BODHISATTVA AND ŚUNYATA

VIETNAM BUDDHIST UNIVERSITY PUBLICATIONS

Dr. Bhikṣuṇī TN Giới Hương

750 Nguyen Kiem, Phu Nhuan, TP.HCM, Vietnam

Tel (Only in Vietnamese): +84-8-3847-8779 - Fax: +84-8-3847-8779

Email: This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. | Website: www.vbu.edu.vn

© All Rights Reserved by the Publishers and Editor, 2012

This book may be re-produced or translated into any

languages with prior permission from the Editor.

First published by VBU Publications, 2012

ISBN: 1 74189 933 8

Responsibility for publication: Quang Thang

Responsibility for printing: Thich Quang Tam

Cover by Le Tam. Designed by Thich Quang Tam

Publication license No. 405-2011/CXB/16-44/PĐ,

issued on 1 January 2012

Printed in Vietnam

By FAHASA Printers, TP.HCM

Vietnam Buddhist University Series

 

Bhikkhuni Gioi Huong

BODHISATTVA AND ŚUNYATA

IN THE EARLY AND DEVELOPED BUDDHIST TRADITIONS

The Oriental Press

(NXB Phương Đông)

 

PREFACE TO THIRD EDITION

 

As the book title indicates, ‘Bodhisattva and Śūnyatā in the Early and Developed Buddhist Traditions’ by Bhikkhuni Dr. Gioi Huong, is a comprehensive and authoritative studies on two most influential concepts of Mahāyāna Buddhism, namely, ‘Bodhisattva (Pāli: Bodhisatta, Chinese: 菩 薩) and Śūnyatā (Pāli: Suññata, Chinese: 空 性). The book has nine chapters, the divided into two parts, out of which two chapters concerning with  the concept of Śūnyatā, while the rest with Bodhisattva.

In  this third revised and enlarged edition, a very few changes have been made, minor errors have been corrected and lots of Chinese characters which are equivalent Pāli works have been added by the author.

The two concepts most profound, sublime and influential of all Mahāyāna texts are the concepts of Bodhisattva and Śūnyatā. In fact, both concepts had their seeds first in the Pāli Nikāyas. In other words, while reading this book, the reader can discover the doctrines of Mahāyāna along with those of Pāli Nikāya which are essentially the same in origin, nature and purpose. He can also recognize how the term Śūnyatā sounds negative but the true meaning of it made Bodhisattva who becomes so positive and affirmative.

How both systems of sūtras provide good visions and practical methods to Bodhisattva in balance with the insight of Śūnyatā in order to help people in modern time overcome the current crisis and can play the important role in establishing a world of peace and happiness for the humanity.

           ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

During the time of my sojourn in India to pursue Ph.D. course of Buddhist Studies in the University of Delhi, I received from Ven. Tri Quang, Late Ven. Tinh Vien, Ven. Nhu Dien, Ven. Minh Chon, Late Ven. Minh Thanh, Ven. Hai Trieu Am… not only in terms of the generous material supports, but also that of the warm spiritual, have in deed created comfort and smooth conditions for me to keep mental peace and light-hearted in order to put whole my mind and will in study. I could not express my debt of gratitude to these most venerable Monks in words.

In the course of writing this research work, I would like to express my deep gratitude specially to Dr. I. N. Singh, my respected supervisor - the Lecturer of Buddhist Philosophy in Department of Buddhist Studies, Delhi University, whose scientific method of guidance has developed in me a critical point of view, with self-confidence and inspired me to do my research work easily without his guidance, I could not be able to do this heavy task.

I should also like to show my deep thankful to all the other professors, readers and lecturers of the Department, who directly or indirectly instructed me during the period of my study Buddhism from M.A. to Ph.D. courses at the place of its origination. I am also very grateful to all my friends – Venerable monks and nuns, lay-men and lay-women and Buddhist disciples have been kindly helpful in one way or another for my knowledge accomplishments, but their names are too many to be mentioned here.

At last, my sincere acknowledgements go to those whose books have been well used for quotations and references in my research work and my thanks are also due to the library staff of Delhi University Library System and Research Services Section, Central Reference Library for research facilities and their helping hands.

                                                 Delhi, March 30, 2003

                                                 Bhikṣuṇī TN Giới Hương

(This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.)

THE LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS

A		AóGUTTARA NIK€YA
BB		BODHISATTVABHˆMI
BDBSL		THE BODHISATTVA DOCTRINE IN BUDDHIST SANSKRIT LITERATURE
BGS		THE BOOK OF THE GRADUAL SAYINGS
BIHP		BUDDHIST IMAGES OF HUMAN PERFECT
BKS		THE BOOK OF THE KINDRED SAYINGS
Bs		BUDDHIST SCRIPTURE
CPB		THE CENTRAL PHILOSOPHY OF BUDDHISM
D		DĪGHA NIK€YA
DB		THE DIALOGUE OF THE BUDDHA
DCBT		A DICTIONARY OF CHINESE BUDDHIST TERMS
DDPN		DICTIONARY OF P€LI  PROPER  NAMES
Dha		DHAMMAPADA
EB		ENCYCLOPAEDIA OF BUDDHISM
EE		THE EMPTINESS OF EMPTINESS
EL		THE ETERNAL LEGACY
GBWL		A GUIDE TO THE BODHISATTVA‘S WAY OF LIFE
GD		THE GROUP OF THE DISCOURSES
I		THE ITIVUTTAKA
J		J€TAKA
LS		THE LOTUS SUTRA
LSPW		THE LARGE SˆTRA ON PERFECT WISDOM
M		MAJJHIMA NIK€YA
Mhvu		MAH€VASTU
MK		M€DHYAMIKA K€RIK€S OF N€G€RJUNA
MLS		THE MIDDLE LENGTH SAYINGS
PED		P€LI-ENGLISH DICTIONARY
PP		THE PATH OF PURIFICATION (VISUDDHIMAGGA)
S		SAñYUTTA NIKAYA
SBFB		STORIES OF THE BUDDHA’S FORMER BIRTHS
Sn		SUTTA NIPATA
SSPW		SELECTED SAYINGS FROM THE PERFECTION OF WISDOM
Ö		ÖIKâ€SAMUCCAYA
Vi		VISUDDHIMAGGA

-˜™-

 

THE LIST OF TABLES

1.      The Current Paradigm of Western Civilization		13
2.      The Table of the Process of Nine Stages of Jhnas		85
3.      The Diagram of Three Special Kinds of Knowledges		95
4.      The Table of Formulation of Prat­tyasamutpda		202
5.      The Table of the Relation of Prat­tyasamutpda, ։nyat, Updya-pratipda and Mdhyama pratipda		212
6.      The Formulation of Four Categories of Intellect		233
7.      The Table of the Display of the Ultimate Truth		237
8.      The Formulation of the Two Truths on Three Levels		240
9.      The Table of the Two Truths: SaòvÙti-satya  and Pramrtha-satya		240
10. The Table of the Role of ։nyat (Emptiness) in Ten Pramits		335
11. The Table of Adhi-±īla, Adhi-citta and Adhi-prajñ on Six Pramits		338
12. The Formulation of Ö­la – Samadhi – Praj– of Vasubandhu		339
13. The Relation between Ten Pramits and Ten Bh‰mis		355

–¯—

CONTENTS

Preface to third edition                                                              v

Acknowledgements                                                                                             vii

The List of Abbreviations                                                                                   ix

The List of Tables                                                                                 xi

CHAPTER ONE:  INTRODUCTION                                                        1

1. Why the Topic 1
2. The Crisis of War 2
3. The Crisis of Increasing population 4
4. The Crisis of Degrading Environment 5
5. The Crisis of Human Moral 9
6. The Problem of Running Fast to Modern World 11
7. The Matter of Exchanging the Western and Northern Thoughts 12
8. The Proposed Solution 15
9. The Responsibilities of the World 15
10. The Tendency of Religions 15
11. The Concrete Inclinations of Buddhism 19
12. The View of Dogma 20
13. The View of Knowledge 22
14. The View of Faith 23
15. The View of Individual 25
16. The View of ‘։nyat’ (Emptiness) 27

III. The Proposed Direction                                                                                30

CHAPTER TWO:  THE CONCEPT OF BODHISATTAHOOD               35

1. The Definition of the Term Bodhisatta 39
2. The Meaning of Other Term Denoting Saints 48
3. Devas or Gods 48
4. The Arahanta 53
5. The Örvakas 55
6. The Pratyeka-Buddha 56
7. The Buddha 57

III. The Concept of Bodhisatta as Depicted in Pli Nikyas                       60

1. From the Time of the Buddha’s Renunciation upto the Time of

His Enlightenment                                                                       61

2. From Gotama Siddattha’s Conception to Gotama Buddha’s

Enlightenment                                                                      64

3. From the Conception of all the Buddhas in Their

                Mothers’ wombs to the Attainment of Their Enlightenment      67

4. The Various Lives of Gotama Buddha 73

CHAPTER THREE: THE BODHISATTA PRACTICE AS

                                 DEPICTED IN P€LI SOURCES                                              79

1. Awakening the Nature of Life 79
2. Seeking for the Truth 81

III. The Middle Way                                                                                               85

1. Meditation 87
2. Knowledge 97

CHAPTER FOUR:  THE ORIGIN AND DEVELOPMENT OF

                 THE BODHISATTVA DOCTRINE         

1. The Origins Leading to the Bodhisattva Doctrine 105
2. The Natural Tendencies of Development within Buddhism 105
3. Mahyna 105
4. The New Concept of Buddhahood 118
5. Bhakti or Devotion      122
6. The External Influences of Other Traditions 124
7. Brahmanism: the Bhgavatas and Öaivas 124
8. Zoroastrianism: Fire-worship 127
9. Accent Religion: Nga-worship 127
10. Greek Art 129
11. Persian Religion and Culture 129
12. Propaganda Among New Tribes 130
13. The Evolution of Mahyna Bodhisattva 130

III. The Meaning and Status of Mahsattva                                                   137

CHAPTER FIVE: THE CONCEPT OF SU„„AT€

                AS DEPICTED IN P€LI NIK€YAS                                        141

1. Su––at as Non-substantial 142
2. Su––at as the Reality 147

III. Su––at as Anatt                                                                                  153

1. Su––at as Paæiccasamuppda or Middle way 170
2. Su––at as Nibbna 178

CHAPTER SIX:  THE CONCEPT OF ֈNYAT€

                  IN   MAH€Y€NA SˆTRAS                                                              189

1. The Survey of Mahyna S‰tras 189

The Praj–-pramit Literature                                                                189

1. The Vajrachedik-praj–-pramit S‰tra 191
2. The HÙdaya S‰tra 193
3. The concept of ։nyat in Mahyna S‰tras 196
4. The Definition of ։nyat 202
5. Similes of ։nyat 203
6. The Meanings of the Concept of ։nyat 204
7. ։nyat as the True Nature of Empirical Reality 205
8. ։nyat as Pratityasamutyda 210
9. ։nyat as the Middle Way 215
10. ։nyat as NirvÏa 223
11. ։nyat as the Negative Attitude or Indescribable 241
12. ։nyat as the Means of the Relative Truth

   and the Ultimate truth                                                                                    245

III. The Relation between the Concepts of Su––at and ։nyat  252

CHAPTER SEVEN:  THE CONDUCT OF

                 BODHISATTVA-CARY€                                                      273

1. The Preliminary Devotional Practices 274
2. The Thought of Enlightenment                                       277

III. The Practice of Virtue Perfections (Pramits)                                     295

1. Ten Pramits in Pli Buddhist texts 298
2. Ten Pramits in Sanskrit Literature 304
3. The Role of ։nyat in Bodhisattva-cary 306
4. Ö­la-Samdhi-Pa–– 354
5. The Major Characteristics of Bodhisattvas 359

VII. The Relation between Pramits and Bh‰mis                                   370

CHAPTER EIGHT:  THE BUDDHA’S MAJOR   

                 CHARACTERISTICS THROUGH

                 BUDDHA BODY PERCEPTIONS                                           377

1. The Buddha-kya Concept in Pli Scriptures 377
2. The view of the Buddha in Early periods (the Classification of Buddhist sects) 381
3. NirmÏakya 401
4. Sambhogakya 405
5. Dharmakya 409

CHAPTER NINE:  THE CONCLUSION                                                  417

1. The Identity in Pli Nikys and Mahyna S‰tras 417
2. The Application of the Concept of Boddhisattva 420
3. The Doctrine of Boddhisattva in the Individual

     and Society Improvement                                                                             420

2. The Doctrine of Boddhisattva in the Gnosiology                                 421

III. The Application from the Concept of ։nyat                                   421

1. The Doctrine of ։nyat and the View of Individual and Universe 421
2. The Doctrine of ։nyat and Science 422
3. The Doctrine of ։nyat in Mutual Understanding

                among Religions                                                                                   424

THE BODDHISATTVAS’ NAMES IN SANSKRIT & CHINESE             427

BIBLIOGRAPHY                                                                                      431

INDEX                                                                                                                     445

v v  v  v  v

 

CHAPTER ONE

INTRODUCTION

 

Why the Topic

Man has forgotten that he has a heart. He forgets that if he treats the world kindly, the world will treat him kindly in return.

Today, the definition of development and growth has to be revised. The society is supposed to be more civilized though everybody has become lonelier, more worried, tensed and afraid of uncertainty.  Science has made it possible to produce more in quality and quantity both but more number of people go to bed with empty stomach, more number of people die without medicine, more number of children are working and lesser going to school. Human race is more aware of the consequence of environmental degradation, pollution etc. but the defense investment on nuclear tests have increased, number of vehicles produced and used have increased, the area of jungle is coming down drastically. In one line it can be said that the world is full of contradictions.

In an era of satellite-communication and advanced technology, man having made great strides in the scientific domain can solve many material problems, but has left unsolved those related to sufferings, sickness, poverty, dissention, hatred, jealousy, doubt and war. Trevor Ling in his famous book Buddha, Marx and God[1] expressed that the Western people have created enormous material wealth, but they have also killed off millions of human beings in periodic outbursts of mass violence which they dignified by the name of war, at the same time as well as may be this is the first time in human history, human have to face the threat of extinction of the human race and of all life on this planet by the nuclear-war and others.

And today we have come to believe that our society as a whole finds itself in a great crisis. We can read about its numerous manifestations every day in the newspapers. We face high inflation and unemployment, we have an energy crisis, a crisis in health care, pollution and other environmental disaster, a rising wave of violence and crime, and so on. We are living in a globally interconnected world, in which biological, psychological, social and environmental phenomena are all interdependent. And the present day we find ourselves in a state of profound, world-wide crisis. It is a complex, multi-dimensional crisis whose facets touch every aspect of our lives-our health and livelihood, the quality of our environment and our social relationships, our economy, technology, and politics. Or in other expression, we can be able to say that in this era humanity is primarily faced with problems such as war, increasing population, degrading the environment, collapsing the morals, exchanging the West and East thoughts, for running fast to modern world…

The Crisis of the War

Fritjof Capra, the best-selling author of The Tao of Physic and in The Turning Point[2] declared about the crisis of war that men have stockpiled of thousands of nuclear weapons, enough to destroy the entire world several times over and the arms race continues at undiminished speed. In November 1978, while the United States and the Soviet Union were completing their second round of talks on the Strategic Arms Limitation Treaties, the Pentagon launched its most ambitious nuclear weapons production program in two decades; two years later this culminated in the biggest military boom in history: a five-year defense budget of 1,000 billion dollars. The costs of this collective nuclear rue are staggering.

In the meantime more than fifteen million people - most of them children - die of starvation each year; another 500 million are seriously undernourished. Almost 40 percent of the world’s population has no access to professional health services; yet developing countries spend more than three times as much on armaments as on health care. 35 percent of humanity lacks safe drinking water, while half of its scientists and engineers are engaged in the technology of making weapons.

The threat of nuclear war is the greatest danger humanity is facing today. …The 360 nuclear reactors now operating worldwide, and the hundreds more planned, have become a major threat to our well being.[3]

As a matter of fact, nowadays, the world is divided into people of various ideologies; with their power‑blocs, who devote most of their minds and energies to the sterile, negative, cruel business of wars. The world cannot have peace till men and nations renounce selfish desires, give up racial arrogance and cleanse themselves of the egotistical lust for possession and power. Ideology divides, it brings about conflict. Ideology takes multifarious forms ‑ political, religious, economic, social and educational. Ideology is an escape from reality. It brutalizes man and holds him in bondage to fanaticism and violence.

In consequences, the belief that the only way to fight force is by applying more force has led to the arms race between the great powers. And this competition to increase the weapons of war has brought man to the very brink of total self-destruction. If we do nothing about it, the next war will be the end of the world where there will be neither victors nor victims-only dead bodies.

We should be conscious that what harm is there if we settle our problems and bring peace and happiness by adopting this cultured method and by sacrificing our dangerous pride.

When the United Nations was formed after the horrors of the Second World War, the heads of Nations who gathered to sign the charter agreed that it should begin with the following preamble:

“Since it is in the minds of men that wars begin, it is in the minds of men the ramparts of peace should be erected”.[4]

The Crisis of Increasing Population

There is really no ground to think that this is the only period in which the population of the world has increased. There is no means of comparison with any period of ancient history. Vast civilizations existed and have disappeared in Central Asia, the Middle East, Africa and Ancient America. No census figures on these civilizations are even remotely available. Population, as everything else in the universe, is subject to cycles of rise and fall. In cycles of alarming increases of birth rate, one might be consequently tempted to argue against rebirth in this or other worlds. For the last few thousands years, there has been no evidence to prove that there were more people in some parts of the world than there are today. The number of beings existing in various world systems is truly infinite.

One of the principal reasons of this crisis is the human’s passion as Ven. K. Sri Dhammananda in the book What Buddhists believe pointed out the main its cause of increasing population is the sex conduct or sense craving and he has given resolve for this problem that:

“Population can further increase unless sensible people take measures to control it.”[5]

Hence, the credit or responsibility of increasing the population almost must be given to over enjoyment in sex not knowing another knowledge or healthy entertainment available. This credit or responsibility of increasing population cannot be allotted to any particular religion or any external sources, as there is a belief among certain people that human beings are created by God. Thus, those who believe that god created everything, why so much suffering to his own creatures such as poverty, unhappiness, war, hunger, disease, famine…all unfortunate occurrences that destroy human lives are not due to the will of god or to the whim of some devil instead of why cannot he control the population?[6]

The Crisis of Degrading Environment

Another reason of the fact makes the hearts of many shudder that is the disasters suffered by people all over the world in recent past. It is proved that now nature herself is letting her fury against man in self-defense in the form of floods, droughts, earthquakes, volcanoes... this has resulted in the destruction of various kinds of flora and fauna making the environment polluted and the future of the planet earth itself unsafe.

As we know, the current environmental crisis is owing to environmental pollutions: air, water, earth pollutions which are caused by atomic tests, chemical arms tests, by poisonous gas emitted from engineering factories, and by the fast increase of above world population, etc.

The term pollution is defined by the Environmental Pollution Panel of the President’s Science Advisory Committee held in November, 1965 in its report: Restoring the Quality of Our Environment, as follows:

“Environmental pollution is the unfavorable alteration of our surroundings, wholly or largely as a by - product of man’s actions, through direct or indirect effects of changes in energy patterns, radiation levels, chemical and physical constitution and abundances of organisms. These changes may affect man directly, or through his supplies of water and of agricultural and other biological products, his physical objects or possessions, or his opportunities for recreation and appreciation of nature”.[7]

Mentioning the problem of Nuclear energy, the well-known physicist Fritjof Capra said that:

“The radioactive elements released by nuclear reactors are the same as those making up the fallout of atomic bombs. Thousands of tons of these toxic materials have already been discharged into the environment by nuclear explosions and reactor spills.  As they continue to accumulate in the air we breathe, the food we eat, and the water we drink, our risk of developing cancer and genetic diseases continues to increase. The most toxic of these radioactive poisons, plutonium, is itself fissionable, which means that it can be used to build atomic bombs. Thus nuclear power and nuclear weapons are inextricably linked, being but different aspects of the same threat to humankind. With their continued proliferation, the likelihood of global extinction becomes greater every day”.[8]

For water and food pollution, Fritjof Capra added:

“The water we drink and the food we eat, both are contaminated by a wide variety of toxic chemicals. In the United States synthetic food additives, pesticides, plastics and other chemicals are marketed at a rate currently estimated at a thousand new chemical compounds a year. As a result, chemical poisoning has become an increasing part of our affluent life. Moreover, the threats to our health through the pollution of air, water and food are merely the most obvious, direct effects of human technology on the natural environment. Less obvious but possible far more dangerous effects have been recognized only recently and are still not fully understood”.[9]

Moreover, the exorbitant use of petroleum has led to heavy tanker traffic with frequent collisions, in which huge amounts of oil are spilled into the seas. These spilled oils have not only polluted the shores and beaches of Europe, but are also seriously disrupting the marine food cycles and thus creating ecological hazards that are still poorly understood. The generation of electricity from coal is even more hazardous and more polluting than energy production from oil. Underground mining causes severe damage to miners’ health, and strip mining creates conspicuous environmental consequences, since the mines are generally abandoned once the coal is exhausted, with huge areas of land left devastated. The worst damage of all, both to the environment and to human health, comes from the burning of coal. Coal-burning plants emit vast quantities of smoke, ash, gases and various organic compounds, many of which are known to be toxic or carcinogenic. The most dangerous of the gases is sulfur dioxide which can severely impair the lungs. Another pollutant released in the burning of coal is nitrogen oxide, which is also the main ingredient in air pollution from automobiles. A single coal-burning plant can emit as much nitrogen oxide as several hundred thousands cars…At the heart of the problem, as usual, lies ecological shortsightedness and corporate men’s overwhelming greed.

In the Los Angeles, according to a statement by sixty faculty members of the University of California Medical School mentioned that: ‘Air pollution has now become a major health hazard to most of this community during much of the year’.[10] This continual pollution of the air not only affects humans but also upsets ecological systems. It injures and kills plants, and these changes in plant life can induce drastic changes in animal populations that depend on the plants.

And they declared that even discounting the threat of a nuclear catastrophe, the global ecosystem and the further evolution of life one earth are seriously endangered and may well end in a large-scale ecological disaster. Over-population and industrial technology have contributed in various ways to a severe degradation of the nature environment upon which we are completely dependant. As a result, our health and well-being are seriously endangered.

This has become clear and firm that our technology is severely disturbing, and may even be destroying, the ecological systems upon which our very existence depends and we can imagine how dangerous the current environmental pollution on earth is! There is neither security nor justice to be universally found. Uncertainty and insecurity have become almost a universal curse. The ‘Conquest of nature’ has not succeeded in achieving either plenty or peace. And this pollution must be evident result of the modem scientific civilization with its fast and uncontrolled; development of industries and economics. This civilization, in its turn, is the result of a very high development of self- thought, way of thinking and enjoying pleasures. So, the main causes of the great environmental crisis which is being warned are desire and ignorance of man.

The Crisis of Human Moral

One of the controversies which is quite heated in the West, specially in the United State today concerns the collapsing moral.

It is true that the developed countries marched forward fast to satisfy their ambitions to bring the prosperous richness through the advancement of all their computer-space-scientific-technological accomplishments, however these were the societies which claimed to be sane, though well-documented studies have shown that these very societies have been sick and inflicted by extremely high rates of suicide, homicide, gang, gambling, marijuana, cocaine, alcoholism and the forms of debaucheries etc. Increasing affluence was accompanied by increasing numbers of alcoholics, suicides… and breathtaking advantages of science and technology have destroyed the solid moorings of a more stable way of life, which had its own ethical character… Moral education in industrial societies is disregarded. Most of the people only attach great importance on how to acquire more money. They measure individual value by how much money each one has obtained regardless of the means. In socialist countries where arbitrariness, dogmatism, individualism, and factionalism prevail, the welfare of the majority of the population being despotic and in the minority, is discarded; all economic resources are in the hands of those who hold power. Both above tendencies give prominence to materialistic value, transforming men into machines for production and gratification without ideal and moral.

In other words, these countries which are supposed to be ‘the most democratic, peaceful, and prosperous’ are becoming increasingly afflicted with dangerous ailments. Commenting on the book The Sane Society, a famous American psychologist, Erich Fromm, he maintains that a plain picture of society related more particularly to the United States than to European countries. But the social trend in the latter was towards the American situation, in reality.[11]

Erich Fromm has made an important point to confirm it that:

“Control by the intellect over nature, and the production of more and more things, became the paramount aims of life. In this process man has transformed himself into thing, life has become subordinated to property, “to be” is dominated by “to have”. Where the roots of Western culture, both Greek and Hebrew, considered the aim of life the perfection of man, modem man is concerned with the perfection of things, and knowledge of how to make them.”[12]

And Fromm came to conclude that the United States, which is the most prosperous and materially the most advanced, showed the greatest degree of decrepitude.[13]

As far as the human psychology is concerned, in the face of these increasing difficulties, men do feel more and more anxious, skeptical and therefore tend to forget it by hastening to enjoy life and kill themselves in alcoholism, drug, homicide and suicide etc.  It is very logical of Eric Fromm that despite increase in production, facilities, technology, science… in West, in fact the happiness of westerners merely leans on the illusion of full of material and money, then day by day men lose themselves and feel too purpose, void, lonely that they lament agonizingly that in the twentieth century, the burning problem is human was dead.[14]

It is no doubt that the crisis of war, increasing population, and degrading environment generate the danger for all our living in this earth and make the moral degeneration lead to social crises of various sorts. Terrorists attacks, wars, corruption, crime against children, women and elderly persons have made this world, indeed, a very unhappy and sad place to live and men became indifferent to everything taking place in the world. This indifference, hard and cruel paved the way for a life-style of ruthlessness, unfairness, and violence even how much science progresses but it can not handle as J. Krishnamurti in his well-known Education and the Signification of Life has written that:

“Technological progress does solve certain kinds of problems for some people at one level, but it introduces wider and deeper issue too. To live at one level, disregarding the total process of life, is to invite misery and destruction. The greatest need and most pressing problem for every individual is to have an integrated comprehension of life, which will enable him to meet its ever-increasing complexities.

Technical knowledge, however necessary, will in no way resolve our inner, psychological pressures and conflicts; and it is because we have acquired technical knowledge without understanding the total process of life that technology has become a means of destroying ourselves. The man who knows how to split the atom has no love in his heart and becomes a monster.” [15]

The Problem of Running Fast to Modern World

The world is moving so fast in modern times, almost with a kaleidoscopic speed. We find a radial transformation in all human activity and organizations that matter most in international situations. But there is no denying the fact that the achievements of science and technology have destroyed the solid moorings of a more stable way of life, which had its own ethical character, and cast large masses of men adrift in a strange and difficult world. The world is fast changing out of recognition.

It is true that the advances in civilization have brought emancipation to humanity and added greatly to the enrichment of our culture, such as it has widened our intellectual horizon but they have also made life very much complicated and troublesome at many levels.

The Matter of Exchanging the Western and Northern Thoughts

Achievement of the so-called ‘scientific-technological-civilization’ of the 21^st century has made societies in the world which have been knitted together closer than ever before and made more responsive to men’s needs and demands. Specially with computer-space-scientific-technological accomplishes, the West and the East, the North and the South can be able to exchange each other about their thoughts, ideas as well at all levels of life in religion, politics, economics, societies, psychology, and culture… They are encountering and intermingling with each other in a scope and depth never experienced before to which in physicist Fritjof Capra’s words now often called a ‘paradigm shift’ - a profound change in the thoughts, perceptions and values that form a particular vision of reality and he has given short note of the history of thought exchange that:

“The paradigm that is now shifting has dominated our culture for several hundreds of years, during which it has shaped our modern Western society and has significantly influenced the rest of the world. This paradigm comprises a number of ideas, values that have been associated with various streams of Western culture, among them the Scientific Revolution, the Enlightenment, and the Industrial Revolution. They include the belief in the scientific method as the only valid approach to knowledge; the view of the universe as a mechanical system composed of elementary material building blocks; existence; and the belief in unlimited material progress to be achieved through economic and technological growth”.[16]

The sociologist Pitirim Sorokin[17] glosses over the modern paradigm shift as part of a consistent process, a regular fluctuation of value systems traceable in Western society. Sorokin has initiated a discussion on the transvaluation of values that has spared nothing in its orbit of social and cultural dynamism.

Table I

Fossil-fuel age in the context of cultural evolution

However, nowadays while the process of the transformation of mutual understanding one another among cultures is going on in some places, the integration of the world makes the multiplicity of human societies and ideologies more conspicuous, causing unprecedented tensions and antagonisms in all areas of life. The coming global age is producing dissension as well as the quest for a greater, more harmonious unity. The difference, opposition and conflict among various ideologies, value systems and ways of thinking become more and more conspicuous throughout the world. Every civilization or culture is structured round a variety of values, some of which are more primary than other, and proclaims a number of often divergent ideals. These values and ideals may differ even within the same culture at any one time according to the vagaries of geographical location or vary with time according to the predominant Zeitgeist.

Human societies which once maintained their own cultural and intellectual patterns are now being pulled together into one great rushing stream of world history, creating waves which slap and dash one against the other. The synchronization of global space by information and transportation technology requires that all people play their parts on the common stage of world history, and hopefully, come to some awareness of their roles in the drama. Nevertheless, only after divisions and oppositions have been overcome and a new spiritual horizon for humanity has been opened up shall we have a truly united destiny.

A clear, self-conscious realization of one world history will not be produced simply by forces working from without, such as the advancement of scientific technology, but will be the work of an innermost human spirituality.

How can we find a common spiritual basis in this pluralistic world without marring the unique characteristics of each of the cultural and spiritual traditions? This is also one of the urgent tasks humankind is now facing.

THE PROPOSED SOLUTION

The Responsibilities of the World

The crisis of man is so deep and appalling that it has affected all aspects of society in its relationships from the individual in his family and home to the community to which he belongs leaving no space on earth without risk of the irrevocable problems that threaten the very existence of such on earth. This encompasses many new conceptions of relationships and implications in society that permeate through global view of education that alone can curtail the narrowness of nationalism and chauvinism from which emanate the vicious circles spreading rancor, apartheid and biases smother the very best in us and in all the faiths and cultures which form the rich legacies of all the time. If we are to be peaceful to all others and ourselves we must discipline ourselves in a way that brings true happiness and peace.

To understand our multifaceted cultural crisis we need to adopt an extremely broad view and see our situation in the context of human cultural evolution. We have to shift our perspective to the better way.

The Tendency of the Religions

As we see that science and technology though having made great progress cannot transform the human mind. Science may solve immediate problems, it feeds more people so that there are more people to feed, it prolongs life but it also finds more effective means of destroying life. According to Robert F. Spencer in The Relation of Buddhism to Modern Science:

“Science, a view today, is nothing more than a method and to make a cult of it, to find in it the answer to problems and questions of the ultimate forms of human destiny, is rank error. It is making a dogma of science where no religious emotion or attitude are ever intended” .[18]

So, the scientific goal is material to satisfy human desire rather than spiritual to improve upon the human ethics and to resolve this obvious imbalance between science, technology, morality and spirit, it is no way more to return the background to philosophy of life as A. J. Toynbee expresses his idea that:

“I believe that a civilization’s style is the expression of its religion and that is, a civilization is decided by the quality of the religion on which it is based.”[19]

It means a religion is the application for people’s spiritual needs and basis of a national culture as H. G. Wells has expounded that:

“Religion is the central part of our education that determines our moral conduct.”[20]

or the famous German philosopher, Kant, stated that:

“Religion is the recognition of our moral principles as laws that must not be transgressed.”[21]

And the Buddha’s message as a religious way of life:

“Not to do any evil, to cultivate good,

to purify one’s mind, this is the advice of the Buddhas”.

(Sabba ppassa akaraÏam, kusalassa upasampad

sacittapariyodapanaò, etaò buddhna ssanaò).[22]

In a further view, we should understand that religion, if it is true religion, must take the whole of man as its province and not merely certain aspects of his life. The good man, i.e., the man who follows his religion, knows that there can be no happiness or peace on earth as long as there is poverty and starvation, injustice and oppression, discriminative legislation, racial segregation, social disabilities and inequalities, corroding fear, mutual distrust and suspicion. Self‑respect without war with others is as necessary to happiness as food, and there can be no self‑respect among those who do not have the opportunity to achieve the full stature of their manhood.

However, it is an undeniable fact that not all religions are useful and good for men. But a history is a witness when a certain religion succeeds to satisfy to one’s belief which may actually lead men to both physical and psychological state, religion exists and lives for long. The religious pluralism is also a remarkable cultural and religious phenomenon in our time and one of the important issues to be addressed by religious thinkers and writers of all traditions. Religious pluralism is an issue commonly challenging all religions in our era, but the degree of its seriousness and the manner of its challenge are not necessarily identical for all religions.

However, as far as the considerable difference between Christianity and Buddhism is concerned, it is worthwhile to mention that although in its early centuries Christianity confronted the problems of religious pluralism it has, in recent centuries, enjoyed a virtual religious monopoly in Europe and America. Only recently, with the collapse of the Europe-centered view of the world and the rapid development of international interaction in various fields of human life, have Christians come again to experience intensely the reality of religious pluralism. In this connection they have come to recognize the existence of non-Christian religions and the integrity of non-Christian systems of belief and values, not only in foreign lands, but in Europe and America as well. Hence, religious pluralism now appears to many Christians to be a serious challenge to the monotheistic character of Christianity.

On the other hand, Buddhism, throughout its long history, has existed and spread throughout Asia within a religiously pluralistic situation: in India, it coexisted with Brahmanism, Jainism and many diverse forms of Hinduism; in China with Confucianism and Taoism; and in Japan with Shinto and Confucianism. Thus, to most Buddhists the experience of ‘religious pluralism’ has not been the serious shock it has been to most Christians.[23]

And in the connection to resolve the problem of above imbalance in religions, societies, economics…, Albert Einstein – the most distinguished scientist in the Relative Theory of the twentieth century- advised that it is quite wise if we know how to combine religion and science that:

“Science can only be created by those who are thoroughly imbued with the aspiration toward truth and understanding. This source of feeling, however, springs from the sphere of religion. To this there also belongs the faith in the possibility that the regulations valid for the world of existence are rational, that is, comprehensible to reason. I cannot conceive of a genuine scientist without that profound faith. The situation may be expressed by an image: science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind.”[24]

While Trevor Ling, Professor of comparative religions at University of Manchester, wondered that “What kind of religion will be most likely to emerge from the encounter?” According to him, it would be very helpful to ask this question with reference to Buddhism, because on the one hand Buddhism was a form of religion which was considered by some to be more compatible with the modem secular climate than most other religions, and on the other hand, the kind of modification of its thought to which Buddhism could be challenged by the encounter with secularism was likely to be of considerable significance to others besides Buddhists.[25] Also the same ideas but in other words, Radhakrishman gave more emphasis to confirm:

“If Buddhism appealed to the modern mind it was because it was scientific, empirical and not based on any dogma”.[26]

The Concrete Inclinations of Buddhism

It should be thought that what we need to overcome our multifaceted crisis is not more energy but a profound change of values, attitudes and life styles and to responding with the present circumstances, Buddhism (佛 教) especially Mahāyāna    (大 乘) or Bodhisattva-yna (菩 薩 乘) with the doctrines of Öūnyat (空 性, wisdom) and compassion (慈 悲, karuÏā) seems to be able to agree with it.

Give a look in the history of Buddhism we can see there are two concepts of the most profound, sublime, and influential of all Mahyna texts (大 乘 經), are the concepts of Bodhisattva (菩 薩) and Öūnyat (空 性) as according to the Vajrachedik praj–-pramit Sūtra (金 剛 般 若 波 羅 密 經) the ideal of Bodhisattva is: “Never to abandon all beings and to see into the truth that all things are empty.”[27] In fact, after Buddha’s pass away, about the second or first century BC, Mahyna played a main and important role in giving rise to the new doctrine of Bodhisattva which succeeded in the Bodhisatta concept in Pli Nikya gradually meandering to Northern Asia, Korea, specially in China, Japan and Vietnam… and the standpoint of Bodhisattva’s ideal (菩 薩 理 想), a form of Mahyna Buddhism was welcome and influenced widely these countries at all levels of life in religion, politics, economics, societies, psychology, and culture from the ancient time to our modern era as Edward Conze has said that the two great contributions which the Mahyna had made to human thought were the creation of the Bodhisattva ideal and the elaboration of the doctrine of “Emptiness”.[28]

However, there are many things, which we should confirm to clarify more the purpose of Buddhist teaching as well as the significance and relevance of research on the topic.

The View of no Dogmas

As we know, Christianity is a salvation religion while Buddhism is the religion of enlightenment. It means the liberation of Christianity, which is the salvation from sin through a Savior, based on certain dogmas followers must trust if they hope to be on heaven after their death. In the Apostle’s Creed are listed many such beliefs and in the ‘Crossing The Threshold of Hope’, John Paul II gave some dogmas and declared that they are ultimate to be obeyed or refused by Christ followers.

And also in the Western religions, God is believed to have the attribute of justice, or righteousness, as the judge, as well as love or mercy as the forgiver. God is the fountain of justice, so everything God does may be relied upon as just. Since God’s verdict or dogma is absolutely just, human righteousness may be defined in terms of God’s judgment.

The notion of justice or righteousness is a double-edged sword. On the one hand, it aids in keeping everything in the right order, but on the other hand, it establishes clear-cut distinctions between the righteous and the unrighteous, promising the former eternal bliss, but condemning the latter to eternal punishment. Further, God in Semitic religions is not merely the One Absolute God in the ontological sense, but a living and personal God who calls humans through his Word and requires that humans respond to his Word.

According to the doctrines of most religions, it is through absolute belief in the Creator or God that the communication between the followers and God or Creator is founded, and that the followers would get luck and happiness by God’s favour in the present as well as future.

Buddha did not support the belief that religious rites and rituals were the only means for man to find salvation. According to the Buddha the development of morality, concentration and the purification of mind are important aspects of religious life leading to final salvation. He pointed out that a religious man must lead a harmless, unblamable, respectable, decent, noble and pure life. The mere act of praying or making offerings, or obeying dogmas does not by itself make a man religious or gain his perfection and salvation.

Buddha also advised people to refrain from evil practices. The reason for keeping away from evil must be for the welfare of living beings and not because of the fear of a god or punishment for its dogma commitment. At the same time, He advised us to cultivate the good humane qualities, practice good deeds and help others without any selfish motives.

