Page220

Twelve
Vasubandhu'sVyakhyayuktiontheAuthenticityoftheMahayanaSutras1
Copyright 1992. State University of New York Press. All rights reserved. May not be reproduced in any form without permission from the publisher, except fair uses permitted under U.S. or

JosIgnacioCabezn

Introduction

Whatisacanon,andwhatdoesitmeantobeauthenticscripture?Scholarsinthefieldofscripturestudieshaveoftenoverlookedtheviewsoftraditionalscholarsin
theirattemptstoprovideanswerstothesequestions.Thereasonsforthisperceivedneedtodistanceoneselffromtraditionalexegesis,fromthewaytraditional
scholarsreadtheirowntexts,are,itseemstome,various.Insomecasesthetradition'sreadingsofitsowntextsareperceivedasnaiveandunsophisticated,especially
whencomparedtotheprinciplessetforthincontemporaryphilosophicalhermeneuticsandliterarytheory.Thefrequentlyconsistentandunivocalnatureofatradition's
interpretiveprinciplesinthisregardareseenassignsofsimplicityandnaivet,again,especiallywhencomparedtothedebatesovermethodologythatrageinthe
correspondingWesternfields.Inotherinstances,"overlooking"traditionalhermeneuticsprovidesmodernscholarshipwiththenecessaryspacetodevelop
"exegesis"(legeagenda)oftheirown,andthereiscertainlynothingwrongwiththisaslongasitisacknowledgedassuchandnotportrayedeitherastheunique
readingorastheviewsofthetradition.Butsadly,thisistoooftenthecase.Initsmostoffensiveform,thisattitudetowardtraditionalhermeneuticshasmanifesteditself
asaspeculativeenterprise,oftenbasedonreductionistideologiesthatusenativeexegesisselectivelyinanattempttocreateaformalsystemunknownto,and
frequentlyinconflictwith,thetradition'sselfunderstanding.Oftentimes,however,theviewsoftraditionalscholarsaresetasideneitherbecauseofaperceivednaivet
norforthepurposeofaxegrindingbutbecausethetraditionalanswerstosuch

applicable copyright law.

EBSCO Publishing : eBook Collection (EBSCOhost) - printed on 1/9/2013 4:57 PM via UNIV OF COLORADO AT BOULDER
9780585069159 ; Timm, Jeffrey Richard.; Texts in Context : Traditional Hermeneutics in South Asia
Account: s8860338
 Page222

questionsarecouchedinanexusofovertreligiouspresuppositions,withrespecttowhichthe"objective"scholarmust,byconvention,remainneutral.Butaswehave
seenalreadyintheprecedingchapters,itisintheseverypresuppositions,intheveryexpressionofsuchreligiousclaimsassetforthbythetraditionalexegete,that
tremendousinsightandoriginalitymanifestsitself.
Copyright 1992. State University of New York Press. All rights reserved. May not be reproduced in any form without permission from the publisher, except fair uses permitted under U.S. or

Consonantwiththethrustofthisbook,thegoalofthepresentchapteristopresenttheviewsofonesuchtraditionalBuddhistscholar,Vasubandhu,onthequestionof
thenatureofthecanonandoftheauthenticityofscripture.TheVyakhyayukti,Vasubandhu'stext,isaclearlyapologeticworkthatpresupposesavarietyofovertly
religiousclaims,andyetitwillemergethattheVyakyayukti'streatmentofthequestionofthecanonanditsauthenticityisbothimaginativeandsophisticated.Its
repudiationofbothhistoricalandlinguistic/philologicalcriteriaasdeterminantsofauthenticity,asweshallsee,speaksasmuchtothemodernastotheBuddhist
scholasticsofVasubandhu'sday.

Inaninfluentialandprovocativeessay,"SacredPersistence:TowardaRedescriptionofCanon,"JonathanZ.Smith(1982)reflectsonthewayreligioustraditions
defineandlimittheiridentitythroughafixedsetofelementstextsinthecaseofliterateculturesandtheconcomitantprocessoftranscendingtheselimitsthroughthe
rulegovernedexegeticalenterprise.2 Smitharguesthattheexaminationofthisprocessoflimitationandextrication,ofcanonformationandexegesis,oughttobeone
ofthechiefconcernsofcomparativereligions.3 Hestatesthat

thishasanumberofconsequences.Itwouldmeanthatstudentsofreligionmightfindastheirmostcongenialcolleaguesthoseconcernedwithbiblicalandlegalstudiesrather
thantheirpresentromanticpreoccupationwiththe"primitive"and"archaic"termswhichhavelargelymeantsimpleorprimordialinthesenseofuninterpreted,andwhichhave
giventhehistoriansofreligionlicenseforultimateactsofimperialism,theremovalofallrightstointerpretationfromthenative,andthearrogationofallsuchrightstothemselves.
(p.43)

Thisexegeticalimperialism,aswehaveseen,hasfoundanumberofexpressions.Eschewingsuchexegeticalimperialism,thischapterproposesadescriptionofsome
oftheinterpretivetechniquesfoundinearlyMahayanaBuddhistscholasticism.WhereasSmith'sarticlefocusesonexegesisasthemediumthroughwhichatradition
"ingeniously"extricatesitselffromthelimitingpredicamentthatisthecanon,thepresentworkseekstoshowtherolethatexegesisplaysintheveryprocessofcanon
formation.Inotherwords,Smithdemonstrateshowinterpretationisthevehiclefortheinflux

applicable copyright law.

EBSCO Publishing : eBook Collection (EBSCOhost) - printed on 1/9/2013 4:57 PM via UNIV OF COLORADO AT BOULDER
9780585069159 ; Timm, Jeffrey Richard.; Texts in Context : Traditional Hermeneutics in South Asia
Account: s8860338
 Page223

ofcreativityinatraditionwithawellestablishedcanonicalcorpus.Thischapter,takingthisinsightastepfurther,willarguethatinterpretationisitselfanessentialpart
oftheprocessofestablishingthecanonicalstatusofdisputedtexts.Specifically,thepresentchapterwillexaminetheroleofsystematicexegesisinearlyscholastic
polemicsregardingtheauthenticityoftheMahayanascriptures,acorpusofBuddhisttextsthatbegantoemergeinthefirstfewcenturiesofthefirstmillenniumC.E.,
textsperceivedasapocryphal(gzhungdubyasba)byearlierBuddhistsects.4
Copyright 1992. State University of New York Press. All rights reserved. May not be reproduced in any form without permission from the publisher, except fair uses permitted under U.S. or

ThegoaloftheMahayanascholasticswhotakeupthequestionis,ofcourse,torefutetheargumentsofthe"Sravakasects,"whowishtodemonstratethat"the
MahayanaisnottheBuddha'sword."Bysodoing,theMahayanistsseektoestablishtheauthenticityoftheirsutras.Avarietyofearlysourcesindicatethatthe
Mahayanascripturesweredisputedtextswhoseauthenticitywasoftenquestioned.TheLotusSutra,itselfanearlyMahayanascripture,condemnstodire
consequencesthosewhowouldquestionitsauthenticity,5 somethinghardlynecessaryifaspersionshadnotalreadybeguntobecastontheauthenticityoftextsofthis
genre.ThequestionistakenupanumberoftimesbytheIndianscholasticsthemselves.TheearliestinstanceisthebriefpolemicfoundinNagarjuna'sRatnavali
(secondcenturyC.E.).6 Bhavaviveka(sixthcenturyC.E.)spendsaconsiderableportionofthefourthchapteroftheMadhyamakahrdaya7 anditsautocommentary,
theTarkajvala,8 discussingthisveryissue,thoughitisclearthatmanyofhisargumentsareborrowedfromanearliertext,theVyakhyayukti,ofwhichweshallhave
moretosaybelow.ThequestionisalsotakenupbySantideva(ca.650750C.E.)inhisBodhicaryavatara.9 BarringNagarjuna'streatmentofthesubject,whichis
brief,theearliestfullaccountofthequestionoftheauthenticityoftheMahayanascripturesistobefoundintheVyakhyayukti[TheScienceofExegesis]aworkofthe
fourthcenturyIndianBuddhistscholar,Vasubandhu.10

I.TheVyakhyayukti11

TheVyakhyayuktiisaworkoftheMahayanascholastictradition.12Itisafascinatingtextforanumberofreasons,notleastofwhichisthefactthatitsetsforthina
lucidandsystematicmannerthetheoreticalfoundationfortheentirescholasticenterprise,somethingthatdependssoheavilyontheexegeticalact.Giventherichness,
breadth,andimportanceofthetext,itisamazingthatithasreceivedsolittleattentiononthepartofBuddhologists.13Thisisdue,inpart,totheinherentcomplexityof
theworkandinparttothefactthattheonlyextantversionofthetextistheTibetanone.

applicable copyright law.

