Buddhism, Yogācāra school of

Author(s):  
Dan Lusthaus

Yogācāra is one of the two schools of Indian Mahāyāna Buddhism. Its founding is ascribed to two brothers, Asaṅga and Vasubandhu, but its basic tenets and doctrines were already in circulation for at least a century before the brothers lived. In order to overcome the ignorance that prevented one from attaining liberation from the karmic rounds of birth and death, Yogācāra focused on the processes involved in cognition. Their sustained attention to issues such as cognition, consciousness, perception and epistemology, coupled with claims such as ‘external objects do not exist’ has led some to misinterpret Yogācāra as a form of metaphysical idealism. They did not focus on consciousness to assert it as ultimately real (Yogācāra claims consciousness is only conventionally real), but rather because it is the cause of the karmic problem they are seeking to eliminate. Yogācāra introduced several important new doctrines to Buddhism, including vijñaptimātra, three self-natures, three turnings of the dharma-wheel and a system of eight consciousnesses. Their close scrutiny of cognition spawned two important developments: an elaborate psychological therapeutic system mapping out the problems in cognition with antidotes to correct them and an earnest epistemological endeavour that led to some of the most sophisticated work on perception and logic ever engaged in by Buddhists or Indians. Although the founding of Yogācāra is traditionally ascribed to two half-brothers, Asaṅga and Vasubandhu (fourth–fifth century bc), most of its fundamental doctrines had already appeared in a number of scriptures a century or more earlier, most notably the Saṃdhinirmocanasūtra (Elucidating the Hidden Connections) (third–fourth century bc). Among the key Yogācāra concepts introduced in the Saṃdhinirmocanasūtra are the notions of ’only-cognition’ (vijñaptimātra), three self-natures (trisvabhāva), warehouse consciousness (ālayavijñāna), overturning the basis (āśrayaparāvṛtti) and the theory of eight consciousnesses. The Saṃdhinirmocanasūtra proclaimed its teachings to be the third turning of the wheel of dharma. Buddha lived around sixth–fifth century bc, but Mahāyāna Sūtra did not begin to appear probably until five hundred years later. New Mahāyāna Sūtra continued to be composed for many centuries. Indian Mahāyānists treated these Sūtras as documents which recorded actual discourses of the Buddha. By the third or fourth century a wide and sometimes incommensurate range of Buddhist doctrines had emerged, but whichever doctrines appeared in Sūtras could be ascribed to the authority of Buddha himself. According to the earliest Pāli Sutta, when Buddha became enlightened he turned the wheel of dharma, that is, began to teach the path to enlightenment. While Buddhists had always maintained that Buddha had geared specific teachings to the specific capacities of specific audiences, the Saṃdhinirmocanasūtra established the idea that Buddha had taught significantly different doctrines to different audiences according to their levels of understanding; and that these different doctrines led from provisional antidotes (pratipakṣa) for certain wrong views up to a comprehensive teaching that finally made explicit what was only implicit in the earlier teachings. In its view, the first two turnings of the wheel – the teachings of the Four Noble Truths in Nikāya and Abhidharma Buddhism and the teachings of the Madhyamaka school, respectively – had expressed the dharma through incomplete formulations that required further elucidation (neyārtha) to be properly understood and thus effective. The first turning, by emphasizing entities (such as dharmas and aggregates) while ’hiding’ emptiness, might lead one to hold a substantialistic view; the second turning, by emphasizing negation while ’hiding’ the positive qualities of the dharma, might be misconstrued as nihilism. The third turning was a middle way between these extremes that finally made everything explicit and definitive (nīthartha). In order to leave nothing hidden, the Yogācārins embarked on a massive, systematic synthesis of all the Buddhist teachings that had preceded them, scrutinizing and evaluating them down to the most trivial details in an attempt to formulate the definitive Buddhist teaching. Stated another way, to be effective all of Buddhism required a Yogācārin reinterpretation. Innovations in abhidharma analysis, logic, cosmology, meditation methods, psychology, philosophy and ethics are among their most important contributions. Asaṅga’s magnum opus, the Yogācārabhūmiśāstra (Treatise on the Stages of Yoga Practice), is a comprehensive encyclopedia of Buddhist terms and models, mapped out according to his Yogācārin view of how one progresses along the stages of the path to enlightenment.

Author(s):  
Dwayne A. Meisner

The third chapter is about a theogony that had been known to the philosopher Eudemus (fourth century BC), and all of the other fragments that modern scholars have associated with this theogony. The Neoplatonist Damascius (fifth century AD) says that the theogony started with Night, but modern scholars have tried to link this to other early fragments of Orphic poetry. This chapter discusses Aristophanes in the first section, and Plato and Aristotle in the second section, arguing that their scattered references to Orphic poems might not have been from the same theogony. The third section introduces the Orphic Hymn(s) to Zeus that appear in different variations, the earliest of which are from around the same time as these other fragments. The fourth section suggests that early Orphic fragments about Demeter and Dionysus are not from the Eudemian theogony.