The Buddha was the only religious teacher who gave due credit to man’s intelligence. He advised us not to become slaves to external agencies but to develop our hidden powers with self-confidence.

The View of Knowledge

What we here call knowledge is right understanding and right thought that constitute Wisdom (空 性, ։nyat) or the sublime truth. In Dhammapada, the Buddha perceives the being without knowledge:

“Long is the night to the wakeful, long is the road to him who is weary, long is saòsra to the foolish who knows not the Sublime Truth.”

(D­gh jgarato ratti, d­ghaò santassa yojanaò,

d­gho blnaò saòsro, saddhammaò avijnatam).[29]

This is the agonizing lament of the aspirant for happiness, the sublime truth forever of man. That aspiration is the good mood for the appearance of all the philosophical principles, ethical theories, psychological studies as well as the religious thoughts on the world, is not that?

However, once again we should comprehend the meanings of this knowledge that if to obey the will of God viz. coming to faith was the virtue of other religions, then the Buddha taught that such a belief neither guides Buddhists to the destruction of the states of anxious, skeptical, craving, defilement, and suffering, nor it leads one to true happiness. This belief is only the basis of the knowledge, practice, self-experience and effort by himself that he can be able to get rid of his sufferings and maintain peace, prosperous and happy world for himself and all to live in. That is the reason K.N. Jayatillaka, in his well-read book Early Buddhist Theory of Knowledge has written that,

“To the intellectual, the Buddha taught that one should not accept the statements of anyone, on ground of authority without first examining it. One should test the consequence of statement in the light of our knowledge and experiences with the idea of verifying their relation to truth, and then accept it. In this teaching, there is no reference to the rejection of authority, and the insistence to reply solely on one’s own experience.”[30] The following sentence in Majjhima Nikya is crucial for the whole dialectic of the matter of knowledge that ‘My teaching is not to come to believe, but to come, see and practice’.

It may be said without doubt that the message which is very simple, meaningful and practical, proves that Buddha highly appreciated the perceptions of ‘the knowing and the seeing’ than ‘the bare believing’ and this is one of different point of views between Buddhism and other religions.

There is a saying in Buddhism that:

“The one who is perfect in knowledge and conduct is supreme among gods and men” (VijjcaraÏa-sampanno so seææho devamnuse).[31]

The View of Faith (Saddhā, 信 心)

In Buddhism, there is no formal act of ‘baptism’ though there is a stereotyped formula used by Buddhists in Buddhist lands to express his act of `taking refuge’ which merely means that the devotee accepts the Buddha as his Teacher and Guide, the Doctrine as his philosophy and his Way of Life and the Sangha (the Community of Monks) as the ideals of this Way of Life.

The Buddhist quality of faith (Saddhā, 信 心) means acceptance in the belief and knowledge that these Refuges are worthy of such acceptance. There is no ‘blind faith’ involved, no case at all of ‘believe or be damned’. In fact, there were instances when followers of other teachers repudiated them and wished to transfer their allegiance to the Buddha, He discouraged them and asked them to give the matter further thought. When they further persisted, He advised them to continue their benefactions to their earlier teachers.

There is a well‑known passage in the Klma S‰tta that teaches the following lesson:

“Yes, Klmas, you may well doubt, you may well waver. In a doubtful matter wavering does arise. Now look you, Klmas. Be ye not misled by report or tradition or hearsay. Be not misled by proficiency in the collections, nor by mere logic or inference, nor after considering reasons, nor after reflection on and approval of some theory, nor because it fits becoming, nor out of respect for a recluse (who holds it). But, Klmas, when you know for yourselves:

These things are unprofitable, these things are blameworthy, these things are censured by the intelligent; these things, when performed and undertaken, conduce to loss and sorrow, then indeed do ye reject them, Kalamas.” [32]

(Alaò hi vo Klm kaÏkhituò alaò vicikicchituò. KaÏkhniye va pana vo æhne vicikicch uppann. Etha tumhe Klm m anussavena m paramparya m itikirya m piæakasampadnena m takkahetu ma nayahetu m kraparivitakkena m diææhinijjhnakkhantiy, m bhavyar‰patya m samaÏo no gar‰ ti, yad tumhe Klm attan va jneyytha—ime dhamm akusal ime dhamm svajj ime dhamm vi––garahit ime dhamm samatt samdinn ahitya dukkhya saòvattant­ ti—atha tumhe Klm pajaheyytha).[33]

It is undisputed evidence that man is of this freedom of choice. It states quite categorically that nothing should be accepted merely on the grounds of tradition or the authority of the teacher, or because it is the view of a large number of people, distinguished or otherwise. Everything should be weighed, examined and judged according to whether it is true or false in the light of one’s convictions. If considered wrong, they should not be rejected outright but left for further consideration. Not only is doubt not considered a heinous sin; it is positively encouraged. This is the view of Faith in Buddhism.

The View of Individual (我, Self, I, or Person)

It is true that the world is riddled with racial, political, religious, communal and ideological misunderstandings. To solve these complex problems, the view of individual (我) plays the central and essence role. Human must know himself who possesses the all powerful force — the creator and destroyer of man and the architect of man’s fate no other else as is illustrated by the Dhammapada as under:

“Self is the refuge of self: for who else could refuge be?

By a fully controlled self one obtains a refuge which is hard to gain.”

(Att hi attano ntho, ko hi ntho paro siy?

attan‘va sudantena ntham labhati dullabhaò.)[34]

Or also the same above idea expressed in different verse:

“By oneself alone is evil done, by oneself is one defiled.

By oneself is evil avoided, by oneself alone is one purified.

Purity and impurity depend on oneself.

No one can purify another.”

(Attan‘va kataò papaò attan saÏkilissati;

attan akataò papaò attan‘va visujjhati;

Suddh­ asuddh­ paccattaò;

n––o a––aò visodhaye) .[35]

Thus, man should be capable of moulding anything if only he knows how to develop and make use of his mind and capability properly in inculcating ethical-moral co-operation for universal good. The misconceptions which had been held for years by followers specially of BrhmaÏism and Christianity, declared that every thing in this world, whether existent or nonexistent, good or bad, lucky or unlucky, glad or sad…all come from the power of a supreme creator, the only ruler to have power of reward and punishment, or human in this earth as suffering beings who need to be saved by supernatural power.

And it seems that following the theistic religions as Catholicism, Hinduism, Bodhisattvas in Buddhism were considered similarly as gods or devas who can save and deliver to suffering creatures on this earth. This is misunderstood in the Buddha’s teachings which will lead to the decline in Buddhism if it is not corrected in time. The key resolution is emphasized that we must adjust our points and acknowledge confidently that man’s position according to Buddhism is supreme because of the three supreme qualities human: memory, pure behaviour and perseverance. The human memory is stronger than that of any other creature. The control of carnal impulses, the performance of moral acts for the benefit of others, often at the sacrifice of one’s own profit, is distinctive only in human behaviour. Human beings are capable of withstanding a great deal of suffering and can overcome almost any difficulty that exists in this world. Determination and perseverance to succeed is another supreme quality in him. In other words, man is his own master and there is no higher being or power that sits in judgment over his destiny.

Because of these characters, the Buddha taught, encouraged and stimulated each person to develop himself to work out his own emancipation. Man has the power to liberate himself from all bondage through his own personal effort and intelligence.

From that foundation, we should bear in mind that Buddhism is not a religion in the sense in which that word is commonly understood, for it is not a system of faith and worship. In Buddhism, there is no such thing as belief in a body of dogmas which have to be taken on faith, such as a belief in a Supreme Being, a creator of the universe, the reality of an immortal soul, a personal savior, or archangels who are supposed to carry out the will of the Supreme Deity. It is true that there are different types of Bodhisattvas (菩 薩) mentioned in Buddhism as devas (諸 天) or spiritual beings, but they are beings like ourselves, subject to the same natural law of cause and effect. They are not immortal, nor do they control the destiny of mankind. The Buddha does not ask us to accept belief in any supernatural agency or anything that cannot be tested by experience.

The View of ։nyat (空 性, Emptiness)

Prof. Masao in his perceptive essay on ‘Buddhism and Interfaith Dialogue’[36] makes a diatribe on the imperfect reasoning of most Western critics who discuss religion in a way of contrast between the ethical and natural theology (C.P. Tile), prophetic and mystical religion (F. Heiler) and monotheistic and pantheistic religion (W. F. Albright A. Lang). In bringing about such contrasts the Western critics generally discuss the broad features of Judes-Christian-Muslim religions and in a way all the other religious faiths that have their origins in the east.

By this method the Western scholars find solace in forming a comparative judgment in evaluating qualities of a religion, little caring if this approach has not only confused them to comprehend the faiths in a genuine spirit in which their founders had them initiated but canonization was preferred in oral transmission. Codification of the scripture started at a later time firstly in the form of the Sutta-piæaka, the precepts assuming the shape of Vinaya-piæaka.

The interregnum between the First Council (Saôgīti) and the actual codification of the canon is wholly uncertain as is the relation between the canon as it exists at the present time and when it had been compiled in the beginning. Whatever is the accepted period the Sutta and the Vinaya piæakas are primary sources of the modern studies of primitive Buddhism.     

As a matter of fact, Buddhism does not talk about One Absolute God who is essentially transcendent to human beings. Instead, Buddhism teaches Pratitya-samutpda (緣 起, 因 緣生起) or the law of ‘Dependent Co-origination’ or ‘Conditional Co-production’ as the Dharma, or the Truth. This teaching emphasizes that everything in and beyond the universe is interdependent, co-arising and co-ceasing (not only temporally, but also ontologically) with everything else. Nothing exists independently, or can be said to be self-existing. Accordingly, in Buddhism everything without exception is relative, relational, non-substantial and changeable. Even the divine (Buddha) does not exist by itself, but is entirely interrelated to humans and nature. This is why Gautama Buddha (瞿 曇 佛), the founder of Buddhism, did not accept the age-old Vedantic notion of Brahman, which is believed to be the only enduring reality underlying the universe. For a similar reason, Buddhism cannot accept the monotheistic notion of One Absolute God as the ultimate reality, but instead advocates Öūnyat (空 性, emptiness) and Tathat  (真如, suchness or as-it-is-ness) as the ultimate reality.

Öūnyat as the ultimate reality as well as the method is concrete practicing in Buddhism. It literally means ‘emptiness’ or ‘voidness’ and can imply ‘absolute nothingness’. This is because Öūnyat is entirely unobjectifiable, unconceptualizable, and unattainable by reason and will. It also indicates the absence of enduring self-being and the non-substantiality of everything in the universe. It is beyond all dualities and yet includes them.

In the realization of ։nyat not only sentient beings but also the Buddha, not only Saòsra (輪 迴) but also NirvÏa (涅 槃), are without substance and are empty. Accordingly, neither Buddha nor NirvÏa but the realization of the non-substantiality of everything, that is, the realization of Öūnyat is ultimate.

This realization of the non-substantial emptiness of everything is inseparably related with the law of dependent co-origination (緣 起, 因 緣 生 起). Dependent co-origination as the Dharma (Truth) is possible only when everything in the universe is without enduring substance (although possessing changeable temporal substance) and is open in its relationship with everything else. We human beings have a strong disposition to substantialize objects as well as our own self as if we and they were permanent and unchangeable substances. This substantialization of, and the accompanying attachment to, all kinds of objects causes human suffering. With respect to the goal of intersubjective understanding, the most serious cases of this problem lie in the substantialization of self (which results in self-centeredness) and the substantialization of one’s own religion (which entails a religious imperialism). Buddhism emphasizes awakening to Öūnyat (空 性), to the non-substantiality of everything, including self and Buddha, in order to be emancipated from suffering. Thus it teaches no-self (anatman, 無 我) and awakening to Dharma (法) rather than faith in the Buddha (佛 陀).

With this in mind, we would in what follows like to represent Buddhism under prevailing situation through the book with the title: Bodhisattva and ։nyat in Early and Developed Buddhist Traditions.

The Proposed Direction

In this part, it had better to confirm one crucial mark which dials in the whole thesis that the concept of Bodhisatta   (菩 薩) is considered as a human being with his own karmas at his very birth as all other creatures, but he can be able to get rid of all his inner conflicts (bad karmas / 業 and sufferings) and external crises (wars, populations, environments disturbances, calamities, moral, dilemma…), can change this unfortunate situation and can make a peaceful, prosperous and happy world for all to live in together by using his effort and determination in cultivating a realistic and practical way - Öūnyat (空性, emptiness) rediscovered and guided by Lord Buddha Gotama, without depending on external powers.

To make this comprehensive, we must neither consider Bodhisattvas (菩 薩) as heavenly gods or devas (諸 天) or permanent entities having the real existences for worship except only as symbolic method of Buddha-dharmas (佛 法) created by intellectual Buddhists after the Buddha’s parinirvāÏa to satisfy the religious need of followers and to preserve Buddhism in response of the circumstance of ‘polytheism’ or ‘religious pluralism’ of one or many societies in a certain historical point in India and Asian countries.

            And the concept of Öūnyat is the Buddhist traditional method of practicing for a Bodhisattva to realize the reality of life and universe, the individual and environment, spirituality and materiality which all are co-arising and co-ceasing by the Law of Dependent Origination. It has been denied the presence of a Creator or God. They give us a scientific and objective outlook of the present world, related to the law of Conditioning. It means that everything is dependent upon conditions to come into being or survive. Putting it differently, there is nothing that can be self-creating and self-existing, independent from others. All sentient beings, objects, elements etc. in this world are determined by the law of conditioning, under the form of formation, stabilization, deterioration, and annihilation. Man is a small cosmos.  He comes into being not by himself but by the activation of the law of transformations.

With the light of Öūnyat, Bodhisattva who is an individual, can be able to eliminate the clings on wrong views, thoughts relating to languages, political systems, custom, ways of life, religions, beliefs, race, sex, and environment…, can reply the misunderstood perceptions about Buddhism, God, tmā, man, karma, world …with some questions as such ‘who am I?’, ‘where did man go and come from?’, ‘why does man get birth, old age, sickness, suffering and death?’, ‘where will he go after death?’, ‘This world is permanent or impermanent?’ and ‘who creates the cosmos?’ etc.; and from that man in all countries can be able to connect in the close relationship, can sit side by side, sympathy and love each other to together build up a better world.

Following the subject-matter, the arrangement of the different chapters has been done as under:

Chapter One describes the brief Significance and Relevance of Research on this topic. Chapter Two we will give an explanation of the Meaning and the Development of the Concept of Bodhisatta as depicted in Pli Nikyas. Chapter Three shall relate the Process of Practice of Bodhisatta Gotama before the Time of his Enlightenment. Chapter Four an attempt has been made to elaborate about the historical situation and the needs for the Development of new Doctrine of Bodhisattva in Mahyna sūtras. Chapter Five is a detailed survey of the Meanings of the Concept of Sū––at as shown in Pli Nikyas. Chapter Six will give a critical approach to the Denotations of Öūnyat through Mahyna Sūtras and in this part, it also discusses the Relation between the Concepts of S‰––at and ։nyat as a Buddhist Traditional Method of Practicing. Chapter Seven will try to represent the Role or a Relevant Application of the Öūnyat Concept in Bodhisattva-cary in the present time, the Major Characteristics of Bodhisattva as well as the Connection between Pramits and Bhūmis. Chapter Eight is an effort to clarify Buddha’s Major Characteristics through Buddha Body Perceptions as well as the Way of Right Understanding of Mahyna Buddhism. And in the chapter Nine, the discussions pursued in the above chapters shall be summed up. If monotheistic religions such as Brahmanism, Judaism, Christianity and Islam place more emphasis on the self-negating, non-substantial aspect of their God rather than the self-affirmative, authoritative aspect of God, or, in other words, if these religions understand the oneness of the ultimate reality or absolute God in terms of non-dualistic oneness rather than in terms of monotheistic oneness, then they may overcome serious conflicts with other faiths and may establish a stronger interfaith cooperation among all religions to resolve the crises as well as contribute to world peace and happiness by a deep and expansive human spirituality.

— & —

CHAPTER TWO

THE CONCEPT OF BODHISATTVAHOOD

When, why and how did the concept of Bodhisattvahood    (菩薩) originate in India in the context of the long and checkered history of Buddhism are some of the most-debated questions among the Buddhologists world over. Both Theravāda[37] and Mahāyāna do, so far as the scriptural testimony is concerned, display their common acquaintance with the concept to the extent that one may easily be led to the belief that the idea was almost inseparable in what is now generally called the original, the earliest or the primitive Buddhism (源 始 佛 教). The idea does not seem to have been alien to the ancient tradition of the Theravādis, although tracing the concept of Bodhisattvahood from the fifth century AD back to the time of the Nikāya period would indicate, as one may opine, a gradual diminution of its scope.

A categorical answer to the question as to whether the Hinayānists[38] borrowed the idea from the Mahāyānists depends much upon how far one is prepared to pursue his research in ancient sources of Buddhism. Emerging from the main trunk of the original teaching of the Master, different branches of the faith grew and flourished side by side, never drifting away from their indisputable heritage of the common tradition.[39]

The development of the Bodhisattva ideal (菩 薩 理 想) goes without reservation to the credit of the Mahāyāna school, in which the Bodhisattva is indeed the characteristic feature. Nonetheless, it seems more likely that the Theravādis inherited the idea from the oldest oral tradition rather than borrowed it from another school. In this context, E.J. Thomas[40] is of the opinion that no school of Buddhism may be called as the originator of the idea, nor any source can be identified from which the rest have borrowed it.

The conception of Bodhisattvas in the Mahāyāna was a corollary to its Buddhological speculation. The Theravādis believe that only Gotama Buddha was born as Bodhisattva in his previous existences, commencing with his birth as Sumedha Brāhmana up to his last existence in the Tusita heave, just before his advent to the mortal world. As a Bodhisattva he lived the life of an average being acquiring merits and avoiding demerits as far as possible. In some existences he sacrificed everything including his body (ātmabhāva) in order to acquire the six (according to Mahāyāna) and ten (according to Hīnayāna / Theravāda) supreme virtues designated as Pāramitās and Pāramis (波 羅密).

According to the Mahāsānghika Lokottaravādis, in his last existence as Siddhārtha Gotama, he was not conceived in his mother’s womb, nor was he actually born like an ordinary human being in the biological form. He only made a show of being ignorant, leading a family life and making efforts for his so-called emancipation, and so forth.

The Mahāyānists are believed to have enriched and developed the Theravāda concept of Bodhisattva. They argued that there were among the worldly beings such individuals who are in a position to develop Bodhicitta (菩 提心), fulfill the pāramis / pāramitās (波 羅 密) and become a Buddha. The development of the Bodhicitta requires that the adept must dedicate himself in his several lives to the service of others, and should not desire his own emancipation unless and until all others have attained it, because seeking one’s own emancipation before that of others would mean that he has not developed the virtue of self-sacrifice to the fullest extent.

According to the Mahāyānists, the Bodhisattvas are innumerable as sand particles in river Gangā (恆 河). In fact, the ontology every human being is a Bodhisattva as he has the potentiality to become a Bodhisattva in this very life or in lives to come. Concrete forms and specific qualities have been given and ascribed to some of the Bodhisattvas. In the earlier Mahāyāna texts, emphasis is more on qualities than on forms, while in the later texts the emphasis is reversed. In the Saddharmapuϯarīka Sūtra, the Kāraϯavyūha Sūtra and many other texts the powers and virtues of several Bodhisattvas have been described, who on their own accord, decided to continue to remain as such and not become a Buddha, for otherwise, they would have attained the metaphysical state which is beyond merit or demerit, and would not have been in a position to exercise Mettā (慈, Skt. Maitrī, love) and KarūÏa (悲, compassion) or it is only the skillful means to serve the suffering beings of the world.

During the course of time, they were given definite forms and insignia for the purposes of worship with elaborate rituals and mythological conceptions which were woven around them much on the same lines as around the Brāhmanical gods and goddesses. Thus, it appears, the Bodhisattva doctrine introduced and strengthened the element of belief (bhakti, 信 心) or devotion (rather blind or unalloyed faith) in the field of Buddhism.[41]

With this conception of the Bodhisattva, the Mahāyānists have chalked, in detail, the career of a Bodhisattva in which they have laid stress not only on the fulfillment of the pāramitās (spiritual perfections of the human values or qualities), but also on several forms of meditation with a view to training the mind for the realization of dharma-śūnyatā (法 空) or tathatā (真 如). Therefore, it is obviously the practical method of Bodhisattva.

One may very well realize how difficult it is to determine the period when the Bodhisattva conception essentially originated. For this purpose one has to ascertain the time of the composition of the Jātakas (in Pli and later on in Mixed Sanskrit as well) and the Avadānas (in Mixed Sanskrit), which contain the Hīnayānist account of the various existences of the Buddha as a Bodhisatta. It must be noted that it might have taken some time after this date that the Mahāyānists developed their conception of Bodhisattva and in due course of time converted it into some sort of a creed known as Bodhisattvayāna (菩薩 乘). In fact, Bodhisattva is a wide term, which has been assigned explanations, interpretations and definitions. Consequently the etymology of the term has become controversial and its application is made with varying significance. This may be considered as the explicit phenomenon of the striking historical point that the sense and value of the term Bodhisattva (Bodhisatta in Pli language) had to undergo various changes more than once in the process of doctrinal development and historical growth.

Now first of all, it is very necessary that we must come to understand what the Buddhist technical meaning of the term ‘Bodhisattva’ is.

The Definition of the Term Bodhisatta

As we know the concept of Bodhisattva (菩 薩) is one of the most important concepts in the Buddhist tradition. The term is frequently mentioned in early as well as later Buddhism. Etymologically, the term ‘Bodhisattva’ is derived from the root / budh, originally meaning to be awake. The noun bodhi comes to the meaning: (i) knowledge, (ii) enlightenment, (iii) the knowledge possessed by a Buddha.[42]

It appears that in the Aôguttara Nikya the term bodhi denotes both the means and the end, viz., Aparihānīyā Dhamm and Nibbāna respectively.[43]

When the term ‘Bodhi’ is combined with the term ‘satta’, the Sarvāstivdīs take it to mean the wisdom of the holy man who attains a stage beyond defilement of all kinds.[44]

The term ‘Buddhi’ is etymologically associated with the term ‘Bodhi’, though its usage is cited here from the Brahmanic systems of philosopy. In the Sôkhya-yoga systems of Philosophy ‘Buddhi’ means only the first product of the evolution of the PrakÙti. At the psychological level PrakÙti is called ‘Buddhi’.[45]

Thus it may be surmised that the term ‘Bodhi’ refers not only to that which leads to ‘Nibbāna’, but ‘Nibbāna’ itself, that is, the supreme bliss itself.

According to Encyclopaedia of Buddhism,[46] etymologically the term can be separated into two parts, bodhi and sattva: bodhi, from the root budh, to be awake, means ‘awakening’ or ‘enlightenment’ and sattva, derived from sant, the present participle of the root as, ‘to be’, means ‘a being’ or, literally, ‘one who is’, a sentient being. Hence, the term is taken to mean ‘one whose essence is Enlightenment’ or ‘enlightened knowledge’. By implication it means a seeker after Enlightenment, a Buddha-to-be. There is also a suggestion that the Pali term may be derived from bodhi and satta, (Skt. Sakta from sa–j) ‘one who is attached to or desires to gain Enlightenment’.

According to the Encyclopaedia of Religion and Ethics[47] “Bodhisattva is usually translated ‘one whose essence is perfect knowledge’ (sattva = ‘essence’, ‘one nature’, ‘svabhavā’). It is possible that this was the original meaning of the word; historical, however, Bodhisattva = ‘one who is on the way to attainment of perfect knowledge’ (Monier – Williams, M., Sanskrit-English Dictionary) i.e. ‘a future Buddha’.

Etymologically, the term ‘Satta’ (Skt. Sattva) is derived from Sat + tva. It generally stands for (i) a living being, a creature, a sentient and rational being or a person, (ii) soul, or (iii) substance.[48]

Har Dayal in his famous work, The Bodhisattva Doctrine in Buddhist Sanksrit Literature[49] agreed that Bodhi means ‘enlightenment’, and mentioned a lengthy etymological discussion of ‘sattva’[50] which has been put forward in different ways from time to time by many dictionaries and scholars in order to get the nearest possible meaning of sattva in the compound Bodhisattva.

After surveying the authoritative views held by various scholars, Har Dayal says “The safest way is always to go back to the Pāli without attaching much importance to the later lexicographers and philosophers” and he comes to the following conclusion that “sattva” (masculine) may mean “any living or sentient being” (Skt. Dicy. M.W) “ein lebendes Wesen” (Skt. Dicy. Pbg). The Pāli word satta may mean “a living being, creature, a sentient being, person (Pāli. Dicy. S.v). The most modern scholars adopt this interpertation”[51] He rightly notes that the term ‘satta’ in this context does not denote a mere ordinary creature. He further points out that it is no doubt related to the Vedic word ‘satvan’ meaning ‘kelegar’ “a strong or valiant man, hero, warrior.”[52]

In the Visuddhimagga (IX 53) the meanings of Satta are given as: “Beings (Satta): they are held (Satta), gripped (Visatta) by desire and greed for the aggregates beginning with materiality, thus they are beings (Satta). For this is said by the Blessed One, ‘Any desire for matter, Raden, any greed for it, any delight in it, any craving for it, has held (Satta) it, has gripped (Visatta) it; that is why a being (Satta) is said.”[53] The term ‘Sat’ occurs in the Vedantic

Philosophy and it means: (i) the world appearance or (ii) the real quality of the existence of the €tman.[54] In the Sôkhya-Yoga, the term ‘Sattva’ denotes the element of PrakÙti which is of the nature of bliss, light and illumination.[55]

The term ‘Bodhisattva’ (Bodhi+sattva) in general, means a ‘Bodhi being’. It denotes a being who is destined to obtain fullest Enlightenment or Buddhahood.[56] The Dīgha Nikya Commentary (II. 427) defines the term thus: “Bodhisatto ti paϯitasatto bujjhanasatto; bodhi-saòkhtesu v catūsu maggesu satto laggamnaso ti bodhisatto.” It literally means that the ‘Bodhisattva’ is (i) one who is an intellectual, or (ii) one who is resolved or attached only to the four paths that lead to Enlightenment.[57]

According to the Sarvstivdīs, it is defined that the Bodhisattva is a person who is certain to become a Buddha. He is a person who is born of wisdom and protected and served by the wise.[58] In the Ngrjuna’s Prajñ-pramit ցstra, the same explanation is given.[59]

In the Bodhicaryvatra Pañjik, €crya Prajñkaramati says: Tatra (bodhau) Sattvaò abhipryo’syeti bodhisattva¾.[60] Similarly, in the Öatashasrik Prajñpramit (p. 2, note 2) it has been said: “bodhau sattvam abhipryo yeãò te bodhisattv¾”.[61] To them, the Bodhisattva is one whose mind, intentions, thoughts or wishes are fixed on Bodhi.

In the text Aãæashasrik Prajñāpāramitā, it is written: “Nothing real is meant by the word Bodhisattva, because a Bodhisattva trains himself in non-attachment to all dharmas. For the Bodhisattva, the great being awakes in non-attachment to full enlightenment in the sense that he understands all the dharmas, because he has enlightenment as his aim, an enlightened being (Bodhisattva).”[62]

According to the Tibetan Lexicographers, the term ‘Bodhisattva’ means byanchub sems-dpah (byan-chub-sams — mind, and dpah — herd).[63] On this Har Dayal rightly points out that this does not make the ‘Bodhisattva’ clearly in any way. Again, he observes that the translator might have associated the idea of ‘mind’ and ‘courage’ with the word ‘satta’.[64] The Chinese on the other hand interpret it as one whose essence has become Bodhi.[65]

T.R.V. Murti’s observation in this respect says that the Bodhisattva is but the virtuous and good and the source of all goodness in the world.[66] Charls Elliot says that a Bodhisattva is one whose essence is knowledge.[67] H.Kern holds that a sentient or reasonable being, possessing bodhi[68] is a Bodhisattva.

In short, etymologicallly Bodhisatta (菩薩) means a Bodhi-being (覺 有 情) or a “Buddha-to-be” or “a being who desires to attain enlightenment”. The word can, therefore, be used in reference to all those who seek bodhi (菩 偍), including Buddhas (諸 佛), Pratyeka-Buddhas (緣 覺) and disciples of the Buddhas, but it is commonly used only for those beings who seek to become Buddha. As far as this research work is concerned, we are able to understand that Bodhisatta (菩 薩) is considered as an ordinary man, a hero or a warrior who with his own karma at his very birth as all other human beings, but with effort and determined mind, he will be able to eliminate all his bad karmas (業) and sufferings, and attain the final liberation by cultivating a realistic and practical way which had been discorvered and taught by Lord Buddha Gotama. Even after the concept had been developed in Mahāyāna, the Bodhisattva became the one who seeks for the ‘Samyak sambodhi’ (正 等 覺) or Anuttara-Samsak-sambodh (阿 耨 多 羅 三 藐 三 菩 提, 無 上 正 等 覺),[69] Insight causing the Enlightenment by one’s own supreme virtues and high effort) in which it is neither for oneself nor from someone, but for the welfare of all kinds of sentient beings with the help of his own pramits (波 羅 密). Time and sufferings are not important for a Bodhisattva, his main concentration is focussed on the full acquirement of pramit and their complete accumulation for the Enlightenment. He has to prepare himself wholeheartedly to undertake it with firm resoluteness and he is the one who for the sake of all sorts of sentient beings, seeks for the ‘Samsak-sambodhi’, plus the ‘Anuttara-Samyak-sambodhi’. However, we should remember the fact that in Mahyna Buddhism such Bodhisttvas are only symbolic names from the characteristics of the historical Buddha or a description on the saints at other worlds, they are neither ‘historical personalities’, nor heavenly gods for worship and the real nature of all the bodhisattvas has crystallized only as a result of the virtues of the historical Buddha being deified as a kind of god in response to the popular demands influenced by the practice of polytheism.

The Meaning of Other Terms Denoting Saints

Before we actually deal with the concept of Bodhisattva, it is better that we have to understand generally different categories of the saints in Buddhism as gods (諸 天), the Arahantas (阿 羅 漢), the Örāvakas (聲 聞), the Pratyeka-Buddhas (辟 支 佛), and even the Buddhas (佛 陀).

Devas or Gods (諸 天)

The concept of gods (諸 天), though present in Buddhism, does not either form the part of its central teachings or serve as a basis for its religious practices. Buddhism is a non-theistic religious-philosophy. This means that it does not accept the possibility of a Creator God, either as the Creator of man or as the Creator of the world.

The Agga––a Sutta of the Dīgha Nikya[70] quite clearly states that both the physical world and the human society are not the products of any creative fiat of a God but merely the products of an evolutionary process.

The Pli term which describes the gods in the Buddhist tradition is ‘dev’ as defined in the Pli Text Society’s Pli-English Dictionary:

“The popular etymology refers it to the root div in the sense of playing, sporting or amusing oneself; a god, divine being, usually in plural dev, the gods. As title attributed to any superhuman being or beings regarded to be in certain respect above the human level…”[71]

According to the Buddhist tradition, the concept of the world means the world of beings – the gods and men. Therefore in the S‰tras of both Theravda (Pli) and Mahyna (Sanskrit and Chinese) literatures the existence of various kinds of gods and goddesses has been accepted. The Mah Sihanādā Sutta of Majjhima Nikya (Vol. 1, 73f) gives description of the different spheres or realms of existence of the diverse types of devas. The lengths of life-span of devas also increase to five hundred celestial years (gods of the Ctummahrjika realm) or sixteen thousand celestial years (the gods of Paranimmitavasavatti realm) or… following to their past conducts. The Mahvastu (II, p. 282) and the Lalitavistara (p. 232 f) quite clearly depict the different stages of gods and goddesses. Goddesses, for example, Gauri, Laksmi, Durg, Kli, Sarasvati were of great importance in the Hindu pantheon. This may have prompted the Mahynists to create goddesses by deifying objects of natural phenomena, abstract ideas and other objects. However, in Buddhism, the position of gods or goddesses is not as important as in other religions, because all kinds of such gods and devas were regarded by the Buddha as different classes of living beings who have not yet liberated themselves from the law of impermanence, who have still been subject to the cycle of saòsra, even though they are superior to man in terms of power and conditions of life and enjoy the bliss in their heaven as it has been said in the Book of Gradual Sayings:

“Upon a time, monks, Sakka, lord of the Devas, was instructing the Devas of the Thirty – Three, and on that occasion uttered this verse:

He who would be like unto me should keep

The fourteenth, fifteenth day and also the eighth

But, monks, this verse was ill sung, not well sung by Sakka, lord of the Devas. It was wrongly, not rightly uttered. How so?

Monks, Sakka, lord of Devas, was not rid of passion, not rid of malice, not rid of delusion: whereas a monk who is an arahanta, one in whom the savas are destroyed, who has lived the life, done what was to be done, who has laid down the burden, attained his own welfare, utterly destroyed the fetters of becoming, who is perfectly released by knowledge, by such an one this saying of ‘ He who would be like unto me’ were fitly uttered. Why so? Because that monk is rid of passion, rid of malice, rid of delusion.

Upon a time, monks, Sakka, lord of the Devas…and on that occasion uttered this verse…

But, monks, this verse was ill sung…It was wrongly, not rightly uttered. How so?

Monks, Sakka, lord of the Devas, was not released from birth, old age and death, from sorrow, lamentation and woe. He was not released from despair and tribulation. He was not released from ill. I declared. Whereas the monk who is arahanta… who is perfectly released by knowledge, - by such an one this saying of ‘He who would be like unto me’ were fitly uttered. Why so?

Because that monk is fully released from birth, old age and death, from sorrow, lamentation and woe: he is fully released from despair and tribulation. He is fully released from ill, I declare”.[72]

(Bh‰tapubbaò bhikkhave Sakko devnaò indo deve Tvatiòse anunayamno tyaò velyaò imaò gtham abhsi:

Ctuddas­ pa–cadas­ yva pakkhassa aææham­

Pæihriyapakkha– ca aææhaÏgasusamgataò

Uposathaò upavaseyya yo p’assa madiso naro ti.

S kho pan’ es bhikkhave Sakkena devnaò indena gth dugg­t na sug­t dubbhsit na subhsit. Taò kissa hetu? Sakko bhikkhave devnaò indo av­targo av­tadoso av­tamoho. Yo ca kho so bhikkhave bhikkhu arahaò kh­Ïsavo vusitav katakaraÏ­yo ohitabhro anuppatta-sadattho parikkh­Ïabhavasamyojano   sammada––vimutto, tassa kho etaò bhikkhave bhikkhuno kallaò vacanya.

Ctudilas­ pa–cadas­ yva pakkhassa aææhaòi

Pæihriyapakkha– ca aææhaÏgasusamgataò

Uposathaò upavaseyya yo p’assa msido naro ti.

Taò kissa hetu ? So hi bhikkhave bhikkhu v­targo v­tadoso v­tamoho ti.

Bh‰tapubbaò bhikkhave Sakko devnaò indo deve Tvatiòse anunayamno tyaò velyaò imaò gthaò abhsi:—

Ctuddas­ pa–cadas­ yva pakkhassa aææham­

Pæihriyapakkha– ca atthaÏgasusamgataò

Uposathaò upavaseyya yo p’assa mdiso naro ti.

S kho pan’ es bhikkhave Sakkena devnaò indena gth dugg­t na sug­t dubbhsit na subhsit. Taò kissa hetu ? Sakko hi bhikkhave indo devnaò aparimutto jtiy jarya maraìena sokehi paridevehi dukkhehi domanassehi upysehi aparimutto dukkhasma ti vadmi. Yo ca kho so bhikkhave bhikkhu arahaò kh­ìsavo vusitav katakaraÏ­yo ohitabhro anuppattasadattho parikkh­Ïabhavasaòyojano sammada––vimutto, tassa kho etaò bhikkhave bhikkhuno, kallaò vacanya.

Ctuddas­ pa–cadas­ yva pakkhassa aææham­

Pæihriyapakkha– ca aææhaÏgasusamgataò

Uposathaò upavaseyya yo p’assa mdiso naro ti.

Taò kissa hetu ? So bhikkhave bhikkhu parimutto jtiy jary maraneÏa sokehi paridevehi dukkhehi domanassehi upysehi parimutto dukkhasm ti vadmi).[73]

Gods are the living beings who can only enjoy by indulging in various kinds of pleasure to satisfy their senses brought back as the result of their past lives’ effort and cultivation, and their pleasure is considered to be better than human’s and other suffering realms as the Mahāsīhanda Sutta of the Majjhima Nikya (Vol. 1, 73f) said beings in heavenly spheres experience feelings which are exclusively pleasant (ekantasukhā vedanā) compared with the continued suffering which is sharp and severe (ekantadukkhā tibbā kaæukā) of the beings of purgatory, suffering which is sharp and severe (dukkā tibbā kaæukā) of the beings of the animal world (tiracchāna yoni), feelings which are abundantly painful (dukkhabahulā vedanā), and the experience of pleasure in general (sukhabahulā vedanā) of the beings of the realm of human beings. However, devas who are unaware of the law of impermanence or the inevitable end of such temporary bliss, then after that they will fall down to the suffering worlds of ghost, animal, and hell and so, the role of gods in Buddhism is somewhat lower than and inferior to that of men.

The heavenly realms are not conceived of as blocks or compartments in a storied structure either above or below the human world, but as categories or types of beings of similar attainments or accomplishments and composition existing in environments parallel and coterminous with the world of human and other beings.

According to the evidence in Pli Canonical texts the Buddhist gods are not objects of prayer or religious ritual, but because the path of the spiritual development of man and everything that is associated with the practice thereof was considered dependent solely on man was therefore outside the intervention and supervision of any one else, divine or otherwise. Hence, the gods are irrelevant to the attainment of Nibbna. Therefore, the gods have no central or important function to perform in Buddhism.

While Bodhisattva was being deified as a kind of god, saint in response to the popular demands influenced by the practice of polytheism, but Bodhisattva makes an attempt in following the path of Buddha for the purpose of liberating themselves as well as using measureless skills to do the same for others in the suffering worlds. Therefore the nature, character and knowledge of Bodhisattva is highly appreciated in Buddhism.

The Arahantas (阿 羅 漢)

Encyclopaedia of Buddhism[74] mentions that the word ‘Arahanta’ is derived from the root ‘arh’, to deserve, to be worthy, to be fit, and is used to denote a person who has achieved the goal of religious life (in Theravāda Buddhism).

