The Evolution of the Buddhist Schools

  

        The term Mahayāna and Hīnayana unsimilar most of the under reader, perhaps event two those who deviated sometimes to the study of Buddhism as method of face, there are diverse a school in Buddhism just asks in other religious systems. After the demise of Buddha there were none at there time evidence to take his place as a religious teachers. Buddha taught the doctrine with solution to the various problems relating to the life in the world and next. There were highly learned. Some of they were discontented from the Brahamana family and others were learned members of various religious leader like,

          Jatila

          Jains

          Ajjīvaka

Buddhist preaches took argumentation but could not arrive at definite conclusion leading disciple also had argumentation. They agreed with these three fundamental propositions:

1.     Sarvam sanikam all is momentary

2.     Anātman all is with soul

3.     Dukkham all is suffering

But there were several diverse of opinion to both Dhamma and Vinaya. But the first 5^th century of Buddhist history show the development of a numeral of school sects, which are traditionally counted as historical tradition about them are uncertain, contemporary and confusing. Those schools seem to have vanished into in significance one after others. When they arose a new school quite different in it general contrail from it pre -discoursed but for more importance it in as religious women. New a school taught everything that was considered to be Buddhist Texts. But it was very comprehensive in it principle method and scope. As a result of these Buddhism was split into Two Great Systems;

1.   Hīnayana 

2.   Mahāyana

All the minor schools which presented Mahayana in there formal established.

The Reasons during the time of the Buddha

There are seven points;

1.   The leadership of Buddhism

   

    The Buddha mentioned that his Dhamma and Vinaya would be shown sufficient in keeping in touch the religious established by him. Thereby the appointment of religious teacher, (Ănanda mayā dēsito paňňattho dhammo vinayo, so vô mama acchayēna sattha). 

According to Sammagāma sutta M.N, Buddha heard of descent in the Jāna community as soon as leader Nigantha Nāthaputa was death. He blessed too much religion on his dhamma, the attachment of his followers to his dhamma and Vinaya which he supposes would be of the complete time forever.

There is a dialogue between Venerable Ănanda and Vassakāra Brahamana, the minister of Maggadha in Mahapparinibbana sutta of D.N

     Vassakāra asked two questions from Ven. Ănanda:

1.     Have any Bhikkhus been specify as would after demise of Buddha becomes the leader of man under whom everybody would seek shelter?

2.     Have any Bhikkhus been selected by the sangha as would become their leader?

     Ven. Ănanda answered negative Vassakāra various to learn courses of previously sects of order expiry of theirs been no leader than Ven. Ănanda replied to him as follow, we are not without leader but dhamma is our leader.

2.   Grouping of Disciples on Noted Thera

    The Buddha who always gives prominent to some of his disciples by extolling them for there testament procession in third stage preache of dhamma.

1.     Sāriputta = the foremost the highly wise (Mahapannam)

2.     Maha moggalam = the foremost of the processor  miracle power (Iddhimantānam)

3.     Anurôdha = the foremost of processor of divine eyes (Dibbhaca kkhunam)

4.     Maha Kassapa = the foremost of the follower dhūto precepts (Dhūtovādanam)

5.     Ănanda = the foremost of vastly (Bhahusuttanam)

6.     Upāli = the foremost of Vinaya (Vinayadharānam)

7.      

3.   Divisions of Monks into Bodies

  

     Divisions of monks into bodies which were each of meant gave optic portion of the Buddhist scriptures. When we through the pali canon, we often come across term like these;

1.     Dhammadharās = master of doctrine

2.     Vinayadharās = master of discipline

3.     Sutantikas = master of sutra discourses

4.     Matikādharas = those versed in Madikā (Abhiddhamma)

5.     Dhammakatika = the preachers of Buddhist doctrine

6.     Digha Bhanaka = a monk who learns by hard about the long discourses.

7.      

4.   Elasticity of the Rules of Discipline

    

     The Pātimokkha obtained its presented shape after various additions and alterations according to the exigencies of time and circumstances. For instance, Buddha made some exceptions in forever of the Bhikkhus who were placed at advantage by reasons of the locality in which they recited.

In Mahapparinibbana sutta in D.N one of his instructions were that the sangha might, if necessary abolished the minor rules, making theirs thereby the Vinaya, subjects to chance as time end circumstances required pali stanza;

          Ăkankamāno Ănanda sangho mama acchayēna

          Khuddanukhuddakāni sikhāpadāni samūhantu

Therefore, circumstance Bhikkhus broke the rules of Vinaya, instance particular saying that Buddha had said it so.

5.   Austerities and Ritualism

     This is well-known from Buddha’s life that he attained of Buddhahood led him to adopt, (Middle Path) which eschewed austerities as a man of attaining religious goal austerities could not be expected to finger in the doctrine preached and recommended by Buddha to his disciples. But insipid of this position, Buddha is praising hermit who was given through practice of Dhūtanga precepts involving austerities.

6.   Competition conduced by Venerable Devadatta

  

     Buddha’s cousin Devadatta, who in his advocacy for austere discipline requested the teacher to introduce the following, Five Rules in monasteries:

1.     Live all their life in the forest

2.     Subsist solely on doles collected outdoor.

3.     Dress themselves in rags pick out of dust heaps

4.     Dwell all ways under tree and never under roof

5.     Never eats fish and flesh.

Devadatta took his opportunity to create a division in the sangha and departed to Gayāsīsa which 500 followers.

7.   The Incident happens between Dhammadhara and Vinayadhara

    

     This incident accurate at once of the monasteries of Kôsambi, where a bhikkhu through ignorance the low committed a breach of discipline. This courses the divisions not only among the monks but also among the lay devotee and ultimately led to Buddha meditation before the different could be settled.

Reason after the demise of the Buddha

 

    There are a few reasons to the spread of Buddhism and Buddhist schools. As above mention, we can identify the reason to which during the time of the Buddha under these subtopics. We can category the other reasons. The details of Ragagaha reciting the dhamma and Vinaya shortly after the Buddha’s Pparinibbana, are found in the Cullavagga Pali of Vinay pitaka. Not only that but also it mentions in the sammantapāsadikā (The commentary of Vianaya pitaka), in the Mahavastu, in the Mahavamsa, in Dīpamsa and Tibetan Dulvā

1.   Subadra = Subadda Thera

  

     Only a week after the passing way of Buddha, one Subadda who had become a monk in his old age, asked the monks not to grieve or over the occasion which proved them freedom from Buddha authority;

          Alam ānso mā sôcitta, mā paridēvitta sumuttā mayam

           Tēna mahā samanēna…. (Cullavagga Pali)

2.   Abolish all the minor Rules

  The Buddhist tradition holds that the vinaya was fixed with assist of Upāli and dhamma with that of Ănanda. Buddha gave the permition to change the minor rules, but when Ven. Ănanda was dued to the impending great demise of the Buddha, could not request Buddha to point out as to how a precept called minor, which may be left out or should be tested. Disciples left to the orders the authority to abolish all the minor rules, for which he did not provide any measures to test if a precept was minor.

3.   The Words of Purāna Thera

 

      The Arahant reciting the Dhamma and Vinaya in the First Buddhist Council possessed some short of suttas, vinaya and Mātikā. It may further be known that one of Purāna monk reduced to participate in the First Buddhist Council. He said that the Dhamma and Vinaya through we rehearsed by the elder monk would not profit him if accepted.

4.   The Controversies arisen at the Second Buddhist Council

 

     Ven. Yasa, the son of Kākhanda came to Vēsāli and found the monks accepting money from the lay on the Upôsatha day. Certain Vajjins of Vēsāli introduced ten indulgences to be permitable. Those Ten were referred to committee (Ubbālika) and rejected them all. These rejection was conformed any assembly of Seven hundred monks. According to Mahavastu, the ten points were settled the elder Revata held the council of the dhamma under patronage of Kāsālôka and this council for eight months.

Ten points

1.   Singilôna kappa

2.   Dvangula kappa

3.   Gāmantara kappa

4.   Avāsa kappa

5.   Anumati Kappa

6.   Acinna kappa

7.   Amathita kappa

8.   Jalôgipāna kappa

9.   Adasaka nisīdam kappa

10.                 Jātarūpa rajata patiggahana kappa

 

   The origin of Mahasanghika School in Mahadēva’s five articles of faith also was a reason for the spread of Buddhist school. These five articles of faith are as follow,

1.     An Arahant may commit a sink under unconsciousness temptation.

2.     One may be an Arahant and not know it.

3.     An Arahant may have doubts own method of doctrine.

4.     One can not attain Arahantship without the leader.

5.     The noble ways may be with shout (how sad).

     These are the two classes of tradition precise in the Buddhist literature. One attributing the Schism of Mahasanghika to the ten points of the breaches of the rules of discipline and other Mahadēva five articles of faith.

The Third Buddhist Council and compilation of Katthāvathū ppakarana the selected one thousand monks held the Third Buddhist Council at Pātaliputta. Here the Three pitakas were reheard to establish to purify of the canon. This council was preceded over by Moggaliputta Thera. He composed the Katthāvathu which view to remind the various doctrine and held non-Theravadins. One of the important results of this council is at the Buddhist canon including in Abhiddhamma was finally completed in as much as this Katthāvathu pre-composed not only the text of Vinaya pitaka and of all the Nikayas of Sutta piataka. Other books of Abhiddhamma pitaka also were completed.

     One of the commentators result of this council was the dissected of missionary to Nine different places, for the propagation of religion.

As the result of Pre-Buddhism becomes the ruling religion of a large part of mankind.

