MahīśÄsaka

![]() |
Early Buddhism |
---|
|
MahīśÄsaka (traditional Chinese: 化地部; ; pinyin: Huà dì Bù) is one of the early Buddhist schools according to some records. Its origins may go back to the dispute in the Second Buddhist council. The Dharmaguptaka sect is thought to have branched out from MahīśÄsaka sect toward the end of the 2nd or the beginning of the 1st century BCE.
History
There are two general accounts of the circumstances surrounding the origins of the MahīśÄsakas. The TheravÄdin Dipavamsa asserts that the MahīśÄsaka sect gave rise to the SarvÄstivÄda sect.[1] However, both the ÅšÄriputraparipá¹›cchÄ and the Samayabhedoparacanacakra record that the SarvÄstivÄdins were the older sect out of which the MahīśÄsakas emerged.[1] Buswell and Lopez also state that the MahīśÄsaka was an offshoot of the SarvÄstivÄdins,[2] but group the school under the VibhajyavÄda, "a broad designation for non-Sarvastivada strands of the Sthaviranikaya," which also included the Kasyapiya.[3]
The MahīśÄsaka sect is thought to have first originated in the Avanti region of India. Their founder was a monk named PurÄṇa, who is venerated at length in the MahīśÄsaka vinaya, which is preserved in the Chinese Buddhist canon.
From the writings of Xuanzang, the MahīśÄsaka are known to have been active in Kashmir in the 4th century CE. Xuanzang records that Asaá¹…ga, an important YogÄcÄra master and the elder brother of Vasubandhu, received ordination into the MahīśÄsaka sect. Asaá¹…ga's frameworks for abhidharma writings retained many underlying MahīśÄsaka traits.[4] André Bareau writes:
[It is] sufficiently obvious that Asaá¹…ga had been a MahīśÄsaka when he was a young monk, and that he incorporated a large part of the doctrinal opinions proper to this school within his own work after he became a great master of the MahÄyÄna, when he made up what can be considered as a new and MahÄyÄnist Abhidharma-piá¹aka.[5]
The MahīśÄsaka are believed to have spread from the Northwest down to Southern India including NÄgÄrjunakoṇá¸Ä, and even as far as the island of Sri Lanka.[6] According to A. K. Warder, the Indian MahīśÄsaka sect also established itself in Sri Lanka alongside the TheravÄda, into which they were later absorbed.[7]
In the 7th century CE, Yijing grouped the MahīśÄsaka, Dharmaguptaka, and KÄÅ›yapÄ«ya together as sub-sects of the SarvÄstivÄda, and stated that these three were not prevalent in the "five parts of India," but were located in the some parts of Oá¸á¸iyÄna, the Kingdom of Khotan, and Kucha.[8]
Appearance
Between 148 and 170 CE, the Parthian monk An Shigao came to China and translated a work which describes the color of monastic robes (Skt. kÄá¹£Äya) utitized in five major Indian Buddhist sects, called Da Biqiu Sanqian Weiyi (Chinese: 大比丘三åƒå¨å„€).[9] Another text translated at a later date, the ÅšÄriputraparipá¹›cchÄ, contains a very similar passage corroborating this information.[9] In both sources, members of the MahīśÄsaka sect are described as wearing blue robes.[9] The relevant portion of the MahÄsÄṃghika ÅšÄriputraparipá¹›cchÄ reads, "The MahīśÄsaka school practice dhyÄna, and penetrate deeply. They wear blue robes."[10]
Doctrines
According to the MahīśÄsakas, the Four Noble Truths were to be meditated upon simultaneously.[11]
The MahīśÄsaka sect held that everything exists, but only in the present. They also regarded a gift to the Saṃgha as being more meritorious than one given to the Buddha.[12] They disagreed with the Dharmaguptakas on this point, as the Dharmaguptakas believed that a giving a gift to the Buddha is more meritorious than giving one to the Saṃgha.[13]
The earlier MahīśÄsakas appear to have not held the doctrine of an intermediate state between death and rebirth, but later MahīśÄsakas accepted this doctrine.[14]
Works
MahīśÄsaka Vinaya
The Indian MahīśÄsaka sect also established itself in Sri Lanka alongside the TheravÄda, into which these members were later absorbed.[15] It is known that Faxian obtained a Sanskrit copy of the MahīśÄsaka vinaya at Abhayagiri vihÄra in Sri Lanka, c. 406 CE. The MahīśÄsaka Vinaya was then translated into Chinese in 434 CE by Buddhajiva and Zhu Daosheng.[16] This translation of the MahīśÄsaka Vinaya remains extant in the Chinese Buddhist canon as TaishÅ Tripiá¹aka 1421.[17]
MahÄyÄna works
It is believed that the MahÄyÄna Infinite Life Sutra was compiled in the age of the Kushan Empire, in the 1st and 2nd centuries CE, by an order of MahīśÄsaka bhikkhus that flourished in the Gandhara region.[18][19] It is likely that the longer SukhÄvatÄ«vyÅ«ha owed greatly to the LokottaravÄda sect as well for its compilation, and in this sÅ«tra there are many elements in common with the MahÄvastu.[20] The earliest of these translations show traces of having been translated from the GÄndhÄrÄ« language, a Prakrit used in the Northwest.[21] It is also known that manuscripts in the Kharoá¹£á¹hÄ« script existed in China during this period.[20]
Views on women
The MahīśÄsaka sect believed that it was not possible for women to become buddhas.[22] In the NÄgadatta SÅ«tra, the MahīśÄsaka view is criticized in a narrative about a bhiká¹£uṇī named NÄgadatta. Here, the demon MÄra takes the form of her father, and tries to convince her to work toward the lower stage of an arhat, rather than that of a fully enlightened buddha (samyaksaṃbuddha):[22]
MÄra therefore took the disguise of NÄgadatta's father and said thus to NÄgadatta: "Your thought is too serious. Buddhahood is too difficult to attain. It takes a hundred thousand nayutas of kotis of kalpas to become a Buddha. Since few people attain Buddhahood in this world, why don't you attain Arhatship? For the experience of Arhatship is the same as that of nirvÄṇa; moreover, it is easy to attain Arhatship."
