). In Sanskrit, “liberation.” See VIMOKṢA.viṃśatiprabhedasaṃgha. (T. dge ’dun nyi shu; C. ershi sengqie/shengwen cidi; J. nijūsōgya/shōmonshidai; K. isip sŭngga/sŏngmun ch’aje 二十僧伽/聲聞次第). In Sanskrit, “the twenty varieties of the SAṂGHA” or “twenty members of the community”; a subdivision of the eight noble persons (AṢṬĀRYAPUDGALA) into twenty based on different faculties (INDRIYA) and the ways in which they reach NIRVĀṆA; a subdivision used in Mahāyāna works, particularly in the PRAJÑĀPĀRAMITĀ literature, as a template to further identify as many as forty-eight ĀRYA BODHISATTVAs. Only those who have reached the noble path (ĀRYAMĀRGA) or the religious life (śrāmaṇya) that begins with the path of vision (DARŚANAMĀRGA) are included in this idealized saṃgha. The twenty varieties are based on the eight noble persons, two for each of the four fruits of the noble path or religious life (ĀRYAMĀRGAPHALA; ŚRĀMAṆYAPHALA). The four fruits, from lowest to highest, are stream-enterer (SROTAĀPANNA), once-returner (SAKṚDĀGĀMIN), nonreturner (ANĀGĀMIN), and worthy one (ARHAT). For each there is one who enters (SROTAĀPANNAPRATIPANNAKA, etc.) and one who abides (SROTAĀPANNAPHALASTHA, etc.) in a particular fruition. This list also includes the seven noble persons (P. ariyapuggala; S. ĀRYAPUDGALA) as found in the MAJJHIMANIKĀYA. They are (1) the follower of faith (P. saddhānusāri; S. ŚRADDHĀNUSĀRIN); (2) the one liberated through faith (P. saddhāvimutta; S. ŚRADDHĀVIMUKTA); (3) the bodily witness (P. kāyasakkhi; S. KĀYASĀKṢIN); (4) the one liberated both ways (P. ubhatobhāgavimutta; S. UBHAYATOBHĀGAVIMUKTA); (5) the follower of the dharma (P. dhammānusāri; S. DHARMĀNUSĀRIN); (6) the one who has attained understanding (P. diṭṭhippatta; S. DṚṢṬIPRĀPTA); and (7) the one liberated through wisdom (P. paññāvimutta; S. PRAJÑĀVIMUKTA).
The list of the twenty according to the MAHĀVYUTPATTI is:
Of these twenty, the first three are subdivisions of the first fruit, the next two of the second fruit, the sixth to twelfth of the third fruit, and the last two subdivisions of the fourth fruit of the ARHAT. The remaining are more general categories. For detailed explanations, see each individual entry.
vimukti. (P. vimutti; T. rnam par grol ba; C. jietuo; J. gedatsu; K. haet’al 解). In Sanskrit, “liberation.” See VIMOKṢA.
vimuktimārga. (T. rnam par grol ba’i lam; C. jietuodao; J. gedatsudō; K. haet’alto 解道). In Sanskrit, “path of liberation”; a technical term that refers to the second of a two-stage process of abandoning the afflictions (KLEŚA). As one proceeds from the path of vision (DARŚANAMĀRGA) to the adept path where there is nothing more to learn (AŚAIKṢAMĀRGA), the kleśas are abandoned in sequence through repeated occasions of yogic direct perception (YOGIPRATYAKṢA), consisting of two moments. The first is called the ĀNANTARYAMĀRGA (uninterrupted path), in which the specific kleśa or set of kleśas is actively abandoned; this is followed immediately by the vimuktimārga [alt. vimokṣamārga], which is the state of having abandoned, and thus being liberated from, the kleśa.
Vimuktisena. [alt. Ārya Vimuktisena] (T. Grol sde). An Indian scholar-monk (likely from the sixth century CE) who is the author of the first extant commentary (vṛtti) on the ABHISAMAYĀLAṂKĀRA, a work associated with the name of MAITREYA or MAITREYANĀTHA, the most influential PRAJÑĀPĀRAMITĀ commentary for Indian and Tibetan Buddhism. Vimuktisena connects the Abhisamayālaṃkāra to the PAÑCAVIṂŚATISĀHASRIKĀPRAJÑĀPĀRAMITĀ (“Perfection of Wisdom in Twenty-five Thousand Lines”), making the otherwise cryptic Abhisamayālaṃkāra comprehensible. In scholastic Tibetan Buddhism his name is linked with the Yogācāra-Madhyamaka synthesis, but Vimuktisena's view is more closely aligned to MADHYAMAKA, without the distinctive terminology associated with the PRAMĀṆA school of DIGNĀGA and DHARMAKĪRTI.
*Vimuttimagga. (T. Rnam grol gyi bstan bcos; C. Jietuodao lun; J. Gedatsudōron; K. Haet’alto non 解道論). In Pāli, “Treatise on the Path to Liberation”; an Indian ABHIDHARMA treatise attributed to Upatissa (S. *Upatiṣya). The Vimuttimagga was composed sometime prior to the fifth century, perhaps in northern India. It is no longer extant in its Indian recension, but was translated into Chinese in its entirety in 505; portions were also translated into Tibetan. The original language of the text is uncertain, and is usually known by its putative Pāli title (its Sanskrit reconstruction would be *Vimuktimārga). It is clear that the work was known to the Pāli exegete BUDDHAGHOSA, who made use of it in composing his VISUDDHIMAGGA, although he does not cite it by name. Like the Visuddhimagga, the *Vimuttimagga sets forth the path in terms of the three trainings in morality (P. sīla; S. ŚĪLA), meditation (SAMĀDHI), and wisdom (P. paññā; S. PRAJÑĀ). The *Vimuttimagga is, however, a much shorter text, omitting the illustrative stories Buddhaghosa offers and including a more succinct section on prajñā. While the Visuddhimagga is regarded as a text delivering the doctrine of the conservative MAHĀVIHĀRA branch of the Sri Lankan Pāli tradition, the *Vimuttimagga is thought to represent instead the views of the ABHAYAGIRI sect, a school that was influenced by MAHĀYĀNA thought.
vinaya. (T. ’dul ba; C. lü; J. ritsu; K. yul 律). In Sanskrit and Pāli, “discipline”; the corpus of monastic regulations, especially that directed at fully ordained monks (BHIKṢU) and nuns (BHIKṢUṆĪ). The term is used by extension for those texts in which these codes are set forth, which form the “basket of the discipline” (VINAYAPIṬAKA) in the Buddhist canon (TRIPIṬAKA). According to an account in the Sifen lü kaizongji, by the Chinese vinaya master DAOXUAN (596–667), UPAGUPTA, the fifth successor in the Buddha’s lineage about a century following his death, had five major disciples, who were said to have established their own schools based on their differing views regarding doctrine; these five also redacted separate recensions of the VINAYA, which the Chinese refer to as “five recensions of the vinaya” (Wubu lü). These five vinayas are (1) the “Four-Part Vinaya” (C. SIFEN LÜ; S. *Cāturvargīyavinaya) of the DHARMAGUPTAKA school; (2) the “Ten-Recitations Vinaya” (C. Shisong lü; S. *Daśādhyāyavinaya; [alt. *Daśabhāṇavāravinaya]) of the SARVĀSTIVĀDA school; (3) the “Five-Part Vinaya” (C. Wufen lü; S. *Pañcavargikavinaya) of the MAHĪŚĀSAKA school and the *Prātimokṣavinaya of the KĀŚYAPĪYA school; (4) the *MAHĀSĀṂGHIKA VINAYA of the MAHĀSĀṂGHIKA school; and (5) the MŪLASARVĀSTIVĀDA VINAYA. All five of these recensions are extant in Chinese translation, but the Sifen lü (“Four-Part Vinaya”) of the Dharmaguptakas came to dominate the conduct of ecclesiastical affairs in East Asian Buddhism. The only vinaya to survive intact in an Indian language is the Pāli vinaya used in the STHAVIRANIKĀYA tradition; this vinaya compilation was unknown to the Chinese Tradition. The largest vinaya of them all, the Mūlasarvāstivāda vinaya, is a massive collection that is some four times longer than any of the other recensions. The entire collection is available in its Tibetan translation; portions of this vinaya were also translated in Chinese, and substantial fragments of its original Sanskrit version have survived. ¶ The vinayas are a rich source of Buddhist history because they describe the occasion surrounding the formulation of each of the myriads of rules of conduct and deportment promulgated by the Buddha. It is said that the Buddha made a new rule only after the commission of an infraction that would need to be prevented in the future, so the vinayas are careful to recount, in sometimes embarrassing detail, the specific events leading up to the Buddha’s formulation of the rule. These accounts therefore provide important insights into issues facing the monastic institutions of India. The principal rules of monastic life are contained in the PRĀTIMOKṢA, which presents rosters of offenses of varying gravity, with penalties ranging from expulsion from the order for the most serious to mere confession for the more minor ones. The most serious offenses, called PĀRĀJIKA, or “defeat,” and requiring expulsion according to some vinaya traditions, were four for monks: sexual misconduct (defined in the case of a monk as the penetration of an orifice to the depth of a mustard seed), theft, the killing of a living being, and lying about spiritual attainments. (Even for such serious misdeeds, however, some vinayas prescribe procedures for possible reinstatement; see ŚIKṢĀDATTAKA.) In the Mūlasarvāstivāda vinaya, there were 253 total rules to be followed by monks, 364 for nuns. The majority of these rules were matters of etiquette and decorum meant to ensure harmonious relations within the monastic institution and with lay patrons. The prātimokṣa was recited fortnightly in the UPOṢADHA ceremony. A second major part of the vinaya is the VIBHAṄGA, or explanation of each rule, explaining the circumstances of its formulation and the conditions under which a violation does and does occur. A third part was called the VINAYAVASTU or KHANDAKA, separate sections (ranging between seventeen and twenty in number) on various topics such as ordination, the rains retreats, bedding, robes, and the use of medicine. Although sometimes regarded simply as a collection of regulations, the various vinaya texts are an essential part of Buddhist literature. Many of the vinayas, but especially the Mūlasarvāstivāda vinaya, also include enormous numbers of narrative tales and ancillary materials, including texts that in other traditions would have been collected in the SŪTRAPIṬAKA.