EBSCO Publishing : eBook Collection (EBSCOhost) - printed on 1/9/2013 4:57 PM via UNIV OF COLORADO AT BOULDER
9780585069159 ; Timm, Jeffrey Richard.; Texts in Context : Traditional Hermeneutics in South Asia
Account: s8860338
 Page224

TheVyakhyayukti(tib.rNambshadrigspa)isaworkofslightlyoveronehundredfoliosinfivechaptersfoundinthesemstsam(cittamatra)sectionoftheTibetan
bsTan'gyur.14Asthenameimplies,itisatreatiseontheartofproper(yukti)commentary(vyakhya),providingnotonlypracticalexamplesofhowoneistogo
abouttheprocessof''explainingthesutras," 15butalsoelucidatingcertaintheoreticalconcernsthatariseintheprocessofdeterminingwhatconstitutes(both
Copyright 1992. State University of New York Press. All rights reserved. May not be reproduced in any form without permission from the publisher, except fair uses permitted under U.S. or

structurallyandideologically)apropercommentary.

AncillarytotheVyakhyayuktiaretwotextsthat,atleastforthemodernscholar,servefunctionsmoretextcriticalthanexplanatory.Thefirstisthe
Vyakhyayuktisutrakhandasata,16acollectionof105sutrapassagesthatserveasVasubandhu'ssourcematerial,bothinhistaskofdemonstratingcommentarial
techniqueandinhisexpositionoftheoreticalissues.ThesecondancillaryworkistheVyakhyayuktitika17ofGunamati(fifthcenturyC.E.).

IntheVyakhyayuktiVasubandhuexaminesindetailnotonlythequestionofwhatitmeanstoexplainthepurportofthetext,butalsotheobjectoftheexegetical
enterprise,towit,theBuddha'sword.Inthiscontext,andmorespecificallyinthecontextofreplyingtoobjections(brgallan)concerningbuddhavacana,he
examinesthequestionoftheauthenticityoftheMahayanasutras,thesubjecttowhichwenowturn.

II.TheMahayanaastheBuddha'sWord

AvarietyoftextualsourcesarewitnesstothefactthattheMahayanascriptureswereconsideredapocryphalbyasignificantsectoroftheIndianBuddhist
philosophicalcommunityforaconsiderableperiodoftime.Indeed,formorethansixhundredyearswefindMahayanascholarsengagedinwhattheyconsideredtobe
arefutationoftheargumentsoftheiropponents,thefollowersoftheSravakayana.18Aswithagreatdealofscholasticpolemic,itmustbegrantedthat,especiallyin
thelaterscholasticliterature,thecontroversymusthavebeenpurelytheoretical.CertainlybythetimeofSantidevaintheeighthcentury(andprobablymuchearlier)the
vastmajorityofMahayanasutraswerealreadyacceptedastheBuddha'swordbyanyonewhowasgoingtodoso.Despitethefactthatthelatertradition'streatment
ofthesubjectmighthavebeenameretheoreticalexercise,avestigeofpastconcerns,thereisnoreasontodoubtthatfortheearlyMahayanascholasticstheissueof
whetherornottheMahayanasutrasweretheBuddha'swordwasaviableone,reflectinganongoingcontroversythatthreatenedtheveryfoundationsofthe
Mahayanascholasticenterprise.IftheGreatVehiclewasnottheBuddha'sword,thenneedlesstosay,thescholasticedificebasedonthemwouldbeseriously
compromised.

applicable copyright law.

EBSCO Publishing : eBook Collection (EBSCOhost) - printed on 1/9/2013 4:57 PM via UNIV OF COLORADO AT BOULDER
9780585069159 ; Timm, Jeffrey Richard.; Texts in Context : Traditional Hermeneutics in South Asia
Account: s8860338
 Page225

Perusingtheargumentsintheirmostelaborateform(i.e.,aspresentedintheVyakhyayuktiandintheTarkajvala)revealsfirstofallthehighlypolemicalnatureofthe
rhetoric.MostofVasubandhu'streatmentofthesubject,forexample,isinanopponent/replyformat,wheredifferentfollowersofthe"Sravakayana"(nyanthostheg
pa)givereasonsforwhytheMahayanacannotbeconsideredtheBuddha'sword,followedbyVasubandhu'srebuttals.IntheVyakhyayukti,asintheTarkajvala,
theburdenofproofrestswiththeSravakasectarians(nyanthossdepa).Hence,thefocusofbothtextsisonrefutingthepositionofopponentsand,atleastinthe
Copyright 1992. State University of New York Press. All rights reserved. May not be reproduced in any form without permission from the publisher, except fair uses permitted under U.S. or

fourthchapteroftheVyakhyayukti,VasubandhuneverarguesinapositivefashionfortheauthenticityoftheMahayanasutras.Thisishardlysurprisingindeed,even
imaginingtheformthatsuchanargumentmighttakeisnoteasy.19

III.TheNatureoftheArguments

Morphologically,theargumentsintheVydkhyayuktimaybecategorizedintothreespecifictypes.20Thisistosaythattheargumentsputforthbythefollowersofthe
SravakayanaintheirattemptstocallintoquestiontheauthenticityoftheMahayanasutrasareofthreebasickinds.Thefirsttypecanbecharacterizedasarguments
fromformthesecond,argumentsfromcontentandthethird,argumentsbasedonintercanonicalcriteriaforauthenticity.Theargumentsfromform,orstructural
arguments,assumeacertainnormativestructuretothecollectionofBuddhisttextsasawholethatis,theyassumeadistinctivenotionofacanon,andattempttoshow
howtheMahayanatextscannotbeconsideredtheBuddha'swordbydemonstratingsomeincompatibilitywithwhathadcometobeaccepted('gragspa)asthe
canon.Thesecondtypeofargument,thatfromcontent,assumescertaindoctrinalnormsand,similarly,seekstoestablishtheapocryphalnatureoftheMahayana
sutrasbyurgingthattheirdoctrinalcontentdoesnotconformtowhatisdoctrinallynormative.InthethirdtypeofargumentwefindtheSravakascitingscriptural
passagesinwhichtheBuddhaisportrayedassettingforthcriteriaforwhatistobeconsideredhisword,thiswithaviewtowarddemonstratingthattheMahayanafails
tomeetthesecriteria.VasubandhuseeshismaintaskinthefourthchapteroftheVyakhyayuktiastherefutationofthesearguments.

ItseemsthattheearliestnotionofaBuddhistcanonisthatofthetripitaka,orthreebaskets,consistingoftheBuddha'sdiscourses(sutra,mdosde),thoseconcerned
withthedisciplineofthemonksandnuns(vinaya,'dulba)andthetreatisesonspeculativemetaphysics(abhidharma,chosmngon).Therewereothermethodsof
subdividingthecanon,however.

applicable copyright law.

EBSCO Publishing : eBook Collection (EBSCOhost) - printed on 1/9/2013 4:57 PM via UNIV OF COLORADO AT BOULDER
9780585069159 ; Timm, Jeffrey Richard.; Texts in Context : Traditional Hermeneutics in South Asia
Account: s8860338
 Page226

AlateMahayanaabhidharmatext,theSamskrtasamskrtaviniscayaofDasabalasrimitra,describesafivefolddivision(rnampaInga)thatincludesstanzas(gathas,
tshigssubcadpa)andprotoabhidarmatextscalledmatrkas(mamo).InadditionDasabalasrimitragoesintoconsiderabledetailconcerningoneninefoldand
anothertwelvefolddivision(anga)ofthescriptures,21demonstratinghowthesemoreelaboratestructurescanbesubsumedwithinthetripartiteformulationofthe
threebaskets.Althoughinterestinginitsownright,especiallytothoseofusenamoredofwhatonecontemporaryscholarhastermedlistenwissenchaften,the
Copyright 1992. State University of New York Press. All rights reserved. May not be reproduced in any form without permission from the publisher, except fair uses permitted under U.S. or

relevanceofthistopictothepresentdiscussionliesinthefactthatitwasparticularlywithinthetwelvefoldschemathatMahayanistssoughttolocatetheirsutras.
Hence,Dasabalasrimitrastates:"TheVaipulya(shinturgyaspa)andAdbhuta(rmaddubyungba)sectionsaretheBodhisattvapitaka."

ThroughouttheVyakhyayuktiVasubandhuarguesnotmerelyfortheauthenticityoftheMahayanasutrasbutfortheequivalencyoftheMahayanaandVaipulya
portionofthetwelvefolddivisionaswell.22Inshort,hearguesnotonlyfortheauthenticityoftheMahayanasutrasbutfortheircanonicityaswell.Throughhis
defenseoftheauthenticityoftheMahayanasutras,heisseekingtogivethesetextsacanonicalhome.

