No CrossRef data available.
Article contents
The Sanskrit fragments of Vinītadeva's Triṃśikā-ṭīkā
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 24 December 2009
Extract
Scholars conversant with the history of the Yogācāra/Vijñnavāda school are familiar with the names of Vasubandhu and his renowned commentator, Sthiramati; the Buddhist logicians Dignāga and Dharmakīrti, who are also associated with that school, are equally well known for their scholastic achievements. A later commentator important in both schools is Vinītadeva (c. 645–715), who has received a great deal of attention in recent years. No less than a dozen of his commentaries, most of them called ṭīkās, are preserved in Tibetan translation. Sylvain Levi's publication in 1925 of Sthiramati's Triṃśikāvijñaptibhāṣya first aroused scholarly interest in Vinītadeva's commentaries. The eminent buddhologist, Theodore Stcherbatsky, was probably the first scholar to study Vinītadeva's work in depth; Stcherbatsky utilized the Tibetan translation of Vinītadeva's Nyāyabinduṭīkā; in his pioneering translation of the Nyāyabindu which appeared in 1930 in his massive two-volume publication, Buddhist logic. The first complete translation of the Tibetan rendering of two of Vinītadeva's ṭīkās, namely, the Viṃśatikā-ṭikā and the Triṃśikā-ṭīkā. was undertaken by Yamaguchi Susumu and Nozawa Josho, respectively; this appeared in Japanese in 1953. More recently, in 1971, M. Gangopadhyaya published a Sanskrit reconstruction with English translation of Vinītadeva's Nyāyabindu-Ṡīkā. A still more recent work appears in the 1975 Ph.D. thesis of Dr. Leslie Kawamura of the University of Saskatchewan.
- Type
- Articles
- Information
- Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies , Volume 48 , Issue 3 , October 1985 , pp. 470 - 492
- Copyright
- Copyright © School of Oriental and African Studies, University of London 1985
References
1 The works of Vinitadeva preserved in Tibetan: To. 4065 PrakaraṇaviṃŚakaṭikā To. 4070 TriṃŚikāṭākā; To. 4114Vinayavibhangapadavyākhyāna; To. 4126 TriŚatakārikāvyākhyāna; To. 4137 Vinayastotrapadavyākhyāna; To. 4140 Samayabhedoparacanachkre nikāyabhedopadeŚanāsaǤgrahaḥ; To. 4230 NyāyabinduṭŚikā; To. 4234 Hetubinduṭīikā; To. 4236 Sambandhaparīkṣātīkā; To. 4238 Saṃtānāntarasiddhiṭītkā; To. 4240 Vādanyāyaṭīkā; To. 4241 Ālambanaparīkṣāṭikā.
2 Levi, Sylvain, ed.; Viñnaptimātratdsiddhi: VimŚatikā (La vingtaine) et TriṃŚikā (La trentaine) (Paris: Librairie Ancienne Honoré Champion, 1925)Google Scholar; Levi, S., tr. Matériaux pour l'étude du systéme Vijnaptimātra Paris: Librairie Ancienne Honoré Champion, 1925.Google Scholar
3 Stcherbatsky, Theodore,Buddhist logic (1930; repr.New York:Dover Publications, 1962).Google Scholar
4 Josho, Nozawa and Susumu, Yamaguchi,Seshin Yui-shiki no Genten Kaimei (Kyoto: Hozokan, 1953), 133408.Google Scholar Sections of their translation originally appeared in instalments in Otanigakuho and Mikkyo bunka between 1944 and 1952.
5 Gangopadhyaya, M.,Viīitadeva's Nyāyabindu-ṭīkā (ndian Studies Past and Present, Calcutta: R. D. Press, 1971)Google Scholar
6 Kawamura, Leslie,‘ Vinītadeva's contribution to the Buddhist mentalistic trend’, Ph.D.thesis, University of Saskatchewan, 1975.Google Scholar
7 Sum-cu-pa'i'grel, Tibetam Tripiṭaka (paking edition), 114, 5571, 1–69aGoogle Scholar. The Tibetan translation is by Jinabhadra, Śilendrabodhi, and Dānaśāla as in Derge vol. Hī.
8 abbreviations and sumbols used in the text:[*] = folio No. of MS.[ ] =additions =emendationsLévi, L. Sylvain, ed,: Vijñaptimātratāsiddhi: Deux Traités de Vasubandhu: ViṃŚatikā et TriṃŚ (Paris: Librairie Ancienne Honoré Champion, 1925).Google Scholar MS The present manuscript of the Sanskrit TriṃŚikā-ṭīkā. T Tibetan tripiṭaka, peking edition Vol. 114, folios l–69a. no. 5571, pp. 175,1. 1 to pp. 203,1. 5, letter 6. This corresponds to Derge, Vo HI, p. 20b, 1. 7 to p. 61b, 1. 7. J Japanese translation by Susumu, Yamaguchi and Josho, Nozawa: Seshin Yui-shiki no Genten Kaimei (Kyoto: Hozoken, 1953) 133408.Google Scholar
9 The Ṭīkā covering the Bhāṣya on the first four kārikās of the TriṃŚikā corresponding to L., p. 15. 1. 1 to p. 21. 1. 27-up to tac ca vartate-is missing. We have reproduced the kārikās for the sake of maintaining the continuity of the text.
