CONTROVERSIES IN DHARMA THEORY: SECTARIAN DIALOGUE ON THE NATURE OF ENDURING REALITY (INDIA)

Sectarian fragmentation within early Indian Buddhism from the third century B.C. to the fifth century A.D. both resulted from and contributed to the contemporaneous development of the Abhidharma exegetical tradition. The Abhidharma analysis of earlier Buddhist doctrine, and indeed all experience, into a number of discrete constituent elements (dharma), and the classification of these elements according to doctrinal criteria often provided the focus for controversies that lay at the root of sectarianism.;The pre-Abhidharma distinction between mental and material dharmas was extended during the Abhidharma period to include a new category--dharmas dissociated from both mind and form. Introduced by the Sarvastivada sect, this new category of dissociated dharmas became a point of dispute not only within that sect, but also between the Sarvastivada and other Abhidharma sects. The factors dissociated from mind (cittaviprayuktasamskara) played a central role in Sarvastivada explanations of causal relations, the continued efficacy of action, and the apparent continuity of the phenomenal individual. Though abstract, these dissociated factors were claimed to exist as independent realities comparable to mind or form. Their existential status as either enduring realities (dravya), or as mere provisional designations (prajnapti) was actively debated among Indian Abhidharma sects, and led to general ontological inquiry into the manner of existence and nature of all dharmas.;This study examines the factors dissociated from mind and the doctrinal controversies they spawned. It focuses on the Nyayanusara of Sanghabhadra (fifth century A.D.), who adopted and subtly transformed the earlier interpretations of the Mahavibhasa (first-second century A.D.) in order to undermine critics and reestablish unequivocally Sarvastivada-Vaibhasika orthodoxy. In addition to refuting the interpretations of Vasubandhu as presented in the Abhidharmakosa, Sanghabhadra also challenged the views of the Darstantika and Sautrantika.;The introduction of this study outlines doctrinal implications of the controversies surrounding each dissociated factor. The body of the work is a translation of relevant sections of the second chapter of Sanghabhadra's Nyayanusara (Chinese). Other texts consulted include Vasubandhu's Abhidharmakosa (Sanskrit), the Mahavibhasa (Chinese), earlier Sarvastivada Abhidharma texts (Chinese), and a range of Sanskrit, Chinese, and Japanese (kanbun) commentaries.