Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Naming the Seventh Consciousness in Yogācāra

  • Published:
Journal of Indian Philosophy Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The Yogācāra School presents the seventh consciousness as the internal mental faculty of the sixth consciousness. According to the Hīnayāna tradition, the internal faculty is called manas, so the complete compound word referring to the seventh consciousness is manovijñāna. Thus, in the Yogācāra system the seventh and sixth consciousnesses are both named manovijñāna. In order to resolve the confusion of the homonyms, one of them must be adjusted. Based on the Tibetan term, nyon yid rnam par shes pa, some scholars recently claimed that the seventh consciousness could be called kliṣṭamanas. However, in the Cheng Weishi Lun, Xuanzang proposed that the seventh consciousness is also reasonably named akliṣṭamanas when referring to the pure Buddha, and therefore it is better to simply term the seventh consciousness “manas”. On the other hand, some Indian ancient Yogācāra theorists suggested that the word manovijñāna should be used to name the seventh consciousness, while the sixth consciousness would in that case be called dharmavijñāna. However, that solution was rejected by Cheng Weishi Lun. Through contextual analysis, utilizing the method of the Indian Śāstra of Vaiyākaraṇa, this article puts forward an innovative way to solve the difficult problem of homonymity: denoting the seventh consciousness as pradhānamanovijñāna (最勝末那識) based on the unique meaning of manas advocated by Yogācāra School itself.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. See Yūki (1972, pp. 192–193).

  2. Viṃśikāvṛtti indicates that vijñapti is the synonym of vijñāna: “cittaṃ mano vijñānaṃ vijñaptiś ca iti paryāyāḥ / (Anacker, 2005, p. 413).” Xuanzang’s Chinese translation reads: 心意識了, 名之差別。(T no.1590, 31: 74b25-b26). Therefore, the word vijñapti can be also translated as “consciousness”. The root of “vijñapti” is jñap of curādigaṇa (the tenth class of roots), which is enumerated in Pāṇini’s Dhātupāṭha: “1625 jñapa jñāna-jñāpana-māraṇa-toṣaṇa-niśāna-niśāmaneṣu.” Here we find six meanings of the root jñap: to know (jñāna), to use (jñāpana), to kill (māraṇa), to satisfy (toṣaṇa), to sharpen (niśāna) and to look or to hear (niśāmana). And the following kṛt-suffix is “ktin”. The ktin in the word vijñapti is within the domain of adhikāra-sūtra “bhāve //3.3.18//” in the Aṣṭādhyāyī. Accordingly, the word vijñapti, acts as bhāva, it indicates the state of accomplishment of the action of cognition. Such an action is called siddha-bhāva in Sanskrit. So vijñapti is not only be seen as a kind of action, but also is a kind of thing looked as entity (dravyavat). Therefore, the word vijñapti is within the domain of adhikāra-sūtra “akartari ca kārake saṃjñāyām //3.3.19//” in Aṣṭādhyāyī, and vijñapti can be used as a proper noun (saṃjñā), Consciousness. (See Cao (2016, pp. 1–10).)

  3. T no.1579, 30: 580 b14-b17: 由有阿賴耶識, 故得有末那。由此末那為依止, 故意識得轉。譬如依止眼等五根, 五識身轉。[All citations of T refer to Taishō shinshiu daizōkyō]. (The English translation is mine.)

  4. See Pradhan (1967, pp. 61–62).

  5. See Pruden (1988, p. 205). (The translation has been modified by me.) Xuanzang’s Chinese translation reads: 淨不淨界種種差別故名為心, 即此為他作所依止故名為意, 作能依止故名為識。 (T no.1558, 29: 21 c21-c22).

  6. See Pradhan (1967, p11).

  7. See Pruden (1988, p. 75). Xuanzang’s Chinese translation reads: 頌曰: 由即六識身, 無間滅為意。論曰: 即六識身無間滅已, 能生後識故名意界。謂如此子即名餘父, 又如此果即名餘種。(T no.1558, 29: 4 b03-b06).

  8. See Cook (1999, pp. 113–114). Xuanzang’s Chinese translation reads: 次初異熟能變識後, 應辯思量能變識相。是識聖教別名末那, 恒審思量勝餘識故。此名何異第六意識?此持業釋, 如藏識名, 識即意故。彼依主釋, 如眼識等, 識異意故。(T no.1585, 31: 19 b07-b11).

