Vasubandhu
| Vasubandhu | |
|---|---|
| |
| Vasubandhu, Indian Buddhist philosopher and co-founder of the Yogācāra school | |
| Tradition | Buddhist philosophy, Mahayana Buddhism, Yogācāra, Abhidharma |
| Influenced by | Asaṅga, Maitreya, Mahayana sutras, Nagarjuna |
| Lifespan | 4th–5th century CE |
| Notable ideas | Yogācāra (Mind-Only); Abhidharmakośa; theories of consciousness and perception; analysis of karma and rebirth |
| Occupation | Philosopher, Monk, Teacher |
| Influenced | Dignaga, Dharmakirti, Xuanzang, East Asian Buddhism |
| Wikidata | Q316343 |
Vasubandhu (c. 4th–5th century CE) was a towering figure in Buddhist philosophy. He was born in Purusapura in Gandhāra (modern Peshawar) and was the younger half-brother of the Yogācāra founder Asaṅga. Initially trained in the traditional Sarvāstivāda (Vaibhāṣika) Abhidharma school, Vasubandhu mastered its doctrines but later became critical of them. He composed the Abhidharmakośa (“Treasury of Abhidharma”), a comprehensive versified summary of Abhidharma doctrine, and an autocommentary that marked an important shift toward the Sautrāntika view of momentariness. Later Vasubandhu embraced Mahāyāna, helping to establish the Yogācāra (“Mind-Only”) school. His concise expositions of “consciousness-only” (vijñāpti-mātra) and the theory of ālaya-vijñāna (storehouse consciousness) deeply influenced Buddhist thought. Revered as one of the six great “ornaments” of Indian Buddhism, Vasubandhu’s works shaped Abhidharma studies and Yogācāra metaphysics for over a millennium.
Early Life and Education
Born in Purusapura (ancient Gandhāra), Vasubandhu came from a scholarly Brahmin family. His father was a brahmanical scholar (of the Kaushika gotra) who served at the court of the regional rulers. In youth Vasubandhu studied both Hindu classics (Nyāya logic and Vaiśeṣika atomism) and Buddhist doctrine. The dominant local Buddhist school was Sarvāstivāda (Vaibhāṣika), and he entered that order. He mastered the Mahāvibhāṣa (Vaibhāṣika treatise) but eventually questioned its ontological assumptions. He traveled to Kashmir – the heartland of Sarvāstivāda scholarship – to study Vaibhāṣika doctrine in secret (some accounts say he feigned madness to gain entry). After four years in Kashmir, Vasubandhu returned to Gandhāra as a highly learned monk.
Back in Purusapura he began lecturing publicly on Abhidharma and independently compiling his knowledge. Living modestly outside any specific monastery, he would teach Vaibhāṣika Abhidharma by day and refine his notes at night. These lectures were gradually distilled into a long corpus of verses. By synthesizing the whole scholastic system, he composed the Abhidharmakośa-kārikā (‘Verses of the Abhidharma Treasury’), an 600+ verse handbook that summarised Sarvāstivāda Abhidharma in didactic form. In it Vasubandhu catalogued seventy-five fundamental phenomena called dharmas (elements of experience) – ranging from the classical fourteen sense-bases to various mental factors, wholesome and unwholesome states, and the unconditioned factors. He organized these into categories (elements, faculties, world systems, karma, afflictions, stages of the path, wisdom, and meditation) to present the theory of how the mind and world function for liberation.
Abhidharma Scholarship
The Abhidharmakośa quickly became influential. In it Vasubandhu generally adopts the Sarvāstivāda schema but framed with clarity and precision. He defines all dharmas in turn and examines their causal relations and karmic functions. Its lucid systematization made it a standard textbook for later Buddhist scholars in Tibet, China and Japan. Numerous commentaries were written on it; for example, the Kashmiri Abhidharmakosa Bhashya by British scholar Vasubandhu himself, and later by Śamathadeva, Yashomitra, Purnavardhana and others (Sanghabhadra, a Vaibhāṣika, even wrote a refutation of Vasubandhu’s positions from the opposite viewpoint).