Arahanta is composed with two parts (word): Ari and hanta. Ari means enemies or defilements. Hanta means killing or destroying. So, an Arahant is a man who killed or destroyed all defilements like lust (rāga), hatred (dosa) and delusion (moha). I.B. Hornor [75] gives us the following four forms of the nouns: arah, arahat, arahanta and arahan.

In early Buddhism, the term denotes a person who has gained insight into the true nature of things (yathābh‰ta–Ïa) and the Buddha was the first Arahanta.

After the first conversion, five brothers of Konda––a (pa–cavaggiya) also became Arahantas. The Arahantas are described as buddhnubuddh, i.e. those who have attained enlightenment after the fully Enlightened One.[76] Then, as time passed, the conception of arahantaship was gradually widened and elaborated by the Teacher and his successors. Thus, an arahanta who was also supposed to comprehend the formula of the twelve nidānas (Causes), had eradicated the three āsravas,[77] practiced the seven factors of enlightenment (Pāli: sambojjhanga),[78] got rid of the five n­varaÏas, freed himself from the three “roots of evil”, ten Fetters (samyojana) of belief. He practiced self-restraint and Concentration, and acquired various wonder-working Powers and awakened the nature of the misery of saòsra. He practiced the four Meditations, the four ecstatic Attainments and the supreme condition of Trance and obtained the six super-knowledge (abhi––),[79] threefold knowledge (tisso vijjā)… resulted in the liberation in the end. This freedom made him an arahanta who destroyed the fetter of rebirth in the cycle of Saòsra (birth, old-age, illness and death) and enjoyed himself in Nibbna (Skt. NirvāÏa) and was worthy of being revered in this world… which we can see in Pli Nikyas as Saòyutta Nikya,[80] AÏguttara Nikya,[81] Majjhima Nikya...[82]

And the same with these ideas, in the Pasdika Suttanta belongs to The Dialogues of the Buddha, we find the Buddha offering us the following arahanta formula:

“The brother who is arahanta (is one) in whom the intoxicants (sav) are destroyed, who has done his task, who has laid down his burden, who has attained salvation, who has utterly destroyed the fetters of rebirth, who is emancipated by true gnosis (sammada––)…”[83]

(Yo so vuso bhikkhu arahaò kh­Ïsavo vusitav katakararaÏiyo ahita-bhro anuppata sedattho praikkh­Ïa-bhava-saòyojano sammas-a–– vimutto).[84]

The discipline of a Buddhist monk is aimed at the attainment of arahantaship. In other words, Arahanta (阿 羅 漢) is an ideal man or sage at the highest of spiritual development.

When we compare Arahanta with gods, the elementary point in Buddhism comes out very clearly that arahanta is beyond the range of the gods, mra even together with Brahm who are relocated into just another sector of saòsra (輪 迴), albeit a pleasant and more enduring sector. Some Buddhists pray to the gods, but they are quite aware that they pray to them for ‘secular’ wealth, love, successful missions…The gods, according to them, can indeed bestow material benefits, but spiritual fruits are totally a matter of the individual’s control and effort.

The Örāvakas (聲 聞)

Örvakas (聲 聞) means ‘disciple’[85] or ‘hearer’ who aspires to become an Arahanta (阿 羅 漢) usually asks for the guidance of a superior enlightened instructor, after hearing, he realizes the nature of things then gets enlightenment. A slight indication from an experienced and wise teacher would alone be sufficient for a morally advanced aspirant to progress on the upward path of enlightenment. Venerable ցriputta (舍 利 弗), for instance, attained the first stage of Sainthood, hearing only half a stanza from Arahanta Assaji. Cula Panthaka, who could not memorize a verse for four months, attained Arahantaship by meditating on the impermanent nature of a clean handkerchief, which he was handling while gazing at the sun…

Arahanta (阿羅漢) is a liberated one from the cycle of saòsra (輪 迴), and enjoys the state of Nibbna (涅 槃). Örvaka is also a realized one from hearing Dhamma and can attain one of four stages of emancipation or all. Four stages of emancipation include:      

1. The status of the Stream Entrant (Sotāpanna, 入 流,七 來),
2. The Once-Returner (Sakadāgāmi, 一 來),
3. The Non-Returner (Anāgāmi, 不 來),
4. The Liberated One (Arahanta, 阿 羅 漢).

Arahanta or Örvaka is the one who is freed from defilements, taints and who is devoting strictly to meditation and liberation. Arahanta represents the example of a virtually pure superhuman teacher. So, he is an object and merit-field which we can follow to cultivate as well as salute.

There are some scholars who consider Arahanta’s ideal as lower, smaller than the Bodhisattva’s, but in my opinion both of them are highly appreciated and each ideal has its own special meaning which will be discussed in detail in the Third Chapter.

Pratyeka-Buddha (緣 覺, 辟 支 佛)

The singular ideal of a Pacceka-buddha (Skt. Pratyeka-buddha, 緣 覺, 辟 支 佛) was also evolved during this period.

In ‘Tu Dien Phat Hoc Han Viet’[86] explains Pratyeka-buddha who was born in life when no Buddha had come down; non any truth had been given out. Therefore he was regarded to be higher than a Örvaka (who had heard Buddha-dhamma then realized). Pratyeka-buddhahood is the independent enlightenment of a highly evolved person who achieves his goal by his own efforts without seeking any external aid, but as a result of personal realization of the doctrine of Dependent Origination; such a holy person is termed a private Buddha, or silent Buddha. He is a ‘Buddha’ on account of awakening the real nature of phenomena, but ‘private’ or ‘silent’ because he lacks the power to purify and serve others by expounding the Dhamma.

There are two kinds of Pratyeka-buddha: firstly, Pratyeka-buddha cultivated alone and secondly, he practised with his accompanies and all realized together. 

Such a Buddha - “one enlightened by himself, i.e. one who has attained to the supreme and perfect insight, but dies without proclaiming the truth to the world” (cf. Puggala-pa––atti, p.14)[87] is definitely different from Bodhisattva ideal. However, we must recognize how much efforts Pratyeka-buddha did in his situation. To cite an example, while Örāvaka gets emancipation from hearing dhamma as a liberated guidance, Pratyeka-buddha attains his goal by his own firm resoluteness and evolution. So, it is much worthy for our admiration and respect. Although the Buddha Gotama (瞿 曇 佛) of the present era has passed away, we are still living in a Buddha cycle, for the teaching still exists in its pristine purity. Therefore no Pratyeka-buddha will arise during this period.

The Buddha (佛 陀)

Encyclopaedia of Buddhism[88] defines the Buddha as a generic name, an appellative – but not a proper name – given to one who has attained enlightenment. This word is the passive past participle derived from the root budh (to wake, to wake up, to perceive, to learn, to understand).

The use of the word ‘Buddha’ (佛 陀) in its Buddhist sense began with its application to Gotama (Skt. Gautama, (瞿 曇), known to his contemporaries also as ցkyamuni - the founder of what came to be known as Buddhism. Gotama was born in what is now Nepal, more than 2500 years ago, attained Enlightenment, taught the truth (Pli: Dhamma, Skt: Dharma,   法), which he had realized and died at the age of eighty. Gotama genarally called him as Tathgata (如 來), Bhagavat (世 尊), the Blessed One, ցkyamuni, but later he is stated as Supreme Teacher, Buddha as below:

“I am the one who is worthy of being revered in this world; I am the Supreme Teacher; I am the only one who has attained the most perfect Enlightenment”

(Ahaò hi arah loke, ahaò satth anuttaro, eko’mhi sammsambuddho).[89]

“I am not indeed a deva, nor a gndharva, nor a yakãya, nor a manuãya (a human). Know ye that I am the Buddha”.

(Na kho ahaò devo bhavissmi, na kho ahaò gandhabbo bhavissmi… yakkho… manusso… buddho ti maò dhrehi).[90]

The Buddha-concept in Theravda (源 始 佛 教) is a man who has perfected himself by realizing his ‘self’ to the highest degree as is possible for a human being. He is the only discoverer of a lost teaching. His greatness was that he found out what his contemporaries could not discover at all or discovered only incompletely. He was a genius by birth who achieved the highest state possible for a man. A Buddha is said to possess ten Powers (balāni, 十 力),[91] four Grounds of Self-confidence (vai±āradyāni, 四 信),[92] the eighteen different characteristics of a Buddha as compared with Bodhisattvas (ĀveÏika-dharmas, 十 八 法 不 共).[93] Because of these, he was a great man, a superman (Mahāpurisa, 大 人) in intellect and morally.

Literally, Buddha means ‘Enlightened One’ (覺 者). A distinction must be made among an Arahanta (阿 羅 漢), a Örāvaka (聲 聞), a Pratyeka-buddha (辟 支 佛), and a Buddha (佛 陀), all of whom are the enlightened beings, but a Buddha is referred to as the supreme, perfectly enlightened one” the ‘Anuttara Samyak sambodhi’ (阿 耨 多 羅 三 藐 三 菩 提, 無 上 正 等 覺).[94] Such a Buddha, every man and woman, every living creature can and must become. This is a Bodhisattva’s goal and ideal. A Bodhisattva should know and comprehend these qualities and characteristics of the Buddha before he can start his career.

The Concept of Bodhisattva as found in the Pāli Nikāyas

Several centuries after Gotama Buddha’s death, Bodhisattva may be regarded as the final outcome of the tendencies that were at work in India and contributed to the rise and growth of the new doctrine of Bodhisattva.

Bodhisattva is one of the most important ideas of Mahyna Buddhists. However, it would be a mistake to assure that the concept of Bodhisattva was a creation of the Mahyna. The term Bodhisattva had been mentioned in the Pli Canon and it stems from the original Pli Buddhism which is used more or less exclusively to designate Gotama Buddha prior to his Enlightenment Nonetheless, if we go through the Pli texts such as the Majjihima Nikya, the Dīgha Nikya, the Sutta-Nipta and the Jtaka of Khuddaka Nikya, it may be shown out that the concept of Bodhisatta has four shades of meanings as noted below:

From the Time of the Buddha’s Renunciation (Mahābhinikkhamaņa) upto the Time of his Enlightenment

First of all, the term Bodhisatta reflects concretely the life of Gotama Buddha from renunciation upto the time of his Enlightenment when he was prince Siddhattha of the Kingdom Kapilavatthu, who was also suffering in the cycle of birth and death as we are, then there was a day as he went out of the palace to the city to see the world outside, he came in direct contact with the stark realities of life. His observant eyes met the strange sights of a decrepit old man, a diseased person, a corpse and a dignified hermit. The first three sights convincingly proved to him the inexorable nature of life and the universal ailment of humanity. The fourth signified the means to overcome the ill of life and to attain calm and peace. Then he decided to abandon his homely life, and became a wandering ascetic in search of truth.

Leaving his parents, wife, son and luxury palace behind, he stole away with a light heart from the palace at midnight and rode into the dark, attended only by his loyal charioteer. Alone and penniless he set out in search of truth and peace. Thus did he renounce the world? It was not the renunciation of an old man who has had his fill of worldly life. It was not the renunciation of a poor man who had nothing to leave behind. It was the renunciation of a prince in the full bloom of youth and in the plentitude of wealth and prosperity - a renunciation unparalleled in history.

It was in his twenty-ninth year that prince Siddhattha made this historic journey. His extraordinary decision becoming a Bodhisatta in seeking for truth was just blooming as soon as he comprehended the bondage and imprisonment of the worldly life as Mahsaccaka Sutta of the Middle Length Sayings depicts:

“Now, Aggivessana, before my Self-awakening while I was still the bodhisatta, not fully awakened, it occurred to me: Narrow is the household life, a path of dust, going forth is the open, nor is it easy while dwelling in a house to lead the Brahma-faring completely fulfilled, utterly purified, polished like a conch-shell. Suppose now that I, having cut off hair and beard, having clothed myself in saffron garments, should go forth from home into homelessness? So I, Aggivessana, after a time, being young, my hair coal-black, possessed of radiant youth, in the prime of my life…So, Aggivessana, sat down just there thinking: indeed this does well for striking”.[95]

(Kim hi no siy Aggivessana. Idha me Aggivessana pubbe va sambodh anabhisamBuddhassa bodhisattass’ eva sato etad - ahosi: Sambdho gharvso rajpatho, abbhokso pabbajj, na-y-idaò sukaraò agraò ajjhvasat ekanta-paripuÏÏaò ekantaparisuddhaò saôkhalikhitaò brahmacariyaò carituò, yann‰nahaò kesamassuò ohretv ksyani vatthni acchdetv agrasm anagriyaò pabbajeyyan - ti. So kho ahaò Aggivessana aparena samayena daharo va samano susu kÀakeso... (repeat from p. 163, 1. 28 top. 167, 1. 8; for bhikkhave substitute Aggivessana)... alam-idaò padhanayati).[96]

Or in the Ariyapariyesana-sutta recounted as follows:

“And, I too, monks, before Awakening, while I was still the Bodhisatta, not full awakened, being liable to birth, because of self, sought what was likewise liable to birth; being liable to ageing because of self, sought what was likewise liable to ageing; being liable to disease because of self…being liable to dying because of self…being liable to sorrow because of self…being liable to stain because of self, sought what was likewise liable to stain. Then it occurred to me, monks: ‘why do I, liable to birth because of self, seek what is likewise liable to birth; being liable to aging… being liable to stain because of self, seek what is likewise liable to stain? Suppose that I, (although) being liable to birth because of self, having known the peril in what is likewise liable to birth, should seek the unborn, the uttermost security from the bonds-nibbna? Being liable to decay because of self…should seek the unageing… Being liable to decay because of self…should seek the undecaying… Being liable to dying because of self…should seek the undying… Being liable to sorrow because of self…should seek the unsorrowing… Being liable to stain because of self, having been seeking the stainless, the uttermost security from the bonds-nibbna?”[97]

(Aham-pi Sudaò bhikkhave pubbe va sambodh anabhi-sambuddho bodhisatto va samno attan jtidhammo sammo jtidhamma––eva pariyesmi, attan jardhammo samno jardhamma––eva pariyesmi, attan bydhidhammo..., attan   maraÏadhammo...,   attan   sokadhammo...,   attan saôkuesadhammo samno saôkilesadhamma––eva pariyesmi.

Tassa mayhaò bhikkhave etad - ahosi: Kin - nu kho ahaò attan jatidhammo samano jatidhamman-neva pariyesami, attana jaradhammo samno - pe - attan saôkilesadhammo samno saôkilesadhamma––eva pariyesmi; yan-n‰nhaò attan jtidhammo samno jtidhamme d­navaò viditv ajtaò anuttaraò yogakkhemaò nibbnaò pariyeseyyaò, attan jardhammo... ajaraò.. pariyeseyyaò, attan bydhi-dhammo... abydhiò...   pariyeseyyaò,   attan  maraÏadhammo...   amataò pariyeseyyaò, attna sokadhammo... asokaò... pariyeseyyaò, attan saôkilesadhammo samno saôkilesa-dhamme d­navaò viditv asankiliææham anuttaraò yogak-khemaò nibbnaò pariyeseyyan- ti).[98]

The Period from Gotama Siddattha’s Conception to Gotama Buddha’s Enlightenment

Secondly, Bodhisattva was extended to denote the period from Gotama Siddattha’s conception to Gotama Buddha’s Enlightenment as depicted below: On the day of his conception, the Bodhisatta’s mother takes the vows of fasting and celibacy at the conclusion of a great festival, and when she has retired to rest she dreams that the Four Regent Gods take her with her bed, bathe her in the Anotatta lake, clad her in divine garments, and place her in a golden palace surrounded by all kinds of luxury. As she lies there “the Bodhisatta in the form of a white elephant enters her womb through her right side”.[99] The earth trembles and all the ten thousand world-systems are filled with radiance. Acchariyabhutadhamma-sutta which belongs to The Middle Length of Sayings depicts vividly this historical point:

“Face to face with the Lord, revered sir, have I heard this, face to face have learnt: The Bodhisatta deceasing from the Tusita group mindful and clearly conscious, entered his mother’s womb, then an illimitable glorious radiance, surpassing even the deva-majesty of devas, appeared in the world with its devas, its Mras, its Bratms, among the generations recluses and brhmans, devas and men…cannot make their light surpassing even there there appeared the illimitable glorious radiance, surpassing even the deva-majesty of devas…”[100]

(Sammukh, me taò, bhante, Bhagavato sutaò sammukh paæiggah­taò; Sato sampajno, €nanda, Bodhisatto Tusit ky cavitv mtu kucchiò okkam­ti; yam pi, bhante, sato sampajno Bodhisatto Tusita ky cavitv mtu kucchiò okkami, idam p’ ahaò Bhagavato acchariyaò abbhutadhammaò dhremi).[101]

or in the Mahapadana Sutta belonging to the Dialogues of the Buddha it has been also retold that:

“Now Vipassi, brethren, when, as Bodhisatta, he ceased to belong to the hosts to the heaven of Delight, descended into his mother’s womb mindful and self-possessed. That in such a case is the rule.

It is the rule, brethren, that, when a Bodhisatta issues from his mother’s womb, there is made manifest throughout the universe - including the worlds above the gods, the Maras and the Brahmas, and the world below with its recluses and brahmins, its princes and people - an infinite and splendid radiance passing the glory of the gods. And those beings who happen to be existing there, perceiving each other by that radiance, say: ‘Verily there be other beings living here!’ And the ten thousands worlds of the universe tremble and shudder and quake. And this infinite splendid radiance is made manifest in the world, passing the glory of the gods – that, in such a case, is the rule”.[102]

(Dhammat es bhikkhave, yad Bodhisatto Tusit ky cavitv mtu kucchiò okkamati atha sadevake loke samrake sabrahmake sassamaÏa- brhmaÏiy pajya sadeva-inamissya anpamÏo uÀaro obhso ptubhavati atikkamma devnaò devnubhvaò. Ya pi t lokan-tarik agh asaòvut andhakr andhakra-timis, yattha pi ‘me candima-suriy’ evaò mahiddhik evaò mahnubhv bhya nnubhonti, tattha pi appamno uÀro obhso ptubhavati atikkamm’ eva devnaò devnubhvaò. Ye pi tattha satt upapann, te pi ten’ obhsena a––aò a––aò sa–jnanti: “A––e pi kira bho santi satt idh‰papann ti.” Aya– ca dasa-sahassi loka-dhtu saòkampati sampakampati sampavedhati. AppamÏo ca uÀro obhso loke ptubhavati atikkamm’ eva’ devnaò devnubhvaò. Ayam ettha dhammat).[103]

Encyclopaedia of Buddhism[104] lay it that the Bodhisatta’s last birth is attended by miracles because both in Pli and Sanskrit sources, an attempt is made to show that at the actual moment of conception there is no physical union of father and mother.[105]

Right after the birth, a great ascetic of high spiritual attainments, named Asita, admired Gotama Siddatha’s body and declared in general that: there were thirty two special marks on His tiny body which say that He would lead His homeless life as a wandering monk and would become a fully - enlightened Buddha, a teacher of Gods and Men. Asita’s words are as follows:

“This prince will reach the summit of perfect enlightenment. He will turn the wheel of the Dhamma, he who sees what is exceedingly pure (i.e. Nibbna), this prince feels for the welfare of the multitude, and his religion will be widely spread”.[106]

(Sambodhiyaggam phusissat’ yam kumro, so dhammacakkam paramavisuddhadass­ vattes’ yam bahujanahitnukampi, vitthrik ‘assa bhavissati brahmacariyam).[107]

That also may be the reasons on which the concept of Bodhisatta developed with this second meaning i.e. even he was in the womb of Queen Mahmy or a tiny baby, he also has the great figure of great man, of a Bodhisatta.

 The Period from the Conception of all the Buddhas in their Mother’s Wombs to the Attaining of their Respective Enlightenment

Thirdly, Bodhisattva with the meaning was all the Buddhas from the conception in their mother’s wombs to the attainment of their respective bodhi or Enlightenment. The earlier and contemporary Indian literature do suggest that the concept of Bodhisattva, along with that of Buddha and cakkavattī / cakravartin (global-ruler, 轉 論 王) was in vogue in India even before the appearance of Gotama Buddha on the scene. When Siddhattha / Sidhārtha (士達多), who later became Gotama Buddha, took conception in Māyā’s womb, a seer is reported to have predicted that Suddhodana’s son would be either a global ruler (Cakkavattī) or a Buddha.[108] Once while answering a question put up by a Brāhman, the Buddha himself is reported to have admitted that he was neither a god nor a yakkha (a category of divine being), but a Buddha meaning thereby one in a succession of Buddhas. The fact of the succession of the Buddhas is testified by the following gāthā or verse of the Dhammapada:

“Not to do any evil, to cultivate good, to purify one’s mind

This is the teaching of the Buddhas.”

(Sabba-pāpassa akaraÏaò kusalasse upasampadā,

Sa-citta-pariyodapanaò etaò Buddhāna Sāsanaò).[109]

Which states that the teaching it contains is not that of a single Buddha, but of all the Buddhas. A reference to the Āmagandha Sūtta[110] may be made in this context which is recorded as a discourse of Kassapa Buddha and not of Gotama Buddha.

By applying the doctrine of karma and of regeneration (or rebirth), which had general acceptance in pre-Buddhist India and its neighbouring countries, the use of the term was further extended to refer to the past lives not only of Gotama Buddha, but also of those rare beings who aspire for Perfect Enlightenment.[111]

The earliest Theravāda tradition, as contained, for instance, in the Mahāpadāna Suttanta belongs to the Dialogues of the Buddha gives the details of six Buddhas who appeared prior to Gotama Buddha. The relevant passage may be reproduced below:

“Ninety-one Kalpas from now, there appeared in the Loka Vipassī Blessed One, Arahanta and Fully-Enlightened One. Thirty-one Kalpas from now, there appeared in the Loka Sikhī Blessed One, Arahanta and Fully-Enlightened One. In that very thirty-first Kalpa, there appeared in the Loka Vessabhū Blessed One, Arahanta and Fully-Enlightened One. In this very Bhadda-kalpa, there appeared in the Loka Kakusandho Blessed One, Arahanta and Fully-Enlightened One. In this very Bhadda-kalpa, there appeared in the Loka Konagamana Blessed One, Arahanta and Fully-Enlightened One. In this very Bhadda-kalpa, there appeared in the Loka Kassapa Blessed One, Arahanta and Fully-Enlightened One.”[112]

(Ito so bhikkhave eka-navuto kappo yaò Vipass­ bhagav arahaò samm-sambuddho loke udapdi. Ito so bhikkhave eka-tiòso kappo yaò Sikh­ bhagav arahaò samm-sambuddho loke udapdi. Tasmiò yeva kho bhikkhave eka-tiòse kappe Vessabh‰ bhagav arahaò samm-sambuddho loke udapdi. Imasmiò yeva kho bhikkhave bhadda-kappe Kakusandho bhagav arahaò samm-sambuddho loke udapdi. Imasmiò yeva kho bhikkhave bhadda-kappe Kongamano bhagav arahaò samm-sambuddho loke udapdi. Imasmiò yeva kho bhikkhave bhadda-kappe Kassapo bhagav arahaò samm-sambuddho loke udapdi. Imasmiò yeva kho bhikkhave bhadda-kappe ahaò etarahi arahaò samm-sambuddho loke uppanno).[113]

This discourse, i.e., the Mahāpadāna Sutta is attributed to the Śākyamuni Buddha himself, who gives the time, caste, family, length of life, etc. of these predecessors of his. They were the Buddha Vipassī (毘 婆 施), the Buddha Sikhī (施 氣), the Buddha Vessabhū (毘 舍 浮), the Buddha Kakusandha (拘 留 尊), the Buddha KoÏagamana (拘 那 含 牟 尼), and the Buddha Kassapa (迦 葉). The D­gha Nikya refers to the last life of seven Buddhas, including the Gotama Buddha with elements bearing colours of legendary events may be reproduced below:

“How, Vipassi, brothers, when, as Bodhisattva, he ceased to belong to the hosts of the heaven of Delight, descended into his mother’s womb mindful and sefl-possessed. That, in such a case, is the rule.” [114]

(Atha kho bhikkhave Vipass­ Bodhisatto Tusit ky cavitv sato Kampajno mtu-kucchiò oldami. Ayam ettha dhammat).[115]

In the Buddhavaòsa, possibly a later work belonging to the Khuddaka Nikāya, the number increases to twenty-five and this number remains fixed in the Theravāda literature. The whole list may be reproduced below:

“1. DīpaÏkara Buddhavaòso, 2. Koϯañña Buddhavaòso, 3. Maôgala Buddhavaòso, 4. Sumana Buddhavaòso, 5. Revata Buddhavaòso, 6. Sobhita Buddhavaòso, 7. Anomadassī Buddhavaòso, 8. Paduma Buddhavaòso, 9. Nārada Buddhavaòso, 10. Padumuttara Buddhavaòso, 11. Sumedha Buddhavaòso, 12. Sujāta Buddhavaòso, 13. Piyadassī Buddhavaòso, 14. Atthadassī Buddhavaòso, 15. Dhammadassī Buddhavaòso, 16. Siddhattha Buddhavaòso, 17. Tissa Buddhavaòso, 18. Phussa  Buddhavaòso, 19. Vipassī Buddhavamso, 20. Sikhī Buddhavaòso, 21.Vessabhū Buddhavaòso, 22. Kakusandha Buddhavaòso, 23. KoÏāgamana Buddhavaòso, 24. Kassapa Buddhavaòso, 25. Gotama Buddhavaòso.”[116]   

It may be noted here that the enumerations given above is by no means exhaustive.  The proof of this fact lies in the Mahpadna Suttanta itself, the Buddha starts the story of the six Buddhas merely by saying that ninety-one kappas ago, there appeared such and such a Buddha implying thereby that such Buddhas were not limited in number. There might have appeared some Buddhas prior to ninety-one kappas and later than ninety-one kappas. In fact, it was this concept that was fully developed and enriched in later Mahyna Buddhism. From this it follows that if the number of the Buddhas can be innumerable, the number of Bodhisattvas could also be innumerable. It is indeed, based upon a logical corollary itself as it is the Bodhisattvas alone who in due course of kalpas/kappas (劫 杷) [117] turn into Buddhas.

In order to understand who a Bodhisattva is, it would be worthwhile to explain more who a Buddha is. The Buddha-concept in Theravda Buddhism is not a personality cult; nor is the Buddha an object of glorified devotion. He is neither a theoretical metaphysician nor a hard-headed materialist. He is not that sort of religious teacher who demands unquestioned loyalty like a Messiah. He is a man who has perfected himself by realising his ‘self’ to the highest degree as is possible for a human being. The fact is that the Buddha’s teachings are man-centred in the sense that only a man can become a Buddha and none else. There may be other supernatural beings inhabiting perhaps other lokas or realms. But they are not capable of becoming a fully-Enlightened One. Even though there may be such beings who lead happier lives in their non-human spheres, still they are subject to the laws of change and evolution (aniccā/vaya-dhammā), and as such not free from birth and death and their attendant conflicts and hence they are not released from dukkha or sufferings. A Buddha is a human being who has realised that there is a happier state than the state obtained in this world of conditioned phenomena. After a persevering struggle, he realises this unconditioned state (asaôkhata) which is free from duality. This freedom from duality implies the absence of any conflict (dukkha).

The psychological state under reference is, therefore, described as free from both sorrow and happiness in the ordinary sense. It is the highest happiness (paramaò-sukhaò) in the transcendental sense. As such it is not subject to change and is, therefore, imperishable (akālika and amata). It is a state of changelessness (avyaya) and, therefore, permanent (dhuva). It is this very state which has been described as the Nibbāna/NirvāÏa. The Buddha is the person who realised this state for the first time in the whole history of human race, by his own efforts and hence he was designated the Teacher (Satthā/Öāstā) and continues to be so for all those who have unquestioned faith on Him (the Buddha, 佛 陀), Law (the Dhamma/Dharma 法) and the Fraternity (the Saôgha, 增). Arahantas are His disciples who follow his teachings. Bodhisattvas are, on the other hand, those who aspire to become the Buddhas (the Fully-Enlightened Ones).

The life of the Buddha, strictly speaking, commenced only from the time of His Enlightenment and His life before that event was that of the Bodhisatta (called Siddhattha). The Buddha himself used the term in this sense and it is more than probable that Gotama Buddha occasionally referred to his previous existences in His discourses to the people in order to elucidate a particular doctrinal point.

 The Various Previous Lives of Gotama Buddha

Fourthly, Bodhisatta means the various previous lives of Gotama Buddha. Jātaka is a part of Khuddaka Nikāya (Minor Work) in Pa–ca-Nikāya and is the later inscribed Nikāyas as T.W. Rhys Davids[118] has introduced the chronological table of the Pli literature as follows:

1. The simple statements of Buddhist doctrine now found, in identical words, in paragraphs or verses recurring in all books.
2. Episodes found, in identical words, in two or more of the existing books.
3. The Sī
4. The Dīgha, Majjhima, Anguttara, and Samyutta Nikā
5. The Jātaka and the Dhammapada.

This classification seems to have been accepted and used by a number of scholars including Maurice Wintemitz, the author of the work History of Indian Literature, H. Nakamura, Indian Buddhism, and others.  

Jātaka is a separate compilation of the Nikāya and forms a part of the Khuddaka Nikya, yet one can find a number of Jtaka ­- like pieces in the other Nikāyas as well. One such Jtaka can be cited in the Mahāgovinda Sutta of the Dialogues of the Buddha whose relevant passage is reproduced below:

“Once upon a time there was a king named Disampati. And king Disampati’s minister was a brahmin named Govinda (the Steward). And king Disampati had a son named Renu and Govinda had a son named Jotipala. And prince Renu and the young Jotipala and six other young nobles – these eight – were great friends…” [119]

(Bh‰ta-pubbaò bho rj Disampat­ nma ahosi. Disaropatissa ra––o Govindo nma brhmaÏo purohito ahosi. Disampatissa ra––o ReÏu nma kumro putto ahosi. Govindassa brhinaÏassa Jotiplo nma mÏavo putto ahosi. Iti ReÏu ca rjaputto Jotiplo ca mÏavo a––e ca chalddiattiy ice ete aææha sahya ahesuò).[120]

The passage cited above clearly bears out the fact under reference. Similarly a passage can be cited from the Makhdeva Sutta which belongs to The Middle Length sayings—

“Upon a time, €nanda, in this very Mithil there was a king named Makhdeva, a dhamma-man, a king under dhamma, firm in dhamma, a great king who fared by dhamma among brahmans and householders, townsfolk and countryfolk, and who observed the Observance on the fourteenth, fifteenth and eighth days of the half-month.”[121]

(Bh‰tapubbaò, €nanda, imiss yeva Mithilyaò rj ahosi Makhdevo nma dhammiko dhammarj dhamme æhito Mahrj dhammiko carati brhmaÏagahapatikesu negamesu c’ eva jnapadesu ca, uposatha– ca upavasati ctuddasiò pa–caddasiò aææhami– en pakkhassa).[122]

The more important change in the doctrinal meaning of Bodhisatta is that which is more clearly visible in the later inscribed Nikays, especially the Jtaka. Its significance lies in the vivid description of the various previous lives of Gotama Buddha which, in the opinion of Bhikãu Thich Minh Chau,[123] may be summarized under four categories of the previous story, that is,

1. Paccuppanna-Vatthu (the present story of Lord Buddha relating to His past karma);
2. Atitavatthu (the past story connecting with the present characters;
3. VeyyākaraÏa (explanation of some verses or terms attached to the past story); and
4. Samodhana (combining two stories of past and present, then pointing out previous characters and showing relationships of the characters between past and present stories).

Bodhisatta concept in Jtaka was so abundant and diverse in various forms such as deva, ascetic, brahm, king, prince, millionaire, landlord, merchant, farmer…or there was time Bodhisatta was born as a fish, bird, bull, deer…However, because Bodhisatta played the role of previous lives of the Buddha, then Bodhisattva’s character was moral, virtuous, compassionate, intelligent and wise. Some typical stories in Jtakas usually start as below:

“Once on a time in the kingdom of Seri, five aeons ago, the Bodhisatta dealt in pots and pans, and was called ‘the Serivan’. In the company of another dealer in the same wares, a greedy fellow who was also known as ‘the Serivan’, he came across the river Telavha and entered the city of Andhapura. Apportioning the streets between the two of them, he set about hawking his wares round the streets of his district, and the other did the same in his district…”

(At­te ito pa–came kappe Bodhisatto Serivaraææhe Serivo nma kacchapuæavÏijo ahosi. So Seriv nma ekena lolakacchapuæavaÏijena saddhiò Telavhaò nma nadiò uttaritv Andhapuraò nma nagaraò pavisanto nagarav­thiyo bhjetv attano pattav­thiy bhaϯaò vikkiÏanto can. Itaro attano pattaò v­thiò gaÏhi).

“Once on a time, when Brahmadatta was reigning in Benares, the Bodhisatta was born a deer. At his birth he was golden of hue; his eyes were like round jewels; the sheen of his horns was as of silver; his mouth was red as a bunch of scarlet cloth; his four hoofs were as though lacquered; his tail was like the yak’s, and he was as big as a young foal. Attended by five hundred deer, he dwelt in the forest under the name of king Banyan Deer. And hard by him dwelt another deer also with an attendant herd of five hundred deer, who was named Branch Deer, and was as golden of hue as the Bodhisatta…”

(At­te Brnasiyaò  Brahmadatte rajjaò  krayamne Bodhisatto migayoniyaò paæisandhiò gaÏhi. So mtu kucchito nikkhanto suvaÏÏavaÏÏo ahosi, akkh­ni c’ assa maÏi-guÀasadisni ahesuò, si–gni rajatavaÏÏani, mukham ratta-kambalapu–javaÏÏaò, hatthapdapariyant lkh parikammakat viya, vladh­ camarassa viya ahosi, sar­raò pan’ assa mahantaò assapotakappamÏaò ahosi. So pa–casatamigaparivro ara––e vsaò kappesi nmena Nigrodhamigarj nma. Avid‰re pan’ assa a––o pi pa–casatamigaparivro Skhamigo nma vasati, so pi suvaÏÏavaÏÏo va ahosi).

“Once on a time when Brahmadatta was reigning in Benares, the Bodhisatta was born into a wealthy family in the kingdom of Ksi. Having come to years of discretion, he saw how from passion springs pain and how true bliss comes by the abandonment of passion. So he put lusts from him, and going forth to the Himalaya became a hermit, winning by fulfillment of the ordained mystic meditation the five orders of the Higher Knowledge and the eight Attainments. And as he lived his life in the rapture of Insight, he came in after times to have a large following of five hundred hermits, whose teacher he was…” [124]

(At­te Brnasiyaò Brahmadatte rajjaò krente Bodhisatto Kesiraææho mahbhugakulo nibbatto vi––‰taò patv kmesu d­navaò nekkhamme cnisaòsaò disv kme pahya Himavantaò pavisitv, isipabbajjaò pabbajitv kasiÏa-parikammaò katv pa–ca abbi––a aææha sampattiyo uppdetv jhnasukhena v­tinmento aparabhge mahparivro pa–cahi tpasasatehi parivuto gaÏassa satth hutv vihsi).[125]

Here is an important thing which we must note that it seems to have been neither a Jtaka collection as such, nor the developed concept of the Bodhisatta practising pramits, until a much later period. Hence, it would appear that the concept of the Bodhisatta could be divided into two parts, the original concept and the concept developed by the later Buddhists.

It means that the earliest use of the term Bodhisatta in literature with the first meaning which seems to refer to from the time of the Buddha’s renunciation upto the time of his Enlightenment. This seems to be the main concept of Bodhisattva through Pli Nikya, then the developed concept with the second, third, and fourth meanings such as the period from Gotama Siddattha’s Conception to Gotama Buddha’s Enlightenment, from the Conception in their Mother’s Wombs to the Attainment of their respective Bodhi or Enlightenment as well as the Various Previous Lives of Gotama Buddha as depicted in the Pāli Suttas inclusive of the fashion of the later Jtaka stories recounted therein.

* *

CHAPTER THREE

THE BODHISATTA PRACTICE AS DEPICTED IN P€LI SOURCES

Awakening the Nature of Life

On the full moon day of Vesākha (May) in the year 623 B.C,[126] there was born in the Lumbini park, on the Indian borders of present Nepal, a noble prince Siddhartha Gotama (Pli: Siddhattha Gotama, 士 達 多) of the Sakya tribe and the son of King Suddhodhana (淨 梵) and Queen Mahāmāya (摩 耶) of the Kapilavatthu Kingdom. He grew up and got education under extremely amiable circumstances and environment, both psychological and material.

At first he enjoyed sensual pleasures to the full, but his attitude to such self-indulgence was quite different from that of the ordinary man. Even while enjoying pleasure, he intuitively felt that true and lasting happiness could never be found by giving in to each and every sensual attraction. That would lead to moral and intellectual ruin, resulting in becoming subject to more and more suffering. He was sure of this fact. He married the princess Bhadda-kaccana (Yasodharā, 耶 瑜 陀 羅) and begot a son-prince Rāhula (羅 侯   羅) and still he felt that that was not the ultimate fulfillment of human life. His inner urge could not stop at anything short of full and complete self-realization, not only for his own private release, but also for the good of humanity as a whole. This made him think:

"What is laughter, what is joy when the world is ever burning? Shrouded by darkness, would you not seek a light?"

(Ko nu hso kimnando? niccaò pajjlite sati

Andhakrana onaddh, pad­paò kiòna gavessatha?)[127]

One glorious day as Siddhattha made four fateful trips to outside world, to the pleasure park to see the world outside. On the first trip he met an old man; on the second, a sick man; on the third, a corpse being carried away to be ere mated on the burning ghat; and on the fourth, a wandering holy monk. He did receive a vital shock on the above trips when he came in direct contact with the stark realities of life. Within the narrow confines of the palace he saw only the rosy side of life, but the dark side, the common lot of mankind, was purposely veiled from him. The first three sights convincingly proved to him the inexorable nature of life and the universal ailment of humanity. The prince Siddattha realized the worthlessness of sensual pleasures, so highly prized by worldliness that all things in the universe are transitory, painful and of changing nature. How could something pure, subtle and eternal associate itself with something as impure, gross and impermanent like me body?… Why every one and I are subjected to birth, decay, disease, death and impurities? Thus, there is a need for search after things of like nature? How can I, who is subjected to things of such nature, realize their disadvantages and seek after the unattained, unsurpassed, perfect security which is Nibbāna? And it might have a way that was the fourth of a dignified hermit who signified the means to overcome the ills of life and to attain calm, peace and unconditioned, permanent state…

These awakening thoughts flashed across his mind and increased the urge in him to loathe and renounce the world, so that in the end at the midnight, he decided to leave the palace in search of truth and eternal peace when he was twenty-ninth years old.