TheStructuralArguments.Thestructuralarguments,aswehavementioned,presumeadistinctiveformfortheBuddhistcanonandurgetheincompatibilityofthe
Mahayanawiththisform.Forthemostpart,MahayanascholasticssuchasVasubandhucriticizetheseargumentsbyshowingthattheyarebasedonfaultyornaive
notionsofthecanon.Forexample,inthefirstargumentintheVyakhyayuktithefolloweroftheSravakayanaisportrayedaschallengingtheauthenticityofthe
Mahayanascripturesonthebasisofthefactthat"theycontradictwhathascometoberecognizedastheBuddha'sword"(Vasubandhu,n.d.,P.113b,D.97a).23
Vasubandhu'srebuttalisprimarilyaimedatdemonstratingthenaivetoftheopponent'sconceptionoftheBuddha'sword.Insteadofcontestingthefactthatthe
MahayanacontradictsthecorpusofreligiousliteraturerecognizedascanonicalbyearlierBuddhists,heshowshowthatearliercanon(a)suffersfromthesame
apparentcontradictionthattheMahayanaisbeingaccusedofand(b)isincomplete.

Citingaseriesofpassagesfromavarietyofacknowledgedcanonicalsources,includingthecontroversial"Killingone'sfatherandmother,"heconcludesthatiftaken
atfacevalueeventheSravakacanonwouldhavetobeacceptedasbeingrifewithcontradictions.Thesolution,hestates,isnottoquestiontheauthenticityofwhat
hasforcenturiescometoberegardedastheBuddha'sword,butinsteadtoshowsomesophisticationinitsmanipulation.Itisatthisjuncturethatheintroduceshis
Sravakaopponentto

applicable copyright law.

EBSCO Publishing : eBook Collection (EBSCOhost) - printed on 1/9/2013 4:57 PM via UNIV OF COLORADO AT BOULDER
9780585069159 ; Timm, Jeffrey Richard.; Texts in Context : Traditional Hermeneutics in South Asia
Account: s8860338
 Page227

thedoctrinesofdefinitivemeaning(nitartha,ngesdon)andprovincialmeaning(neyartha,drangdon).24Citingyetotherpassagesfromtheearlycanon,hegoeson
toshowhowtheapparentinconsistenciescanbereconciledthroughinterpretation.Thosepassagesthatcannotbetakenliterallymustbeconsideredtobeofulterior
purport(abhiprayika,dgongspacan)andmustbeinterpreted.ItisclearfromhisrhetoricthatVasubandhuperceiveshimselfashavingturnedthetablesonhis
Sravakacritic.WhenchallengedconcerningthefactthattheMahayanacontradictsthedoctrinesoftheestablishedcanon,Vasubandhudemonstratesthatthatvery
Copyright 1992. State University of New York Press. All rights reserved. May not be reproduced in any form without permission from the publisher, except fair uses permitted under U.S. or

canon,naivelythoughtbytheSravakatolackinconsistency,actuallysuffersfromthesamefault.Whatismore,byintroducingthedoctrinesofdefinitivemeaningand
ulteriorpurport,heisinasenseplayingaformofoneupmanshipwithhisopponentbyshowingthattheMahayanahasamethodofcopingwithscriptural
inconsistencythattheSravakayanadoesnot,hencetherelativehermeneuticalsophisticationoftheMahayana.

Again,inanattempttoexposethenaivetofhisopponentinregardtothenotionofcanon,VasubandhugoestogreatlengthstodemonstratethattheSravakacanon
bycomparisontowhichtheauthenticityoftheMahayanaisbeingchallengedisitselfincomplete.25Citingoveradozensutrapassages,heproveswithoutadoubtthat
therearetextsmentionedintheSravaka'sowncanonthatnolongerexisthistorically,thatis,sutraswhoseoralrecitationlineageshavebeenlost.26Notonlyarewe
missingsutrasandportionsofsutras,butwecannotevenbesureoftheeditionsofthetextsthatwedohave.Hestates:
sutrassuchastheMahaparinirvanaSutraarereciteddifferently.Hence...itisclearthatevenintheSravakayanathewordoftheBuddhaisincomplete.Eventheauthorized
editions(yangdagparbsduspa'igzhibo)whicharecomposedbythefourarhantssuchasMahakasyapa,etc.havedegenerated,forthevarioussects(sdepa)havedisparate
waysofsettingforththescriptures,ofdividingthemintochapters,andsoforth...Whatismore,eveninonesect,oneandthesamesutrawilloftentimeshavedifferentpassages
andchapters...Hence,whentheauthorizedversionshavedegeneratedhowcanweknowthatthewordoftheBuddhaexistsinitsentirety?(P.116b,D.99b)

AnotherformofstructuralargumentattributedtotheSravakasismorecrass.HerewefindattemptstobringintoquestionthecanonicalstatusoftheMahayanaby
offeringdefinitionsofbuddhavacanathatclearlycannotincludetheMahayanasutras.AmongthemwefindtheclaimthattheBuddha'sword"isanythingheldin
commonbytheeighteen(Sravaka)subsects"(P.124a,D.106b).TothisVasubandhuretortsthatevenamongthe

applicable copyright law.

EBSCO Publishing : eBook Collection (EBSCOhost) - printed on 1/9/2013 4:57 PM via UNIV OF COLORADO AT BOULDER
9780585069159 ; Timm, Jeffrey Richard.; Texts in Context : Traditional Hermeneutics in South Asia
Account: s8860338
 Page228

eighteenSravakasubsectsthereisconsiderabledisagreementastowhatiscanonicalwork,27makingthiscriterionanunacceptableoneonwhichtobasethe
definitionoftheBuddha'sword.

Realizingthatconsensusamongalloftheeighteensubsectsasacriterionforauthenticityexcludesavastamountofliteraturefromthecanon,anotheropponenturges
Copyright 1992. State University of New York Press. All rights reserved. May not be reproduced in any form without permission from the publisher, except fair uses permitted under U.S. or

thatonlythoseworksthatareupheld(asauthentic)bycertainlineagesofmasters(acarya,slobdpon)shouldbeconsideredtheBuddha'sword(P.124b,D.106b).28
Althoughallowingforcanonicityofawiderrangeoftextualmaterial,thisdefinitioninasensebegsthequestion,foritmustofferreasonsforacceptingcertain"lineages
ofcertainmasters"whilerepudiatingothers,whichitfailstodo.AsVasubandhustates,"Howcanallofthosemutuallyinconsistentexpositionsbeconsideredthe
Buddha'sword?"(P.124a,D.106b).Moreover,giventhefactthat"notalloftheBuddha'swordexistsnowadays,''anydefinitionoftheBuddha'swordthatseeksto
characterizebuddhavacanaintermsofwhatexistsatanypointintimeisboundtofailinthatitisunabletoaccountforthecanonicityoflostworks.Hence,from
Vasubandhu'sviewpoint,neitherhistorynorphilologycanserveasthebasisforthecriterionofauthenticityorcanonicity.

ArgumentsfromContent.TheargumentsthatchallengetheauthenticityoftheMahayanasutrasonthebasisoftheircontentare,bycomparisontothestructural
arguments,farmoreprevalent,notonlyintheVyakhyayuktibutinothertextssuchastheTarkajvalaaswell.HeretheSravakasarecharacterizedasclaimingthat
thesutrasoftheGreatVehiclecannotbeconsideredtheBuddha'swordbecauseuniquelyMahayanadoctrinessuchastheselflessnessofphenomenaandthefact
thatthehistoricalBuddhawasanillusorymanifestation(nirmana,sprulpa)cannotbeconsideredBuddhistdoctrine.Vasubandhu,ofcourse,neverquestionsthe
uniquenessofcertainMahayanadoctrinaltenets,nordoesheattempttoreducetheMahayanatotheSravakayana,for,ashestates,thesetenets"werenotmeantto
betaughtto[theSravakas]...foritwoulddepressthem"(P.125b,D.107b).WhenaSravakaopponentthenaskshimwhethertheBuddhawasdeceptive,whether
he"taughttotheSravakas[adoctrine]thatwashalftrueandhalffalse"(P.125b,D.108a),Vasubandhuanswerswithaquestion:

[Reply:]IstheBlessedOnebeingdeceptivewhenheteachesthatsentientbeingsaremanifestandexistent?

[Opponent:](Buthedoesnotmeanthisliterally).WhentheBlessedOneexplainsthingsbymeansofanulteriorpurportheisnotbeingdeceptive.

applicable copyright law.

EBSCO Publishing : eBook Collection (EBSCOhost) - printed on 1/9/2013 4:57 PM via UNIV OF COLORADO AT BOULDER
9780585069159 ; Timm, Jeffrey Richard.; Texts in Context : Traditional Hermeneutics in South Asia
Account: s8860338
 Page229

[Reply:]ThenwhentheBlessedOneexplains(toyou,theSravaka)thatphenomenaexistbymeansofanulteriorpurport(whentheyareactuallyempty)heisnotbeingdeceptive.

Inshort,VasubandhuusestheuniquenessofcertainMahayanadoctrinesasawayofenteringintoadiscussionofthenotionofupaya(thabs),orskillfulmeans.Again
histackistodemonstratethatthisnotioncannotberepudiatedbytheSravakasbecauseitisanimplicit,thoughperhapsunacknowledged,elementinthereadingof
Copyright 1992. State University of New York Press. All rights reserved. May not be reproduced in any form without permission from the publisher, except fair uses permitted under U.S. or

theirowncanon,astheabovepassageclearlydemonstrates.