In her reply, NÄgadatta rejects arhatship as a lower path, saying,
A Buddha's wisdom is like empty space of the ten quarters, which can enlighten innumerable people. But an Arhat's wisdom is inferior.[22]
The MahīśÄsaka sect held that there were five obstacles that were laid before women. These are that they may not become a cakravartin, MÄra king, Åšakra king, Brahma king or a Buddha. This MahīśÄsaka view is ascribed to MÄra in the NÄgadatta SÅ«tra of the SarvÄstivÄdins:[22]
MÄra said, "I have not even heard that a woman can be reborn as a cakravartin; how can you be reborn as a Buddha? It takes too long to attain Buddhahood, why not seek for Arhatship and attain nirvÄṇa soon?" NÄgadatta replied, "I also have heard that a woman cannot be reborn as a cakravartin, a Sakra, a Brahma, and a Buddha, and yet I shell make the right effort to transform a woman's body into a man's. For I have heard that those Noble Ones, by the practice of bodhisattvacarya for a hundred thousand nayutas of kotis of kalpas diligently attain Buddhahood."
The MahīśÄsakas believed that women essentially could not change the nature of their minds or physical bodies, and would cause the teachings of Buddhism to decline. Of this, David Kalupahana writes,
The MahīśÄsaka prejudice against women is based upon the traditional view of women. Like some of the other early Buddhist practitioners, they did not trust women, even nuns. This explains why they restricted nuns' social and religious activities in the sangha. Sometimes they liken the nuns' existence to hail which damages a good harvest.[23]
See also
References
- 1 2 Baruah, Bibhuti (2000). Buddhist sects and sectarianism (1st ed.). New Delhi: Sarup & Sons. ISBN 978-8176251525., p. 50
- ↑ Buswell & Lopez 2013, p. 516.
- ↑ Buswell & Lopez 2013, p. 859.
- ↑ Anacker, Stefan. Seven Works Of Vasubandhu: The Buddhist Psychological Doctor. 1984. p. 58
- ↑ Sharma, Ram Karan, ed. (1993). Researches in Indian and Buddhist philosophy : essays in honour of Professor Alex Wayman. Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass. ISBN 978-8120809949., p. 5
- ↑ Dutt, Nalinaksha. Buddhist Sects in India. 1998. pp. 122–123
- ↑ Warder, A. K. (2000). Indian Buddhism (3rd rev. ed.). Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass Publishers Private Ltd. ISBN 978-8120817418., p. 280
- ↑ Yijing (2000). Li, Rongxi, ed. Buddhist monastic traditions of Southern Asia: a record of the inner law sent home from the South Seas. Berkeley, CA: Numata Center for Buddhist Translation and Research: Numata Center for Buddhist Translation and Research. ISBN 978-1-886439-09-2., p. 19
- 1 2 3 Hino & Wada 2004, p. 55.
- ↑ Bhikkhu Sujato. Sects & Sectarianism (The Origins of Buddhist Schools). Santi Forest Monastery. p. i.
- ↑ Potter, Karl. The Encyclopedia of Indian Philosophies, Vol. IX: Buddhist philosophy from 350 to 600 AD. 2004. p. 106
- ↑ Willemen, Charles. The Essence of Scholasticism. 2006. p. 17
- ↑ Willemen, Charles. The Essence of Scholasticism. 2006. p. 17
- ↑ Potter, Karl. The Encyclopedia of Indian Philosophies, Vol. IX: Buddhist philosophy from 350 to 600 AD. 2004. p. 106
- ↑ Warder, A.K. Indian Buddhism. 2000. p. 280
- ↑ Hsing Yun (2008). Humanistic Buddhism : a blueprint for life (Rev. ed.). Hacienda Heights, CA: Buddha's Light. ISBN 978-1932293333., p. 163
- ↑ The Korean Buddhist Canon: A Descriptive Catalog (T 1421)
- ↑ Nakamura, Hajime (1987). Indian Buddhism : a survey with bibliographical notes (1st Indian ed.). Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass. ISBN 978-8120802728., p. 205
- ↑ Williams, Paul (2009). MahÄyÄna Buddhism : the doctrinal foundations (2nd ed.). London: Routledge. ISBN 978-0415356534., p. 239
- 1 2 Nakamura, Hajime. Indian Buddhism: A Survey With Biographical Notes. 1999. p. 205
- ↑ Mukherjee, Bratindra Nath (1996). India in Early Central Asia: a Survey of Indian Scripts, Languages and Literatures in Central Asia of the First Millennium A.D., p. 15
- 1 2 3 4 Kalupahana 2001, p. 109.
- ↑ Kalupahana 2001, p. 113.
Sources
- Buswell, Robert E.; Lopez, Donald S. (2013), The Princeton Dictionary of Buddhism, Princeton University Press
- Hino, Shoun; Wada, Toshihiro, eds. (2004), Three Mountains and Seven Rivers: Prof. Musashi Tachikawa's felicitaion volume, Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass, ISBN 978-8120824683
- Kalupahana, David (2001), Buddhist Thought and Ritual, New York: Paragon House, ISBN 978-0892260898