Thi Van Anh Vo | Ryukoku University (original) (raw)

Papers by Thi Van Anh Vo

龍谷大学大学院文学研究科紀要, Dec 24, 2014

Journal of Indian and Tibetan Studies インド学チベット学研究 No. 22 , 2018

Journal of Indian and Buddhist Studies (Indogaku Bukkyogaku Kenkyu), 2017

Journal of Indian and Buddhist Studies (Indogaku Bukkyogaku Kenkyu), 2018

Journal of Indian and Buddhist Studies (Indogaku Bukkyogaku Kenkyu), 2016

Journal of Indian and Buddhist Studies (Indogaku Bukkyogaku Kenkyu)

Journal of Indian and Buddhist studies , 2017

The stages of practice or “Bhūmi theory” of Mahāyāna Buddhism are conventionally understood to be... more The stages of practice or “Bhūmi theory” of Mahāyāna Buddhism are conventionally understood to be the ten bhūmis expounded in the Daśabhūmika-sūtra (DBS). However, the theory found within the Bodhisattvabhūmi (BBh) of the Yogācāra School cannot make the same claim. The rationale is that there are two kinds of bhūmis within the BBh, which are the bhūmis preached in the Vihāra-paṭala and also in the Bhūmi-paṭala.
Furthermore, it is well known that within the ten stages, the Yogācāra School views the first bhūmi as the most important stage, while the DBS does not . To clarify the question of why the Yogācāra school regards the first bhūmi to be the most important, the bhūmi theory within the BBh must be further investigated. This essay sets out to provide a background to the early Yogācāra School’s bhūmi theory in order to help answer this question.

Previous research has shown that the stages of the bodhisattva in the Yogācāca school were compil... more Previous research has shown that the stages of the bodhisattva in the Yogācāca school were compiled from the ten stages (bhūmi) which were presented in the Daśabhūmikasūtra (DBS). It has also been confirmed that the ten pāramitā of this school are also derived from this sūtra. According to explanations thus far, all schools’ theoretical thought was deployed from the scriptures (sūtra), following the formula of “from sūtra to commentary (śāstra)”. However, according to my research about the relationship between “the theory of the path of practice" of the Yogācāra and DBS, the relationship was the opposite, ie, the theory established by this school was launched backward to the sūtra, following the formula of “from śāstra to sūtra”. In fact, this point was discovered by N. Aramaki [1974], but his evidence for this has not been satisfactory, so that it still is an issue left unresolved. In this study, I will provide some grounds for this argument of the inverse relationship.
The core focus of my study will be based around the reciprocal relationship between the ten bhūmi and ten pāramitā. According to the current texts of DBS, it can be divided into two lines: in three old Chinese translation versions, it has a form (A) of an uncompleted reciprocal relationship, while in the last Chinese translation versions and the extant Sanskrit text versions, it has the form (B) of a completed reciprocal relation. In particular, form (B) conforms better with that seen in the Daśabhūmikasūtra-śāstra of Vasubandhu. Therefore, N.Aramaki guessed that what was said in this śāstra was brought into the sūtra.
However, the matter is difficult to judge because, according to recent studies, Vasubandhu and the oldest manuscript of DBS are almost simultaneous in time. Even assuming this chronology may be reasonable, there is an additional problem. As my research has shown, because the DBS does not attach importance to the doctrine of pāramitā, even if Vasubandhu explained the form of ten bhūmi combined with the ten pāramitā, it is difficult to believe that the DBS’s followers easily accepted this arbitrary explanation.
In summary, we should understand that, at that time in Indian Buddhism, this form of explanation had become universal. Thus it was reflected in the work of Vasubandhu, as well as in the DBS. This interpretation is derived from the traditional emphasis on the stages of practice and the theory of pāramitā in schools of Yogācāra. The ten stages combined with the ten pāramitā can be found in a śāstra of Maitreya, namely Madhyāntavibhāga, chapter five, kārikā 27ab, which attatches importance to the doctrine of ten pāramitā.

It is well known that prajñāpāramitā (the perfection of wisdom) and nirvikalpajñāna (non-conceptu... more It is well known that prajñāpāramitā (the perfection of wisdom) and nirvikalpajñāna (non-conceptual wisdom) play an important role in the texts of the Yogācāra School. Both are mentioned as equal value in the works of Asanga and Dignāga.
In this study I will show that nirvikalpa has two aspects. First, it is used with the meaning of an object, indicating what is to be reached through practice. Second, it is used with the meaning of the workings of a transitive verb by taking the object, showing the behavior of the Buddhas and Bodhisattvas, which are the activities of nirvikalpajñāna. I infer that this second meaning of nirvikalpa plays a preliminary role in Asanga and Dignāga’s view that nirvikalpajñāna is the same value as prajñāpāramitā.
With these two meanings of nirvikalpa, we can understand the following two points. First, with the stages of a practitioner, after reaching the nirvikalpa that is expressed by the meaning of an object, one proceeds to the stage of nirvikalpa that is expressed with the meaning of the workings of a transitive verb by taking the object. Second, within the historical ideology, it holds the meaning of that which should be achieved through meditational practice that has been developed and inherited in the Yogācāra school, thus further introduces the factors of the bodhisattva’s practices which are contained in the teachings of Mahāyāna sūtras. This second meaning aids an understanding to the making of the theory of the path of practice in the early Yogācāra School.