  9. See Ballantyne (2010, p. 286).

  10. All the Sūtra of Aṣṭādhyāyī see Böhtlingk (1998, Volume I).

  11. See Lévi (1925, p. 13).

  12. See Cook (1999, p. 378). (The translation has been modified by me.) Xuanzang’s Chinese translation reads: 次第二能變, 是識名末那。依彼轉緣彼, 思量為性相。(T no.1585, 31: 60 b10-b11).

  13. Among definitions of manas, the another one is “manyana-ātmaka” in Laṅkāvatārasūtra, which reads as follows:

    cittam ālayavijñānaṃ mano yan manyana-ātmakam /

    gṛhnāti viṣayān yena vijñānaṃ hi tad ucyate // 10.102// (Huang, 2011, p. 555).

    藏識說名心, 思量以為意, 能了諸境界, 是則名為識。(T no.672, 16: 626 c22-c23).

  14. See Lévi (1925, p. 13): “evaṃ manana-ātmakatvān mana ity ucyate nairuktena vidhinā //.”

  15. See Sarup (1967, p. 76). This sentence indicates, “manas (mind) is derived from (the root) man (to think).” (Sarup, 1927, p. 57).

  16. See Cook (1999, p. 114). (The translation has been modified by me.) Xuanzang’s Chinese translation reads: 然諸聖教恐此濫彼, 故於第七但立意名。 又標意名, 為簡心、識, 積集、了別, 劣餘識故。 或欲顯此與彼意識為近所依, 故但名意。(T no.1585, 31: 19 b11-b14).

  17. See Pradhan (1967, p. 61). And the Laṅkāvatārasūtra indicates that “cittaṃ vikalpo vijñaptir mano vijñānam eva ca / ālayaṃ tribhavaś ceṣṭā ete cittasya paryayāḥ //10.459//. (Huang, 2011, p. 648)” The Chinese text reads: 心、意及與識, 分別與表示, 本識、作、三有, 皆心之異名。(T no.672, 16: 632 b22-b23).

  18. See Pradhan (1967, p. 61).

  19. All the roots see Panashikar (1985, pp. 729–739).

  20. But from the verse of Laṅkāvatārasūtra, “cittena dhāryate kāyo mano manyati vai sadā / vijñānaṃ citta-viṣayaṃ vijñānaiḥ saha chindati //10. 461// (Huang, 2011, p. 649),” we can find that the root of “manyati” is the fourth class. The Chinese text reads: 心能持於身, 意恒審思慮, 意識諸識俱, 了自心境界。(T no.672, 16: 632 b26-b27).

  21. Xuanzang’s Chinese translation reads: 此中諸識皆名心、意、識。若就最勝, 阿賴耶識名心。何以故?由此識能集聚一切法種子故……末那名意, 於一切時執我、我所及我慢等, 思量為性。餘識名識, 謂於境界了別為相。(T no.1579, 30: 651 b19-b24). (The English translation is mine.)

  22. Xuanzang’s Chinese translation reads: 云何意根……又意增上, 發意識, 於法已正當了別, 及彼同分, 是名意根……所有名號……謂名意、名意處、名意界、名意根。(T no.1537, 26: 499 b03-b11). (The English translation is mine.)

  23. According to the non-secular analysis (alaukikavigraha) by the Indian Sanskrit Grammarian (Vaiyākaraṇa), the compound word mana-indriya is composed of the preceding word (pūrvapada) “manas” with a “sup” suffix and the posterior word (uttarapada) “indriya” with a “sup” suffix. By applying the sūtra of Aṣṭādhyāyī, “supo dhātu-prātipadikayoḥ //2.4.71//,” we can see that the suffixes in the base of the noun are replaced by the disappearance (luk), and therefore manas (sup) + indriya (sup) → manas + indriya. Then according to the Aṣṭādhyāyī sūtra “sa-sajuṣo ruḥ //8.2.66//,” the letter “s” of manas is replaced by “r”, so manar + indriya is obtained. And by the sūtra “bho-bhago-agho-a-pūrvasya yo ’śi //8.3.17//,” we can see that the letter r before the sonant letter i is replaced by the y, so manar + indriya→manay + indriya. Then according to the sūtra “lopaḥ śākalyasya//8.3.19//,” the final letter y is replaced by disappearance(lopa). so manay+indriya→mana+indriya. At this point, the final vowel a of the preceding word and the initial vowel i of the posterior word should have performed the sūtra of Aṣṭādhyāyī, “ād guṇaḥ//6.1.87//,” that means a and i should be replaced by a diphthong e and are thus obtained mana+indriya→ man+e+ ndriya = manendriya. However, due to the restriction power of the sūtra “pūrvatra-asiddham //8.2.1//,” the above sūtra 6.1.87 cannot be performed. So the final result is mana+ indriya = mana-indriya. The reason why I use a hyphen “-” in compound words is that if it is removed, the word form of the compound is manaindriya, the form “ai” is easily misunderstood to be one vowel ai. So the final form of the compound word is “mana-indriya” in Latin alphabet. It is the same case for other compound words such as mana-āyatana.