Thenotionofskillfulmeanscomesintoplay,however,onlyafterthedoctrineinquestionhasbeenshowntobeaviableone.Obviouslyitwouldbeabsurdtoclaim
thattheBuddhahadtaughtanuntenabledoctrineassupreme.Beforeinvokingtheupayaprincipletoexplainthedifferentlevelsoftenets,itisnecessarytoprovetheir
viabilityastenets.Thus,oneoftheprincipaltasksoftheVyakhyayuktiistodemonstratethattheseuniquelyMahayanatenetsarereasonable.Anticipatingthe
objectionthatthePrajnaparamitaSutras,perhapsthemostimportantgenreofMahayanascripture,teachnihilismwhentheyquitepointedlystatethatnothingexists,
VasubandhuexplainsthattheseclaimscannotbetakenliterallyandthattheSutrasthemselvesareofulteriorpurport.Thisdoesnot,however,preventtheopponent
fromraisingtheobjectionthatwithinthePrajaparamitaliesthedangerofnihilism:
Hence,becausethiswilldestroythoseoffeebleintellect,howcanoneacceptthemtobescripturesatall?Evenifyouclaim,asyoudo,(thattheyarenottobetakenliterally),
therewillalwaysbesomeonewhowillbeattractedtotheviewthatnothingexists.(P.118a,D.101a)

Vasubandhu'sreplyisareasonableone.Hestatesthatiftheseworksleadtothedegenerationofcertainindividuals,itisnofaultofthetextsthemselvesbuteitherof
the"faultywisdom"oftheadeptsoroftheirkarma.Ultimately,heclaims,itisobstinacyinone'srefusaltoadmitthattherearenonliteralpassages,passagesthat
requireexegesis,thatisthecauseofbeingleadastray:
Ifonedoesaccept(thattherearenonliteralpassages)thenhowcouldtheMahayanascripturesberegardedasapocryphal,asworksthatleadtothedestruction(ofthosewho
followthem)?(P.118b,D.101b)

VasubandhuthencitesavarietyofMahayanascripturestoprovethatthesearetheworksthatrepudiatefalseviewssuchasnihilism,thattheyadvocate

applicable copyright law.

EBSCO Publishing : eBook Collection (EBSCOhost) - printed on 1/9/2013 4:57 PM via UNIV OF COLORADO AT BOULDER
9780585069159 ; Timm, Jeffrey Richard.; Texts in Context : Traditional Hermeneutics in South Asia
Account: s8860338
 Page230

theconventionaldoctrinesofBuddhismsuchascharity,moralconduct,love,andcompassion.Moreimportantly,however,heactivelydemonstrateshowthe
apparentlynihilisticclaimsofthePrajaparamitaaretobecorrectlyinterpreted.InthishereliesheavilyontheSamdhinirmocanaSutra,thetextthatformsthe
basisofthehermeneuticoftheMindonlyschooltowhichVasubandhuandhisbrother,Asanga,belong.29
Copyright 1992. State University of New York Press. All rights reserved. May not be reproduced in any form without permission from the publisher, except fair uses permitted under U.S. or

WemustrememberthatVasubandhuisengagednotonlyinestablishingthevalidityoftheMahayanabutinupholdingthetenetsofaparticularphilosophicalsubschool
oftheMahayana,theCittamatra,orMindonly,school.HerethegreatnemesisisnottheSravakayanabutarivalMahayanaschoolknownastheMadhyamaka.The
Madhyamaka,ofcourse,doesnotdisputetheauthenticityofMahayanascripturessuchasthePrajaparamitaSutras,butitdoesofferexplanationsoftheseworks
thatcontrastmarkedlywiththeCittamatra's.Byinterpretingthesesutrasliterally,thefollowersoftheCittamatraclaimthattheMadhyamikasfallintotheextremeof
nihilism.HencewefindthatVasubandhuonseveraloccasions30faultstheMadhyamikasforfailingtoproperlyinterpretthemessageofthePrajaparamitaSutras.
InthissenseitisclearthatheviewstheMadhyamakaandtheSravakayanaastwosidesofthesamecoininthatbothfailtorealizetheimportanceofinterpretation.
TheSravakayana,ontheonehand,becauseofitsnaivenotionofcanonanditsfixationoncompletenessandconsistency,failstoappreciatetheneedforexegesis.
TheMadhyamikas,ontheotherhand,attractedastheyaretodoctrinalnihilism,areportrayedaslackingthewilltorepudiate,throughproperexegesis,the
Prajaparamita'sclaimsthatnothingexists.Inbothcasesthelackofproperinterpretationofthescriptures(eitherthroughnaivetorthroughobstinacy)condemns
thesetwoschoolstologicalfault.

IntercanonicalCriteriaforAuthenticity.OneofthemostinterestingargumentsascribedtotheSravakasintheVyakhyayuktiisbasedoncanonicalpassagesthat
themselvesgivecriteriaforwhatistobeconsideredtheBuddha'sword.AswehavepointedoutabovewithreferencetotheLotusSutra,thefactthatthereexists
intercanonicalspeculationconcerningthequestionofauthenticityisclearindicationofthefactthatthismusthavebeenanissuepriortothediscussionswefindinthe
scholasticliterature.Bethatasitmay,theSravakasarehereportrayedasrelyingontheseintercanonicalcriteriaasawayofbringingintoquestiontheauthenticityof
theMahayanasutras.Theargument,asweshallsee,isinpartanargumentfromformandinpartonefromcontent.Insofarasitpresumesanormativenotionof
canon(herespecificallysutraandvinayapitakas)andurgescommensurabilitywiththeseasnecessaryconditionsforauthenticity,it

applicable copyright law.

EBSCO Publishing : eBook Collection (EBSCOhost) - printed on 1/9/2013 4:57 PM via UNIV OF COLORADO AT BOULDER
9780585069159 ; Timm, Jeffrey Richard.; Texts in Context : Traditional Hermeneutics in South Asia
Account: s8860338
 Page231

sharesobvioussimilaritiestothestructuralargumentsdescribedabove.Insofarasthefinalofthethreecriterialis"noncontradictionwithreality"(dharmata,chos
nyid),ithearkensbacktotheargumentsfromcontent.

TheactualstatementofthepositionintheVyakhadyuktireadsasfollows:
Copyright 1992. State University of New York Press. All rights reserved. May not be reproduced in any form without permission from the publisher, except fair uses permitted under U.S. or

Letussaythatwhatiscommensuratewiththesutranta,whatappearsinthevinayaandwhatdoesnotcontradictrealityistheBuddha'sword,forthesearethereliableteachings
oftheGreatOne.(P124b,D.106b)

AlthoughthesutrathatisthebasisofthisparaphraseisnotidentifiedinVasubandhu'stext,itiscitedintheTika:
ThatisthevalidteachingoftheGreatOne.ItisnottheteachingoftheDarkOne.Simplybecauseamonksaysthathedirectlyheardsomething,thathedirectlyapprehendedit
fromtheBlessedOne,oneshouldnotrejoiceinhisexplanation,oneshouldnotbedazzledbyit.Oneshouldneitherrejoicenorshouldonebedazzledbyit.Itshouldbe
commensuratewiththesutranta,itshouldappearinthevinaya,itshouldbeconsistentwithreality.Ifitismadetoexistsinthesutrantaandmadetoappearinthevinayabutis
not(actually)inthesutranta,doesnotactuallyappearinthevinayaandisnotconsistentwithreality,thenyoushouldaddressthemonkasfollows."VenerableOne,withouta
doubt,thosedoctrinesarenottheworkdsoftheBlessedOne(D.270b)theVenerableOnehasincurredafault.Thosedoctrineshavebeenmadetoexistinthesutranta,have
beenmadetoappearinthevinaya,whereastheydonotexistinthesutranta,theydonotexistinthevinayaandtheyareinconsistentwithreality.Hence,theyarenotthe
Dharma,theyarenotthevinaya,theyarenottheteachingsoftheteacher.Knowingthis,youshouldgivethemup!"(P.153ab,D.270ab)

Vasubandhu'sresponsetosuchanargumentisstraightforward.Considerthefollowingexchange:
[Reply:]Butwhatarethesutrantaandthevinaya,andwhatisreality?

[Opponent:]Thesutrantaandthevinayaarewhathavebeenproperlycollectedbytheredactorsandrealityisthecharacteristicofphenomenaasithascometobeknown
throughthose(twosetsoftexts).

[Reply:]Haven'tIdemonstratedthatthebasisofthecollectionshasdeteriorated?

applicable copyright law.

EBSCO Publishing : eBook Collection (EBSCOhost) - printed on 1/9/2013 4:57 PM via UNIV OF COLORADO AT BOULDER
9780585069159 ; Timm, Jeffrey Richard.; Texts in Context : Traditional Hermeneutics in South Asia
Account: s8860338
 Page232

[Opponent:]Well,letrealitybe(thatdoctrine)thathasbeensetforthinwhateverhasbeencollectedinanysect.