Deliver school in Buddhism at the end of Buddhist council, Buddhist monks divided Two Groups;

1.   Theravadin

2.   Mahasanghika   

     Those who disagreed with the ten points were Theravadins. Other rejected the Second Buddhist Council and organized other councils. By the time of the Third Buddhist Council, There were Eighteen Buddhist Schools;

1.   Theravada

2.   Mahinsāsaka

3.   Vajjiputaka

4.   Sabbatthivāda

5.   Dhammaguptika

6.   Dhammuttariya

7.   Bhadrayānika

8.   Chaňňagarika

9.   Sammitiya

10.                Kassapika

11.                Sankantika

12.                Sunttavadi

13.                Mahasanghika

14.                Gokulika

15.                Ekabbôhārika

16.                Bahussutika

17.                Cetiyavādi

18.                Paňňattivadi

  The Fourth Buddhist Council and King Kaniska, The king Kaniska reigned mark a turning point in the history and literature of Buddhism.

It was during this period Mahayana Buddhism began arose it visible. The Fourth Buddhism Council was held at Kashmis after the advice of learned Pārsva and under the presidentship and vice presidentship respectively of Vasumita and the philosopher Asvaghôsa.

  The selected Five hundred monks composed the Upadēsa sastra, the commentary on the sutta pitaka, the vinaya vibhāsā, the commentary of vinaya pitaka and Abhiddhamma vibhāsā,The commentary of Abhiddhamma pitaka. Each contenting five hundred thousand Slôkās (Stanza). This is the first time Buddhist Texts were translated in Sanskrit language.

  The First Scholars mentioned this council as a First council of Mahayana. They changed their medium and disparted missionary in the world, the figure of Mahayana Buddhism, Buddha and Boddhisattva began to appear.

The Concept of Trikāya

 

        The Mahayana Buddhism was developed after the Third Buddhist Council. Until they got the royal patronage of king Kaniska, they were unable to sit on their own foot. In this time, Buddhism was going to be vanished. According to Japanese scholar Suzuki, if Mahayana Buddhism did not appear, Buddhism completely destroyed. Though the Theravada Buddhism paves the way or the individual to attain their final liberation (Nibbana), most of people do not wish. They needed to experience the worldly happiness. Mahayanese understood the general views of the people well. Having understood that they followed the religion Hinduism, the higher place is given to the Three Gods. They are; Brahmana, Vishnu and Shiva (Isvara). Generally it is called Trinity. Therefore Mahayanese introduced a new teaching about the Buddha.

          There are Three Kāyas  

1.     Nirmānakāya = human view

2.     Sambôgakāya = ideal view

3.     Dharmakāya = universal view

  Though they have introduced the concept of Three Kāyas, it is not Three Buddhas but only one. Accordingly Dharmakāya is the Buddha view from the universal point the ideal point of view is the Sambôgakāya. According to the human point of view the Buddha is Nirmānakāya.

  The Saddharma Pundarika sutta and Swarnaprabhāsha sutta thrice to invade from the Mahayana people about the historical Buddha. That is why they have introduced the concept of Kāyas in the Saddharma pundarika sutta, the Buddha asked to ordain thrice to believe his birth. The Buddha mentioned (I attained Sambôdhi incalculable aeons ago, and since than I have been preaching the dhamma. All that I have said about the previous Buddhas.

Tathāgata Dīpankara …..etc, their nirvana was all my creations. Though I have not attained nirvana, I said that I attained it in order to rouse scurrility in the mind of people).

  It is quite to explain to Three Kāyas but with the general understanding about the Mahayana, it is helpful for the task. According to scholars, they mentioned that three kāyas concept emerge from the Mahasānghika. Though who pays their attention on Mahasānghika tradition that Mahasānghikas are not off-shoot of Mahayana tradition, because both traditions were developed separately. Anyhow, when we pay our attention on Mahasānghikas concept as they had. Mahasānghikas are the first this schools which states that Buddha is not human being, he is a supernatural power. On this other hand, they rejected Arahanthood and they show that Arahanthood is selfish states.

Therefore, Buddhahood is the higher state, because of that all the followers of this Buddhism should try to attain the Buddhahood. Therefore, they should become Bodhisattvās.

  When taking those together we can see how the Mahayana was emerged. The most importance teaching found in Mahayana is Bodhisattvās concept, Prajňā and Karunā, Dasabhūmi, six Parimitās and three kāyas. However not only in Mahayana, but in Theravada tradition, the concept of three Kāyas is mentioned up-to extinct. Before the Vakkalī Thera, Buddha asked (why are you looking at decay body)

          Kim te vakkalī iminā pūtikayena ditthena

          Yô dhamma phassati sô mam phassati.

     “Buddha stated that if you want to see me, see the dhamma”. According to that it is discussed about Dharmakāya. In the Kathāvatthupakarana the following quotation is given,

          Bhagavā tusitabhavane nippatto hôti  manussalôkampi āgacchati             nimita rūpakam pana metam dassati

             At that time Buddha delivered the Abhidhamma. He has to come the human world for the milk. Though he came for his aim around the preaching of Abhidhamma did not stop. It was continued by Nirmākāyas. Therefore with the quotation we can think that it also discusses about two Kāyas such as Sambôgakāya and Nirmākāya.  

          Theravadin taught they don’t accept Trikāya on several occasions. Buddha mentioned that I have already taught the dharma and Vinaya, after my demise dharma and vinaya would be your teacher.

       This is given in Mahapārinibbana sutta in Dīgha Nikaya;

           “Dhammo ca vinayo ca mayā dēsito paňňatto

           So vo mana accayēna sattha”

           In Gopaka sutta of Majjhima Nikaya, Gopaka Moggalana Thera and Ven. Ănanda discussed about the teacher. The question was who would be the teacher after demise of Buddha.

       Answering the question Ven. Ănanda said that dharma and Vinaya will be our teacher. At the beginning Gopaka Moggallana thera said as Appatisaranā (No-teacher).

       Then Ven. Ănanda answered as dhammmappatisaranā (dhamma is the teacher) because of above Two statements, we can accept that. In Theravada tradition also it has discussed the Body of dhamma (dhammakāya).

            Both in Dīgha nikaya and Majjhima nikaya, it is stated that the assistance of two Kāyas belong to Buddha;

           “ Tathāgatassa  hetam

             Vāsettha adhivacanam

             Dhammakāyo itipi,

             Brahmakāya itipi

             Dhammabhūto itipi

             Brahmabhūto itipi.”

        

 

    According to the statement, Dharmakāya it equalizes to Brahmakāya. Anyhow we can see term given two kāyas as Dharmakāya and Brahmakāya. But another Kāya is being seen, that was Brahmakāya, but Brahmakāya is not the body of Brahma.

     Theravāda tradition always mentions that Buddha is a human being. One of suttas in Anguttara nikaya explains the real nature of the Buddha. In the sutta Drona Brahmana noticed the sign wheel in the feed of Buddha approach to the Buddha. And then Buddha explains thing as such as a lotus it’s born in the river growth but it re-emerges about and is a part from, so also Buddha was born in the world growth of in it but overcame it and lived by self. Therefore, I am neither God nor the Gandhabbha nor a man. But I am the Buddha.

     Dependent on this sutta, Mahayanist proves the existence of Nirmānakāya. According to Mahaparinibbana sutta, Buddha said to Ănanda that he can stay even Kalpa if someone invited him. In this case also Buddha is not a human being.

Nirmānakāya

   In Saddhammapundarika sutta, it said that Tathāgata should explain paradox for the welfare of religion. According to the sutta, Buddha had asked thrice to believe his birth, the words are

“I attain Sambhūti incalculable years ago, and think then I have been preaching the dhamma all that I had said about the previous Tathāgatas and their parinibbana were all my creations”. Though I had not attained parinibbana I said that I had attained it in order rouse scarcity in the mind of the people and decided to see the Buddha.

       Nirmānakāya, Buddha is to be found everywhere and at all times. Nirmānakāya body is the vehicle for the activities of the Tathāgata and wherever and wherever he sees manifest himself through his Nirmānakāya he does. Buddhakāya is the so do creator to follow the way of life and the world. Human being usually thinks that Buddhahood is the most difficult state to be attained. Therefore, Nirmānakāya appears in the world to bring innovation in the heart of the people that attainment of Buddhahood was not impossible. The Buddha can take any forms for sake of various plugs of being.

      In Paňcavisati the Buddha helps to service to bring of all Lokadhātus (world), by Nirmāna Mēghēna (Nirmāna cloud) named it has Nirmānakāya. In the text suttrālankāra made by Asanga used the following;

  “Silpa Janama mabābôdhi sadā nirmāna darsanā

   Buddhā nirmānakāyayam mahāmāyô vimôcane”

     Accordingly the Buddha was born out of the womb of Mahayana through his Nirmānakāya therefore even the birth of him was happened with the Nirmānakāya. As we know Buddha has taken medicine, but the Mahayana believes that the Buddha took medicine to except the world nature through he did not have any decease. The passing away of the Buddha is also represented the nature of world.

Dharmakāya

    

  Western scholar translated Dharmakāya as body of the law. Dharma is a very pregnant word and covers a wide range of meaning. The root through means to hold, to carry, to bear and supports.

In English most equivalent frequently use for Dharma by aortal scholar is low doctrine, kāya maybe render body, not underside personality, but in that of system, unity and union foreigner.

The Dharmakāya is a soul, a willing and no wide being, one that is will and intelligence, thought these actions. It is as understood by the Mahayanist, not abstract metaphysical principle life suchness. But it is living a spirit, that many facts itself in nature as well as in thought.