2017 ◽  
Vol 67 (1) ◽  
pp. 247-262 ◽  
Author(s):  
James Corke-Webster

In 1967 Alan Cameron published a landmark article in this journal, ‘The fate of Pliny'sLettersin the late Empire’. Opposing the traditional thesis that the letters of Pliny the Younger were only rediscovered in the mid to late fifth century by Sidonius Apollinaris, Cameron proposed that closer attention be paid to the faint but clear traces of the letters in the third and fourth centuries. On the basis of well-observed intertextual correspondences, Cameron proposed that Pliny's letters were being read by the end of the fourth century at the latest. That article now seems the vanguard of a rise in scholarly interest in Pliny's late-antique reception. But Cameron also noted the explicit attention given to the letters by two earlier commentators—Tertullian of Carthage, in the late second to early third century, and Eusebius of Caesarea, in the early fourth. The use of Pliny in these two earliest commentators, in stark contrast to their later successors, has received almost no subsequent attention.


1926 ◽  
Vol 19 (2) ◽  
pp. 165-172
Author(s):  
B. H. Streeter

One of the great glories of the Freer Gallery of the Smithsonian Institution at Washington is the MS. of the Four Gospels, commonly cited as W, which was bought in Egypt in 1906, and may have been found in the ruins of an Egyptian monastery. With regard to it Professor A. S. Hunt, after again looking at photographs of the MS., writes me: “A date within the fourth century seems to me quite possible, but the early fifth century is not to be excluded. Personally I should incline to put it towards the end of the fourth century…. But… the first quire of John is obviously considerably later.” Thus W is probably the third oldest MS. of the gospels in Greek. Yet on account of the extraordinary variety in the types of early text contained in it, W is of all MSS. the most enigmatic. I hope in this article to contribute something towards the solution of the enigma.


1939 ◽  
Vol 59 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-44 ◽  
Author(s):  
J. D. Beazley

I am indebted to Sir Leonard Woolley for his invitation to publish the red-figured vases found in his excavations at Al Mina; to Mr. Martin Robertson, who has helped me in many ways, and was the first to notice many of the joins; to Mr. C. O. Waterhouse for the drawings and photographs. I give only a selection of the finds, but have omitted, I think, little of importance. The red-figure is all Attic.The black-figure from Al Mina is scanty, poor, and no older than the earliest red-figure sherds found there, which are from eye-cups:—1. Three fragments of an eye-cup. The largest measures 0·041 m. across. A, part of the left-hand eye; shank and heel of the figure, cutting across the tear-gland. B, part of the left-hand eye and of the ground-line. The fragment not figured gives another bit of eye. Not one of the very earliest eye-cups: about 525.2. There is no saying whether a third fragment of an eye-cup belongs to the last or not: the cup was bilingual, and part of the b.f. interior remains, a centaur with a stone in his right hand: greatest breadth 0·060 m.Red-figure does not become plentiful at Al Mina until well on in the third quarter of the fifth century. In the fourth century the import increases. There is little archaic red-figure, and most of what there is belongs to the end of the period.


1970 ◽  
Vol 20 (2) ◽  
pp. 277-287 ◽  
Author(s):  
M. L. West

In the controversy over the date of Corinna, the following points may be taken as agreed:1. An edition was made in Boeotia about the end of the third or beginning of the second century B.C.2. The texts of Corinna current in the late Hellenistic and Roman periods were all descended from that Boeotian edition.3. Before its dissemination, Corinna was unknown in Greece at large. If she wrote at an earlier period, she must have been remembered only locally.The difference between Boeotian spelling of the fifth century and that of the fourth is very great: but the difference in this respect between the mid-fourth century and the late third or early second is comparatively slight. It is therefore tenable that whereas there would be a good reason for the re-spelling of fifth-century Boeotian into the later convention of any period, there would be no obvious or adequate reason for re-spelling Boeotian of the fourth century into the orthography of the third, or that of the third into that of the second. Even those features of fourth-century spelling which have ceased to preponderate are by no means unknown or even uncommon at the end of the third century.


2020 ◽  
Vol 47 (2) ◽  
pp. 330-346
Author(s):  
Ashish Kumar

This article analyses the formation of state polities in central India, where according to Ashokan edicts, āṭavī tribes had been present in the third century bce. From several of these tribes, āṭavīka-rājās (forest kings) arose by the fourth century ce and the Gupta monarch Samudragupta reduced them to the position of servants. This article argues that the two ruling houses—the Parivrājaka and the Uchchakalpa—rose to power in the second half of the fifth century ce in eastern Madhya Pradesh from āṭavīka background and erected their state apparatus similar to that of their overlord Gupta rulers. In the epigraphs of the Parivrājaka rulers, Ḍāhala region, comprising much of eastern Madhya Pradesh with Tripur ī (near Jabalpur) as its centre, is mentioned as a part of their rājya. The Parivrājaka and the Uchchakalpa rājyas had common boundaries and the epigraphs indicate the presence of some territorial conflict between these two. The article proposes that both of these ruling houses, having being subordinated to the Guptas, made land grants to brahmanas and temples for the integration of their territories. The shrines of a local tribal goddess Piṣṭapurikādēvī received land grants from both the Parivrājaka and the Uchchakalpa rulers, and this paper argues that under the patronage of these same rulers, this goddess was absorbed into brahmanical pantheons as Lakṣmī—the consort of god Viṣṇu, due to the efforts of a non-brahmana individual, Chhōḍugōmika. The state formation, accompanied by cult assimilation in central India, therefore had been a complex and multilayered process.


