Buddhist path with meticulous attention to nuances
and differences of opinion on a broad range of exact-
ing topics.
Vasubandhu’s two main disciples (though they
probably encountered his writings through intermedi-
ary generations of teachers) were DIGNAGA(ca. 480–540
C.E.), who revolutionized Indian logic and epistemol-
ogy, and Sthiramati (ca. 510–570), who wrote impor-
tant commentaries on the works of Asan ̇ga and
Vasubandhu, notably Abhidharmasamuccayabhasya,
Trim ́ikas vijñaptitlka,and a subcommentary on Va-
subandhu’s commentary on the Madhyantavibhaga.
After Vasubandhu, Yogacara developed into two dis-
tinct directions or branches: (1) a logico-epistemic tra-
dition, exemplified by such thinkers as Dignaga,
DHARMAKIRTI, S ́antaraksita, and Ratnakrti; and (2) an
abhidharma-style psychology, exemplified by such
thinkers as Sthiramati, Dharmapala, XUANZANG, and
Vintadeva. While the first branch focused on ques-
tions of epistemology and LOGIC, the other branch re-
fined and elaborated the abhidharma analysis
developed by Asan ̇ga and Vasubandhu. These branches
were not entirely separate, and many Buddhists wrote
works that contributed to both. Dignaga, for instance,
besides his works on epistemology and logic, also wrote
a commentary on Vasubandhu’s Abhidharmakos ́a.
What united both branches was a deep concern with
the process of cognition, that is, analyses of how peo-
ple perceive and think. The former branch approached
that issue epistemologically, whereas the latter branch
approached it psychologically and therapeutically.
Both identified the root of all human problems as cog-
nitive errors that needed correction.
The abhidharmabranch faded in importance by the
eighth century in India, while the logico-epistemic
branch remained vital until the demise of Buddhism
in India around the thirteenth century. Nonetheless,
various Hindu and Jain schools have continued up to
the present day to study and write about its arguments
and contributions to Indian philosophy. Such litera-
ture usually labels the Yogacara positions VIJN
ANA-
VADA(consciousness school).
Yogacara outside India
In the early sixth century in China, while translating
Vasubandhu’s commentary on the Ten Stages Sutra
(Sanskrit, Das ́abhumikasutropades ́a; Chinese, Dilun),
the two translators, Bodhiruci and Ratnamati, parted
due to irreconcilable differences of interpretation.
Bodhiruci favored a more orthodox Yogacara ap-
proach, while Ratnamati was drawn to a Yogacara-
TATHAGATAGARBHAhybrid ideology. The former em-
phasizes removing mental obstructions, whereas the
latter stresses an ontological pure nature that shines
forth once defilements are removed. Their feud had an
immediate and lasting impact on Chinese Buddhism,
with followers of Bodhiruci’s interpretation develop-
ing into the so-called Northern Dilun school and Rat-
namati’s followers becoming Southern Dilun. That
feud dominated contemporary Chinese Buddhism, and
it intensified when in the mid-sixth century the Indian
translator PARAMARTHA(499–569) introduced another
version of Yogacara, amenable to the tathagatagarbha
ideology, that reified a ninth consciousness (amalavi-
jñana,pure consciousness) that would emerge with
enlightenment, even though no Indian text attests to
this concept. Asan ̇ga’s Mahayanasamgraha(Chinese,
Shelun) became the key text for Paramartha’s follow-
ers, so their school was dubbed Shelun.
In 629, seeking to resolve the disputes between these
schools, Xuanzang (ca. 600–664) traveled to India, re-
turning in 645 with over six hundred texts—seventy-four
of which he translated—and a better understanding of
Indian Yogacara as taught at Nalanda(the prime seat
of Buddhist learning at that time). His successor, KUIJI
(632–682), founded the Weishi school (Sanskrit, Vi-
jñaptimatra), also called FAXIANG(Dharma Charac-
teristics). Students who had come from Korea and
Japan to study with Xuanzang and Kuiji brought the
teaching back to their countries, where it thrived for
many centuries, and survives today in Japan as Hosso
(the Japanese pronunciation of Faxiang). Although the
Weishi school came under attack from the newly emerg-
ing sinitic Mahayana schools, such as the HUAYAN
SCHOOL, for challenging ingrained orthodoxies, ironi-
cally those orthodoxies were themselves largely
grounded in developments from the earlier Yogacara-
oriented Dilun and Shelun schools. The CHAN SCHOOL,
which started to institutionalize around the time of
Xuanzang and Kuiji, initially drew on the LAN ̇KAVATARA-
SUTRA,a Yogacara-tathagatagarbha hybrid text, as one
of its main scriptures. Thus, much of the later devel-
opments in East Asian Buddhism can be seen as aris-
ing out of inter-Yogacara rivalries.
Yogacara entered Tibet in the eighth century with
S ́antaraksita (ca. 725–790) and his disciple Kamalas ́la
(ca. 740–795), who were among the earliest Buddhist
missionaries there. While never established in Tibet as
an independent school, Yogacara teachings became
part of the curriculum for other Tibetan schools, and
exerted an influence on RNYING MA(NYINGMA) and
Dzogs chen thought. TSONG KHA PA (1357–1419),YOGACARASCHOOL