     The Dharmakāya is discussed even during the time of Buddha. At the First Buddhist Council, Dharmakāya was also discussed because it was named as the teacher. Even in Theravada tradition, Dharmakāya is generally accepted. The Avatamsaka Sutta according to the nature of Dharmakāya uses following quotation,

(The Dharmakāya through many facings itself in the triple world is free from impurity and desire. It unfolds itself here and there and everywhere responding to the Karma. It is not the end individual reality, it is not a false existence, but it is universal and pure, it does not exist itself nor is it subject to annihilism. It is forever serene and eternal.

The goal of Bodhisattva is to realize Dharmakāya. Dharmakāya is indescribable. It is the only reality that Buddha realized at the Bodhicaryā. In the Astasāka Shrihā Prajňa pāramitā appears the following passage.

“Oh monks, you should not think that, this individual body is my body. Oh monks, you should see me from me accomplishment of the Dharma body,” “the Tathāgata can not be seem from his material body. The Dharma bodies are the Tathāgata”.

In SūtraLankāra following passage is given “the one who has never seen the sun shrine, can’t be explained the sun shrine, because he is blind such as the Dharmakāya can’t be explained with the worlds, Dharmakāya can only be realized by practicing Prajňa pāramitā. With the practices, the knowledge will be are used. The Dharmakāya can be seen”.

Sambogakāya

  We can understand the relation between Dharmakāya and Nirmānakāya, the latter being similar to the nation of god incarnate (human) or to that of Avatāra. The concept of Sambogakāya is all together to my sterious to be fathomed by a limited consciousness.

    Sambogakāya is the ideal of Buddha. Nirmānakāya is for the human being but Sambogakāya is for the Bodhisattva. In the Paňcavisatti, sambogakāya was introduced as following “Bodhisattva, after attaining Bodhi by meant of Prajňa pāramit, takes the body takes with 32 majors or minerious sense with a view to preach the doctrine Mahayana to Bodhisattva wake up and the same time to arouse in their mind, joy, delighted and love for his excellence dharma.

       According to SūtraLankāra through Sambogakāya, Buddha enjoys the dharma and these bodies are difference according to the different Lokadhātu (world). Each Buddha of each Lokadhātu has his own sambogakāya and it is different from other Buddhas. Anyhow the sambogakāya can not be seen through the ordinary sense of general individual.

      According to commentators on Vijňňāna mātratā shastra, the body of bless (sambogakāya) has two different aspects:

1.     The body of obtain by Tathāgata for his self joyment, by

Dint of his religious disciples through econs (Srasambogakāya).

2.      The body which the Tathāgata manifest to the Bodhisattva in pure land (Sukhāvati) (Prasambogakāya).

     This last body is in position of wonderful spiritual power, reveals wheel of dharma and resolves all the religious down raised by Bodhisattva.

      Abhisambidhā Lankāra states that Sambogakāya is a very subtle body of Buddha. It is endowed with Mahapurisa sign it is generally assumed by Buddha for imparting the higher and metaphysical truth to the advance Bodhisattva.

      As it is given in Ashasambogakāya, there are no coming or going of the Tathāgata. A sleep man might see in his dream one Tathāgata or two or three or on thousand or still more. On walking up he would. However, no longer sees even one Tathāgata or two or three or up to one thousand or still more. These Tathāgatas do not come from anywhere nor go to anywhere. There are eternal and even existences.

The Mahāyana Scriptures

    

  Mahayanist developed their teaching under the patronage of king Ksaniska. The king gives the patronage to Fourth Buddhist Council. At the council, they rejected the Tripitaka that was accepted by Theravādin but they discussed the Buddha’s teachings. In the Mahayana tradition, Dharmas are Twofold such as;

1.                 Sūtra

2.                 Sāstra = Abhidhamma

      Sūtras are nine folds (Naradharma)

 They are;

1.   Ashthasāhasrikā prajňā pāramitā sutra.

2.   Gandhavyūha sutra.

3.   Dhasabhūmī Svara sutra.

4.   Samādhirāj sutra.

5.   Lankāvatāra sutra.

6.   Saddharmapundarīkā sutra.

7.   Tathāgata guhyaka sutra.

8.   Svarnaprabhāsa sutra.

9.     Lalitavistara.

    There are other sutras which do not belong to this category. All the sutras named above are discussed the factors to be arisen the page on Mahayana tradition. The sutra discusses the basic Mahayana’s teaching such as;

1. Bodhisattva ideal

2. Practice of Bodhisattva

3. Six perfections (Pāramitā)

4. Ten Bhūmīs

5. The Concept of Trikāya.

    The texts that do not belong to Naradharma are:

1.       Karunāpundarīka sutra.

2.       Kārandvyūha sutra.

3.       Suhkāvativyūha sutra.

4.       Rastapāla sutra.

5.       Ărya shālistambha sutra.

    Among all these sutras they have classified as Avatamsaka and Vaypulya sutra.

Samādhirāja sutra named as Avatamsaka sutra. Saddharmapundarīka sutra is named as Vaypulya sutra with rapid of development of Mahayana tradition. It made several scholars such as:

1.   Vasumitra

2.   Vasubandu

3.   Nāgārjuna

4.   Ăryadēva

5.   Shāntidēva

6.   Ashvaghôsa

7.   Prajňā karamati

  Each of these scholars dedicated their time for the prevention (protect) Mahayana literature. Anyhow, because of their individual view they branch off from Mahayana tradition.

The Two Schools;

1. Madyamika

2. Yāgācāra

    The text which was reasonable for these divisions are;

1.       Mūlamadyamita kārikā

2.       Madyantavibhanga shāstra

3.       Yôgācāra bhūmī shāstra

4.           Satyasiddhi shāstra

    Shantidēva, Ashvaghôsa and Nāgārjuna have compounded several other texts.

  They are;

1. Bodhicaryāvatāra

2. Shiksā samuccaya

3. Abhisamaga lankāra

4. Vajrasūci

5. Mahayana Sraddhôtpūda

6. Vigrahavivartanī

      According to Chinese tradition, the date of compassion of this text can not be determined. Approximate date can be determined in directly. It is first century.

    Ashthasāha srika prajňā pāramitā sutra according to the Mahayana tradition, several prajňā pāramitā sutras can be available. Among those sutras the followings are much valuable.

1. Ashthasāha Srika prajňā pāramitā sutra = 80000

2. Paňcavinsatisāha srika prajňā pāramitā sutra = 25000

3. Shatasāha srika prajňā pāramitā sutra = 100000

  Among this sutra Ashthasāha srika prajňā pāramitā is the most prominent discourses. In the sutra the emptiness (Sūnyatā) is highly discussed. In the common sense, emptiness is discussed in the Mahayana tradition. Therefore, the text should belong to Mahayana tradition.

    First chapter (Sarvakāraňňata) discusses the Bodhisattva practice. This is delivered by the Buddha to Ven. Subhūti and Ven. Sāriputta. Ven. Subhū and Ven.Sāriputta were among the Bodhisattva. As it is mentioned in the sutra, the duty of the Buddha is to escort the Bodhisattva to the enlightenment. Therefore, the practical part is given. It is called the realization of the emptiness. One can not understand this, as he is living in illusory world. In the teaching of emptiness, the common nature of world and the being are given. That is illusion. The five aggregates are collectively called being. Here emptiness means when the five aggregates are classified, there is nothing. On one hand, anyone of the aggregates can not exist alone. On other hand, they do not have their own existence.

  

 In the Sūnyata, Ven. Sāriputta asked from Ven. Subhūti the reason to follow the prajňā pāramitā as the Bodhisattva in the following manner;

    “Here Ven. Subhūti answering the question explains the real nature of five aggregates. The world he realized only through the prajňā pāramitā. Five aggregates come into existence because of the nature of depict. Otherwise, they do not exist.”

     In the Theravāda tradition, the cause and depict theory is discussed. The basic formulates are as follow:

    “Hētum paticca sambhūtam,  Hētu bhngā nirojjhati.

     Yamkinci samudaya dhammam, sabban tam nirodha dhammam.

    Ye dhammā hētuppatavā, tēsam hētum tathāgato āha.

    Through in Theravāda tradition, cause and depict theory is discussed, in Mahayana tradition, the cause and depict theory critical and deeply examine there the all sutras are discussed the practical aspect of realization of emptiness.

Saddharma Pundarikā

“The Lotus Sutra”

      The Saddharma pundarikā or discourse, popularly known as Lotus sutra. This is the most importance text of Mahayana Buddhism. The lotus sutra gives us very a little information as to what universal or absolute is. Some modern scholars believe, absolutism in Mahayana was to be established on the basic of emptiness “Sūynata”, the lotus lives as empty handed, commenting on the doctrine of emptiness in the lotus “All the same, the lotus’s reference to emptiness”. The absolutism of the lotus sutra regarding to both the path and goal. According to it, there is only one truth path not a second or third. The following simply is used to illustrate. “It is just as the potter, makes pots with the same clay. Among them some become pots for sugar. Some pots for classify bottle. Some pots for curd or milk. While some become pots for inferior and filthy. There is no different in the clay. But rather a different in the pots best on the things into them.

     O Kāssapa in this way is there, this one and only one vehicle, the Buddha’s vehicle. There exist neither a second no a third.

The sutra was delivered by the Buddha to the many Bodhisattvas. The reason for this is that other beings can not understand easily.

       “Durbodyam tathāgatassa sanghabyam” in this sutra the three Bodies are stated. All of them the Buddhahood are the higher. Those who are with more unwholesome deed can not attain the enlightenment. Therefore, in Mahayana tradition, a prominent place is given to enlightenment. Therefore, their vehicle is the higher. It is called Mahayana. With the following quotation it can be proved;

      “Ekam eva aham satvānam  dharmmam dēsayāmi,

       Yadidam Buddhayānam na hinci sāriputta dutiyam vā

       tatiyam vā yānam sanvidyatē”.