  24. See Pradhan (1967, p. 295).

  25. See Pruden (1988, p. 807). Xuanzang’s Chinese translation reads: [謂契經]說: 識二緣生。其二者何?謂眼及色, 廣說乃至意及諸法。(T no.1558, 29: 104 b12-b14).

  26. See Sardesai and Padhye (2009, p. 15).

  27. See Soni (2020, p. 320).

  28. See Chatterjee and Datta (2011, p. 253).

  29. See Virupakshananda (2001, p. 52).

  30. See Lévi (1925, p. 14).

  31. See Cook (1999, p. 380). Xuanzang’s Chinese translation reads: 意識常現起, 除生無想天, 及無心二定, 睡眠與悶絕。(T no.1585, 31: 60 c07-c08).

  32. Huang (2011, pp. 476-477). Chinese translation reads: 何等為八?謂如來藏名藏識, 意及意識並五識身。 (T no.672, 16: 621 c2-3).

  33. See Lévi (1925, p. 18).

  34. See Chatterjee (1980, p. 40).

  35. See Lévi (1925, p. 23).

  36. See Chatterjee (1980, p. 55). (The translation has been slightly modified by me.)

  37. See Kano (2005, pp. 119–120): “tena vikalpena ālayavijñānaṃ kliṣṭaṃ manaḥ pravṛtti-vijñāna-svabhāvena.”

  38. See Lévi (1925, p. 35).

  39. See Chatterjee (1980, p. 103). (The translation has been slightly modified by me.)

  40. See Schmithausen (1979, pp. 16–17), Odani (2010, pp. 11–12).

  41. See the Chinese text: 有染污意, 與四煩惱恒相應: 一身見, 二我慢, 三我愛, 四無明。此識是餘煩惱識依止。(T no.1593, 31: 114 a18-a22). (The English translation is mine.)

  42. See Kramer (2013, p. 112).

  43. The Chinese text reads: 如是六轉識, 及染污意, 阿賴耶識, 此八名識蘊。(T no.1613, 31: 854 c10-c11). (The English translation is mine.)

  44. See Gerloft (2017, p. 186).

  45. See Seegers (2018, pp. 59–60).

  46. See Lévi (1925, p. 13). Xuanzang’s Chinese translation reads: 阿羅漢滅定, 出世道無有。(T no.1586, 31: 60 b15).

  47. See Cook (1999, pp. 140–141). Xuanzang’s Chinese translation reads: 此中有義, 末那唯有煩惱障俱, 聖教皆言三位無故, 又說四惑恒相應故, 又說為識雜染依故; 有義彼說教理相違。出世末那, 經說有故。無染意識如有染時, 定有俱生, 不共依故。論說, 藏識決定恒與一識俱轉, 所謂末那。(T no.1585, 31: 24 a19-a24).

  48. See Cook (1999, p. 154). Xuanzang’s Chinese translation reads: 或名色識乃至法識, 隨境立名, 順識義故。謂於六境了別名識, 色等五識唯了色等。法識通能了一切法, 或能了別法獨得法識名。故六識名無相濫失。(T no.1585, 31: 26 a21-a24).