He journeyed far and crossing the river Anomā, rested on its banks. Here he shaved his hair and beard and handing over his garments and ornaments to Channa (沙 匿) with instruction to return to the palace, assumed the simple tawny garb of an ascetic and led a life of voluntary poverty, became a penniless wandering Bodhisatta.

Seeking for the Truth

Thus as a wanderer, a seeker after what is good, searching for the unsurpassed peace, Bodhisatta wandered from one place to another, met a number of contemporary famous religious leaders, practiced their doctrines, and attained whatever goal they aimed at. During his historical spiritual journey, the three notable periods may be mentioned here:

The first time was that Bodhisatta Gotama approached Ālāra Kālāma (尉 陀 迦 羅 羅),[128] one of the most distinguished religious masters at that time. After a short time having accepted him as a master and trained under his guidance, the young ascetic was not satisfied with a discipline and a doctrine which led only to the realm of nothingness (āki–ca––āyatana, 無 所 有 處 定) and a high degree of concentration, but did not lead to ‘disgust, detachment, cessation of suffering, tranquility, intuition, enlightenment, and Nibbna’. Bodhisatta felt as if a blind man leads another blind man or men and hence he politely took leave from Master Ālāra Kālāma. During the second period, the intelligent ascetic Gotama approached Uddaka Rāmaputta (尉 陀 迦 羅 摩)[129] whose reputation and prestige were better and higher than that of Ālāra Kālāma, and who was the second spiritual master among the wanderers. Then so on, he grasped this doctrine of Uddaka Rmaputta and attained the final stage of concentration, the realm of neither perception nor non-perception (n’eva sa–– n’sa––yatana, 非 想 非 非 想 處) (the fourth arupa jhāna), but still his ultimate goal was far ahead and this method did not response to the question of dealing with sufferings in life. Dissatisfied with this too, he departed thence, contented therewith no longer he also realized that the highest truth is to be found within oneself and thus he ceased to seek external aid.

During the third period, the ascetic Gotama went into the jungle near Uruvelā and practised the forms of asceticism with five sages:  Anna Kondanna (Skt: Ajnata Kaundinya, 阿 惹 橋 陳 如), Assaji (Skt Asvajit, 馬 勝 / 圠 坒), Bhaddiya (Skt Bhadhrika, 帗 提 / 婆 提), Dasabala Kassapa (Skt. Dasabala Kasyapa, 十 力 迦 葉) and Mahānāma-kuliya, 摩 訶 南 拘 厘). He spent six years in hard penances in forests, slept on beds of thorns, burnt in the heat of midday sun, and suffered cold at night, ate one bean per day… until the day he starved himself into a state of extreme emasculation. He earnestly and seriously trained himself in this way until he remained a body of skeleton. One day, nevertheless, he realized that his fasts and penances had been useless, and failed to bring him to any further knowledge and vision for an absolute emancipation as it has been described in the Middle Length of Sayings as cited below:

“It occurred to me, Aggivessana: suppose now that I were to take food little by little, drop by drop, such as bean-soup or vetch-soup or chick-pea-soup or pea-soup? So, I, Aggivessana, took food little by little, drop by drop, such as bean-soup or vetch-soup or chick-pea-soup. While I, Aggivessana, was taking food little by little, drop by drop, such as bea-soup or vetch-soup or chick-pea-soup or pea-soup, my body became exceedingly emaciated. Because I ate so little, all my limbs became like the joints of withered creepers; because I ate so little, my buttocks became like a bullock’s hoof; because I ate so little, my protruding backbone became like a string of balls; because I ate so little, my gaunt ribs became like the crazy rafters of a tumble-down shed; because I ate so little, the pupils of my eyes appeared lying low and deep; because I ate so little, my scalp became shriveled and shrunk by hot wind. If I thought, Aggivessana: ‘I will touch the skin of my belly’, it was my backbone that I took hold of. If I thought: ‘I will touch my backbone’. It was the skin of my belly that I took hold of. For because I ate so little, the skin of my belly, Aggivessana, came to be cleaving to my backbone. If I thought, Aggivessana: ‘I will obey the calls of nature’. I fell down on my face then and there, because I ate so little. If I, Aggivessana, soothing my body, stroked my limbs with my hand, the hairs, rotted at the roots, fell away from my body as I stroked my limbs with my hand, because I ate so little…”[130]

(Tassa mayhaò Aggivessana etad - ahosi: Yan - n‰nhaò thokaò thokaò hraò hreyyò pasataò pasataò, yadi v muggay‰saò yadi v kulatthay‰saò yadi v kaÀyay‰saò yadi v hareÏukay‰san - ti. So kho ahaò Aggivessana thokaò thokaò hraò hresiò pasataò pasataò, yadi v muggay‰saò yadi v kulatthay‰saò yadi v kalayay‰saò yadi v hareÏukay‰saò, Tassa mayhaò Aggivessana thokaò thokaò hraò hrayato pasataò pasataò, yadi v muggay‰saò yadi v kulattay‰saò yadi v kalayay‰saò yadi v hareÏukay‰saò, adhimattakasimnaò patto kyo hoti. Sey-yath pi nma s­tikapabbni v kalapabbni v evaò-eva-ssu me aÏgapaccaÏgni

bhavanti ty' ev' apphratya, sey-yath pi nma oææhapadaò evam - eva - ssu me nisadaò hoti tay' ev' apphratya, seyyath pi nma vaææanvaÀ­ evam eva-ssu me piææhikaÏæako unnatvanato hoti tay' ev' apphrutya, seyyath pi nma juraslya gopnasiyo olugga-vilugg bhavanti evam- eva - ssu me phsuÀiyo oluggavilugg bliavanti ty' ev' apphratya, seyyath pi nma gambh­re udapne udakatrak  gambh­ragat  okkhyik  dissanti  evam-eva-ssu  me akkhik‰pesu akkhitrak gambh­ragat okkhyik dissanti ty' ev' apphratya, seyyath pi nma titta- klbu makacchinno vttapena sampuæito hoti sammilto evam-eva-ssu me s­sacchavi sampuæit hoti sammilt tay'ev' apphratya. So kho ahaò Aggivessana: udaracchaviò parimasissm­ti piææhikaÏæakaò yeva parigaÏhmi, piææhi-kaÏæakaò parimasissm­ti udaracchaviò yeva parigaÏhmi. Yva - ssu me Aggivessana udaracchavi piææhikaÏæakaò all­n hoti tay' ev' apphratya. So kho ahaò Aggivessana: vaccaò v muttaò v karissm­ti tatth' eva avakujjo papatmi ty' ev' apphratya.   So kho ahaò Aggivessana imam - eva kyaò asssento pÏin gattni anomajjmi. Tassa mayhaò Aggivessana pÏina gattni anomaijato p‰tim‰lni lomni kyasm papatanti  ty' ev' apphratya. Api - ssu maò Aggivessana manuss disv evam-haòsu: kÀo samaÏo Gotamo ti.   Ekacce manuss evam - haòsu: na kÀo samaÏo Gotamo, smo samaÏo Gotamo ti. Ekacce manuss evam-haòsu: na kÀo samaÏo Gotamo na pi smo, maôguracchavi samaÏo Gotamo ti. Yava-ssu me Aggivessana tva parisuddho chavivaÏÏo pariyodto upahato hoti ty' ev' apphratya.)[131]

Then the following thought occurred to ascetic Gotama:

“This, Aggivessana, occurred to me: Some recluses or brahmans in the past have experienced feelings that were acute, painful, sharp and severe, but this is paramount, nor is there worse than this. And some recluses and brahmans are now experiencing feelings that are acute, painful, sharp, severe, but this is paramount, nor is there worse than this. But I, by this severe austerity, do not reach stages of further-men, the excellent knowledge and vision befitting the ariyans. Could there be another way to awakening?”[132]

(Tassa mayhaò Aggivessana etad-ahosi: Ye kho keci at­taò - addhnaò samaρ v brhmaρ v opakkamik dukkh tipp kaæuk vedan vedayiòsu, etvaparamaò na - y - ito bhiyyo; ye pi hi keci angatam - addhnaò samaρ v brhmaρ v opakkamik dukkh tipp kaæuk vedan vedayissanti, etvaparamaò ra-y-ito bhiyyo; ye pi hi keci etarahi samaρ v brhmaρ v opakkamik dukkh tipp kaæuk vedan vediyanti, etvaparamaò na-y-ito bhiyyo. Na kho panhaò imya kaæukya   dukkarakrikya   adhigacchmi uttari   manussadhamm, alamariyaria–aÏadassana- visesaò, siy nu kho a––o maggo bodhyti.)[133]

From this experience, he realized that he would die before he could find the answer. Therefore he should find another way and the dawn of truth was discovered step by step by him.

The Middle Way

Owing to experiences accumulated by his own knowledge and learnt from different religious masters, both in the earthly life as well as spiritual one, and by strongly patronizing his potentially intellectual power he was awakened that one should avoid the fixed or extreme position of self mortification that weakens one’s intellect as he spent six yeas of austerities and the fixed or extreme position of self-indulgence that restarts one’s moral progress as he spent his years in all luxuries and pleasant things of life at Kapilavathu kingdom. Both of them are useless for the spiritual progress.

Just like a person playing guitar, if he lets the strings too straight (as austerity) or loose (as enjoying pleasure), the sound will be unsatisfactory and bad. In the contrast, the good player makes the sound excellent because he knows how to adjust the string fit and proper (as in the case of the Middle Way).

Following this, he gave up the path of austerities and began to beg for food to regain his health to make a new start of practice. His five fellow ascetics witnessed the change in him and declared, “Gotama has taken the easy course of life!” and kept themselves far away from him.

Siddhattha was then lonely in the midst of the immense ocean of sufferings of birth and death. He started thinking again and again of a Middle Way between the luxurious ways and the austerity-based one that he had practiced. He recalled an incident during a ‘ploughing Festival’ when, as a child of six or seven years, he sat under a rose-apple tree and entered meditative absorption (the first jhna). He pondered over and said to himself, ‘Might that be the way to Enlightenment?’

Siddhattha went on to Uruvela and stopped at a place nowadays called Bodh Gaya in the modern Indian state of Bihar, He determined to sit under an Assattha-tree[134] on the bank of Nairanjana river and practiced his own way of meditation until he could find the exact answer to the question of dealing with sufferings in life. The excerpt from the Discourse of Ariyapariyesana may be reproduced below:

“Then I, monks, a quested for whatever is good, searching for the incomparable, matchless path to peace, walking on tour through Magadha in due course arrived at Uruvela, the camp township. There I saw a delightful stretch of land and a lovely woodland grove, and a clear flowing river with a delightful ford, and a village for support nearby. It occurred to me, monks, “Indeed it is a delightful stretch of land... Indeed this does well for striving of a young man set on striving”. So I, monks, set down just there, thinking, “Indeed, this does well for striving”.[135]

(So kho aham, bhikkhave, kim kusalagaves­ anuttaram santiuarapadam pariyesamno Magadhesu anupubbena-crikam caramno yena Uruvel sennigamo tadavasarim Tatth'addasam rama–­yam bhumibhgam psdika– ca vanasandam, nadi–-ca sandantim setakam supatittham  raman­yam  samant  ca gocaragmam. Tassa mayham, bhikkhave, etadahosi: Ramani­yo vata bh‰mibhgo psdiko ca vanasando, nad­ ca sandati setak supatitth ramany, samant ca gocaragmo, alam vat'idam kulaputtassa padhnatthikassa padhnyati. So kho aham, bhikkhave, tatth'eva nis­dim, alam-idam padhnyati.)[136]

Meditation

There is a saying in the Dhammapada that teaches the following lesson:

“Easy to do are things that are bad and not beneficial to self;

But very, very hard to do indeed is that which is beneficial and good”.

(SukarÏi asdh‰ni attano ahitni ca

Yaò ve hita– ca s¯hu– ca tam ve paramadukkaraò).[137]

That is perfectly true. As a matter of fact, to gain the way of liberation, Boddhisatta Gotama uninterruptedly struggled for enlightenment for forty-nine days meditating under the bodhi tree. There occurred very naturally and psychologically the human instinctive desires which are humanized in the names of Māra such as sensual pleasure (kāma, 快 樂), aversion of the holy life (arati, 不 如 意), thirst and hunger (khuppipāsā, 餓 渴), craving (tanhā, 渴 愛), sloth and torpor (thīna-middha, 睡 眠), fear (bhī, 驚 駭), doubt (vicikiccha, 疑 問), detraction and obstinacy (makkha-thambha, 匪 謗,固 執), gain (lābha, 成 達), praise (siloka, 讚 歎), honour (sakkāra, 名 譽), fame (yasa, 有 名)… and which started to rise and disturb his mind. But with his extraordinary, immovable vow (pranidhāna), and determined great mind, Boddhisatta Gotama concentrated profoundly on all ways gone through by him for the sake of finding a way leading to complete liberation.

Boddhisatta Gotama was awakened that link of karma and the link of becoming as referring to rebirth, both rebirth and karma came from mind. This is the main reply for the question of resolving the suffering of life. Therefore, if five hindrances (restlessness, torpor and sloth, sensuous, desire, ill-will and skeptical doubt), desire, envy and ignorance… are transformed, bad kamma by doing evil actions will be born in suffering stages must be far away, then we are liberated. This is the truth of existence of men and things which is very subtle, deep and difficult to see as it has been explained in the Discourse of Ariyapariyesana and has been confirmed as follows:

“This too was a matter difficult to see, that is to say, the tranquilizing of all the activities, the renunciation of all attachment, the destruction of craving, dispassion, stopping, nibbna”.[138]

(Alayarmya kho pana pajya layaratya layasammuditya duddasam idam thnam yadidam idappaccayat paticcasamuppdo, idam-pi kho thnam duddasam yadidam sabbasankhrasamatho sabbupadhipatinissaggo tanhakkhayo virgo nirodho nibbnam.)[139]

To calm down desire and trouble, Boddhisatta began to practice meditation under the Bodh-tree on the bank of Niranjana river. After entering deep into concentration (Samadhi, 禪 定), Boddhisatta Gotama cultivated insight meditation (vipassanā, 明 察 慧) and easily developed the first jhāna which he gained in his youth. Degrees by degrees, he attained the second, the third… the nine jhāna as well. Nine stages of jhānas are illustrated as below:

Table II

THE PROCESS OF NINE JH€NAS IN P€LI NIK€YAS[140]

	Practice of dhammas	Attainment	Existence of spiritual maturity
1	Aloof from pleasure of senses, unskilled state of mind	The First Meditation	Initial and sustained thought, rapture and joy, one pointedness of mind, impingement, feeling, perception, will, thought, desire, determination, energy, mindfulness, equanimity, attention.
2	Allaying initial and discursive thought	The second  Meditation	Inward tranquility, rapture, joy, one point of mind, impingement, feeling, equanimity, attention.
3	Fading out of rapture, dwelling with equanimity	The Third  Meditation	Equanimity, joy, mindfulness, clear consciousness … attention.
4	Getting rid of anguish, pleasure, sorrow…	The Fourth  Meditation	Equanimity, feeling that neither painful nor pleasant impassively of mind, purification by mindfulness… determination, energy mindfulness … attention.
5	Beyond Perception of Material Shapes…	The Plane of Infinite Either	Perception the plane of Infinite Either, one point of mind, impingement, feeling … equanimity, attention.
6	Beyond the plane of Infinite Either	The plane of Infinite Consciousness	Perception the plane of Infinite Consciousness, one point of mind, impingement, feeling … equanimity, attention.
7	Beyond the plane of Infinite Consciousness	The plane of Nothing	Perception in the plane of Nothing, one point of mind, impingement, feeling … equanimity, attention.
8	Beyond the plane of Nothing	The plane of Neither- Perception-nor-Perception-non-Perception	The plane of Neither- Perception-nor-Perception-non-Perception, mindfulness, he emerged from the attainment, he regards those things that are past, stopped and changed.
9	Beyond the plane of Neither-Perception-nor -Perception-non-Perception	Stopping of Perception and Feeling	With intuitive wisdom, all cankers are utterly destroyed… comprehending ‘there is no further escape’.

And the Discourse of Anupada stated the degrees of spiritual maturity from one level to another or the process of salvation (transcending) the world in full of formation as follows:

“This monks, is due to Sriputta’s uninterrupted insight into things: as to this, monks, Sriputta, aloof from lures of the senses, aloof from unskilled states of mind, may enter on and abide in the first meditation which is accompanied by initial thought and discursive thought, is born of aloofness, and is rapturous and joyful. And those things which belong to the first meditation: initial thought and sustained thought and rapture and joy and one-pointedness of mind, impingement, feeling, perception, will, thought, desire, determination, energy, mindfulness, equanimity, attention are uninterrupted set up by him; know to him these things arise, know him persist, know they disappear. He comprehends thus: “Thus indeed things that have not been in me come to be; have been they pass away”. He, not feeling attracted by these things, not feeling repelled, independent, not infatuated, freed, released, dwells with a mind that is unconfined. He comprehends ‘There is a further escape’. There is zealous practice for him concerning that.

(Tatr' idaò, bhikkhave, Sriputtassa anupadadhammavipassanya hod.  Idha, bhikkhave, Sriputto vivice' eva kmehi vivicca akusalehi dhanunehi savitakkaò savicraò vivekajaò p­tisukhaò pathamajjhnaò upasampajja viharati. Ye ca paæhamajjhne dhamma vitakko ca vicro ca p­ti ca sukha– ca citte-kaggat ca phasso vedan sa––a cetan cittaò chando adhimokkho viriyaò sati upekh manasikro, tyssa dhamm anupadavavatthit honti, tyssa dhamma vidit uppajyanti, vidit upaææhahanti, vidit abbhatthaò gacchanti. So evaò pajnti: Evaò kira me dhamm, ahutv sambhonti, hutv pativedent­ti. So tesu dhammesu anupyo anapyo amssito apaæibaddho vippamutto visaòyutto vimariydikatena cetas viharati; So: Atthi uttariò nissaraÏan ti pajnti. Tabhahulikr atthi t' ev' assa hoti.)

And again, monks, Sriputta, by allaying initial and discursive thought, with his mind subjectively tranquilized and fixed on one point, enters on and abides in the second meditation which is devoid of initial thought and discursive thought, is born of concentration, and is rapturous and joyful. And those things which belong to the second meditation: inward tranquillity and rapture and joy and one-pointedness of mind, impingement, feeling… equanimity, attention, are uninterruptedly set up by him, know to him these things… disappeared. He comprehends… ‘There is a further escape’. There is zealous practice for him concerning that.

(Puna ca paraò, bhikkhave, Sriputto vitakkavicrnaò v‰pasam ajjhattaò sampasdanaò cetaso ekodibhvaò avitakkaò avicraò samadhijaò p­tisukhaò dutiyajjhnaò upasampajja viharati. Ye ca dutiyajjhne dhamm ajjhatta-sampasdo ca p­ti ca sukha– ca citte-kaggat ca phasso vedan sa––a cetan cittaò chando adbimokkho viriyaò sati upekh manasikro, tyssa dhamm anupææavavatthit honti, tyssa dhamm vidit uppajjanti, vidit upaææhahanti, vidit abbhatthaò gacchanti. So evaò pajnti: Evaò kira 'me dhamm ahutv sambhonti, hutv pativedent­ti. So tesu dhammesu anupyo anapyo anissito appaæibaddho Vippamutto visaòyutto vimariydikatena cetas viharati. So: Atthi uttariò nissaraÏan ti pajnti. Tabbahulikr atthi t' ev' assa hoti.)

And again, monks, Sriputta, by the fading out of rapture, dwells with equanimity, is mindful and clearly conscious, and he experiences in his person that joy of which the ariyans say: ‘Joyful lives he who has equanimity and is mindful’ and he enters on and abides in the third meditation. And those things which belong to the third meditation: equanimity and joy and mindfulness and clear consciousness… equanimity, attention, are uninterrupted set up by him, know to him these things… disappear. He comprehends… ‘There is a further escape’. There is zealous practice for him concerning that.

(Puna ca paraò, bhikkhave, Sriputto p­tiy ca virg upekhako ca viharati sato ca sampajno sukha– ca kyena paæisaòvedeti, yan taò ariy cikkhanti: Upekhako satim sukhavihr­ ti, tatiyajjhnaò upasampajja viharati. Ye ca tatiyajjhne dhamm upekh ca sukha– ca sati ca sam-paja––an ca citte-kaggat ca phasso vedan sa––a cetan cittaò chando adhimokkho viriyaò upekh manasikro, tyssa dhamm anupadavavatthit honti, tyssa dhamm vidit uppajjanti, vidit upaææhahanti, vidit abbhatthaò gacchanti. So evaò pajnti: Evaò kira 'me dhamm ahutv sambhonti hutv pativedent­ti. So tesu dhammesu anupyo anapyo anissito appaæibaddho vippamutto visaò-yutto vimariydikatena   cetas viharati. So: Atthi uttariò nissaraÏan ti pajnti. Tabbahulikr atthi t' ev' assa hoti.)

And again, monks, Sriputta, by getting rid of joy, by getting rid of anguish, by the going down of his former pleasures and sorrows, enters on and abides in the fourth meditation which has neither anguish nor joy, and which is entirely purified by equanimity and mindfulness. And those things which belong to the fourth meditation: equanimity, feeling that neither painful nor pleasant … impassivity of mind, purification by mindfulness, one-pointedness of mind, and impingement, feeling, perception, will, thought, desire, determination, energy, mindfulness, equanimity, attention, are uninterruptedly, energy, mindfulness, equanimity, attention, are uninterruptedly set up by him; know to him these things arise, know they persist, know they disappear. He comprehends … ‘There is a further escape’. There is zealous practice for him concerning that.

(Puna ca paraò, bhikkhave, Sriputto sukhassa ca pahn dukkhassa ca pahn pubbe va somanassadomanassnaò atthagam adukkhamasukhaò upekhsatiprisuddhaò   catutthjjhnaò upasampajja viharati.  Ye ca catutthajjhne dhamm upekh adukkhamasukh vedan passi vedan cetaso anbhogo sati prisuddbi citte-kaggat ca phasso vedan sa––a cetan cittaò chando adhimokkho viriyaò sati upekh manasikro, tyssa dhamm anupadavavatthit honti, tyssa dhamm vidit uppajjanti, vidit upaææhahanti, vidit abbhatthaò gacchanti.  So evaò pajnti: Evaò kira 'me dhamm ahutv sambhonti hutv pativedent­ti. So tesu dhammesu anupyo anapyo anissito appaæibaddho vippamutto visaòyutto vimariydikatena  cetas viharati. So: Atthi uttariò nissaraÏan ti pajnti. Tabbahulikr atthi t' ev' assa hoti.)

And again, monks, Sriputta, by passing quite beyond perceptions of material shapes, by going down of perceptions of sensory reactions, by no attending to perceptions of variety, thinking: ‘Ether is unending’, enters on and abides in the plane of infinite ether. And those things which belong to the plane of infinite ether. And those things which belong to the plane of infinite ether: perception in the plane of infinite ether and one-pointedness of mind and impingement, feeling… equanimity, attention, are uninterruptedly set up by him; know to him these things… disappear. He comprehends… ‘There is a further escape’. There is zealous practice for him concerning that.

(Puna ca paraò, bhikkhave, Sriputto sabbaso r‰pa-sa––naò samatikkam, paæighasa––anaò  tthagam nnattasa––anaò amanasikr: Ananto kso ti ksna–cyatanaò upasampajja viharati. Ye ca ksana–cayatane 'dhamm ksana–cayatanasa––a ca citte- kaggat ca phasso ca vedan sa––a cetan cittaò chando adhi-mokkho viriyaò sati upekh manasikro, tyssa dhamm anupadavavatthit honti, tyssa dhamm vidit uppajjanti, vidit upaææhahanti, vidit abbhatthaò gacchanti. So evaò pajnti: Evaò kira 'me dhamm ahutv sambhonti, hutv pativedent­ti. So tesu dhammesu anupyo anapyo anissito appaæibaddho vippamutto visamyutto vimariydikatena cetas viharati. So: Atthi uttariò nissaraÏan ti pajnti. Tabbahulikr atthi t' ev' assa hoti.)

And again, monks, Sriputa, by passing quite beyond the plane of infinite ether, thinking ‘Consciousness is unending’ enters on and abides in the planes of infinite consciousness. And those things which belong to the plane of infinite consciousness: perception in the plane of infinite consciousness and one-pointedness of mind and impingement, feeling... equanimity, attention, are uninterruptedly set up by him; know to him these things… disappear. He comprehends … ‘There is a further escape’. There is zealous practice for him concerning that.

(Puna ca paraò, bhikkhave, Sriputto sabbaso ksna–cayatanaò    samatikkam:    Anantaò    vi––aÏan    ti vi––Ïa–cyatanaò upasampajja viharati. Ye ca vi––Ïa–cyatane dhamm vi––Ïa–cyatanasa–– ca citte-kaggat phasso vedan sa–– cetan cittaò chando adhimokkho viriyaò sati upekh manasikro, tyssa dhamm anupadavavatthit honti, tyssa dhamm vidit uppajjanti, vidit upaææhahanti, vidit abbhatthaò gacchanti.  So evaò pajnti: Evaò kira 'me dhamm ahutv sambhonti hutv pativedent­ti. So tesu dhammesu anupyo anapyo anissito appaæibaddho vippamutto visaòyutto vimariydikatena cetas viharati. So: Atthi uttariò nissaraÏan ti pajnti. Tabbahulikr atthi t' ev' assa hoti.)

And again, monks, Sriputta, by passing quite beyond the plane of infinite consciousness, thinking: ‘There is not anything’ enters on and abides in the plane of nothing. And those things which belong to the plane of no-thing: perception in the plane of nothing and one-pointedness of mind and impingement, feeling… equanimity, attention, are uninterruptedly set up by him; know to him these things… disappear. He comprehends… ‘There is a further escape’. There is a zealous practice for him concerning that.

(Puna ca paraò, bhikkhave, Sriputto sabbaso vi––Ïa–cyatanaò samatikkam: Na 'tthi ki–c­ti ki–ca––yatanaò upasampajja  viharati. Ye ca ki–ca––ayatane dhamm ki–ca––ayatanasa––a ca citte-kaggat ca phasso vedan Sa––a cetan cittaò chando adhimokkho viriyaò sati upekh manasikro, tyssa dhamm anupadavavatthit honti, tyssa dhamm vidit uppajjanti, vidit upaææhahanti, vidit abbhatthaò gacchanti. So evaò pajnti: 'Evaò kira 'me dhamm ahutv sambhonti hutv pativedent­ti. So tesu dhammesu anupyo anapyo anissito appaæibaddho vippamutto visaòyutto vimariydikatena cetas viharati. So: Atthi uttariò nissaraÏan ti pajnti. Tabbahulikr atthi t' ev' assa hoti.)

And again, monks, Sriputta, by passing quite beyond the plane of no-thing, enters on and abides in the plane of neither-perception-nor-non-perception. Mindful, he emerged from that attainment. When he has emerged, mindful, from that attainment he regards those things that are past, stopped, changed as: “Thus indeed things that have not been in me come to be; have been they pass away”. He, not feeling attracted by these things, not feeling repelled, independent, not infatuated, freed, released, dwells with a mind that is unconfined. He comprehends ‘There is a further escape’. There is zealous practice for him concerning that.

(Puna ca paraò, bhikkhave, Sriputto sabbaso ki–c––ayatanaò samatikkam nevasa––nasa––yatana upasampajja viharati. So tya sampattiy sato vuææhahati. So tya sampattiy sato vuææhahitva ye dhamm at­ta mruddh vipariÏat te dhamme samanupassati; Evaò kira 'me dhamm ahutv sambhonti hutv pativedent­ti. So tesu dhammesu anupyo anapyo anissito appaæibaddho vippamutto visaòyutto vimnriydikateha cetas viharati. So: Atthi uttariò nissaraÏan ti pajnti. Tabbahulikr atthi t' ev' assa hoti.)

And again, monks, Sriputta, by passing quite beyond the plane of neither-perception-nor-non-perception, enters on and abides in the stopping of perception and feeling. And having seen by means of intuitive wisdom, his cankers are utterly destroyed. Mindful, he emerges from that attainment. When he has emerged, mindful, from that attainment, he regards those thing that are past, stopped, changed as: ‘Thus indeed things that have not been in me come to be; having been they pass away’. He, not feeling attracted by these things, not feeling repelled, independent, not infatuated, freed, released, dwells with a mind that is unconfined. He comprehends: ‘There is no further escape’. There is no zealous practice for him concerning that.[141]

(Puna ca paraò, bhikkhave, Sriputto sabbaso nevasa––nasa––ayatanaò    sapatikkam  sa––avedayitanirodhaò upasampajja viharati. Pa––aya c' assa disv asava parikkh­Ï honti. So tya sampattiy sato vuææhahati. So tya sampattiy sato vuææhahitv ye te dhamm at­ta niruddha vipariÏat te dhamme samanupassad: Evaò kira 'me dhamm ahutv sambhonti hutv pativedent­ti. So tesu dhammesu anupyo anapyo anissito appaæibaddho vippamutto visaòyutto vimariydikatena cetas viharati. So: Na 'tthi uttariò nissaraÏan ti pajnti. Tabbahulikr na 'tthi t' ev' assa hoti.)[142]

These are the nine states of jhnas which Bodhisatta practised to transform all defilements into joy, equanimity, happiness…This is the way of seeing, developing and cultivating mind. Without it, a person cannot understand what really is, and cannot resolve his psychological problems for peace and happiness in the here and now as well as for ending the sufferings of life and become the Buddha – The Enlightened One. That is the reason, the Buddha praised the merits of nine stages of Jhnas as under:

“And so long, €nanda, as I attained not to, emerged not from these nine attainments of gradual abidings, both forwards and backwards, I releazed not completely, as one wholly awakened, the full perfect awakening, unsurpassed in the world with its gods, Mras, and Brahms, on earth with its recluses, godly men, devas and men; but when I attained to and emerged from these abidings such wise, then, wholly awakened, I realized completely the full-perfect awakening unsurpassed. Then knowledge and vision rose up within me: mind’s release for me is unshakeable, this birth is final, there is now no becoming again”.[143]

(Ynakiva– chaò €nanda im nava anupubbavihrasampattiyo na evam anulomapaæilomaò sampajjim pi vuææhahim pi, neva tvhaò €nanda sadevake loke sam rake sabrahmake sassamaÏabrmaÏay pajya sadevamanussya anuttaraò sammsambodhiò abhisambuddho pacca––siò. Yato ca kho ahaò €nanda im nava anupubbavihrasampattiyo evam anulomapaæilomaò sampajjim pi vuææhahim pi, athhaò €nanda sade vake loke samrake sabrahmake sassamaÏabrhmaÏiy pajya sadevamanussya anuttaraò sammsambodhiò abhisambuddho pacca––siò. „Ïa– ca pana me dassanaò udapdi ‘akupp me cetovimutti, ayam antim jti, natthi dni punabbhavo’ ti.)[144]

With this consequence, we can understand the method of meditation is the main task of the Bodhisatta Way (Magga) to liberation in Pāli Nikāyas. 

 Knowledge

Bodhisatta had enjoyed in the nine states of spiritual mind and with the thoughts tranquilized, purified, cleansed of nine jhānas, Bodhisatta directed his mind to achieve three special kinds of knowledges (Tisso vijjā, 三 明) in the last night when he got Enlightenment as the Discourse of the Bhayabheravasutta belonging to the Middle Length Sayings[145] recounted clearly these three perfect knowledges which appeared in the last night when Bodhisatta Siddhattha attained Enlightenment under the Bodhi-tree on the bank of Niranjana river as follows:

“Thus with mind composed, quite purified, quite clarified, without blemish, without defilement grown soft and workable, fixed, immovable, I directed my mind to the knowledge and recollection of former habitations: I remembered a variety of former habitations, thus: one birth, two births, three..., four...,  hundred..., a hundred  thousand births and many an a eon of integration  disintegration; such an one was I by name, having such and such a clan, such and such a colour, so was I nourished, such and such pleasant and painful experiences were mine, so did the span of life end...

This brahman, was the first knowledge attained by me in the first watch of the night; ignorance was dispelled, knowledge arose, darkness was dispelled, light arose, even as I abided diligent, ardent, self-solute.

(So evam samhite citte parisuddhe pariyodte anangane vigatupakkilese mudubh‰te kammaniye thite nejjappatte pubbenivs-nussatinnya cittam abhininnmesim. So anekavihitam pubbeniudsam anussarmi, seyyathidam: ekampi jtim dve pijt­yo, ...jtisatasahassampi, anekepi samvattakappe anekepi vivattakappe; amutr' sim evannmo evamgotto evam vanno evamahro evam sukhadukkhapatisamved­ evamyupariyanto, so tato cuto amutra udapdim, tatrap’ sim evannmo evamgotto evamvanno evamahro evam sukhadukkhapativedii evamyupariyanto, so tato cuto idhupapanno ti. Iti skram sauddesam anekavihitam pubbenivsam anussarmi. Ayam kho me, brhmana rattiy pathame yme patham vijj adhigat. Avijj vihat vijj uppann. Tamo uihato loko uppanno. Yth tam appamattassa tpino pahitattassa viharato.)

Then with mind composed quite purified, ...I directed my mind to the knowledge of the passing hence and the arising of beings ...I comprehend that beings are mean, excellent, comely, ugly, well-going, ill-going, according to the consequences of their deeds, and I think: Indeed these worthy beings who were possessed of wrong conduct in body, who were possessed of wrong conduct of speech, who were possessed of wrong conduct of thought, scoffers at the ariyans, holding a wrong view, incurring deeds consequent on a wrong view  these, at the break up of the body after dying, have arisen in a sorrowful state, a bad bourn, the abyss, Niraya Hell. But those worthy beings who were possessed of good conduct in body, ...of speech, ...in thought, who did not scoff at the ariyans, holding a right view... at the breaking up of the body after dying, have arisen in a good bourn, a heaven world... This, brahman, was the second knowledge attained by me in the middle watch of the night; ignorance was dispelled, knowledge arose...

(So evam samhite citte parisuddhe pariyodte anangane vigatupakkilese mudubh‰te kammaniye thite nejjappatte sattnam cutuapapatana–ya cittam abhininnmesim. So dibbena cakkhun visuddhena atikkantamnusakena satte passmi cavamne upapajjamne…)

And: “Then with mind composed, quite purified, ... I directed my mind to the destruction of the cankers. I understood as it really is: this is anguish, this is the arising, this is the stopping of anguish, this is the course leading to the stopping of anguish. I understood as it really is: There are the cankers, this is the arising of the cankers, ... this is the course leading to the stopping of the cankers. Knowing this thus, seeing thus, my mind was freed from the canker of sense pleasures, ... from the canker of becoming, ... from the canker of ignorance... This, brahman, was the third knowledge attained by me in the last watch of the night; ignorance was dispelled, knowledge arose, darkness was dispelled, light arose even as I abided diligent, ardent, self-resolute”.

(So evam samhite citte parisuddhe... abhininnmesim. So,idam dukkhanti yathbhutam abbhannsim. Ayam dukkhasamudayo ti yathbh‰tam abbha––sim. Ayam dukkhanirodhoti yathbhutam abbha––sim. Ayam dukkhanirodhagmini patipadti yathbh‰tam abbha––sim...

Ayam kho me, brhmana, rattiy pacchime yme tatiy vijj adhigat, avijj vihat vijj uppann, tamo vihato loko uppanno. Yath tam appamattassa tpino pihatattassa viharato.)[146]

From here Bodhisatta knew that “Delivered am I”, and “Rebirth is ended, fulfilled the holy life, done what was to be done: there is no more of this state again”. This as ignorance was clear wisdom arose; darkness vanished and light arose. In order to grasp easily the process of three kinds of super-wisdom, we can give a look at the diagram III as under:

Table III: THREE SPECIAL KINDS OF KNOWLEDGES (Tisso Vijj)[147]

The 49th night	Existence of spiritual feelings	The objects for contemplating	Attainment
The first watch	Mind composing quite purified, clarified, soft, without blemish, without defilement workable, fixed, immovable.	A variety of former habitations, one birth…a hundred thousand births, many a eon of integration disintegration.	Pubbe Nivasnussat- –na (The Knowledge of Remembering many former existence of himself)
The Middle watch	Mind composing quite purified, clarified, soft, without blemish, without defilement workable, fixed, immovable.	The passing hence and the arising of beings as one possessed of wrong conduct in body, speech, thought; after dying, have arisen in a sorrowful state, a bad bourn, the abyss, Niraya Hell. In the contrast…good bourn, a heaven world.	Cut‰papta-–na (The Knowledge of the Workings of kamma)
The last watch	Mind composing quite purified, clarified, soft, without blemish, without defilement workable, fixed, immovable.	There are the cankers of sense pleasures, becoming, ignorance. This is the cankers, a arising of cankers, the stopping of the cankers and the course leading to the stopping of cankers.	€savakkha- –na (the Knowledge of the Destruction of the cankers)

After the last watch of the forty-ninth night, the historical event of the marvelous Enlightenment. Siddhattha Boddhisatta was extolled as the Buddha, the Enlightened-One, the Blessed-One, the Tathāgata, the Bhagava and so on… was still in a position of man (not God or saviour), but the Enlightened man or the Perfected man of human history, whose life was beyond all spheres of normal humanly desire, whose work was for the benefit of all living beings through his task of spreading the Enlightened Way, also called the Middle Way, until he passed away.

From the time of becoming the Enlightened-One in Bodhgaya at the age of thirty-five years up to the attainment of Mahāparinibbāna at Kusinr at the age of eighty, the Buddha tirelessly and ceaselessly walked almost the whole of northern and central India to spread the way of practice or his message for the good of many for the welfare of many: bahu jana hitaya ba hujana sukhya.[148]

To conclude the chapter, one may say that the Pli Nikyas explain the Middle Way and Meditation as the means of Enlightenment and suggest that Gotama Buddha not only sought to help himself – a Boddhisatta and lead a peaceful and happy life during his own lifetime, but also after his Mahāparinibbāna, it became a source of inspiration for the process of spiritual mind wherever the Buddha and disciples could spread the message. Strive on with diligence, were the last words of the Buddha. No emancipation or purification can be without personal striving. As such petitional or intercessory prayers are denounced in Buddhism and in their stead is meditation, which leads to self-control, purification and enlightenment. The object of the Buddha mission was to deliver beings from suffering by eradicating its cause and to teach a way to put an end to both birth and death if one wishes to do so.