    Therefore, Mahayana is the only one vehicle to realize the world. The Bodhisattvas who are in the world are introduced the Mahayana. It is called Bôdhiyāna.

Lankāvatāra Sutra

The lankavatāra Sutra was delivered by the Buddha in Sri Lanka having heard that Buddha visited to Sri Lanka; king Rāvana came to meet the Buddha. After that Buddha delivered the sermon to Rāvana and many Bodhisattvas. In the Sutra, the doctrinal factor discusses are paňcadharma, Svabhāva, viňňana and Nayaryatmavāda. The lankavatāra has a two fold historical significant ÷

  First one is, the title suggest that it is a discourse on the entry into Lanka and there can’t be much downed that lanka refers to the island (Srilanka) where Buddhism established during the region of the emperor Asoka in third century B.C. yet it is never mentioned in any literatures belonging to Srilankan Buddhist tradition or set of chronicle “Mahavamsa and Dīpavamsa”.

  The second one is, the Lankavatāra is one of the most importance texts in the category called Vaypulya sutra. In the East Asian Buddhist tradition, it becomes the most secret text of the Sôtô Zen.

The second chapter of the sutra is discussed the following÷

1.           Citta or consciousness

2.           Five kinds of Viňňāna

3.           Five kinds of Viňňāna as Citta

4.                 Mind is a consciousness

According to the doctrinal factor even in the sutra, we can see six kinds of Viňňāna

They are ÷

          Caksu

        Srota

        Ghrāna

        Jihva

        Kāya

        Mano

          Later they have added mana as a sense and Ălaya Viňňāna.

          The third chapter of the sutra is rejected both Magga and Phala as they are not Magga and Phala. Therefore they are not superior like the Buddha.

The following stages make it clear ÷

        “Sotāpatti Phalam cēva, sakadāgāminasa tatha,

     Anāgāmi phalam cēva, Arahantvam citta vibrūmam”

          The reality that would be attained through the path and fruit “are rejected”. The Arahanthood wrong understands. It is an illusion in the sutra the path of bodhisattva is delivered to Mahamatī Bodhisattva. The practical part comprised homage of doctrine.

1.           Puggala dharmanairyātma

2.           kleshāvarana and ňeyyāvarana

3.           Cuti uppati

4.           Māna and drusthi

The two kinds of nairyātma accepted in the sutra are; puggala nairyātma and dharmanairyātma. The following this stanza is explained the nature of being and samsāra;

“Cittam manasya viňňānam svabhāvam dharmapaňcakkham nairyātmayam  dvayam shuddham prabhante vināyakāha”.

Here the Bodhisattva is able to understand dharmanairyātma and puggala nairyātma. Then he does not have view about the existence. Through Ălaya Viňňāna he understands the real nature of the existence.

          The sutra Prajňā bhāvita and saddharma pundarikā sutra were the reason for the development of Mādyamika tradition. “Yôgācāra viňňānavāda was emerged as result of lankavatāra sutra.

Avatamsaka sutra

    The full name of the Avatamsaka sutra in Sanskrit is the Buddhāvatamsaka Vaipulya sutra. According to the Mahayana tradition, sutra ninefold but there is no a sutra called Avatamsaka among them. Samādhirāga sutra is named as Avatamsaka sutra. When we pay our attention to the full name of the Avatamsaka sutra, the term Vaipulya is a title given to a sutra said to include profound doctrine. It is included as category in the ninefold division of the Buddhist scripture.

      The central element in the title of this sutra is (Buddhāvatamsaka). The term Avatamsaka means a garland of flowers, indicating that all the virtue that the Buddha has accumulated time he attained enlightenment are like a beautiful garland of flowers. The Avatamsaka was translated into Chinese by Buddhabhadra this translation divided into 34 chapters, was based on a Sanskrit text that had been brought to China from Khotam. The Avatamsaka originally was not as length it is today. In the Mahaprajňā pāramitāpadesa, the Dassabhūmīka sutra and Gandavyūha are quoted. Thus, before they were in cooperated in the Avatamsaka these two works must have circulated independently conquicificantly, the Avatamsaka is clearly composed a numeral of individual sutras. Among the earliest part of Avatamsaka in the Dassabhūmīka sutra.

    The Avatamsaka is said to revealed the Buddha enlightenment just as it is, without shaping the contents to fit the need of the ordain the Buddha preaches the sutra while he is in the ocean seal concentration (Sāgaramudrā samādhi) in which everything is clearly manifested in his mind. Because the teaching was extremely difficult to understand Srāvakas such as Sāriputra and Maudgalyayana are said to have not understood the sutra at all and to have acted as if they were deaf and dumb.

     The realm of enlightenment described in the sutra is the world of Vairocana, the Buddha of preventive light. He has attained ultimate virtue, paid homage to all Buddhas taught myriad sensation being and realized supreme.

He is a majestic Buddha who opens the Buddhist path to sensation being. His wisdom is compared to the ocean (mind), which reflects light (object) everywhere without limited.

      The Avatamsaka sutra does conceit of the description authority of Bodhisattva as he tries to realize enlightenment.

The stages on the path to enlightenment and wisdom realized in various stages are systematically discussed.

Among the stages described the 10 Vihāras, the 10 practices (Cariyā), 10 stages at which merits are given to another sensation being (Parināmanā) and 10 thrones (Dassabhūmi).

Sukhāvativyūha Sutra

    

The name of this sutra in English is the pure land sutra. Modern scholars believed that sutra was composed in either China or central Asia. However, even though the sutra may not have been composed in India, the content reflects Indian view. Asian Buddhists traditionally have claimed that it was translated into Chinese a total of 12 times, however only 5 of these translations have survival. In addition, a Tibetan translation of the sutra existed and Sanskrit versions have been publiced.

      According to one of the Chinese translations, the Bodhisattva Dharmakāya made 48 that were fulfill when he later attained Buddhahood and became Amitābha.

Additional various variations in the content the number can be counted in the letters Chinese translation, the Tibetan translation and the Sanskrit version of the sutra.

    The comparison of various translations of the text prevails how the content changed from the earliest versions to the letter one. This sutra contains a description of meditation through which a person can be visual Amitābha in front of him. In addition many of the sutras translated content passages on Amitābha. The frequency mentions of Amitābha in a variety of sutra and the number of Bodhisattva how are identified with the past life of Amitābha.

This belief in Amitābha did not originated with compassion of the    

Sukhāvativyūha.

    From among the many stories concerning the past life of Amitābha Buddha, the story of the Bodhisattva Dharmākārya is the most importance. However, Dharmākāya and Amitābha do not seem to have been identified with each other at the first. Moreover, the story of Amitābha’s past life as various Bodhisattvas do not seem to be related to each other. The name Amitābha (ultimate light) and Amitāyus originally do not seem to have had clear Buddhist content. The belief Amitābha was influence by Mahayana ideal of the Buddha’s compassion.

    The sutra concerned Amitābha Buddha, but in the context of the meditative exists in which the practioner virtue life the Buddha in this sutra Amitābha Buddha is significant as a Buddha of unlimited light or life who is taken as the object of the virtue.

Mūlamadhyamaka Kārikā

      

The author of the Mūlamadhyamka kārikā is Nāgarjuna, who lived at that time when the Theravada-Mahayana conflict had not degenerated to the level that is presented in the Suddharma Pundarikā sutra. Therefore, had and already different missions. It was indeed not the least from the missions that lay before Moggalīputtissa, to expose the internal ability of certain hieratical view that was gradually becoming popular in the Buddhist tradition careful reading of the Mūlamadhyamaka kārikā will prevail that fact Nāgarjuna had all the helps he needed to achieve this task.

       In the following analysis of the Mūlamadhyamaka, Nāgarjuna attempted to describe the Sarvāstivādins and Sautrāntikās and established the non-substantiality (Nairatmya) of the all dharmas, as well as the non-substantiality of individual. Therefore, to explicate the positive doctrines of the Buddha in the early discourses like the Kāccāyanapotta sutra of Samyutta Nikaya.

     Attempts have often been made by modern scholars to pick out selection or chapter from the work of eminent philosopher of the East to provide a complete and guarantee picture of their ideas.

    Considering the inspect such method, the present analysis Nāgarjuna’s taught will be presented on basic of an examination of his Kārikā taken as a while hold with every world, every verse and every chapter in it.

    A superficial reading of this book with 448 verses divided into 27 chapters could have the reader with impression that the text is repetitions. This is a wrong impression this from impression will disappear like mirage if one keeps in the mind the following circumstance,

       1. Led to the complication of this work.

       2. The mortification for writing it.

      3. The background in which it was written.

      4. The goal that was to achieve such consideration will able one to                                         

         See a carefully exceeded plane or structure in the kārikā.

Mūlamadhyamaka will be analyzed here into four major sections÷

(I-II) 1. Causation and change this section deals with the most under mental doctrine of Buddhism.

The second chapter deals with the problem created, not by empirical theory of change and impermanent. This is also a fundamental of early Buddhism; Nāgārjuna to have that the problem of substance is the problem of explaining causality and change. Therefore, before proceeding to establish the non-substance of all elements Nāgārjuna devoted two chapters of classification of these issues. Nāgārjuna turns to pragmatic definition of invent as fruit (Artha), argue again the rationalism explanation that the fruit itself is unique event.