Keywords: prajñāpāramitā, nirvikalpajñāna, Mahayānasaṃgraha, Prajñāpāramitāpiṇḍārthasaṃgraha, Bodhisattvabhūmi, Prajñāpaṭala, Mahāyānasūtrālaṃkāra, śrāvakabhūmi

The aim of this paper is to continue my last paper, "On the Acceptance of the Doctrine of Pāramit... more The aim of this paper is to continue my last paper, "On the Acceptance of the Doctrine of Pāramitā in Yogācāra School: Focusing on the Number of Ten-Pāramitā (Daśa-pāramitā)" that was published in Bulletin of Buddhist studies of the Ryukoku University No. 18 on March 2014. In that paper, I clarified how, in which case and what period of time these ten Pāramitā were used in the yogācāra schools. And to continue, this paper is intended to investigate the origin of those ten Pāramitā.
Documents used for this study are the texts of the Prajñāpāramitā-sūtra group, which attach great importance to the concept of Pāramitā, and the texts of Daśabhūmi-sūtra group, which presume to having close relationship with the number ten. Before now, there have been many researches conducted on these two texts; we will survey this topic based on the results of those previous researches. And the summary gathered for this paper is as follows.
For the ten Pāramitā that were mentioned in the Prajñāpāramitā sūtra group, except in the translation of Xuanzang and the sanskrit version of Pañcaviṃśatisāhasrikā Prajñāpāramitā, we can not identify them anywhere in the system of the old translation (i.e. the translation of Kumālajīva...), therefore, it can be surely assumed that the ten Pāramitā in no way could have origins from these texts.
For the ten Pāramitā that were mentioned in the Daśabhūmisūtra, especially the definition of means (upāya), prayer (praṇidhāna), power (bāla), wisdom (jñāna) pāramitā, which comprises the latter part of the 10 pāramitā, we found a parallel text, which interpreted it like the explanation in the Caryā-paṭala of Bodhisattvabhūmi, a literature of the yogācāra school. So it can be safely concluded that ten pāramitā of the Yogācāra school have their origins in Daśabhūmisūtra.

Bulletin of Buddhist Studies Ryukoku University No. 18, Mar 2014

龍谷大学大学院文学研究科紀要36, 2014

The aim of this paper is to re-analyse the compound expression "sad-asat-tattva" which is the pro... more The aim of this paper is to re-analyse the compound expression "sad-asat-tattva" which is the property of the pariniṣpanna-svabhāva in the Madhyāntavibhāga-śāstra (MAV).
In previous researches, this compound word is understood as "the true property of the existence of non-existence" (Tatpuruṣa conpound term); until now, this concept is also seen as the nature of pariniṣpanna-svabhāva. However it was not explained as such in the commentary document prepared by Sthiramati. This scholar Sthiramati has interpreted the sad-asat-tattva (existence and non-existence and truth) as a dvandva compound term. I assumed that perhaps he based his theory on the two kinds of pariniṣpanna-svabhāva: they are 1) nirvikāra-pariniṣpanna (unchanged 無変異) and 2) aviparyāsa-pariniṣpanna (non-contrariety 無顛倒) of the pariniṣpanna svabhāva which were mentioned in Chapter 3 of this MAV.
The evidence is, in the term of sad-asat-tattva, Sthiramati interpreted the word tattva is "viśuddhyālambana". This viśuddhyālambana - based on the results of the examination from many other texts of the Yogācāra school - will be understood in two ways, the object for cleaning (Tatpuruṣa) and the object that cleans (Karmadhāraya). Therefore, it would be a good guess that Sthiramati has intentions when using the term viśudhyālambana for interpreting the word tattva; that term ālambana (object) indicates the two natures of the pariniṣpanna - which refers to the suchness (nirvikāra-pariniṣpanna) and dharma-teaching (aviparyāsa-pariniṣpanna).
Also on this same consideration, it is possible to point out the difference betwen Sthiramati and Vasubandhu. While the aviparyāsa of pariniṣpanna occupied an important position in Sthiramati's work, it was not mentioned anywhere in various logical statement of Vasubandhu, who happened to be his predecessor. In addition, given the cautious attitude of Sthiramati, perhaps he possibly interpreted pariniṣpanna-svabhāva amidst its criticism from scholars of the Mādhyamika Bhāviveka. Therefore, I can possibly present that this is an important point to notate when one considers comparing the relation between these two monks.

印度学仏教学研究62（2）, Mar 2015

Although the vast majority of Mahāyāna Buddhist texts refer to a set of six pāramitā, some works ... more Although the vast majority of Mahāyāna Buddhist texts refer to a set of six pāramitā, some works belonging to the Yogācāra School suggest a group of ten pāramitā instead. As is known, these ten pāramitā are matched up with ten bhūmi in the fifth chapter of the Madhyāntavibhāga (MAV). Aside from this style of presentation, however, two further aspects of the theory of pāramitā contained in this particular text are worth mentioning as well.
First, the word parama, which occurs in kārikā 4, is identified with the term pāramitā in Sthiramati’s commentary by means of the interpretive etymological method (nirukti-nyāya). By providing an etymology for pāramitā from the point of view of the Yogācāra School, this interpretation provides important evidence for addressing the problem of the etymology of the term pāramitā, which has still not been conclusively settled by contemporary scholars.
Second, rather than focusing on the virtues of the pāramitā, MAV-V instead emphasizes the essential nature of the pāramitā as practices (pratipatti), and, moreover, argues that this essential nature constitutes the fundamental essence of bodhisattvas. In addition, judging from the fact that the “Yānānuttarya-pariccheda” takes the distinguishing characteristics of Mahāyāna Bodhisattvas as its subject, this essential nature (in the sense of “practice”) of the pāramitā should also be understood as constituting practices unique (asādhāraṇa) to bodhisattvas, that is to say, to the Mahāyāna.

presentation by Thi Van Anh Vo