  49. See Cook (1999, p. 153). Xuanzang’s Chinese translation reads: 隨根立名具五義故。五謂: 依、發、屬、助、如根。(T no.1585, 31: 26 a17-a18).

  50. See Cook (1999, p. 154). Xuanzang’s Chinese translation reads: 此後隨境立六識名, 依五色根未自在說。若 得自在, 諸根互用, 一根發識, 緣一切境。但可隨根, 無相濫失。《莊嚴論》說, 如來五根, 一一皆於, 五境轉者, 且依麤顯同類境說。(T no.1585, 31: 26 a24-a28).

  51. See Li (2008, p. 17). The Chinese text reads: 最勝意者, 謂緣阿賴耶識為境。(T no.1612, 31: 850 a07-a08).

  52. See Kramer (2013, p. 108).

  53. See Kramer (2016, p. 158).

  54. See Kramer (2013, p. 108).

  55. This Sanskrit sentence was written by me. The meaning is: [Anyone of the] six consciousnesses has passed away, its’ entity immediately works as a manas. In Chinese it is “六識身無間滅意”.

  56. The Chinese text reads: 意謂: 恒行意及六識身無間滅意。(T no.1579, 30: 280 b08-b09). (The English translation is mine.) The Sanskrit text reads: “manaḥ katamat / yat ṣaṇṇām api vijñāna-kāyānām anantara-niruddhaṃ kliṣṭaṃ ca mano yan nityam avidya-ātmadṛṣṭy-asmimāna-tṛṣṇā-ālakṣaṇaiś caturbhiḥ kleśaiḥ samprayuktaṃ //.” (Bhattacharya (1957, p. 11)) Kragh believes that the Chinese version is earlier than the Sanskrit version. (Kragh (2013, p. 585))

  57. See Chodron (p. 36). The Chinese text reads: 意有二種。第一與作等無間緣所依止性, 無間滅識能與意識作生依止; 第二染污意與四煩惱恒共相應, 一者薩迦耶見, 二者我慢, 三者我愛, 四者無明, 此即是識雜染所依。識復由彼第一依生, 第二雜染, 了別境義故。等無間義故, 思量義故, 意成二種。(T no.1594, 31: 133 c05-c09).

  58. The Chinese text reads: 言意界者, 謂即彼無間滅等。(T no.1612, 31: 850 b01-b02). (The English translation is mine.)

  59. The Chinese text reads: 最勝意者, 謂緣阿賴耶識為境。恒與我癡、我見、我慢、及我愛等相應之識。(T no.1612, 31: 850 a07-a09). (The English translation is mine.)

  60. The Chinese text reads: 彼所依者: 等無間依, 謂意; 種子依, 謂如前說一切種子阿賴耶識。(T no.1579, 30: 280 b09-b11). The Sanskrit text reads: āśrayaḥ katamaḥ / samanantarāśrayo manaḥ / bījāśrayaḥ pūrvavad eva / sarvabījakam ālayavijñānaṃ //. (Bhattacharya (1957, p. 11))

  61. See Kramer (2013, p. 108).

  62. The Chinese text reads: 當知諸心差別而轉略由五相。 一由世俗道理建立故。二由勝義道理建立故。三由所依能依建立故。四由俱有建立故。五由染淨建立故。 云何世俗道理建立……勝義道理建立差別我今當說……復次此中諸識皆名心意識。就最勝, 阿賴耶識名心。何以故?由此識能集聚一切法種子故……末那名意, 於一切時執我我所及我慢等, 思量為性。餘識名識, 謂於境界了別為相。(T no.1579, 30: 651 b08-b23). (The English translation is mine.)

  63. See Li (2008, p. 17).

  64. The Chinese text reads: 最勝意者, 謂緣阿賴耶識為境, 恒與我癡我見我慢及我愛等相應之識。(T no.1612, 31: 850 a07-a09). (The English translation is mine.)

  65. See Kramer (2013, p. 108).

  66. See Kramer (2013, p. 108): “tat ṣaṣṭhasya manovijñānasya āśraya-prasiddhy-artham na tu manyana-ākāratvāt / ato na tasya prādhānyena manastvam /.”