Author(s):  
Andrew Louth

Mariological reflection in some second-century Fathers is introduced, especially the parallel with Eve; this explicit reflection on Mary is set beside second-century reflection on the Church as Virgin Mother, a tradition only later explicitly related to Mary as Virgin Mother. Attention is paid to the second-century Protevangelium of James with its remarkably developed Mariology; the nature of its esotericism is discussed, and later apocryphal texts introduced. Other tantalizing hints of devotion to Mary are mentioned, not least the use of the title Theotokos in a prayer belonging, possibly, to the third century. Mary’s virginity as an ascetic model in the fourth-century ascetic movement is briefly discussed. The first elaborate celebration of Mary is found in the liturgical poetry of the fourth-century Ephrem the Syrian. Mariology developed dramatically from the fifth century, witnessed in Proklos’ homilies, Romanos’ Kontakia, and the Akathist Hymn.


1941 ◽  
Vol 61 ◽  
pp. 6-13
Author(s):  
Arthur Bernard Cook

Some years ago at a London sale of antiquities I acquired three marbles described as ‘Graeco-Roman heads.’ Sale Catalogues are sometimes (not often) unduly modest. One of these heads is in fact an Aphrodite of the Petworth type in close-grained lychnítes, and might be assigned to the closing years of the fourth century, though I should prefer to call it shop-work of a somewhat later period. A second head is a fragment broken from a small portrait statue in crystalline island marble presumably from the quarries of Naxos: it once wore a metal diadem pegged into a single drill-hole on the nape of the neck and perhaps represented some Hellenistic prince. But the third head (Pl. I), which forms the main subject of this paper, is of greater moment, for it is—as all who have seen it agree—an Attic original of the mid fifth century, and as such merits the most careful and circumspect investigation.Of its provenance and history little can be said. It came, like other items sold with it, from a collection formed about 1830 by the grandfather of its late owner. The collector was a wealthy man who had certainly visited Egypt and probably made purchases in Rome. In short, we have the usual story of a well-to-do traveller returning from the Grand Tour with a trunk or two full of Levantine spoils.


1973 ◽  
Vol 53 (2) ◽  
pp. 191-218 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alan D. McWhirr

SummaryThe 1969–72 excavations have concentrated on two main areas to be affected by the proposed relief road around Cirencester. In insula XII two houses, apparently constructed in the second half of the third century A.D., have been uncovered and planned. A total of twelve mosaics were found in varying states of preservation. Building XII, I was rectangular with a bath suite to the west, whilst the latest phase of XII, 2 resembled the plan of a winged corridor villa. From this building came evidence of iron working. Both buildings continued to be used in the fourth century and there is slight structural evidence suggesting fifth century occupation.To the west of Cirencester excavation of a late Roman cemetery has produced 268 burials, not all of which were complete, and a small number of associated finds. All but one were inhumations and two were in stone coffins. The skeletons have been studied by Dr. C. Wells and a short report on his work is included. Work has also been carried out on a road leading towards the amphitheatre. To the north of this road was a boundary(?) wall. Other excavated sites are mentioned in this report. Several interesting pieces of Roman sculpture were found.Two appendices are included which discuss the mosaics and inscriptions found during the period under review.


1965 ◽  
Vol 85 ◽  
pp. 149-159 ◽  
Author(s):  
M. L. West

K. Latte,De saltationibus Graecorum44, notes the possibility thatκορεwas originally written, representingκῶρε. There are instances in the hymn ofεandοrepresenting secondaryε̄andο̄(cf. on 5, 30, 38, 50), though we also findκατῆχεin 38. This orthography must go back to the original written text, and helps to date the composition, being found in a few Cretan inscriptions of the third century B.C. but not later (Bechtel,Gr. Dial, ii 680 ff.). Before the fourth century,ηand ω were not used at all in Crete, so that if the hymn were as early as the fifth century, as Wilamowitz asserts (Griech. Verskunst502) without giving his reasons, we should expect eitherεandοthroughout or a uniform transliteration, not the distinction that is actually apparent betweenη, ωfor originalη, ω(also forη<αεandεα, ω<εο) andε, οfor the contraction ofεε,οο, and forε, οlengthened by compensation. The usual dating of the hymn to the fourth or third century thus receives confirmation.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document