Buddha-nature
|
Buddha-nature, Buddha-dhatu or Buddha Principle (Skt: Tathāgatagarbha; Jap: Bussho), is taught differently in various Mahayana Buddhism traditions. Broadly speaking Buddha-nature is concerned with ascertaining what allows sentient beings to become Buddhas. [1]
Contents |
[edit] Etymology
Buddha-nature (Classical Chinese: 佛性, modern pinyin fó xìng) literally corresponds to the Sanskrit Buddha-dhātu - "Buddha Element", "Buddha-Principle", but seems to have been used most frequently to translate the Sanskrit "Tathāgatagarbha". The Sanskrit term "tathāgatagarbha" may be parsed into tathāgata ("the one thus gone", referring to the Buddha) and garbha ("root/embryo").[2] The latter has the meanings: "embryo", "essence";[3] whilst the former may be parsed into "tathā" ("[s]he who has there"[clarification needed] and "āgata" (semantic field: "come", "arrived") and/or "gata" ("gone").[4]
For the various equivalents of the Sanskrit term "tathāgatagarbha" in other languages (Chinese, Japanese, Vietnamese), see Glossary of Buddhism, "tathagatagarbha"
[edit] Development of the concept of Buddha-nature
[edit] Nikāyas
There is a reference in the Anguttara Nikāya to a "luminous mind", present within all people.[5]
[edit] Abhidhamma
The Buddha-nature doctrine may be traced back, in part, to the abhidharmic debates over metaphysics. Those arose among the Nikāya schools as they attempted to reconcile various perceived problems. One problem is how to integrate the doctrine of anatta, which stipulates that there is no underlying self, with the idea of karma: who is suffering? Another problem is soteriology: what is the subject of awakening, is there an essence to awakening?
Debates between different Nikāya schools at this time provided a context for the later origination of the Mahāyāna concepts. The concept of "seeds", espoused by the Sautrāntika in debate with the Sarvāstivādins over the metaphysical status of phenomena (dharmas), is a precursor to the store-consciousness of the Yogācāra school and the tathāgatagarbha[6]. The latter is closely related to the concept of Buddha-nature [7]
[edit] Tathāgatagarbha Sutras
The "Tathāgatagarbha Sutras" are a collection of Mahayana sutras which present Buddha-nature as the uncreated and indestructible essence (svabhava or atman) of all beings (vide Mahaparinirvana Sutra). This collection was generally ignored in India[8], but East Asian Buddhism assigns some significance to these texts.
Some sutras mention the self in a very affirmative manner, including the Lankavatara Sutra, the Śūraṅgama Sūtra, the Mahāvairocana Sūtra[9] and the Sutra of Perfect Wisdom called The Questions of Suvikrantavikramin:
...one who wisely knows himself (atmanam) as nondual, he wisely knows both Buddha and Dharma. And why? He develops a personality which consists of all dharmas ... His nondual comprehension comprehends all dharmas, for all dharmas are fixed on the Self in their own-being. One who wisely knows the nondual dharma wisely knows also the Buddhadharmas. From the comprehension of the nondual dharma follows the comprehension of the Buddhadharmas and from the comprehension of the Self the comprehension of everything that belongs to the triple world. "The comprehension of Self", that is the beyond of all dharmas.[10]
[edit] Mahāparinirvāṇa Sūtra
The Mahāparinirvāṇa Sūtra (written 2nd century CE) specifically contrasts its doctrine of the self with that of the Astikas in order to remove the reifying notion that the self was a little person or homunculus, the size of a grain of rice or of one's thumb, sitting in the heart of the being, thus: "mundane [philosophers] mistakenly imagine it to be a person (puruṣa) the size of a thumb, the size of a pea or a grain of rice that dwells shining in the heart." This, the Buddha says, is a misconception of the nature of self, for "that opinion of theirs is a mistaken opinion, one that is transmitted onwards from person to person, but it is neither beneficial nor conducive to happiness." The self of which the Buddha speaks is said by him to be the "essential intrinsic being" (svabhava) or even "life-essence" (jīvaka) of each person, and this essential being is none other than the Buddha himself - "radiantly luminous" and "as indestructible as a diamond".[11]
The Buddha in the Mahāyāna Mahāparinirvāṇa Sūtra states that Buddha nature is everlasting, pure and blissful.[12] The Buddha-nature is taught in such tathāgatagarbha sutras to be an ultimate, conceptually inconceivable, immortal reality.
