MINOR BUDDHIST TEXTS (Part 1)

G. TUCCI
of Dharmakaya. While in the AA., the bodies of Buddha
are four, in Asanga's commentary on the Vajracched
i k a only two are recorded, the Dharmakaya and
the Nirmanakaya, the absolute and the apparitional
body; this relates our text to the Pancavimsati.
Moreover, while the AA. considers the path of the Bodhisattva
as well as that of the Pratyekabuddha and of the
Sravaka, Asanga's commentary discusses only the path of
the Bodhisattva. On the other hand, the path is equally
divided into two parts: n. 1-16, the preparatory one, and
n. 17-18 mystic knowledge and the realization of the
identity with the absolute, the Dharmakaya.
Occasional analogies with M ahayanasutralank
a r a , and Mahayanasamgraha are also noticeable,
but no allusion is made to alayavijnana and
suchlike theories so peculiar to the Yogacaras (except in the
Comm. on karika 76) J) . But of course no conclusion
can be drawn from this fact because the booklet is only
concerned with the path, not with speculation or dogmatics.
*) According to I Ching (Ta. 1817) who reproduces an Indian tradition,
Asanga had the revelation of the karika s from Maitreya in the Tusita: the
Prajfia was explained according to the tenets of the Yogacara, and the
Vijnaptimatrata. Then Vasubandhu the great scholar yC ZC explained
them. Again Vasubandhu bodhisattva wrote the explanation of the meaning
of the seven " doors " of the Prajfia (viz. the Saptapadartha). This
text was transmitted in Nalanda and on account of its difficulty it was commented
upon by pljl -f"
^rjr> Simhacandra and the very learned (b ahusrut a) Candragomin
J 1 } [=j from eastern India: there arose different schools of interpretation:
some followed the three-sv a b h a v a-doctrine and did not agree with the
Madhyamikas; others followed Nagarjuna's doctrine and did not agree with the
Yogacaras, the fundamental point of difference being that for the Yogacaras the
real exists and the conventional does not exist, and for the Madhyamikas, on the
contrary, the conventional exist and a reality does not exist. The first ones state
the theory of the three svabhava: the second ones base themselves on the
two-truths-principle. The great school of the Prajfia embodies both views.
[30]