3 ғасырдағы Шри-Ланкалық философ және жазушы Āryadeva

3rd century Sri Lankan philosopher and writer

Āryadeva (fl. 3rd century CE) (; , Chinese: 提婆 菩薩 Tipo pusa meaning Deva Bodhisattva), was a Mahayana Buddhist monk, a disciple of Nagarjuna and a Madhyamaka philosopher. Most sources agree that he was from "Siṃhala", which some scholars identify with Sri Lanka. Āryadeva's writings are important sources of Madhyamaka in East Asian Buddhism. His Catuḥśataka (Four Hundred Verses) was influential on Madhyamaka in India and China and his *Śataka (Bailun, 百論, T. 1569) and Dvādaśamukhaśāstra (both translated by Kumārajīva in the 4th century) were important sources for the East Asian Madhyamaka school.

The earliest biographical sources on Aryadeva state that he was a Buddhist monk who became a student of Nagarjuna and was skilled in debate.</blockquote>Lang also discusses Xuanzang's (7th century) writings which mention Aryadeva:<blockquote>He reports that Aryadeva came to south India from the island of Simhala because of his compassion for the ignorant people of India. He met the aging Nagarjuna at his residence on Black Bee Mountain, located southwest of the Satavahana capital, and became his most gifted student. Nagarjuna helped Aryadeva prepare for debate against Brahmanical teachers who had defeated Buddhist monks in the northeastern city of Vaisali for the previous twelve years. Aryadeva went to Vaisali and defeated all his opponents in less than an hour.

Most of Āryadeva's works were not preserved in the original Sanskrit but mainly in Tibetan and Chinese translations.

The Catuḥśataka śāstra kārikā (the Four Hundred Verse Treatise) is Āryadeva's main work. It is available in fragmentary Sanskrit, in Xuanzang's Chinese translation of the second part only, and in a full Tibetan translation. It is a work of sixteen chapters. David Seyfort Ruegg outlines the content as follows:(i—iv) Elimination of the erroneous positing of things as permanent (nitya), pleasant (sukha), pure (asubha or suci), and self (atman) (according to Candrakirti these four chapters which dispel the four viparyasas explain the nature of mundane things so that they may be abandoned and buddhahood may be achieved), (v) The Bodhisattva's practice (which makes it practically possible to achieve Buddhahood). (vi) Elimination of the defilements (klesa) which hinder the preceding, (vii) Elimination of attachment to the enjoyment of seemingly desirable sensory objects (visaya), which causes the defilements to arise and increase. And (viii) the practice of the disciple. The first eight chapters of the Catuḥśataka are thus concerned with the preparation of those who practise the path. The last eight chapters then explain the non substantiality of the dharmas. They deal in turn with the negation (pratisedha) of (ix) permanent entities, (x) self (atman), (xi) time, (xii) dogmatic opinions (drsti), (xiii) sense faculties and their objects, (xiv) the positing of doctrinal extremes (antagraha, e. g. existence, non existence, both, and neither) with special reference to identity and difference, and (xv) the positing of conditioned (samskrta) things as real. Finally chapter xvi, entitled 'An exposition of the cultivation of ascertainment for master and disciple', is devoted to a consideration of logical and epistemological problems in the doctrine of sunyata. In particular, it is pointed out (in conformity with Vigrahavyavartani 29—30) that he who does not maintain a thesis (paksa) based on the positions of existence (sat), non existence (asat), and both cannot be attacked in logic by an opponent (xvi. 25). There also exists a complete commentary to this text by Chandrakirti which is only extant in Tibetan. Xuanzang also translated Dharmapāla’s commentary to verses 201–400 of the Catuḥśataka, published as Dasheng Guang bailun shi lun (大乘廣百論釋論, T. 1571). This text also comes with a commentary by an author known as Vasu (婆藪).

Chinese sources attribute a commentary to Nagarjuna's Madhyamakasastra ascribed to a "Pin lo chieh" ("Pingala") as being a work of Āryadeva. But this attribution has been questioned by some scholars according to Ruegg. Tillemans writes that while Tibetans attribute the Destruction of Errors about Madhyamaka (*madhyamakabhramaghāta), "this text copiously borrows from the Verses on the Heart of  Madhyamaka (madhyamakahṛdayakārikā) and Torch of Dialectics (tarkajvālā) of Bhāviveka, a celebrated Mādhyamika who lived in the sixth century (i. e., 500 570 C. E.)" and thus cannot be Aryadeva's. Tillemans also notes that the Compendium on the Essence of Knowledge (jñānasārasamuccaya) "gives the fourfold presentation of Buddhist doctrine typical of the doxographical (siddhānta) literature, a genre which considerably post dates the third century". Traditional historians (for example, the 17th century Tibetan Tāranātha), aware of the chronological difficulties involved, account for the anachronism via a variety of theories, such as the propagation of later writings via mystical revelation. A useful summary of this tradition, its literature, and historiography may be found in Wedemeyer 2007.