Vinayamūlasūtra. Another name for GUṆAPRABHA’s VINAYASŪTRA. See VINAYASŪTRA.
vinayapiṭaka. (T. ’dul ba’i sde snod; C. lüzang; J. ritsuzō; K. yulchang 律藏). In Sanskrit and Pāli, “basket of discipline” or the “collection of discipline”; one of the three “baskets” (TRIPIṬAKA), or divisions of Buddhist scripture, together with the SŪTRAPIṬAKA and the ABHIDHARMAPIṬAKA. Although typically presumed to include just the rules and regulations of monastic conduct, the vinayapiṭaka is actually one of the richest sources for understanding Buddhist practice and institutions in India. It is said that the Buddha instituted a new rule only after the commission of some form of misconduct that he sought to prevent in the future, so the vinayas are careful to recount in great detail the circumstances leading up to the Buddha’s promulgation of the rule. The vinayapiṭaka is therefore composed largely of narratives, some of considerable length; one of the earliest biographies of the Buddha appears in the vinaya of the MŪLASARVĀSTIVĀDA school (see MŪLASARVĀSTIVĀDA VINAYA). According to tradition, the redaction of the vinayapiṭaka occurred at the first Buddhist council (SAṂGĪTI; see COUNCIL, FIRST), shortly after the Buddha’s death, when a group of ARHATs assembled to recite the Buddha’s teachings. There, the monk UPĀLI, considered an expert in the monastic code, was called upon to recite the vinaya. However, assuming that such a recitation occurred, disputes soon arose over what was allowable conduct according to the rules and regulations included in the vinayapiṭaka. At the time of his death, the Buddha told ĀNANDA that, after his death, the minor rules could be disregarded. At the first council, he was asked what those minor rules were, and Ānanda admitted that he had failed to ask. All rules were therefore retained, and his failure to ask was one of his errors requiring a confession of wrongdoing. The eventual division into the traditional eighteen MAINSTREAM BUDDHIST SCHOOLS often centered on questions of vinaya practice and conduct. There is, therefore, no single vinayapiṭaka, but a number of vinayapiṭakas, with the precise content determined by the specific Indian school. To give one example, the Pāli vinayapiṭaka, which was perhaps redacted around the first century CE, is composed of the following three major divisions: (1) SUTTAVIBHAṄGA (S. sūtravibhaṅga; cf. VINAYAVIBHAṄGA), which includes the pāṭimokkha (S. PRĀTIMOKṢA) code with explanations and commentary, including the mahāvibhaṅga with the rules for monks and the bhikkhuṇīvibhaṅga with the rules for nuns; (2) KHANDHAKA (S. skandhaka; cf. VINAYAVASTU), which is subdivided between the MAHĀVAGGA, which includes chapters on such topics as the procedure for the ordination of monks, the fortnightly observances (P. uposatha; S. UPOṢADHA), the rains retreat, the use of clothing, food, medicine, and so forth, and the CŪḶAVAGGA, which includes a variety of judicial rules, procedures for the ordination of nuns, and accounts of the first and second Buddhist councils; and (3) PARIVĀRA, an appendix that provides a summary and classification of the rules of monastic conduct. ¶ Numerous vinaya texts were translated into Chinese, including complete (or near-complete) vinayapiṭakas associated with five of the mainstream schools of Indian Buddhism. In the order of their translation dates, these five are (1) “Ten-Recitations Vinaya” (C. Shisong lü; C. *Daśabhāṇavāravinaya; *Daśādhyāyavinaya) of the SARVĀSTIVĀDA school, perhaps composed sometime between the first and third centuries CE and translated into Chinese between 404 and 409 CE; (2) DHARMAGUPTAKA vinaya, the renowned “Four-Part Vinaya” (SIFEN LÜ), translated between 410 and 412 CE, which becomes the definitive recension of the vinaya in the East Asian traditions and the focus of scholarship in the different East Asian vinaya schools (see NANSHAN LÜ ZONG, DONGTA LÜ ZONG, RISSHŪ); (3) MAHĀSĀṂGHIKA vinaya (Mohesengji lü), composed between 100 and 200 CE and translated between 416 and 418; (4) MAHĪṂŚĀSAKA vinaya, or the “Five-Part Vinaya” (Wufen lü), perhaps composed in the first century BCE and translated between 422 and 423; and (5) the MŪLASARVĀSTIVĀDA vinaya, perhaps composed in the fourth or fifth century CE and translated into Chinese between 703 and 713. (The complete Tibetan translation of this vinaya becomes definitive for Tibetan Buddhism). ¶ It is important to note that the texts contained in the vinayapiṭaka of any school have served as just one source of the monastic code. In China, no complete recension of any Indian vinaya was translated until the beginning of the fifth century. (Indeed, none of the surviving recensions of the vinayas of any Buddhist school can be dated prior to the fifth century CE.) When the Indian vinayas were translated into Chinese, for example, their regulations were viewed as being so closely tied to the customs and climate of India that they were sometimes found either incomprehensible or irrelevant to the Chinese. This led to the composition of indigenous Chinese monastic codes, called guishi (“regulations”) or QINGGUI (“rules of purity”), which promulgated rules of conduct for monks and nuns that accorded more closely with the realities of life in East Asian monasteries. In Tibet, the VINAYASŪTRA by GUṆAPRABHA, a medieval Indian summary of the much larger Mūlasarvāstivāda vinaya, was the primary source for the monastic code, but each monastery also had its own regulations (BCA’ YIG) that governed life there. See also PRĀTIMOKṢASŪTRA.
Vinayasūtra. (T. ’Dul ba’i mdo). In Sanskrit, “Discourse on Discipline”; a work on the monastic code by the Indian master GUṆAPRABHA, who is dated between the fifth and seventh century CE. Despite its title, the work is not a SŪTRA (in the sense of a discourse ascribed to the Buddha), but instead is an authored work composed of individual aphoristic statements (sūtras). The text offers a summary or condensation of the massive MŪLASARVĀSTIVĀDA VINAYA. At approximately one quarter the length of this massive vinaya collection, Guṇaprabha’s abridgment seems to have functioned as a kind of primer on the monastic code, omitting lengthy passages of scripture and providing the code of conduct to which monks were expected to subscribe. In this sense, the text is an important work for determining what monastic practice may actually have been like in medieval India. The Vinayasūtra became the most important vinaya text for Tibetan Buddhism, being studied in all of the major sects. In the DGE LUGS, it is one of the five books (GZHUNG LNGA) that served as the basis of the monastic curriculum. The detailed commentaries on the Vinayasūtra by the Pāla dynasty writer Dharmamitra (early ninth century) and the BKA’ GDAM PA master Tsho sna ba Shes rab bzang po’s (b. thirteenth century) were widely studied.
vinayavastu. (T. ’dul ba’i gzhi; C. pinaiye shi; J. binayaji; K. pinaya sa 毘奈耶事). In Sanskrit, “foundation of the vinaya”; that section of the Sanskrit vinayas that corresponds to the KHANDHAKA (S. skandhaka) in the Pāli vinaya. This section consists of separate chapters (ranging in number from seventeen to twenty) on individual topics related to monastic life, including the procedures for ordination, the proper performance of the rains retreat, the KAṬHINA ceremony, and rules concerning the acquisition, use, and disposal of monastic robes (CĪVARA), foodstuffs, and medicines.
vinayavibhaṅga. (T. ’dul ba rnam par ’byed pa; C. Genben Shuoyiqieyoubu pinaiye; J. Konpon Setsuissaiubu binaya; K. Kŭnbon Sŏrilch’eyubu pinaya 根本
一切有部毘奈耶). In Sanskrit, lit. “Differentiation of the Discipline”; a major division of Sanskrit VINAYA literature, corresponding to the SUTTAVIBHAṄGA in the Pāli VINAYAPIṬAKA. The primary foci of such sections are the disciplinary rules for monks (PRĀTIMOKṢA), the exact number of which varies according to the tradition. The vinayavibhaṅga of the MŪLASARVĀSTIVĀDA vinaya (to which the Sinographs above correspond), for example, lists 253 such rules. Each rule is accompanied by a description of the appropriate response to its violation. These sanctions may range from possible expulsion from the order, as with the rules of “defeat” (PĀRĀJIKA), to simple confession of the misdeed during the fortnightly recitation of the rules (UPOṢADHA). The narrative form used to convey these rules follows that of most other vinaya literature, describing the circumstances that led to the Buddha’s declaration of a particular rule. Just as the Pāli vinaya begins with a section of this type, the vinayas of the SARVĀSTIVĀDA and Mūlasarvāstivāda schools also begin with sections entitled vinayavibhaṅga. In both of these vinayas, a formal listing of the rules is followed by commentary and narratives that explain each rule more fully. These accounts provide important and often surprising insights into the concerns of Indian Buddhist monastic life.