Soon after composing the Abhidharmakośa, Vasubandhu wrote an accompanying prose commentary (Abhidharmakośa-bhāṣya). In this commentary he began to critique orthodox Vaibhāṣika positions from the Sautrāntika perspective. For example, traditional Vaibhāṣikas held that dharmas (mental and physical phenomena) exist in the past, present, and future; Vasubandhu objected that this implies unreal eternal entities, defending instead the Sautrāntika view that dharmas exist only as discrete present moments. He argued that continuity and change must be understood logically rather than by positing enduring substances. His critique also touched on cosmology, theory of perception, and the status of nirvana as the cessation of mental events. Vaibhāṣika scholars were displeased: legend says Vasubandhu refused to debate Sanghabhadra (a leading Vaibhāṣika) before an audience, preferring to let his Bhāṣya speak for itself.
The result is that the paired works Abhidharmakośa and Bhāṣya contain strikingly different viewpoints. The verses state Vaibhāṣika doctrines, while the commentary often refutes them. This made Vasubandhu a controversial figure among his contemporaries. Nonetheless, these works became primary sources for later Buddhists. The Tibetan and Chinese Buddhist traditions consider the Abhidharmakośabhaṣya the definitive exposition of Shravakayana Abhidharma thought. Today it is the core text for Tibetan monastic study of Sarvāstivāda psychology (as translated into Tibetan by Xuanzang’s team, Kawa-zhonnu and Jinamitra in the 8th century) and remained highly regarded in East Asia as well.
Beyond the Kosha and its commentary, Vasubandhu wrote many related works. He composed Karmasiddhiprakaraṇa (“Treatise on Action”), which examines karma and rebirth. In this treatise he introduces and applies the idea of a “storehouse consciousness” (ālaya-vijñāna) – the underlying mind-stream that holds karmic seeds – to explain how karma persists in a causally consistent way (onKarma#:~:text=of%20the%20most%20important%20treatises,ground%20consciousness www.rigpawiki.org). He also wrote the Pañcaskandha-ṭīkākāra (“Commentary on the Five Aggregates”), a concise Abhidharma manual for meditation, and the Vyākyāyukti (“Proper Exposition”), a guide to interpreting Buddhist texts. Other short texts include Abhidharmamukha (“Gateway to the Abhidharma”), an introductory summary of Abhidharma topics, and various quizzes and verse tracts on doctrinal points. Throughout these writings Vasubandhu demonstrated mastery of logic and debate. He is traditionally credited with refining Buddhist syllogistic logic – distinguishing a formal five-step debate method from a simpler three-step reasoning used in everyday argumentation (www.britannica.com). He applied rigorous analysis to both Buddhist and non-Buddhist philosophies, often refuting opponents. For instance, he is said to have publicly defeated the dualist Sāṅkhya school and other Brahmanical philosophers in debate (iep.utm.edu).
Shift to Mahāyāna: Yogācāra Philosophy of Mind
In later legend, Vasubandhu underwent a dramatic conversion to Mahāyāna Buddhism under the influence of his brother Asaṅga. The traditional story tells that, having boasted of his devotion to the Hīnayāna path, he was challenged and ultimately convinced by Asaṅga’s presentation of the Yogācāra teachings (often said to involve the Perfection of Wisdom Sūstras). In gratitude Vasubandhu vowed to use his wisdom and scholarship for the Mahāyāna cause. He then composed voluminous treatises from the Yogācāra viewpoint, including numerous sūtra commentaries (on texts such as the Aṣṭaśatikā Prajñāpāramitā, Daśabhūmikasūtra, Vimalakīrtinirdeśa, etc.) and independent sutras analysis. Tibetans recount that before dying Vasubandhu cut short his travels to join Asaṅga’s Kryptic teaching circle, but historical details are unclear.