[Reply:]Haven'tIalreadyrefutedthatbysaying,"Howcanallofthesemutuallycontradictory(doctrinalpositions)beconsideredtheBuddha'sword?"(P.124b,D.107a)

Hence,asinthepreviousarguments,thehistoricalincompletenessandphilologicallyproblematicnatureofthevariouseditionsofthecanonvitiateagainstitbeingthe
Copyright 1992. State University of New York Press. All rights reserved. May not be reproduced in any form without permission from the publisher, except fair uses permitted under U.S. or

standardofauthenticity.Atthispoint,however,theSravakachangestactics,andtheargumentshiftsfromastructuralonetoonebasedoncontentquadoctrine:
[Opponent:]Wellthen,letussaythat(theBuddha'sword)isthatwhichisnotdiscordantwithwhatexistsinthesutrantathatteachthefournobletruths,with(anotionof
vinaya)asthediscipliningoftheafflictionsandwithanotionofrealityasdependentorigination.(P.124b,D.107a)

VasubandhumakesitclearthatheisquitewillingtolivewithsuchadefinitionoftheBuddha'swordbuthastenstoaddthattheMahayanaisquitecompatiblewith
suchadefinition.

ThissameargumentwefindduplicatedinBodhicaryavatara(IX,43)anditscommentarialliterature.Santideva'sconclusionbeing,"Whateverreasonsyou(the
opponent)giveforyourbelief(thatyourownscripturesaretheBuddha'sword)similarly(applytovalidate)theMahayana."Hence,fromSantideva'sviewpoint,any
criterionthatisgeneralenoughtoaccountforthetextualanddoctrinaldiversityoftheSravakapitaka,wouldalsoservetovalidatetheauthenticityoftheMahayana
sutras.AftercitingtheSravaka'sargument,thatconcordancewithsutra,vinaya,andrealityisthecriterionforauthenticity,andaftermaintainingthattheMahayana
qualifiesasbeingbuddhavacanaaccordingtothiscriterion,Prajakaramati'srebuttaltakesaslightlydifferentdirection.ArguingthatintheMahayanatherealsoexist
scriptural(i.e.,intercanonical)sourcesfordeterminingwhatistobeconsideredtheBuddha'sword,hecitestheSutraElicitingtheSuperiorThought(Lhagpa'i
bsampabskulba'imdo)asprovidingthecorrectdefinitionoftheBuddha'sword.31Awork,statestheSutra,isauthenticifit(1)ismeaningful,(2)possessesthe
Dharma,(3)eliminatestheafflictions,and(4)teachesthebenefitsandqualitiesofnirvana.Whatismostinterestingaboutthispassage,however,arethelinesthat
follow:

Maitreya,whatevermonkornunorlaymanorlaywomanhashad,willhaveorhasconfidenceinthosefourreasonsshouldberegardedbythesonordaughterofgoodfamilyasa
buddha.Regardingthemastheteacher,theyshouldlistentotheholyDharma

applicable copyright law.

EBSCO Publishing : eBook Collection (EBSCOhost) - printed on 1/9/2013 4:57 PM via UNIV OF COLORADO AT BOULDER
9780585069159 ; Timm, Jeffrey Richard.; Texts in Context : Traditional Hermeneutics in South Asia
Account: s8860338
 Page233

fromthem.Why?Maitreya,itisbecausewhateverisspokencorrectly(legspar)istheBuddha'sword...thefactthatitdoesnotcontradictrealityistheproperdefinition(ofthe
Buddha'sword).(P.246ab)

Vasubandhuhimselfnevergoessofarastosuggestthatanythingthatistrue,anythingthatisspokencorrectly,istheBuddha'sword,butitisclearthatlaterscholastics
Copyright 1992. State University of New York Press. All rights reserved. May not be reproduced in any form without permission from the publisher, except fair uses permitted under U.S. or

whobasethemselvesonhisargumentsdonothesitatetodoso.TheVyakhyayukti'sclaim,aswellastheclaimoftheroottextoftheBodhicaryavatara,ismore
modestnamely,thatanyintercanonicaldefinitionoftheBuddha'swordhavingachanceofsuccessisboundtobegeneralenoughtoallowfortheauthenticityofthe
Mahayanasutras.

IV.Conclusion

AgainsttheonslaughtofSravakaargumentsthatquestiontheauthenticityoftheMahayanasutras,Vasubandhu'schiefweaponseemstobewhathecharacterizesas
"properexegesis,"theliteraltitleofhiswork.Againstthestructuralargumentshearguesforamoresophisticatednotionofcanon.Intheprocessherejectsthe
SravakapresuppositionthattheBuddhistcanon,eventhelesscomplexversionknowntothem,iscompleteandconsistent.Thelackofcompleteness,heimplies,isa
factthatwemustlivewith,butthelackofconsistencyissomethingthatisinthescholar'spowertorectify.Through"correctexegesis,"thatis,throughinterpretation
basedonthedistinctionbetweenprinciplesofdefinitivemeaningandulteriorpurport,theapparentinconsistencydisappears.Theimplicationis,ofcourse,thatthis
samehermeneuticalstrategycanbeappliedtotheMahayanascriptures,therebyreconcilingthemtotheexistingcanon.Thoughperhapsnotguaranteeingtheir
authenticitythroughpositivearguments,Vasubandhurepudiatestheclaimthattheyareapocryphal.

Justas"properexegesis"isVasubandhu'sresponsetothestructuralarguments,sotooisithissolutiontothedoctrinalones.Ifproperlyinterpreted,heclaims,eventhe
apparentlynihilisticclaimsofthePrajaparamitaSutrascanbeunderstoodtobecogent.Hence,intheprocessofarguingforhisparticularinterpretationofthe
doctrineofemptiness,thatoftheCittamatraschool,hearguesfortheneedtoproperlyinterpretthePrajaparamitaSutras,perhapstheprincipalsourceofthis
doctrine.ThissilencestheSravakaopponent,whoseprincipleobjectiontothesetextsliesinthefactthattheirdoctrines,iftakenliterally,aretantamounttonihilism.
"Properexegesis,"saysVasubandhu,isthecorrectivetothismisunderstanding.Heclaimsthatthesescriptureswerenevermeanttobetakenliterally,thattheir
meaning

applicable copyright law.

EBSCO Publishing : eBook Collection (EBSCOhost) - printed on 1/9/2013 4:57 PM via UNIV OF COLORADO AT BOULDER
9780585069159 ; Timm, Jeffrey Richard.; Texts in Context : Traditional Hermeneutics in South Asia
Account: s8860338
 Page234

mustbeelucidatedthroughexegesis.Ironically,thesameargumentappliestotheMadhyamikas.IftheSravakascanbecharacterizedasattemptingtofaultthe
Mahayanaforitsnihilism,fromVasubandhu'sviewpoint,theMadhyamikasareevidentlyseenashavingalreadyfallenintothetrapbywillinglyacceptingtheliteral,and
thereforeinhiseyesthenaive,interpretationoftheseworks.Thesolutiontobothproblemsisthereforeidentical:itisproperexegesisthatinsuresthelegitimacyofthe
doctrinesespousedbytheMahayanasutras.
Copyright 1992. State University of New York Press. All rights reserved. May not be reproduced in any form without permission from the publisher, except fair uses permitted under U.S. or

Oftheargumentsthatrelyoncertainscripturalcitations(i.e.,canonicalsources)forthedeterminationofcriteriaofauthenticity,wecanrecognizetwotypes.Themore
crudeformsoftheseargumentsareshowntoeitherbegthequestionortobereducibletotheargumentsfromformorcontentalreadydiscussed.If,however,these
passages,andothersfromtheMahayana'sowncorpus,are"properlyinterpreted,"andiftheMahayanasutrasinquestionarethemselves"properlyinterpreted,"these
criteriawillalsobeseentoimplytheauthenticityoftheMahayanascriptures.

Inarecentarticle,MatthewKapstein(1989)hasarguedthatthedefinitionsofbuddhavacana,theBuddha'sword,thatdependon"conceptsofconsensus,doctrinal
content,accordwithmanifestreality,andsoforth,allinvolveaweakeningoftheviewsuggestedbystricthistoricalrealism,"(P.222)theviewthattheBuddha'sword
is"theactualspeechsoundsproducedatgivenplacesbytheSakyamunihimself"(P.221).HenceheconcludesthattheTibetantradition,theheirstotheformofIndian
scholasticismthatgaverisetotheseahistoricalcharacterizationsoftheBuddha'sword,"wasneversuccessfulinitsattempttoelaboratefromthestandpointof
historicalrealismasatisfactorysetofcriteriaforscripturalauthenticity"(P.224),withtheresultthatitwas''incapableofgivingrisetoawhollycriticalmethodoftextual
research"(P.237).

