By examining the few occurrences of bīja and bījabhāva in the Abhidharmakośabhāṣya and its commentaries, Kazuo Hyōdō concludes that Vasubandhu clearly distinguishes bīja from bījabhāva. According to Hyōdō, bījabhāva denotes the capability (śakti) to generate effect in the serial continuity (saṃtati) while bīja refers to the nāmarūpa that holds such a capability. Hyōdō’s opinion has been widely accepted by many scholars, such as Junshō Katō and Changhwan Park. For example, Park holds that bīja demonstrates the diachronic botanical aspect of seed—the karmic causality known as saṃtati-pariṇāma-viśeṣa, while bījabhāva demonstrates the synchronic subliminal aspect of seed—the anuśaya which co-exists with the paryavasthāna. However, KL Dhammajoti based on one example concerning anuśaya in the Yogācārabhūmi asserts that bījabhāva is synonymous with bīja. This paper examines the occurrences of bīja and bījabhāva in the Abhidharmakośabhāṣya and the Yogācārabhūmi. It will be argued that bījabhāva does not inherently imply temporality, but only means the causal mechanism of seed. Whether bījabhāva suggests simultaneity between seed and its fruit depends on the theoretical paradigm of a specific Buddhist school.