10 The beginning corresponds to L., p. 21. 1. 27; T., p. 20b, 1. 7, letter 20; J., p. 228, 1. 2.
11 MS: reads: padārthavad.
12 L. reads: yathā hy oghas.
13 L. reads ākarṣayan.
14 Corresponds to L., p. 22, 1. 17; T, p. 25a, 1. 7.
15 Not found in T, 26a, 1. 4.
16 Corresponds to L., p. 22, 1. 27; T, 26a, 1.6.
17 MS reads: manana.
18 Corresponds to L., P. 23, 1. 11; T, 26a, 1.6.
19 L reads: saṃmūḍhāḥ.
20 MS reads ātmajñānaṃ which is not supported by T: mi Śes pa gaṁ yin pa bolag tu rmoṁ pao (yat tad ajnānaṃ sa ātmamohaḥ), T, 28a, 1. 2.
21 Corresponds to L., p. 23, 1. 23; T, 28a, 1. 2.
22 L. (p. 24, n. 1) given lokottarena ca sa a variant reading.
23 The reading: mārge na is supported by T, 28b, 1. 7 to 29a, 1. 1.
24 Corresponds to L., p. 24, 1. 16; T, 29a, 1. 1.
25 Corrwaponds to L., p. 25, 1. 5; T, 29b, 1. 7.
26 MS reads: prcchann āha/
27 L. reads: sparŚa eṣām ādir iti.
28 L. reads; tathā hy eta ālayavijn?āne₽ p. 25, 1. 17.
29 Corresponds to L., p. 25, 1. 26; T, 31a, 1. 1.
30 MS reads:samprayukte which is an error. The word Saṃstute appears immediately below.
31 In the Ms this portion is repeated and subsequently bracketed for omission by the scribe.
32 Corresponds to L., p. 26, 1. 6; T, 31b, 1. 6.
33 Corresponds to L., p. 26, 1. 16; T, 32b, 1. 4.
34 L. (p. 26, 1. 18) reads: ete his pañca dharmāḥ parasparaṃ vyatiricyāpi vyāvartante, Our reading vartante is correct and supported by T: tha da dü gyur nas skye ba yin gyi (32b, 1. 6).
35 Addition supported by T.
36 Corresponds to L., p. 26, 1. 26; T, 33b, 1. 1.
37 Addition supported by T.
38 L. reads: anāsaktiḥ vaimukhyam, p. 27, 1. 6.
39 Corresponds to L., p. 27, 1. 10; T, 34b, 1. 1.
40 Corresponds to L., p. 27, 1. 23; T, 35a, 1. 8.
41 L. notes this reading (p. 27, n. 5) but amends it to yair alobhādīn in agreement with T.
42 MS reads: trabhiḥ
43 Corresponds to L., p. 28, 1. 3; T, 36a, 1. 5.
44 Here the MS crosses out five letters (tato bhāvanā) not found in T.
45 Thas four more line here covering L., P. 28, 11. 14–16 (from sa punar to nirdiŚuate) which is not found in our MS.
46 Corresponds to L., p. 28, 1. 20; T. 37a, 1. 7.
47 MS reads: niŚritya.
48 MS reads: paṇḍitaṃ
49 MS reads: apraŚritatā.
50 MS reads: apraŚritatā.
51 MS reads: Vidyate which is wrong. Cf. cittonnatisvarŪpābhed' pi (L., p. 29, 1. 3).
52 Corresponds to L., p. 29, 1. 6; T, 38a, 1.5.
53 MS reads: vijħānacittādibhih.
54 MS reads: Vijħānacittādibhih.
55 MS reads: vidyeran.
56 MS reads: nītīranākāratvena.
57 Corresponds to L., p. 29, 1. 21; T, 39a, 1.5.
58 Found in T: ħes par spyod pa.
59 MS reads: -parāmar0E63;ah.
60 MS reads: -parāmar0E63;ah.
61 T reads: na prthay vidyate (de ltar khoṇ khro bahi ihar gtogs pa de ħid de bud na med do).
62 Corresponds to L., p. 30, 1.8; T, 40b, 1. 1.
63 This line is missing in T.
64 MS repeats this line.
65 Folios corresponding to L., p. 30, 1. 25 through to p. 31, 1. 22 (T, 41b, 1. 2 through to 43, 1. 3; and J, p. 298, 1. 14 through to p. 307, 1. 7) are missing.
66 Corresponds to L., p. 31, 1. 25; T, 41b, 1. 2.
67 MS reads: viruddhatvavyupaśamah.
68 MS reads: katamam cety ādi, which is an error. T reads instead: źi gnas kyi bar du good paẖi las can no źes by ba smras so. 43b, 1. 8.