    (III-XV) 2. The non-substantiality of elements this second section includes 13 chapters, beginning with an examination of sense faculty and ending with an examination of substance (Svabhāva). The entire section it and attempts to establish the doctrine of non-substantiality of elements (Dharma Nairātmya), without having to get rid of anyone of the category such as aggregates, faculty (āyatana) and element (dhātu).

    Here our analyses to element treated from hand of objective stands point. There are three of the prominent categories of the early discourses at the top of list.

       Categories discusses are as follow÷

1.     Faculty = Indriya

2.     Aggregates = Skhandha

3.     Elements = Dhātu

4.     Lust = Rāga

5.     Dispositional condition = Sanskrta

6.     Action and agent = Karma-kārikā

7.     The prior entity = pūrva

8.     Fire and fuel = agnindhana

9.     Prior and posterior end = purvāpara kôti

10. Suffering = Dukkha

11. Dispositive  =  sankhāra

12. Association =  samsarga

13. Self-nature = Svabhāva

    (XVI-XXVI) 3. The non-Substantiality of individual this section also includes 11 chapters. It is a section that has caused confusion in the mind of many who wrote on Nāgārjuna’s many of the topics deal with in the pervious sections are analyzed here. This gave the impression that the text is rapidity. However, reading the 11 chapters one can not held coming to the conclusion. They were intended to establish the non-substantiality of the individual, but not to eliminate the conception of an individual all together. Here we begin with the discussing of the problem of treat by creation, explain either term of the aggregates or personal being. The terms under examination are;

1.     Bondage and release = Bondhana-moksa

2.     Fruit of action = Karma –phala

3.     Self = Atma

4.     Time = Kāla

5.     Harmony = Sāmagrī

6.     Occurrence and delusion = Sāmbhāva-vibhāsa

7.     Thus-gone-one = Tathāgata

8.     Perversion = Viparyāsa

9.     Noble Truths= Ăryasacca

10 .Freedom = Nirvana

11. The Twelve course facts = Dvādassanga

   (XXVII) 4. Nāgarjuna could have concluded his treatise with the pervious section. He was aware that his most favorites discourse the Kaccāyanagotta sutra of Samyutta Nikaya, began with the question regarding Sammādhitthi. Nāgārjuna has already explained almost every aspect of the Buddha’s doctrine and shown what constitute “Right View”, as against the “Wrong View” to appear in the Buddhist tradition. The last chapters represent and explanation of highest form of freedom. This freedom made Buddhism, one of the most tolerances religious ever to appear on earth.

  The Buddha had referred to 62 views with which his disagree his own was the 63. To insist on rejection the 62 views and uphold a 63 would be dogmatism. Nāgārjuna was a pragmatic view that called for modification of any view depending on the context and its pragmatic value.

Viññānaptimātrata Siddhi

  Vasubandhu was prominent Buddhist teacher and one of most importance figure in the development of Mahayana in India.

Though he is particular admired by later Buddhist as co-founder of the Yogācāra School along with his half brother Asang, his Pre-Yogācāra was such as Abhidhammakôsa and his auto commentary on it. He wrote commentaries on many sutras, works on logic, devotional poetry, and work on Abhidhamma classification, as well as original and innovative philosophical treatises. Some of his writings have survived in their original Sanskrit form. Vasubandhu was a many sided thinkers, and his personality as it emerged from his work and his Biography shown him as a man who was not only a great genius and a philosopher, but also a human being who was filled with great compassion.

  130 verses “Trinsattikā” according to tradition Vasubandhu’s brother Asang, after becoming discontent with the Mahĕsāsaka Buddhist teachings he had been studying, went into forest meditated for 12 years after which he felt no closer to his goal. Thence a Bodhisattva named Metriya appeared to him from Tusita heaven and instructed him dictating a numeral of treatises to him that becomes the foundation of Yogācāra School. In Mahayana Buddhism, Metriya functions as type of messianic figure the future Buddha who will come to earth when sensation beings are sufficiently enlightened to enter Nirvana. It should be pointed out that although Buddhist considers Vasubandhu and his brother to be founder of Yogācāra.

  Eventually Asang covered Vasubandhu to the Yogācāra School and Vasubandhu began writing commentary criticizes in earnest expounding his new view. One the Mahayana Vibhāga consists of verses by “Metriya” accompanies by the Vasubadhu’s commentary.

  The text attempts to refashion Nāgārjuna notion of emptiness allowing it to reinforce rather than negate Yogācāra idea.

  Vasubandhu’s trinsatikā, disperse it privacy, it on of his most mature works. Vasubandhu summed up his doctrine of Viññānaptimātrata by defining the eight consciousness theories of Yogācāra in Abhidhammic term, concluding with five step parts enlightenment. The eight consciousnesses are the five senses consciousness “Cakkhu, Satra…..Etc”. The empirical consciousness “Mano Viññāna”. A self-concerned “Klistha Mano Viññāna” and “Ălaya Viññāna”. Vasubandhu described each and explains how each can be overcome.

  The point of Viññānaptimātrata, as many writers have clamed to establish a theory of transcendental idealism. Consciousness which is closer to be real, internal world is nothing more than projected desire and predilection of consciousness, by direct, immediate cognition (Jñāna). The five step parts gradually leads one to this enlightenment which is described else where in Yogācāra writing as the transformation of the Ălaya Viññāna into the great mirror cognition that refers without based and anticipation or attachment accurately replaces everything before it.

  The three nature theories which treated in Yogācāra text including an independent treated by Vasubandhu, maintains that there are three nature or cognitive realms.

1. The delusion cognitively constructed realm which is unreal and which posits hypostatic essences or selves for oneself and other things.

2. The realm of causal dependency when mixed with the constructed realm lead one to mistake the product of the flux of causes and condition for fix permanent empties.

3. The perfection realm which function like Nāgārjuna’s emptiness to remove all traces of hypostatic thinking and cognition.

  These self natures are also called three non-self-natures, since their lack fixed, independent, permanent, identity and thus should not be hypostatic. The first is intrinsically unreal, the third “empty” and the second is of unfixed nature since it can be mixed with either of other two.

20 Verses “vinsatikā”

  Vasubandhu’s most original and philosophical interesting critic is the 20 verses. Yogācāra clams that what we think is internal object nothing more than mental projection. This has been mistaken for an idealist position, because interpreters focus on the world “object” instead of “internal”. Vasubandhu doesn’t deny that cognitive object exists what he denies that they appear anywhere else than in the very act of consciousness which apprehended them. He denies that such cognitive objects have internal refers “Bahya-Artha” what Vasubandhu meant is that cognition never takes place anywhere except in consciousness. Everything we know through sensory experience. We are fool by consciousness into believing that those things which we perceive and appropriate within consciousness are actually “outside”, our cognitive sphere. Put other ways we mistake our interpretation of thing for the things themselves. The goal of Yogācāra is to break out of cognitive narcissism and finally wake up to things as they are devoid of erroneous conceptual projections.

  The realize object internal thing must exist because they are consistently locate in sphere, time, subjective   wishes do not determine objective reality and objective world function by determination causal principle. Having stated the objection Vasubandhu devoted the rest of the text to his respond. Vasubandhu replies to the first two realize objections by nothing that object also seems to have specialist and temporal politic on realms, although nothing “internal is present”. Thus his apparent cognitive object doesn’t require an actual object internal to the consciousness cognizing it, but without the consciousness not an internal object is the necessary condition.

  For the third objection Vasubandhu argues that groups due to collective karma, gives right misperception or interpretation in common. According to karma theory, it is the consequences of one’s own action that determines what sort of situation one will be born into and thus the type of group which will share common views and ways of seeing.

  As the fourth objection Vasubandhu points out that the appearance of causal and effect also accrued in dream. Moreover, in a wet dream, even though the erotic object is not extremely real, the imagined object causal and observable physical effect, observable in the world as well as in dream. Thus our conscious “dream” can have causal effect.

The Origin and Development of Mādhyamaka Phylosphy

  Mādhyamaka philosophy was introduced by Nāgārjuna in 150^th B.C. but it was developed within during 2^nd century. There are reasons to origin of Mādhyamaka philosophy. As the method of dialectical necessity, a theory of element formulated or at least suggested by the Buddha. The Mahayana Buddhism clear recognized this dialectical when they speak of Pudgala Nairātmya, it denies of substant as intended to pave the way for absolutism.

  Sûnyatā is an unreality of elements as well (Dhamma Nairātmya).

The doctrine of elements to be an ultimate stand-point is evidence from certain treads and text of the Pali canons. Buddha declares Rûpa, Vadena, Saññā, Sankkhāra and Viññāna to be illusory. In the Majjhima Nikaya, it is stated (depending on the oil and wick thus the light of lamp burn. It is neither in the one, nor in other, nor anything in itself.

Likewise, phenomena are nothing in themselves. All things are unreal, there are deceptions. Nibbana is the only fruit).

  Basically the text Nāgārjuna said (in declaring that it is deceptive and illusory, the lord means Sûnyatā is depended of thing. Condemning is in capacity some of the monks to understand the deeper, inner meaning of his teaching. Buddha speaks of the Bhikkhus of future period. It is mentioned in the Sûnyatā Patisamyuta of Samyutta Nikaya as follow:

     “The monks will no longer wish to hear and learn the Suttantas, deep, deep in meaning, preaching beyond the world, dealing with the void, but will only lead their ears to the profane Suttantas proclaim by disciples and made by poem”.

  There is another place to identify the Mādhyamaka stand-point in Sutta Pitaka. Buddha tells us that there are two principal view points.