  67. As for the meaning of prādhānyena, we should also do some syntactic analysis following the Indian traditional śāstra of Vaiyākaraṇa. By the Aṣṭādhyāyī sūtra “guṇa-vacana-brāhmaṇa-ādibhyaḥ karmaṇi ca //5.1.124//,” a taddhita affix “ṣyañ” should be after a word expressive of quality. Therefore, when we want to express the meaning of “pradhānasya bhāvaḥ”, we can get the form of “pradhāna+ṣyañ”. In the “ṣyañ”, the letters ṣ and ñ are itsaṃjñā (term of indicator). Actually, by the Aṣṭādhyāyī sūtra “tasy lopaḥ //1.3.9//” and “adarśanaṃ lopaḥ //1.1.60//,” the terms of indicator cannot be seen, thus “pradhāna+ṣyañ→pradhāna+ya”. According to the sūtra “taddhiteṣv acām ādeḥ //7.2.117//,” the vṛddhi is substituted for the first vowel of the stem, when a taddhita affix having an indicator of ñ or ṇ follows. Therefore, we have “prādhāna+ya”. Moreover, based on the Aṣṭādhyāyī sūtra “yaci bham //1.4.18//” and “yasya īti ca //6.4.148//,” the final letter a of a bha stem should be elided before the taddhita affix. Consequently, we get “prādhāna+ya→ prādhān+ya=prādhānya”. In this case, the word prādhānya means “the nature of pradhāna”, so we could translate it into “uttermost” or “principle”. Thereby prādhānyena means “by the view of the uttermost or principle”.

  68. See Vaidya (1960, p. 261).

  69. The Suvarṇasaptati indicates that: “自性者, 或名勝因, 或名為梵, 或名眾持。(T no.2137, 54: 1250 b30-c01).” The prakṛti is also called the supreme cause (pradhāna), or else Brahman or else “that which comprehends all” (bahudhānaka). (See Takagusu (1932, p. 30).)

  70. See Ashton (2020, p. 35).

  71. See Larson and Bhattcharya (1987, p. 30).

  72. See Solomon (1973, p. 36).

  73. See Kumar and Bhargava (1992, p. 173).

  74. See Pradhan (1967, p. 2).

  75. According to the Pāṇini’s Aṣṭādhyāyī sūtra, “avyayaṃ vibhakti-samīpa-samṛddhi-vyṛddhy-arthābhāva-atyaya- asamprati-śabdaprādur-bhāvapaścād-yathā-anupūrvya-yaugapadya-sādṛśya-sampatti-sākalya-anta-vacaneṣu // 2.1.6 //,” yathāpradhāna is an indeclinable (avyayībhāva) compound word conveying the sense of “yathā”. The Sidhhāntakaumudī explains that the word “yathā” is concerned with four meanings, “yogyatā-vīpsā-padārthānativṛtti-sādṛśyāni yathā-arthāḥ.” Therefore, the anterior word (pūrvapada) “yathā” of “yathā-pradhānam” means pada-artha-anativṛtti (not beyond the meaning of the word). Thus, when we want to convey the meaning of “pradhānam anatikramya” (to the uttermost of its’ essence), we get an indeclinable compound word yathāpradhāna. As such, we can translate the word into “as most essential as” or “real”.

  76. The Chinese text reads: 由彼對法論中, 勝義入此攝故, 此得藏名。(T no.1558, 29: 1 b14) (The English translation is mine.)

  77. See Pradhan (1967, p. 349).

  78. The Chinese text reads: 通三業為體。雖就最勝, 唯是意業。(T no.1558, 29: 121 a14-a15) (The English translation is mine.)

  79. In Chinese, we can call it “最勝意” , “最勝末那” and “勝義末那”.

  80. In Chinese, we can call it “最勝意識”, “最勝末那識” and “勝義末那識”.

References

Primary Sources

  • T: Taishō shinshiu daizōkyō 大正新修大藏經.(Tōkyō: Daizōkyō kankō kai, 1924-1935).

  • Abhidharmakośabhāṣya (阿毘達磨俱舍論) T no.1558. Text attributed to Vasubandhu. Trans. (Chinese) Xuanzang (玄奘). Edited by P. Pradhan in Abhidharma-koshabhāṣya. Patna: K.P. Jayaswal Research Institute, 1967. Trans. (English) Leo M. Pruden in Abhidharmakośabhāṣyam of Vasubandhu. Berkeley, Calif.: Asian Humanities Press, 1988.

  • Aṣṭādhyāyī Edited by Otto Böhtlingk in Pāṇini’s Grammatik. Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass Publishers Private Limited, 1998.

