________________
( 179 )
sena, who is claimed by certain scholars to be a Buddhist philosopher. For instace, Bhattacarya says in his introducţion to the Tattvasangraha that "nothing definite is known about Yogasena; he is not mentioned in the Nanjio's catelogue of the Clunese Tripitaka nor in any of the Tibetan catalogues". He then tries to prove that Yogasena was a Buddhist philosopher on account of his appellation Bhadanta saying "But the word Bhadanta is always used in the Tattvasangraha to denote a Buddhist, or more preferably a Hinayāna Buddhist. Our authors have not made a confusion in this respect anywhere in this book, and on this ground we can take Yogasena to be a Buddhist 30
But Šantaraksita has not indicated anywhere that the word Bhadanta should be limited only to the Buddhist Acāryas. It has been widely used in Jaina literature as a term of res. pect to elder Bhikkhus. It is, therefore, not impossible that Yogasena was a follower of Jainism or was influenced by its conceptions, as his views against K şani kavāda represent the Jajna standpoint.81 Further Šāntarakṣita did not mention anywhere explicitly the criticism made by Jainas against the Kşanı kavida. Moreover, it is unlikely that in such a comprehensive work he should forget to mention the refutation of the Buddhist theory of momentariness by the Jainas, when the Jainas were their greatest opponents.
Some schools of thought opposing the doctrine of momentariness ( Kşanabhangavāda ) were rising even within Buddhist system. For instance, Śāptarakṣita refers to the view of Vatsiputrijas who classified things under two headings momentary and non-momentary,32 The conception of soul, according to them, has also been refuted by Santaraksita. Stcher batsky mentions the Vātsīputriyas who admitted the existence of a certain unity between the elements of a living personality. In all probability they have been influenced by the Jaina views as their arguments are very similar to the Jaina arguments raised against the view of Ksanikavada and analmavāda.