ThequestionraisedimplicitlyinKapstein'sarticleisoneofthemostfascinatinginthefieldofcomparativehermeneutics.Whenitcomestothequestionofthe
authenticityoftexts,thereseemtobetwomajoravenuesofapproach:thefirst,apathadmiredbyelementsoftheSravakacommunityandmanymembersofourown,
lookstohistoryandtophilologyastheanswertoquestionsofauthenticitythesecond,espousedbyearlyMahayanascholasticssuchasVasubandhu,looksonlyto
ahistoricalelements,whereaccordancewithrealityistheultimateandfinalcriterion,astherelevantfactorsinthedeterminationofauthenticity.Itistemptingatthis
pointtosuggestthenaivetofthislatterapproach,eitherattributingtheahistoricalnatureoftheanalysistoaformofreligiousdogmatismthatrefusestosubjectits
tenetstospaciotemporalscrutinyor,worse,attributingittoahistoricalnaivetthatseemstomanytobeendemictoIndia.Iwouldsuggest,however,thatwhen
Vasubandhurejectshistoricalandphilologicalcriteria

applicable copyright law.

EBSCO Publishing : eBook Collection (EBSCOhost) - printed on 1/9/2013 4:57 PM via UNIV OF COLORADO AT BOULDER
9780585069159 ; Timm, Jeffrey Richard.; Texts in Context : Traditional Hermeneutics in South Asia
Account: s8860338
 Page235

asirrelevantinthediscussionoftheauthenticityoftexts,hedoesnotdosonaively,thatis,unawareofhistoricalorphilologicalmethods.Evenacursoryreadingofthe
fourthchapteroftheVyakhyayuktirevealsVasubandhu'scriticalexaminationofhistoricalandphilologicalmethodology.Farfromrejectingtheseinanadhocor
naiveway,hedoessoconsciouslyandonlyafterconsiderablereflection.InhiscritiqueofthecompletenessofthecanonVasubandhudemonstratesthefutilityof
applyingphilologicalortextcriticalmethods(e.g.,thecomparisonofdifferentlineagesofrecitation)towardthegoalofproducinganhistoricallyaccurateandcomplete
Copyright 1992. State University of New York Press. All rights reserved. May not be reproduced in any form without permission from the publisher, except fair uses permitted under U.S. or

corpusoftextsgivingusaccesstotheBuddha'sword.Hence,theMahayanascholasticrejectionofhistory(orwhatKapsteincalls"historicalrealism")infavorofa
doctrinalorphilosophicalprinciple("accordancewithreality")astheultimatecriterionofauthenticityisfarfrombeinganinstanceofhermeneuticalnaivet.Itis,infact,
theresultofaconsiderablecriticalreflection.32ThatrealitywastheguidingprincipleofMahayanascholastichermeneutics,andthatexegesiswastheroadtoit,will
notsurprisethosefamiliarwiththisliterature.ThatscholarslikeVasubandhuwereawareofthemyriadobstaclesinvolvedinadvocatingsuchatheory,thatthey
defendeditrigorouslyinamannercriticallysophisticatedevenbytoday'sstandards,maycomeasasurprise.Insuchinsights,Ibelieve,liestheuniquevalueof
exploringcomparativetraditionalhermeneutics.

Notes

1.ThisarticlewaswrittenduringtenureofaFulbrightSeniorResearchFellowshipinIndiain1989.Itakethisopportunitytoexpressmythankstothestaffofthe
UnitedStatesEducationalFoundationinIndiaandtoProfessorRamshankarTripathioftheSramanVidyaSankay,SampurnanandaSanskritUniversity,fortheir
hospitalityasmyhostsduringmypleasantstayinIndia.

2.IhavediscussedsomeofthelimitationsofSmith'sarticle,specificallyhisnotionthattheprocessofcanonizationisarbitrary,inarecentarticle,"TheCanonizationof
PhilosophyandtheRhetoricofSiddhantainTibetanBuddhism,"forthcomingintheMinoruKiyotafestschriftvolume.

3."Thetaskofapplicationaswellasthejudgmentoftherelativeadequacyofparticularapplicationstoacommunity'slifesituationremainstheindigenoustheologian's
task,butthestudyoftheprocess,particularlythestudyofcomparativesystematicsandexegesis,oughttobecomeamajorpreoccupationofthehistoryof
religions"(Smith1982,43)Andalso,

applicable copyright law.

EBSCO Publishing : eBook Collection (EBSCOhost) - printed on 1/9/2013 4:57 PM via UNIV OF COLORADO AT BOULDER
9780585069159 ; Timm, Jeffrey Richard.; Texts in Context : Traditional Hermeneutics in South Asia
Account: s8860338
 Page236

"Ilookforwardtothedaywhencoursesandmonographswillexistinbothcomparativeexegesisandcomparativetheology,comparingnotsomuchconclusions
asstrategiesthroughwhichtheexegeteseekstointerpretandtranslatehisreceivedtraditiontohiscontemporaries"(Smith1982,52)

4.ItwillbecomeevidentfrommyremarksbelowthatIdisagreewithMatthewKapstein(1989)whenhestatesthat"atextiscalled'aprocryphal'notsomuchin
Copyright 1992. State University of New York Press. All rights reserved. May not be reproduced in any form without permission from the publisher, except fair uses permitted under U.S. or

virtueofitsbeingsoregardedwithinthetraditioninwhosescriptureitisfoundbut,rather,invirtueofthescholar'sjudgement"(P.219),aswhenheclaimsthatthereis
nosufficientbasis"fortheregularuseofthephrase'Buddhistapocrypha'exceptinthesensefirstdefined,thatwhichreferstotextswhoseorigins,whenscrutinized
fromaphilologicalstandpoint,aredeemedsuspect"(P.220).Thenotionof''apocrypha"foundinpolemicsconcerningtheauthenticityoftheMahayanasutrasofthe
sortIdescribebelow,anotionfoundwithinthetraditionitself,seemstometobeperfectlyunderstandable.Ofcourse,suchanotionmustberecognizedtoberelative
inthesensethatwhatisapocryphalforonesegmentofatraditionmightverywellbecanonicalforanother,apointthatProfessorKapsteinhimselfmakesbutone
pageearlierinhisessay.Nonetheless,thatthereisanidentifiableandmeaningfulnotionofanapocryphaltextintheBuddhisttraditionseemstometobeindisputable.
BythispassingremarkIdonotmeantoquestiontheoverallimportanceofProfessorKapstein'sexcellentessay,whichIconsidertobeoneofthemostlucid,
sophisticatedandprovocativearticlesonthequestionofcanonicityinBuddhistStudiestodate.ItseemsthatDr.RonaldM.Davidsonhasalsodevotedanarticleon
thissubject,toappearinRobertBuswell,ed.,BuddhistApocrypha,aworkthatIhaveyettosee.

5.Gathas11336seealsoDutt(1976,vi).

6.sDedgeedition(D)oftheTibetanTripitaka,Toh.no.4158,Pekingedition(P)no.5658,dBumadza.Therelevantpassageistobefoundattheendofthefourth
chapter,Pfolio147a.SeealsotheverybriefcommentsintheTikaattributedtoAjitamitra,Pno.5659,dBumadzafolios194ab.Forapartialbibliographyofwork
thathasbeendoneonRatnavaliseeNakamura(1987,241)seealsoHahn1982,andanunpublishedarticlebythesameauthor,"DasaltesteManuskriptvon
NagarjunasRatnavali,"aswellastheforthcomingstudyofthetextbyNgawangSamten.

7.DToh.no.3855Pno.5255,dBumadza.Thefourthchapteristobefoundonfolios19a22b.MostofthetexthasbeenstudiedbytheJapanesebuthas
receivedlittleattentiononthepartofWesternscholars.SeeNakamura(1987,284)andthefollowingnote.

applicable copyright law.

EBSCO Publishing : eBook Collection (EBSCOhost) - printed on 1/9/2013 4:57 PM via UNIV OF COLORADO AT BOULDER
9780585069159 ; Timm, Jeffrey Richard.; Texts in Context : Traditional Hermeneutics in South Asia
Account: s8860338
 Page237

8.DToh.no.3856Pno.5256,dBumadza.Thecommentaryonthefourthchapteristobefoundonfolios157b218b.SeealsoNakamura(1987,284)alsoIida
1980andGokhaleandBahulkar1985.

9.DToh.no.3871Pno.5272,dBumala.Therelevantportionistobefoundonfolios36b37a.SeealsoNakamura(1987,28788).
Copyright 1992. State University of New York Press. All rights reserved. May not be reproduced in any form without permission from the publisher, except fair uses permitted under U.S. or

10.OnthedatesofVasubandhu,seeFrauwallner1951andJaini's1958responsetoFrauwallnerforbibliographicalreferencestotheworkofJapanesescholars
whocontestFrauwallner'sthesis,seeNakamura(1987,268).

11.ThissectionisforthemostpartasynopsisofarecentpaperthatistoappearshortlyintheJagannathUpadhyayafestschrift(Cabezn,"SomeNotesonthe
Vyakhyayukti,"forthcoming).

12.IdiscussthetraditionofBuddhistscholasticisminaforthcomingbook,BuddhismandLanguage:AStudyofIndoTibetanScholasticism.