The Buddha was the absolute purity and perfect holy Bodhisatta. He also was the profoundest of thinkers, the most persuasive of speakers, the most energetic of workers, the most successful of reformers, the most compassionate and tolerant of teachers, the most efficient of administrators. His will, wisdom, compassion, service, renunciation, exemplary personal life, the blameless methods that were employed to propagate the Dhamma and his final success-all these factors have contributed to hail the Buddha as the greatest religious Teacher. That is the reason, Pandit Nehru always referred to the Buddha as the greatest son of India. Or S. Radhakrishnan, another Indian leader and a philosopher, in paying a glowing tribute to the Buddha states:

“In Gotama Buddha we have a mastermind from the East second to none as far as the influence on the thought and life of the human race is concerned, and sacred to all as the founder of a religious tradition whose hold is hardly less wide and deep than any other. He belongs to the history of the world’s thought, to the general inheritance of all cultivated men, for judged by intellectual integrity, moral earnestness and spiritual insight, the Buddha is undoubtedly one of the greatest figures in history”.[149]

And also the same ideas, the historian H.G. Wells, in the Three Greatest Men in History wrote,

“In the Buddha, you see clearly a man-simple, devout, lonely, battling for light-a vivid human personality, not a myth. He too had a message to mankind universal in character. Many of our best modern ideas are in closest harmony with it. All the miseries and discontents are due. He taught unselfishness. Before a man can become serene he must cease to live for his senses or himself. Then he merges into a great being... In some ways, the Buddha is nearer to us and our needs. He was more lucid upon our individual importance, sacrifice and service than Christ and less ambiguous upon the question of personal immortality.” [150]

*********

CHAPTER FOUR

THE ORIGIN AND DEVELOPMENT OF THE BODHISATTVA DOCTRINE

As it has been seen in Chapter One which introduced Bodhisatta (菩 薩) doctrine as integral part of the Nikya Sūttas with the shades of four meanings, of its doctrinal progress in the history of Pli Buddhism. Nonetheless, the philosophical development of the Bodhisatta concept in the Nikyas is not only about the personality of Gotama Buddha or six (twenty-four) other Buddhas, or the various of last lives of Gotama Buddha which seemed not to have been successful in responding to the needs of Buddhists affected by the doctrine of polytheism of other religions or other tendencies at certain times and places and so, Mahyanists developed and practiced the doctrine of Bodhisattva after several centuries of Gautama Buddha’s passing away. There had been many reasons related with Buddhism and other traditions in such contexts. The issues related with them may be discussed under the following heads:

The Origins Leading to the Bodhisattva Doctrine

The Natural Tendencies of Development within Buddhism

Mahāyāna (大  乘  佛  教 )

A contention arose in Vesali in the order a century later after the Buddha’s great decease. The contending monks offered frame certain new rules in the vinaya which were not accepted by the conservatives in the West. This gave rise to the convention of the second council (saôgīti, 結 集) of seven hundred elder monks in the reign of Kl±oka.

Thus, regional and doctrinal differences caused a breach in the unity of the saôgha which was split up into two distinct branches of Buddhism: the conservative Theravda (Teachings of the Elders, 源 始 佛 教) school, becoming popular in the South and more innovative Mahsaôghika (Great Assembly, 大 眾 部) school in the North. The latter became more popular in time for being closer to the spirit of the masses as liberal and inclined to allow great freedom of interpretation of the Buddha’s teachings. Besides, they were deposed to study more seriously the ideal of Bodhisattva and Buddhology.

It is uncertain whether division into sects had actually taken place by 300 B.C., though the spread of the faith into various regions led to divergence that became a major cause of schism. Missionary efforts supported by the great Mauryan emperor Asoka (阿 育 王) in the third century B.C. contributed to the religion’s spread.

It is generally believed that due to Asoka’s sponsorship of the faith, the Sarvstivda (Holders of the Doctrine That All Is, 一 切 有 部) school of Buddhism took strong root in northwest India after the Third Council and the Theravda school in the South extending its influence to Sri-Lanka. Knowledge of Buddhism was carried as far west as Greece and the areas under its control. Buddhist teachings may have left a mark on early Christianity, though no clear evidence has survived. During the two or three centuries following Asoka’s reign, eighteen, twenty, or perhaps more Buddhist sects came into existence, marking the advent of what is called sectarian Buddhism.

People who heard the Buddha’s sermons were apparently able to grasp his meaning, but as time passed and the circumstances under which they had been delivered were forgotten, his sermons became increasingly difficult to be understood fully. It was the task of later Buddhists to define obscure words, draw inferences, and pull everything together into an orderly system of belief. The resulting studies and expositions are called Abhidharma (Pli: Abhidhamma, 阿 毘 曇 論), or that which is ‘about the Law’.

The origins of Abhidharma literature may be traced to the few works of explanation or commentary in the sutras of primitive Buddhism. In time, however, such expository writings became more specialized and detailed and diverged too far from the sutras to be included among them.

Ultimately they came to constitute a distinct literary form occupying a separate division, or basket, in the canon, the Abhidharma-piæaka (論 藏). Therefore, now in Buddhism there do exist Tipiæaka (Skt. Tripiæaka, 三 藏):  Sutta Nikyas   (經 藏), Vinaya Nikyas (律 藏) and Abhidhamma Nikyas (論  藏, the commentaries on the suttas) which were complete and also called the scriptures of primitive Buddhism.

Sectarian Buddhism concerned itself first and foremost with strict observance of the monastic precepts and study of the scriptures, pursuits that encouraged dogmatism. Emphasis was on literal interpretation of the canon. In contrast, a group of pragmatic reformers, members of the Mahsnghika sect, favoured interpreting the words of the scriptures in accordance with their deeper meanings. And therefore, Mahyna Buddhism developed out of this reformist movement within the Mahsnghika sect.

The Mdhyamika assertion is common to both the Abhidhrmika Buddhists as well as the Mahynists who refute the Sthaviras for overemphasizing the issues of existence and karma (causality) and thus take recourse to Nirvôa, which is without residue (freedom from existence). But these are doctrinal differences in the meaning of technical terms.

The central conception in early Buddhism is interpreted by Th. Stherbatsky as the concept of plurality of ultimate elements (dharmas). The central conception of Mahyna is their relativily (Öunyatā). The Buddha had reiterated again and again, that one should strive to save the other beings as it is the Bodhisattva ideal. In Mahyna we are ordained to accept the Bodhisattva ideal instead of the objective of the Arahat. For it is in Mahyna, indeed, that by following the practices of the Mahyna it is possible to transport the entire sentient world to Buddhahood.

Supported by new converts and by many Abhidharma Buddhists to whom the revisionist position appealed, Mahyna spread rapidly throughout India. At about the beginning of the first century A.D., scriptures based on Mahyna principles began appearing in a swelling stream that included a group of texts of various lengths called the Perfection of Wisdom Sūtras (Praj–pramitā-sūtras, 般 若 波 羅 密 經), the Vimalakīrti Sūtra (Vimalakīrtinirde±a Sūtra, 維 摩 詰 經), the Flower Garland Sūtra (Avataòsaka S‰tra, 華 嚴 經), the Lotus Sūtra (Saddharma- puϯarīka Sūtra, 妙 法 蓮 花 經), and the Amitabha Sūtra (Sukhavat­vy‰ha S‰tra, 彌 陀 經)... all destined to become great religious classics. Though these sūtras are presented as having been preached by Öakyamuni   (釋 迦 牟 尼 佛) himself, the oldest of them could have been written no earlier than about 450 years after his death. It is impossible to know who the authors were, but they were no doubt devout Buddhists convinced that their writings revealed the Buddha’s true message. With the Mahynists four points were prominent:

1. They were progressive and affirmative.
2. Whereas the Hīnaynists developed with the Order as the centre, the Mahynists concentrated rather upon the individual.
3. While the Hīnaynists laid the greatest stress upon the Tripitaka, the Mahyna was content to propagate the Buddha’s fundamental teaching wherever found. Compared with them, the Hīnaynists were both formal and systematic in their scholastic orthodoxy.
4. Whereas Hīnayna was a forest or mendicant denunciative way, while Mahyna not excluding this feature, wished to make the Buddhist life open to all, priest and layman alike. With it the ideal became not the Arahata bent upon his own salvation but the Bodhisattva to which all may aspire. The Bodhisattva takes a vow to attain perfect knowledge and to save all sentient beings. This was and remains the most important of many important points in Mahy

The kernel of Mahyna is Deliverance for all, for all stand in relationship, which is causation, and Mind is the origin of all causation. Yet Mind, Buddha, and Beings are one. The real object of Mahyna Buddhism is to obtain enlightenment, to get rid of delusion, and to benefit others without hope of reward. Bodhi (菩 提), Bodhicitta (菩 提 心), Bodhisattva (菩 薩), Pramit (波 羅 密) are the words most frequently met with in Mahyna literature (佛 教 大 乘). When these are established, the notion of vow (praÏidhana, 願) is inevitable. May be, because of it, Sir. C. Eliot also stated that two conspicuous features of Mahyna were the worship of Bodhisattvas and the idealist philosophy.

According to Kogen Mizuno in the ‘Basic Buddhist Concepts’, the history of Indian Buddhism may be divided in detail with five periods as below:

1. The age of primitive Buddhism, which lasted from the time of ցkyamuni (c. 560 - c. 480 B.C) until the division of Buddhism into sects (about 300 B.C),
2. The age of sectarian Buddhism, which lasted from about 300 B.C. until the beginning of the first century A.D,
3. The early period of Mahyna Buddhism, which lasted from the beginning of the first century A.D. until about 300,
4. The middle period of Mahyna Buddhism, which lasted from about 300 to about 700,
5. The late period of Mahyna Buddhism, which lasted from about 700 to the early thirteenth century.

This is the process of Buddhist history which ran from the Buddha’s time to the present day. As a matter of fact, the most important and impelling force directing the progress not only of Buddhism, but also of all real religions for their long-term survival, must be the potential of association with the contemporary knowledge and the need of people at all times, which is invariably in flux as pointed out by the Buddha himself, ‘All is momentary and ever-changing’ (Sarvaò kãaÏikaò) or ‘Materiality (and the rest) is impermanent, changing, becoming other. Whoever decides about, places his confidence in these dhammas in this way, is called mature in confidence (saddhānusārī, 隨 信 行).

Moreover, the teachings of Lord Buddha should neither be regarded as dogma, nor creed, nor formulated golden words absolutely obeyed and reverenced, but it had better use as a means ridding of the cycle of birth and death. As a result, the indispensable and inevitable improvements in due course of Buddhism for the sake of living beings at certain historical times leading to the present reality of the so-called ‘Theravda (Southern) and Mahyna (Northern) Buddhism’ are but the active and living pictures of the only one Buddhism through ages with one aim to awaken all worldly beings and objects are transient (anitya, 無 常), momentary (kãaÏika, 剎 那), perpetual flux (santāna, 流) and without any real substance (antmakaò, 無 我) in order to follow the Buddha’s teaching – the Law of Causation (Prat­tya-samutpāda, 緣 起, 因 緣 生 起), to get rid of attachment (rāga, 貪), hatred (dveãa, 瞋) and delusion (moha, 痴) and enlightenment. Therefore, here we should have a proper look at what we call the true meanings of H­nayna and Mahyna in order to consider them as brothers in the same family of Buddhism just as Beatrice Lane Suzuki in Mahyna Buddhism suggested: “Are we not losing ourselves in a forest of brambles when we spend so much time over the problem of the historicity of H­nayna or Mahyna? Why not accept both as representations of the same truths, and take that one to ourselves which is best suited to our own minds?”[151]

And as far as the usage of the Arahanta ideal in H­nayna and the Bodhisattva ideal in Mahyna is concerned, there are some ideas which we should consider.

D.T Suzuki in this context points out as follows:

“…As Buddhism is a religion and as every religion has its practical and social side, without which it will lose its reason of existence, the LaÏkvatra also prepares the Bodhisattva for his mission as one of the members of a co-operative life. In fact, this is what distinguishes the Mahyna from the H­nayna, for the latter’ s object of spiritual discipline does not extend beyond his own interest, attainment of Arhantaship, a solitary saintly life…”[152]

Har Dayal said that or “Arahan too self-centered”, or “They were indifferent to the duty of teaching”, or “The coldness and aloofness of the arhats led to a movement in favour of the old gospel of ‘saving all creatures’. The Bodhisattva ideal can be understood only against this background of a saintly and serene, but inactive and indolent monastic Order.” [153]

Or Isaline B. Horner in The early Buddhist Theory in Man Perfected expressed that:

“Arahan has been accused of the selfishness of being intent upon his own welfare, and not giving sufficient attention to enlightenment”[154]

Har Dayal also said that the Bodhisattva ideal of the Mahyna has been regarded as a protest against the Arahanta ideal of the H­nayna. But the charge of selfishness has to be levelled not against the Arahantas but against the Theravda monks who have portrayed Arahantaship as a selfish ideal by their own behaviour and writings and thereby made a higher religious life (Brahmacariya) appear impractical.

In fact, these words are too extreme and prejudicial. How Arahanta (阿 羅 漢) who did extoll as the highest aim in the SaÏgha (僧伽), in the Buddha’s time, the jewel of emancipation, a virtually purely Superhuman Teacher of the world which has been considered as selfish, limited, lack of true spiritual fervour and altruism, small, lower than Bodhisattva ideal…here it needs to be quoted what somewhat the Buddha taught in the Book of the Kindred Sayings[155] to verify it as below:

“Throughout the seven abodes, brethren, up to the highest becoming, these are the topmost, these are the best in all the world, these Arahantas.

Thus spoke the Exalted One. The Well-farer having so said, the Teacher said this further:

“Ah, happy saints, the Arahantas! In them no craving’s seen. The ‘I’ concept is rooted up: delusion’s net is burst.

Lust-free they have attained; translucent is the heart of them.

These god-like beings, drug-immune, unspotted in the world.

Knowing the fivefold mass, they roam the seven domains of good.[156]

Worthy of praise and worthy they – sons of the Wake true-born.

The wearers of the sevenfold gem,[157] the threefold training trained.[158]

These mighty heroes follow on, exempt from fear and dread: Lords of the tenfold-potency,[159] great sages tranquilized: Best beings they in all the world; in them no craving’s seen.

They’ve won the knowledge of adept. This compound is their last.

That essence of the holy life that have they made their own. Unshaken by the triple modes, set free from birth to come. The plane of self-control they’ve won, victorious in the world. Upward or crossways or below – no lure is found in them. They sound aloud their lion’s roar ‘Supreme are they that wake’”.

(Yvat bhikkhave sattvs yvat bhavaggaò ete agg ete soææ lokasmiò yad idam arahahto ti.//

Idaò avoca Bhagav // idaò vatv Sugato athparam etad avoca satth  Sukhino vata arahanto // taÏh tesaò na vijjati //

Asmimno samucchinno // mohajlaò padlitam //

Anejanto anuppatt // cittaò tesaò anvilaò //

loke anupalitt te // brahmabhut ansav //

Pa–cakkhandhe pari––aya // sattasaddhammagocar //

pasaòsiy sappuris // putt buddthiassa oras //

Sattaratanasampann // t­su sikkhsu sikkhit //

Anuvicaranti mahv­r // pah­nabhayabherav //

Dasahaôgehi sampann // mahng samhit //

ete kho seææh lokasmiò // taÏh tesaò na vijjati //

Asekha–Ïaò uppannam // ant­mo yam samussayo //

Yo sro brahmacariyassa // tasmim aparapaccay //

Vidhsu na vikampanti // vippamutt punabbhav //

dantabh‰mim anuppatt // te loke vijitvino //

Uddhaò tiriyaò apc­naò // nandi tesaò na vijjati //

nandanti te s­handaò // Buddh loke anuttarti //).[160]

In the Book of Kindred Sayings,[161] the Buddha declared that Thera Sriputta (舍利弗) profoundly realized and understood the doctrine of Pratītysamutpda (the Dependent Origination, 緣 起, 因 緣 生 起) as He himself did. Even if Lord Buddha could put questions on the matters in seven days and nights, Thera Sriputta did not have any trouble in his answers. Furthermore, in the other Nikyas, many theras and therīs such as Mahkassapa (大 迦 葉), Mogallna (目 犍 蓮), Dhammadinna (法 那)... possessed capacities equal to the Buddha in terms of preaching, interpreting the Dhamma, or entering different stages of meditation, or performing many kinds of magical powers which proved that hundreds of his noble disciples also attained stages of spirituality equal to him and even the Buddha defined clearly that he is as an Arahanta:

“Now regarding the venerable Gotama, such is the reputation that has been noised abroad - That Blessed One is an Arahant, a fully awakened one, abounding in wisdom and goodness, happy, with knowledge of the worlds, unsurpassed as a guide to mortals willing to be led, a teacher for gods and men, a Blessed One, a Buddha” .[162]

(Taò kho pana Bhagavantaò Gotamaò evaò kalyÏo kittissado abhuggato: ‘Iti pi so Bhagav arahaò sammsambuddho vijj-caraÏa-sampanno sugato loka-vik‰ anuttaro purisa-dhamma-srath­ setth deva-manussnaò buddho bhagav).[163]        

The term Arahanta is a standard epithet of the Buddha, we also find that in some places the term ‘Buddha’ is an epithet of the Arahanta. In one gth section of the Majjhima Nikya we find a poetical discussion of what it means to be an Arahanta:

“Who knows his former habitations and sees heaven and the sorrows ways,

Who has attained destruction of births, accomplished by super-knowledge, a sage is he.

Who knows his mind is quite pure, freed from every attachment,

Who has got rid of birth and dying, in the Brahma-faring whole is he.

Who is master of all states of mind, such a one Awake is called”. [164]

(Pubbenivsaò yo vedi Atho jtikkhayaò patto, Cittaò visuddhaò jnti pah­najtimaraÏo prag‰ sabbadhammnaò saggpga– ca passati abhi––  vosito muni muttaò rgehi sabbaso brahmacariyassa keval­ Buddho tdi pavuccat­ti).[165]

Or in the Book of the Kindred Sayings the Buddha does not make any statement differentiating between Himself and an Arahanta as follows:

“The Tathgata, Brethren, who being arahant, is fully enlightened, he it is who doth cause a way to arise which had not arisen before; who doth bring about a way not brought about before; who doth proclaim a way not proclaimed before; who is the knower of a way, who understand a way, who is skilled in a way. And now, brethren, his disciples are wayfarers who follow after him. That, brethren, is the distinction, the specific feature which distinguishes the Tathgata who, being arahant, is fully enlightened, from the brother who is freed by insight”.[166]

(Tathgato bhikkhave arahaò sammsambuddho anuppannassa maggassa uppdet asa–jatassa maggassa sa–jnet anakkhtassa maggassa akkht magga––u òaggavid‰ maggakovido // Maggnug ca bhikkhave etarahi svak viharanti pacchsamanngat //

Ayaò kho bhikkhave viseso aya adhipplyoso idaò NnlaraÏaò Tathgatassa arahato sammsambuddhassa panuavimuttena bhikkhuna ti //).[167]

The Buddha and Arahanta are, in every significant sense, identical in terms of spiritual achievement. As a very genaral rule, this seems to be the position found in the oldest sections of the Sutta piæaka.

In the book Buddhist Images of Human Perfection, Nathan Katz showed out that:

“The pa––vimutto Arahant is said to be equal to the Buddha in terms of spiritual attainment, as they have both completely overcome the sav”.[168]

The Milindapa–ha[169] speaks of arahans outshining all other bhikkhus (毘丘), overwhelming them in glory and splendour, because they are emancipated in heart. Arahanship is called the jewel of emancipation.

The commentary of AsaÏga (無 著) also puts forth the same kind of idea of Theravda Buddhism where the Boddhisattva after having attained Enlightenment (bodhi, 菩 提) becomes an Arhant, a Tathgata (如 來), i.e. Buddha, (佛     陀).[170] That is to say nobody is beyond the stage of Arahantaship, the Arahanta ideal should be the ideal life of Buddhism which has truly originated from the enlightenment of the Buddha and is acknowledged by Him as the highest spiritual stage in His teachings.

And return to Mahyna part, we can conclude that to meet the potential of association with the contemporary knowledge and need of people at all times, Mahyna was formed and developed out. And it is Mahyna played a main and important role in arising the new doctrine of Bodhisattva in Sanskrit and Chinese sources which succeeded in the Bodhisatta concept in Pli Nikya, to which Edward Conze has said that the two great contributions which the Mahyna had made to human thought were the creation of the Bodhisattva ideal and the elaboration of the doctrine of “Emptiness”.[171]

The New Concept of Buddhahood (佛 陀)

In the original Buddhist texts, the Buddha is only a human being like us but he realized the real nature, the truth of existence of men and things by his own efforts. But with the passage of time, the Buddha was soon idealized, spiritualized and universalized. The conception of Buddhahood was widened and elaborated under the circumstances in India where was influenced by Hindu theology and metaphysics. The Buddha is now no longer historical, he is the object of religious devotion, he is eternal, multiplied, immortalized, deified, spiritualized, universalized and unified.

The Lalitavistara (神 通 遊 戲 經) speaks of koæis (koæis)[172] of Buddhas, as does also the Saddharma-Puϯarīka Sūtra (妙 法 蓮 花 經). The SuvarÏa-prabhsa Sūtra (金光明經) tells us of ‘thousands’, while the Sukhvatī Vyūha (無 量 壽  經) estimates their exact number at 81 koæi-niyuta-±ata-sahasrÏi (81 million niyutas)[173] or “The Buddhas are like the sands on the banks of the Ganges”. Each Buddha has his Buddha-kãetra    (佛 剎, field), which he guides and ‘ripens’ in spirituality. A kãetra (剎)[174]consists of many worlds and universes, with their heavens, purgatories, earths, devas (諸 天), pretas (餓 鬼), human beings (人) and animals (畜 生). A Buddha, who appears on this earth or in any other world, can never cease to exist. Gautama Buddha (瞿 曇 佛) also lives for ever (sad sthita¾), the Buddhas are immortal. A Buddha’s duration of life is unlimited and immeasurable.[175] Buddhas are also superhuman (lokottara) and deificated in all their actions, even during their earthly lives. He eats, drinks, and takes medicine in illness only in order to conform to the ways of the world as he is really not subject to hunger, thirst, disease, or any human needs and infirmities. His body is not formed by the physical union of his reputed parents, and he is born as a child merely in order to act like ordinary human beings.

If a Buddha is immortal and superhuman, his physical body cannot represent his real nature. He must therefore be essentially a spiritual Being, who either assumes a human form (incarnation) as an avatra (無 量) or shows an unreal physical body to the people for their edification. In his created body (Rūpa kāya, 色 身) or Nirmna kya (應 身/化 身),[176] he can appear anywhere in the universe to spread Dharma (法). In contradistinction to the r‰pa-kya, the Mahyanists speak of a Buddha’s dharma-kya (法 身, cosmic, spiritual Body). A Buddha is the embodiment of dharma, which is his real Body. He is also identified with all the constituents of the universe (form, thought, etc). It is the same as the Absolute Reality (Tathatā, 真 如), which is also one and indivisible for the entire Universe. It is immutable and undifferentiated. If a Buddha’s real body is the cosmic Absolute, then it follows that all Buddhas are spiritually united in the dharma-kya (法 身). “All Buddhas are one,” declares the Mahyna SūtrlaÏkra (大 乘 大 莊 嚴 經).[177] Buddhahood, which belongs to the realm of Freedom and Perfection (anāsrave dhātu, 無 漏 界), unites them all, as they have one Wisdom and one Aim. A Buddha also possesses a Body of Bliss or Enjoyment, which is radiant and glorious, and bears thirty-two special marks and eighty minor signs (sambhoga-kāya, 報 身). It is the result of the Merit, which a Buddha has acquired by his good deeds during many aeons and whatever sermons he gives in the Mahyna Sūtras (大  乘 經) are given in this capacity. The world he sees, the events taking place in connection with his appearance and the language he uses are all radiations from his Sambhogakya.

Thus, the conception of Buddhahood (佛陀) was developed to its ultimate conclusion in universal pan-Buddhism (as distinct from Pantheism) soon after Gautama Buddha’s death.

It was continued and intensified by the MahsÏghikas, the Vetulyakas, the Andhakas and other Buddhist sects. They perhaps also thought and felt that so wise and virtuous a man as Gautama Buddha (瞿曇佛) could not end in blank nothingness. They transformed him into a living, immortal, powerful and gracious deva. They also bestowed on him all the mystical attributes of the impersonal Brahman (梵 天) of the Upanisads (幽 杷 尼 色). His humanity, his physical body and his death were therefore denied or thrown into the background, and he was endowed with the sambhoga-kya (報 身) and the dharma-kya (法 身). The Mahynists borrowed and assimilated the entire theology and metaphysics of Hinduism, and then evolved their impressive and comprehensive conception of the Buddha. The life of Gautama was the foundation of the edifice: the other sects supplied the material for the superstructure.

Then as the time passed on, as the Hindus could not love or adore the metaphysical Brahman of the Upaniãads but needed deities of flesh and blood for their cult, so the Buddhists too could not approach the idealized and transcendental Buddha of the Mahyna with prayer and worship. Such a concept of Buddha again became an unsuitable and unattractive object for the pious Buddhist’s bhakti (信 心, devotion, faith, love), because he had become too great, vast, nebulous, impersonal and incomprehensible for such relations. The Mahynists turned in their need to the earlier history of Gautama Buddha, when he was not the remote metaphysical Buddha, but only a charitable, patient and wise Bodhisattva, a married citizen and a denizen of this work-day world. As a Bodhisattva, he had helped many men and women with gifts of wealth and knowledge. He was a more humane and lovable figure at that stage of his career. The pious worshippers could pray to a Bodhisattva for health, wealth and mundane blessings, and that was all that they really wanted. The Bodhisattvas were thus chosen for worship and adoration in order to satisfy the needs of the devout and pious Buddhists. The Buddhists invented their class of saints (Bodhisattvas) chiefly by personifying the different virtues and attributes of Gautama Buddha’s personality.  They also took up certain epithets that were applied to Gautama Buddha, and converted them into the names of some Bodhisattvas.

Bhakti or Devotion (信 心)

The Encyclopaedia of Buddhism[178] defines the term bhakti from the root bhaj, which originally means, to divide, to share and which later developed to mean, to serve, to adore, and to love.

Scholars, who uphold that bhakti is of Buddhistic origin, consider the term saddh generally translated as faith, to be the precursor of bhakti. But there is no substantial evidence to prove that bhakti evolved from saddh. The term saddh, in Buddhist scriptures, could mean faith, trust, belief or confidence. Faith in the Buddha is repeatedly declared to be essential for the spiritual development of the monks and the laymen. The disciples of a wise and virtuous teacher must love and revere him personally. It is Personality that secures the triumph of a religious movement, the dogmas and precepts shine in the light reflected from Personality. Bhakti cannot arise without the historical fact of the life and work of a great man. So, bhakti accepted, is not a belief in a system, but a love directed to a great person.[179]

For this reason, it could not have originated among the meta-physicians of the Upanisads, as A. B. Keith has assumed.[180] There was no great man like Buddha or Mahāvira among them. Apart from the irresistible influence of Personality, the absence of any other objects of adoration led the Buddhists to concentrate their love and devotion on the Buddha. They did not hold the ancient devas in high esteem. They could not have any devotional feeling for them or pray to them. The devas were regarded by the Buddhists as glorified supermen, who enjoyed bliss and power, but who were subject to the law of death and rebirth and needed wisdom and liberation as much as the human beings on earth. They were far inferior to the Buddha in character and knowledge. As the Buddhists despised the devas, they put the Buddha in their place.

Owing to the change that it underwent, the Buddha’s personality lost its human conception and it ceased to attract the attention of the lay devotees. This as well as the intention to popularize Buddhism in order to save it from the complete disappearance, made the Mahynists evolve and develop the Bodhisattva doctrine which subsequently overshadowed the Buddha-personality. In order to counteract the concept of deities in Hinduism the Mahynists attributed divine qualities to Bodhisattva ideal. The belief in the efficacy of the transfer of merits gave an impetus to this new doctrine. With the development of the Bodhisattva, the influence of the bhakti cult (信 心) found free access to Buddhism.

In Mahyna, the feature of bhakti did never evolve to be a separate, independent school, but remained of one or the other schools of Mahyna Buddhism. Even the worship of Avalokite±vara (觀 世 音 菩 薩) and Amitbha (阿 彌 陀 佛) existed as feature shared by many schools. The real development of this worship into an independent school took place, not in India but in China and Japan.

In short, the deep-rooted feeling of bhakti found an outlet in the invention and adoration of the Bodhisattvas. For that reason, Har Dayal has said that “The Bodhisattva doctrine was the necessary outcome of two movements of thought in early Buddhism, viz. the growth of bhakti (devotion, faith, love) and the idealisation and spiritualisation of the Buddha.”[181]

The External Influences of Other Traditions

Brāhmanism: the Bhāgavatas and Öaivas

Although the idea of bhakti originated among the Buddhists and was adopted in self-defence by the Hindus, yet the new sects, which arose after the fifth century B.C., exercised a profound influence on the further development of Buddhism. They established the cults of certain devas and deified heroes, and the Buddhists were compelled to endow their Buddhas and Bodhisattvas with similar attributes and powers.

The Bhgavata sect, which was probably founded in the second century B.C in the western part of India, inculcated the worship of Bhgavata (帗 伽 聽, the Adorable) as the supreme Deity and was almost monotheistic. In course of time, the Bhgavatas came to identify Vsudeva (帕 子 仙) with Bhāgavat and the ancient sun-god ViãÏu. The existence of a sect of Vsudeva-worshippers at this period explains certain features of the Bodhisattva doctrine. Historical evidence establishes the existence of the powerful bhakti-cult of the worshippers of Vsudeva in the centuries that followed the expansion of Buddhism.The Öaiva (濕 婆) sect was making progress during the same period. Öiva is also praised in the Mahabharata, but the chronology of that immense poetical encyclopaedia is uncertain.[182] The Öaivas are mentioned along with the Vsudeva-worshippers in the Milinda-pa–ha (p. 191, lines 6 ff., “siva vsudev ghanik”). The sect of the P±upatas who worshipped Öiva existed in the second century B.C., if not earlier.[183] Megasthenes wrote that the Indians also worshipped ‘Dionysos’: “The Indians worship the other gods, and Dionysos himself in particular, with cymbals and drums... he instructed the Indians to let their hair grow long in honour of the god.”[184] This ‘Dionysos’ has been identified with Öiva. The cumulative evidence of all these historical data points to the existence of a vigorous sect of Öiva-worshippers, who had chosen the ancient Rudra and Isāna of the Veda as their deity.

These sects were soon controlled and assimilated by the BrhmaÏa priests (婆 羅 門), who were exerting themselves to stem the tide of Buddhism. The great revival of Brhmanism   (婆 羅 門 教) under the ÖuÏga dynasty in the second century B.C. after the fall of the Maurya (孔 爵) dynasty in 184 B.C.,[185] obliged the Buddhists to develop new methods of popular propaganda. The family of the ÖuÏgas whose principal religion was Brhmanism, became the principal rulers of India. Under Puãyamitra (C.187-151 B.C),[186] Buddhism underwent a savage persecution. With the support of the rulers of the ÖuÏga dynasty, Brhmanism started making an attempt to consolidate and spread its strength and power by setting itself on a campaign of great revival.

According to Nalinaksha Dutt,[187] Har Dayal[188] and Charles Eliot,[189] Brhmanism began a new policy of its doctrinal propagation by presenting itself as a universal religion, instead of having been the religion of a privileged class in a special region, or the one and only religion of India as a whole. As E. W. Hopkins has pointed out, the second century B.C. was a critical period in the history of Buddhism.[190]  With the cult of Bhgavata of Brhmanism patronised by the ÖuÏgas,[191] the cult of sun-worship,[192] the Bhakti etc… took a chance in making their real revival in Indian society, which actually attracted masses into its fold. Such tendencies must have been the key elements pushing towards the outburst of the worship of heavenly Bodhisattvas as Buddhist counterparts of Brhmanic deities, their incarnation… in the Buddhist community.

Zoroastrianism: Fire-worship

Zoroastrianism, the religion of ancient Persia, may also have contributed to the rise of the Bodhisattva doctrine in India, because it supplied a great deal of mythology to Judaism. Its fravashis and amesa-spentas bear a certain resemblance to the Bodhisattvas. The six amesa-spentas (immortal, holy or beneficent ones, archangels), who are associated with Ahura-Mazdah, are personified abstractions, and the chief Bodhisattvas are also really personifications of Wisdom and Love… Zoroastrianism influenced the development of Buddhism more directly through the cult of sun-worship, which was introduced into India in the third century B.C.[193] Sun-worship is referred to in the Dīgha-Nikya (i, 11, line 2l), and it is ridiculed in the Adiccupatthna-jtaka (Jtaka ii, pp. 72-3).  Many familiar names of the Mahyna are suggestive of sun-worship, e.g. Amitbha (無量光, Measureless Light), Vairocana (毘 爐 枷 那 佛, the Brilliant One)… It is probable that they established an organised sect of sun-worshippers on the basis of Zoroastrianism and the ancient Indian domestic rites of sun-worship. The solar myth penetrated deep into every phase of Buddhism, and many Bodhisattvas were endowed with solar attributes.

Accent Religion: Nga-worship

Here, it is important to mention the point made by N. Dutt when he suggests that in spite of all the patronage of A±oka and the glorious accounts of the popularity of Buddhism in Kashmir, the fact remains that Buddhism had to face a strong opposition in the country from the established beliefs in Nga-worship being the practice of ancient Indian before the appearance of Buddhism. Without adverting to the antiquity of the Nga-worship, it may be safe to state that Nga beliefs were quite common in India when Buddhism made its appearance and that is the reason why the legends of Ngas and their conversion by Buddha occur occasionally in the Buddhist texts. The Buddhist chronicles also speak of Kashmir as a land of lakes under the control of the Ngas. They are generally associated with watery and mountainous regions, and so it is quite likely that Kashmir should be called a land of Nga-worshippers.[194]

It is, nevertheless, very important to keep in mind that there could not be any influence of Christianity or Islam in the initial development of the Bodhisattva ideal because the birth of Christianity and advent of Islam into India took place at a later stage. Christianity certainly influenced the development of Mahyna Buddhism at a later period and was also influenced by Buddhism to some extent during its early phase because there were several channels of communication between the Buddhist and the Christian countries of Western Asia, Africa and Europe. The Buddhists could establish intercourse with the Christians in Alexandria, Southern India and Central Asia. The Gnostics, who were numerous in the Roman Empire in the early centuries of the Christian era, borrowed some ideas from Buddhism. The existence of a Christian community in Southern India during the sixth century is attested by the Egyptian writer, Kosmas’ Indikopleustes.[195]

Greek art

Kozen Mizuno in ‘Basic Buddhist Concepts’ agreed with Har Dayal that Greek art played a role in the development of this concept. Before Kanishka’s reign,[196] Northwest India had been the birth place of the Gandhra (干 陀 羅) school of Buddhist sculpture which influenced by Greek statuary, revolutionized Indian sculpture. There were such symbols as stylized renderings of the Buddha footprints, the wheel of law, the Bodhi tree under which he attained enlightenment. And the Buddhists invented their pantheon of Bodhisattvas in order to worship half-divine half-human beings such as the Hellenic gods were.[197]

Persion Religion and Culture

According to Har Dayal, the Bodhisattva doctrine may well have been influenced by foreign cultures, because, according to him, features of Persian culture[198] have shown their characteristics in the art at the lion-capital of Asoka’s pillar at Sarnath (鹿 苑), and also in the architecture of the palaces at Pataliputra (華 侍 成). Persia was a great empire from the time of Cyrus to the invasion of Alexander, and Darius I annexed the valley of the Indus about 518 B.C.[199] Persian culture continued to exercise considerable influence on the nations of Asia during many centuries. Persia and India were close neighbours, and the Persians were in many respects more advanced in civilization than the Indians, so India certainly borrowed much from Persia during this period and Zoroastrianism, the religion of ancient Persia, may also have contributed to the rise of the Bodhisattva doctrine in India.

Propaganda among New Tribes

During the centuries that followed Alexander’s invasion of India, the northwestern part of India was repeatedly overrun by foreign invaders like the Pahlavas, the Cakas and the Kusans. It was a real meeting-place of nations. This international atmosphere favoured the introduction of new ideas in Buddhism.

The Buddhists grappled with the task of converting these sturdy and semi-barbarous tribes to their faith. Polytheism had to be tolerated and even rendered attractive. The Bodhisattva doctrine exalted Love and Activity and peopled the heavens with gracious Beings, who could be worshipped.  It is likely that some deities of the new tribes were adopted as Bodhisattvas.

The Concept of Bodhisattva in Mahyna S‰tras

It is very difficult to regard the precise chronological brackets of the Bodhisattva (菩 薩) doctrine with many ideas. The Encyclopaedia of Buddhism[200] is of opinion that the Bodhisattva doctrine has taken shape around 1^st century B.C. with the statement below:

“Round about the first century A.C. the luxuriant fancy of India began to invent and multiply divinities much in the fashion of the Øgvedic poets and the Buddhist theologians of the time were no exception. When personalities of Öiva and ViãÏu were taking shapes in Hinduism, the figures of divine Bodhisattva were taking shape in Mahyna Buddhism.”

In the opinion of Har Dayal[201] the Bodhisattva doctrine probably originated in the 2nd century B.C.: “We may regard the second century B.C as the chronological starting-point for the development of the Bodhisattva”. N. Dutt[202] observes it to be around the 2^nd or 1^st century B.C. Nakamura[203] and A.K Warder [204] have maintained that Bodhisattvayna (菩 薩 乘) might have come into existence probably towards the beginning of the Christian era. The Encyclopaedia of Religion[205] holds that the concept of Bodhisattva apparently emerged between the beginning of the first century B.C and the middle of the first century AD… Such are several representative ideas on the chronology of Bodhisattva doctrine accepted and used by scholars. It may, however, be supposed that these views actually refer to the outburst of the worship of Bodhisattva ideal (菩 薩 理 想) assignable to the development of Bodhisattva philosophy in Mahyna (佛 教 大 乘).

