BAUDDHA Darshanam

By Dr. Korada Subrahmanyam

The system that is useful in ascertaining the “tattvam” (real nature) is called Darśanam. Since Veda is not taken as an authority and refuted this is considered a Nāstikadarśanam (system of atheists). It was Buddha, who propounded and expounded the theories of this Darśanam and therefore it is named after him. Bauddhas (followers of Buddha) believe in the four truths. Buddha or Sugata is God and the Universe is momentary. Among Bauddhas there are four denominations.

Pāṇini rules (Aṣṭādhyāyī 4.4.60 – asti nāsti diṣṭaṃ matiḥ) one who does not believe in paraloka (another world) is called Nāstika (atheist). Bhṛgu in Manusmṛti (2.10,11) defines a Nāstika:

श्रुतिस्तु वेदो विज्ञेयो धर्मशास्त्रं तु वै स्मृतिः।
ते सर्वार्थेष्वमीमांस्ये ताभ्यां धर्मो हि निर्बभौ॥
योऽवमन्यते ते मूले हेतुशास्त्राश्रयाद्द्विजः।
स साधुभिर्बहिष्कार्यः नास्तिको वेदनिन्दकः॥
śrutistu vedo vijñeyo dharmaśāstraṃ tu vai smṛtiḥ।
te sarvārtheṣvamīmāṃsye tābhyāṃ dharmo hi nirbabhau॥
yo’vamanyate te mūle hetuśāstrāśrayāddvijaḥ।
sa sādhubhirbahiṣkāryaḥ nāstiko vedanindakaḥ॥

Śruti (Veda) and Smṛti (Dharmaśāstram – code of conduct) are the two bases of Dharma and in all matters they are not to be subjected to logic. Any Dvija (Brāhmaṇa / Kṣatriya / Vaiśya) who belittles them by the application of logic is called Nāstika or Vedanindaka and such a person should be excommunicated by noble people.

So, in any case Bauddha is a Nāstika as he neither believes in paraloka (another world) nor in Veda. But a close look at the tenets of Buddhism makes one believe that undoubtedly the roots of Bauddha philosophy lie in Veda, i.e. Upaniṣats.


While Cārvākas accept Pratyakṣam (Perception) only, Bauddhas, having refuted the argument of Cārvākas, accepted Pratyakṣam and Anumāna (Inference). Needless to say, the rest of the Pramāṇas are included in the above two.

Four Denominations of Bauddhas

A sentence like “gato’stamarkaḥ” (the sun is set) is understood differently by different people following their will – a lover approaches his love, a thief goes for a theft and a Vaidika (who follows Veda) goes to perform Sandhyāvandanam (worship of twilight). Similarly although it was a single Upadeśa (preaching) by Buddha, due to the difference in the Buddhi (intellect) of the disciples it was received in four different ways and thus there are four denominations among Bauddhas.

I. Mādhyamikāḥ

The disciples ought to do two things – Yoga and Ācāra. Yoga means Paryanuyoga, i.e. asking questions to know the unknown things. Ācāra means accepting whatever is said by Guru (teacher). Since these people followed Ācāra they are the best and since they did not follow the Yoga they are the worst – by and large they are called Mādhyamikas (those in the middle). They declared – “through the four Bhāvanas we get rid of the bad vāsana (influence) and now we will get Nirvāṇa (Mokṣa) in the form of Śūnya (void) that is required. And no more preaching to us.”