There are namely:

1.     The existence (Bhavadi tthi)

2.     The non-existence (Vibhavadi tthi).

  No one holding to either of these can hope to be preached free of this world. Only those who analysis and understand the origin, nature and condition of these two views can be freed from the grief of birth and death (Samsara).

  In Kaccāyana Gotta Sutta of Samyutta Nikaya, Buddha tells Kaccāyana to rely on duality,   

         “Dvaya nissitokhôyam kaccāna lôka atthitam ca natthitam ca sabham atthīti ayam ĕko antô sabham natthīti dutiyô antô”.

  “Kaccāyana desire to know the nature of the world is accustomed to rely on duality, on the (it is) (Attitam) and on the (it is not) (Nattitam). That everything existed, is Kaccāyana one extreme that it doesn’t exist, is another. Not accepting the two extremes, Tathagata proclaims the truth (Dhamma) for the middle position”.

  Nāgārjuna rejected both the “is” and “is not” view with references Kaccāyana Gotta sutta.

  The Ratanakûta Sutra explicitly mentioned the two stand points “Ătmya and Nairātmya” and the middle position as transcending both.

  Buddha composed the dhamma to a raft which has to be left off after crossing the stream, they are not meant to be taken as ultimate one. Buddha mentions this Alagadhûpama Sutta of Majjhima Nikaya.

          “Kullûpamam vo bhikkhave dhammam dĕsissāmi

         nisaratthāya nô       gahanatthāya”.    

  Buddha rejected all speculative philosophies as dogmatism and his declaration the Tathagata is free from all theories. This is entire accord with Mādhyamaka stands point of criticism and rejection of all theories as constituting the higher wisdom.

  The realization of the insuperable difficulty in each of standpoints lead to imagine of the Mādhyamaka dialectic it is a consciousness of the inherent contradiction presented in a subtraction of reason to characterize unconditioned in terms of imperial. There are two principal moments in dialectic the system of Atmya tradition represented the thesis and Abhidhammika system the antithesis of the antinomical conflict.

  Buddha’s refusal to be pawn into the net of speculative metaphysical is consciousness of the transcendent of the real to thought. In Mādhyamaka, the same attitude is carried out in systematic form. The Mahdyamaka system represents the majority of the critical consciousness within the whole of Buddhism. There was no sudden from early pluralistic Buddhism of the Hīnayāna to Madhyamaka. A number of temporary and intermediary schools and doctrines pave the way for the advance of Madhyamaka absolutism (Sûnyatā).

  The rises of Madhyamaka as a religion on the distinctly philosophical basics were the work of several countries, but the beginning could be tried shortly after the demise of the Buddha.

Three features sensuously distinctly Madhyamaka from the early schools:

1.     The conception of the supramance personality of Buddha (Lokutara).

2.     The Boddhisattva ideal of salvation for all beings, as against the private and selfish salvation for oneself of the Srāvākayāna and the attainment of Buddhahood instead of Arahantship.

3.     Metaphysic of Suññatā, instead of a radiation pluralism of ultimate element.

  According to Kimura, who has made a special tropical study of these terms that the terms Mahayana and Hīnayāna were coined by the Mahasanghikas as a sort of reiteration against the Theravadin who called them as Pāpa Bhikkhus and heretic.

  The evolution of the Mahayana maybe said to have began from time of Buddhaparinibbana, it was almost complete by the first century B.C. the process lasted (expend) for more than three or four century during which period the peeper and more fruitful ideas of the master gained ground on the religious, ethic metaphysic fronts.

  Universally condemned by the all the Buddhist text schools as heretical, the Vātsīputriyas held tenaciously to the doctrine of the Pudgalātman (the individual) as a permanent entity, neither completely identical with the mental stages nor different them. The Vātsīputriyas shown the emptiness of the doctrine of element, the stages can’t be completely substitute the ātmya. They could not attain to critical position of the Mādhyamaka. According to Madhyamaka tradition, there are nor stage without the self, nor is there the self without stage and therefore, both are unreal, being relative.

  The Mādhyamaka system is the systematical form of the Suññatā doctrine the Prajnāpāramitā treatises. Its metaphysical spirit path and religious ideal are all presenting there with Prajnāpāramitā an entirely new phrase of Buddhism began a several times of absolutism established by dialectic, by negation (Suññatā) of all imperial speculative theories, replaces the pluralism, dogmatism of the early Buddhism. The Prajnāpāramitā revolutionized Buddhism, in all aspects of its philosophy and religion by the basic concept of Suññatā.

  Early Buddhist was Semitic semi critical; it denied the reality of the substance soul (Pudgalā Nairātmya), but dogmatically affirmed the reality of the element two (Dharma Nairātmya). The Prajnāpāramitā can do and claim expounds the deeper, found teaching of Buddha.

  There is evidence to belief that the Astasāhasrikā (8000) is the oldest and basic Prajnāpāramitā text from which there has been expectation. It is difficult to say with any definitions regarding to the other canonical texts that might have perceived and influenced Nāgārjuna and Ărya Dĕva. The nine Dharmas are held in great veneration by both the Mādhyamak and Yogācāra.

  The Mādhyamaka standpoints of the steering clear of the extremes of Nitya and Anitya of Ătma and Nairātmya, it brought out with emphasize and clarity in Ratnakûta. The Mādhyama Pratipāda is very suggestively characterized as the self conscious or critical awareness of thing as they are. It is not a position at all and indescribable.

  In the Prajnāpāramitā and subsidiary canonical literature of Mādhyamaka, the one basic ideal that is retreated that there is nor changed, nor origination, nor cessation, nor coming in or going out. The real is neither one, nor many neither ātman, nor ātman. It is as it is always.  Origination, decays are imagine by the uniformed. The real is developed of these other conceptual constructions. It is transcendent to thought and realize only in non-dual knowledge (Prajnā), which is the absolute itself.

  The distinction between two truths (Samvruti Paramārta) that it emphasizes. But if there criticism dogmatic speculation early Buddhism. According to that five aggregates are not impermanent, but there are Suññatā, relining a nature of their own.

Vocation Second Term 23/07/2010

   

      

The Central Teaching of the Buddha

    The doctrine of the Paticcasamuppāda is occupied as the central place in Theravāda teaching. We recognize it with help of relevant available is the Nikāyas and with other Buddhist schools. The general tradition of the Buddhist, which is common to all leading schools, accepted the central position of Paticcasamuppāda in the Buddhist Philosophy. The Theravada Buddhist tradition holds that the Buddha’s Enlightenment consisted in gaining of the insight into causal law as formulated in the Paticcasamuppāda. The account in the Vinaya Pitika represents the Buddha immediately after his Enlightenment reflecting over the twelve terms of formula of the Paticcasamuppāda forwards and backwards.

In the Mahāpadāna Sutta, the Buddha says,

‘Yo Paticcasamuppādam passati so dhammam passati

                Yo dhammam passait so Paticcasamuppāda passati’

‘Whoever sees Dependent Origination, sees the Teaching, whoever sees the teaching, sees the Dependent Origination of all phenomena’.

   At many others places in the Nikāyas, the Dhamma is again identified with the truth of Dependent Origination. Thus, in the Mijjhimanikāya, the Buddha is represented as seeing,

                   ‘Dhammam vo desisāmi asmin sati idam hoti

imassa uppādā idam uppajjati asmin asaot idam na hoti imassa nirodhā idam nirojjaccati’

‘I will teach you the Dhamma if this is, comes to be. From the arising of this, that arises. If this is not, that does not come to be. Form ceasing of this, that ceases’.

   The doctrine of causality is described sometime in the formula term in with the Dhamma itself is described,

                   ‘Accariyam bhante abhutam bhante

                yā ve gambhirocāyam bhante

Paticcasamuppādam gambhirovabhāso’

‘Wonderful! Sir is the fact the teaching on the Dependent Origination is profound in its very appearance very profound’.

   It would appear from this fact recorded in the Nikāyas that the doctrine of causality represents the central teaching basis of the Buddha’s teaching. This traditional claim has been called in question that is by Ms. Rhys Devid. She denies that the teaching on the Paticcasamuppāda as it is given in Pāli Nikāyas formed a part of the original teaching of the Buddha. The reasons adduced for this view seem ingénues rather then believe a birth. The arguments of Ms. Devid are based not on the scientific method, but on the doubtful method of deduction to the original teaching of the Buddha.

   His tradition which emphasizes the central place of the doctrine of causality cannot be dismissed likely. The pali canon as represent things the tradition makes this assertion by identified the Dhamma with the doctrine of Dependent Origination. The Truth of causality in the process of nature holds good irrespective of the fact of the appearance or the non-appearance of the Buddha.

The Enlightenment of the Buddha consists in the inside into the truth of causality. The purpose of the appearance of the Buddha is described as revealing and teaching the nature of the truth of this causality.

   It is significant to note that the every first sermon traditionally credited to the Buddha mentions causal law as the basic teaching. The truth of causality is described as difficult of comprehension to those attach to the conventional habits of thought. The Sāmaññaphala Sutta describes knowledge of causality as for meant the super sensory, psychic powers. The Anguttara Nikaya, the claim is made that the knowledge of causality goes beyond both love and meditation.

   The Samyutta Nikaya itemizes the direct result of this knowledge, namely that is enable one to see the truth to gain full vision, to understand the sublime Dhamma, acquire spontaneous wisdom, to grasp the arid Truth and to knock on the door of immorality. The truth alone enables to one to gain salvation in this life its self and thereby to ripe the fruit of Arahantship. The continuity of the circle of the rebirth is due to ignorance of the causal law. The knowledge of the causal relationship is the only way to salvation. In an important passage in the Samyutta Nikāya, the Buddha declares that the doctrine relating to causality is like an ancient part (Burānam añjasam) which he has merely rediscovered for himself.