Vinītaruci. (V. Tỳ Ni Đa Lưu Chi 
尼多流支) (d. 594). The Sanskrit name of an Indian monk who is traditionally regarded as the founder of the first school of THIỀN (CHAN) in Vietnam. The Vietnamese genealogical history THIỀN UYỂN TẼP ANH records that Vinītaruci was a brāhmaṇa from south India who wandered throughout India as a young man searching for the essence of the Buddhist teaching. He is reputed to have arrived in China in 574, where he went to see the third Chan patriarch SENGCAN, who offered him instruction before advising him to go south. Vinītaruci then traveled to Zhizhi monastery in Guangzhou, where he remained for six years and translated many Buddhist texts. In 580, he arrived in Vietnam and settled at Pháp Vân monastery, where he subsequently transmitted the mind-seal (XINYIN) to Pháp Hiền (died 626), who carried on this Chan lineage associated with the third patriarch. He passed away sometime in 595. The Vinītaruci mentioned in the Thiển Uyển Tập Anh is undoubtedly the same Indian monk whose name is mentioned in Chinese Buddhist literature as a translator; however, it remains unclear whether Vinītaruci ever really came to Vietnam, as the Vietnamese Buddhist tradition reports. In any case, there are no historical grounds for the claim that he was the founding patriarch of a Chan lineage in Vietnam or to attribute to him the teaching style emblematic of the Southern school of Chan (NAN ZONG), which did not appear until centuries after his death.
viniyata. (T. yul nges; C. biejing [xinsuo]; J. betsukyō [no shinjo]; K. pyŏlgyŏng [simso] 別境[心所]). In Sanskrit, “determinative,” or “object-specific”; the second of the six categories of mental concomitants (CAITTA) according to the hundred dharmas (BAIFA) schema of the YOGĀCĀRA school, along with the omnipresent (SARVATRAGA), the wholesome (KUŚALA), the root afflictions (MŪLAKLEŚA), the secondary afflictions (UPAKLEŚA), and the indeterminate (ANIYATA). There are five mental factors in the category of determinative mental concomitants; their function is to aid the mind in ascertaining or determining its object. The five are aspiration or desire-to-act (CHANDA), determination or resolve (ADHIMOKṢA), mindfulness (SMṚTI), concentration (SAMĀDHI), and wisdom (PRAJÑĀ). According to ASAṄGA, these five determinative factors accompany wholesome (kuśala) states of mind, so that if one is present, all are present.
vipāka. (T. rnam par smin pa; C. guobao/yishu; J. kahō/ijuku; K. kwabo/isuk 果報/異熟). In Sanskrit and Pāli, lit. “ripening,” thus “maturation,” “fruition,” or “result”; referring specifically to the “maturation” of past deeds (KARMAN). Vipāka refers to any mental phenomenon that occurs as a result of a morally wholesome or unwholesome volitional action performed by body, speech, or mind, either in this or previous lives. Fruitions can be divided between those that occur during the lifetime in which the deed is performed, those that occur in the lifetime immediately following the lifetime in which the deed is performed, and those that occur two or more lifetimes later. Although the fruition is the result of a wholesome or unwholesome act, the vipāka itself is always morally neutral and manifests itself as something pleasant or painful that is either physical or mental. Vipāka is a subset of the related term “fruition” (PHALA); in the context of moral cause and effect, the ripening of moral causes is called the VIPĀKAPHALA, which is one of the five types of effects or fruitions (phala) described in the VAIBHĀṢIKA school of SARVĀSTIVĀDA ABHIDHARMA; in that context vipākaphala is limited to effects, such as the body and so on, that last from the first moment to the last moment of a life. In the MAHĀYĀNA in general, the term also appears (with other forms of the verbal root √pac, “to cook”) in the sense of “maturation,” to refer to the power of buddhas and BODHISATTVAs to “ripen” beings in their progress along the path (MĀRGA).
vipākahetu. (T. rnam smin gyi rgyu; C. yishu yin; J. ijukuin; K. isuk in 異熟因). In Sanskrit and Pāli, lit. “ripening cause”; the “retributive cause” that leads to either wholesome or unwholesome karmic retribution (VIPĀKAPHALA); one of the six types of causes (HETU) described in the VAIBHĀṢIKA school of SARVĀSTIVĀDA ABHIDHARMA and by VASUBANDHU in the ABHIDHARMAKOŚABHĀṢYA. The vipākahetu refers to the karmic seeds of either wholesome (KUŚALA) deeds (KARMAN) that are tainted by ignorance (AVIDYĀ), or of unwholesome (AKUŚALA) deeds; neutral actions cannot serve as retributive causes. These deeds have the potency to ripen, even at some point in the distant future, as vipākaphala, specifically as the aggregates (SKANDHA) of a future lifetime, producing the physical body (RŪPA), the six types of consciousness (VIJÑĀNA), and sensations (VEDANĀ). According to some schools, the retributive cause is essentially identical to volition (CETANĀ), since it is the force that initiates action. The goal of the eightfold path (ĀRYĀṢṬĀṄGAMĀRGA) is to end the generation of such causes and thereby exhaust the karmic forces that bind one to SAṂSĀRA.
vipākaphala. (T. rnam smin gyi ’bras bu; C. yishu guo; J. ijukuka; K. isuk kwa 異熟果). In Sanskrit, lit. “ripened fruit,” viz., “retributive effect”; one of the five types of effects or fruitions (PHALA) described in the VAIBHĀṢIKA school of SARVĀSTIVĀDA ABHIDHARMA, as well as by VASUBANDHU in the ABHIDHARMAKOŚABHĀṢYA. These are karmic effects of either wholesome (KUŚALA) deeds (KARMAN) that are tainted by ignorance (AVIDYĀ), or of unwholesome (AKUŚALA) deeds; neutral actions do not produce ripened effects. These effects, the results of the VIPĀKAHETU, ripen, even at some point long after the performance of the specific deed, as the aggregates (SKANDHA) of a future lifetime, producing the physical body (RŪPA), the six types of consciousness (VIJÑĀNA), and sensations (VEDANĀ). The vipākaphala is the ultimate and inevitable effect of the “retributive cause” (vipākahetu): in a metaphor used in the tradition, the retributive cause is the seed that grows into the fruit-bearing tree that is the retributive effect.
vipakṣa. [alt. vipakṣabhūta] (T. mi mthun phyogs; C. yipin/suoduizhi; J. ihon/shotaiji; K. ip’um/sodaech’i 異品/所對治). In Sanskrit, “opposite class”; referring to a category that is the opposite of another category, such that one must be absent for the other to be present. The term appears especially in two contexts in Buddhist literature. First, in Buddhist logic (HETUVIDYĀ), vipakṣa is one of three terms: PAKṢA (logical subject), SAPAKṢA (similar instance), and vipakṣa (dissimilar instance). For example, in the syllogism (PRAYOGA) “sound is impermanent because it is produced,” sound is the pakṣa. A pot would be an example or sapakṣa (a “similar instance” or “in the similar class;” knowledge that a pot breaks because it is produced can be extended to sound). Space would be a counterexample or vipakṣa (a dissimilar instance or in the dissimilar class; knowledge that it is not produced because it is permanent can be extended to exclude a sound from the dissimilar class because it is articulated and produced). Second, in Buddhist literature on the practice of the path (MĀRGA), vipakṣa is contrasted with PRATIPAKṢA (“counteracting force” or “antidote”) to the afflictions (KLEŚA). For example, the opposing class of hatred (DVEṢA) is counteracted by loving-kindness (MAITRĪ), such that meditation on loving-kindness temporarily displaces hatred from the mind but does not permanently remove it, as does a pratipakṣa.
vipariṇāmaduḥkhatā. (P. vipariṇāmadukkha; T. ’gyur ba’i sdug bsngal; C. huaiku; J. eku; K. koego 壞苦). In Sanskrit, “suffering associated with change”; the second of the three types of suffering, along with DUḤKHADUḤKHATĀ (“physical and mental suffering”) and SAṂSKĀRADUḤKHATĀ (“suffering intrinsic to conditioned existence itself”). This type of suffering is defined as feelings of mental and physical pleasure that inevitably turn into pain if the activity that produces them is continued indefinitely, such as overindulging in delicious food, staying out in the sun too long, or sitting in the same posture for hours on end. The Buddhist claim is that pain and pleasure are qualitatively different: painful feelings will continue to be painful unless some further action is taken to assuage the pain, whereas pleasurable feelings will become painful if one persists in engaging in the activity that produces the pleasure. For example, after walking for a long distance, walking becomes painful, at which point it is pleasurable to sit down. After sitting for a long period of time, sitting becomes painful, and it is pleasurable to stand up and walk. Feelings of pleasure are thus a type of suffering, because they will inevitably revert to pain. An example is pouring cold water on a burn; after a moment of relief, the burning sensation will return. In the same way, feelings of pleasure are merely a brief lessening of pain.
viparyāsa. (P. vipallāsa; T. phyin ci log; C. diandao; J. tendō; K. chŏndo 顚倒). In Sanskrit, lit. “inversion,” but referring to “perverted,” “corrupted,” or “inverted” views (the Chinese translation diandao literally means “upside down”) or simply “error.” There is a standard list of four “inverted views” that cause sentient beings to remain subject to the cycle of rebirth (SAṂSĀRA). The four are (1) to view as pleasurable what is in fact painful or suffering (DUḤKHA), (2) to see as permanent what is in fact impermanent (ANITYA), (3) to see as pure what is in fact impure (AŚUBHA), and (4) to see as having self what is in fact devoid of self (ANĀTMAN). These four inversions are corrected through insight into the true nature of reality, which prompts the realization that the aggregates (SKANDHA) are in fact suffering, impermanent, impure, and devoid of self. In the TATHĀGATAGARBHA literature, these four putatively correct views are in turn said also to be inversions from the standpoint of the tathāgatagarbha, which is said to possess four perfect qualities (GUṆAPĀRAMITĀ): bliss, permanence, purity, and selfhood.