II. Yogācāras

Some disciples have questioned – even if the four Bhāvanas and void of outside thing are accepted how can the inner things, i.e. the things in the form of Jñānam (cognition) also be accepted as void? So these are named “Yogācāras”. They argue – one should accept – “knowing self and identifying one’s own cognition”. Otherwise no business can be transacted and the world turns gloomy. Dharmakīrti explains –

अप्रत्यक्षोपलम्भस्य नार्थदृष्टिः प्रसिद्ध्यति
apratyakṣopalambhasya nārthadṛṣṭiḥ prasiddhyati


For one, who does not identify cognition through perception, cognition of things is not possible

They argue – conceiving an outside thing is simply not possible, i.e. the existence of an outside thing and knowing it is impossible by all means. None of the options can stand: the thing that is being conceived through cognition (Jñānam) – is it already born or not yet born? The one that is born would perish in the next moment, i.e. Kṣaṇika or momentary, and as such it cannot be there (the Kṣaṇikavāda or theory of mutability is the lifeline of Buddhism – everything in the universe is momentary). On the other hand, for a thing that is not yet born there cannot be the existence. Take a look at the third option – the thing of past, had caused cognition and therefore such a thing can be conceived through Jñānam? This is just childish – the cognition is: “the thing is there now”. Moreover, if a thing is conceivable through Jñānam due to its virtue of generating Jñānam, then the Indriyam (sense-organ) also becomes conceivable by Jñānam as it also generates Jñānam.

Further, is the thing to be conceived in the form of a Paramāṇu (atom) or like an Avayavī, i.e. assembly of different parts? The second one is untenable – whether the complete thing such as a ghaṭa (pot) is subject of Jñānam or a part of it? The complete pot cannot be the subject as in a moment of time one cannot perceive the entire ghaṭa. If a part of it is conceived then it is not the ghaṭa but part of it. Each single part of ghaṭa is not ghaṭa but a conglomeration of all parts. So an outside thing in the form of an Avayavī cannot be conceived by Jñānam. The first one is also untenable – it is beyond the sense organs and all six parts of a Paramāṇu cannot be seen simultaneously –

षट्केन युगपद्योगात्परमाणोः षडङ्गता।
तेषामप्येकदेशत्वे पिण्डः स्यादणुमात्रकः॥
ṣaṭkena yugapadyogāt paramāṇoḥ ṣaḍaṅgatā।
teṣāmapyekadeśatve piṇḍaḥ syādaṇumātrakaḥ॥

A Paramāṇu would have connection with six directions – four directions, up and down. As such it has got six parts. If all the six parts have got a single place then even if there are so many Paramāṇus united to form a pot, the pot would be the size of a Paramāṇu.

Therefore since there is no anything to be conceived other than itself, i.e. Buddhi (intellect), just like it shines itself, the Buddhi in the form of the thing shines. It is clarified –

नान्यथोऽनुभाव्यो बुद्ध्यास्ति तस्या नानुभवोsपरः।
ग्राह्यग्राहकवैधुर्यात् स्वयं सैव प्रकाशते॥
nānyatho’nubhāvyo buddhyāsti tasyā nānubhavo’paraḥ। grāhyagrāhakavaidhuryāt svayaṃ saiva prakāśate॥

There is no any other thing to be known through Buddhi. It does not have any other Jñānam. Because there are no two separate things called grāhya (the one being conceived) and grāhaka (the one which conceives). Rather the Buddhi itself shines spontaneously.

The statement “tasyāḥ nānubhavo’paraḥ” is meant to refute the theory of Naiyāyikas (logicians). Naiyāyikas argue that Buddhi conceives a thing like ghaṭa (pot) and thus one would get the cognition of ghaṭa (ghaṭajñānam). When the Buddhi conceives the ghaṭa, that is outside, there will be ghaṭajñāna. After having ghaṭajñāna, one would get a Jñānam in the form of “ghaṭajñānavān aham” (I have the cognition of pot) and this is called Anuvyavasāya (the cognition that follows the initial cognition). According to Bauddhas the outside thing is not conceivable to Buddhi (intellect). Rather the Buddhi itself modifies the form of the thing, such as ghaṭa (pot) and shines itself. Buddhi is just like a lamp, which although shines things such as ghaṭa, also shines itself. Buddhi in the form of ghaṭa shines on its own. So Bauddhas do not accept “Anuvyavasāya” of Naiyāyikas. “tasyāḥ nānubhavo’paraḥ” in the verse means this.

