mahayana. Later schools of Madhyamaka and Yogacara develop in their own way the ‘Sautrantika germs’. Madhyamika continues the logical pruning of dharmas that was started by Sautrantika and reduces them all into samvrti satya. Yogacara cling to Svasamvedana and give reason for it with their Vijnaptimatrata.

https://testbook.com/objective-questions/mcq-on-indian-logic--5eea6a0e39140f30f369e44e