vipassanā. In Pāli, “insight” (see also S. VIPAŚYANĀ). Insight is defined as the direct intuition of the three marks (P. tilakkhaṇa; S. TRILAKṢAṆA) of existence that characterize all phenomena: P. aniccā (S. ANITYATĀ) or impermanence, dukkha (S. DUḤKHA) or suffering, and anatta (S. ANĀTMAN) or nonself. Insight associated with the attainment of any of the eight noble paths and fruits (P. ariyamaggaphala; S. ĀRYAMĀRGAPHALA) or associated with the attainment of cessation (NIRODHASAMĀPATTI) is classified as supramundane (P. lokuttara; S. LOKOTTARA); that which is not associated with the noble paths and fruits is classified as mundane (P. lokiya; S. LAUKIKA). The classical commentarial paradigm pairs vipassanā with samatha (S. ŚAMATHA), or tranquillity, these two together being described as the two wings of Buddhist meditative cultivation (BHĀVANĀ). Vipassanā, when fully developed, leads to enlightenment (BODHI) and nibbāna (S. NIRVĀṆA); samatha when fully developed leads to the attainment of JHĀNA (S. DHYĀNA), or meditative absorption, and the attainment of certain supranormal powers (P. abhiññā; S. ABHIJÑĀ). While the formal training in vipassanā meditation does not require the prior attainment of either jhāna or abhiññā, the mind must nevertheless have achieved a modicum of pacification through “threshold concentration” (UPACĀRASAMĀDHI) as a prerequisite for successful vipassanā practice. The VISUDDHIMAGGA lists eighteen main types of vipassanāñāṇa (S. vipaśyanājñāna), or insight knowledge, of (1) impermanence (aniccānupassanā), (2) suffering (dukkhānupassanā), (3) nonself (anattānupnupassanā), (4) aversion (nibbidānupassanā), (5) dispassion (virāgānupassanā), (6) extinction (nirodhānupassanā), (7) abandoning (paṭinissaggānupassanāā), (8) waning (khayānupassanā), (9) disappearing (vayānupassanā), (10) change (vipariṇāmānupassanā), (11) signlessness (animittānupassanā), (12) wishlessness (apaṇihitānupassanā), (13) emptiness (suññatānupassanā), (14) higher wisdom regarding phenomena (adhipaññādhammavipassanā), (15) knowledge and vision that accords with reality (YATHĀBHŪTAJÑĀNADARŚANA), (16) contemplation of danger (ādīnavānupassanā), (17) contemplation involving reflection (paṭisaṅkhānupassanā), and (18) turning away (vivaṭṭanānupassanā). While the terms samatha and vipassanā do appear in sutta discussions of meditative training—although far more often in the later KHUDDAKANIKĀYA sections of the canon—they figure most prominently in the ABHIDHAMMA and the later commentarial literature. The systems of vipassanā training taught today are modern constructs that do not antedate late-nineteenth century Burma (see LEDI SAYADAW; MAHASI SAYADAW); they are, however, derived from, or at least inspired by, commentarial or scriptural precedents. Two of the most successful vipassanā organizations outside Asia are the Insight Meditation Society and the loosely knit group of centers teaching S. N. Goenka’s vipassana meditation; the former originates with AJAHN CHAH BODHIÑĀṆA (1917–1992) of the Thai forest tradition and the latter with the Burmese teacher U BA KHIN (1899–1971). See also YATHĀBHŪTAJÑĀNADARŚANA.
vipassanādhura. In Pāli, lit., “the burden of insight,” in the sense of the obligation to develop insight through formal meditation training. The term is often contrasted with GANTHADHURA, “the burden of book,” in the sense of the obligation to study. In the later THERAVĀDA tradition, these two duties have been seen as two vocations open to monks, viz., contemplative practice and doctrinal study. See also PAṬIPATTI.
vipassanāñāṇa. In Pāli, “insight knowledge”; see VIPASSANĀ.
vipassanāñāṇikasamādhi. In Pāli, “concentration of insight knowledge”; a commentarial term used to refer to a form of concentration that is developed through attending to the arising and passing away of the present thought-moment or object, when such concentration has successfully removed all distractions. It is equal in intensity to the “threshold concentration” (UPACĀRASAMĀDHI) that is cultivated in the course of practicing tranquillity meditation (P. samathabhāvanā; see ŚAMATHA). Vipassanāñāṇikasamādhi, when fully developed, leads to the attainment of the paths (P. magga; S. MĀRGA) and fruits (PHALA) of liberation, whereas upacārasamādhi, when fully developed, leads only to the attainment of “absorptive concentration” (APPANĀSAMĀDHI), which is synonymous with “meditative absorption” (P. JHĀNA; S. DHYĀNA).
vipassanūpakkilesa. In Pāli, “defilement of insight”; according to the VISUDDHIMAGGA, ten experiences that occur to the diligent practitioner of meditation as natural concomitants of insight training (VIPASSANĀ-BHĀVANĀ). If the practitioner should become attached to any of these experiences, they become a hindrance to further progress along the path to liberation and thus would be deemed defilements of insight. The ten experiences are (1) a vision of radiant light (P. obhāsa; S. avabhāsa), (2) knowledge (P. ñāṇa; S. JÑĀNA), (3) physical rapture (P. pīti; S. PRĪTI), (4) tranquillity (P. passaddhi; S. PRAŚRABDHI), (5) mental ease or bliss (SUKHA), (6) determination (P. adhimokkha; S. ADHIMOKṢA), (7) energy (P. paggaha; S. pragraha), (8) heightened awareness (P. upaṭṭhāna; S. upasthāna), (9) equanimity (P. upekkhā; S. UPEKṢĀ), and (10) delight (P. nikanti; S. nikānti). As long as the mind is disturbed through attachment to the ten defilements of insight, it will be unable to comprehend the three marks of existence (P. tilakkhaṇa; S. TRILAKṢAṆA) of impermanence P. (anicca; S. ANITYA), suffering (P. dukkha; S. DUḤKHA), and nonself (P. anatta; S. ANĀTMAN), the knowledge of which is the content of enlightenment (BODHI). These ten defilements may cause the practitioner to believe that he has already attained enlightenment as a stream-enterer (SROTAĀPANNA), a once-returner (SAKṚDĀGĀMIN), a nonreturner (ANĀGĀMIN), or a worthy one (ARHAT), when in fact he has not. Infatuation with the defilements is overcome by understanding them for what they are, as mere impermanent by-products of meditation. This understanding is developed through perfecting the “purity of knowledge and vision of what is and is not the path” (MAGGĀMAGGAÑĀṆADASSANAVISUDDHI), which is the fifth of seven “purities” (VISUDDHI) to be developed along the path to liberation.
vipaśyanā. (P. vipassanā; T. lhag mthong; C. guan; J. kan; K. kwan 觀). In Sanskrit, “insight”; a technical term for an understanding of reality (either conceptual or nonconceptual) at a level of mental concentration equal to or exceeding that of ŚAMATHA. The presence of vipaśyanā is the distinguishing feature of the wisdom that derives from meditation (BHĀVANĀMAYĪPRAJÑĀ). Such insight is required to destroy the various levels of afflictions (KLEŚA) and to proceed on the path to liberation (VIMOKṢA) from REBIRTH. See also VIPASSANĀ; MOHE ZHIGUAN; XIUXI ZHIGUAN ZUOCHAN FAYAO.
Vipaśyin. (P. Vipassī; T. Rnam gzigs; C. Piposhi fo; J. Bibashi-butsu; K. Pibasi pul 毘婆尸佛). Sanskrit proper name of the sixth of the seven buddhas of antiquity (SAPTATATHĀGATA), who directly precede ŚĀKYAMUNI; Vipaśyin is also listed as the nineteenth of twenty-five buddhas mentioned in the BUDDHAVAṂSA. In the Pāli tradition, his story is first recounted in the MAHĀPADĀNASUTTA in the DĪGHANIKĀYA. There, it is said that Vipassī’s father was Bandhumā and his mother was Bandhumatī. He was born in the Khema park and belonged to the Kondañña clan. During his time, the human life span was eighty thousand years. He dwelt as a householder for eight thousand years and possessed three palaces named Nanda, Sunanda, and Sirmā, one for each of the three seasons. His wife’s name was Sutanā, and he had a son named Samavattakkhandha. When he renounced the world, he left his house in a chariot, after which he practiced austerities for eight months. As with all BODHISATTVAs, Vipassī abandoned austerities as unprofitable when he realized that they did not lead to enlightenment. He attained buddhahood under a pāṭali (S. pātali) tree. In the description of his enlightenment, he is shown contemplating dependent origination (PRATĪTYASAMUTPĀDA), but in a chain of ten rather than the standard twelve links. He preached his first sermon in the Khema Deer Park to his brother Khandha and to Tissa, the son of his family’s priest. These two became his chief monk disciples. His chief nun disciples were Candā and Candamittā, and his attendant was named Asoka. His chief lay disciples were the laymen Punnabbasummitta and Nāga, and the laywomen Sirimā and Uttarā. He died at the age of eighty thousand in the Sumittārāma, and over his relics was erected a reliquary (STŪPA) seven leagues high. The bodhisattva who was to become GAUTAMA Buddha was at that time a NĀGA king named Atula.
viprayuktasaṃskāra. (S). See CITTAVIPRAYUKTASAṂSKĀRA.
vīra. (T. dpa’ bo; C. yongmeng; J. yūmyō; K. yongmaeng 勇猛). In Sanskrit and Pāli, “hero”; a common epithet of the Buddha. The word is also used for a bodhisattva skilled in tantric practices who accompanies a ḌĀKINĪ during the GAṆACAKRA (tantric feast) ritual. Ekavīra (T. Dpa’ bo gcig pa), “Solitary Hero,” is a form of YAMĀNTAKA widely practiced in Tibet and is used in general to describe the depiction of a male tantric deity without a consort.
virati. (T. spong ba; C. li; J. ri; K. i 離). In Sanskrit and Pāli, lit. “abstinence,” “seclusion”; a polysemous term in both Sanskrit and Buddhist literature. In its Buddhist usages, virati generally refers to the separation or detachment from mental afflictions (KLEŚA) and false conceptualizations (VIKALPA); it may also indicate a desire to leave behind such afflictions. In Pāli literature, virati indicates three specific types of abstention, viz., from wrong speech, wrong action, and wrong livelihood. In SARVĀSTIVĀDA thought, virati results from a positive sense of perplexity about one’s state in the world, and from it arises the soteriologically indispensable NIRVEDA, “disgust with the world” or “disillusionment.” Two kinds of seclusion (C. ERZHONG YUANLI) are also discussed in the Chinese tradition: physical seclusion (shen yuanli) and the seclusion of the mind (xin yuanli). Removing oneself from a distracting, unwholesome, and disquieting environment by leaving it behind constitutes physical seclusion. Seclusion of the mind usually refers to “guarding one’s senses” (INDRIYASAṂVARA) with mindfulness so that the mind will neither cling to, not be repulsed by, sensory stimuli; it also refers to the “withdrawal” from sensory stimulations and the consolidation of attention during meditative states (see DHYĀNA).