The abheda (non-difference) between the thing being conceived or grāhya and the one that conceives or grāhaka (here it is Buddhi) is to be known through Anumāna (Inference). The norm is –

यद्वेद्यते येन वेद्यते तत् ततो न भिद्यते, यथा ज्ञानेनात्मा
yadvedyate yena vedyate tat tato na bhidyate, yathā jñānenātmā

The thing, that is known by a cognition, is not different from that cognition. Just like Jñānam (cognition) is not different from Ātmā (soul).

Here Bauddhas follows Advaitavedānta – Ātmā is a form of Jñāna. Therefore, the Ātmā that is known through Jñānam is not different from the latter. Similarly the things, such as nīla (black), are not different from their Jñānas (cognitions). Bauddhas argue – if there is a difference between grāhya and grāhaka then there cannot be a relation as essential cause Tādātmya (identity) is not there. Jñāna born out of thing cannot rule the relation. There is no any perennial relation between a ghaṭa and its causes, viz. potter, stick and wheel.

The appearance or experience of grāhya, grāhaka and Jñānam separately is just an illusion like a single Moon appearing as two (for a person suffering from myopia). This kind of illusion is caused by the uninterrupted stream of “bhedavāsanā” (the smell or impression of difference that remains in the mind) that is anādi (beginningless). The following verses are in a summarized form –

सहोपलम्भनियमादभेदो नीलतद्धियोः।
भेदश्य भ्रान्तिविज्ञानैः दृश्येतेन्दाविवाद्वये॥
अविभागोऽपि बुद्ध्यात्मा विपर्यासितदर्शनैः।
ग्राह्यग्राहकसंवित्तिभेदवानिव लक्ष्यते॥
sahopalambhaniyamādabhedo nīlataddhiyoḥ।
bhedaśya bhrāntivijñānaiḥ dṛśyetendāvivādvaye॥
avibhāgo’pi buddhyātmā viparyāsitadarśanaiḥ। grāhyagrāhakasaṃvittibhedavāniva lakṣyate॥

There cannot be a Jñānam (cognition) without a Viṣaya (thing). The cause of the relation between Jñāna and Viṣaya is Tādātmya (identity) between them. In case it is said that Viṣaya is different from Jñāna then, since there is no Tādātmya, there cannot be a relation between them. Therefore, Buddhi itself shines in many forms due to beginningless impressions and when, due to the four Bhāvanas all the impressions do perish and consequently the gamut of forms of different things is also gone. Then the pure Vijñāna emerges and the same is Mokṣa.

This is the theory of Yogācāras who are called by the name Vijñānavādins.

III. Sautrāntikas

Another group of Bauddhas, called Sautrāntikas oppose the argument of Vijñānavādins – there cannot be an outside thing (bāhyārtha) is untenable as there is no Pramāṇam (an authority of Means of Knowledge). The norm of concomitance of grāhya and grāhaka cannot be accepted as Pramāṇam as there is no any positive logic that thwarts the doubt such as “there may be a concomitance of grāhya and grāhaka somewhere even if there is difference between the thing to be known (vedya) and the thing that knows (vedaka)”.

Moreover, Jñānam (cognition) is internal and Jñeya (the thing to be known) is external. As such both the things are seen separately. Vijñānvādi’s argument that – “although the form of black (nīlākāraḥ) is in the form of Jñāna it is seen outside due to Bhrānti (illusion)” is explained by the following –

परिच्छेदान्तराद्योऽयं भागो बहिरिव स्थितः।
ज्ञानस्याभेदिनो भेदप्रतिभासोऽप्युपप्लवः॥
यदन्तर्ज्ञेयतत्त्वं तद्बहिर्वदवभासते।
paricchedāntarādyo’yaṃ bhāgo bahirivasthitaḥ।
jñānasyābhedino bhedapratibhāso’pyupaplavaḥ॥
yadantarjñeyatattvaṃ tadbahirvadavabhāsate।