13.Asidefrompassingreferencesinavarietyofworks,tomyknowledgethereexistonlythetwoarticlesofSusumuYamaguchiontheVyakhyayukti,viz.Nippon
BukkyoGakukaiNenpo25(1959)pp.3568,andTohoGakukaiSoritsuJugoshunenKinenTohogakuRonshu(1962)pp.36991,andtheoneofMatsuda
(1985).

14.DToh.no.4061,Semstsamsi,folios29a134bPno.5562,Semsstamsi,folios31b156a.Aswiththeothertwoworksweshallmentionbelow,the
VyakhyayuktiwastranslatedintoTibetanfromtheSanskritbyateamconsistingoftwoIndianscholars,VisuddhasimhaandSakyasimha,andoneTibetanscholar,
Devendraraksita.

15.D29a:mdornams'chad'doddedagla/delaphenparbyaba'iphyir/manngagcungzadbstanparbya."Iwillnowgivealittleadvicethatmaybeofhelp
tothosewhowishtocommentonthesutras."

16.DToh.no.4060,Semsstamsi,folios17b29aPno.5561,Semstsamsi,folios19a31b.TheVyakhyayuktisutrakhandasatadoesnotidentifythescriptural
sourcesofthepassagesitcollects,noraretheyidentifiedintheVyakhyayuktiitself.Ofthe105passagesintheSutrakhandasata,thefirstchapterofthe
Vyakhyayuktiisdevotedtotheexplanationofthefirst,takingitasthe"excuse"forsettingforthageneraltheoryofcommentarialscience,notanunknownstrategyof
thescholastics.Thetheoryissetforthinaverse,theVyakhyayuktistanzamostfrequentlyquotedbyTibetanexegetes:

Thosewhorelatethemeaningofsutras,
Muststatetheirpurpose(prayojana,dgospa),theirconcisemeaning

(pindartha,bsduspa'idon),

applicable copyright law.

EBSCO Publishing : eBook Collection (EBSCOhost) - printed on 1/9/2013 4:57 PM via UNIV OF COLORADO AT BOULDER
9780585069159 ; Timm, Jeffrey Richard.; Texts in Context : Traditional Hermeneutics in South Asia
Account: s8860338
 Page238

Themeaningofthewords(padartha,tshigdon),theboundaries(oftheir

differentsections)(anusamdhi,mtshamssbyar),
Andthecontradictions(urgedbyopponents)withtheirrebuttals
(codyaparihara,brgallan).
Copyright 1992. State University of New York Press. All rights reserved. May not be reproduced in any form without permission from the publisher, except fair uses permitted under U.S. or

mdodonsmrabadaggisni
dgospabsduspa'idonbcasdang
tshigdonbcasdangmtshamssbyorbcas
brgallanbcasparbsnyadparbya.(D.30b,P33b)

ThisisoneofthefewversesoftheVyakhyayuktiavailableinSanskrit:
pravojanamsapindarthampadarthahsanusamdhikah/
sacodyapariharascavacyahsutrarthavadibhih//(Haribhadra1934,15)

Thesecondchapter,byfarthelongest,comprisingasitdoesalmosthalfoftheentirework,thencommentsontheremaining104passages.Specialattentionis
giveninthesecondchaptertopassages2through5,whichsetforththequalitiesoftheBuddha.Thethirdchapterbeginswithageneralexplanationofthefour
aspectsofthe"meaningofthewords,"namely,synonyms(paryaya,rnamgrangs),definition(laksana,mtshannyid),etymology(nirukti,ngespa'itshig),and
thesubdivisions(prabheda,rubtudbyeba).Usingthismodel,then,Vasubandhugoesontoconsiderseveralpassagesfromthesutrasthatleadhimto
discussionoftopicsasdiverseasthetheoryofdependentarising(pratityasamutpada),causality,thetwotruths,andthemoralstatusofgettingdrunk.Inthe
fourthchapter,ourfocusinthispaper,hedefendstheauthenticityoftheMahayanasutrasandgivesadetailedexpositionofthedoctrinesofprovisional
(neyartha)anddefinitive(nitartha)strategiesinvolvedintheexpositionofthesutras,demonstratinghowoneshouldtakeintoaccountthementalabilitiesofone's
audience.

17.DToh.no.4069,Semstsamsi,folios139b301aPno.5570.Semstsamsi,foliosl194a.GunamatiisattributedwithcommentariesontheAbhidharmakosa,
theMulamadhyamakakarikasofNagarjuna,aworkentitledLaksananusarasastra,whichisanabhidharmaworkwhosepurposeistorefutethesoultheoriesof
thenonBuddhists,aswellaswithasubcommentaryonVasubandhu'scommentaryonthePratityasamutpddadivibhanganirdesasutra.OnGunamati,see
Taranatha(1970trans.:10,212),whostatesthathewasacontemporaryoftheKingPacamasimha,andalsoacontemporaryof"Sampradutah,adiscipleof
Bhavya."SeealsoTakakasu(1966,lviii,lix,181)andespeciallyWatters(1961,1,324II,108,165,246)whereheisvariouslyidentifiedasthe"teacherof
Vasumitra,"acontemporaryofSthiramati,andashavinglivedearlierthan600C.E.

applicable copyright law.

EBSCO Publishing : eBook Collection (EBSCOhost) - printed on 1/9/2013 4:57 PM via UNIV OF COLORADO AT BOULDER
9780585069159 ; Timm, Jeffrey Richard.; Texts in Context : Traditional Hermeneutics in South Asia
Account: s8860338
 Page239

18.Inthisregard,someTibetansourcesmakeadistinctionbetweentheSravakasandthefollowersoftheSravakayana.Wefind,forexample,inmKhasgrubdGe
legsdpalbzang'ssTongthunchenmo(1972,19)theclaimthataSravakaarhant,forexample,couldnotpossiblydisputetheauthenticityoftheMahayanasutras
because"itwouldfollow,absurdly,thatthoughthearhanthadeliminatedalloftheafflictions,he/shecouldnonethelessaccumulatethekarmaofdisparagingthe
doctrine(chossponggilas),asiftheywerestillriddenwiththeignoranceoftheafflictions."Hence,frommKhasgrubrje'sviewpoint,thoughsuchachallengemay
Copyright 1992. State University of New York Press. All rights reserved. May not be reproduced in any form without permission from the publisher, except fair uses permitted under U.S. or

comefromindividualswhoareSravakasphilosophically,itcannotcomefromtheSravakaswhohaveactuallyobtainedtheendresultoftheirpath.

19.SuchargumentswereattemptedbysomeearlymodernJapaneseBuddhistscholarsforasummaryofsomeofthesearguments,seeMizuno(1982,12533).

20.Itwillbecomeclearthatthethreetypesofargumentsdescribedherearenotalwaysmutuallyexclusiveandattimestendtooverlap.Despitethis,itseemstometo
beavalidandhelpfuldistinctiontomakeintheanalysisofthesepolemics.

21.Nakamura(1987,28)proposesatheoryforthedevelopmentofthecanonbasedonthediachronicdevelopmentoftheangas.

22.Thefourthchapterendswiththefollowinglines:"Hence,thereisnocontradictioninclaimingthattheMahayanaisthewordoftheBuddhaandthereforethereis
nocontradictioninmaintainingthattheVaipulyaistheMahayana"(P.133a,D.114a).

23.AllreferencestotheVyakhyayuktiaregivenintermsofthefolionumbersofthePekingandsDedgeeditionsoftheTibetantripitaka.Forthefullreferencesto
thesetexts,seenote14.

24.ItisinterestingtonotethatthroughoutVasubandhu'sargumentshedoesnotactuallyusetheterm"provisionalmeaning,"insteadpittingtheconceptofsutrasof
definitivemeaningagainstthatofsutrasofulteriorpurport.Atonepoint,however,hedoesusetheexpression"meaningthatistobeinterpreted"(bkriba'idon)
(P.116b,D.99b).

25.ThisdiscussionoccursasaresponsetoanobjectionconcerningthedoctrineofdefinitivemeaningraisedbytheSravaka,onethatisnotaltogetherclear.The
opponent'squestionreadsasfollows:"WhyisitthatintheMahayanathereisabsolutelynodefinitivemeaningthatallowsonetoascertainthelackofcontradictions
(amongscriptures)?"(thegpachenpolaniganggisna'galbamedparngesparbzungba'ingespa'idoncung

applicable copyright law.

