Lecture Notes 9 & 10: The Doctrines of the Yogcra Partly in reaction to the Prajpramit school of thought which

categorically claimed that all is empty, there arose the other major Mahyna school known as the Yogcra, around the latter part of the 3rd century C.E. In this context, it must be noted that although Ngrjuna brilliantly expounded on the doctrine of nyat and as a result the Mdhymika school came to be established, it is debatable whether he could be called the founder of the school in the proper sense. For one thing, his Mlamadhyamaka-krik had been highly esteemed and commented upon by masters of both the Mdhyamika and the Yogcra schools. Akira Saito, noting that great Yogcra masters such as Asaga, Sthiramati,1 etc. and not only the Mdhyamika masters wrote commentaries on it, suggests that the Mlamadhyamaka-krik had been a common property to the various Mahyna masters holding different interpretative perspectives on it. He suggests that it was probably owing to these differences in perspective that there came to be the Yogcra school followed by the Mdhyamika school. 2 The name of the school, Yogcra, was derived from its fundamental work, the Yogcra-bhmi (; translated by Xuan Zang in 100 fascicles). The word, Yogcra, seems to have been used as an adjectival compound, meaning one whose practice is yoga, i.e., a spiritual practitioner. Historically, the Mahyna Yogcras were most probably evolved from the rvakayna yogcra-s in the Sarvstivda tradition. In the Great Commentary (), these ancient yogcra-s figure quite prominently and seem to have been highly respected by even the bhidharmika-s (the Abhidharma specialists). Asaga (circa 4th century C.E.) was generally regarded as the effective founder of the Yogcra school. Tradition tells us that he received the Yogcra teachings from Bodhisattva Maitreya in the Tuita heaven at nights. For this reason, the school is sometimes said to have been founded by Maitreya, and the Chinese tradition scribes the Yogcra-bhmi to Maitreya (Tibetan tradition gives its author as Asaga). Other works considered to be authored by him include the Madhynta-vibhaga () and the Dharma-dharmat-vibhga (), etc. The historicity of Maitreya as Asagas spiritual teacher, however, is controversial among scholars. Nevertheless Asaga can no doubt be claimed as the schools systematiser. Works attributed to him are: Mahyna-strlakra (), *Mahyna-sagraha (), Abhidharma-samuccaya (), Xian-yang-sheng-jiao-lun (), etc.3 Vasubandhu (circa 361440 C.E.) continued his effort, and further importantly contributed to the schools doctrinal development. He composed the Twenty Verses on the Proof of Mere-Cognition (Viik Vijaptimtrat-siddhi; ) and ThirtyVersesontheProofofMere-cognition (TriatikVijaptimtrat-siddhi; ) the latter came to be studied as a standard textbook on the merecognition doctrine and wrote commentaries on Asagas works. Doctrinal position of the earliest Yogcras While the Yogcra school came to advocate the famous mere-cognition (vijaptimtra ; mere-consciousness) doctrine denying the reality of the external world, the earliest Yogcra masters, as seen in the Basic Section () of the Yogcra-bhmi (), were in fact realists accepting the existence of the external reality. For them, while all objects of knowledge are not separated from our mind, these objects nevertheless have their ultimate existential bases (vastu-