That which is other than the part of the internal cognition (which makes the object known) is seen as if it were external (cognition itself which takes the form of object being conceived). This apparent duality in what is, but one cognition, is an illusion. Whatever is internal, that itself appears as if it were external.
This is not acceptable to the Sautrāntikas. They say – “So, if the black thing has got the form of Jñāna, then there should be a Jñānam such as ‘ahaṃ nīlam’ (I am black) but not ‘idaṃ nīlam’ (this is black) as Ātmā is referred to as ‘aham’ (I) but not ‘idam’ (this). The upamāna (simile), i.e. ‘bahirvat’ (like a thing outside), does not hold logic as there is no any outside thing that exists. No sane person can say ‘Vasumitra looks like the son of a barren woman’ (vasumitraḥ vandhyāputravat avabhāsate). Moreover, by the word ‘bahirvat’ (like the outside thing) you (Vijñānavādin) suggest that one should imagine the existence of an outside thing thereby hitting self by one’s own arrow.”

One may argue – “a ghaṭa that is born in a Kṣaṇa (point of time) would generate another ghaṭa in the second Kṣaṇa and would perish (following Kṣaṇikavāda). Then conceiving a thing that is there in different time by Jñāna is not possible.” That is not so – a thing connected with sense-organs would render its form in the Jñānam it is going to generate. By such a form the thing is inferred. In the following verse the question and answer are summarized –

भिन्नकालं कथं ग्राह्यमिति चेत् ग्राह्यतां विदुः।
हेतुत्वमेव च व्यक्तेः ज्ञानाकारार्पणक्षमम्॥
bhinnakālaṃ kathaṃ grāhyamiti cet grāhyatāṃ viduḥ।
hetutvameva ca vyakteḥ jñānākārārpaṇakṣamam॥

So, just like – the food by good physique, country by language, affection by reception are inferred the thing is by the form of Jñāna –

अर्थेन घटयत्येनां न हि मुक्त्वार्थरूपताम्।
तस्मात् प्रमेयाधिगतेः प्रमाणं मेयरूपता॥
arthena ghaṭayatyenāṃ na hi muktvārtharūpatām।
tasmāt prameyādhigateḥ pramāṇaṃ meyarūpatā॥

The Jñānam joined with the thing of cognition (by the cognisor) does not exist in any other form bar the form of the thing of cognition. Therefore the means of cognizing the thing to be known is nothing but Jñāna’s “meyarupatā” (form of the knowable).

According to Bauddhasiddhānta, Vijñānam (cognition) itself is Ātmā. But, just like any other Padārtha (thing) this Vijñānam is also Kṣaṇika (momentary). So an uninterrupted stream of Vijñānas (called santāna) is Ātmā. This is called Ālayavijñānam. Each person is an Ālayavijñānasantānam. When a person is in the form of Ālayavijñānasantānam, he gets connection with things (Viṣayāḥ) through senses (Indriyāḥ) and the Vijñānam teaches and specifies viṣayas like nīla (black) etc. Then it is called Pravṛttinimittavijñānam (cognition of behaviour). It is clarified –

तत् स्यादालयविज्ञानं यद्भवेदहमास्पदम्।
तत् स्यात् प्रवृत्तिविज्ञानं यन्नीलादिकमुल्लिखेत् ॥
tat syādālayavijñānaṃ yadbhavedahamāspadam।
tat syāt pravṛttivijñānaṃ yannīlādikamullikhet ॥

Ālayavijñānam is that which is subject in the cognition of “aham” (I). The cognition that specifies things such as nīla is called Pravṛttivijñānam.

Therefore there is an outside thing (bāhyapadārtha) that is different from Ālayavijñānam and the same is the cause of Pravṛttivijñānam that springs up now. That particular bāhyapadārtha (outside thing) is grāhya (to be taken up / conceived). But not the one that springs up now and then due to the Vijñānams that are born now and then due to Vāsanāparipāka (readiness of impressions to generate an activity) as claimed by Vijñānavādins (Yogācāras). In order to facilitate the Paripāka to happen now and then only, one should accept that the five Jñānas related to Śabda (sound), Sparśa (touch), Rūpa (form), Rasa (taste) and Gandha (smell) along with the Jñānam of internal things, such as Sukham (comfort) – all these six Jñānas are born out of the following four Pratyayas (causes). A wise person must accept these as they are being experienced even if he does not like it.