Modern historians debate how abrupt his transition really was. Some scholars suggest he may have gradually integrated Yogācāra insights even while writing his Abhidharma works, rather than experiencing an overnight “conversion.” Other critics of the traditional biography (such as the 20th-century scholar E. Frauwallner) once speculated that there were two Vasubandhus – an “earlier” Abhidharma master and a “later” Yogācāra master – but this idea is no longer widely accepted. Strikingly, there is continuity in his writings: even in his Abhidharma phase he was critical of reified entities, foreshadowing Yogācāra’s emphasis on emptiness and mind.
Under the Yogācāra system, Vasubandhu presented a sophisticated “consciousness-only” (vijñāpti-mātra) theory of experience. This view holds that all that appears to the mind are mental representations; there is no independent external reality separate from cognition. According to this doctrine, the mind has eight consciousnesses: the six ordinary sense consciousnesses (sight, hearing, etc.), the mental consciousness (manovijñāna) that integrates sense impressions, and the deeper storehouse consciousness (ālaya-vijñāna). The ālaya-vijñāna underlies all experience: it continuously “stores” the seeds (bīja) of karmic tendencies and dispositions. At each moment of perception, karmic seeds ripen into conscious experience. When perception ceases (sleep or death), only the subtle ālaya consciousness carries the karmic seeds forward. Thus mental phenomena can account for personal continuity and the effects of karma without assuming a self or enduring substance.
Vasubandhu also articulated the famous triadic framework of the three natures (trisvabhāva): the parikalpita-svabhāva (imaginary nature), which is the falsely perceived duality of subject and object, spun by conceptual construction; the paratantra-svabhāva (dependent nature), which is the flow of ever-changing relational processes (the causal continuum of consciousness moments linked by karma); and the pariniṣpanna-svabhāva (perfected nature), which is the ultimate reality of things as they are in the absence of false conception. In simple terms, Vasubandhu taught that ordinary appearances arise from karma-conditioned mind-streams and are therefore empty of inherent existence. Only the perfected nature – realized by the Buddha’s wisdom – fully overcomes the imaginary duality.
He summarized these insights in several concise sutra-based treatises. The Viṃśatikā (“Twenty Verses on Consciousness-Only”) and the Triṃśikā (“Thirty Verses”) are two such versified presentations. The Twenty Verses sets out the Yogācāra theses (sometimes with refutations of objections), while the Thirty Verses builds the system of the three natures. In these short works he does not dwell on opponent views or objections but rather skillfully delineates the core Yogācāra vocabulary and arguments. For example, he discusses how in deep sleep all gross consciousness ceases yet some continuity remains; he resolves this only by positing the store consciousness. He also explains how karmic actions (good or bad) leave imprints in the mental continuum that determine future experience, without needing a soul to carry them. Throughout these doctrines, Vasubandhu insisted that consciousness itself has no self-nature (svabhāva); everything perceived is mediated by mind and ultimately lacks independent substance.
Influence and Reception
Vasubandhu’s influence spread widely across Buddhist cultures. In India his Abhidharma works and Yogācāra treatises became staple texts for training monks and scholars. After his time, Yogācāra held a leading role in Indian Buddhist metaphysics for many centuries. In the 6th–7th century CE his works were carried to China. The Chinese monk Paramārtha translated his Abhidharmakośa and its commentary, and later the renowned scholar-translator Xuanzang (602–664 CE) produced authoritative Chinese versions of Vasubandhu’s verse texts and ṭīkās (explanatory works). These translations underpinned the Chinese Fǎxiàngzōng (Dharma-Characteristics) school of Yogācāra. In East Asia, the Viṃśatikā and Triṃśikā (often via Xuanzang’s Chinese commentaries) became canonical. The Japanese Hossō school likewise regards Vasubandhu (as “Yuigai”) as a patriarchal founder.