      

   A part from this assertion there is another kind of indirect evidence in the Pali Nikāyas that maybe prohibited examine with a view to finding out whether causality actually central in the teaching of the Buddha.     

  This is body of the formal doctrine. It will be relevant and useful to the present purpose to consider briefly the causal implication of this body of teachings. The main doctrine of early Buddhism centers on the following topics;

1)   Bhava

2)   Anata

3)   Kamma

4)   Viññaņa

5)   Ariyasacca

1.   Bhava the term Bhava which it dynamic importance is one of the most importance characteristic in Buddhist philosophy. It denies the studies concept of nature. All phenomena are characterized by importance (Sabbe sankhāra aniccā). The knowledge of importance nature of thing constitutes the part to purify.

     (Sabbe sankhāra aniccā yadā paññāya passati attha nibhindatī dukkho ĕsa maggo visuddhiya).

     All things that are of the nature of arising are of nature of decaying.

     (Yam kinci samudaya dhammam sabbam tam nirodha dhammam).

Both physical and mental things are subjects to a process of incenses flues, of becoming otherwise

     (Viparināma dhammam) becoming is that which is impermanent; compose arisen, subject disintegration, dissociation, decline and cessation

     (Bhavo bhikkhave anicco sankhato paticcasamupanno khayadhammo vayadhamma virādhamma nirodhadhammo).

     The truth of change or of becoming, which facts of nature have a deep religious and ethical significant for the Buddha. It is the fact of change that makes possible the life of religious endeavor and thereby the cultivation of spiritual perception. Moreover, if it is maintained that man that is only divided nature and he is substance with conceptacle the practice superfluous and meaningless. Since change can be either for the better or for worse the fact of becoming grantees the possibility for the better man of one imperfect nature.

     The Buddha said in the Sammaññapala sutta of D.N, if thing does not change and if there are no cause and condition for even in experience than there is no point in following the life of virtue. The reference here is to Makkhali Gosāla. Cleanly this teaching of becoming (Bhava) issue direct from the recognition of working of causality in nature, for causality if the Buddha explanation for changing in physical and mental life.

2.   Anatta = Soullessness

     This is one of the characteristic teachings in Buddhism and follow as a result from the theory of becoming. If everything is contumely becoming, there is no entity in phenomena that maybe regarded as enduring or in destructible.

In other words phenomena are characterized by no-substantiality (sabbe dhammā anattā).

    The fact of no-substantiality also has a religious significant for the Buddha. The life of religious requires a sense of self-a denegation. The Buddha enjoyed his disciples to get rid of the nation Ahamkāra and Māmamkāra.

     This has been brought homage to disciples by way of the application of Anatta to individual. By anglicizing the individual into five aggregates the former is de+personante. In addition division into five Khandhas, we also have in the nikaya other divisions such as Nāma rûpa āyatana and dhātu. As a result of analysis of man into impersonal aggregates the disciple is unable to obtain his idea of egoism and selfishness. Clearly the teaching of Anatta is ethical and religious adaptation of the central truth of causality.

3.   Kamma = action

     Kamma is the moral application of doctrine of causality. In Sammaññapala sutta, the Buddha refused the views that circumstance of life is due to fortuitous factor and says that they can be explained in term of cause and conditions. The entire of system of the Buddha taught was based on the recognition of the truth of moral cessation.

4.   Viññāna = consciousness

     The Buddha teaching on mind is directly based on causality. The law of causality reigns supreme throughout mental life. Sociological phenomena causality originated.

In the Mahahatthipadopama sutta of M.N, the Buddha said, excepted through participating condition there is no arising of consciousness (Aññattapaccaya natti viññānassa sambhavo). The formula of 12 Nidanas is wholly confined to the causality of the individual sociology.

5.   Ariyasacca   

     The four truths are evidently of the religious basic deriving from the theory of causality. The cessation connection between causality and Four Noble Truths are recognized in the pali book themselves. The discount of the enlightenment in the later text this is admitted that compotation on suffering led to the formulation of Paticcasamupada. The Eightfold Noble Path which is implied in the four truths are themselves of base on the recognition of the causality of sociological process.

     It will be seen from foregoing doctrine of causality is basing and central in the teaching of Buddha. All other doctrines of Buddha are escorted from this fundament doctrine.  

Causality and Suňňatā

The Theory of Sūnyatā is specially associated with the name of Nāgārjuna and the Madhyamaka school of Buddhism. Sūnyatā is intimately connected with teaching in Dependent Origination and as real the development of the logical implication of the latter. The Theravāda also deals with Suňňatā but this subject has hardly being taken into serious consideration by scholar of the present day. Some scholars are altogether unaware of any teaching on Sūnhnhatā on the path of the Theravādins.

The followings are some interesting views that have been expressed on the subject by three noted scholars.

·       Dr. N. Ayyaswamy     “the Sūnyatā is not quite on familiar with the early Buddhism. They take it for Nairātmaya (non-substantiality). Sūnyatā as an equivalent for Dependent Origination, is quite and innovation of Nāgārjuna.”

·       Dr. Stcherbatsky        “The term Sūnyatā is an innovation of the Mahāyāna, an innovation made necessary by the cause of philosophic development. Its germs are found in the Hīnayāna, but the Mahāyāna has given it a quite new interpretation, an interpretation in which the two main schools of the Mahāyāna.”

·       Dr. N. Dutt     “ Saravāstativādins are also responsible of the addition of fourth term, Sūnya, to the usual trio , dukkha, anicca and anātma, though the words conveyed no Mahāyānic meaning as it connoted no other senses than Anātma.”

In this study, we propose to analyze all the evidence the Pali text bearing on Sūnyatā and causality and show that the fact available point to an altogether different conclusion. To be more precise, we propose to prove three conceptions. They are:

·                   Suňňatā is used in the Theravada as an equality for Dependent Origination.

·                   Sūnyatā is used the Theravada not only as an equalent for the nature of the phenomenal world but also as an equilent for Nibbāna and the absolute.

·                   The Conception of the Sūnyatā far from being quite a new interpretation of the path of Nāgārjuna or of the Mahāyāna, presents more accurately only a more detail statement of the logical consequences of the Theravāda theory of causality and Sūnhnhatā.

Dr. Stcherbatsky’s statement that the term Sūnyatā is an innovation of the Mahāyāna is remarkable for the ignorance; it betrays of the facts of early Buddhism. The literal and philosophic senses of the term are already clearly attested in the Pali text. These texts have all the evidence to indicate clearly the stages in the evolution of the meaning of the term from its original literal sense to the later highly develop philosophical sense. The original meaning of Sūnya is non-philosophic and has the sense of the empty, uninhabited, useless and non-philosophic.

They are numerous instance of the use of Sūnya in this special sense in the Pali Nikaya;

Ananda asked, “Sunhnho loko sunhnho lokoti vuccati

                   Kittāvatānu kho bhante.

                    sunhnho lokoti vuccati?      

The Buddha answered, “Yasmā ca kho Ananda snuhnham attena vā attenīyena

vā tasmā sunhnho lokoti vuccati” there is no anything can be introduced as ‘I and my’.”

Another verse;

                   “Sunhnhato lokam avekkhassu mogharāja sadā sato”

                Moghaājas sees the world as the non-substance as sunhnha.’

The term sunhnha is not an innovation on the path of Sārvastivadins as Dutt thinks. It certainly is found in the Pali Nikāyas and goes back to the time of the Buddha, Himself as the evidence so far sited shows. It is a mistake to think that in the Theravada there are only three ways of looking at things, namely as Aniccā, Dukkha and Anattā. The Pali canon knows of more ways of looking at the world than thus any other Mahāyāna texts or group of text. At numerous places in the Nikāyas mention is made of as many as 11 ways of looking at the nature of phenomena.

“Paccupādānakkhnadhā aniccato, dukkhato, rogato, gandhato, sallato, āghāto, abādhato, parato, palokato, sunhnhato, anattato, yonisomanasokātabbo”

    The term suññatā follows closely on the heel suñña and it found used in the nikaya in its each philosophical signification of non-substantiality. But this is not the only meaning of suññatā in the nikaya. It also refers to the transcendental truth of universe.

     The Buddha referred to the  fact that the sutta  he has expound deal with deep, profound and transcendental truth of suññatā and said that those the monks who do not grasp the meaning contain in them fails to unreal deal had not truth. Suññatā here referred not merely to non-substantiality. It took sometimes for the early Buddhist to bring out explicitly all the implication of these pregnant passengers.   

     The M.N devotee two suttas for the specific consideration of suññatā. The first this describe suññatā as the higher attainment that brings about relic in the Cûla suññatā sutta (small sutta).

Suññatā is reality as it is the purest, the higher incomparable and above change. The Cûla suññatā sutta also mentions the suññatā as distinct from suññatā though not as a contradictory of the latter, but as a complimentary to it.

     Reflection on suññatā has been described by the Buddha as the way cultivated by all great beings

                   (Katamĕna tvam sāriputta vihārena ĕtarahi bahulam vihārāsi’ti.

                Suññatā vihārena kho aham bhante etarahi bahulam vihārāmi,

                Sādhu  Sādhu   Sāriputta)

    This is no Nāgārjuna or the Madhymaka or the Mahayana teachers who were the frist to identify suññatā with Nirvana. In the Dhammapada  suññatā is identified with Vimokkha which is another term for Nibbana

                   Suññato vimkkho yassa gocaro)

    Suññatā as the truth of the universe is the foundermental conclusion yield by the theory of paticcasamupāda. Insight into suññatā is the insight into non-substantiality.

