Abstract
It is well known that the Buddha (5th century B.C.E.) advocated the equality of four kinds of varnas or castes, i.e. brahmana, ksatriya, vaisya, and sudra, which comprise the traditional class structure in India. This attitude seems to have been followed by the schools of Mahayana Buddhism, including both the Madhyamika and the Yogacara schools. For example, Aryadeva (circa 3rd century), a member of the Madhyamika school, was famous for his strict censure for the authority of brahmanas and ksatriyas. In the case of Yogacara, the equality of four castes was advocated in the Yogacarabhumi, which is considered to be composed in the 4th century.
Some studies [Kajiyama 1963, de Jong 1990, and Nonin 1992], however, indicated that the tradition of varnas was accepted in the Prajnapradipa of Bhaviveka, a commentary on the Nagarjuna's Mulamadhyamakakarika and Avalokitavrata's commentary on the former. But when the sentence of the Prajnapradipa and its commentary that was cited by Drs. Kajiyama, de Jong, and Nonin are critically investigated from the philological point of view, we will find that both Bhaviveka and Avalokitavrata were actually attempting to reduce the discrimination against the sudra and the vaisya, the lower two castes. Therefore, the sentences of the Prajnapradipa and its commentary do not lend any support to the argument for the existence of the Buddhists who supported the Brahmanical hierarchy.
