personal identity in Buddhism, there was a strong
opinion that more than one stream of consciousness
could not exist simultaneously in any sentient being at
a given moment. According to this position, strongly
advocated by the Sarvastivada school, when one feels,
for example, that one is seeing something and listen-
ing to something at the same time, the visual con-
sciousness and the auditory consciousness are in fact
operating in rapid succession and not simultaneously.
It is recorded that some schools belonging to the Ma-
hasamghika lineage did not share this opinion, but it
seems to have been widely accepted by other schools.
The SAUTRANTIKA(Those Who Follow Sutras) tradi-
tion, which, according to the common view, was an off-
shoot of the Sarvastivada school, was considered to have
shared the Sarvastivada opinion on this matter, but this
has been questioned recently by some scholars.
Sautrantika theories of consciousness
The exact identity of the tradition called “Sautrantika”
is one of the biggest problems in current Buddhist
scholarship. Sautrantika is commonly believed to have
been preceded by a tradition called Darstantika (Those
Who Resort to Similes). However, the exact relation-
ship between these two traditions is a matter of dispute.
Generally speaking, both Darstantika and Sautran-
tika seem to have had nominalistic tendencies; thus
they challenged the realistic system of Sarvastivada on
many points. For example, in both the Sarvastivada
and Yogacara schools, consciousness(es) are consid-
ered to be associated with various psychological fac-
tors (caitta), such as lust and hatred, which are
themselves distinct elements. The Darstantika tradi-
tion, on the other hand, treats psychological factors as
something not distinct from the consciousness itself.
The Darstantika and Sautrantika traditions also tend
not to admit a causal relationship between two simul-
taneous elements. In order for a cause to bring about
a result, the cause must be at least one moment prior
to the result. Thus, the cognitive object, which is con-
sidered to be a cause of consciousness, must precede
the cognition of that object. In addition, what one per-
ceives is the cognitive image of an object within one’s
consciousness; one cannot directly perceive the object
itself. The existence of the external object, however, is
inferred from its cognitive image.
Theory of consciousness in
Buddhist epistemology
The Darstantika and Sautrantika traditions are con-
sidered to have exerted a strong influence over Bud-
dhist epistemologists such as DIGNAGA(ca. 480–540)
and DHARMAKIRTI(ca. 600–660). At the same time,
Dignaga also clearly inherited the idealistic system of
Yogacara, as is shown in the theory of cognition cog-
nizing itself(svasamvitti) in the Pramanasamuccaya
(verses 1.8cd–12).
Further, one of Dignaga’s important contributions
(Pramanasamuccaya [Collected Writings on the Means
of Cognition],verses 1.2–8ab) was the redefinition of
perception (pratyaksa) and its strict differentiation
from inference(anumana). He maintained that the
cognition of the five sense consciousnesses (from vi-
sual through tactile) are always perception, and that
the mental consciousness operates in both perception
and inference. This distinction between the five sense
consciousnesses and the mental consciousness is in line
with the theories of Sarvastivada and Yogacara.Relationship with the tathagatagarbha theory
Another development in the theory of consciousness
is the association of the storehouse consciousness with
the TATHAGATAGARBHA (embryo of tathagata, or
buddha-nature) theory. The storehouse consciousness
was originally conceived as the root of the deluded
mind and the defiled world, and thus is itself defiled.
It was to be transformed into pure wisdom when one
attains awakening, but the storehouse consciousness
before the transformation was not considered to be a
pure element in the original Yogacara system. How-
ever, some lines of the Yogacara tradition, most no-
tably the position presented in the LAN ̇KAVATARA-
SUTRA(Discourse on the Occasion of the [Buddha’s] En-
try into Lan ̇ka) came to associate, and even identify,
the storehouse consciousness with the tathagata-
garbha, the pure element latent in deluded, ordinary
beings. Since some Indian masters who transmitted
the Yogacara doctrine to China, most notably PARA-
MARTHA(499–569), were heavily influenced by these
lines of thought, the exact relationship between the
storehouse consciousness and the tathagatagarbha be-
came an important issue in Chinese Buddhism.See also:Anatman/Atman (No-Self/Self); Philosophy;
Psychology; Sarvastivada and MulasarvastivadaBibliography
Aramaki, Noritoshi. “On the Formation of a Short Prose
Prattyasamutpada Sutra.” In Buddhism and Its Relation to
Other Religions: Essays in Honour of Dr. Shozen Kumoi on His
Seventieth Birthday,ed. Kumoi Shozen Hakushi Koki Ki-
nenkai. Kyoto: Heirakuji Shoten, 1985.CONSCIOUSNESS, THEORIES OF