Virūḍhaka. (P. Virūḷhaka [alt. Viḍūḍabha]; T. ’Phags skyes po; C. Zengzhang tian; J. Zōjōten; K. Chŭngjang ch’ŏn 增長天). Sanskrit proper name of one of the four LOKAPĀLA, the kings of the four directions who reside on the four sides of Mount SUMERU. He is king of the south and resides on the southern face of the central mountain, where he is lord of the kumbhaṇḍas. ¶ Virūḍhaka (corresponding to the Pāli transcription Viḍūḍabha) is also the proper name of a king of KOŚALA at the time of the Buddha; he was the son of the Buddha’s patron, PRASENAJIT, and usurped his father’s throne. When Prasenajit ascended the throne, he requested a wife from the ŚĀKYA tribe. The Śākyas instead sent a maidservant, claiming that she was from a noble family, and she eventually gave birth to Virūḍhaka. As a boy, he visited KAPILAVASTU and learned of his low birth. Realizing that his father had been deceived, he vowed to take revenge upon the Śākyas. After his father’s death, he led an army against Kapilavastu, destroying the Śākya kingdom and slaughtering its inhabitants. A violent storm caused a flood during the night, and Virūḍhaka and his warriors, who were sleeping in the riverbed, were swept away. See also CĀTURMAHĀRĀJAKĀYIKA.
Virūpa. (Bi rū pa). Sanskrit proper name of one of the eighty-four MAHĀSIDDHAs, particularly revered in the SA SKYA sect of Tibetan Buddhism. Very little can be said with certainty about his life (whether he was a historical figure is open to question), but he may have lived at the end of the tenth century CE. He is said to have been a monk and a distinguished scholar of NĀLANDĀ monastery (in some sources, SOMAPURA), who was originally named Dharmapāla, devoting himself to scholastic study during the day and tantric practice at night. He recited the MANTRA of CAKRASAṂVARA for years, but, unable to make any progress in his practice, he threw his rosary into the latrine. That night, the goddess NAIRĀTMYĀ, appeared to him in a dream, instructing him to retrieve his rosary. Over the course of six nights, she conferred initiations and instructions that allowed him to attain the sixth bodhisattva BHŪMI. She also gave him a text, which is otherwise unknown in Sanskrit, whose Sanskrit title might be reconstructed as *Mārgaphalamūlaśāstra, the “Root Treatise on the Path and Its Fruition.” Dharmapāla subsequently began to engage openly in tantric practices and was expelled from the monastery and branded “deformed” or “ugly” (virūpa), whence he derived his name. Among the many stories told about him, perhaps the most famous tells of his stopping in a tavern to drink. When the tavern keeper demanded payment, he offered her the sun instead, using his ritual dagger to stop the sun in its course. The sun did not move for three days, during which time Virūpa consumed huge amounts of drink. In order to set the sun on its course, the king agreed to pay his bill. Virūpa eventually encountered two YOGINs who became his disciples: Ḍombiheruka and Kṛṣṇacārin. In the eleventh century, the Tibetan scholar SA CHEN KUN DGA’ SNYING PO of the ’Khon clan is said to have had a vision of Virūpa in which he received transmission of the *Mārgaphalamūlaśāstra. This became the foundation for the LAM ’BRAS teachings of the Sa skya sect, where Virūpa is regarded as a buddha, equal in importance to Nāropa for the BKA’ RGYUD sect. His most famous work is his RDO RJE TSHIG RKANG (“Vajra Verses”).
Virūpākṣa. (P. Virupakkha; T. Mig mi bzang; C. Guangmu tian; J. Kōmokuten; K. Kwangmok ch’ŏn 廣目天). One of the four LOKAPĀLA, the kings of the four directions who reside on the four sides of Mount SUMERU. He is king of the west and resides on the western face of the central mountain, where he is lord of the NĀGAs.
vīrya. (P. viriya; T. brtson ’grus; C. jingjin; J. shōjin; K. chŏngjin 精進). In Sanskrit, “energy,” “effort”; an enthusiasm to perform virtuous acts, which serves as the antidote to laziness. Since, by definition, the term refers to a delight in virtue, striving for nonvirtuous ends would not be considered “energy.” The connotations of the term include the willingness to undertake virtuous deeds, the delight in the performance of virtuous deeds, a lack of discouragement, a commitment to success, and a dissatisfaction with minimal virtues. Deemed essential to progress on the path, vīrya is a constituent of many numerical lists. Vīrya is the second of the five spiritual faculties (INDRIYA) and counters the hindrance (NĪVARAṆA) of sloth and torpor (STYĀNA-MIDDHA). It is counted as one of the eleven wholesome mental concomitants (KUŚALA-CAITTA) and constitutes the fourth of the six perfections (PĀRAMITĀ).
vīryapāramitā. (P. viriyapāramī; T. brtson ’grus kyi pha rol tu phyin pa; C. jingjin boluomiduo; J. shōjinharamita; K. chŏngjin paramilta 精進波羅蜜多). In Sanskrit, “the perfection of energy [alt. effort, vigor]”; the fourth of the six [alt. ten] perfections (PĀRAMITĀ) cultivated on the BODHISATTVA path. It is perfected on the fourth of the ten stages (DAŚABHŪMI) of the bodhisattva path, ARCIṢMATĪ (radiant), where the flaming radiance of the thirty-seven factors pertaining to enlightenment (BODHIPĀKṢIKADHARMA) becomes so intense that it incinerates all the obstructions and afflictions, giving the bodhisattva inexhaustible energy in his quest for enlightenment. When the six perfections are divided based on whether they are associated with the accumulation of merit (PUṆYASAṂBHĀRA) or of wisdom (JÑĀNASAṂBHĀRA), the perfection of energy is associated with both.
Viśākha. (P. Visākha; T. Sa ga; C. Pishequ; J. Bishakya; K. Pisagŏ 舍佉). A wealthy merchant of RĀJAGṚHA and husband of the female ARHAT DHAMMADINNĀ; he should be distinguished from VIŚĀKHĀ (s.v.), the foremost donor among laywomen. According to the Pāli account, Viśākha accompanied King BIMBISĀRA on a visit to the Buddha during the latter’s first sojourn at Rājagaha (RĀJAGṚHA) after his enlightenment. Upon hearing the Buddha preach, Visākha became a stream-enterer (SROTAĀPANNA) and, subsequently, a once-returner (SAKṚDĀGĀMIN) and a nonreturner (ANĀGĀMIN). Once he became a nonreturner, his behavior toward his wife Dhammadinnā changed, and once she learned the reason, Dhammadinnā requested permission to renounce the world and enter the order as a nun. Impressed by his wife’s piety, he informed Bimbisāra, who arranged for her to be carried to the nunnery on a golden palanquin. After Dhammadinnā attained arhatship, Visākha asked her questions pertaining to dharma, all of which she expertly answered. He reported this to the Buddha, who praised her for her skill in teaching. Visākha and Dhammadinnā were husband and wife during the time of Phussa (S. Puṣya) Buddha (the twenty-first of the thousand buddhas) when, as a treasurer, he had arranged an offering of alms for Phussa Buddha and his disciples. Visākha was a renowned teacher in his own right and is mentioned as one of seven lay disciples who each had five hundred followers.
Viśākhā. (P. Visākhā; T. Sa ga ma; C. Pishequmu/Luzimu; J. Bishakyamo/Rokushimo; K. Pisagŏmo/Nokchamo 舍佉母/鹿子母). Prominent female lay disciple of the Buddha (and to be distinguished from the Buddhist layman VIŚĀKHA); in the AṄGUTTARANIKĀYA, the Buddha declares her to be foremost among laywomen who minister to the order. According to the Pāli account, Visākhā was born into a wealthy family and was converted by the Buddha at the age of seven, when he visited her native city of Bhaddiya. Visākhā had been dispatched by her grandfather, Meṇḍaka, with five hundred chariots, five hundred companions, and five hundred slaves to approach the Buddha and listen to him preach. Upon hearing his sermon, Visākhā became a stream-enterer (SROTAĀPANNA). Later, Visākhā was married to the son of a wealthy merchant named Migāra, who dwelt in the city of Sāvatthi (ŚRĀVASTĪ) and was a follower of the Nigaṇṭhas (S. NIRGRANTHA; see JAINA). Although she was a dutiful wife and daughter-in-law, Visākhā was offended by the nakedness of the Nigaṇṭha ascetics and refused to show them respect. When criticized for her attitude, she threatened to return to her parents’ house. Although sorely distressed by his daughter-in-law’s behavior, Migāra consented to listen to a sermon by the Buddha if she would consent to remain in his family. Upon hearing the Buddha preach, Migāra became a stream-enterer (SROTAĀPANNA), and remained forever grateful to Visākhā, even giving her the sobriquet Migāramātā, “Migāra’s Mother.” Visākhā fed five hundred monks in her home daily, and was constant in her attentions to the monastic community in Sāvatthi. She fulfilled a long-held wish when she had a grand monastery built to the east of the city named Migāramātupāsāda (S. MṚGĀRAMṚTUPRĀSĀDA), which she visited with her children, grandchildren, and great grandchildren. The Buddha related how, in previous lives, Visākhā had ministered to the needs of the Buddhas Padumuttara (S. Padmottara) and Kassapa (S. KĀŚYAPA). Visākhā was said to have died at the age of 120, although she always looked to be a maiden of sixteen. She was endowed with phenomenal strength, and the people of Sāvatthi believed that she brought good fortune to their city. Visākhā is upheld by the tradition as the ideal laywoman.