mtra; ) which are real and specific, but ultimately ineffable. Unlike the Prajpramit school of thought, they think it important to assert the intrinsic natures (svabhva; ) of all dharma-s which, for them, are twofold: (1) Intrinsic nature of conceptualization (prajaptivda-svabhva; ) which are non-existent. E.g., the intrinsic nature of matter (rpa; ) being visible, obstructive; consciousness (vijna; ) being that which discerns; etc. as taught by the Abhidharma masters. (2) Ineffable intrinsic nature (nirabhilpya-svabhva; ) which are the ultimate, real bases for conceptualization. These can only be directly experienced through spiritual insight. Like the bhidharmikas, the conceptualized is necessarily based on an ultimately real basis. Interpretation of nyat and the Middle Way The above doctrine of the twofold intrinsic nature, representing two levels of truths, is elaborately expounded in the Chapter on Reality (tattvrtha; ) of the Basic Section. This doctrine also explicitly shows the Middle Way, rejecting the two extremes: the Abhidharma standpoint that all dharma-s have intrinsic natures as defined by them, and the all is empty standpoint of the Prajpramit school of thought. For these earliest Yogcras, the Abhidharma doctrine is one of superimposition (samropa; ) superimposing conceptual intrinsic natures on the ultimately ineffable reals; while all is empty is the extreme of denial (apavda; ) denying the ultimate real existents. The real Middle Way consists in steering clear of these two extremes, emptying what is not existent, but affirming what truly exists. This, to them, is the proper way of understanding the nyat doctrine found in the Prajpramit scriptures. The bodhisattva is exhorted by these early Yogcras to skilfully interpret in a conforming manner (anulomayati; ) the true meaning of these Prajpramit scriptures: Some sentient beings do not understand the intentional (implicit) meanings of the Tathgatas stra-s connected with profound nyat. In these stra-s, it is stated that all dharma-s are without any intrinsic nature, without any object-base (nirvastuka; ), without arising and ceasing; all dharma-s are said to be the same as space, like dreams, like illusion. The bodhisattva skilfully and properly interprets [these] implicit and profound meanings , and explain to them: These stra-s do not assert that all dharma-s in every way are non-existent. Rather, their linguistically constituted (abhilptmaka ) intrinsic nature does not exist. For this reason, they state that all dharma-s are without any intrinsic nature. Even though there is this effable object-base (abhilpya-vastu; ), basing on which linguistic expressions (abhilpa) operate; but from the absolute standpoint, it is not constituted of that intrinsic nature which is linguistically expressed by means of such linguistic expression. Accordingly [the dharma-s] are said [in the Prajpramit stra-s] to be without any object-base ... Just as, in space (ka), variegated material forms and material activities are apperceived, and it accommodates these material forms and material activities. ... If at that time, all these material forms and material activities are removed, thereupon,

the pure space of only the nature of the mere absence of material forms manifests. In the same way, with regard to that ineffable object-base (nirabhilpye vastuni) comparable to space, there arise various ideation-conceptualizations generated by linguistic expression (abhilpa-kta) accompanied by attachment to conceptual proliferation, comparable to the material activities [in space]. And that ineffable object-base comparable to space accommodates all those linguistically generated ideationconceptualization accompanied by attachment 4 to conceptual proliferation which are comparable to the variegated material activities [in space]. And when those linguistically originated false ideation-conceptualizations accompanied by attachment to conceptual proliferation have been completely removed by the bodhisattva-s through the noble (outflow-free) knowledge, then on account of that noble knowledge, that ineffable object-base which alone exists, manifested through the non-nature of all effable intrinsic natures, comparable to space and pure, is realized by those most noble bodhisattva-s. And it is not that they seek another intrinsic nature of it beyond that. Therefore, the dharma-s are said to be the same as space, [empty in this sense]. It is just like the case of an illusion (my); it does not exist in the manner that it manifests, nor does what is created by that illusion definitely not exist in every way. Likewise, those dharma-s do not exist in the very manner in which they manifest to the fools (the unenlightened) by virtue of linguistic conditioning/familiarity (abhilpasastava-vaena), nor do they not exist in every way in respect of the absolute ineffable nature (pramrthika-nirabhilpytman; ). From the perspective of this principle-penetration, the [dharma-s] are neither existent nor non-existent, and thus nondual, like an illusion. Hence they are said be like an illusion. It is in this way that a bodhisattva ... distinctly knows the real as real (bhta ca bhtata prajnti ) and declares accordingly. ...5 nyat is the ultimately real From the above passage, it is also clear that the Yogcras would disagree with the assertion that emptiness too is empty. For them nyat is the ultimate reality existent in the absolute sense, albeit ineffable revealed by emptying all that is nonexistent, i.e., nya ( = ). Asagas Analysis of the Middle and the Extremes(Madhyntavibhaga; ) states at the very beginning: The false imagination exists; [But] duality therein is not found. Emptiness however exists in it, And it too exists in that [Emptiness].6 [Commentary:] 'The False Conceptualization' the grasped-grasper conceptualization. 'Duality' grasped and the grasper. nyat the devoidness/absence of that False Conceptualization as the grasped and the grasper.

