Asaṅga

Record year4C

summaryOrganizes early scattered materials into a general treatise covering Yogācāra theory and practice, giving the school's issues a systematic text that can be taught, criticized, and annotated. The systematic synthesis of general Yogācāra theory and practice structure in the Mahāyānasaṃgraha; the underlying sutras, Vasubandhu's treatises, later commentaries and translations, sectarian institutions, and doctrinal truth values are excluded.

M rationaleBoth Oxford and SEP regard this text as a core work in Asaṅga's systematization of Yogācāra, forming a wide-ranging intellectual textual end state, assigned M5.6; M assesses the organization of knowledge and argumentation, and does not assert that religious doctrine is objectively true.

attribution rationaleAsaṅga 0.36; antecedents in sutras, treatises, and practice 0.28; community 0.12; Maitreya inspiration tradition 0.08; early text team 0.06; institutions 0.03; unresolved 0.07.

overlap boundaryA systematic synthesis in the Mahāyānasaṃgraha of Yogācāra general theory and the structure of practice; the sutras themselves, Vasubandhu's writings, later commentaries and translations, sectarian institutions, and the truth-value of doctrine are excluded.

Evidence gapsSanskrit, Tibetan, and Chinese versions, together with scholarly textual criticism, are needed to further resolve the original layers and the responsibilities of specific authors.

Record year4C

summaryExisting classificatory traditions are reselected, connected, and explained from Yogācāra and Mahāyāna standpoints, forming a technical reference text distinct from a general theoretical synthesis. The Abhidharmasamuccaya organizes categories of mental and material phenomena from Yogācāra/Mahāyāna standpoints, together with the evidenced classificatory and doctrinal-compendium corpus of the Xianyang Shengjiao lun; the general system of the Mahāyānasaṃgraha, the Yogācārabhūmi, and later commentary and translation are excluded.

M rationaleSEP explicitly states that the Abhidharmasamuccaya is a synthetic account of categories of dharmas from Yogācāra/Mahāyāna perspectives, and Oxford confirms relatively broad authorial consensus for the two books, supporting M5.3 for a technical text family; M is not duplicated across the two books.

attribution rationaleAsaṅga 0.34; classificatory antecedents 0.30; scholastic community 0.13; text team 0.07; institutions 0.04; unresolved 0.12.

overlap boundaryThe Abhidharmasamuccaya organizes categories of mental and material phenomena from Yogācāra/Mahāyāna standpoints, together with the evidenced classificatory and doctrinal-compendium corpus of the Xianyang Shengjiao lun; the general system of the Mahāyānasaṃgraha, the Yogācārabhūmi, and later commentary and translation are excluded.

Evidence gapsCritical editions and research on both books are needed to confirm their intertextual relations, editorial layers, and the specific increment of the Xianyang Shengjiao lun.

Record year4C

summaryA long-term community organized heterogeneous paths of practice, psychological classifications, and bodhisattva-path materials into a large-scale reference system; Asaṅga may have participated, but the specific layers are unknown. The Yogācārabhūmi is treated as the overall editorial end state of a multi-layered, multi-author composite text of practice and doctrine, together with a limited residual of Asaṅga's possible participation; traditional Maitreya revelation, sole authorship by Asaṅga, all intellectual content of every layer, and later translation and sectarian traditions are excluded.

M rationaleSEP explicitly states that this work was compiled across multiple layers, over a long period, and by multiple authors, including the well-known Śrāvakabhūmi and Bodhisattvabhūmi; the overall textual scope supports M5.5, but M belongs to a collective result, and Asaṅga receives only a 0.10 share for possible participation.

attribution rationaleAsaṅga 0.10; multi-author community 0.40; intellectual antecedents 0.25; editorial and scribal team 0.13; institutions 0.04; unresolved 0.08.

overlap boundaryThe Yogācārabhūmi is treated as the overall editorial end state of a multi-layered, multi-author composite text of practice and doctrine, together with a limited residual of Asaṅga's possible participation; traditional Maitreya revelation, sole authorship by Asaṅga, all intellectual content of every layer, and later translation and sectarian traditions are excluded.

Evidence gapsLayered textual criticism and chronological research are needed to locate passages that may specifically relate to Asaṅga; the formal ledger must not add the unresolved share back to the individual.