The concept of Bodhisattva as depicted in the Majjhima Nikya was compiled around the fourth and third centuries B.C.[206] The admission of Gotama Siddhrtha of being a Boddhiasattva before enlightenment should be taken to be a simple statement of the Bodhisattva ideal in the Pli Nikya: “…before awakening, while I was still the Bodhisattva …”.[207] In this, we meet with the idea of transdevelopment of the Arahat ideal to the Bodhisattva ideal.

According to Bimala Churn Law, his opinion the chronology of the Pli canonical literature should be classified as follows:

1. The simple statements of Buddhist doctrine now found, in identical words, in paragraphs or verses recurring in all books.
2. Episodes found, in identical words, in two or more of the existing books.
3. The S­la, the PryaÏa group of sixteen poems.
4. D­gha, Vol. I, the Majjhima, the Saòyutta, the AÏguttara Nik
5. The D­gha, Vol. II and III, ... the collection of 500 Jat”[208]

The subjoined division relating to some transformation of the chronological order of the Dīgha Nikya, Vol. II and III supposed to be composed after the Majjhima Nikya, the term ‘Bodhisattva’, which might well have been pressured by the outburst of the new Buddhist Schools, especially the Mahsnghika (大 眾 部)[209] school with its philosophical progress because of disagreements with the Theravda sect about the Vinaya as well as doctrine, particularly in term of Buddhology,[210] is now deified in the good omens and extraordinary characteristics when “the Bodhisatta descending from the Tusita group entering his mother’s womb”.[211] The second landmark in the development of the Bodhisattva ideal is the deification of the portrait of seven Buddhas by manifesting the descent of the Bodhisattva from the Tuãita paradise entering his mother’s womb. The Buddha’s descent on earth is the third step of development in the Buddhist teaching.

The profusely illustrated pictures of the Bodhisattva as found in the Jtakas are assumed to be the fourth phase of the philosophical progress of the doctrine. It is a genuinely strong religious trend reclining towards a mythological scope of Bodhisattva doctrine. It is not easy to analyse the revolution in Buddhism at the time which is often told to be caused by a marked decline in the order and exhaustion of its Arhat ideal for preaching the Dharma. That may be the reason Isaline B Horner in The Early Buddhist Theory of Man Perfected [212] stated that:

 “First, there is the original and positive element of the altruism of the arahan in foregoing his meditations in order to give counsel and instruction to other members of the Order and to the laity; and secondly, there is the increasing amount of solitude sought by the later arahants, which was possibly due to the loss of the inspiring presence and example of the Master”.

The compilation of Jtakas has been a unique experiment in the history of Buddhism which took deep root in popular sentiment and evoked great applause among men of all countries of the world to accept the doctrine. It thus did not remain confined to Indian masses. For centuries, the ideal of Bodhisattva manifesting the power of the Buddha has been inspiring men to live up to the ideal of the Buddha in making the life of the beings peaceful and happy. That is to say, during a period of about four centuries from the 6^th to the 3^rd century B.C, Buddhology of the Pli Nikyas with its realistic conception of the Buddha, that of Sarvastivada (一 切 有 部) with its two kinds of Buddhakya (佛 身), viz., Dharmakya (法 身) and Rupakya (色 身) has still centred around and has revered the enlightenment ideal of Buddhism, and has smoothly run among the Buddhist circles without much transformation. In the fifth phase of the doctrinal dissemination a strong commotion had been felt across the world to usher into a permanent stage of philosophical contention and unequivocal growth of the meditative trends and practices based on manifestations of the divine. The preceptors genuinely looked into the affair of men benefiting them by invocations of gods and goddesses that were adored by all.

The double Equipment characteristic of Knowledge (j–āna-sambhāra, 智 資) and Merit (puôya-sambbhāra, 福 資) of the Buddha are deified as Bodhisattva Ma–ju±ri (文 殊 師 利 菩 薩) and Avalokite±vara (觀 世 音 菩 薩) respectively. In the Mahyna, Wisdom is considered to be somewhat more important than Mercy and is invoked in the opening verses of several treatises, and it has been praised in the Saddharma-Puϯar­ka (妙 法 蓮 花 經). The glorification of Wisdom reaches its climax in the writings of the Mdhyamika school (中 論) of philosophy, which was founded by Ngrjuna in the second century A.D. Wisdom (Praj–ā, 智 慧) is extolled ad nauseam, while Mercy (karūÏā, 慈 悲) is not discussed in detail. But the later Mahyna emphasises Mercy more than Wisdom. It is emotional rather than argumentative.

It sometimes seems to ignore and discard Wisdom altogether, as when it declares that karūÏa is the one thing needful for a Bodhisattva. As this ideal gains ground, the Bodhisattva Avalokite±vara (觀 世 音 菩 薩) increases in importance till he becomes the supreme and unique Bodhisattva. The Mahyna slowly passes from the ascendancy of Ma–ju±rī (文 殊 師 利 菩 薩) to the reign of Avalokite±vara (Lord of Mercy) who is considered as Lord of Compassion (慈 悲 的 王).

The early Mahyna teaches that altruistic activity is one of the means of attaining Enlightenment, which is the goal. But the later Mahyna seems to forget even that far-off destination and prefers to loiter on the way. A Bodhisattva need not be in a hurry to win Bodhi and become a Buddha, as he can help and succour all living beings more effectively during his mundane career as a Bodhisattva. This idea also resulted in the subordination of the Buddhas to the Bodhisattvas. There is a marked tendency to regard Altruism as an end in itself. Avalokite±vara does not seem to think seriously of becoming a Buddha. In the two great Bodhisattvas — Avalokiteśvara and Ma–ju±rī, one can very well see the personifications of kindness / compassion and knowledge / wisdom respectively. They invite comparison with the Zoroastrian Amesha Spentas and with the Christian archangels. With such developments in Budhological realm, it is but natural that the number of Bodhisattvas became virtually endless. In fact, the important Mahyna scriptural texts like the Saddharma-puϯarīka Sūtra (妙 法 蓮 花 經), Avataòsaka Sūtra (華 嚴 經) and so on provide a very long list of such Bodhisattvas and in essence, when the Bodhisattvas could not be named or designated, the compilers of those s‰tras simply refered to those Bodhisattvas in millions, rather innumerable.[213]

In addition to Avalokiteśvara  (觀 世 音 菩 薩) and Ma–ju±rī (文 殊 師 利 菩 薩), there are other important figures like Asita (who has been prophesied by Śkyamuni Buddha (釋 迦 牟 尼  佛) to be the Maitreya Buddha (彌 勒 佛), Samantabhadra (普 賢 菩 薩), Mahsthmaprpta (大 勢 至 菩 薩) and Kãitigarbha (地 藏 菩 薩) and so on and so forth, who have become important not only in India, but also in the Far East. These six Bodhisattvas along with €kśagarbha (虛 空 藏 菩 薩) and VajrapāÏī (金 剛 手 菩 薩), form a group of eight Bodhisattvas (菩 薩) who have become more famous than the others. These and many others are worshipped both in the form of icons and through various methods of spiritual sdhans (practices) especially by the Mahāyāna Buddhists. However, we should remember the fact that the Bodhisattvas in Mahyna Buddhism are not historical figures, but they are the enlightened ones from other worlds. They are also manifestations of the supreme power of the Buddha. It is a known fact that in all religious systems there are some kinds of symbolic figures which are prayed for granting wishes and are practices for being awaken.

A Bodhisattva is a person in the school of the elders who is desirous of acquiring the characteristics of a perfect being, the enlightened-one. It appears as such in the Pli Nikyas. The accomplishment of such a state makes him content. But the ideal of Mahyna induces him to greater effort based on dynamic activity to help the other beings attain ultimate bliss; before that he does not lay ore to save beings from the state of suffering. Not satisfied with his own mitigation of desire some actions that make him subjected to malice and all kinds of cravings, he strives up on helping all other beings to come over the affray.

The Meaning and Status of Mahāsattva (摩 訶 薩)

It will be in the fitness of things if a special mention is made to Mahyna S‰tras (大 乘 經) in order to show the meaning and status of Mahsattva, because the term Bodhisattva (菩 薩) is often coupled with Mahsattva (大 人, Great Being).

‘Mah’ (大) means ‘great’ and ‘sattva’ (情) means either ‘being’ or ‘courage’. Ngrjuna (龍 樹) gives a number of reasons why Bodhisattvas are called ‘great beings’. It is because they achieve a great work, stand at the head of a great many beings, activate great friendliness and great compassion, save a great number of beings. The Tibetans translate Mahsattvas (摩 訶 薩) as ‘great spiritual hero’ and their aspirations are truly on a heroic scale. They desire to discipline all beings everywhere, to serve and honour all the Buddhas everywhere, and to purify all the Buddha-fields everywhere. They want to retain firmly in their minds all the teachings of all the Buddhas, to have a detailed knowledge of all the Buddha-fields to comprehend all the assemblies which anywhere gather around a Buddha, to plunge into the thoughts of all beings, to remove their defilements and to fathom their potentialities.[214]

In the beginning of the Aãæashasrikā Prajñ pramit (八 天 頌 若 波 羅 密 經), the Lord Buddha explained the meaning of great being (Mahāsattva, 摩 訶 薩), when Subhūti (須 菩 提) asked about it. The Lord says that a Bodhisattva (菩 薩) is called ‘a great being’ in the sense that he will demonstrate Dharma so that the great errors should be forsaken — such erroneous views as the assumption of a self, a being, a living soul, a person, of becoming, of not becoming of annihilation, of eternity, of individuality, etc.[215] The Saddharmapuϯarika (妙 法 蓮 花 經) and the Vajracchedik praj–pramit Sūtras (金 剛 般 若 波 羅 密 經) say that Mahsattvas also have good qualities and method of practice pramit (波 羅 密) as Bodhisattvas (菩 薩) and “…who under many hundred thousands of Buddhas had planted the roots of goodness.” [216]

In other words, Mahsattva is like Bodhisattva who will be able to eliminate all his bad karmas (業) and sufferings and will show the emancipation way to all beings with all skills by his deep compassion. However, in Pli Nikyas, we do not find the word Mahsattva, but in some Mahyna s‰tras this term is used quite frequently like Bodhisattva and also often both terms appear together as in the Saddarmapuϯarika S‰tra (妙 法 蓮 花 經), MahāparinirvÏa Sūtra (大 般 涅 槃 經)… for example the Bodhisattva Mahsattva Ma–ju±rī (文 殊 師 利 菩 薩 摩 訶 薩), the Bodhisattva Mahsattva Avalokite±vara (觀 世 音 菩 薩 摩 訶 薩), the Bodhisattva Mahsattva Mahsthma-prpta (大 勢 至 菩 薩 摩 訶 薩), the Bodhisattva Mahsattva Nityodyukta (常 精 進 菩 薩 摩 訶 薩), the Sadparibhūta Bodhisattva (常 不 輕 菩 薩 摩 訶 薩), the Bodhisattva Mahsattva Aniksiptadhura (不 休 息 菩 薩 摩 訶 薩), the Bodhisattva Mahsattva  RatnapÏi (寶 掌 菩 薩 摩 訶 薩), the Bodhisattva Mahsattva Bhaiãajyarja (藥 王 菩 薩 摩 訶 薩), the Bodhisattva Mahsattva Pralna±ūra (勇 施 菩 薩 摩 訶 薩), the Bodhisattva Mahsattva Ratnacandra (寶 月 菩 薩 摩 訶 薩), the Bodhisattva Mahsattva Ratnaprabha (寶 光 菩 薩 摩 訶 薩), the Bodhisattva Mahsattva PūrÏacandra (滿 月 菩 薩 摩 訶 薩), the Bodhisattva Mahsattva Mahvikrmin (大 力 菩 薩 摩 訶 薩), the Bodhisattva Mahsattva Anantavikrmin (無 量 力 菩 薩 摩 訶 薩), the Bodhisattva Mahsattva Trailokyavikrmin (越 三 界 菩 薩 摩 訶 薩), the Bodhisattva Mahsattva Bhadrapla (賢 首 菩 薩 摩 訶  薩), the Bodhisattva Mahsattva Maitreya (彌 勒 菩 薩 摩 訶 薩), the Bodhisattva Mahsattva Ratnkara (寶 積 菩 薩 摩 訶 薩)… and so on.[217]

The Saddharma-puϯarīka Sūtra shows the special status of Bodhisattvas who not only attempt search of Bodhi for the sake of themselves, but also devote their energy to saving all living beings. For that reason, they are named Mahsattvas, great beings.

–  &  —

CHAPTER FIVE

THE CONCEPT OF SUÑÑAT€

AS DEPICTED IN P€LI NIK€YAS

According to the Vajrachedik-praj–-pramit S‰tra (金 剛 般 若 波 羅 密 經), there are two things which are most needful to the Bodhisattva, and to his practice of wisdom: “Never to abandon all beings and to see into the truth that all things are empty”,[218] are the ones of the most profound, sublime, and influential of all Mahyna texts (大 乘 經).

Su––at, i.e., ‘emptiness’ or ‘voidness’ of all phenomena is stressed in many Mahyna scriptures, beginning with the Praj–-pramit Sūtras (般 若 波 羅 密 經), and from that becomes of paramount importance, not only to the Mādhyamika (中 論) and Yogācāra (瑜 伽 論) school in India (including all of their respective subdivisions), but to all the Mahyna schools across the geographic landscape, ancient and modern. Öūnyat (空 性) also plays a critical role in  all the Vajrayna (金 剛 乘) schools as well. Consequently, it is probably not unreasonable to cite its concept as the single most important Mahyna (大 乘) innovation. However, just like Bodhisattva (菩 薩), the concept of ։nyat (空 性) has also its seeds in the Pāli Nikyas. By analytical and empirical approach how the concept of Su––at (空) made impress on the scriptures of Pāli, we will found there are some shades of meanings illustrated as below:

Suññatā as Non-Substantiality

At first, we must give a look in the Oxford Advanced Learner’s Dictionary[219] where ‘empty’ means:

1. (a) having nothing inside

(b) with nobody in it

2. (a) empty of something, without or lacking in (a quality)

(b) without sense or purpose: empty threats, words, promises, dreams

3. hungry

And the verb of ‘empty’ means:

1. make something empty
2. (a) empty something out (into/onto) remove the contents of something and put them somewhere else.

(b) empty (from/out) of something (into/onto something)

This is the original or first meaning of Su––a (Skt. Öūnya, 空) which expresses non‑philosophic content and has the sense of ‘empty’, ‘uninhabited’and ‘useless’.

Following these significations which we understand su––a is non-substantiality as opposite of substantiality, full, material, appearance...In fact, the meaning of empty in Buddhism is very profound and sublime and it is rather difficult to cognize because not only neither something, nor figure, nor sound, nor… is empty, but also all living beings, phenomena come to existence by ‘dependent co-arising’ (Pratītyasamutpāda, 緣 起, 因 緣 生 起) is all so-called ‘emptiness’. Here, the emptiness means the true reality that has left the false thoughts or wrong beliefs. That is the reason many times the Buddha has made this statement as follows:

 “I, €nanda, through abiding in (the concept of) emptiness, am now abiding in the fulness thereof ”.[220]

(Su––atvihrenhaò, €nanda, etarahi bahulaò viharm­ti).[221]

However, in the evolution of the concept of emptiness in Pāli Nikāyas, the first meaning of empty - ‘non-substantiality’ also can be found as below:

“He sees an empty village and whatever house he may enter he finds it empty, deserted and void”.[222]

(So passeyya su––aò gmam ya––ad eve gharam paviseyya rittaka––e­va paviseyya tucchaka––eva paviseyya su––aka––eva paviseyya).[223]

or in the Dialogue of the Buddha also expressed in the same idea:

“Now there comes also a time, brethren, when, sooner or later, this world-system begins to re-evolve. When this happens the Palace of Brahma appears, but it is empty. And some being or other, either because his span of years has passed or his merit is exhausted, falls from that World of Radiance, and comes to life in the Palace of Brahma. And there also he lives made of mind, feeding on joy, radiating light from himself, traversing the air, continuing in glory; and thus does he remain-for a long period of time.”[224]

(Hoti kho so, bhikkhave, samayo yaò kadci karahaci d­ghassa addhuno accayena ayaò loko vivaææati. Vivaææamne loke su––aò Brahma-vimnaò ptu-bhavati.  Ath’ a––ataro satto yukkhay v pu––akkhay v €bhassaraky cavitv su––aò Brahma-vimnaò upapajjati. So tattha hoti manomayo p­ti-bhakkho sayaò-pabho antalikkha-caro subhaææhy­, c­raò d­ghaò addhnaò tiææhati).[225]

or in the Sutta‑nipta occurs as the following lines:

“Look upon the world as being non‑substantial, O Mogharaja, being ever so mindful. One surpasses death by uprooting belief in substantiality. Death does not get hold of him who regards the world in this way.”

(Sunnato lokam avekkhassu

Mogharja sadd sato,

attnudiææhim uhacca

evam maccutaro siy

evam lokam avekkhantam

maccurj na passati).[226]

As su––a means ‘empty’ and ‘void’ it is frequently used in the sense of ‘devoid of’ (this or that quality of character): 

“This being so, good Gotama, that fold of the sects is empty even in regard to attaining heaven.

This being the case, O Vaccha; the institution of heretics is devoid of even a person who goes to heaven”.[227]

(Evaò sante bho Gotama su––aò adun titthyatanaò antamaso sagg‰pagena p­ti.

Evam sante Vaccha su––am adun titthyatanam antamaso saggupagena).[228]

Also in the same text of Majjhima Nikya but different volume, the Buddha teaches the following valuable that:

“And what, your reverence, is the freedom of mind that is signless? As to this, your reverence, a monk, by paying no attention to any signs, entering on the concentration of mind that is signless, abides therein. This, your reverence, is called the freedom of mind that is signless. This, your reverence, is the method according to which these states are different in connotation as well as differing in denotation. And what, your reverence, is the method according to which these states are identical in connotation while being different in denotation? Attachment, your reverence, is productive of the measurable, hatred is productive of the measurable, confusion is productive of the measurable. For a monk whose cankers are destroyed, these are got rid of, cut off at the roots, made like a palm-tree stump so that they can come to no further existence in the future. To the extent, your reverence, that freedoms of mind are immeasurable, unshakable freedom of mind is shown to be their chief, for that unshakable freedom of mind is void of attachment, void of hatred, void of confusion. Attachment, your reverence, is something (obstructive), hatred is something (obstructive), confusion is something (obstructive). For a monk whose cankers are destroyed, these are got rid of, cut off at the roots, made like a palm-tree stump so that they can come to no further existence in the future. To the extent, your reverence, that freedoms of mind are naught, unshakable freedom of mind is shown to be their chief, for that unshakable freedom of mind is void of attachment, void of hatred, void of confusion. Attachment, your reverence, is productive of signs, hatred is productive of signs, confusion is productive of signs. For a monk whose cankers are destroyed these are got rid of, cut off at the roots, made like a palm-tree stump so that they can come to no further existence in the future. To the extent, your reverence, that freedoms of mind are immeasurable, unshakable freedom of mind is shown to be their chief, for that unshakable freedom of mind is void of attachment, void of hatred, void of confusion. This, your reverence, is the method according to which these states are identical in connotation while being different in denotation.”

Thus spoke the venerable Sriputta. Delighted, the venerable Koææhita the Great rejoiced in what the venerable Sriputta had said.”[229]

(Ayaò vuccat’ vuso su––at cetovimutti. Katam c’ vuso animitt cetovimutti: Idh’ viiso hhikkhu sabbanimittnaò amanasikr animittaò cetosamdhiò upasampajja viharati. Ayaò vuccat’ vuso animitt cetovimutti. Ayaò kho vuso pariyyo yaò pariyyaò gamma ime dhamm nnaææh c’ eva nnbya–jan ca.   Katamo c’ vuso pariyyo yaò pariyyaò gamma ime dhamm ekaææh, bya–janam – eva nanam: E,ago kho avuso pamanakarano, doso pamÏakaraÏo, moho pamÏakaraÏo; te kh­Ïsavassa bhikkhuno pah­n ucchinnam‰l tlvatthukat anabhvakat yatiò anuppdadhamm. Yvat kho vuao appamÏ cetovimuttiyo akupp tsaò cetovimutti aggam - akkhyati, s kho panakupp cetovimutti su––a rgena su–– dosena su–– mohena.   Rgo kho vuso ki–cano,’ doso ki–cano. Moho ki–cano, te kh­Ïsavassa bhikkhuno pah­n ucchinnam‰l tlvatthukat anabhvakat yatiò anuppdadhamm. Yvat kho vuso ki–ca–– cetovrmuttiyo akupp tsaò cetovimutti aggam - akkhyati, s kho panakupp cetovimutti su–– rgena su–– dosena su–– mohena. Rgo kho vuso nimittakaraÏo, doso nimittakaraÏo, moho nimittakaraÏo. te kh­Ïsavassa bhikkhuno pah­n ucchinnam‰l tlvatthukat anabhvakat yatiò anuppdadhamm. Yvat kho vuso animitt cetovimuttiyo akupp tsaò cetovimutti aggam akkhyati, s kho panakupp cetovimutti su–– rgena su–– dosena su–– mohena. Ayaò kho vuso pariyyo yaò pariyyaò gamma ime dhamm ekaææh, bya–janam eva nnan ti.)[230]

In accordance with this usage, the word Suññat is then employed to express the fact that there is no permanent, adjacent entity underlying the phenomena of the world of experience:

 “Su––am idam attena va attaniyena v ti”.[231]

The specific philosophic sense of the term Su––a has its beginnings here. At first the term was used in its literal adjectival sense of ‘devoid’ (of substance or anything substantial) when used with ‘atta’ or ‘attaniya’. Later the term came to be used without the other two words, namely, atta and attaniya, to convey the meaning of non‑substantiality. As a result of this absolute usage su––a, which otherwise is an ordinary word, now emerges as a technical term having a philosophic import and connotation.

In brief, the first meaning of emptiness – ‘non substantiality’ in the non-philosophy which is very concrete, easy and without abstract or general, then gradually the Buddha starts to express the emptiness in the philosophical signification.

Suññatā as the Reality

As we know, Buddhism is the way to live and liberation and Buddhists come to it by knowledge, intellectual or wisdom except belief or superstition. To advance wisdom, the Buddha has shown the four fundamental characteristics of individual existence established as anicca (Skt. Anitya, 無 常), or impermanence, dukkha (Skt. Duhkha, 苦) or suffering, anatta (Skt. anātman, 無 我) or no-selfness, i.e., non-substantiality and Su––at (Skt. Öūnyatā, 空) or emptiness. The four marks are philosophically relevant to guide us to insight the reality except the themes for moral speculation or conclusion that life is the root of suffering, radical transience, impermanence, we must not desire and phenomena around us is empty. Such a thought not only harms all of us on the way to enlightenment, but also misconstrues Buddha’s teaching purpose.

We must often reflect on the reality of ourselves and phenomena round us and look at it by our insight to attach no any bonds. The basic principle of Buddha is to be free by wisdom through the method of contemplation and cultivation.

In Pli Nikyas, Majjhima Nikya devoted two suttas for specific consideration of the way of contemplation of Su––at: Cūlla Su––ata Sutta and Mah Su––ata Sutta.

In the Cūla-Su––at Sutta, the Buddha defined the meaning of emptiness on two characters i.e. emptiness on the dwelt place and attaining of the stages of jhnas. In other word, the reflection on Su––at from the simple, concrete material, to deep, sublime essence. First of all the Buddha explained emptiness as under:

“As this palace of Migra’s mother is empty of elephants, cows, horses and mares, empty of gold and silver, empty of assemblages of men ad women, and there is only this that is not emptiness, that is to say the solitude grounded on the Order of monks”.[232]

(Seyyathpi ayaò. Migramtu psdo su––o hatthigavssavaÀavena, su––o jtar‰parajatena, su––o itthipurisasanniptena; atthi c’ev’ idaò asu––ataò yadidaò bhikkhusaòghaò paæicca ekattaò.)[233]

Thus, a monk reflects the perception of village as emptiness and attending to the perception of human beings as existence. Here, Buddha clarifies that the emptiness on the dwelt place has the meaning that when a Bhikkhu enters a village which has nothing, no elephant, cow, horse, mare, gold and silver… then he should comprehend them as emptiness. In the contrast, in the palace of Migra’s mother has something, the lecture-hall, the Order of Monks… then he should awaken exactly as its existence. This means there presents the perception of human beings except the perception of village.

The next meaning is without the perception of human beings and village except attending to solitude grounded on the perception of forest as under:

“The disturbances there might be resulting from the perception of village do not exist here, the disturbances there might be resulting from the perception of human beings do not exist here. There is only this degree of disturbance, that is to say solitude grounded on the perception of forest”.[234]

(Ye assu darath gmasa––aò paæicca, te ‘dha na santi; ye assu darath manussasa––aò paæicca, te ‘dha na santi; atthi c’ evyaò darathamatt yadidaò ara––asa––aò paæicca ekattan ti.)[235]

Likewise, he has done with the perception of the earth.

The second point of Su––at in C‰lla Su––ata Sutta relates to the stage of jhnas. There are five stages of jhnas which a monk should attain to enliven the emptiness and enjoy Nibbna as illustrated under:

“The disturbances there might be resulting from the perception of forest do not exist here, the disturbances there might be resulting from the perception of earth do not exist here. There is only this degree of disturbance, that is to say solitude grounded on (the perception of) the plane of infinite ksa”.[236]

(Ye assu darath ara––asa––aò paæicca te ‘dha na santi; ye assu darath paæhav­sa––aò paæicca te ‘dha na santi; atthi c’ evyaò darahamatt yadidaò ksna–cyatanaò paæicca ekattan ti.)[237]

Like that, he contemplates (the perception of) the plane of infinite consciousness, the plane of no-thing, the plane of neither-perception-nor-non-perception, the concentration of mind.

And in Mah Su––at Sutta, the Buddha taugh a monk who has desired to enter on an inward (concept of) Mah Su––at, must be:

“Aloof from pleasure of the senses, aloof from unskilled states of mind, entering on it abides in the first meditation…the second…the third…the fourth meditation. Even so, €nanda, does a monk steady, calm, make one-point and concentrate his mind precisely on what is inward”.[238]

(vivice’ eva kmehi vivicca akusalehi dhammehi savitakkaò savicraò vivekajaò p­tisukham paæhamajjhnaò upasampajja viharati; vitakkavicrnaò v‰pasam ajjhattaò sampasdanaò cetaso ekodibhvaò avitakkaò avicraò samdhijaò p­tisukhaò dutiyajjhanaò — tatiyajjhnaò — catutthajjhnaò  upasampajja viharati. Evaò kho, €nanda, bhikkhu ajjhattam eva cittaò saÏæhapeti sannisdeti ekodikaroti samdahati. So ajjhattaò su––ataò manasikaroti; tassa ajjhattaò su––ataò manasikaroto ajjhattaò su––atya cittaò na patkkhandati nappas­dati na santiææhati na vimuccati. Evaò santam etaò, €nanda, bhikkhu evaò pajnti: Ajjlnittaò su––ataò kho me manasikaroto ajjhattaò su––atya cittaò na pakkhandati nappas­dati na santiææhati na vimuccat­ti. Itiha tattha sampajno hoti. So bahiddh su––ataò manasikaroti; so ajjhattabahiddh su––ataò manasikaroti; so Ïa–jaò manasikaroti; tassa Ïa–jaò manasikaroto Ïa–je cittaò na pakkhandati nappas­dati na santiææhati na vimuccat­ti. Evaò santam etaò, €nanda, bhikkhu evam pajnti: €Ïa–jaò kho me manasikaroto Ïanje cittaò na pakkhandati nappas­dati na sautiææhati na vimuccat­ti. Itiha tattha sampajno hoti. Ten’, €nanda, bhikkhun tasmiò yeva purimasmiò samdhinimitte ajjhattam eva cittaò saÏæhapetbbaò sannisdetabbaò ekodiktabbaò samdahtabbaò. So ajjhattaò su––ataò manasikaroti; tassa ajjhattaò su––ataò manaaikaroto ajjhattaò su––atya cittaò pakkhandati pas­dati santiææhati vimuccati. Evaò santam etaò, €nanda, bhikkhu evam pajnti: Ajjhattaò su––ataò kho me manasikaroto ajjhattam su––atya cittaò pakkhandati pas­dati santiææhati vimuccat­ti. Itiha tattha sampajno hoti. So bahiddh su––ataò manasikaroti; bo ajjhattabahiddh su––ataò manasikaroti; so Ïa–jaò manasikaroti; tassa Ïa–jaò manasikaroto Ïa–je cittaò pakkhandati pas­dat­ santiææhati vimuccati. Evaò santam etaò, €nanda, bhikkhu evaò pajnti: €Ïa–jaò kho me manasikaroto Ïa–je cittaò pakkhandati pas­dati santiææhati vimuccat­ti. Itiha tattha sampajno hoti.)[239]

Then from attending to an inward (concept of) emptiness, he proceeds to attend an external (concept of) emptiness, and to imperturbability. And when he attains this level he knows it very well:

“This being so, €nanda, the monk comprehends thus: ‘while I was attending to imperturbability my mind was satisfied with, pleased with, set on and freed in imperturbability’. So he is clearly conscious in regard to it.”[240]

(Evaò maò sayantaò nbhijjhdomanass ppak akusal dhamm anvssavissant­ti; —itiha tattha sampajno hoti.)[241]

or in the Kindred Sayings about the Unrevealed is expressed the same idea that:

“‘Now what think you, Anurdha! Is body permanent or impermanent?

Impermanent, Lord.’

‘What is impermanet, is that weal or woe?’

‘Woe, Lord’

‘Now what is impermanent, what is woe, what is woe, what is of a nature to change, - is it proper to regard that thus: ‘This is mine. This am I. This is my self?’

‘Surely not, Lord’

‘Is feeling permanet or impermanent?’

‘Impermanent, Lord’

Is perception …are the activities…is consciousness permanent or impermanent’

‘Impermanent, Lord’

‘Now what is impermanent…is it proper to regard that thus: ‘This is mine. This am I. This is my self?’

‘Surely not, Lord’

‘Therefore, Anurdha, whatsover body, be it past, future, or present, inward or outward, subtle or gross, low or high, far or near, every body should be regarded, as it really is, by perfect insight, thus: ‘This is not mine. This am not I. This is not my self.’ Whatsoever feelings…whatsoever perception… whatsoever activities… whatsoever consciousness, be it past, future or present, inward or outward… should be so regarded, as it really is, by right insight”.[242]

(Taò kim ma––asi Anurdha r‰paò niccaò v aniccaò v aniccaò v ti. Aniccam bhante, Yam panniccaò dukkhaò v taò sukkhaò v ti Dukkham bhante. Yam panniccaò dukkhaò vipariρmadhammam kallaò nu tam samanupassituò Etam mama eso ham asmi eso me att ti .No hetani bhante. Vedan nicc v anicc v ti, Sa––, SaÏkhr, Vi––Ïaò niccam v aniccaò v ti Aniccm bhante Yam panniccaò dukkhaò v taò sukhaò v ti. Dukkham bhante. Yam panniccam dukkhaò viparinmadhammaò kallaò nu taò samanupassituò Etam mama eso ham asmi eso me att ti No hetam bhante. Tasm ti ha Anurdha yaò ki–ci r‰pam atitngata paccuppannam ajjhattam va bahiddha va olarikam va sukhumam va h’nam va panitam va yam dure eantike va sabbaò r‰paò Netam mama neso ham asmi na meso att ti evam etaò yathbh‰taò sammappa––aya daææhabba.  Y kci vedan at­tngatapaccuppann pe. Y kci sa–– Ye keci saÏkhr Yaò ki–ci vi––Ïaò at­tngatapaccuppannam ajjhattaò v bahiddh v oÀrikaò v sukhumaò v h­naò v paÏ­taò v, yaò d‰re santike v sabbaò vi––Ïaò Netam mama neso ham asmi na me so att, ti evam etaò yathbb‰tam sammappa––ya daææhabbaò)[243]

From these points, we can see Su––at (空) does not mean that all phenomena or all stages of jhnas (禪 定) are emptiness, nothing, but whatever has appeared or attained, clearly exists. And in the contrast, whatever disappears, does not achieve we must understand it is empty as it is. Here, ‘the negation’ or ‘the affimation’ are of something specific. From this, the Buddha guides us reality. Therefore, Su––at is also considered as reality.

Suññatā as Anattā (無 我)

Su––at also is understood as anatt (無 我, no-self). First of all, we keep in mind that in scriptures of Nikyas, the Buddha always expounds the doctrine of no-self (anattā) the scheme of emptiness (Suññatā, 空). Because the term of Suññatā is very abstract and difficult to grasp. But when we study more and more in the meaning of Suññatā, we recognize that Su––at also bears the idea of anatt.

In the Cūlla Suññatā and Mah Suññatā Suttanta, the Buddha once told €nanda that he often dwelt in the liberation of the void, Suññatā-vihāra when requested by Ānanda, he explained liberation of the void meant liberation through insight that discerns voidness of self and the Buddha addressed Venerable €nanda:

“Certainly, €nanda, you heard this properly, leant it properly, attended to it properly and understood it properly. Formerly I, €nanda, as well as now, through abiding in (the concept of) emptiness, abide in the fulness thereof. As this palace of Migāra’s mother is empty of elephants, cows, horses and mares, empty of gold and silver, empty of assemblages of men and women, and there is only this that is not emptiness, that is to say the solitude grounded on the Order of monks; even so, €nanda, a monk, not attending to the perception of village, not attending to the perception of human beings, attends to solitude grounded on the perception of forest. His mind is satisfied with, pleased with, set on and freed in the perception of forest. He comprehends thus: ‘The disturbances there might be resulting from the perception of village do not exist here; the disturbances there might be resulting from the perception of human beings do not exist here. There is only this degree of disturbance, that is to say solitude grounded on the perception of forest.’ He comprehends, ‘This perceiving is empty of the perception of village.’ He comprehends, ‘This perceiving is empty of the perception of human beings. And there is only this that is not emptiness, that is to say solitude grounded on the perception of forest.’ He regards that which is not there as empty of it. But in regard to what remains there he comprehends,’ That being, this is.’ Thus, €nanda, this comes to be for him a true, not a mistaken, utterly punned realisation of (the concept of) emptiness.”[244]

(Taggha te etaò, €nanda, sussutaò suggah­taò sumanasikataò s‰padhritaò. Pubbe chaò, €nanda, etarahi ca su––atvihrena bahulaò viharmi. Seyyathpi ayaò Migramtu psdo su––o hatthigavssavaÀavena, su––o jtar‰parajatena, su––o itthipurisasanniptena; atthi c’ ev’ idaò asu––ataò yadidaò bhikkhusaòghaò paæicca ekattaò; evam eva kho, €nanda, bhikkhu amanasikaritv gmasa––aò amanasikaritv manussasa––aò ara––asa––aò paæicca manasikaroti ekattaò. Tassa ara––asa––ya cittaò pakkhandati pas­dati santiææhati vimuccati.  So evaò pajnti: Ye assu darath gamasa––aò paæicca, te ‘dha na santi; ye assu darath manussasa––aò paæicca, te ‘dha na santi; atthi c’ evyaò darathamatt yadidaò ara––asa––aò paæicca ekattan ti. So: Su––am idaò sa––gataòn gmasa––yti pajnti; Su––am idaò sa––gataò manussasa––yti pajnti. Atthi c’ ev’ idaò asu––ataò yadidaò ara––asa––aò paæicca ekattan ti. Iti yaò hi kho tattha na hoti, tena taòn su––aò samanupassati; yaò pana tattha avasiææhaò hoti, Taò santaò idam atth­ti pajnti. Evam pi ‘ssa es, €nanda, yathbhucc avipallatth parisuddh su––atvakkan ti bhavati).[245]

When colloquially or non-philosophically used, Suñña applies most often to a change of situation or a change of perception, e.g., a palace of Migra’s mother has the Order of monks and at the next moment void of it; or there are now monastery, monks and nuns to be seen in the window, while after a change of the viewer’s position, only the sky is seen through the empty window. These are instances of void and emptying which are mind change in reference to the perceptual contents; they have nothing to do with the principle of Suññat as an experience of the fundamental truth in the absolute canonical sense.

Nevertheless, intellectual grasping of perceptual changes, or, in other words, understanding the changes of consciousness which are based merely on emptying the contents of perception, can also be employed didactically in instructions for meditation, as is actually done by the Buddha in his discourse, the C‰la-Suññat Sutta.

Unlike the science of psychology, Buddhist methods analyze the changes of mind, of its subjective side, and develop the skill of changing the mind at will.  For this training and analysis, there is a necessary precondition to be fulfilled: the discovery of hitherto unnoticed inner phenomena by means of bare attention. This discovery works through mindful noticing which discerns the sense experience, the feeling, the state of consciousness, and the contents of consciousness as these come and go without any interventions.

Scientific theories elicit their truth from the conspicuous phenomena, making thus the extremes, criteria for the outcomes; the Buddhist practice promotes the middle way aiming at equanimity and peace. However, there are some extreme experiences encountered by long term meditators which may be very spectacular, intense, and unusual. Some very advanced meditators experience supreme bliss, free from any emotional changes and void of conceptualizations and images. Such states of mind are sometimes connected with an intense experience of clear light. In the original tradition of practical insight meditation, these extreme experiences are called ‘imperfections of insight’ (vipassanā-upakkilesā).

The Buddha’s discourse is addressed to listeners who are familiar with certain features of his teaching, in particular with the doctrine of anatt.  Thus, for the sake of better understanding, we also have to grasp, at least roughly, the principle of anatt and some other technical terms in the Pli Nikyas (or Theravāda Canon). As a doctrinal term, Suññat refers exclusively to the Anatt doctrine.

I           n meditation practice, Suññat and Anatt are inseparable:

“Contemplation of not-self and contemplation of voidness are one in meaning and only the letter is different.” states Buddhaghosa.[246]

In enlightened experience of reality, anatt (無 我) is the wise knowledge (vijjā, 明) that there is no self; vijj is wisdom which is void of ignorance (avijjā, 無 明) splitting reality into I and not-I, mine and not-mine.  Unenlightened persons identify various parts of reality with the self, cling to them, and consequently, suffer due to the frustration of such delusional identifications. The enlightened view of reality, which is characterized by anatt, pierces all things which may be conventionally (Sammuti, Skt. SaòvÙti-satya, 俗 諦) conceived as identities and sees them ultimately (Paramāttha, Skt.Paramārtha-satya, 真 諦) as an interplay of conditions, as an interaction of different aspects, as a change of context, as a dynamic evolution of arising and ceasing — all this as originating in profound interdependence and void of any persisting core. The enlightened view of reality is void (suñña) of any identity clingings triggered by conventional concepts. There are no longer delusional percepts of stable identities; whatever exists is clearly seen as void of self (suññam attena) and as dependently arisen paticcasamuppannam (Pratītyasamutpāda, 緣 起, 因 緣 生 起).