And it too exists in that [it refers to] the False Conceptualization. In this way, wherein that which does not exist, one properly observes (samanupayati) on account of that as empty. And that which comes to be left here one truly understands (yathbhta prajnti): "It is existing here." Thus, the non-topsy-turvy characteristic of nyat comes to be illuminated. This stanza, together with its commentary, famously expounds on the Yogcra notion of nyat: What does not exist is nya; but the nyat itself, which comes to be revealed after removing all that is nya, is not nya. It is the Absolute Reality that exists. It is noteworthy that the last paragraph commenting on nyat is virtually identical with that in the Majjhima-nikya.7 Doctrine of the threefold natures and threefold absence of nature A little later, we see in the Sandhinirmocana-stra (), a doctrine of the threefold natures and threefold absence of nature. The three intrinsic natures are: 1. The completely conceptualized/imagined (= PK; parikalpita, ) 2. The other-dependent (PT; paratantra, ) 3. The fully accomplished (PN; parinipanna ) These three intrinsic natures represent three progressive levels of cognition, and the three corresponding degrees of reality. Together, they also represent what the Yogcra believes is that correct understanding of the Buddha's teaching on what are nya and what are not, and hence also of the Middle way: PK is nya, non-existent in every sense; PT is not nya, being a relative existent; PN is also not nya, being absolute existent. This is believed to be a truer perspective of nyat: Firstly, it distinguishes between what is nya and what is anya, thus conforming to the Buddha's Middle Way standpoint. Secondly, it not only distinguishes between existent and non-existent, but further distinguishes between a relative and absolute existent. In the course of development, this doctrine came to be progressively articulated in the various Yogcra texts. The 'completely conceptualized' is totally unreal, non-existent, nya. The term itself indicates clearly that it is completely a superimposition in our cognition through language and concept. This process results in ontologizing what we cognize through concepts. This is compared to the erroneous cognition of a rope as a snake. But the 'completely conceptualized' cannot simply come about without any basis. This cognitive basis is the 'other-dependent'. It is an existent that arises in the phenomenal world in accordance with the principle of conditioned co-arising. That is, it is a phenomenon that arises when the necessary assemblage of conditions obtains. It is not an absolute existent existing by virtue of itself not a 'thing in itself'. But at the same time it is not a total non-existent, not nya; but a relative existent. This is compared to the understanding that the snake that was mistakenly cognized is after all a rope, an existent arisen by virtue of conditioned Co-arising. It is the referent to which the linguistic reference 'snake' conventionally refers. In the course of spiritual progress, when the completely conceptualized is totally purged, absolute reality is fully/completely (pari- ) brought about/accomplished (nipanna ). This is the highest level of reality, called the 'completely accomplished'. It can only be realized by the Non-conceptualizing Insight (nirvikalpa-jna ). This absolute reality is a true existent, and certainly not nya. It has various synonyms: nyat, tathat (), dharmat (

), paramrtha (), etc., This is compared to the ultimate realization that not only is the snake wrongly cognized was totally non-existent; the rope so-called too is only a relative existent, derived from hemp which is the ultimate source. The so-called 'threefold absence of intrinsic nature' are formulated on the basis of the three intrinsic natures. They are : 1. Absence of intrinsic nature from the perspective of characteristic (LN, lakaa-nisvabhvat *mtshannyidgyisngoponyidmedpa) 2. Absence of intrinsic nature from the perspective of arising (UN, utpattinisvabhvat *skyebakyisngoponyidmedpa) 3. Absence of intrinsic nature from the perspective of Absolute Reality (PN, paramrtha-nisvabhvat *don dam pa kyis ngo po nyid medpa) The PK characteristic is totally imagined, they do not exist from the standpoint of intrinsic nature. This is the 'absence of intrinsic nature from the perspective of characteristic'. The PT characteristic is produced in dependence on causal conditions; they are not independent intrinsic natures that arise independently by themselves. Hence, 'the absence of intrinsic nature from the perspective of arising'. The absolute realty (paramrtha ) is the object-domain of the Nonconceptualizing Insight; it is No-Self-ness. Therein there is neither the PK nor the PT characteristic. Hence 'the absence of intrinsic nature from the perspective of Absolute Reality'. Further, PN is the Absolute Reality which is nyat, revealed by what are nya by the absence of intrinsic nature hence it is the 'absence of intrinsic nature from the perspective of Absolute Reality' Doctrine of the laya-vijna ( ) In the fully developed form of Yogcra, eight consciousness are enumerated: (1) visual (6) mental consciousness, (7) the defiled manas () responsible for the attachment to the Self, (8) the laya-vijna. The last, sometimes called the fundamental consciousness is the base and sources of all the preceding seven which are collectively called the activity-consciousness (pravtti-vijna; ). However, It is certain that the doctrine of the laya-vijna evolved gradually within the Yogcra.8 The laya-vijna is where all the potential efficacies (bja; seeds) of conceptual conditionings including karmic efficacies are stored; hence also called the store consciousness ( ), and the all-seed consciousness (sarvabjaka-vijna; ). The relationship between these seeds and the layavijna is said to one of being neither identical nor different. In every moment, the totality of existence, including ourselves and the external world, is manifested from these efficacies (seeds) within the laya-vijna. In the same moment as the phenomena are manifesting out of these seeds, they perfume back on the layavijna, leaving behind their efficacies. In this way, one has the continuity in our experiencing oneself and the universe. This simultaneous process is called the seeds generating the manifested phenomena; the manifested phenomena perfuming as seeds (). The laya-vijna is the agent of transmigration, continuing as a serial flow from life to life. It ceases only when the practitioner, after a gradual process of spiritual striving comes to have his whole psycho-physical complex (his whole being) transformed, with the attainment of the non-discriminating wisdom which 5