  • Bodhicaryāvatāra Text attributed to Śāntideva. Edited by Dr. P. L. Vaidya in Bodhicaryāvatāra of Śāntideva with the Commentary of Pañjikā. Darbanga: Mithila Institute, 1960.

  • Cheng Weishi Lun (成唯識論) T no.1585. Text attributed to Dharmapāla. Trans. (Chinese) Xuanzang(玄奘). Trans. (English) Francis H. Cook, in Three Texts on Consciousness Only. Berkeley: Numata Center for Buddhist Translation and Research, 1999.

  • Laṅkāvatārasūtra (大乘入楞伽經) T no.672. Trans. (Chinese) Śikṣānanda (實叉難陀). Edited and translated by Baosheng Huang (黃寶生) in Laṅkāvatārasūtra: Parallel Texts of Sanskrit and Chinese. Beijing: China Social Sciences Press, 2011.

  • Mahāyānasaṃgraha (攝大乘論) T no.1594. Text attributed to Asaṅga. Trans. (Chinese) Xuanzang (玄奘). Translated from French into English by Gelongma Karma Migme Chodron in Mahāyānasaṃgraha (La Somme du Grand Véhicule d'Asaṅga) Étienne Lamotte Volume II : Translation and Commentary.(PDF Text)

  • Pañcaskandhaka (大乘五蘊論) T no.1612. Text attributed to Vasubandhu. Trans. (Chinese) Xuanzang (玄奘). Edited by Xuezhu Li (李學竹) & Ernst Steinkellner in Vasubandhu’s Pañcaskandhaka. Beijing: China Tibetology Publishing House, 2008.

  • Pañcaskandhakavibhāṣā (大乘廣五蘊論) T no.1613. Text attributed to Sthiramati. Trans. (Chinese) Di Po He Luo (地婆訶羅). Edited by Jowita Kramer in Sthiramati’s Pañcaskandhakavibhāṣā. Beijing: China Tibetology Publishing House, 2013.

  • Sāṃkhyakārikā Edited by Esther A. Solomon in Sāṃkhya-saptati-vṛtti. Ahmedabad: Ramanand Printing Press, 1973.

  • Suvarṇasaptati (金七十論) T no.2137 Trans. (Chinese) Zhendi (真諦).

  • Triṃśikāvijñaptibhāṣya Edited by Sylvain Lévi in “Vijñaptimātratāsiddhi” Deux Traités De Vasubandhu: Viṃśatikā Et Triṃśikā. Paris: Librairie Ancienne Honoré Champion, 1925. Edited and translated by K. N. Chatterjee in Vasubandhu’s Vijñapti-mātratā-siddhi With Sthiramati’s Commentary. Varanasi: Kishor Vidya Niketan, 1980.

  • Triṃśikāvijñaptikārikā (唯識三十頌) T no.1586. Text attributed to Vasubandhu. Trans. (Chinese) Xuanzang (玄奘). Edited by Sylvain Lévi in “Vijñaptimātratāsiddhi” Deux Traités De Vasubandhu: Viṃśatikā Et Triṃśikā. Paris: Librairie Ancienne Honoré Champion, 1925. Edited and translated by Francis H. Cook, in Three Texts on Consciousness Only. Berkeley: Numata Center for Buddhist Translation and Research, 1999.

  • Viṃśikāvṛtti (唯識二十論) T no.1590. Text attributed to Vasubandhu. Trans. (Chinese) Xuanzang (玄奘). Edited and translated by Stefan Anacker in Seven Works of Vasubandhu. Deli: Motilal Banarsidass Publishers Private Limited, 2005.

  • Yogācārabhūmi (瑜伽師地論) T no.1579. Text attributed to Maitreya. Trans. (Chinese) Xuanzang (玄奘). Edited by Vidhushekhara Bhattacharya in The Yogācārabhūmi of Acaraya Asanga: the Sanskrit Text Compared with the Tibetan Version.Calcutta: Calcutta University Press, 1957.

Secondary Sources

  • Ashton, G. (2020). The Puzzle of Playful Matters in Non-Dual Śaivism and Sāṃkhya: Reviving Prakṛti in the Sāṃkhya Kārikā through Goethean Organics. Religions, 11(5), 221.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ballantyne, J. R. (2010). Laghusiddhāntakaumudī (Text with English Translation). Chowkhamba Vidyabhawan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cao, Y. (2016) .Vijñānamātra and Vijñaptimātra: A Reappraisal. Sambodhi Indological Research Journal of L.D.I.I., Vol. XXXIX, 1-10.