visaṃyogaphala. (T. bral ba’i ’bras bu; C. liji guo; J. rikeka; K. igye kwa 離繫果). In Sanskrit, “separation effect”; a term used to describe liberation from rebirth and the reality of NIRVĀṆA. This is one of the five effects (PHALA) enumerated in the VAIBHĀṢIKA school of SARVĀSTIVĀDA ABHIDHARMA and the YOGĀCĀRA system. Liberation (VIMOKṢA) and nirvāṇa are forms of cessation (NIRODHA) and as such are unconditioned phenomena (ASAṂSKṚTADHARMA) and permanent (NITYA) because they do not change moment by moment. Specifically, they are classified as “analytical cessations” (PRATISAṂKHYĀNIRODHA), that is, states of cessation that arise through the process of insight. In the Buddha’s delineation of the FOUR NOBLE TRUTHS (catvāry āryasatyāni), the third truth of cessation (NIRODHASATYA) is followed by the fourth truth of the path (MĀRGASATYA). Later commentators would explain that cessation and path stand in a relationship of effect and cause, respectively. However, this is not possible in the literal sense, because an impermanent and conditioned phenomenon such as the path cannot serve as the cause for a permanent and unconditioned phenomenon such as cessation. In order to preserve this distinction but nonetheless acknowledge the role of religious practice in bringing about the state of nirvāṇa, the Vaibhāṣika school proposed the category of visaṃyogaphala, which is essentially an effect that has no cause. Thus, the practice of the path leads to a permanent separation from the KLEŚAs, and because that state of separation is permanent, it not formally the effect of a cause.
viṣaya. (P. visaya; T. yul; C. jing; J. kyō; K. kyŏng 境). In Sanskrit, lit. “sphere” or “object”; in epistemology, a general term for the object of a sensory consciousness (VIJÑĀNA). Various types of such objects are described in works on logic and epistemology, with distinctions made between the objects perceived by the five sensory consciousnesses and the objects perceived by the mental consciousness (MANOVIJÑĀNA).
Viśiṣṭacāritra. (C. Shangxing; J. Jōgyō; K. Sanghaeng 上行). In Sanskrit, “Exemplary Practices”; the leader of the four BODHISATTVAs of the earth to whom ŚĀKYAMUNI Buddha transfers the quintessence of the SŪTRA in the SADDHARMAPUṆḌARĪKASŪTRA (“Lotus Sūtra”). Viśiṣṭacāritra is said to represent the “true self” aspect of the buddha-nature (FOXING). Viśiṣṭacāritra has special significance for the Japanese NICHIRENSHŪ schools, because NICHIREN himself believed that his proselytization work had fulfilled the charge that Śākyamuni had given the bodhisattva. Thus, some Nichiren schools assume that their founder is the reincarnation of Viśiṣṭacāritra.
viśuddhabuddhakṣetra. (T. dag pa’i zhing khams; C. qingjing foguotu; J. shōjōbukkokudo; K. ch’ŏngjŏng pulgukt’o 清淨佛國土). In Sanskrit, lit. “purified buddha-field”; an important concept in Mahāyāna Buddhology and closely synonymous with some denotations of the East Asian term JINGTU (“PURE LAND”). According to certain MAHĀYĀNA texts, when a bodhisattva achieved buddhahood, the merit that he accumulated over the course of the path fructifies not only as the body, speech, mind, and activities of a buddha but also as the physical environment of that buddha as well. That physical environment is called a “buddha-field.” These lands may be either “impure” or “pure,” depending upon a number of factors, the most common of which is whether the land does or does not include three baleful destinies (DURGATI) of animals (TIRYAK), ghosts (PRETA), and hell denizens (NĀRAKA). The most famous of these pure buddha-fields is SUKHĀVATĪ, the land of the buddha AMITĀBHA. See also BUDDHAKṢETRA.
viśuddhi. [alt. viśuddha] (P. visuddhi; T. rnam par dag pa; C. qingjing; J. shōjō; K. ch’ŏngjŏng 清淨). In Sanskrit, “purity”; of which two types are enumerated: innate purity (prakṛti or svabhāvaviśuddhi) and purity free of temporary or adventitious stains (āgantukamalaviśuddhi). The former is the natural state of the mind (see PRABHĀSVARA) as in the Pāli AṄGUTTARANIKĀYA: “The mind, O monks, is luminous (P. pabhassara), but is defiled by adventitious defilements” (pabhassaraṃ idaṃ bhikkhave cittaṃ, tañ ca kho āgantukehi upakkilesehi upakkiliṭṭhaṃ). The latter is the mind when the path (MĀRGA) has cleansed it of hindrances (see NĪVARAṆA; ĀVARAṆA). In Pāli, there are seven purities (visuddhi) that must be developed along the path leading to liberation. The list of seven purities is first enumerated in the MAJJHIMANIKĀYA and forms the outline for both BUDDHAGHOSA’s VISUDDHIMAGGA and Upatissa’s earlier *VIMUTTIMAGGA. The seven purities are likened to seven carriages that one takes in sequence to reach seven progressive goals. Thus, (1) the purity of morality (P. sīlavisuddhi; see S. ŚĪLAVIŚUDDHI) leads to its goal of (2) the purity of mind (CITTAVISUDDHI), and the purity of mind leads to its goal of (3) purity of understanding or views (DIṬṬHIVISUDDHI). The purity of understanding leads to its goal of (4) purity of overcoming doubt (KAṄKHĀVITARAṆAVISUDDHI), and the purity of overcoming doubt leads to its goal of (5) the purity of knowledge and vision of what is and is not the path (MAGGĀMAGGAÑĀṆADASSANAVISUDDHI). The purity of knowledge and vision of what is and is not the path leads to its goal of (6) knowledge and vision of progress along the path (PAṬIPADĀÑĀṆADASSANAVISUDDHI), and knowledge and vision of progress along the path leads to its goal of (7) the purity of knowledge and vision (ÑĀṆADASSANAVISUDDHI). The goal of this last purity is liberation through the attainment of any of the four supramundane paths (P. ariyamagga; S. ĀRYAMĀRGA).
Visuddhimagga. In Pāli, “Path of Purity”; the definitive Pāli compedium of Buddhist doctrine and practice, written by the exegete BUDDHAGHOSA at the MAHĀVIHĀRA in ANURĀDHAPURA, Sri Lanka, in the fifth century CE. The work serves as a prolegomenon to the soteriological content of the entire Pāli canon in terms of the three trainings in morality (P. sīla; S. ŚĪLA), concentration (SAMĀDHI), and wisdom (P. paññā; S. PRAJÑĀ). These are the “three trainings” (P. tisikkhā; S. TRIŚIKṢĀ) or “higher trainings” (P. adhisikkhā; S. adhiśikṣā). In his use of this organizing principle for his material, Buddhaghosa is clearly following Upatissa’s earlier *VIMUTTIMAGGA, which is now extant only in a Chinese translation. Buddhaghosa had originally come to Sri Lanka from India in order to translate the Sinhalese commentaries (AṬṬHAKATHĀ) to the Pāli canon back into the Pāli language. It is said that, in order to test his knowledge, the Mahāvihāra monks first gave him two verses and ordered him to write a commentary on them; the Visuddhimagga was the result. Legend has it that, after completing the treatise, the divinities hid the text so that he would be forced to rewrite it. After a third time, the divinities finally relented, and when all three copies were compared, they were found to be identical, testifying to the impeccability of Buddhaghosa’s understanding of the doctrine. The commentaries that Buddhaghosa was then allowed to edit and translate make numerous references to the Visuddhimagga. The text contains a total of twenty-three chapters: two chapters on precepts, eleven on meditation, and ten on wisdom. In its encyclopedic breadth, it is the closest equivalent in Pāli to the ABHIDHARMAMAHĀVIBHĀṢĀ of the SARVĀSTIVĀDA school of ABHIDHARMA. The post-fifth century CE exegete DHAMMAPĀLA wrote a Pāli commentary to the Visuddhimagga titled the PARAMATTHAMAÑJŪSĀ (“Container of Ultimate Truth”), which is also often referred to in the literature as the “Great Subcommentary” (Mahāṭīkā).
Viśvaṃtara. (S). See VESSANTARA.
Vitakkasaṇṭhānasutta. (C. Zengshangxin jing; J. Zōjōshingyō; K. Chŭngsangsim kyŏng 增上心經). In Pāli, “Discourse on Removing Distracting Thoughts,” the twentieth sutta in the MAJJHIMANIKĀYA (a separate SARVĀSTIVĀDA recension appears as the 101st SŪTRA in the Chinese translation of the MADHYAMĀGAMA); preached by the Buddha to an assembly of monks at the JETAVANA grove in the town of Sāvatthi (S. ŚRĀVASTĪ). The Buddha teaches five methods that can be used to overcome unwholesome, distracting thoughts (P. vitakka; S. VITARKA) that may arise during the course of meditation. These methods include replacing the unwholesome thought with a wholesome thought, contemplating the danger of the unwholesome thought, ignoring the unwholesome thought, progressively stilling the process of thought formation, and forcibly suppressing the unwholesome thought through the application of concentration. An analogous treatment of five methods of controlling thoughts also appears in the YOGĀCĀRABHŪMIŚĀSTRA.
vītarāgapūrvin. (T. chags bral sngon song; C. xian liyu ren; J. senriyokunin; K. sŏn iyok in 先離欲人). In Sanskrit, “one already free from attachment,” that is, one who has eliminated the afflictions (KLEŚA) that cause rebirth in the sensual realm (KĀMADHĀTU) prior to reaching the path of vision (DARŚANAMĀRGA); a general designation used in ABHIDHARMA to describe a set of the twenty members of the ĀRYASAṂGHA (see VIṂŚATIPRABHEDASAṂGHA). The vītarāgapūrvin are said to be those who do not gain each of the four fruits of the noble path (ĀRYAMĀRGAPHALA) in a series, but leap over one or more before reaching NIRVĀṆA. See SROTAĀPANNAPHALAPRATIPANNAKA; SAKṚDĀGĀMIPHALASTHA.