enables him to see things truly as they are (yath-bhtam; ). As the layavijna is the fundamental cause (source) of pollution/defiling (saklea-hetu; ); this transformation also results in the annihilation of all defiling. This is called the transformation of the basis (raya-parvtti/parivtti; . D.T. Suzuki calls it the revulsion at the seat of consciousness). The Sagraha () of the Yogcrabhmi explains thus: The laya-vijna is the element (dhtu; ) of the conditionings subsumed by all the proliferations (prapaca; ) [the practitioner] by repeatedly developing the knowledge that takes Suchness (tatht; ; i.e., Ultimate Reality) as the cognitive object, comes to acquire the transformation of the basis. Immediately after his basis has been transformed, his laya-vijna is said to have ceased. As a result its ceasing, all defiling is said to have been ceased. 9 Doctrine of mere-cognition (vijaptimtra; ) The Yogcra came to develop an idealistic doctrine that the external world is nothing but a projection from our mind. As we have seen above, this means that it is merely a manifestation from the seeds within our laya-vijna. This doctrine seems to have been based on meditative experience, as seen in the Sandhinirmocana-stra: Maitreya: Bhagavat, the image focused in vipayan samdhi is it different from the mind or not different? Buddha: O Maitreya, It is not different. Why? Because that image is mere-cognition. O Maitreya, I have explained that the cognitive object of consciousness is manifested by mere-cognition. Maitreya: Bhagavat, if that image focused in samdhi is not different from this mind, how does this mind perceive this mind itself? Buddha: O Maitreya, herein no any dharma perceives any other dharma. Nevertheless. As that mind arises in such a manner, there is a manifestation [of the image] in such a manner. (de ltar skyes pai sems gang yin pa de de ltar snang ngo; that mind which arises in such a manner manifests in such a manner). O Maitreya, just as, basing on a form when the form itself is perceived, one thinks I see an image. Maitreya: Bhagavat, the manifestation to sentient beings as matter, etc., which is a mental image abiding in its own nature is this too not different from the mind? Buddha: It is to be said to be not different. 10 Thus, starting from the situation in meditative experience, the text then goes on to generalize that even in the normal situations, when we are not in samdhi, the objects cognized by us are in fact none other than our mind they are mere-cognition.11 However, this doctrine is not elaborated until we come to Asagas Mahynastrlakra (). The following verse elucidates on the principle that at

each moment of our experience, our consciousness bifurcates simultaneously into the apprehender (grhaka; ) and the apprehended (grhya; ): The untrue conceptualization(/-zer), Characterized as the apprehended and the apprehender, Of threefold-threefold manifestation (bhsa; ), Is the characteristic of the other-dependent (PT).12 ( ) [Commentary:] 'Of threefold-threefold manifestation' It has a threefold-threefold manifestation. Among them, the [first] threefold manifestation is: manifestation of location (pada; )13, of the object (artha; ) and of body (deha; ). There is a further threefold manifestation: the manifestation of the mind (manas ), of grasping/apprehension (udgraha, ) and of conceptualization (vikalpa ). The mind is that which is always defiled. Grasping is the group of five [sensory] consciousnesses. Conceptualization is the mental consciousness (mano-vijna). Among them, the first threefold manifestation has the characteristic of the grasped/apprehended. The second has the characteristic of the grasper/apprehender. Such is this untrue conceptualization, the characteristic of the other-dependent.14 These explanations may be represented as follows:
manifn of location = receptacle world) Apprehended aspect (=) PT = Untrue Conceptualization (laya-vijna) apprehending aspect (=) manifn of object () object

manifn of body () = body possessing organs manifn of manas = manas () manifn of grasping = 5 consc () manifn of conceptn = mental consc ()

organs

consc

Accordingly, it can be seen that these manifestations comprise the totality of our experience the 18 dhtu-s comprising the objects, the organs and the corresponding consciousnesses.