All Dhammas by their nature illustrate the truth of suññatā, Buddhaghosa employed a numeral of similes to the facts of unreality of Dhamma.

Like a bubble of water like a line drawn, like a flesh of ling thing, like can illusion, like mirage, like a dream, like a wheel of fire, like a banana tree. We are able to see here the intimated connection that exists between causality and suññatā. The two inseparability connected. suññatā  is  the logical consequence of the Buddha causality.

     Here we came to a very importance difference between the approaches of the Theravada and Mahayana, specially the Mahayana. The teaching on suññatā is almost the same in the two systems (Theravada and Mahayana) but they appear to be difference due to the difference in standpoints. Standpoint that is a doubted by each school (Theravada and Mahayana).

     The Madhymaka is primarily interested in showing incompetence of logic and reason to grasp reality or describe it acquirer accurately. On the other hand, the primarily interested of the Theravada is in ethic and ethical culture.

     Nāgārjuna has analyzed gratis the concept of causality in his Mûlamadhymakarika can be no doubted that the causal theory here analysis and critics have been taken by Nāgārjuna to represent the one that was hold by Sārvativādin school of early Buddhism;

          (Nahi svabhāvo bhāvānam pratyayādisu vidyate,

        avidyamānĕ svabhāvo parabhāvo na vidyate).

The independent nature of thing is not to be found in such (thing) as Pratyayas. If there is no independent nature there can not be inexistence others to itself.

     If we closely examine the argument we shall begin to see that the difficultly involved here intimately to language. In other words the difficulties are arising as they do from the original definition given about existence. It does clear with phenomena can have no independent existence as long as they are dependent for their arising on various conditions. The only way in which nature of dhamma can be described it to say that they are   Sūnyna or void that is void of any independent self existence;

1.   Pratītya sumutadpā  = sûnyatā

2.   pratītya sumutpada = Madhyma pratipadā

3.     Pratītya sumutadpā  = sûnyatā

     Therefore, Nāgārjuna said

          ((Yah Pratītya sumutadpan sûnyatam tam pracahasmahe sa

          prajñaptirupāday pratipatsaiva mādhyamā)

This is the final position preached by the Nāgārjuna in his Mûlamadhymakarika.

Yogācāra School

The Three Vijñāna (klistha, mano, Alay vinnana)

(In early Buddhism, they always mention Dhamma and puggalana)

There are six – cakkhu vinnana, sota, ghana jivha, kaya, mana,)

There is no insurmountable difficulty in accepting idealism (vijnanavada) that no empirical distinction is ever done away with, whatever metaphysics being embraced. But establishing idealism merely on this general ground is not enough. The claim that all phenomena are explainable on its own principles must be authenticated (prove). Vinnana which is the soul (soul means only one) reality, yet diversifies itself into the complex of terms and relation every step of this process must be shown in detail.

          The only existence is Vinnana, and yet what we perceive is an infinite plurality. This plurality must be reproduced in Vinnana itself. Kinds of Vinnana must be accepted to account for the empirical distinctions. The Yogācāra accepts three kinds of Vijñāna. They are;

         

1. Alaya Vijñāna

                2. Mano Vijñāna

3. Pravrti (Vijñāna klisa Vijñāna

The evolutes of the Vijñāna are infinite, and these are the three stages of its evolution. Vijñāna diversifies itself and gives rise to the whole panorama of empirical existence and these three Vijñāna represent different stages of this diversifying process. The difference is only that of the degree of self determination. Again, just as none of the evolutes has an absolute existence of its own, so here none of these three is ultimate. The evolution itself is not ultimate, though it is a real process; it is caused solely by an illusory idea. Once this idea of objectivity is eradicated, all the three Vijñānas revert to the pristine purity of VijnaptimAtratā.

1.     Ālaya Vijñāna

The first and most fundamental of these three is the Ālaya Vijñāna. It is the first phase in the process of pure Vijñāna. It is called Ālaya, as it is the place or the receptor in which are contained the seeds or impressions of any karmas whatever, good, bad or indifferent. All Dharmas ensue from it as its effects or evolutes. Therefore, Ālaya Vijñāna is called (Sarva bijka) being the cause of everything empirical. It is Vipāka because any kinds of karma done by the individual in any sphere of existences, lives its trice in Ālaya.

          The Ālaya saves to functions in the cosmic process. It is the receptor of the impressions of past Vijñāna, while in its own turn. It gives rise to further Vijñāna by maturing those impressions. The whole order is cyclic. Therefore, the cosmic evolution has two aspects.

I.                  The replacement of Vāsanā,

II.              The fructification of  this into further Vijñāna,

Which again lay their own seeds in the Ālaya and so on? The accumulation of seeds of Vijñāna in Ālaya is called the hetuparinAma, while their actuality the Pala parinAma. Both Parinama are, since Ālaya incessantly undergoes change, it is momentary. Hetuparinama is the development and maturity of VasanA in the Ālaya, and PalaparinAma is the emerging into existence of their respective effects. Vijñāna is to be understood as the motive force, governing the evolutionary process. There are two kinds of Vāsanā via, Vipāka Vāsanā and Nihsyanda Vāsanā.

Vipaka is more ultimate, being that which keeps going the stream of mental process, the continuity of the individual through the successive births. When the outcome of previous karma come an end and dead gets invoSlve, the activity of VipAka Vāsanā into a new stream, beginning from the next birth of the individual. Vipāka Vāsanā maintains the cycle of births.

Nihsyanda Vāsanā is the fructification of the present experiences, due to maturity of this, the other Vijñāna evolved out the Alaya. Nihsyanda Vāsanā supplies the content of each birth.

          Pravrti Vijñāna alone, being conscious experience proper, can lay both sorts of Vāsanā, in the Alaya, only conscious experience can be good or bad and can supply the seeds of future experiences. Mano Vijñāna is more or less a function; it supplies only the Nihsyanda Vāsanā, the force which impels the present experiences.

Mano vihññāna

This is the second, the Mano vihññāna. The function of this consciousness in the

Evolutionary process is rather obscure, and the text is not very illuminating. Why is this consciousness accepted at all? What is its significance and importance? The pravrtti

vinnana presents no problem because according to the idealistic principle, they are the universe its self as identical with the knowing consciousness. Without a repository in which the latent forces dormant, the flow of phenomenal existence would come to a stop. Consciousness is momentary, and unless its seeds are stored in the Alaya Vijññana, its further continuity will of its own accord an end. Further, in certain states like deep, sleep and trance, the empirical consciousness does not exist at all. Here the unbroken sequence of the Alaya must be posited to account for the revival of waking life. The Alaya must therefore be accepted over and above the various pravrtti vijññana.

If these two layers of consciousness suffice to explain phenomena, the Mana needs not be accepted as a different consciousness. It cannot however be dispensed with, because it’s mediate between these two consciousnesses, whenever two terms are posited, the intervention of a third entity as a connecting links become necessary. If two unrelated reals are accepted, they cannot even be known as two.

In the case of Mana, the mediation is all the more necessary since the empirical consciousness arises out of the Alya, the question of unrelated reals dose not arise. On the one hand, there is the Alaya with an indeterminate content, on the other hand, there are the pravrttia Vijññanas with determinate content, in between these is the process of determination. This transitional function is served by the Mana. It makes possible the emergence of the object consciousness out of the Alaya, and at the same time maintains the distinction between the two.

Theatricality and duality requires the intervention of a third entity, including the duality between a term and this third entity itself, practically the acceptance of three serves all purposes, but three at less must be accepted. Mana is so-called because the process of the interlasion of Mana is always going on in it. An apparently, different account of Mana is given in the text. It is invariably referred to as defile (Klista) because it is surcharged with a particular class of mental as the four nivrtāvrta, klesas. As long as Mana functions, it must be accompanied by these four,

1.     The false notion of an ego (ātmadrsti)

2.     Ignorance about ego (ātmamoha)

3.     Illation over it (ātmamāna)

4.     Attachment to it (ātmaprema)

Pravrtti Viññana {external and internal}

The third stage of evolution of the consciousness is the determinate awareness of the object. This is the only consciousness which matters in empirical discourse. For all practical purposes these constitutes our universe, since it include very thing whatever, as can be presented before the empirical consciousness. This consciousness is not a unity, but a class comprising six kinds of consciousnesses, all of which are grouped together because of their comment empirical nature. These consciousnesses can be classify into two groups via; external and internal.

The external includes six consciousnesses corresponding to the six sense-organs which give us all the information; we have about the external world. They are; Rupa, sabda, ghandha, rasa, sprustvya, and dharma. Dharma is a miscellaneous category which includes whatever confronts consciousness, except in the objective way. This Mano Viññana is not to be confused with the Klista Mana.

All these six Visaya Vijññanas arrive out of the Alya due to their respective seeds; they can arrive either singly or simultaneously. To create the illusion of a full fledged object, many sense-data must combine which is possible if their consciousness arise simultaneously. This conception can be compared to the emergence of waves in an ocean. The number of waves is not fixed, but depends upon the wind passing over the ocean. So also empirical consciousness arises out of the Alaya, due to the presence of the ālambana pratyays (object condition), one or many. By the ocean should not be meant an identical and substantial, substratum. The whole ocean must change very moment, to be comparable to the Alaya. None of three or rather eight consciousnesses is ultimate. Consciousness is disturbed owing to the impact of a wrong idea, and once this idea is eradicated or realized to be illusory, the agitated commotion of consciousness is calmed down, and it regains its external quiescence.

For exam:

Madhayamaka philosophy

 Evolution of Yogacara

Thrikaya concept

Mahayana concept