vitarka. (P. vitakka; T. rtog pa; C. xun; J. jin; K. sim 尋). In Sanskrit, “thoughts,” “applied thought,” or “applied attention”; one of the forty-six mental concomitants (CAITTA) according to the VAIBHĀṢIKA school of SARVĀSTIVĀDA ABHIDHARMA, one of the fifty-one according to the YOGĀCĀRA school, and one of the fifty-two in the Pāli ABHIDHAMMA. Although etymologically the term contains the connotation of “investigation,” vitarka is polysemous in the Buddhist lexicon and refers to a mental activity that could be present both in ordinary states of consciousness as well as during meditative absorption (DHYĀNA). Generically, vitarka can simply denote thoughts, and specifically “distracted thoughts,” as in the VITAKKASAṆṬHĀNASUTTA. In ordinary consciousness, it is perhaps best translated as “applied thought” or “initial application of thought” and refers to the momentary advertence toward the chosen object of attention. Vitarka is listed in the ABHIDHARMA as an indeterminate mental factor (ANIYATA-CAITTA), because it can be employed toward either virtuous or nonvirtuous ends, depending on one’s intentions and the object of one’s attention. In meditative absorption, vitarka is one of the five constituents (DHYĀNĀṄGA) that make up the first DHYĀNA, and is perhaps best translated in that context as “applied attention” or “initial application of attention.” In dhyāna, vitarka involves directing one’s focus onto the single chosen meditative object. According to the Pāli VISUDDHIMAGGA, “applied attention” is like a bee flying toward a flower, having oriented itself toward its chosen target, whereas “sustained attention” (VICĀRA) is like a bee hovering over that flower, having closer contact with and fixing itself upon the flower.
vitarkamudrā. (C. anwei yin; J. anniin; K. anwi in 安慰印). In Sanskrit, “gesture of instruction” or “gesture of discussion.” Vitarkamudrā is formed with a combination of gestures: the right palm faces outward, fingers up near the shoulder in the ABHAYAMUDRĀ, and the left palm faces out, fingers down by the knee in the VARADAMUDRĀ. Typically, the thumb and index finger of each hand also touch lightly, forming circles, while the rest of the fingers are splayed outward. This is a common gesture in Buddhist iconography, and the pose is often seen used with images of BHAIṢAJYAGURU, VAIROCANA, AMITĀBHA, MAÑJUŚRĪ, and even AVALOKITEŚVARA. This gesture is also sometimes called the vyākhyānamudrā, “the gesture of explanation.”
vivartakalpa. (P. vivaṭṭakappa; T. chags pa’i bskal pa; C. chengjie; J. jōkō; K. sŏnggŏp 成劫). In Sanskrit, “eon of formation” or “eon of creation”; one of the four periods in the cycle of the creation and destruction of a world system, according to Buddhist cosmology. These are the eon of formation (vivartakalpa), the eon of abiding (VIVARTASTHĀYIKALPA), the eon of dissolution (SAṂVARTAKALPA), and the eon of nothingness (SAṂVARTASTHĀYIKALPA), According to the ABHIDHARMAKOŚABHĀṢYA, each of the four eons lasts for twenty intermediate eons. The eon of formation begins when a wind begins to blow in space, impelled by the KARMAN of sentient beings. A circle of wind forms, followed by a circle of water, followed by a circle of golden earth. The entire world system of the sensuous realm (KĀMADHĀTU) then forms, including Mount SUMERU, the four continents and their subcontinents, the heavens, and the hells (see BHĀJANALOKA). These are then populated by beings (see SATTVALOKA), reborn in the various realms as a result of their previous karman. When all realms of the world system have been populated, the eon of formation ends and the eon of abiding begins.
vivartasthāyikalpa. (P. vivaṭṭaṭṭhāyikappa; T. gnas pa’i bskal pa; C. zhujie; J. jūkō; K. chugŏp 住劫). In Sanskrit, “eon of abiding,” or “eon of duration”; one of the four periods in the cycle of the creation and destruction of a world system, according to Buddhist cosmology. The others are: the eon of formation (VIVARTAKALPA), the eon of abiding (vivartasthāyikalpa), the eon of dissolution (SAṂVARTAKALPA), and the eon of nothingness (SAṂVARTASTHĀYIKALPA). According to the ABHIDHARMAKOŚABHĀṢYA, each of the four eons lasts twenty intermediate eons. The eon of formation begins when a wind begins to blow in space, impelled by the karman of sentient beings. A circle of wind forms, followed by a circle of water, followed by a circle of golden earth. The entire world system of the sensuous realm (KĀMADHĀTU) and the first DHYĀNA of the realm of subtle materiality (RŪPADHĀTU) then forms (see BHĀJANALOKA), which is then populated by beings (see SATTVALOKA) who are reborn there as a result of their previous KARMAN. When all realms of the world system have been populated, the eon of formation ends and the eon of abiding begins. At the beginning of the eon of abiding, the human life span is said to be “infinite” and decreases until it eventually reaches ten years of age. It then increases to eighty thousand years, before decreasing again to ten years. It takes one intermediate eon for the life span to go from ten years to eighty thousand years to ten years again. The eon of abiding is composed of twenty eons, beginning with the intermediate eon of decrease (in which the life span decreases from “infinite” to ten years), followed by eighteen intermediate eons of increase and decrease, and ending with an intermediate eon of increase, when the life span increases from ten years to eighty thousand years, at which point the next eon, the eon of dissolution, begins. ŚĀKYAMUNI Buddha appeared when the life span was one hundred years. It is said that MAITREYA will come when the human life span next reaches eighty thousand years.
viveka. (T. dben pa; C. yuanli; J. onri; K. wŏlli 遠離). In Sanskrit and Pāli, “seclusion,” “aloofness,” “solitude.” In Buddhist meditative literature, viveka refers to the “aloofness” that occurs as a result of becoming increasingly focused on a meditative object and thus more “secluded” from the things of the sensual world. In the NIDDESA of the Pāli KHUDDAKANIKĀYA, three kinds of viveka are described: kāyaviveka, or “physical seclusion”; cittaviveka, or “mental seclusion;” and upadhiviveka, or “seclusion from the substrata of rebirth (UPADHI),” viz., the five aggregates (SKANDHA) and/or the afflictions (KLEŚA). Kāyaviveka is actual physical separation from family, friends, and distracting sense objects; cittaviveka is when meditative practitioners remain “aloof” or “secluded” from greed (RĀGA), hatred (DVEṢA), and delusion (MOHA). In some MAHĀYĀNA texts, the slavish pursuit of viveka is explained as a violation of the bodhisattva ideal, because the devotion to solitude impedes the bodhisattva’s vow to save others from their suffering. In Buddhist tantras, such as the GUHYASAMĀJATANTRA, the practice of the three isolations of body (kāyaviveka), speech (VĀGVIVEKA), and mind (cittaviveka) precedes the practice of illusory body (MĀYĀKĀYA), clear light (PRABHĀSVARA), and union (YUGANADDHA).
Vô Ngôn Thông. (無言通) (d. 826). Vietnamese monk regarded by tradition as the founder of the second principal school of THIỀN (CHAN) in Vietnam. According to the Vietnamese genealogical history, THIỀN UYỂN TẼP ANH, Vô Ngôn Thông originally came from Guangzhou (China) and entered the Buddhist order at Shuanglinsi in Wuzhou. Because he was known for his ability to silently comprehend and realize the nature of things, his contemporaries called him “Wordless Realization” (V. Vô Ngôn Thông; C. Wuyantong). He is reputed to have studied under BAIZHANG HUAIHAI. In 820, Vô Ngôn Thông came to Kiền Sơ Monastery in northern Vietnam and took up residence there to practice Chan. He generally sat facing the wall (see BIGUAN), without uttering a word. A disciple, Cảm Thành, served him for many years and received the transmission of his full teaching.
Vṛjiputraka. (P. Vajjiputtakā; C. Baqizi; J. Batsugishi; K. Palgija 跋耆子). In Sanskrit, “Sons of Vṛji”; a group of monks condemned at the second Buddhist council (SAṂGĪTI; see COUNCIL, SECOND), the council at VAIŚĀLĪ, for what were judged to be ten violations of the VINAYA, the most serious of which was accepting gold and silver from the laity. Other violations included carrying a provision of salt, using a fringed sitting mat, eating after noon, eating meals from two different villages on the same day, and performing an ecclesiastical act (SAṂGHAKARMAN) without a sufficient number of monks being present. According to Pāli sources, after their condemnation, these monks seceded to form the MAHĀSĀṂGHIKA school. See also VĀTSĪPUTRĪYA; YAŚAS.
Vulture Peak. See GṚDHRAKŪṬAPARVATA.
vyākaraṇa. (P. veyyākaraṇa; T. lung bstan pa; C. shouji/piqieluo; J. juki/bigara; K. sugi/pigara 授
/毘伽羅). In Sanskrit, “prediction” or “prophecy”; a statement made by a buddha indicating the course of future events, especially regarding when, where, and with what name a BODHISATTVA will become a buddha. The most famous instance of such prophecy in the MAHĀYĀNA sūtras appears in the SADDHARMAPUṆḌARĪKASŪTRA (“Lotus Sūtra”), where the Buddha makes predictions that the great ARHATs, beginning with ŚĀRIPUTRA, will all eventually achieve buddhahood. ¶ Vyākaraṇa is also used to refer to one of the nine (NAVAṄGA) (Pāli) or twelve (DVĀDAŚĀṄGA[PRAVACANA]) (Sanskrit) categories (AṄGA) of Buddhist scripture according to their structure or literary style, where it refers to prophetic teachings or expositions. In the ninefold Pāli division, BUDDHAGHOSA defines veyyākaraṇa as something of a default category, which comprises the entire ABHIDHAMMAPIṬAKA, all suttas that do not contain verses, and any teaching of the Buddha that does not fall into any of the other eight categories.