Next, in the *Mahyna-sagraha (), Asaga gives definitive arguments to establish this doctrine of mere-cognition. Firstly, he speaks of the laya-vijna as the fundamental basis (raya; ) of the totality of existence the whole of it is manifested from the seeds within the laya-vijna. Even the attainment of Nirva the process of purification has it as the basis. He also explicitly subsumes all phenomena (into a total of 11 classes) physical, mental, inner, outer, beings and the phenomenal world as cognitions (vijapti). In brief, according to both texts, the apprehended-apprehender experiential complex is all manifestation from the seeds qua consciousness. And this represents Asanga's perspective that all forms of consciousnesses evolve from the one consciousness comprising all seeds ( ), the laya-vijna. Progress of insight into the fact of mere-cognition The liberative insight into the fact of mere-cognition is described in the following sequence in Maitreya-Asagas AnalysisoftheMiddleandtheExtremes: Basing on the (consciousnesss) apperceivability, the (objects) non-apperceivability is begotten. Basing on the (objects) non-apperceivability, the [consciousnesss] non-apperceivabilty is begotten. Hence is established the fact of apperceivabilty being of the nature of non-apperceivability. And therefore the equality can be known of non-apperceivability and apperceivability.15 External phenomena are manifested by the Untrue Conceptualization (laya-vijna); they exist relatively. When the practitioner contemplates on their completely conceptualized nature ( PK), he is able to empty them; hence the insight into their non-apperceivability. Having first realized the emptiness of external phenomena by relying on the consciousness which is existent (non-empty; i.e., apperceivable), of the nature of other-dependent ( PT), he now comes to realize that the consciousness itself too is non-existent since now no external phenomenon serves as object to generate consciousness. (This doctrine that consciousness arises necessarily by taking an object is actually a doctrine derived from the Abhidharma tradition). Hence, consciousnesss non-apperceivability. In fact, as we saw above, PT is without svabhva from the absolute standpoint (). When even consciousness is experienced to be empty non-existent he comes to realize that both the (formerly) apperceivable consciousness (subject) and the non-apperceivable phenomena (object) are in fact likewise non-apperceivable. Thus, the equality/sameness non-duality, non-distinguishability of Absolute Reality (= dharma-nature = PN = emptiness) comes to be revealed.16

1 2

See Asagas , T no. 1565, and Sthiramatis , T no. 1567. See SAITO, Akira, Is Ngrjuna a Mdhyamika?. In: , 2007, 153 ff. Saito of course offeres other corroborative reasons for his conclusion. 3 Yin Shun also ascribe the Vinicaya-sagarha () of the Yogcra-bhmi to him. See Yin Shun, A History of Buddhist Thoughts in India, 248.

Dutt, 181: prapacasaj-. Corrected to prapacasaga- in Wogihara (SktCh Index, 259); supported by Chinese, T30, 541b: . 5 45, , , : ; , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ; , , , , , : , , , , , , , , , , , ; , (T30, 541a12-b23) 6 abhtaparikalpoastidvayamtatranavidyate|nyatvidyatetvatratasymapisavidyate || yangdagmayinkunrtogyod|delagnyispoyodmayin|stongpanyidnidilayod|delayangni deyoddo|| : , , , (T31, 464b) 7 Casuat-sutta (M.N. III, 104-109): I. ya hi kho tattha na hoti, tena ta sua samanupassati; II. yam pana tattha avasiha hoti, ta santam idam atthti pajnti. III. evam assa es, nanda, yathbhucc avipallatth parisuddh suat-avakkanti bhavati. In this sutta, the purpose is to lead the meditator into the meditation on the empty; it stresses the seeing truly into the presence and absence of the practitioners defilements. 8 (T30, no. 1579, p. 584, a15-b2) 9 51 , , , , (T30, 581, c3-8) 10 sems can rnams kyi gzugs la logs par snang ba, sems kyi gzugs brnyan rang bzhin du gnas pa gang lagsba|deyangsemsdangthadadpamalagszhesbgyiam| 11 3: , , ? , , , , , , ? , , , (T16, 698, a27-b13) 12 trividhatrividhbhsogrhygrhakalakaa|abhtaparikalpohiparatrantrasyalakaam ||(XI, 40) 13 The Chinese version here has ! 14 15 upalabdhisamrityanopalabdhiprajyate| nopalabdhsamrityanopalabdhiprajyate ||6|| upalabdhestatasiddhnopalabdhi-svabhvat|tasmccasamatjeynopalambhopalambhayo||7|| 16 T31, no. 1600, p. 465, a5-15