Tibetan Buddhists deeply revere Vasubandhu’s Abhidharma corpus. His Kosha (Ngöndzö in Tibetan) and Bhāṣya are central to monastic education; almost all Tibetan Buddhist philosophical schools rely on them for an understanding of Sravaka Abhidharma. Many seminal Tibetan scholars (such as Sthiramati, Dharmakīrti’s disciple Jñānagarbha, and later Tsongkhapa) wrote extensive commentaries on his works. His Yogācāra texts were also studied: for example, Vasubandhu’s treatises on mind-only were translated and taught, often in dialogue with competing Madhyamaka views.
Even beyond these tradition-lines, Vasubandhu attained semi-legendary status. In Chan (Zen) Buddhism he is sometimes listed among the Indian patriarchs of the lineage (for instance as the “21st Patriarch” in some Chinese records). In Japanese Pure Land (Jōdo Shinshū) Buddhism, Honen and Shinran identify Vasubandhu as the second patriarch of their tradition. These title attributions reflect his role in transmitting the consciousness-only strand of Mahāyāna thought.
In modern times, Vasubandhu has attracted scholarly and philosophical interest too. Comparisons have been made between Yogācāra idealism and Western thought. Some writers liken his analysis of mind to Kantian “transcendental idealism” or Western phenomenology, since both stress the active role of consciousness in constituting experience (www.static.hlt.bme.hu). Others prefer to emphasize that Vasubandhu spoke more like a phenomenologist or epistemologist: he explored how cognition structures reality, without necessarily claiming metaphysical conclusions about a thing-in-itself ([https://plato.stanford.edu/ENTRIES/vasubandhu/index.html#:~:text=match%20at%20L1513%20idealist%E2%80%9D%20or,50 plato.stanford.edu]) (plato.stanford.edu). His theory of consciousness – with its model of cognitive processing and latent memory seeds – is sometimes cited in discussions of Buddhist contributions to psychology.
Critiques and Debates
Vasubandhu’s positions sparked debate in his own time and ever since. His refutation of Sarvāstivāda provoked hostile responses from orthodox Vaibhāṣikas, who attempted (not always successfully) to argue against his contentions. Debate stories involving Vasubandhu often highlight his skill in disputation: besides defeating the Sāṅkhya philosophers, he also tackled Sāṃkhya logic and even beyond-Buddhist views, showing the breadth of his engagement. Among Buddhists, one pungent target was the Personalist school (Vātsīputrīya or Pudgalavāda). Vasubandhu composed a treatise named Refutation of the Theory of a Self (Pudgalavāda-vāda) which dismantles the idea of a subtler self (pudgala) carried from life to life. In this work he argues that only mental and material phenomena exist; the personalist’s “person” is just a convenient term, not an actual entity.
Later Buddhist critics, especially from the Madhyamaka tradition, challenged Yogācāra as leaning toward a hidden realism. They accused Yogācārins of reifying consciousness into an ultimate principle, thus violating the Madhyamaka doctrine of universal emptiness. Vasubandhu anticipated such criticism. He explicitly says that “mind-only” is itself just an appearance, and that ultimately there is no fixed substance anywhere (plato.stanford.edu). For example, when asked whether his view implies that consciousness truly exists as something (merely unobserved), he points to a higher truth that cannot be put into words. He insisted that both the stream of consciousness and its objects are shapes conditioned by causes; nothing has its own essence. Modern interpreter Stephen Batchelor calls him an “epistemological idealist”: Vasubandhu did not ultimately assert a mind-substance. Lusthaus has noted that Yogācāra is better seen as a philosophy of experience (how things appear) than a doctrine about an external reality (plato.stanford.edu).
