[Buddha-l] Pudgalavada - Vasumitra-2a

[L.S. Cousins]

Dan,

>Paramaartha's version (T.49.2033.21c21-22a15)
>
>These are the basic opinions held by the Vaatsiiputriiya:
>[Both Paramaartha and Xuanzang translate, rather than transliterate, 
>this school's name. Paramaartha's rendering means something like 
>"Son Able to Abide" while Xuanzang's means "Son of a Heifer" (ý
 du 
>means a calf).]

A Prakrit form like Vaccha-, interpreted as deriving from vatsyati ?

>They establish the person, etc. to be a prajñapti (jiaming). There 
>are three types of prajñapti. 1. Everything (is) prajñapti category. 
>2. One part is prajñapti category. 3. Cessation and 'passing over' 
>prajñapti category.
>[The tricky word, which occurred in the previous line ("since it 
>_she_ skandhas, dhaatus, and aayatanas") and here appears after each 
>of the numbers, is she, which, as a verb would mean "collected 
>into," but is frequently used in Buddhist literature of this sort 
>simply to indicate that this is a "category." It can make sense 
>either way. As "category," a "smoother" translation might read: 1. 
>The category of "everything is prajñapti." 2. The category of 
>"one-part is prajñapti." 3. The category of "cessation and 'passing 
>over' is prajñapti."I am taking it in the latter sense. Bareau 
>apparently took in the former sense, as "collected." If, as may be 
>the case, Paramaartha is trying to imply the sense of 
>"appropriation" - our upaadaana, upaadhi, etc., term - by using 
>_she_, then the three prajñaptis might be rendered: 1. The prajñapti 
>of collecting (i.e., appropriating) everything; 2. the prajñapti of 
>collecting one part; 3. the prajñapti of 'collecting' cessation and 
>'passing over.']

eka"se.sanaya and ekade"sanaya ?

>Apart from ruupa, there is not a single dharma that follows from 
>this life to the next life. It is the person that can be said to 
>have transposed (yi, anugacchati).
>[This is illogical, since ruupa doesn't "transpose" or "transmit" 
>from one life to another. The new life acquires a new rupic bundle. 
>One's ruupa even changes each moment during a single life. 
>Paramaartha may have been thinking of some notion of the continuity 
>of the body during a single life as an identity marker, contrasting 
>it with sa.msk.rta dharmas, but ruupa is also a sa.msk.rta dharma. 
>He seems to want to suggest that mental events are momentary, and 
>thus lack continuity, while physical continuity does occur. But 
>since the context here is across lives, not the continuity of a 
>single life, his editorialization is missplaced.]

I suggested in my article mentioned before that the Pudgalavaadins 
may have had something to do with the development of antaraabhava 
theories. If so, they may have believed that subtle materiality 
carries through into the antaraabhava and beyond.

Lance
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.swcp.com/mailman/private/buddha-l/attachments/20061206/8631da79/attachment.htm