| Part ofa serieson |
| EarlyBuddhism |
|---|
 |
| Buddhism |
*This list is a simplification. It is likely that the development of Buddhist schools was not linear. |
TheSautrāntika orSutravadin (Sanskrit:सौत्रान्तिक,Suttavāda in Pali;Chinese:經量部\ 說經部;pinyin:jīng liàng bù\ shuō jīng bù;Vietnamese:Kinh lượng bộ, Thuyết chuyển bộ;Japanese:経量部,romanized: Kyōryōbu) were anearly Buddhist school generally believed to be descended from theSthavira nikāya by way of their immediate parent school, theSarvāstivādins.[1] While they are identified as a unique doctrinal tendency, they were part of the SarvāstivādaVinaya lineage of monastic ordination.[2]
Their name means literally "the conclusions of thesutras" wheresūtra is lengthened into thevṛddhi derivativesautra, and combined with the wordanta, meaning end or conclusion, with a final nominal markerika (compare with the termvedānta), meaning their philosophy is derived from thesūtras. As stated by the commentator Yasomitra, they hold thesutras, but not theAbhidharma commentaries (sastras), as authoritative.[1][3] The views of this group first appear in theAbhidharmakośabhāṣya ofVasubandhu.[2]
The name Sautrāntika indicates that unlike other North IndianSthaviras, this school held the Buddhist sutras as central to their views, over and above the ideas presented in theAbhidharma literature. The Sarvastivada scholar Samghabhadra, in hisNyayanusara, attacks a school of thought named Sautrantika which he associates with the scholars Śrīlāta and his studentVasubandhu.[4] According to Samghabhadra, a central tenet of this school was that all sutra is explicit meaning (nitartha), hence their name.[4]
The Sarvāstivādins sometimes referred to them as theDārṣṭāntika school, meaning "those who utilize the method of examples".[3] This latter name may have been a pejorative label.[5] It is also possible that the name 'Dārṣṭāntika' identifies a predecessor tradition, or another related, but distinct, doctrinal position; the exact relationship between the two terms is unclear.[6] Charles Willemen identifies the Sautrāntika as a Western branch of the Sarvāstivādins, active in theGandhara area, who split from theSarvāstivādins sometime before 200 CE, when the Sautrāntika name emerged.[7] Other scholars are less confident of a specific identification for the Sautrāntika; Nobuyoshi Yamabe calls specifying the precise identity of the Sautrāntika "one of the biggest problems in current Buddhist scholarship".[6]
The founding of the Sautrāntika school is attributed to the elderKumāralāta (c. 3rd century CE),[8] author of a "collection of dṛṣtānta" (Dṛṣtāntapaṅkti) called theKalpanāmaṇḍitīkā. The Sautrāntikas were sometimes also called "disciples of Kumāralāta".[9] According to Chinese sources, Harivarman (250-350 CE) was a student of Kumāralāta who became disillusioned with BuddhistAbhidharma and then wrote theTattvasiddhi-śāstra in order to "eliminate confusion and abandon the later developments, with the hope of returning to the origin".[10] The Tattvasiddhi was translated into Chinese and became an important text in Chinese Buddhism until the Tang Dynasty.
Other works by Sautrāntika affiliated authors include theAbhidharmāmṛtarasa-śāstra attributed toGhoṣaka, and theAbhidharmāvatāra-śāstra attributed toSkandhila.[11] The elderŚrīlāta, who wasVasubandhu's teacher is also known as a famous Sautrāntika who wrote theSautrāntika-vibhāṣa.[12] Ghoṣaka's Abhidharmāmṛtarasa and Harivarman's Tattvasiddhi have both been translated into English.
The Buddhist philosopherVasubandhu wrote the famous Abhidharma workAbhidharmakośakārikā which presentedSarvāstivāda-Vaibhāṣika Abhidharma tenets, he also wrote a "bhāṣya" or commentary on this work, which presented critiques of theVaibhāṣika tradition from a Sautrāntika perspective.[13] The Abhidharmakośa was highly influential and is the main text on Abhidharma used in Tibetan and Chinese Buddhism up until today.
Buddhist logic (pramāṇavāda) as developed byDignāga andDharmakīrti is also associated with the Sautrāntika school.
No separatevinaya (monastic code) specific to the Sautrāntika has been found, nor is the existence of any such separate disciplinary code evidenced in other texts; this indicates that they were likely only a doctrinal division within the Sarvāstivādin school.[5]
The Sautrāntika criticized the Sarvāstivādins on various matters such asontology,philosophy of mind andperception.[5][14] While the Sarvāstivādinabhidharma described a complex system in which past, present, and future phenomena are all held to have some form of their own existence, the Sautrāntika subscribed to a doctrine of "extreme momentariness" that held thatonly the present moment existed.[5] They seem to have regarded the Sarvāstivādin position as a violation of the basic Buddhist principle ofimpermanence.[5] As explained by Jan Westerhoff, this doctrine of momentariness holds that each present moment "does not possess any temporal thickness; immediately after coming into existence each moment passes out of existence" and that therefore "all dharmas, whether mental or material, only last for an instant (ksana) and cease immediately after arising".[15]
The Sarvāstivādin abhidharma also broke down human experience in terms of a variety of underlying phenomena (a view similar to that held by the modernTheravadin abhidhamma); the Sautrāntika believed that experience could not be differentiated in this manner.[5]
Sautrantika doctrines expounded by elder Śrīlāta and critiqued in turn by Samghabhadra'sNyayanusara include:[16]
According toVasubandhu, the Sautrāntika also held the view that there may be many Buddhas simultaneously, otherwise known as the doctrine of contemporaneous Buddhas.[20]
.svg)