Vyākhyāyukti. (T. Rnam par bshad pa’i rigs pa). In Sanskrit, “Principles of Exegesis,” a treatise by VASUBANDHU preserved only in Tibetan translation. In the broadest sense, the text deals with scriptural interpretation, touching on a wide range of related issues, including the authenticity of the MAHĀYĀNA sūtras as the word of the Buddha (BUDDHAVACANA), which Vasubandhu upholds. The work is a companion to another work by Vasubandhu, the Vyākhyāyuktisūtrakhaṇḍaśata (“One Hundred Extracts from the Sūtras for the Principles of Exegesis”), a collection of 109 passages presented without identification and without comment, all of which derive from “mainstream” (that is, non-Mahāyāna) sources, in most cases from the canon of the MŪLASARVĀSTIVĀDA. These passages serve as the basis for the discussion in the Vyākhyāyukti, which states that sūtras are to be explained according to (1) their purpose, (2) their summarized meaning, (3) their sense, (4) their sequence, and (5) objections and responses. In discussing the sense or meaning of a sūtra passage, he considers thirteen terms that have multiple meanings, including DHARMA, RŪPA, and SKANDHA. In his explication of technical terminology, Vasubandhu explains four distinct aspects of “the meaning of the words” (padārtha): synonyms (paryāya), definition (lakṣaṇa), etymology (nirukti), and their subdivisions (prabheda; perhaps implying subsidiary meanings, or “connotations,” in this context). In the course of the discussion, several Mahāyāna sūtras are quoted. The work was influential in late Indian scholastic circles, eliciting a commentary by Guṇamati; it was also cited by such scholars as HARIBHADRA. It was highly praised by such luminaries as SA SKYA PAṆḌITA and BU STON in Tibet, where it was used to establish principles for the translation of Buddhist texts from Sanskrit into Tibetan. See also NETTIPPAKARAṆA; PEṬAKOPADESA; SANFEN KEJING.
vyāpāda. (T. gnod sems; C. chen; J. shin; K. chin 瞋). In Sanskrit and Pāli, “malice” or “ill will”; the ninth of ten unwholesome courses of action (AKUŚALA-KARMAPATHA), referring to the hateful wish that harm will befall another. The ten courses of action are divided into three groups according to whether they are performed by the body, speech, or mind. Malice is classified as an unwholesome mental action (AKUŚALA-KARMAN), and forms a triad along with covetousness (ABHIDHYĀ) and wrong views (MITHYĀDṚṢṬI). Only extreme forms of defiled thinking are deemed an unwholesome course of mental action, such as the covetous wish to misappropriate someone else’s property, the harmful intent to hurt someone, or the adherence to pernicious doctrines. Lesser forms of defiled thinking are still unwholesome (akuśala), but do not constitute a course of action. ¶ “Malice” is also listed as one of the five hindrances (NĪVARAṆA) to DHYĀNA, obstructing the dhyāna factor of rapture (PRĪTI). Malice is fostered by unwise attention (AYONIŚOMANASKĀRA) to objects causing aversion and is removed through frequent wise attention to loving-kindness (MAITRĪ), developing the meditation on loving-kindness, and recognizing the fact that every person’s actions are his or her own and acknowledging the futility of anger. Malice is countered by faith (ŚRADDHĀ), the first of the five spiritual faculties (INDIYA), and by the enlightenment factors (BODHYAṄGA) of physical rapture (prīti) and equanimity (UPEKṢĀ). “Malice” is also included among the ten fetters (SAṂYOJANA) and is completely overcome only upon becoming an ARHAT.
vyāpti. (T. khyab pa; C. bian/bianzhi; J. hen/henshi; K. p’yŏn/p’yŏnji 遍/遍至). In Sanskrit, “pervasion” or “concomitance”; a term used in logic to indicate the relation that obtains between the reason and the predicate in a correct syllogism (PRAYOGA). There is positive concomitance (anvaya) and negative concomitance (VYATIREKA). For example, in order for the syllogism (PRAYOGA) “Sound is impermanent because of being produced” to be correct, it must be true that whatever is impermanent must necessarily be produced. That is, the category of the reason must either be coextensive with or subsume the category of the predicate. In Tibetan monastic debate, the term figures in one of three answers that the defender of a position may give. When presented with a syllogism or consequence (PRASAṄGA) by the challenger, the defender may (1) accept the thesis (’dod), (2) state that the reason is not a quality of the subject (rtags ma grub), or (3) state that there is no pervasion between the reason and the predicate (ma khyab).
vyatireka. (T. ldog pa; C. lizuofa; J. risahō; K. ijakpŏp 離作法). In Sanskrit, in Buddhist logic, “exclusion” or negative concomitance, as compared with positive concomitance (anvaya); in the syllogism (PRAYOGA) “Sound is impermanent because of being produced,” the negative concomitance is whatever is permanent is not produced; the positive concomitance is whatever is produced is impermanent. The term also is used in the discussion of “reverse” (vyāvṛtta; T. ldog pa), a term that occurs in epistemology and logic treatises to describe how thought (as opposed to direct perception, viz., PRATYAKṢA) apprehends its object via a negative route, whereby, for example, the idea of “chair” is arrived at through the exclusion of everything that is “nonchair.” This “non-nonchair” would be called the “reverse” (vyāvṛtta) of chair and the object of the concept of “chair.” See also APOHA.
vyavadāna. (P. vodāna; T. rnam byang; C. jing; J. jō; K. chŏng 淨). In Sanskrit, “purification” or “cleansing”; often contrasted with SAṂKLEŚA, meaning impurity, defilement, stain, or pollution. This vyavadāna/saṃkleśa dichotomy is used in a variety of ways. These are understood to be two distinct and opposite modes of causation that condition one’s future—one leading to suffering and other to the end of suffering. A being’s consciousness (VIJÑĀNA) is constantly entering into either the process of purification (vyavadāna) or defilement (saṃkleśa), depending upon actions and thoughts at any given moment. The process of purification may be undertaken by way of morality (ŚĪLA), concentration (SAMĀDHI), or wisdom (PRAJÑĀ). Purification is evidenced by the resultant presence of tranquillity (PRAŚRABDHI). In some MAHĀYĀNA texts, it is emphasized that the ultimate result of the process of purification is the realization that all phenomena (DHARMA) are ultimately devoid of any distinction between pure and impure. The term vyavadāna may also be used independently of saṃkleśa, as, for example, where a BODHISATTVA’s understanding of the DHARMA is said to be vyavadāna—pure and without blemish.
vyavahāra. (T. tha snyad; C. sudi/yanyu; J. zokutai/gongo; K. sokche/ŏnŏ 俗諦/言語). In Sanskrit, “convention” or “designation”; often with the connotation of something superficial. Generally, this term refers to matters involved with the mundane or worldly realm, as opposed to those of the sacred or supramundane realm. Vyavahāra has two general applications in a Buddhist context. First, it is used to indicate the established social conventions, experiences, and practices of the quotidian world. In Buddhism, these conventions are contrasted with the strict moral practices that conform to the ultimate truth (PARAMĀRTHASATYA) perceived by noble beings (ĀRYA). In this sense of a “conventional truth,” vyavahārasatya is synonymous with SAṂVṚTISATYA. Second, and rather more commonly, this term is used in the context of language and discourse to indicate those conventional words used by ordinary, unenlightened beings to designate reality as they (mis)understand it. Here, again, the terms and the objects that they designate are merely conventional truths (saṃvṛtisatya); the term vyavahārasatya sometimes is used as a synonym. Since, according to the doctrine of emptiness (ŚŪNYATĀ), all phenomena are devoid of any inherent, unchanging nature, the linguistic expressions used to designate the things of this world are purely conventional designations and cannot contain or communicate the true nature of those phenomena. Through the power of their practice, buddhas and BODHISATTVAs have an inherent understanding of all such linguistic expressions (see NIRUKTI; PRATIBHĀNA) and use that knowledge to communicate the DHARMA to unenlightened beings. Buddhas and bodhisattvas, however, understand both the true and ineffable nature of the language they use, as well as the phenomena that language is meant to describe.
Vyavahārasiddhi. (T. Tha snyad grub pa). In Sanskrit, “Proof of Convention”; a work attributed to NĀGĀRJUNA; it is no longer extant, but six stanzas are cited by ŚĀNTARAKṢITA in his MADHYAMAKĀLAṂKĀRAVṚTTI. The verses state that a MANTRA is composed of letters just as a medicine is composed of ingredients, but the mantra and the medicine are neither the same as nor different from the elements of which they are comprised. Because they are dependently arisen, they cannot be said to be either existent or nonexistent; instead, they exist conventionally. This fact is true of all phenomena, including cessation (NIRODHA), which were set forth by the Buddha for specific purposes.
vyaya. (T. ’jig pa; C. mie; J. metsu; K. myŏl 滅). In Sanskrit and Pāli, “disintegration” or “destruction”; a close synonym of ANITYA, viz., “desinence” or “impermanence.” In the SARVĀSTIVĀDA ABHIDHARMA, “disintegration” or “desinence” constitutes the final of the four characteristics (CATURLAKṢAṆA) of compounded phenomena (SAṂSKṚTADHARMA), along with production or origination (JĀTI), continuance or maturation (STHITI), and “senescence” or decay (JARĀ). Vyaya refers to the inevitable tendency of all compounded things to disintegrate, once the cause and conditions that sustain them vanish. The various abhidharma systems disagree as to whether these four conditioned characteristics are natural qualities inherent in all compounded things; or whether they are external factors that act upon those things, such as through “forces dissociated from thought” (CITTAVIPRAYUKTASAṂSKĀRA). They also disagree as to whether the four occur successively over a period of time or whether they are four perspectives on a single instant (KṢAṆA).