On historical terms, some of Vasubandhu’s own details are subject to dispute. The chronology of his life is tied to Gupta dynasty history and is somewhat uncertain. Traditional biographies disagree on dates and events (for instance, whether he taught a king named Vikramāditya who is later identified with either Chandragupta II or Skandagupta). Early Western scholars once entertained the “two Vasubandhus” hypothesis, but most now regard the body of work as from a single polymathic author. Some have argued (e.g. Robert Kritzer) that if any “conversion” occurred, it was gradual or conceptual rather than a sudden flip. In any case, Vasubandhu’s many writings present a remarkably unified project: even when he debates an opponent, he clearly states their view before refuting it. This rigorous dialectical style sometimes makes it hard to pin down a single “position”; his works read like careful philosophical arguments meant to teach both viewpoints.
Legacy
Vasubandhu is remembered as one of Buddhism’s greatest systematizers of mind and doctrine. His Abhidharmakośa remains a fundamental text for understanding classical Buddhist psychology; it is still studied word-for-word in Tibetan and Japanese seminaries. In Mahāyāna schools the Yogācāra ideas he popularized are integral: the very concept of ālaya-vijñāna continues to feature in meditation manuals and philosophical texts (although understood allegorically by some modern teachers). The phrase vijñaptimātra (“consciousness-only”) is widely known almost as a synonym for Yogācāra.
Scholars of comparative religion often refer to Vasubandhu when discussing mind and reality. His approach – emphasizing the “construction” of world-experience by consciousness – resonates with debates in Western philosophy about idealism and phenomenology. Contemporary Buddhists sometimes cite Vasubandhu (via the Twenty-Verses and Thirty-Verses) when explaining how perception is an active process. He has also been a subject of academic study; recent works (like Jonathan Gold’s Paving the Great Way) analyze his attempt to “unify” Buddhism’s disparate doctrines. Moreover, Vasubandhu’s analytic style – defining terms, laying out arguments, and tackling objections – sets a model for later Buddhist scholastic writing.
Vasubandhu’s name and image appear in Buddhist art and lineage charts across Asia. In Japan the Hosso school tattoo his portrait in temple halls; in Tibet his statue may stand alongside those of Nāgārjuna and Asaṅga. Western Buddhists who study Dzogchen or Tibetan philosophy often encounter Vasubandhu as the origin of many key ideas. Even outside strictly Buddhist circles, his theories of karma and mind occasionally appear in discussions on reincarnation, cognitive science, and ethics.
Selected Works
- Abhidharmakośakārikā – Treasury of Abhidharma, a 600+ verse summary of Sarvāstivāda Abhidharma doctrine. (Includes his own commentary, Abhidharmakośabhāṣya.)
- Abhidharmakośa-bhāṣya – Vasubandhu’s prose commentary on the above, critiquing Vaibhāṣika positions from a Sautrāntika viewpoint.
- Viṃśatikā-vijñaptimātratāsiddhi – Twenty Verses on Consciousness-Only, a concise Yogācāra treatise (often studied with late Chinese commentary).
- Triṃśikā-vijñaptimātra – Thirty Verses on Consciousness-Only, a poetic exposition focusing on Yogācāra’s three natures of perception.
- Trisvabhāvanirdeśa – Exposition of the Three Natures, elaborating the Yogācāra doctrine of the three levels of reality.
- Karmasiddhiprakaraṇa – Treatise on Action (Karma), discussing how karma is stored and ripens in the mind-stream (introduces ālaya-vijñāna).
- Pañcaskandha-ṭīkākāra – Commentary on the Five Aggregates, an Abhidharma manual explaining the bundle-of-skandhas model of experience.
- Vyākhyāyukti – On the Proper Mode of Exposition, a guide to interpreting and expounding Buddhist texts correctly.
- Commentaries on Mahāyāna sūtras – Vasubandhu wrote detailed analyses of important Mahāyāna scriptures, such as the Aṣṭasāhasrikā Prajñāpāramitā, Daśabhūmikasūtra, Vimalakīrti-nirdeśa, Śrīmālādevī-nirdeśa, and others, applying Yogācāra perspectives.
Each of these works played a role in shaping Buddhist thought. Vasubandhu’s texts continue to be studied by scholars and practitioners who seek to understand the nature of mind, karma, and liberation in the Buddhist tradition.