[edit] The Lotus Sutra
The development of the doctrine is associated with the Lotus Sutra (written between 100 BCE and 200 CE) and its influence on later sutras.[13] A unique theme in the Lotus Sutra is contained in the tenth chapter, which details that all living beings can become a buddha, including monks, nuns, laypeople, shravakas, bodhisattvas, non-human creatures, dragon kings and centaurs.[13] It also details that all living beings can be a 'teacher of the Dharma'.
The twelfth chapter of the Lotus Sutra details that Buddha nature is universal among all people, and writes that even the historical Devadatta has the potential to become a buddha.[14] The story of Devadatta is followed by another story about a dragon princess who is both a nāga and a female whom the bodhisattva Mañjuśrī proclaims will reach enlightenment immediately, in her present form. Based on the metaphors of the Lotus Sutra, Tiantai developed the teaching of revealing the Buddha nature in one's current form. [15]
[edit] Varying interpretations of Buddha-nature
Scholars of Buddhism have varying interpretations of Buddha-nature. Some[who?] see the buddha-nature as the innate potential to become awakened, without reifying the potential.
[edit] Nichiren Buddhsim
Nichiren Buddhism views the Buddha nature as "The inner potential for attaining Buddhahood", common to all people. [16]
[edit] Chan
In Chinese Ch’an Buddhism the Buddha-nature tends to be seen as the essential nature of all beings. Writing from this tradition, Master Hsing Yun, forty-eighth patriarch of the Linji School of Ch’an Buddhism, equates the Buddha-nature with the Dharmakāya in line with pronouncements in key tathāgatagarbha sutras, defining these two as:
the inherent nature that exists in all beings. In Mahāyāna Buddhism, enlightenment is a process of uncovering this inherent nature … The Buddha nature [is] identical with transcendental reality. The unity of the Buddha with everything that exists.[17]
[edit] Tibetan Buddhism
According to the Nyingma and Sakya schools, tathāgatagarbha is the inseparability of the clarity and emptiness of one's mind. According to the Gelug school, it is the potential for sentient beings to awaken since they are empty (i.e. dependently originated). According to the Jonang school, it refers to the innate qualities of the mind which expresses itself in terms of omniscience etc. when adventitious obscurations are removed.
[edit] Nyingma
Speaking for the Tibetan Nyingma tradition, Tulku Urgyen Rinpoche sees an identity between the Buddha-nature, Dharmadhātu (essence of all phenomena and the noumenon) and the three vajras, saying:
Dharmadhatu is adorned with dharmakaya, which is endowed with dharmadhatu wisdom. This is a brief but very profound statement, because "dharmadhatu" also refers to sugata-garbha or buddha nature. Buddha nature is all-encompassing ... This buddha nature is present just as the shining sun is present in the sky. It is indivisible from the three vajras [i.e. the Buddha's Body, Speech and Mind] of the awakened state, which do not perish or change.[18]
The Nyingma meditation masters, Khenchen Palden Sherab and Khenpo Tsewang Dongyal, emphasise that the essential nature of the mind (the Buddha-nature) is not a blankness, but is characterised by wonderful qualities and a perfection that is already present and complete:
The nature of the mind is not hollow or blank; it is profound and blissful and full of wonderful qualities... meditation practice reveals our true nature as being totally perfect and complete.[19]
They add:
The true nature of mind is beyond conception, yet it is present in every object. The true nature is always there, but due to our temporary obscurations we do not recognize it ... The primordial nature is beyond conceptions; it cannot be explained ... cannot be encompassed by words. Although you can say it is clarity and vastness, you cannot see it or touch it; it is beyond expression.[20]
[edit] Dzogchen
Germano (1992: pp.viii - ix) relates Dzogchen, via Buddha-nature to Madhyamaka, Yogachara and Abhinavagupta:
...the Great Perfection represents the most sophisticated interpretation of the so-called "Buddha nature" tradition within the context of Indo-Tibetan thought, and as such, is of extreme importance for research into classical exoteric philosophic systems such as Madhyamaka and Yogacara, while also providing fertile grounds for future explorations of the interconnections between Indo-Tibetan and East Asian forms of Buddhism, as well as between Indo-Tibetan Buddhism and contemporary Indian developments such as the tenth century non-dual Shaivism of Abhinavagupta.[21]
The 19th/20th-century Tibetan Buddhist scholar, Shechen Gyaltsap Gyurme Pema Namgyal, sees the Buddha nature as ultimate truth,[22] nirvana, which is constituted of profundity, primordial peace and radiance:
Buddha-nature is immaculate. It is profound, serene, unfabricated suchness, an uncompounded expanse of luminosity; nonarising, unceasing, primordial peace, spontaneously present nirvana.[23]
[edit] Kagyu
In the Tibetan Kagyu tradition, Thrangu Rinpoche sees the Buddha nature as the indivisible oneness of wisdom and emptiness:
The union of wisdom and emptiness is the essence of Buddha-hood or what is called Buddha-nature (Skt. Tathagata-garbha) because it contains the very seed, the potential of Buddhahood. It resides in each and every being and because of this essential nature, this heart nature, there is the possibility of reaching Buddhahood.[24]
[edit] Gelukpa
The 14th Dalai Lama, representing the Gelukpa School of Tibetan Buddhism, and speaking from the Madhyamaka philosophical position, sees the Buddha-nature as the "original clear light of mind", but points out that it ultimately does not exist independently, because, like all other phenomena, it is of the nature of emptiness:
Once one pronounces the words "emptiness" and "absolute", one has the impression of speaking of the same thing, in fact of the absolute. If emptiness must be explained through the use of just one of these two terms, there will be confusion. I must say this; otherwise you might think that the innate original clear light as absolute truth really exists.[25]
[edit] Jonangpa
The Jonangpa School of Tibetan Buddhism, whose foremost historical figure was the Tibetan scholar-monk Dolpopa, sees the Buddha-nature as the very ground of the Buddha himself, as the "permanent indwelling of the Buddha in the basal state".[26] Dolpopa comments that certain key tathāgatagarbha sutras indicate this truth.
Moreover, the Buddhist tantric scripture entitled Chanting the Names of Mañjuśrī (Mañjuśrī-nāma-saṅgīti), repeatedly exalts, as portrayed by Dolpopa, not the non-Self but the Self, and applies the following terms to this ultimate reality : 'The Buddha-Self, the beginningless Self, the solid Self, the diamond Self'. These terms are applied in a manner which reflects the cataphatic approach to Buddhism, typical of much of Dolpopa's writings.[27]
Dolpopa further expressed the viewpoint that the Buddha-nature transcends the chain of dependent origination. It is not empty of its own ultimately real essence, but only of extraneous, transitory and relative phenomena.
Dr. Cyrus Stearns writes on Dolpopa's attitude to the 'third turning of the wheel' doctrines (i.e. the Buddha-nature teachings):
The Third Turning of the Dharma Wheel presented the teachings on the Buddha nature, which are the final definitive statements on the nature of ultimate reality, the primordial ground or substratum beyond the chain of dependent origination, and which is only empty of other, relative phenomena.'[28]
In the Ghanavyuha Sutra (as quoted by Longchenpa) this Buddha essence is said to be the ground of all things:
... the ultimate universal ground also has always been with the Buddha-Essence (Tathagatagarbha), and this essence in terms of the universal ground has been taught by the Tathagata. The fools who do not know it, because of their habits, see even the universal ground as (having) various happiness and suffering and actions and emotional defilements. Its nature is pure and immaculate, its qualities are as wishing-jewels; there are neither changes nor cessations. Whoever realizes it attains Liberation ...[29]
[edit] The Rimé movement
Ringu Tulku says, "There has been a great deal of heated debate in Tibet between the exponents of Rangtong, (Wylie: Rang-stong) and Shentong, (Wylie: gZhan-stong) philosophies. The historic facts of these two philosophies are well known to the Tibetologists."
