[Buddha-l] Vaitulyakas

[Dan Lusthaus]

Rahula,

The Kathaavatthu, of course, as usual, does not provide any name or attribution for the positions taken by the various opponents. It is the commentaries (many centuries later) that attempt to assign various positions to various schools, and this is the case with the Vaitulyakas.

The KV, in fact, does not present the reasoning or arguments of the opponent in this case at all, moving immediately to their refutation.

As to who they were, the English tr. of the Kathaavatthu, _Points of Controversy_, states in an annotation to XVII.6 (another position attributed to them by the commentary) that "the Vetulya[ka]s, who are known as the Mahaasu~n~nataavaadins." There is some debate among scholars whether these Mahaa-"suunyataa-vaadins are to be identified with proto-Madhyamaka, other groups (such as that reflected in the Tattvasiddhi), or something else. The name Vetulyaka pops up from time to time, especially in Abhidharma literature, negatively, when an author wants to dismiss an unacceptable claim by associating the maker of such a claim with these Vetulyakas. Some have suggested that Vaitulya is a synonym for Vaipuulya, which is often used in Indian Abhidharma and early debate literature as a synonym for Mahaayaana. See, e.g., P. Jaini, "On the Theory of Two Vasubandhus," BSOAS, 21, 1/3. 1958, pp. 48-53, in which he offers some evidence for that equivalence.

Dan Lusthaus
  The Kathavatthu records how the Vaitulyakas had made a provision that "on account of a particular intention, the saint could resort to sexual-intercourse"

  Kathavatthu, XXIII.219.1, p.535 - ekaabhippaayena methuno dhammo patisevitabbo

  Can anyone verify this?Who are the Vaitulyakas?
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.swcp.com/mailman/private/buddha-l/attachments/20060528/c784f8a3/attachment.html