The Conception of Buddhist Nirvana — Th. Stcherbatsky (1927)

the reality of the external world. They thus reduce all the elements ( dharmas ) of Hinayana to modes of one single conscious principle. Asvagosa’s system 1 is in all essential points the same as the Madhyamika’s, but it accepts the theory of an «All conserving Mind» ( alaya-vijnana ), as a stage in the evo¬ lution of «Suchness» (tathatd) in which consciousness is awakened)). 2

The Yogacara school is divided into the ancient one, or the followers of Aryasanga, and the new one, or the followers of Dignaga. The first 3 esta¬ blished their idealistic views on a new interpretation of the old Abhidharma. Aryasanga himself composed a Mahayanistic Abhidharma, 4 where the number of elements (dharma) is increased from 75 to 100. The alaya-vijnana is here a new element, a store house, a real granary, where the seeds ( bija ) of all future ideas and the traces of all past deeds are stored up. However it is not the Absolute. It belongs to the phenomenal part of existence be¬ cause all the results ( vipdka ) 5 of Karma are there stored up. This store-con¬ sciousness in this system occupies a position analogous to the Primitive Matter ( pradhana ) 6 of the Sankya school. All individual objects and ideas are regarded as its modifications ( parindma ) by the Sankhya. The Yoga¬ caras likewise regard all separate ideas as modifications of their store-con¬ sciousness. This represents a disguised return from the theory of a stream of thought to the doctrine of a substantial Soul. 7 In the stream of thought every preceding moment of consciousness is the cause of the next following one. This relation, called samanantara-pratyaya ) is now replaced by the re¬ lation of the store consciousness ( dlaya ) to its modifications (parindma). 8

But in the Sankhya system both the Primitive Matter and its modifi cations were realities. The Yogacaras regarded both as unreal. From their

1 Whether this Asvaghoga, a Mahayanist, is the same as the author of Buddhacarita has been doubted. About his system cp. Suzuki, Discourse on the awakening of the faith (Chicago, 1900), and Yamakami Sogen, Systems of Buddhist Thought, p. 252 ff. (Calcutta, 1912).

2 Suzuki, Op. cit., p. 151.

3 A clear exposition of Aryasanga’s system isto be found in the Trimsika of Yasubhandhu with acomment by Sthiramati, ed. bySylvainLevi (Paris, 1925). Cp. Yamakami Sogen op. cit. 210 ff. Cp. B. Keitb, Buddhist Phil., p. 242 ff. where all the literature is indi¬ cated. A still earlier(third)ideali8tc scholl of that name is mentioned,cf. B a c h a t e B„H,apaHaTa p. 7 6.

4 Abhidharma-samuccaya, Bstan-hgyur, Mdo, vol. 32.

5 Cp. Trimsika, p. 18. 21.

6 Ibid. p. 86. 9.

7 Cp. my Central Conception, p. 35.

* Trimsika, p. 34. 5 ff. This is Sthriramati’s view about dlaya. Other views were en¬ tertained by Nanda, Dignaga and Dharmapala, cp. Scbiefner, Taranatha, p. 301.

predecessors, the Madhyamikas, they adopted the theory of the relativity and consequent unreality (. sunyatd=nihsvabhdvatd) of all individual existence, 1 of all plurality, with that difference that they introduced different degrees of this unreality. First of all, individual ideas were unreal because they were logical constructions (parikalpita) without any adequate reality corres¬ ponding to them in the external world. This was called their essential un¬ reality (laksana-nilisvabhdvatd) . 2 They were nevertheless contigently real (paratantra) in that sense that they obeyed to causal laws ( pratitya-samutpada) ? \ This was called their causal unreality or relativity (utpatti-nihsvabhdvatd). They were, at last, unreal individually as far as they were mer¬ ged in the unique reality ( parinispanna ) of the Absolute (tathatd = dharmatd). This was called their absolute unreality (paramdrtha-nihsvabhavatd) 4 as individual entities. It was the same as their reality in the Abso¬ lute, their reality, so to say, sub specie aeternitatis. The Absolute thus be¬ came immanent to the phenomenal world, it was neither different, nor undifferent (ndnya ndnanya) . 5 As an assemblage of individual ideas it was different, but viewed as an organic whole it became identical. It was a spi¬ ritual Absolute ( citta-dharmatd ), 6 pure consciousness, undifferentiated into subject and object ( grahya-grdhaka-rahita ). 7 It is the essence of Reality (dharma-dhdtu) and it is therefore identified with the Cosmical Body (dhama-kaya) of the Buddha. 8 All the numerous synonyms which are used to characterise this conception in other schools can be applied to it. 9 The yogi in his mystic intuition is supposed to possess a direct cognition of this undifferentiated pure consciousness (advaya-laksanam vijnapti-matram). 10