is nothing more than a collective term for the seeds themselves. For the
Sautrantika author of the Abhidharmakosa-bhasya the notion of the seed
(bija) is equally nothing more than a power (sakti) within the five
aggregates--specifically it is a designation (prajnapti) for an uncognised
process (asamjnayamanah) within the skandhas [17]. This also appears to be
the view put forward in Vasubandhu the Yogacarin's other major works [18].
For the Sautrantika author of the Abhidharmakosa-bhasya, this means that
the adoption of conceptual categories other than the analysis of the
pudgala in terms of the five skandhas is both scripturally and logically
questionable. This is pure Sautrantika (the name 'Sautrantika' itself
designating those who believe that the Sutra-pitaka alone contains the
actual words of the Buddha). Thus, upon closer examination we find that
many of the most important 'new' Yogacara concepts (such as
vijnana-parinama and alaya-vijnana) as utilised in the various Mahayana
sastras attributed to Vasubandhu, seem to be philosophical elaborations or
extensions of concepts and themes already found in the
Abbidharmakosa-bhasya.

Abhidharma Antecedents of Vijnaptimatrata

Let us consider, for instance, another notion which is central to the
Yogacara school--that of Vijnaptimatrata or `Cognitive-Representation
Only'. It is no surprise, given our previous discussion, to note that the
term `vijnapti' also has a historical background in Abhidharma
scholasticism. Vijnapti is a technical term of Abhidharma Buddhist
philosophy, often translated as `intimation' or `information'. `Avijnapti',
as its negation, would therefore be rendered as `non-intimation' or
`non-indication'. The Vaibhasika Abhidharma distinguishes between two forms
of 'intimation' (vijnapti) [19].

(1) vagvijnapti (or vacika-vijnapti)--verbal intimation or expression, and

(2) kayavijnapti (or kayikavijnapti)--corporeal intimation or
gesticulation.

In early Mahayana literature `vijnapti' came to designate any cognitive act
which is carried out by the mind (manas). In the Yogacara school all
experience is claimed to be fundamentally 'mental' in nature. More
specifically, an individual's experience is constituted by a series of
projections externally intimated from the store-consciousness
 (alayavijnana) of karmic impressions (vasana). There appears to be no
explicit distinction here between types of vinapti as we find in the
Vaibhasika texts.

In direct contrast to the notion of vijnapti is the Vaibhasika notion of
avijnapti-rupa [20]. avijnapti-rupa, or 'matter which is not-manifested in
consciousness', is matter (rupa) of the highest subtlety [21]. It offers no
resistance to the sense organs and does not even allow itself to be
`touched' (sparsariyate) by consciousness (vijnana-dharma). Thus the
postulation of its existence remains purely inferential. It is the subtle
residue left over by the physical vijnaptis. avijnapti-rupa retains the
moral quality of the vijnaptis from which it originates in terms of the
passively accumulated seeds (bijas) or perfumes (vasana) which later reach
fruition in the form of future karmic retribution. This residue is
described as material since it is compounded by the four basic elements
(mahabhuta) [22]. Takakusu thus describes the avijnapti-rupa in the
following terms:

Of the eleven [rupa dharmas], the first five are sense-organs and the next
five are sense-objects. The four gross elements--Earth, Water, Fire,
Air--are represented by the sense-objects. In addition to these, there is a
peculiar one. That is the 'form-element not manifested' outwardly
(avijnapti-rupa). When we will to act the mental function itself is called
will (cetana). Inis called will-action. This is usually expressed in words
or in body, and is called word-action or body-action respectively. These
two actions manifested outwardly, whether they are good or bad, present a
corresponding and similar action in mind, and form an abiding impression or
image. They are then called unmanifested action (avijnapti-karma). These
actions being taken as form-elements are considered to be sense-objects
though not manifested (avijnapti-rupa) [23].

`Avijnapti' as a category therefore represents the result of (karmic)
actions which has yet to manifest. As such it is the notion of a latent
impression caused by karmic activity. For the Vaibhasikas this 'entity' was
postulated to account for the temporal discrepancy between an action and
its subsequent (karmic) fruition. Here again we see that vijnapti denotes
the manifested result of karman. One hardly need point out that this is
also a fundamental aspect of the Yogacara usage of the term and may be said
to illustrate further the continuity of thought between the
Vaihasika/Sautrantika complex of Abhidharma notions under discussion in the
Abhidharmakosa-bhasya of Vasubandhu and the Yogacara philosophy expounded