EBSCO Publishing : eBook Collection (EBSCOhost) - printed on 1/9/2013 4:57 PM via UNIV OF COLORADO AT BOULDER
9780585069159 ; Timm, Jeffrey Richard.; Texts in Context : Traditional Hermeneutics in South Asia
Account: s8860338
 Page240

zadkyangmeddozhena)(P.114b,D.97b)Fromoneviewpoint,thequestionmakessense,becauseuptothispointVasubandhuhascitedonlyfromthe
Sravakas'owncanoninsupportofthefactthatcontradictionscanbereconciledthroughreferencetootherscripturesandthroughinterpretation.Onewouldthink,
however,thatinreplytotheSravakas'objectionVasubandhuwouldsimplyhavestatedthatsuchMahayanascriptures,textsthatarbitratebetweendisparate
claimssuchastheSamdhinirmocanaSutra,doexist(somethingthatheinanycasedoesdosubsequently).Insteadheusestheopponent'sremarkasa
Copyright 1992. State University of New York Press. All rights reserved. May not be reproduced in any form without permission from the publisher, except fair uses permitted under U.S. or

springboardtoanexcursusontheincompletenessofbothcanons,sothatthefirststatementofhisrebuttalis,"HaveyoubeentoldorshowntheentireMahayana
bythegraceofthegods?"fromwhichhegoesontodemonstratethatthecanonisincompleteandthattheeditionsoftextsthatwedohaveareuntrustworthy.
FromthisitseemsthatthisisasubjectthatVasubandhufeltwasimportanttotreatinitsownrightright,sothatdespitethefactthathehadamucheasierrebuttal
totheSravakaobjectionavailableatthispoint,hechoseamorecircuitousapproachwiththeaimofbringingupthequestionoftheincompletenessofthecanons.

26.OnthequestionoftheoraltransmissionandpreservationoftheBuddhistsutras,seeGraham(1987,68).

27.Herehecitestheexampleoftwoworksthat,thoughacceptedbysome,arecontestedbyothersubsects,towit,theSutraofUltimateEmptiness(Dondampa
stongpanyidkyimdo)andtheSutraoftheSevenExistences(Sridpabdungimdo).Hegoesontostatethatthissamedisagreementexistsconcerningthe
vinayaandadhidharmaaswellasthesutranta.

28.ThisargumentisrepeatedwithaslightvariationinSantideva'sBodhicaryavatara(IX,43).ForthemostextensivediscussionintheIndiancommentarialliterature,
seePrajakaramati'sremarksinhisPanjika,Pno.5273,dBumala,folios247ab.

29.TheprinciplesofthishermeneuticalmethodhavebeendiscussedextensivelyinTsongkhapa'sLegsbshadsnyingpo,translatedbyThurman(1985,191208).
SeealsomKhasgrubrje(1972,2067).

30.See,forexample,P.128a,D.109bpassim.

31.Vasubandhu(P.125b,D.107b)alsocitesadifferentunidentifiedMahayanasutraasprovidingfivereasonsthatdeterminewhetherornotsomethingcanbe
consideredasutra:(1)becauseitisincompleteaccordwiththecorrectusageofterminology,(2)becauseitisinaccordancewiththemethodofvariousintentions,
(3)becauseitaccordswiththefactthatthosewhoholdtoitwithgreatforceunderstandreality,(4)becauseitisin

applicable copyright law.

EBSCO Publishing : eBook Collection (EBSCOhost) - printed on 1/9/2013 4:57 PM via UNIV OF COLORADO AT BOULDER
9780585069159 ; Timm, Jeffrey Richard.; Texts in Context : Traditional Hermeneutics in South Asia
Account: s8860338
 Page241

accordancewiththefactthatfromtheunderstandingofitsmeaningonecomestoabideinthehappinessthatisdistinguishedbyblissand(5)because,sinceitsets
forthacoherentnarrative('belba'igtamnyid),itaccordswiththewayinwhichwisdomanalyzesthings.

32.Ofcourse,whetherornotsuchreflectionisvalidisadifferentquestionaltogether.Itwillitselfhavetobesubjectedtothesametypeofscrutinyasanyotherform
Copyright 1992. State University of New York Press. All rights reserved. May not be reproduced in any form without permission from the publisher, except fair uses permitted under U.S. or

ofcriticalselfreflection.

References
BustonRinchengrub
1986 TheHistoryofBuddhisminIndiaandTibet.1932.Reprint.TranslatedbyE.Obermiller.
Delhi:SriSatguru.

Cabezn,JosIgnacio
forthcoming "TheCanonizationofPhilosophyandtheRhetoricofSiddhantainTibetanBuddhism."M.
Kiyotafestschrift.EditedbyJ.KeenanandPGriffiths.SanFrancisco:BuddhistBooks
International.

forthcoming "SomenotesontheVyakhyayuktiofVasubandhuandItsAncillaryLiterature."Toappearin
theJagannathUpadhyayafestschrift.

forthcoming BuddhismandLanguage:AStudyofIndoTibetanScholasticism.Albany:SUNYPress.

Davidson,RonaldM.
inpress "Appendix"toBuddhistApocrypha,editedbyRobertBuswell.Honolulu:Universityof
HawaiiPress.

Dutt,Nalinaksha
1976 MahayanaBuddhism.Calcutta:FirmaKLM.(Correctedreprintofthe1973edition)

Frauwallner,E.
1951 OntheDateoftheBuddhistMasteroftheLawVasubandhu.SerieOrientaleRoma3.
Rome:IsMeo.

applicable copyright law.

EBSCO Publishing : eBook Collection (EBSCOhost) - printed on 1/9/2013 4:57 PM via UNIV OF COLORADO AT BOULDER
9780585069159 ; Timm, Jeffrey Richard.; Texts in Context : Traditional Hermeneutics in South Asia
Account: s8860338
 Page242
Gokhale,V.V.,andBahulkar,S.S.
1985 "MadhyamakahrdayakarikaTarkajvala,Chapter1."InMiscelleneaBuddhica,Indiske
Studier5,editedbyChr.Lindtner.Copenhagen:AkademiskForlag.
Copyright 1992. State University of New York Press. All rights reserved. May not be reproduced in any form without permission from the publisher, except fair uses permitted under U.S. or

Graham,William
1987 BeyondtheWrittenWord:OralAspectsofWrittenScriptures.Cambridge:Cambridge
UniversityPress.

Hahn,Michael
1982 Nagarjuna'sRatnavali.Vol.1.Bonn:IndicaetTibeticaVerlag.

Haribhadra
1934 AbhisamayalamkaralokaPrajaparamitavyakhya.EditedbyU.Wogihara.Tokyo:
ToyoBunko.

Iida,Shotaro
1980 ReasonandEmptiness:AStudyinLogicandMysticism.Tokyo:HokuseidoPress.

Jaini,P.
1958 ReviewofE.Frauwallner'sOntheDatesoftheBuddhistMasteroftheLawVasubandhu.
BulletinoftheSchoolofOrientalandAfricanStudies21:4853.

Kapstein,Matthew
1989 "ThePurifactoryGemandItsCleansing:ALateTibetanPolemicalDiscussionofApocryphal
Texts."HistoryofReligions28(3):21744.

mKhasgrubdgelegsdpalbzang
1972 sTongthunchenmo.InMadhyamakaTextSeries,vol.1,editedbyLhamkharyongs'dzin
bstanpargyalmtshan.NewDelhi:Editor.

Matsuda,Kazunobu
1985 "TheTwoTruthsDiscussedintheVyakhyayukti:NotesofVasubandhu(2)"[inJapanese].
IndogakuBukkoyagakuKenkyu33(2):75056.

applicable copyright law.

EBSCO Publishing : eBook Collection (EBSCOhost) - printed on 1/9/2013 4:57 PM via UNIV OF COLORADO AT BOULDER
9780585069159 ; Timm, Jeffrey Richard.; Texts in Context : Traditional Hermeneutics in South Asia
Account: s8860338
 Page243
Mizuno,Kogen
1982 BuddhistSutras:Origin,Development,Transmission.Tokyo:Kosei.

Copyright 1992. State University of New York Press. All rights reserved. May not be reproduced in any form without permission from the publisher, except fair uses permitted under U.S. or

Nakamura,Hajime
1987 IndianBuddhism:ASurveywithBibliographicalNotes.Delhi:MotilalBanarsidass.

Smith,JonathanZ.
1982 "SacredPersistence:TowardaRedescriptionofCanon."InImaginingReligion:Babylonto
Jonestown.Chicago:UniversityofChicagoPress.

Takakasu,J.
1966 ARecordoftheBuddhistReligionasPracticedinIndiaandtheMalayArchipelagoby
Itsing.NewDelhi:MunshiramManoharlal.

Taranatha
1970 HistoryofBuddhisminIndia.TranslatedbyLalaChimpaandA.Chattopadhyaya,and
editedbyD.Chattopadhyaya.Simla:IndianInstituteofAdvancedStudies.

Thurman,RobertA.F
1987 Tsongkhapa'sSpeechofGoldintheEssenceofTrueEloquence.Princeton:Princeton
UniversityPress.

Vasubandhu
n.d. Vyakhyayukti.TibetantranslationintheTibetanTripitaka,Pekingeditionno.5562,sDedge
edition(Toh.no.4061),Semstsamsi.

Watters,T.
1961 OnYuanChwang'sTravelsinIndia(A.D.629645).NewDelhi:MunshiramManoharlal.

applicable copyright law.

EBSCO Publishing : eBook Collection (EBSCOhost) - printed on 1/9/2013 4:57 PM via UNIV OF COLORADO AT BOULDER
9780585069159 ; Timm, Jeffrey Richard.; Texts in Context : Traditional Hermeneutics in South Asia
Account: s8860338