Jamgon Kongtrul says about the two systems:
Madhyamika philosophies have no differences in realising as 'Shunyata', all phenomena that we experience on a relative level. They have no differences also, in reaching the meditative state where all extremes (ideas) completely dissolve. Their difference lies in the words they use to describe the Dharmata. Shentong describes the Dharmata, the mind of Buddha, as 'ultimately real'; while Rangtong philosophers fear that if it is described that way, people might understand it as the concept of 'soul' or 'Atma'. The Shentong philosopher believes that there is a more serious possibility of misunderstanding in describing the Enlightened State as 'unreal' and 'void'. Kongtrul finds the Rangtong way of presentation the best to dissolve concepts and the Shentong way the best to describe the experience.[30]
In 2006, Khentrul Rinpoche Jamphal Lodro founded "The Tibetan Buddhist Rimé Institute" in Melbourne, Australia. It aims to propagate the Rimé view of harmony within all Buddhist traditions and to introduce the rare Jonang Kalachakra Tantra lineage teachings in the western world.[31]
[edit] Modern scholarship
Modern scholarship points to the various possible interpretations of Buddha Nature as either Sunyata or an essential self, and Buddha Nature as the inherent possibility of awakening.
According to Heng-Ching Shih, the tathāgatagarbha/Buddha nature does not represent a substantial self (ātman). Rather, it is a positive language expression of emptiness (śūnyatā), which enphasizes the potentiality to realize Buddhahood through Buddhist practices. The intention of the teaching of tathāgatagarbha/Buddha nature is soteriological rather than theoretical.[32]
Paul Williams puts forward the Madhyamaka interpretation of the Buddha-nature as emptiness in the following terms:
… if one is a Madhyamika then that which enables sentient beings to become buddhas must be the very factor that enables the minds of sentient beings to change into the minds of Buddhas. That which enables things to change is their simple absence of inherent existence, their emptiness. Thus the tathagatagarbha becomes emptiness itself, but specifically emptiness when applied to the mental continuum.[33]
According to Matsumoto Shiro and Hakamaya Noriaki, essentialist conceptions of Buddha-nature are at odds with the fundamental Buddhist doctrine of dependent origination.[34][35] Sallie B King objects their view. She sees the Buddha-nature as a metaphor for the potential in all beings to attain Buddhahood, rather than as an ontological reality.[36]
This view of the Buddha-nature as non-Buddhist is termed Critical Buddhism. Paul Williams has criticised this view, saying that Critical Buddhism is too narrow in its definition of what constitutes Buddhism. According to Williams,
We should abandon any simplistic identification of Buddhism with a straightforward not-Self definition".[37]
Sutton agrees with this critique on the narrowness of interpreattion. In discussing the inadequacy of modern scholarship on Buddha-nature, Sutton states,
One is impressed by the fact that these authors, as a rule, tend to opt for a single meaning disregarding all other possible meanings which are embraced in turn by other texts".[38]
He goes on to point out that the term tathāgatagarbha has up to six possible connotations. Of these, he says the three most important are:
- an underlying ontological reality or essential nature (tathāgata-tathatā-'vyatireka) which is functionally equivalent to a self (ātman) in an Upanishadic sense,
- the dharma-kāya which penetrates all beings (sarva-sattveṣu dharma-kāya-parispharaṇa), which is functionally equivalent to brahman in an Upanishadic sense
- the womb or matrix of Buddhahood existing in all beings (tathāgata-gotra-saṃbhava), which provides beings with the possibility of awakening.[39][40]
Of these three, Sutton claims that only the third connotation has any soteriological significance, while the other two posit Buddha-nature as an ontological reality and essential nature behind all phenomena.[41]
[edit] See also
[edit] Notes
- ^ Williams, Paul. Buddhist Thought. Routledge 2000, page 160.