The following are the four Pratyayas (causes) of Cittam (the Vijñānam of form etc.) and Caittam (Sukham etc.) –

1. Ālambana: Literally it means ādhāra (base). The cittam (the cognition of rūpa / form etc.), which is also called “Jñānam” and which shines the Nīla (black) etc., takes the form of Nīla following Ālambanapratyaya (the cause of the base). The base of Pravṛttijñānam (cognition of behaviour) is the Viṣaya (thing) and therefore the Viṣaya itself is called Ālambanapratyaya.

2. Samanantarapratyaya: The cittam is called Jñānam when there is the form of a thing in it. The capacity to conceive the form into self is Bodha (Jñānam / Cognition). Just like from a ghaṭa (pot) of the earlier Kṣaṇa (moment / point of time) another similar ghaṭa is born in the next Kṣaṇa (Kṣaṇikavāda) from a Jñāna of the earlier Kṣaṇa, which is capable of conceiving the form, another similar Jñānam is born. There is no beginning of such a Jñānapravāha (stream of Jñānas). There will be two forms in such a Jñānam – “aham” (I) and “idam” (this). The first form (ākāra) is born from the Jñānam of earlier Kṣaṇa (moment). For this no other cause is required. It (ahamākāram) is “anādi” (beginningless), eternal and immutable (unchanging). This “ahamākāram” will be there even when a Pravṛttivijñānam such as “ayaṃ ghaṭaḥ” (this is a pot) etc. arises. The second type of form, i.e. idamākāram, springs up now and then. So it requires other causes, has got beginning and is seen differently. Things, such as Śabda, Sparśa etc. effect similar forms in the Jñāna and thus they cause Pravṛttivijñānam.

3. Sahakāripratyaya: This is a light that makes the Jñānam clear. “Manaḥ saṃyoga” (connection with mind) is also a Sahakāripratyaya.

4. Adhipatipratyaya: Indriyam (sense-organ) is called Adhipatipratyaya. Eye helps in getting form only. Tongue gets taste only and so on. Thus the Indriyas control the forms of different things and are therefore called Adhipatis (controller – literary meaning).

The above are four causes of Sukha (comfort) etc. which are in the form of Citta (rūpādivijñānam) and Caittam (Sukha etc.).

The formless things other than the five elements are called Skandhas. The Skandha in the form of Citta and Caitta is of five types –

1. Rūpaskandha: The things are identified by these Indriyas. So they are called Rūpaskandhas.

2. Vijñānaskandha: The stream of Ālayavijñāna and Pravṛttivijñāna is called Vijñānaskandha.

3. Vedanāskandha: The stream of experience of Sukha (comfort) and Duḥkha (misery) born out of the relation of the above two Skandhas is Vedanāskandha.

4. Saṃjñāskandha: The stream of Jñānam (cognition) that touches Śabdas such as “gauḥ” (cow or bull) is Saṃjñāskandha. In the things denoted by words like “cow”, “pot” etc. there are two parts – nāma (name) and rūpa (form). The part related to name is “abhautika” (non-physical) and therefore it is Caittam. The other part related to form is “bhautika”.

5. Saṃskāraskandha: Māna (ego) etc., Dharma and Adharma are Saṃskāraskandha.

Four Āryasatyas of Buddha

The gamut of things in the universe is (full of) misery, center of misery, and also cause of misery – one should think like this and should gain the Tattvajñānam (philosophical cognition) that is required to arrest such a misery. Buddha named four facts called Tattvas or Āryasatyas to achieve the Tattvajñānam.

1. Duḥkham: All kinds of misery in the universe.

2. Samudāyaḥ: The cause of Duḥkha is called Samudāya. It is of two kinds:
i. Pratyayopanibandhansamudāya: a kārya (effect) is born due to the combination of different causes and there is no need of any other living thing (cetanapadārtha).
ii. Hetūpanibandhanasamudāya: According to Bauddhas the birth or non-birth of a thing depends on the state of Kāryakāraṇabhāva (the relation of cause and effect). There is no any other living entity (cetanaḥ adhiṣṭhātā) or controller.

