Abstract

The traditional Buddhist Sanskrit term _vijñāna_ cannot be given the meaning “consciousness” in accordance with the grammatical rules of Pāṇini’s _Aṣṭādhyāyī_. In Vedic texts the traditional Sanskrit terms _citta_ and _manas_ refer to the eternal cognitive entities, which were also popular in some Indian Prakrit languages at the time of Buddha. It seems possible that Buddha himself created the new Prakrit term to denote the impermanent cognitive apparatus, which is produced by object and sensory organ. The sound of the Prakrit term is recorded and written as _vijñāna_ with Sanskrit letters. In the case of a hypothetical debate between a Buddhist and a Brahmanist, the Brahmanist would insist on strictly following Sanskrit Grammar in order to interpret the Sanskrit word _vijñāna_. Discrepancies arising from the non-native usage of this term would lead to a great many mistakes and cause debates to become impossible. Vasubandhu, therefore, introduced a new Sanskrit term _vijñapti_ to refer to consciousness and remedy this confusion. Through the analysis presented in Pāṇini’s _Aṣṭādhyāyī_, we find that the root of _vijñapti_ is not _jñā_ as some scholars have said, but _jñap._ Although _vijñapti_ looks like a substantive thing, it is just a momentary aggregation of cognitive efficacies (_vyāpṛti_) without any ontic base. Therefore, the new term _vijñapti_ can not only be translated as consciousness, but it is also in conformity with the Mahāyāna doctrines of _anityatā_, _niḥsvabhāvatā_ and _śūnyatā_ well.