69 Corresponds to L., p. 32, 1. 8; T, 44b, 1. 4.
70 The word citta is found in both L. and T.
71 The word citta is found in both L. and T.
72 MS reads: vrtyā.
73 Ms reads: tadvān (tad vā ?). Both L. and T read tat only.
74 cetanāprajòaptiviśeṣaḥ, which is not supported by L. or T.
75 Folios corresponding to L., p. 32, 1. 24 through to p. 34, 1. 8 (T, 45b, 1.4 through to 47b, 1. 7; J, p. 317, 1. 12 through to p. 331, 1. 4) are missing.
76 Corresponds to L., p. 34, 1. 8; T, 47b, 1. 7.
77 Here the T has the following lines not found in our MS: sus ḥdod paẖi khams su ḥdu śes med paḥi sħoms par ḥjug pa bskyed pa de ni hau śes med paḥi ίha rnams kyi nan du skyeḥo // sus ḥdod paḥi khams su ḥgog paḥisħoms par ḥjug pa bskyed pa de ni srid paḥ stse mor skye⸥o // ḥdu śes med pa ni ci yaħ mi śes te/ don med par gnas so // (T, 48b, II. 1–3; compare J, p. 331, II. 5–7).
78 Corresponds to L., p. 34, 1. 21; T, 48b, 1. 5.
79 L. reads: sasamprayogasya, p. 34, 1. 24.
80 L. reads: àgantunà-, p. 34, 1. 1.
81 L. reads: paħca, p. 34, 1. 1.
82 Corresponds to L., p. 35, 1. 5; T, 49b, 1. 4.
83 abhūtaparikalpaś ca cittacaittās tridhātukāḥ/
84 L. reads: nānyataḥ, p. 35, 1. 18.
85 L. reads: ca, p. 35, 1. 19.
86 Corresponds to L., p. 35, 1. 27; T, 50b, 1. 4.
87 Folies corresponding to L., p. 36, 1. 16 through to p. 44, 1.9 (T, 51b, 1.3 through to 67a, 1. 4; J. p. 342, 1. 4 through to p. 403, 1. 14) are missing.
88 Corresponds to L., p. 44, 1. 9; T, 67a, 1. 5; J, p. 403, 1. 15.
89 L. reads: dvayāvaranabījam, p. 44, 1. 17.
90 L. reads: tad ughātād; T supports L. (deḥi phyir de dag bcom pa źes bya ba).
91 L. reads: sa tv āsravavigataḥ, p. 44, 1. 20; T (68a, 1. 2) supports sarvāsrava (źag pa thams cad).
92 L. reads: anāsravadharmamayatvāc ca, p. 44, 1. 22.
93 L., p. 44, 1. 24 reads: asmāt, which is wrong.
94 Corresponds to L., p. 44, 1. 24; T, 68a. 1. 6.
95 L. reads: bhūmipāramitādi⃛ p. 44, 1. 26.
96 As pointed out in the Introduction, our MS at this point contains a long passage from Sthiramati's commentary to Madhyāntavibhāga, corresponding to Yamaguchi Susumu's edition, p. 92, II, 15 through to p. 93, 1. 8. We reproduce this portion as it appears in our MS: [line 4] mokṧabhāgīyānām āropaṇam indriyeṣv āvaraṇam uktam/ kim ity (atra) āvaraṇam/ yo (e)nopakleșe [na] mokṣabhāgīyaṃ nākṣipati/ sā punarbhavasaktir nirvāṇ trāsaś ceti/ baleṣu teṣām evendriyāṇāṃ daurbalyam āvaraṇam iti prakrtam / kathaṃ daurbalyam ity [line 5] ata [āha/] vipaksavyavakiranād iti/ āśraddhyakausīdyamuṣitasmṛtivikṣepadauhprajħātmakena vipakṣeṇābhidhavād ity arthaḥ/ ū’magatamūrddhaprabhāvitānīndriyāṅiò etac ca dvividham api nirvedhabhāgīyaṃ durbalam āśraddhyādivipakṣābhibhavād ata eva tasmin parihā[ṇi][line6]sambhavaḥ/ nirjitavipakṣatvāt tu śraddhādīni kṣāntyagradharmayor balākhyāṃ pratilabhante/ atas teṣām eva śraddhādīnām ūṣmagatamūrddhāvasthānāt(sthāyāṃ ?) yad vipakṣąbhibhavād daurbalyaṃ tad balānām āvaraṇam/ tasmin sati balāvasthā 'sambhavāditi/ kim atrāvaraṇam/ sa evāśraddhyā[diko] vipa[kṣaḥ]/ [line 7] bodhyaṅgeṣaḥ/ āvaraṇam ity atra vartate/ bodhir atra darșanamārgo 'bhipretaḥ/ tasyaitāni smṛtidharmavicayaprītiprasrabdhisamādhyupek’ātmakāni sapta bodhyaṅgāni darśanaheyaprahāṇakāle utpadyanta ity aṅgānīty [ucyante] ⃛/MS ends here.