3. Nirodhaḥ: Nirodha or Mokṣa or Mukti is arresting both the Duḥkha and its cause or the birth of Jñāna after arresting the above.

4. Mārgaḥ: The device for Nirodha, i.e. Tattvajñānam is called Mārga. The secret is that Tattvajñānam happens due to the strength of earlier impressions and the impressions of Sūtras (principles) such as “sarvaṃ kṣaṇikam” (everything is momentary) etc.

Buddha told some disciples, who were asking about the Sūtrānta (end of the principle) – since you are asking about Sūtrānta you will be identified as Sautrāntikas. Initially Buddha preached “sarvaṃ śūnyam” (everything is void). “Then there will not be the universe” asked Vijñānavādins. “Okay, let us accept Jñānam” said Buddha. Then there was the question – how can there be Jñānam without an outside thing (bāhyārtha)? Buddha said – “okay, let us accept ‘bāhyārtha'”. Then some disciples asked “where is the end of this Sūtra?” These later came to be known as Sautrāntikas.

IV. Vaibhāṣikas

Although the bāhyārtha (outside thing) such as gandha (smell) and “āntarārtha” (inner thing) such as rūpādiskandha are there, in order to generate aversion to some students, Buddha said “sarvaṃ śūnyam” (everything is void). To some others, who were particular about Vijñānam, he said “vijñānameva ekaṃ sat” (there is only one thing called Vijñānam). To a third group of students, who believed “ubhayaṃ satyam” (both are real), he said “vijñeyam anumeyam” (the thing to be known is inferential). Then the fourth group said “seyaṃ viruddhā bhāṣā” (this is self-contradictory). So they became Vaibhāṣikas.

Mādhyamikas accept “sarvaśūnyatva” (everything is void). Yogācāras accept “bāhyārthaśūnyatva” (there is no any outside thing). Sautrāntikas accept “bāhyārthānumeyatva” (the outside thing is inferential). Vaibhāṣikas accept “bāhyārthapratyakṣatva” (the outside thing is perceivable).

Bhāvanācatuṣṭayam: Buddha preached the four Bhāvanas (theories / principles)

1. सर्वं क्षणिकं क्षणिकम् (sarvaṃ kṣaṇikaṃ kṣaṇikam): Everything is certainly momentary.

2. सर्वं दुःखं दुःखम् (sarvaṃ duḥkhaṃ duḥkham): Everything is full of misery or causes misery.

3. सर्वं स्वलक्षणं स्वलक्षणम् (sarvaṃ svalakṣaṇaṃ svalakṣaṇam): Everything would have an identification of its own. One looks at a thing such as “ghaṭa” (pot) for the first time and identifies it as “ghaṭa”. This is possible following the Jāti (class), i.e. ghaṭatva (potness), that is immutable and present there in a ghaṭa. Similarly, vṛkṣatva, puruṣatva, strītva (treeness, manhood, womanhood) etc. This is the argument of Naiyāyikas (Logicians). But since Bauddhas do not accept anything to be immutable / eternal, they do not accept Jāti. They follow Kṣaṇikavāda (the theory of momentariness). So Svalakṣaṇam is to counter Jāti.

4. सर्वं शून्यं शून्यम् (sarvaṃ śūnyaṃ śūnyam): Everything is certainly void.