Anatt (無 我) means that there is no self, no core, no unchangeable identity to be found in anything. Such a self (attā) is a pure construct which has a justification within the system of language. However, such a construct is misleading, for as soon as it is taken for real, it produces false thoughts and wrong beliefs which are divorced from reality and sustained only by concepts. Buddhist meditation principally uses three approaches as means for overcoming the delusion of self: [247]

1. Mindful analysis (satipatthāna, 四 念 處) of components of seemingly compact things and events, the most important;
2. Clear view or insight (vipassanā, 明 察 慧) that whatever exists arises dependent on impermanent conditions and has to dissolve and pass away;
3. Direct experience of one’s powerlessness to master (avasavattana, 空 被 支 浿) the passing phenomena.

The insightful realization of Suññat (空) and Anatt (無  我) is not only a remedy for the frustration of wrong belief, it is also a prophylaxis and emancipation from any suffering which would arise due to possible self-identification in the future. The delusion of self is apt to arise in any person who is exposed to difficult life situations, unless the enlightened wisdom of anatt has been cultivated and firmly established.

The emotional identification with whatever we perceive as supporting essentials (upādhi, 貪 生)[248] of our life is not necessarily at a conscious level so as to allow an explicit formulation of the self-view (attānuditthi, 我 見) as a rational belief. This self-delusion causes us to identify with our body, our habits, our titles, our bank account, our preferences, etc. in a pre-rational experience of the conceit ‘I am’ (asmi-māna: 我 慢, mna is a product of perception which tendentiously conceives: maññati).

For ignorant beings enslaved by the delusion of self, the struggle to maintain a selfidentity is only all too real. Those wrongs believing in identities cannot perceive reality as it is; they can react only to the concepts, which purport to represent the identities of things, and of the self. They are victims of ignorance (avijjā, 無 明) as they cannot see reality as it is. This has pathological consequences on several psychological and social levels, which grow from wrong views and prejudices.

The experience of Anatt (無 我) and Su––at (空) within the context of emancipatory mind training does not exclude the use of concepts as designations for the ultimate realities (Paramāttha-dhammā, Skt.Paramārtha-satya 真諦) seen during that very experience. Nevertheless, any concept carried by a verbal or a visual symbol is nothing more than a sign (nimitta, 相) which represents a mind-object. Signs as such are not ultimate realities; while the ultimate realities are designated by a lakkhana[249] (characteristic) and not by a nimitta. Sign can be an object of samatha meditation (觀), whereas vipassan (明 察 慧) uses the ultimate realities as its objects and is therefore characterized as animitta.

As a part of the mind-training, one learns to structure the meditative experience in terms of discerning the ultimate realities of sensory bases (āyatana, 處) such as visual object and the visual sense organ, sound and the acoustic sense-base, odour and the olfactory sense, taste and the gustatory sense, tactile object and the bodily sense of touch, and the two bases of ideation which are represented by the mind organ and the mind object (percept, idea, etc.).  All these bases are directly, introspectively observable.  Their existence is evident to any person who has normal sensory equipment.  Therefore no epistemological question regarding the inter-subjective validity of ultimate realities such as the sensory bases would be really meaningful for any normal person. However, some training is needed to sustain concentration upon any one of the yatanas — we had a first-hand experience to support this statement as we experimented with the figure and background within the field of ‘visual object’. Then it was even more difficult for us to concentrate for some time upon its subjective counterpart, the yatana ‘visual sense’. Only a mind well-trained in satipatthna meditation (四 念 處) can sustain the attention upon any of these twelve sense bases so as to experience directly that they are impermanent and void of any self.

The meditative analysis of phenomena in Buddhism is counterbalanced by methods of synthesis which reveal the relations between things and their general characteristics (lakkhana) such as impermanence, conditionality, voidness, etc. Moreover, this synthetic approach unifies the multitude of phenomena and opens up the coherence of the world to a holistic view.

The world can be transcended only by one who experiences its unity and wholeness (manasikaroti ekattam, 同作意) as the C‰la Suññt Sutta shows. It should be stressed here that all doctrinal concepts of the P1i Canon — thus also the synthetic ones — are experientially anchored in the ultimate realities; this means they always refer to some specific experiential ground (yathābhūta, 如 實). In contrast to Western science, Buddhist thought employs no hypothetical variables, no speculative constructs and no a priori assumptions. For Buddhism, the wholeness of the world is neither a product of theoretical thinking, nor a belief deduced from some dogma. Such experiential anchorage holds true for the voidness of the world as well, for the Buddha says:

“Void is the world! Void is the world! …Because it is void of a self. €nanda, or of what belongs to a self, therefore is it said ‘Void is the world!”[250]

(Su––o loko su––o loko ti…Yasm ca kho €nanda su––am attena v attaniyena v tasm Su––o loko ti vuccati).[251]

The same text of Saòyutta Nikya in the third volume expresses this idea again:

“Body, brethren, is impermanent. What is impermanent that is suffering. What is suffering, that is void of the self. What is void of the self, that is not mine, I am not it, it is not my self. That is how it is to be regarded by perfect insight of what it really is. Feeling is impermanent…likewise perception…the activities…

Consciousness is impermanent. What is impermanent is suffering. What is suffering, that is void of the self. What is void of the self, that is not mine, I am not it, it is not my self. That is how it is to be regarded by perfect insight of what it really is.

Thus seeing (the well-taught Ariyan disciple is repelled and realized)… ‘for life in these conditions there is no hereafter’ .”[252]

(R‰pam bhikkhave aniccaò, yad aniccam taò dukkhaò yaò dukkhaò tadanatt, yad anatt taò netam mama neso ham asmi na meso att ti.  Evam etaò yathabh‰taò sammappa––ya daææhabbaò. Vedan, anicc yad aniccaò taò dukkhaò yam dukkhaò tad anatt Yad anatt taò netam mama neso ham asmi na meso atttii Evam etaò yathbh‰taò sammappa––ya daææhabbaò Sa–– anicc, SaÏkhr anicc Vi––Ïam aniccam yad aniccaò taò dukkhaò, yaò dukkhaò tad anatt, Yad anatt tam netam mama nesoham asmi na me so att ti. Evam etaò yathbh‰taò sammappa––ya daææhabbaò. Evam passaò, la, nparam itthattyti pajnt­ti).[253]

Similar statements are recorded at several places in the Saòyutta Nikya and the Khuddaka Nikya, followed by elaborations of analysis in regard to various sets of ultimate realities designated by such concepts as dhtu (界, elements of experience), khandh (Skt. Skandhas, 蘊: groups of materiality, perception, feeling, formation, and consciousness), yatana (處) and so on.

In the Salyatana Saòyutta, the Buddha specifies this voidness for each of the outer and inner six sense-bases (āyatana, 處) as well as for their contact (phassa, 觸) and whatever pleasant (受 樂), unpleasant (受苦), or neutral experiencing (受不樂不苦) (vedanā, 受) which arises dependent upon these conditions.

“Eye is void of self and anything belonging to self, form is void…, visual consciousness is void…, mind is void…, mind-states are void…, consciousness is void…, contact is void…, whatsoever pleasant, unpleasant, or neutral experiencing which arises dependent upon them is void of self and everything belonging to self. That is why, €nanda, is is said: “Void is the world”.[254]

(Cakkhum suññam attena v attaniyena v, r‰p suñña… cakkhuviññanam suññam cakkhu-samphasso suñño yam pidam cakkhusamphassa-paccay uppajjati vedayitam sukham v dukkham v adukkhamasukham va tam pi suññam attena va attaniyena va. Yasm ca kho €nanda suññam attena v attaniyena v tasm suñño loko ti vuccatī tī.) [255]

This is obviously the Buddha’s key instruction for highest insight (mahā vipassanā) without previous advanced concentration (samatha) instructions. The Salyatana Saòyutta begins with detailed vipassan instructions for noticing the impermanence (anicca, 無 常), unsatisfactoriness (dukkha, 苦), and non-self (anattā, 無 我) of all phenomena. These instructions are systematically applied to various sets of ultimate realities and elaborated so as to lead the meditator to the highest goal. As the name of this Saòyutta suggests, the mindfulness directed to the sense bases plays the central role. This instruction for mindfulness disclosing the emptiness (Suññatā, 空) and Dependent Origination (Prat­tyasamutpda, 緣 起, 因 緣 生 起) when directed to the sense-bases is also the culmination of the Buddha’s instruction given in the C‰la Suññat Sutta.

There are specific techniques of insight meditation (vipassanā) for the scrutiny of the phenomena labelled as yatana (處), khandha (蘊), dhtu  (界), etc. which are the ultimate realities (paramatth dhamm, 真 諦) directly perceptible to the mind void of concepts and steadied through samatha (concentrative meditation, 觀). The meditative analysis of the apparently solid identities is an experiential scrutiny which resolves the compact (ghana-vinibbhoga) into its elements, in order to make the absence of any self clearly visible.

To realize this, the meditator has to go through changes of perception such as experientially discerning the ultimate realities and their accessories (nāma-rūpa-pariccheda, 心 法 分別); getting their conditional structure (paccaya-pariggaha) into view; then comprehending them as suffering in order to get free from desire (appanihita, 無 願) for them; getting tuned to the stream of everchanging reality (anicca, 無 常) which destroys their only apparent stability supported by signs and opens the experience for the signless (animitta, 無 相).

The analytical approach of vipassan insight meditation resolves thus the seemingly compact identities and exposes them as void of self. Wrong views are absent, the mind is empty.  And this very emptiness makes possible the full experience of reality as it is. And the mind has to be well balanced in equipoise developed through methods of samatha. Then the purified and non-distracted mind encompasses the dynamic wholeness of the reality and becomes filled with intense joy (pīti, 喜). Only a joyful, pacified, and concentrated mind can reach complete liberation and enlightenment. The path towards emancipation leads through three different ‘gateways to liberation’ (vimokkha-mukhā):

1. The realization of the desireless (appanihita, 無 貪)
2. The realization of the signiess (animitta, 無 相)
3. The third gate to liberation is the realization of voidness (Su––atā, 空).[256]

And with the same ideas, in Majjhima Sutta occurs:

“That emancipation of the heart is devoid of attachment, devoid of animosity and devoid of ignorance”.

(Sa kho panakuppa cetovimutti sufifid ragena sufifid doserta sufifid mohena).[257]

In accordance with this usage the word Su––a is then employed to express the fact that there is no permanent, subjacent entity underlying the phenomena of the world of sense‑experience by the following passage:

“Your reverence, whatever is immeasurable freedom of mind and whatever is the freedom of mind that is naught and whatever is freedom of mind that is void and whatever is freedom of mind that is signless—there is a method according to which these states are different in connotation as well as being different in denotation; and, your reverence, there is a method according to which these states are identical in connotation while being different in denotation. And what, your reverence, is the method according to which these states are different in connotation as well as being different in denotation? As to this, your reverence, a monk abides having suffused the first quarter with a mind of friendliness, likewise the second, likewise the third, likewise the fourth; just so above, below, across; he dwells having suffused the whole world everywhere, in every way with a mind of friendliness, that is far-reaching, wide-spread, immeasurable, without enmity, without malevolence. He dwells having suffused the first quarter with a mind of compassion . . . with a mind of sympathetic joy. . . with a mind of equanimity, likewise the second, likewise the third, likewise the fourth; just so above, below, across; he dwells having suffused the whole world, everywhere, in every way with a mind of equanimity that is far-reaching, wide-spread, immeasurable, without enmity, without malevolence. This, your reverence, is called immeasurable freedom of mind. And what, your reverence, is the freedom of mind that is naught?

As to this, your reverence, a monk passing quite beyond the plane of infinite consciousness, thinking, There is not anything,’ enters on I and abides in the plane of no-thing. This, your reverence, is called the freedom of mind that is naught.

And what, your reverence, is the freedom of mind that is void. As to this, your reverence, a monk forest-gone or gone to the root of a tree or gone to an empty place, reflects thus: ‘This is void of self or of what pertains to self. This, your reverence, is called the freedom of mind that is void.)[258]

(Y cyaò vuso appamÏ cetovimutti y ca ki–ca–– cetovimutti y ca su––at cetovimutti y ca animitt cetovimutti, ime dhamm nnaææh c’ eva nnbya–jan– ca udhu ekaææh, bya–janam eva nnan ti. — Y cyaò vuso appamÏ cetovimutti y ca ki–ca–– cetovimutti y ca su––at cetovimutti y ca animitt cetovimutti, atthi kho vuso pariyyo yaò pariyyaò gamma ime dhamm nnaææh c’ eva nnbya–jan ca, atthi ca kho vuso pariyyo yaò pariyyaò gamma ime dhamm ekaææh, bya–janam eva nnaò.   Katamo c’ vuso pariyyo yaò pariyyaò gamma ime dhamm nnaææh c’ eva nnbya–jan ca: Idh’ vuso bhikkbu mettsahagatena cetas ekaò disaò pharitv viharati, tath dutiyaò tath tatiyaò tath catutthiò, iti uddham - adho tiriyaò sabbadhi sabbattatya sabbvantaò lokaò mettsahagatena cetas vipulena mahaggatena appamÏena averena abybajjhena pharitv viharati.  Karuρsahagatena cetas — pi—muditsahagatena cetas — upekhsahagatena cetas ekaò disaò pharitv viharati, tath dutiyaò tath tatiyaò tath catutthiò, iti uddham - adho tiriyaò sabbadhi sabbattatya sabbvantaò lokam upekhsahagatena cetas vipulena mabaggatena appamÏena averena abybajjhena pharitv viharati. Ayaò vuccat’ vuso appamÏ cetovimutti.   Katam c’ vuso ki–ca–– cetovimutti: Idh’ vuso bhikkhu sabbaso vi––Ïa–cyatanaò samatikkamma na tthi ki–citi ki–ca––yatanaò upasampajja viharati. Ayaò vuccat’ vuso ki–ca–– cetovimutti. Katam c’ vuso su––at cetovimutti: Idh’ vuso hhikkhu ara––agato v rukkham‰lagato v su––gragato v iti paæisa–cikkhati: su––am idaò attena v attaniyena v ti.)[259]

There is a saying which taught in the Dhammapada concludes that whoever comprehends with the insight the phenomena of the world of sense‑experience as no-self, that is to say he is practising and walking the purified way of the Buddhas as under:

“Soul-less is everything that is when this with wisdom one discerns,

Disgusted then is one with ill. This is the Path to Purity.”

(sabbe dhamm anatt ti yad pa––ya passati

atha nibbindat­ dukkhe, esa maggo visuddhiy.)[260]

From that we can see that in the psychology, whoever experences the ideal of the no-self is the great and brave hero, but no-self is the nature of all phenomena even man admit it or not. No-self (無我) means without any permanent nature, without absolute subject, without permanent soul or creator. Everything exists or unexists by co-dependance. Our bodies combined from five aggregations form existence in the Dependent-Origination. Thus, the existence of living beings is no-self. The way of destroying suffering is the way to realize the idea of no-self. No-self is the nature of the reality for extinguishment of suffering to attain Nibbna (涅 槃).

As far as the three characteristics of existence, we can find Su––a (空) defined as anatt (無 我) which is always combined with two other marks such as the transient (anicca, 無 常) and suffering (dukkha, 苦). In other word, anicca (無 常), dukkha (苦), Anatt (無 我), and Su––a (空) are four ways in which the early Buddhists looked at Dhammas. Four marks are the nature of all phenomena of the world.

In the Pli canon, the Buddha tells us that:

“All formations (of dharma-elements which constitute the individual stream of existence) are transient (anicca); all such formations are subject to suffering (dukkha); all things are without a self-substance  (anatt) . . .that which is transient is subject to suffering; and of that which is transient and subject to suffering and change one can rightly say:  This am I;  this  is  my Ego.” [261] 

Thus, the three fundamental characteristics of individual existence according to Buddhism are established as anicca (Skt. Anitya, 無 常) or impermanence, dukkha (Skt. dukkha, 苦) or suffering, and anatta (Skt. anātman, 無 我) or no-selfness, i.e., non-substantiality.  The three marks are philosophically relevant in that they already point to the very root of suffering, namely, to the fact of radical transience and impermanence. Impermanence is expressed by the two marks which constitute the bipolar axis of the wheel of suffering. Anicca and anatt are these two ‘polar’ marks. Anicca represents the transiency and impermanence of all ‘objective’ manifestations of being in the realm of relative existence, including all the corporeal reality which constitutes the embodiment and support (asraya) of all.

There are numerous instances of the use of Su––a (空) in this special sense in the Pli Nikyas:

“Void is the world! Void is the world!” is the saying, lord. Pry, lord, how far does this saying go?”

“Because the world is void of the self, €nanda, or of what belongs to the self, therefore is it said “Void is the world”.[262]

(Su––o loko su––o loko ti bhante vuccati. Kittvata nu kho bhante su––o loko ti vuccati?

Yasm ca kho €nanda su––am attena v attaniyena v. Tasm su––o loko ti vuccati). [263]

In accordance with this usage, the word Suññat is then employed to express the fact that there is no permanent, adjacent entity underlying the phenomena of the world of experience:

 “Su––am idam attena va attaniyena v ti”.[264]

Anatt (無 我), however, represents the ‘subjective’ side of impermanence as this mark points to the insubstantiality of what appears to be an absolute and permanent Ego:  thus, it signifies the total absence of a commonly postulated ontological basis. In point of fact anicca (無常, impermanence) and anatta (無 我, non-substantiality) convert into one another in that the same impermanence afflicts both the flux of subjective consciousness which appears as the Ego and the external objects of our perceptions, feelings and volitive addictions.  And by the same token, the same insubstantiality affects both the apparent, permanent Ego that seems to underly our conscious states as well as all the objects of the external appearing world that become the source for desire and action. The wheel of ‘Suffering’ (dukkha, 苦) turns around this bipolar axis of world-impermanence (anicca, 無常) and Ego-insubstantiality (anattā, 無 我).

And not only four characteristics of anicca (無常), dukkha (苦), anatt (無 我) and su––a (空), the Pāli Canon knows of more ways of looking at the world than does any other Mahyna text or group of texts. At numerous places in the Nikys mention is made of as many as eleven ways of looking at the nature of phenomena.

“It should be properly considered that the grasping of the five aggregates is of impermance, sufferings, illness, boil, affliction, emptiness, and non-self”.

(Pancupadnakkhandh aniccato dukkhato, rogato, gandato, sallato, aghato, bdhato, parato, palokato, suññato, anattato yonosomansik-tabb).[265]

This shows very clearly that €nicca, Dukkha, Anatta, and Suññ are four of eleven ways in which the early Buddhists looked at Dhammas and Suññ is found in its philosophical signification of Non-Substantiality.

Overall, four main characteristics of the world such as anicca (無 常), dukkha (苦), anatt (無 我) and su––a (空) taught by the Lord Buddha points out the truth of human being’s existence as well as phenomenal world. He himself knew it, then practiced it and realized as the best way to lead human being entring the best peaceful states that is the deep aspiration for men.

Suññatā as Paæiccasamuppāda (緣 起, 因 緣 生 起) or Middle Way (中 道)

Dependent Origination (Paæiccasamuppda, 緣 起, 因 緣 生 起) is considered as the basic doctrine in both Northern and Southern Buddhism. The truth of Paæiccasamuppda at which the Buddha got enlightenment under the Bodhi tree and from it, he became the Awakened one.

This doctrine of universal causation and inter-dependence (Paæiccasamuppda) is embodied and formulated in the numerical list of the twelve nidnas (因, bases, grounds, causes), which has been devised to explain how the law of causality operates by the Book of Kindred Sayings as under:

“Conditioned by Ignorance (avidy) activities (saòskras) come to pass; conditioned by activities Consciousness (vij–na); conditioned by consciousness Name-and-shape (nma-r‰pa); conditioned by Name-and-shape Sense (sad-ayatana); conditioned by Sense Contact (sparsa); conditioned by Contact Feeling (vedan); conditioned by Feeling Craving (tÙãρ); conditioned by Grasping (clinging, updna); conditioned by Grasping Becoming (bhava); conditioned by Birth old age-and-death (jti), grief, lamentation, suffering, sorrow, despair come to pass. Such is the uprising of this entire mass of ill. This brethren, is called (causal) happening”. [266]

(Avijjpaccay bhikkhave saÏkhr, saÏkhrpaccay vi––anaò, vi––aÏapaccay nmar‰paò, nmar‰papaccay saÀyatanaò, saÀyatanapaccay phasso, phassapaccay vedan, vedanpaccay taÏh, taÏhapaccay updnaò, updnnpaccay bhavo, bhavapaccay jti, jtipaccay jarmaraÏaò soka-parideva-dukkbadoiuanassupyas sambhavanti. Evam etassa kevalassa dukkhakkhandhassa samudayo hoti. Ayaò vuccati bbikkhave samuppdo.) [267]

In the fomulation of twelve nidnas, the ignorance is put in the first position which means the Buddha desires to emphasise the importance of the wisdom and encourage us cultivating it to attain the enlightenment. The ignorance which is the dark, does not see the truth of Dharma, and clings to self. In the fomulation of twelve nidnas. If we hope to end the existence of suffering, then we only destroy one part of it, then naturally all the round of twelve nidnas will be extinguished.

In the Pāli canon, the root-idea of the twelve nidnas is summed up in short formulation by the Buddha as under:

“This being, that becomes; from the arising of this, that arises; this not becoming, that does not become; from the ceasing of this, that ceases.” [268]

(Iti imasmiò sati idaò hoti imassuppd idam uppajjatill imasmiò asati idaò na hoti imassa nirodh idaò nirujjhati.) [269]

It means twelve nidnas (因) is the cause for the arising of human beings and the world, but it also is the destruction of living beings and the phenomena which is expounded specificy by the Buddha as follows:

“I will teach you, brethren, the arising and the destruction of the world. And what is that?

Owing to eye and objects arises eye-consciousness. The coming together of the three is contact. Dependent on contact is feeling. Dependent on feeling is craving. Dependent on craving is grasping. Dependent on grasping is coming to be. Dependent on coming to be is rebirth. Dependent on rebirth, decay and death, sorrow and grief, woe, lamentation and despair come into being. This is the arising of the world.

Owing to ear and sounds…nose and scents…tongue and savours…body and tangibles…owing to mind and mind-states arises mind-consciousness. The coming together of the three is contact. Dependent on contact is feeling… This is the arising of the world.

And what, brethren, is the going to destruction of the world?

Owing to eye and objects…dependent on feeling is craving. But by the utter passionless cessation of craving is the ceasing of grasping…Thus is the ceasing of this whole mass of ill.

This, brethren, is the going to destruction of the world”.[270]

(Lokassa bhikkhave samudaya–ca atthagama– ca desissmi, taò suρtha, Katamo ca bhikkhave lokassa samudayo. Cakkhu–ca paæicca r‰pe ca uppajjati cakkhuvi––Ïaò, tiÏÏam saÏgati phasso, phassapaccay vedan, vedanpaccay taÏh, taÏhpaccay updnaò, updnapaccay bhavo, bhavapaccay jti, jtipaccay jarmaraÏaò sokaparidevadukkhadomanassupys sambhavanti ayam lokassa samudayo. Sota– ca paæicca. Ghna– ca paæicca. Jivha– ca paæicca|. Kya– ca paæicca. Mana– ca paæicca dhamme ca uppajjati manovi––Ïaò, tiÏÏaò saÏgatiphasso, phassapaccay vedan, vedanpaccay taÏh, tanhpaccay updnaò updnapaccay bhavo, bhavapaccay jti jtipaccay jarmaraÏaò sokaparidevadukkhadomanassupys sambhavanti, ayaò kho bhikkhave lokaesa samudayo. Katamo ca bhikkhave lokassa atthagamo.)[271]

Cakkhu–ca paæicca r‰pe ca uppajjati cakkhuvi––naò tiÏÏaò saÏgatiphasso|| phassapaccay vedan vedanpaccay æaÏh tassyeva taÏhya asesavirganirodh updnanirodho pe. Evam etassa kevalasaa dukkhakkhandhassa nirodho hoti. Ayaò kho bhikkhave lokassa atthagamotill).

Thus, it proves firmly that ‘all things arise or cease by a reason’ or ‘that being, this is’[272] in which no any seft is true or is created by God. If one realizes it, he will get emancipation. That was the reason when Venerable €nanda had praised the Paæiccasamuppda, and the Lord Buddha said that:

“Deep is this doctrine of events as arising from causes, and it looks deep too. It is through not understanding this doctrine, through not penetrating it, that this generation has become a tangled skein, a matted ball of thread, like munja-grass and rushes, unable to overpass the doom of Waste, the Woeful Way, the Downfall, the Constant Round (of transmigration)”.[273]

(Gambh­ro cayaò €nanda paticca-samuppdo gainbh­rvabhso ca. Etassa €nanda dhammassa ananubodh appaæivedh evam ayaò paj tantkulaka-jt gul-guÏæhika-jt mu–ja-babbaja-bh‰t apyaò duggatiò viniptaò saòsraò nativattati).[274]

As far as the relation between the concepts of Su––at     (空) and Paticcasamuppda (因 緣 生 起) is concerned, we find in the Cūla-Niddesa of the Khuddaka Nikya, how the visual object and the sense-base of the eye meet and eye-consciousness arises is explained. Sound and the sense-base of the ear, etc., are also analyzed. Thus attention is guided to the dependent arising of all phenomena. Similarly, dependent on the sensory bases (āyatana, 處), sensory contact (phassa,   觸) arises; dependent on contact feeling (vedanā, 受) arises; and so on.

These observations are qualified by the statement: “Empty is the eye-consciousness, etc.” in regard to all phenomena up to the highest meditation experiences. Dependent Origination (Paæiccasamuppda) becomes visible and Suññat is experienced in regard to all these phenomena:

“...They are void of a self, void of permanency, they are coreless, without a core of permanency, core of happiness, or core of self.”

That Suññat (空) is the truth of the universe is the fundamental conclusion yielded by the theory of Paæiccasamuppda. The insight into Suññat is the insight into non‑substantiality: ‘Suññatnupassan ti anattnupassan va’.[275]

This comes about as a logical development of the application of the idea of Suññat (空) that we have already considered. Each of the twelve Paccayas or Paccaya‑dhammas that constitute the formula of the Paæiccasamuppda is, by virtue of being a paccaya, devoid of any independent existence. Hence each of them is of the nature of Suññat. If all the terms that go to make up the formula are devoid of substantiality then the formula itself is of the nature of Su––at. The formula is but the statement of the nature of the Paæiccasamuppda. This nature then is identical with the nature of the Paæiccasamuppda; this nature then is identical with the nature of Su––at itself. Buddhaghosa (佛音) represents the formula of the Paæiccasamuppda as a circle, inasmuch as the twelve terms comprehend, according to his interpretation, all the stages of the cycle of births and death. Hence the whole of the wheel of becoming (bhavaccakka), which illustrates the Paæiccasamuppda becomes itself Suññat:

(Yasm panettha avijj udayabbavadhammakatti dhuvabhavena, sankiliææhatt saÏkilesikatt ca ubhabhvena, udayctbbavap­litatt sukhabhvena, paccayttavuttitt vasavattanabh‰tena attabhvena ca su––a: tath samkhrd­ni pi angni, tasm dvdasavidhaSu––at su––am etaò bhavacakkanti vedilabbam).[276]

This passage then is eloquent proof that the identification of ։nyat (空) and Pratītvasamutpda (因 緣 生 起) is not a development unique in the Mdhyamika (中論) but this conception that has always been implicit in Buddhism, that is, before Buddhaghosa (佛 音) expressed it in so many words.

It aids in disabusing one’s mind of the belief in substance: “tya atthi att ti abhinivesassa pahanaò hoti...”[277] The highest intuition (adhipaññā vipassanā) is possible only after establishing the Suññat of things.[278] This precisely is the purpose of the understanding of causality too, that is, as taught by the Buddha in the Paæiccasamuppda.

There are various ways in which Paæiccasamuppda (因 緣 生 起) and Su––at (空) are identical. They both express the same truth. The first is the premise of which the second is the conclusion. In the ultimate analysis all the truths which express a feeler, a doer, a released (person), a goer, a sufferer... all these are comprehended by Suññat, which is unreality and non‑substantiality:

(... ettha su––ato tva paramatthena sabban’ eva saccni vedakakraka nibbuta gamakabhava’to su––an­ti veditabbni ...,

Dukkham eva lti na koci dukkito krako na kiriyva vijjati atthi nibbuti, na nibbuto pum, maggam atthi, gamako na vijjati...)[279]

To assert the truth of dukkha (苦), nibbuti (解 脫) and magga (道) is not to assert substance, permanence, stability and happiness, for these are all unreal and untrue.

(Dhuva‑subha‑sukhatta‑su––am purimadvayam attasu––am amata­padaò; dhuva‑sukha‑attavirahito maggo iti Su––at tesu).[280]

It is worthwhile to mention in this part that the Middle way is also considered as emptiness as in the record of the Buddha’s first sermon at the Deer Park, the Blessed One addressed the group of five religious mendicants:

“Mendicants, there are two extremes which should not be practiced by any person who has left society to find salvation. What are these extremes?

On the one hand there is the realm of desire and the pursuit of pleasure which is in accord with desire—it is a base pursuit, boorish, profane crude and without profit. On the other hand, there is the pursuit of self-mortification which is sheer misery, as well as crude and without profit.

Mendicants, passing through these two extremes and avoiding them both is the Middle Way, object of the Tathgata’s perfect awakening, opening the eyes and the mind, leading to peace, to omniscience, to complete awakening, and to nirvÏa.”[281]

The Middle Way (中 道) is very clearly defined here as a practical approach to the religious life, a prescription for the sort of behavior that will eventually lead to release from fear and suffering. Elsewhere we find evidence of a different conception of the Middle Way, a much more abstract application of the concept to ontological categories. The Buddha is in this instance explaining the nature of ‘right view’ to a wandering ascetic named Ktyyana:

“Ktyyana, everyday experience relies on the duality of “it is” and “it is not.” But for one who relies on the Dharma and on wisdom, and thereby directly perceives how the things of the world arise and pass away, for him, there is no “it is” and no “it is not.” “Everything exists” is simply one extreme, Ktyyana, and “nothing exists” is the other extreme. The Tathgata relies on neither of these two extremes, Ktyyana; he teaches the Dharma as a Middle Way”.[282]

The concept of Middle Way (中 道) obviously proved to be a very fruitful heuristic in early Buddhist literature, a device that could seemingly be exploited as an aid toward the explanation of virtually any important point of doctrine. One of the most crucial doctrinal issues for all Buddhists is, of course, the concept of selflessness (nairātmya, 無 我), and here as elsewhere we encounter the all-pervasive influence of the Middle Way. The avoidance of reifed concepts of being and nonbeing, that is, the Middle Way. The middle way as emptiness is often presented as a provisionary name for the fact that all things are dependent upon each other. The Buddha used Paæiccasamuppda (緣 起, 因 緣 生 起) to refute extreme views and to prove the emptiness of all things. Therefore, in Buddhism, the Emptiness, the Middle way and Dependent Origination have the relation together.

In short, with the contents of Paæiccasamuppda and the Middle way above, we are able to conclude that the doctrine of emptiness is the essential consequence of Paæiccasamuppda and the Middle way. In other word, when Paæiccasamuppda or the middle way develops to the transcendential level which will lead to the door of emptiness. ‘Emptiness’ means paæiccasamuppda as the Buddha expounded, “This being, that becomes, from the arising of this, that arises. This not becoming, that does not become, from the ceasing of this, that ceases”.[283] Therefore, ‘emptiness’ in the meaning of paæiccasamuppda is considered as the fundamental and vital doctrine in Buddhism. Whoever is awakened of emptiness (空), he also enlightens the nature of Paæiccasamuppda (緣 起, 因 緣 生 起) or the Middle way (中 道).

Suññatā as Nibbāna (涅 槃)

The feature in the Cūlla Suññat Sutta affirms the statement of the Buddha:

“I, €nanda, through abiding in (the concept of) emptiness, am now abiding in the fulness thereof”.[284]

(Su––atvihrenhaò, €nanda, etarahi bahulaò viharm­ti.)[285]

And it is said that once when Sriputta approached the Buddha after an afternoon of meditation, the latter commented on his calm expression and his pure and clear complexion. Sriputta gave this explanation:

“Sir, I am now completely absorbed in the state of emptiness.”

 (Su––atvihrena kho ahaò, bhante, etarahi bahulam viharmiti).[286]

Thus, what the emptiness is, from that the Buddha abides in the fulness of transcendence and Sriputta was completely absorbed in it? It is Nibban (涅 槃), empty of all canker of sense-pleasure, becoming and ignorance, is not it? This got the approval of the Buddha who called emptiness the state of great men (mahāpuri-savihāra). Now, what is meant by ‘state of emptiness’?

In the AÏguttara Nikya, Sriputta makes exactly the same comment to Anuruddha about his calm expression, etc. But he gets a different explanation:

“My mind is well established in the four states of mindfulness (satipaææhna).”[287]

This parallel indicates at least that exercises in mindfulness could give the same visible result as emptiness. In the Saòyutta Nikya there is question asked: what is the path that goes to the uncompounded i.e. Nibbna. The answer is:

“The concentration that is empty, signless and undirected.”

(Su––ato samdhi animitio samdhi appaÏihito samdhi).[288]

Hence, the general trend of these meditation levels is to reduce the amount of conscious contents, until the mind is completely motionless and empty: one of the levels is called ki–ca––yatana, (無 所 有 處 定)[289] ‘the dimension of nothingness’. And in Majjhima Nikya III, the Buddha says:

“But, €nanda, Tathgata has completely understood this state, namely how to attain and stay in the inward emptiness, by leaving all signs unnoticed.”

(Ayaò kho pan’, €nanda, vihro Tathgatena abhisambuddho, yadidaò sabbani-mittnaò amanasikr ajjhultam su––ataò npasampajja viharituò.)

It is evident from these examples, that the word emptiness was used with reference to a psychological state attainable through meditation. That is to say, the perfect purified state - nibbna (涅 槃).

As we mentioned above, the Cūlla-Su––at Sutta belonging to Majjhima Nikya described all the levels of concentration as levels of progressing emptiness.

At first, a monk starts to meditate in a forest, and then he sees only the forest, no village and no people:

“He regards that which is not there as empty of it.”[290]

(Iti yaò hi kho tattha na hoti, tena taò su––aò samanupassati).[291]

Then he passes through the eight first levels and attains.

“The concentration of mind that is signless”.[292]

(animittaò cetosamdhiò).[293]

And the text continues:

“He comprehends thus, ‘This concentration of mind that is signless is effeted and thought out But whatever is effected and thought out, that is impermanent, it is liable to stopping’. When he knows this thus, sees this thus, his mind is freed from the canker of becoming and his mind is freed from the canker of ignorance.”[294]

(So evaò pajnti: Ayam pi kho animitto cetosamdhi abhisankhato abhisa–cetayito. Yaò kho pana ki–ci abhisankhataò abhisa–ce-tayitaò, tad aniccaò nirodhadhamman ti pajanti. Tassa evaò jnato evaò passato kmsav pi cittaò vimuccati, bhavsav pi cittaò vimccati, avijjsav pi cittaò vimuccati.)[295]

Then comes the Arahanta-formula, so it is clear that this is a description of the attainment of Nibbna. This is finally expressed in terms of emptiness:

“He comprehends: ‘This perceiving is empty of the canker of sense-pleasures’. He comprehends: ‘This perceiving is empty of the canker of becoming’. He comprehends: ‘This perceiving is empty of the canker of ignorance. And there is only this that is not emptiness, that is to say the six sensory fields that, conditioned by life, are grounded on this body ifself’.”[296]

(So: su––am idaò sa––gataò kmsaventi pajnti; su––am idam sa––gataò bhavsaventi pajnti; su––am idaò sa––gataò avijjsaventi pajnti. Atthi c’ev ‘idaò asu––ataò, yadidaò imam eva kyam paæicca saÀyatanikaò j­vitapaccay ti).[297]

Very often we get the impression that Su––at as a conscious state is a very important aspect of Nibbna itself. When the Arahanta Uttama calls herself ‘winner of the emptiness and signless’, (suññatassānimittassa lābhinī, 空 與 無 相 定)[298] i.e., she seems to attain Nibbna. One of the synonym: for Nibbna in the long list, is ‘without attributes’ (anidasscananaò, 無 屬 性).[299] Or it is said: ‘all conscious processes have nibbna as their end’ (nibbānapariyosānā sabbe dhanamā, 有 情 的 究 竟 涅 槃),[300] or Nibbna is called ‘the signless state’ (animittā dhātu, 法 無 相).[301]

The most probable explanation of this is that the highest level of meditation ‘the ceasing of ideation and feeling’ (sa––āvedayitanirodha, 滅 受 想 定), was used so frequently as a stepping­stone to the realization of Nibbna, that same of its characteris­tics were transferred to nibbna itself, especially the experience of undifferentiated wholeness that is called Su––at (空). The attainment of Nibbna is namely also called ‘the cessation of consciousness’ (viññāÏassa nirodho, 識 的 滅 盡).[302]And Nibbna (涅 槃) had to be exactly that, since rebirth is effected through the medium of vi––Ïa (識) and Nibbna is the cessation of rebirth, the reality of no-self. In the stream of conscious processes, of which vi––Ïa consists, is stopped and emptied, usually by means of the meditational exercises to insight (paññā, 智 慧) exist.

Hence, we should keep in mind that Su––at is emphasized by the Buddha not as ideal, a method, but here it is enlightenment as the truth, the reality of no-self which also means Nibbn, because Nibbna is the final bliss, state of no-self. This is essential thing in Buddhism. Although the Buddha expounded many methods of Dhammas (法) but the aim is merely to guide people to return oneself ­_ the nature of no-self.

Buddhism had always maintained that the state of Nibbna cannot be expressed in words by a lot of negation, say:

“There is the not-bom, the not-become, the not-created, the not-compounded. ...If there were not this not-born etc... there could be no escape from this world of compounded things.”