- ^ The term "garbha" has multiple denotations. A denotation of note is the garba dence) of the Gujarati: where a spiritual circle dance is performed around a light or candle placed at the centre, bindu. This dance informs the Tathāgatagarbha Doctrine. Interestingly, the Dzogchenpa tertön Namkai Norbu teaches a similar dance upon a mandala, the Dance of the Six Lokas as terma, where a candle or light is similarly placed.[citation needed]
- ^ Lopez, Donald S. (2001). The Story of Buddhism: a concise guide to its history & teaching. New York, NY, USA: HarperCollins Publishers, Inc. ISBN 0-06-069976-0 (cloth): p.263
- ^ Brandon, G. S. F., ed. (1972). A Dictionary of Buddhism. (NB: with an "Introduction" by T. O. Ling.) New York, NY, USA: Charles Scribner's Sons. [I]SBN 684-12763-6 (trade cloth) p.240.
- ^ Harvey, Peter (1989). Consciousness Mysticism in the Discourses of the Buddha. In Werner, Karel, ed., The Yogi and the Mystic. Curzon Press: p. 94. The reference is at A I, 8-10.
- ^ Gethin, p.222
- ^ Gethin, p. 252
- ^ Williams, Paul. Buddhist Thought. Routledge 2000, page 161.
- ^ "Those who have been initiated into the Mahayana Mandala Arising from Great Compassion, who are honest and pliant, and who always have great compassion ... They know their hearts to be the Great Self" — Hodge, Stephen, trans. (2003) The Maha-Vairocana-Abhisambodhi Tantra. London: Curzon: p.355
- ^ Conze, Edward, trans. (2002). Perfection of Wisdom: The Short Prajnaparamita Texts. Totnes, Devon: Buddhist Publishing Group: p.32
- ^ cf. Yamamoto, Kosho, trans.; Page, Dr. Tony, ed. The Mahayana Mahaparinirvana Sutra in 12 Volumes. London: Nirvana: Vol. 3, pp. 4-5
- ^ Yamamoto, Kosho, trans.; Page, Dr. Tony, ed. The Mahayana Mahaparinirvana Sutra in 12 Volumes. London: Nirvana: Vol, 8, p. 23
- ^ a b Reeves 2008, pp. 15–16
- ^ Reeves 2008, p. 5
- ^ http://www.sgilibrary.org/view.php?page=1052
- ^ http://www.sgilibrary.org/search_dict.php?id=212
- ^ Hsing Yun, Master; tr. by Tom Graham (1999). Being Good: Buddhist Ethics for Everyday Life. New York: Weatherhill: pp. 152-153
- ^ Urgyen Rinpoche, Tulku (1999). As It Is. Hong Kong: Rangjung Yeshe Books: p. 32
- ^ Sherab, Khenchen Palden and Dongyal, Khenpo Tsewang (2006). Opening to Our Primordial Nature. New York: Snow Lion: pp. 3, 9
- ^ Sherab, Khenchen Palden and Dongyal, Khenpo Tsewang (2006). Opening to Our Primordial Nature. New York: Snow Lion: pp. 22 - 23
- ^ Germano, David Francis (1992). Poetic thought, the intelligent Universe, and the mystery of self: The Tantric synthesis of rDzogs Chen in fourteenth century Tibet. The University of Wisconsin, Madison. Doctoral thesis. Source: [1] (accessed: Friday December 18, 2009)
- ^ Rabjam, Shechen (2007). The Great Medicine: Steps in Meditation on the Enlightened Mind. Boston: Shambhala: p. 21
- ^ Rabjam, Shechen (2007). The Great Medicine: Steps in Meditation on the Enlightened Mind. Boston: Shambhala: p. 4
- ^ Thrangu Rinpoche, Khenchen. Buddha Nature and Buddhahood: the Mahayana and Tantra Yana
- ^ Dalai Lama, the (1999). Buddha Heart, Buddha Mind. New York: Crossroad: p. 110
- ^ Hopkins, Jeffrey, trans. (2006). Mountain Doctrine: Tibet's Fundamental Treatise on Other-Emptiness and the Buddha-Matrix. NY: Snow Lion: p. 196
- ^ cf. Hopkins, Jeffrey, trans. (2006). Mountain Doctrine: Tibet's Fundamental Treatise on Other-Emptiness and the Buddha-Matrix. NY: Snow Lion: pp.279-280
- ^ Dr. Cyrus Stearns, The Buddha from Dolpo: A Study of the Life and Thought of the Tibetan Master Dolpopa Sherab Gyaltsen, State University of New York Press, Albany, 1999, p. 87
- ^ Thondup Rinpoche, Tulku (1989). Buddha Mind. Ithaca, New York: Snow Lion: p.218
- ^ Ringu Tulku: The Rimé (Ris-med) movement of Jamgon Kongtrul the Great
- ^ Website of The Tibetan Buddhist Rime Institute of Australia
- ^ Shih, Heng-Ching. The Significance Of 'Tathagatagarbha' — A Positive Expression Of 'Sunyata.