Dichotomy of Jñānam

According to Sautrāntika everything is “anumeya” (inferential), i.e. there is no Pratyakṣam (Perception). Without Pratyakṣam there cannot be Anumānam (Inference). And it is also illogical to declare that there are no bāhyārthas (outside things). So, a padārtha (thing) is of two types – grāhya (the one taken as a thing) and adhyavasāya (the one that is decided). Between them the “nirvikalpakagrāhya”, the thing to be taken without any qualifier such as Rūpa (form), Jāti (class), Saṃjñā (name) etc., is authentic as there will not be any artificial creations or superimpositions. Since “Adhyavasāya” is “savikalpaka” (having qualifiers such as form, class and name), i.e. is full of artificial creations, it is not authentic. The theory is summarized –

कल्पनापोढमभ्रान्तं प्रत्यक्षं निर्विकल्पकम्।
विकल्पो वस्तुनिर्भासादसंवादादुपप्लवः॥
ग्राह्यं वस्तु, प्रमाणं हि ग्रहणम्, यदितोऽन्यथा।
न तद्वस्तु; न तन्मानं शब्दलिङ्गेन्द्रियादिजम्॥
kalpanāpoḍhamabhrāntaṃ pratyakṣaṃ nirvikalpakam।
vikalpo vastunirbhāsādasaṃvādādupaplavaḥ ॥
grāhyaṃ vastu, pramāṇaṃ hi grahaṇam, yadito’nyathā।
na tadvastu; na tanmānaṃ śabdaliṅgendriyādijam ॥

Dvādaśāyatanapūjā (Worship of twelve resorts)

Bauddhadarśanam advocates the worship (leaving the restricted things and enjoying the things through senses) of twelve resorts –

अर्थानुपार्ज्य बहुशः द्वादशायतनानि वै |
परितः पूजनीयानि किमन्यैरिह पूजितैः॥
ज्ञानेन्द्रियाणि पञ्चैव तथा कर्मेन्द्रियाणि च।
मनो बुद्धिरिति प्रोक्तं द्वादशायतनं बुधैः॥
arthānupārjya bahuśaḥ dvādaśāyatanāni vai।
paritaḥ pūjanīyāni kimanyairiha pūjitaiḥ॥
jñānendriyāṇi pañcaiva tathā karmendriyāṇi ca।
mano buddhiriti proktaṃ dvādaśāyatanaṃ budhaiḥ॥

Having collected the things by all means, the twelve resorts are to be worshipped. What is the use of worshipping other things? Five senses of cognition, five senses of action, mind and intellect are said to be the twelve resorts.

Bauddhamatam (the theory of Bauddhas)

In Vivekavilāsa the gist of Bauddhamatam is given:

बौद्धानां सुगतो देवः विश्वं च क्षणभङ्गुरम्।
आर्यसत्याख्यया तत्त्वचतुष्टयमिदं क्रमात्॥
दुःखमायतनं चैव ततः समुदायो मतः।
मार्गश्चैत्तस्य च व्याख्या क्रमेण श्रूयतामतः॥
bauddhānāṃ sugato devaḥ viśvaṃ ca kṣaṇabhaṅguram।
āryasatyākhyayā tattvacatuṣṭayamidaṃ kramāt॥
duḥkhamāyatanaṃ caiva tataḥ samudāyo mataḥ।
mārgaścaittasya ca vyākhyā krameṇa śrūyatāmataḥ॥

For Bauddhas Sugata (Buddha) is God. The universe goes on perishing by the moment. There is Tattvacatuṣṭayam (four factors), which is also called Āryasatyas (truths of Āryas) – Duḥkha (misery), Āyatanam (resort), Samudāya (Ātmā) and Mārga (momentariness). Now the commentary –

दुःखं संसारिणः स्कन्धाः ते च पञ्च प्रकीर्तिताः।
विज्ञानं वेदना संज्ञा संस्कारो रूपमेव च॥
duḥkhaṃ saṃsāriṇaḥ skandhāḥ te ca pañca prakīrtitāḥ.
vijñānaṃ vedanā saṃjñā saṃskāro rūpameva ca॥
A person in this universe would have five Skandhas; which are the causes of misery – Vijñānaskandha, Vedanāskandha, Saṃjñāskandha, Saṃskāraskandha and Rūpaskandha।
पञ्चेन्द्रियाणि शब्दाद्याः विषयाः पञ्च मानसम्।
धर्मायतनमेतानि द्वादशायतनानि तु॥
pañcendriyāṇi śabdādyāḥ viṣayāḥ pañca mānasam।
dharmāyatanametāni dvādaśāyatanāni tu॥
Five senses such as ear etc, five things, i.e. Śabda etc., mind and body are the twelve resorts.