  • Chatterjee, S., & Datta, D. (2011). An Introduction to Indian Philosophy. Rupa Publication India Pvt. Ltd.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gerloft, T. (2017). Saroruha’s Hevajra-Lineage: A Close Study of the Surviving Sanskrit Works (Ph.D. Thesis). University of Hamburg.

  • Kano, K. (2005). Two Folios from Sthiramati’s Triṃśikābhāṣya in Sanskrit Photographed by Rāhula Sāṅkṛtyā-yana: Diplomatic and Critical Editions of Göttingen Xc14/1e. Vienna Journal of South Asian Studies, Vol. 49,113–149.

  • Kragh, U. T. (2013). The foundation for Yoga Practitioners: The Buddhist Yogācārabhūmi Treatise and Its Adaptation in India, East Asia, and Tibet. Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kramer, J. (2016). Some Remarks on the Proofs of the “Store Mind” (Ālayavijñāna) and the Development of the Concept of Manas. In B. Dessein & W. Teng (Eds.), Text, History, and Philosophy: Abhidharma Across Buddhist Scholastic Traditions (pp. 146–148). Brill.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kumar, S., & Bhargava, D. N. (1992). Yuktidīpikā (Vol. 2). Eastern Book Linkers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Larson, G. J., & Bhattcharya, R. S. (1987). Encyclopedia of Indian Philosophies (Volume IV): Sāṃkhya (A Dualist Tradition in Indian Philosophy). Motilal Banarsidass.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Odani, N. (2010). 染汚意と意根——我執の根深さの根拠, 仏教学, Vol.92, 1–13.

  • Panashikar, V. L. S. (1985). The Siddhānta-kaumudī with the Tattvabodhinī Commentary of Jñānendra Sarasvatī and the Subodhinī Commentary of Jayakṛṣṇa. Chaukhamba Sanskrit Pratishthan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sardesai, N. G. & Padhye, D. G. (2009). Amarakośa of Amaradingh.Varanasi: Chowkhamba Vidyabhawan.

  • Sarup, L. (1927). The Nighantu and The Nirukta: The Oldest Indian Treatise on Etymology, Philology and Semantics. Panjab University Oriental Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sarup, L. (1967). The Nighaṇṭu and Nirukta. Motilal Banarsidass.

  • Schmithausen, L. (1979). 我見に関する若干の考察——薩迦耶見、我慢、染汚意. 仏教学, Vol. 7, 1–18.

  • Seegers, M. (2018). The Third Karma-pa Rang-byung-rdo-rje’s (1284‒1339): Discourse on the Distinction between Perception (rnam shes: vijñāna) and Gnosis (ye shes: jñāna) (M.Phil. Thesis). University of Hamburg.

  • Soni, J. (2020). The Concept of Manas in Jaina Philosophy. Journal of Indian Philosophy, 48, 315–328.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Takagusu, M. (1932). The Samkhya Karika: Studied in the Light of Its Chinese Version. Diocesan Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Virupakshananda, S. (2001). Tarka Saṃgraha. Sri Ramakrishna Math.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yūki, R. (1972). The Development of Indian Thought of Vijñānamātra. In Buddhist Modern Academic Series (Vol. 24). Mahāyāna Culture Press.

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. School of Philosophy, Wuhan University, Wuhan, 430072, China

    Yan Cao

Authors
  1. Yan Cao
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Yan Cao.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

This study is part of the Research Project “A Study of Triṃśikāvijñaptikārikā Based on Panini’s Sanskrit Grammar” (17BZJ015) supported by the National Office for Philosophy and Social Sciences of China. Thanks for the Guidance from Prof. Dipti Tripathi, Prof. Pushpa Dikshit, Prof. Haiyan Hu-von Hinüber and Prof. Eli Franco. Thanks to Dr. Ben Goldstein for his assistance polishing.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Cao, Y. Naming the Seventh Consciousness in Yogācāra. J Indian Philos 50, 201–222 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10781-021-09487-w

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10781-021-09487-w

Keywords

Search

Navigation