Reviews
By Dineshchandra Sircar, Nalinaksha Dutt, Chintaharan Chakravarti, Narendra Krishna Sinha, A. B. M. Habibullah, U. N. Ray
Summary
Prof. P. V. Bapat’s *Vimuttimagga & Visuddhimagga: A Comparative Study* (1937) analyzes the relationship between Upatissa’s *Vimuttimagga* (Chinese translation by Seng-chie-po-lo, 505–520 CE) and Buddhaghosa’s *Visuddhimagga* (c. 422 CE). He argues that the *Vimuttimagga*, linked to the Abhayagirivasin tradition, predates the *Visuddhimagga*, associated with the Mahaviharavasins. Despite Dhammapila’s interpretation of Buddhaghosa’s term “ekacce” as referencing Upatissa’s work, Bapat rejects the theory of a shared source, suggesting earlier texts of similar type preceded both. The texts differ significantly in structure: the *Vimuttimagga* employs a catechetical method, while the *Visuddhimagga* uses straightforward exposition. The review critiques Bapat’s focus on Chapter III of the *Vimuttimagga*, noting the omission of a full translation, unlike scholars like N. H.
AI-generated summary, automatically checked against the article text.
Conclusion
This comparative analysis of the Vimuttimagga and Visuddhimagga reveals significant insights into their historical and doctrinal distinctions, challenging earlier assumptions of shared origins. Prof. Bapat's rigorous examination demonstrates that while both texts address similar themes, their methodological differences—catechetical versus expository—reflect distinct monastic traditions. The findings underscore the complexity of early Buddhist textual transmission, highlighting the likelihood of earlier prototypes influencing both works. This study enriches understanding of Abhayagiri and Mahavihara scholarly traditions, emphasizing the need for nuanced approaches to tracing doctrinal evolution in ancient Buddhism. The detailed analysis of austerities further illustrates practical applications of these philosophical frameworks.