रागादीनां गणो यस्मात्समुदेति नृणां हृदि।
आत्मात्मीयस्वभावाख्यः स स्यात् समुदयः पुनः॥
rāgādīnāṃ gaṇo yasmātsamudeti nṛṇāṃ hṛdi।
ātmātmīyasvabhāvākhyaḥ sa syāt samudayaḥ punaḥ॥
From which the group of Rāga (desire) etc. is born in the minds of the people, that Ātmā, also called the nature of Ātmā, is called Samudaya.

क्षणिकाः सर्वसंस्कारा इति या वासना स्थिरा।
स मार्ग इति विज्ञेयः स य मोक्षोऽभिधीयते॥
kṣaṇikāḥ sasvasaṃskārā iti yā vāsanā sthirā।
sa mārga iti vijñeyaḥ sa ya mokṣo’bhidhīyate॥
The firm belief that all the impressions are momentary is called Mārga and the same is Mokṣa.

प्रत्यक्षमनुमानं च प्रमाणद्वितयं तथा।
चतुष्प्रस्थानिका बौद्धाः ख्याता वैभाषिकादयः॥
pratyakṣamanumānaṃ ca pramāṇadvitayaṃ tathā।
catuṣprasthānikā bauddhāḥ khyātā vaibhāṣikādayaḥ॥
Pratyakṣam (Perception) and Anumānam (Inference) are the only Pramāṇas for Bauddhas. They also have four doctrines and Vaibhāṣikas etc. are the denominations.

अर्थो ज्ञानान्वितो वैभाषिकेण बहु मन्यते।
सौत्रान्तिकेन प्रत्यक्षग्राह्योऽर्थो न बहिर्मतः॥
artho jñānānvito vaibhāṣikeṇa bahu manyate।
sautrāntikena pratyakṣagrāhyo’rtho na bahirmataḥ॥
Vaibhāṣika accepts a thing with cognition. Sautrāntika does not accept a thing that is outside. Rather, everything for him is inferential.

आकारसहिता बुद्धिः योगाचारस्य संमता।
केवलां संविदं स्वस्थां मन्यन्ते मध्यमाः पुनः॥
ākārasahitā buddhiḥ yogācārasya saṃmatā।
kevalāṃ saṃvidaṃ svasthāṃ manyante madhyamāḥ punaḥ॥
Yogācāras hold that intellect itself turns into the form of a thing and shines like a thing. Mādhyamikas accept that cognition only will be there in its own form.

चतुर्णामपि बौद्धानां मुक्तिरेषा प्रकीर्तिता॥
caturṇāmapi bauddhānāṃ muktireṣā prakīrtitā॥
All the four kinds of Bauddhas agree that by the destruction of the impressions of the Cognitions of Rāga (desire) etc. one would get Mokṣa.

कृत्तिः कमण्डुलुः मौण्ड्यं चीरं पूर्वाह्णभोजनम्।
सङ्घो रक्ताम्बरत्वं च शिश्रिये बौद्धभिक्षुभिः॥
kṛttiḥ kamaṇḍuluḥ mauṇḍyaṃ cīraṃ pūrvāhṇabhojanam।
saṅgho raktāmbaratvaṃ nca śiśriye bauddhabhikṣubhiḥ॥
Bauddhabhikṣus have resorted to the skin of an antelope, Kamaṇḍalu (a jar), clean shaven head, old cloth, only morning meal and red cloth.

* * * * *


Sarvadarśanasaṅgraha of Sāyaṇamādhava with a Sanskrit Introduction and Commentary by Vasudeva Sastri Abhyankar, Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute, Pune, 1978.
Sarvadarśanasaṅgraha, English Translation by Cowell and Gough (without Śaṃkara’s System), London, 1914.