- ^ Williams, Paul (2000). Buddhist Thought. London: Routledge: pp. 164-165
- ^ Matsumoto Shirõ (1997), The Doctrine of Tath„gata-garbha Is Not Buddhist
- ^ Hakamaya Noriaki (1997), Critical Philosophy Versus Topical Philosophy
- ^ Sallie B. King (1997), The Doctrine of Buddha Nature is Impeccably Buddhist
- ^ Professor Paul Williams, Mahayana Buddhism, Routledge, London, 2nd Edition, 2009, p. 128
- ^ Sutton, Florin Giripescu (1991). Existence and Enlightenment in the Laṅkāvatāra-sūtra. SUNY (ISBN 0-7914-0172-3): p.51
- ^ Takasaki, Jikido (1991). A Study on the Ratnagotravibhāga. ISMEO 1966: p.198
- ^ Florin Giripescu Sutton, Existence and Enlightenment in the Laṅkāvatāra-sūtra, SUNY(ISBN 0-7914-0172-3): p.53
- ^ Wayman, Alex (1981). The Title and Textual Affiliation of the Guhya-garbha Tantra. In: From Mahayana Buddhism to Tantra — Felicitation Volume for Dr Shunkyo Matsumata. Tokyo: p.4
[edit] References
- Gethin, Rupert (1998). Foundations of Buddhism. Oxford University Press.
- Hookham, Dr. Shenpen (tr.) (1998). The Shrimaladevi Sutra. Oxford: Longchen Foundation.
- Page, Dr. Tony, (2003). Buddha-Self: The 'Secret' Teachings of the Buddha in the Mahaparinirvana Sutra. London, Nirvana Publications.
- Powers, J. A. (2000). Concise Encyclopaedia of Buddhism.
- Rawson, Philip (1991). Sacred Tibet. London, Thames and Hudson. ISBN 050081032X.
- Reeves, Gene (2008). The Lotus Sutra: A Contemporary Translation of a Buddhist Classic. Somerville: Wisdom Publications. ISBN 0-86171-571-3.
- Suzuki, D.T., (1978). The Lankavatara Sutra, Prajna Press, Boulder.
- Yamamoto, Kosho (tr.), Page, Dr. Tony (reviser and editor), (1999–2000) The Mahayana Mahaparinirvana Sutra in 12 volumes. London: Nirvana Publications.
[edit] Further reading
- Zimmermann, Michael, A Buddha Within: The Tathāgatagarbhasūtra, Biblotheca Philologica et Philosophica Buddhica VI, The International Research Institute for Advanced Buddhology, Soka University (2002) [PDF can also be downloaded from the Institute's website]
- The Buddha in the Robot: a Robot Engineer's Thoughts on Science and Religion, by Masahiro Mori, 1974
- Brunnholzl, Karl. Luminous Heart: The Third Karmapa on Consciousness, Wisdom, and Buddha Nature. Snow Lion Publications, 2009. ISBN 9781559393188
[edit] External links
- "Tathagatagarbha Buddhism": key "Buddha Nature" sutras in full or in part
- On the Buddha-nature of Insentient Things
- "Nirvana Sutra": full text of "Nirvana Sutra", plus appreciation of its teachings.
- "Buddha Nature" talk (audio) by Stephen Batchelor
- The Laṅkāvatāra Sūtra A Mahāyāna Text
- Theosophy in Tibet: The Teachings of the Jonangpa School by David Reigle
- Nanzan Institute: Pruning the Bodhi Tree. Critical scholarship in the tathagatagarba-doctrine
|
|