“There is the realm where there is neither earth nor water... neither the boundless realm of space nor boundless consciousness... This I call neither coming nor going nor standing, neither origination nor annihilation. Without support, without beginning, without foundation is this. The same is the end of suffering.”[303]

 It is even spoken of in positive terms as:

“A reality beyond all suffering and change, as unfading, still, undecaying, taintless, as peace and blissful. It is an island, the shelter, the refuge and the goal.”

(asankhatam ca vo bhikkhave desissmi asaòkhatagmiÏca maggani. . . ansavanca. . . saccam. . . param. . . nipuÏam. . . ajajjaram. . . dhuvam... sntam . . . amatam . . . pan­tam . . . sivam . . . khemam . . . abbh‰tam... antikadhamma . . . nibbnam . . . d­pam tÏam . . . saraÏam . . .) [304]

Buddha after his enlightenment is a representative example of Nibbna. Nirupadhi±eãa Nibbna (無 餘 涅 槃) is the state of final release where even the skandhas (蘊), which constitute empirical existence, have totally ceased.

Consider the importance of this below passage that Su––at refers to the transcendental truth of the universe - Nibbna.

“Herein, monks, in whatsoever, company the monks listen not to the discourses uttered by the Tathagta, discourses deep and deep in meaning, transcendental, dealing with the Void, when they are recited: where they lend not a ready ear to them, apply not to them a mind bent on understanding, consider not that those teachings are something to be learned by heart and mastered: but when those discourses made by poets, trickled out with fair-sounding phrases, discourses external to Dhamma uttered by their followers”.[305]

(Idha bhikkhave yassam parisayaò bhikkhu ye te suttant Tathga­tahbsit gambhir gambhiratth lokuttar Su––atpaæisaòyutt tesu bha––amanesu na sussusanti na sotam odahanti na a––a cittam upaææhpenti na ca te dhamme uggahetabbam pariypuni tabbam ma––anti, ye pana ie suttant kavikat kaveyy cittakkhar cittavya–jan bhirak svakabhsit tesu bha––amdnesu sussu­santi sotam odahanti a––a cittam upaææhpenti to ca dhamme uggahetabban pariypunitabbam ma––anti, to tam dhammam pariypunitv na c’eva nnamannan paæipucchanti na paæivitaranti idam katham imassa kvattho ti.)[306]

In verses 92 and 93 of Dhammapada, Suññat (空) is identified with Vimokkha (解 脫), which is another term for Nibbna (涅 槃):

“They for whom there is no accumulation who reflect well over their food, who have Deliverance, which is Void and Signless as their object, their course cannot be traced, like that of birds in air.”

(yesaò sannicayo n’ atthi ye pari––atabhojan

su––ato animitto ca vimokho yesaò gocaro

kse va sakuntnaò gati tesaò durannay.)[307]

“He whose corruptions are destroyed, he who is not attached to food, he who has Deliverance, which is Void and Signless, as his object, his path cannot be traced, like that of birds in air.”

(yasssav parikkh­Ï hre ca anissito

su––ato animitto ca vimokho yassa gocaro

kse va sakuntnaò padaò tassa durannayaò) [308]

The term of the Nibbna which was described in the literature of Pli Nikyas, clearly refers to a unity eternally existing beyond the three worlds (kāma dhātu: 欲 界, rūpa dhātu: 色 界 and arūpa dhātu: 無 色 界). It is infinite, inexpressible, unborn, undecaying and empty. It is homogeneous (ekarasa) and knows no individuality. In it, all discriminations or dichotomy cease.

Every being is a conglomeration of elements, which can be classified under five heads: r‰pa (色), vedana (受), sanna (想), sankhara (行) and vi––Ïa (識) hence one being is not essentially different from another, an ordinary man is not different from a perfected saint. But if the nature and proportion of each of the five constituents existing in an individual be taken into account, then one being is different from another, an ordinary man is different from a perfected saint. The combination of elements is the outcome of Karma  (業, past deeds) and is happening every moment (kãaÏika, 剎那), implying that the disintegration of elements always precedes it. The elements in a combined state pass as an individual, and from time immemorial he labours under the misconception of a self (我) and of things relating to a self (我 所). His vision being distorted or obscured by ignorance of the truth he cannot perceive the momentary combination and disintegration of elements. On the other hand, he is subject to an inclination for them. A perfect man with his vision cleared by the Buddhist practices and culture realises the real state of things viz. that an individual consists of the five elements and does not possess a permanent and unchanging entity called soul.

In short, with the above characteristics of emptiness our knowledge opened out: the incomparably highest concept of emptiness which the Buddha utterance to in the Pli Nikyas is the reality of no-self, or utterly purified Nibbna and we should attain it, because not only at present, but also in the past or future, those Bodhisattas all practised it as the Buddha confirmed in the C‰la Su––at Sutta that:

“And those recluses or brahmans, €nanda, who in the distant past, entering on the utterly purified and incomparably highest (concept of) emptiness, abided therein – all these, entering on precisely this utterly purified and incomparably highest (concept of) emptiness, abided therein. And those recluses or brahmans, €nanda who in the distant future, entering on the utterly purified and incomparably highest (concept of) emptiness, abided therein – all these, entering on precisely this utterly purified and incomparably highest (concept of) emptiness, abided therein. And those recluses or brahmans, €nanda, who at present, entering on the utterly purified and incomparably highest (concept of) emptiness, are abiding in it – all these, entering on precisely this utterly purified and incomparably highest (concept of) emptiness, abided therein. Wherefore, €nanda, thinking: ‘Entering on the utterly purified and incomparably highest (concept of) emptiness, I will abide therein’ – this is how you must train yourself, €nanda.”[309]

(Ye hi keci, €nanda, at­tamaddhnaò samaρ v brhmaρ v parisuddhaò paramnuttaraò su––ataò upasampajja vihariòsu, sabbe te imaò yeva parisuddhaò paramnuttaraò su––ataò upasampajja vihariòsu. Ye hi keci, €nanda, angataiuaddhnaò samaρ v brhmaρ v parisuddhaò paramnuttaraò su––ataò upasampajja viharissanti, sahbe te imaò yeva parisuddhaò paramnuttaraò su––ataò upasampajja viharissanti. Ye hi keci, €nanda, etarahi samρ v brhmaρ v parisuddhaò paramnuttaraò su––ataò upasampajja viharanti, sabbe te imaò yeva parisuddhaò paramnuttaraò su––ataò upasampajja viharanti.  Tasmtiha, €nanda, Parisuddhaò paramnuttaraò su––ataò upasampajja viharissu–m­ti, — evaò hi vo, €nanda, sikkhitabban ti).[310]

Or in the Book of the Gradual Sayings also is found the same idea that:

“And-what, monks, is the company trained in bluster, not inquiry?

Herein, monks, in whatsoever, company the monks listen not to the discourses uttered by the Tathagta, discourses deep and deep in meaning, transcendental, dealing with the Void, when they are recited: where they lend not a ready ear to them, apply not to them a mind bent on understanding, consider not that those teachings are something to be learned by heart and mastered: but when those discourses made by poets, trickled out with fair-sounding phrases, discourses external to Dhamma uttered by their followers,—when such are recited they listen thereto, lend a ready ear to them, apply to them a mind bent on understanding and consider that those teachings are something to be learnt by heart and mastered, and when they have mastered that teaching they do not open up a discussion thus: “what is this? What is the meaning of this? “– when they neither open up the unrevealed nor explain the unexplained, nor dispel doubts on divers doubtful points of doctrine, - such a company, monks, is called “trained in bluster, not in inquiry”.[311]

(Idha bhikkhave yassaò parisyaò bhikkh‰ ye te suttant Tathgatabhsit gambh­r gambh­ratth lokuttar su––atpatisa––utt tesu bha––amnesu nn suss‰santi na sotaò odahanti Ïa a––cittaò upaææhpenti na ca te dhanune uggahetabbaò pariypuÏitabbaò ma––anti, ye pana te suttant kavikat kveyy cittakkhar cittavya–jan bhirak svakabhsit tesu bha––amnesu suss‰santi sotaò odahanti a––cittaò upaææhpenti te ca dhamme uggahetabbaò pariypuÏitabbaò ma––anti, te taòn dhammaò pariypuÏitv na c’eva a––ama––aò paæipucchanti na paæivivaranti idaò kathaò imassa kvattho ti. Te avivaæa– c’eva na vivaranti anuttni-kata– ca na uttn­-karonti anekavihitesu ca kankhæhn­yesu dhammesu kakhaò na paæivinodenti. Ayaò vuccati bhikkhave ukkcita-vin­t paris no paæipucch-vin­t).[312]

In the above passages the Buddha refers to the fact that the Sutts he has expounded deal with the deep, profound and transcendental truth of Suññat and says that those monks who do not grasp the meaning contained in them, fail to unravel the hidden truth.

“In which abiding are you, Sariputta, now abiding in the fulness thereof?

“Abiding in (the concept of) emptiness do I, revered sir, now abide in the fulness thereof.”

“It is good, Sariputta, it is good. You, Sariputta, are now indeed abiding in fulness in the abiding of great men. For this is the abiding of great men, Sariputta, that is to say (the concept of) emptiness. Wherefore, Sariputta, if a monk should desire: ‘ May I now abide in fulness in the abiding in (the concept of) emptiness,’ that monk should consider thus, Sariputta: ‘ On the road by which I entered the village for almsfood or in the part in which I walked for almsfood or on the road by which I left the village after (walking for) almsfood—did I have there in my mind desire or attachment or aversion or confusion or sensory reaction in regard to material shapes cognisable by the eye?” [313]

(Katamena tvam Sriputta, vihrena etarahi bahulam viharas­ ti. Su––at-vihrena kho aham bhante, etarahi bahulam viharmi. Sdhu sdhu, Sriputta. Mahpurisa-vihrena kira tvam Sriputta, etarahi bahulam viharasi. Mahpurisa-vihro hesa Sriputta, yadidam Suññat. Tasintiha, Sriputta, bhikkhu sace kaÏkheyya:  Su––atvihrena etarahi bahulaò vihareyyan ti, tena, Sriputta, bhikkhun iti paæisa–cikkhitabbaò: Yena cahaò maggena gmaò piϯya pvisiò, yasmi– ca padese piϯya acariò, yena ca maggena ginato piϯya paæikkamiò, ritthi nu kho me tattha cakkhuvi––eyyesu r‰pesu chando v rgo v doso va moho v paæighaò v pi cetaso ti?)[314]

–  &

CHAPTER SIX

THE CONCEPT OF ֈNYAT€ IN

MAH€Y€NA SˆTRAS

The Survey of Mahāyāna Sūtras

As we have known the Buddha did not express his religious doctrine in terms of ։nyat (空性), but rather by Dependent Origination (Pratītyasamutpāda, 緣 起, 因 緣 生 起) and Middle Path (Madhya-mārga / Madhyamā-pratipad, 中 論 ). Several centuries later, a group of Mahyna texts such as the Vajrachedik-praj–-pramit S‰tra (金 剛 般 若 波 羅 密 經) and the HÙdaya Sūtra (心 經) or Praj– HÙdaya Sūtra (心 經 般 若) belonging to the Praj–-pramit literature (般 若 波 羅 密 經), introduced strongly the doctrine of ։nyat. That is the reason, we may select them to analyze for the purpose of this chapter.

Let us first of all run to the information of the sources of these s‰tras.

The Prajñā-pāramitā Literature (般 若 波 羅 密 經)

Issues of the origins of the Praj–pramit and those of the Mahyna are closely connected, since at the present stage of our knowledge the earliest Mahyna s‰tras are probably Praj–-pramit Sūtras (般 若 波 羅 密 經). The Praj–-pramit or ‘Perfection of Wisdom’, which represents the Dharma-Jewel, is not so much a s‰tra as a family of s‰tras or even a dynasty. Dr. Edward Conze, who devoted the greater part of his life to studying, translating and explaining these documents, collates from Sanskrit, Chinese, Tibetan and Khotanese sources, a list of forty Praj–-pramit texts, not all of them s‰tras or canonical, the composition of which began about 100 B.C.E., and continued steadily until the time of the virtual disappearance of Buddhism from India in the thirteenth century C.E. Edward Conze[315] has said that the time of the composition of the Praj–-pramit texts can be roughly stretching over more than a thousand years from 100 B.C.-1200 A.D and he distinguished four phases in the development of the Praj–-pramit literature as under:

1. The elaboration of a basic text (100 B.C.-100 A.D.) which constitutes the original impulse,
2. The expansion of that text (100-300 A.D.),
3. The re-statement of the doctrine in the short s‰tras and in versified summaries (300-500 A.D.),
4. The period of Tantric influence and of absorption into magic (600-1200 A.D.).

The traditional classification is simply in terms of length. Taking the sloka or verse of thirty-two syllables as the unit of measurement, there are ‘Large’s‰tras consisting of 18,000, 25,000 and 100,000 ‘lines’, all of which made their appearance during the second of Conze’s four phases of development, and ‘Small’ ones consisting of anything from a few hundred lines, or less, up to 8,000 lines, that appeared during the first and during the third phase.

The principal or the oldest text is the Aãæssarik Praj–-pramit S‰tra (八 天 頌 般 若 波 羅 密 經), ‘The S‰tra on the Perfection of Wisdom’ in 8,000 lines and its shorter verse summary or possible original, as the case may be, the Ratra-guna-samuccaya-gth, ‘Verses on the Accamulation of Precious Qualities’ (寶 積 經). It may be (at least it is the prevailing theory) that the Aãæashasrik was expanded in the Satasahasrik (100,000 lines) (一 百 千 頌 般 若 波 羅 密 經) and the Pa–cavimsatishasrik (25,000 lines) (二 萬 五 千 頌 般 若 波 羅 密 經), and then condensed in the Srdhadvishasrik (2,500 lines) (二 千 五 百 頌 般 若 波 羅 密 經). The Astadasa or Perfection of Wisdom ‘in 18,000 lines’ (十 八 千 頌 般 若 波 羅 密 經). A Dasasahasrik or Perfection of Wisdom ‘in 10,000 lines’ (十 千 頌 般 若 波 羅 密 經) is also sometimes classed with the larger s‰tras. The Saptasatik (700 lines) (七 百 頌 般 若 波 羅 密 經) and the Adhyardhasatiku (150 lines) ( 一 百 五 十 頌 般 若 波 羅 密 經).[316]

Among the shorter s‰tras or around 300-500 the texts were shortened, the finest of this process are the two earliest, both appearing before 400 C.E., the Vajracchedik (金 剛 般 若 波 羅 密 經 ) in 300 lines and the HÙdaya (Heart s‰tra, 心 經 hoaëc 心 經 般 若) in 25 or 14 lines[317] and the latter comprises only 262 words in the Chinese translation.[318]

The Vajrachedikā-prajñā-pāramitā Sūtra (金 剛 般 若 波 羅 密 經)

The Vajrachedik (金 剛 or 金 剛 般 若) or ‘Diamond-Cutter’ s‰tra (vajra, 金 剛 is really the mythical ‘thunderbolt’, and denotes something of irresistible strength) is also known as ‘the Perfection of Wisdom’. A short text in two parts and thirty-two chapters, it is in the form of a dialogue between the Buddha (佛 陀) and Subh‰ti (須 菩 提 ). The Sanskrit original does not, however, give any chapter division, and the one adopted by Max Muller and other scholars date back to ca. 530 C.E. when in China it was introduced into Kumarajiva of translation (摎  摩  羅  什 ). It is not really of much help. Unlike the summaries, the Vajracchedik S‰tra (as it is popularly known) does not attempt to give a systematic survey of the Praj–-pramit teachings. Instead, it confines itself to a few central topics, which it inculcates by addressing the intuition rather than the logical intelligence. The result is not one that is calculated to endear the work to scholars.

The full title the Vajracchedik Praj–-pramit Sūtra (as it reads in Kumarajiva’s version) indicates that the teaching of the s‰tra aims at revealing the Buddha’s Diamond Mind, so as to cut off people’s doubts and awaken their faith. This Diamond Mind is the Absolute Mind of Supreme Enlightenment. What the Buddha does, in the course of his dialogue with Subh‰ti, is simply to remove the latter’s doubts as they arise one by one in his mind as he listened to the Buddha’s discourse. According to Thich Nhat Hanh, the name of this s‰tra is Vajracchedik Praj–-pramit. Vajracchedik means ‘The Diamond that cut through afflictions, agnorance, delusion or illusion’. In China and Vietnam, people generally call it the Diamond S‰tra, emphasizing the word ‘diamond’, but, in fact, the phrase ‘cutting through’ is the most important. Therefore, the S‰tra’s full name is ‘the Diamond that Cuts through Illution’.[319]

Praj–-pramit means ‘Perfection of Wisdom’, ‘Transcendent Understanding’, or ‘the understanding that brings us across the ocean of suffering to the other shore’. Studying and practicing this S‰tra can help us cut through ignorance and transporting ourselves to the shore of liberation.

Six Chinese translations are extant, beginning with Kumarajiva’s (摎 摩 羅 什 , 402 C.E.), and proceeding through those of Bodhiruci (菩 提 留 志 , 509 C.E.), Paramartha (真  諦 , 562 C.E.), Dharmagupta (達  摩  鋦 多, 605 C.E.), and Hsuan-tsang (玄 莊 , 648 C.E.), to that of I-tsing (義  淨 , 703 C.E.). They were not all made from the same recension; Kumarajiva’s, indeed, was not made direct from the Sanskrit text. In addition there are various Tibetan, Mongolian and Manchu translations, as well as one in Sogdian which has not survived completely. The hundred or so commentaries in Sanskrit, Tibetan and Chinese, though of no concern to us here are nevertheless further evidence of the overwhelming popularity of the s‰tra. In the West, it has begun to attract a corresponding degree of attention. Editions of the Sanskrit text, and renderings into English, French and German have already appeared. In English alone there are at least eight complete translations, besides incomplete ones. Versions have also appeared in modern Japanese and in Thai. It would seem that the Vajracchedik S‰tra is destined to exert no less influence in the future than it did in the past, and over an even vaster field.[320]

The HÙdaya Sūtra (心 經)

The HÙdaya or Heart S‰tra, often bound up in one volume with the Vajracchedik S‰tra, is the only Praj–-pramit text that rivals it in popularity. Indeed so closely are the two allied, both intrinsically and extrinsically, that it is really quite improper to speak in terms of rivalry at all. Though an extremely concentrated work, consisting of only a single leaf in most editions, it exists in two recensions, a long and a short one.

These agree in the body of the Sūtra, but the longer recension has, both at the beginning and the end, an account of the circumstances of its preaching. The S‰tra is really a dialogue in which, although only one of them actually speaks, the two participants constitute, as it were, two poles between which is generated the energy that determines the dialectical movement of the exposition.

The participants are the Bodhisattva Avalokite±vara, who does not figure prominently elsewhere in the Praj–-pramit literature, and ցriputra. It is the former who speaks. Addressing the great disciple by name, he reveals to him the content of his transcendental spiritual experience as he courses in the profound Perfection of Wisdom.

Specifically the S‰tra is a restatement of the Four Noble Truths in the light of the dominant idea of Öūnyat. As in the case of several other very short S‰tras, by far the greater portion of the material has been taken from the Large Praj–-pramit. Nevertheless, the parts have been welded together into a convincing artistic unity, and the dialectical stages through which Avalokite±vara conducts ցriputra follow one upon another as inevitably, as the movements of a Beethoven quartet. As if the message of the Praj–-pramit were not already sufficiently condensed, the body of the s‰tra proper concludes with a short mantra constituting as it were its veritable quintessence: ‘Gate, Gate, Pragate, Prasamgate, Bodhi Svh’ (堨 諦, 堨 諦，波 羅 堨 諦, 波 羅 增 堨 諦，菩 提 薩 婆 訶).[321] By the proper intonation of these words one’s heart is opened to the influence of Perfect Wisdom.

The HÙdaya s‰tra being as popular as the Vajracchedik S‰tra, its literary backwash is no less impressive. The Sanskrit text of both recensions has been found in palm-leaf form in Japan, the shorter one having been brought there in 609 C.E. and the longer in 850 C.E. In the course of six centuries seven Chinese translations of the s‰tra produced, by Kumraj­va (摎  摩  羅  什 ) or one of his disciples - (ca. 400 C.E.), Hsuan-tsang (玄 莊 , 649 C.E.), Dharmacandra (法 月 , 741 C.E.), Praj– (大  慧 , 790 C.E.), Praj–cakra (慧  眼 , 861 C.E), Fa-cheng (施  護 , 856 C.E), and Dnapala (陀  那  杷  羅 , ca. 1000 C.E). It was translated into Tibetan by Vimalamitra (無  垢  有 ). There are also Mongolian and Manchu versions. Commentaries and expositions abound. Its popularity in the West is attested by a dozen English translations, besides six in French and one in German.[322]

A Dictionary of Chinese Buddhist Terms (中 英 佛 學 辭 典 ) gives a difinition as below:

‘The S‰tra of the heart of Praj–; there have been several translations, under various titles, the generally accepted version being by Kumarajiva, which gives the essence of the Wisdom S‰tras. There are many treatises on the S‰tra.’[323]

On average, two new versions of the HÙdaya S‰tra became available to the public every one hundred years, each with some incremental improvements. Because of its brevity and preciseness, the text was popular and most widely circulated in China.

The HÙdaya S‰tra was the pan-sectarian text accepted by all Buddhist schools as the essential core doctrine of Mahyna Buddhism, not only by the above scholastic traditions but also by the practical traditions of Ch’an and Pureland. As it is concise and short, the text was fit for memorization and chanting by an individual or community of people. Monks and nuns as well as lay people in China, Vietnam, Japan, Korea... frequently chant this S‰tra at the pray performance. The widespread use of the HÙdaya S‰tra was one of the distinctive features of Mahyna Buddhist culture in the later half of the first millennium. In other words, the essence of the entire Mahyna teaching is contained in this s‰tra of only 262 words in the Chinses translation. How important the HÙdaya S‰tra is! We may recognize it.

The Concept of Öūnyatā in Mahāyāna Sūtras

After the Buddha’s parinirvāôa, Buddhism became popular and developed from early Buddhism into Hīnayna (小 乘 ) (we also call Early Buddhist Tradition) and Mahyna (大  乘 ) (the Developed Buddhist Tradition).[324] The division between Hīnayna and Mahyna Buddhism was established sometime between the first century B.C. and the first century A.D. Hīnayna is the conservative Buddhist school which tries to preserve the orthodox teachings and practices of Buddhism. It accepts the Pli canon as the main scriptures.[325] For H­naynists, there is only one Buddha, who is the founder of Buddhism, and the highest goal or level one can achieve in life is to become an Arahata, a good disciple of the Buddha who attains salvation for himself by his own effort.

Mhayna Buddhism is the later liberal Buddhist school which has a new interpretation of Buddhism. It does not accept the Pli canon as the sole scriptural source, but has many new scriptures written in Sanskrit, then Chinese, Tibetan…[326] According to Mhaynists there is not just one Buddha, but many. In principle, everyone has Buddha-nature and can become a Buddha. The ideal one seeks to achieve is to become not merely an Arahata, but a Bodhisattva, a Buddha-to-be, who has a great compassion for the world of mortals, and, after attaining salvation for himself, helps others to attain salvation. The chief philosophical difference between H­nayna and Mahyna is that while the former assert the reality of dharmas (elements or entities), the latter declare that all things are empty.

 In other words, it is said that pudgalanairtmya (我 空) and dharma- nairtmya (法  空 ) (non-substantiality of the self and the dharmas) are the two important concepts associated with Hinayna and Mahyna respectively.[327]

In the later development of Mahyna Buddhism, the philosophy of concept of non-substantiality of the dharmas (dharma nairtmya, 法 空 ) was widely accepted. It basically denied the separate reality of the elements (of existence). According to this, substance is unreal, a thought-construction (vikalpa, 想 ) and the modes and attributes (associated with the thought-construction) are also unreal. It is well known that with the emergence of a vast literature such as Praj–-pramit (般 若 波 羅 密 經), Saddharma-Puϯar­ka (妙 法 蓮 花 經 ), LaÏkvatra (楞 伽 經), Lalitavistara (神 通 遊 戲 經), Samdhirja (三 妹 王 經), Suvarnaprabhsa (金 光 明 經), Dasabh‰mi (十 地 經), Sukhvati (無 量 壽 經), Vimalak­rti (維 摩 詰 經), €vataòsaka S‰tras (華 嚴 經) and other Mhayna scriptures are too numerous to mention and among them specially the title of Praj–-pramit. T.R.V. Murti says in this connection, “The praj–pramit revolutionised Buddhism in all aspects of its philosophy and religion by the basic concept of ։nyat.”[328]

The philosophical systems of Praj–-pramit literature including Vajrachedik-praj–-pramit S‰tra and the HÙdaya S‰tra in Buddhism made radical changes in the earlier concepts. The twin concepts of pudgalnairtamya and the dharmanaittmya as found in the early Buddhism were made broad based in the Praj–-pramit literature. The basic concept of nairtmya was further transformed into ։nyat. This concept of ։nyat subsequently absorbed in itself some of the concepts which were primarily conceived either ontological, epistemological or metaphysical. Some of the concepts like dhytma, r‰pa ( 色 ), saòskÙta (有 為 ), asamkÙta (無 為 ), prakÙti (自 性 ), bhva ( 有 ), abhva ( 非  有 ), svabhva (實 體 ), parabhva (真 體 ), vij–na (識 ) , saòskara ( 行 ), vastu  (事  健 ) and sattva (有 情 ) were associated with the concept of ։nyat.

It may be stated that the Mdhyamika (中 論 ) system is a school of thought relying the concept of ։nyat, but Bodhisattva Ngrjuna (龍 樹) cannot be called its founder because ։nyat was present before him in the Mahyna S‰tras (大 乘 經), some of which are prior even to Ashvaghoãa (馬 鳴). Ngrjuna is only the first systematic expounder of ։nyat. However, it is to the glory of Ngrjuna that he seized these threads and wove them into unity; it is to the greatness of Ngrjuna that he developed these more or less scattered ideas almost to perfection in a thoroughly consistent manner. Ngrjuna who wrote number of works of which the Mdhyamika-karik is regarded as his masterpiece presents in a systematic manner the philosophy of Mdhyamika school in particular, Mahyna Buddhism in general.

։nyatvādins (空  論  者 ) call themselves Mdhyamikas or the followers of the Middle Path realized by Buddha during his Enlightenment, which Path, avoiding the errors of existence and non-existence, affirmation and negation, eternalism and nihilism, also at once transcends both the extremes.

The study of the Praj–-pramit literature also shows that some of the Yogcrins (瑜 伽 者) also produced the versified summaries of the Praj–-pramit. It is said that Dignga (陳  那 ) in his PiÏdrtha dwells on sixteen modes of ։nyat.[329] It may be mentioned here that out of these sixteen modes of ±ūnyat prakÙti±ūnyat (非 自 性 ), saòskÙta±ūnyat (非 有 為) and asaòskÙta±unyat (非 無 為) are referred in the commentary of Haribhadra (師 子 賢 ) known as €loka (無 色 界 ). The Praj–-pramit-piϯrtha[330] of Dignga even negated the Bodhisattva itself. Thus, it can be said that the basic concepts of pudgala-nairtmya and the dharma-nairtmya of the early Buddhism were made more elaborate in the twenty modes of ։nyat, as found in the Aãæssarik Praj–-pramit (八天 頌 般 若 波 羅 密 經) whereas the Praj–-pramit-piϯrtha of Dignga refers only to sixteen modes of Öūnyat.

 It may be pointed out here that the various modern commentators such as Prof. Stcherbatsky,[331] Aiyaswami Sastri, Bhvaviveka,[332] Obermiller,[333] Murti[334]… who have contributed to the successive development of the concept of ։nyat. According to Dr. Harsh Narayan, ։nyavda is complete and pure Nihilism. Öūnyavda is a negativism which radically empties existence up to the last consequences of Negation. He has taken great pains to prove that ։nyavda is Nihilism pure and simple and to establish his preconceived view he has not only given some evidence from Mahyna Texts but has relied upon the verdict of tradition too as illustrated below:

“In the face of such an almost unanimous verdict of tradition, it is difficult to see how the nihilistic interpretation of ±‰nyavda can be rejected as totally false.”

The thinkers of Yogcra school describe Öūnyavda as total Nihilism. Dr Radhakrishnan says that absolute (i.e. Öūnyatā) seems to be immobile in its absoluteness. Dr. T.R.V. Murti views Prajñ-pramit as absolute itself and said:

“The absolute is very often termed ±‰nya, as it is devoid of all predicates”.

As we see, with the emergence of the Mahyna S‰tras and Mahyna philosophers, a new dimension of ։nyat was added to the concept of Su––at in Pli Nikyas or pudgalanairtmya and dharmanairtmya in H­nayna. This concept of ։nyat literally revolutionised the earlier concept in Pli Nikyas with regard to some shades of different entities and different meanings in Mahyna S‰tras such as ։nyat as the true nature of empirical Reality, Prat­tyasamutpda (緣 起, 因 緣 生 起), Middle Way (中 道), NirvÏa (涅 槃), and ։nyat (空 性) is considered as beyond the Negation or Indescribable (Chatuãkoæi-vinirmukta) and ։nyat is the means of the relative Truth (Sammuti, Skt. SaòvÙti-satya, 俗諦) and the ultimate Truth (Paramārthasatya, Skt. Paramārtha-satya, 真 諦).

Now let us come to study them respectively, but first of all, we must grasp their concise definition in Mahyna field.

The Definition of ։nyat

The term ։nyat,[335] terminologically compounded of ‘±‰nya’ (empty, void, hollow) and an abstract suffix ‘t’ (equivalent to ‘ness’), was almost invariably translated into Chinese as (空 性) (emptiness, voidness, or vacuity). The concept of this term was essentially both logical and dialectical. The difficulty to understand this concept is due to its transcendental meaning (paramrtha, 真 諦) in relation to the logico-linguistic meaning (vyavahra), especially because the etymological tracing of its meaning (i.e. ±‰nya meaning ‘vacuous or hollow within a shape of things’, 真 空) provides no theoretical or practical addition to one’s understanding of the concept.

According to A Dictionary of Chinese Buddhist Terms (中  英  佛  學  辭  典 ),[336] ‘The nature void, i.e. the immateriality of the nature of all things’ is the basic meaning of ։nyat. It is very interesting if we will step to examine the field of this definition through the poetic and figural similes of Öūnyat, before entering to discover the major meanings of the concept of ։nyat.

Similes of Öūnyatā

The phenomenal nature of the Dhammas is well illustrated by Buddhaghosa who employs a number of similes to illustrate their unreality. Ngrjuna also takes these similes to point out the efficacy of the logic contained in them, to comprehend the unreality of the Dhammas. These Dhammas are ever new (nicanava), like dew at sunrise (suriyaggamane ussavabindu), like a bubble of water (udake dndaraji), like a mustard seed at the end of an awl (aragge sasapo), like a flash of lightening of instantaneous duration (vijjuppado viya ca paritthayino), like an illusion (māyā, 幻 覺), like a mirage (marici, 焰 喻), like a dream (supinanta, 夢), like a wheel of fire (alatacakka, 熱 輪 車), like the city of the Gandharvas (gandhabba‑nagara, 乾 撻 婆), like froth (phena, 浮  水 ) and  like the banana tree (kadali, 香 蕉 ).

It is very interesting and significant too that Ngrjuna himself has used most of these similes in his Karikas: alatacakranirmana (熱 輪 車), svapna (夢), maya (幻 覺), marici (幻 想 ), ambu‑candra (球 周 ), gandharvanagara (乾 撻 婆)...[337]

The Buddha used a number of similes in the Nikyas to point out the unreality of dhammas of every kind and it is these similes that have been later used with great effectiveness in Mahyna philosophical schools, specially of Chinese Buddhist thinkers:[338]

1. Emptiness implies non-obstruction… like space or the Void, it exists within many things but never hinders or obstructs anything.
2. Emptiness implies omnipresence… like the Void, it is ubiquitous; it embraces everything everywhere.
3. Emptiness implies equality… like the Void, it is equal to all; it makes no discrimination anywhere.
4. Emptiness implies vastness… like the Void, it is vast, broad and infinite.
5. Emptiness implies formlessness or shapelessness… like the Void, it is without form or mark.
6. Emptiness implies purity… like the Void, it is always pure without defilement.
7. Emptiness implies motionlessness… like the Void, it is always at rest, rising above the processes of construction and destruction.
8. Emptiness implies the positive negation… it negates all that which has limits or ends.
9. Emptiness implies the negation of negation… it negates all Selfhood and destroys the clinging of Emptiness (pointing to the thorough transcendency that is free from all abiding).
10. Emptiness implies unobtainability or ungraspability… space or the Void, it is not obtainable or graspable.

First appearing in the Nikyas the ten similes, expressed in every Mahyna philosophical school, illustrate in a poetic way the unreality of the phenomena.

The Meanings of the Concept of Öūnyat

Öūnyatā as the True Nature of Empirical Reality

In early Buddhism, Su––at ( 空 ) defined as anatt (無 我). The Theravdists and H­naynists understood Su––am or antmam i.e. the non-existence of any real substance as tman or individuality, e.g., pudgala-suññat, as N. Dutt writes:

“The Sarvstivdins are also responsible for the addition of a fourth term, ‘±‰nya’, to the usual three, namely dukkha, anitya and antma, though the word conveyed no Mahayanic meaning as it connoted no other sense than antma”. [339]

While the Mahynists took it to be the nonexistence of individuality (pudgala suññatā) as also of the objective world (dharma suññatā).

The word Öūnyat (空 性) served to designate the true nature of empirical Reality or what is the same, the form of true nature of all phenomena. This subject matter of Öūnyat will cover all the questions concerning the Buddhist outlooks on life and world.

The true Reality which usually has two widely philosophical concepts: the norm of existence and the essence of existence or it is referred to as the abstract idea of universal principle, law, causality or the such-as-it-is-ness of existence. In this aspect the true reality is not the Universe but the sufficient reason of the Universe. It is stated in the second chapter of the Sadharma-puϯarika S‰tra as follows:

“The true entity of all phenomena can only be understood and shared between Buddhas. This reality consists of the appearance, nature, entity, power, influence, inherent cause, relation, latent effect, manifest effect, and their consistency from beginning to end.”[340]

(唯 佛 與 佛 乃 能 究 盡 諸 法 實 相。 所 謂 諸 法：如 是 相，如 是 性，如 是 體，如 是 力，如 是 作，如 是 因，如 是 緣，如 是 果，如 是 報，如 是 体 末 究 竟 等).[341]

As we see, such a reality which has meanings that all things are always as they truly are. All the marks, nature, subtance, powers, functions, causes, conditions, effects, retributions and the equal identity of these nine factors of all dharmas are always like such. Put it in further explanations as below:

As saying that we recognize a thing, it means that we by our senses perceive the marks manifesting the distinctive characters or nature of that thing. Since there exist the external marks manifesting the internal attributes or nature, so the thing is assumed a certain substance. The assumed substance is definitely to possess an inherent power as the nature of ։nyat, whose directional vector turns outwards to accomplish its function of manifestation. This is the aspect of existence of the thing itself. The world or universe is ‘a great set’ of myriad of things. All things co-exist, co-operate and interact upon one another to create innumerable phenomena. This is called the cause. The cause under different conditions produces the different effects, which lead to either good or bad or neutral retributions. It is the very universal principle, the reason of existence or the norm of existence as such. In other words, because of ։nyat, all things can exist; without ։nyat, nothing could possibly exist. ։nyat is therefore extremely dynamic and positive, in the HÙdaya S‰tra’s words, this is also called ‘Form (rūpa) is no different from the void (sūnya), nor the void from form’ (色 不 是 空，空 不 是 色).[342] And Ngrjuna claimed Öūnyat as the true nature of empirical Reality by the following famous sentence:

“With ։nyat, all is possible; without it, all is impossible.”[343]

And of course, this corresponds to the Reality as Vajrachedik-Praj–-pramit text writes,

“Subh‰ti, the Tathagtas’ words are true and correspond to reality. They are ultimate words, neither deceitful nor heterodox”. (須 菩 提！如 來 是 真 語 者，實 語 者，如 語 者，不 獨 語 者，不 異 語 者). [344]

։nyat is not a dogma. It is simply what can be grasped in its total and absolute integrity, only in an act of intuitive Yogic knowledge, which is reserved to the great Buddha. ։nyat stands for the avoidance of all dogmas. The persons who take ։nyat as a dogma are patients of an incurable malady. The Mūlamdhyamika-krik presents that:

(։nyat sarvadrsæīnm prokt nih±araôam jinaih ye±am tu ։nyat drsæistnasdhyn pabh±ire).[345]

In the Praj–-pramit scriptures, Öūnyat refers to the world of enlightenment, but it is also stated that this world of enlightenment is not separate from the world of delusion: ‘Form (the world of delusion) is identical with void (the world of enlightenment)’, and ‘void is identical with form’.[346] Here, ‘form is identical with void’ may be considered to point to the path leading from delusion to enlightenment, while ‘void is identical with form’ points to the path descending from enlightenment to delusion.

The purpose of Öūnyat refers to the objective of extinguishing linguistic proliferation and the efforts leading towards this objective: ‘Öūnyat’ corresponds to ultimate truth, namely, the state in which linguistic proliferation has been extinguished; and the ‘meaning of Öūnyat’ signifies all existents relating to our everyday life in which ։nyat is an actually established fact.

The Öūnyavadin is neither a thorough-going sceptic nor a cheap nihilist who doubts and denies the existence of everything for its own sake or who relishes in shouting that he does not exist. His object is simply to show that all world-objects when taken to be ultimately real, will be found self-contradictory and relative and hence mere appearances.

True, he indulges in condemning all phenomena to be like illusion, dream, mirage, sky-flower, son of a barren woman, magic etc which suggest that they are something absolutely unreal. But this is not his real object. He indulges in such descriptions simply to emphasize the ultimate unreality of all phenomena. He emphatically asserts again and again that he is not a nihilist who advocates absolute negation, that he, on the other hand, maintains the empirical Reality of all phenomena.

He knows that absolute negation is impossible because it necessarily presupposes affirmation. He only denies the ultimate reality of both affirmation and negation. He condemns intellect from the ultimate standpoint only for he knows that its authority is unquestionable in the empirical world. He wants that we should rise above the categories and the contradictions of the intellect and embrace Reality. He asserts that it is the Real itself which appears. He maintains that Reality is immanent in appearances and yet it transcends them all, that Reality is the Non-dual Absolute, Blissful and beyond intellect, where all plurality is merged. This is the constructive side of the dialectic in ։nyat which we propose to consider now. Here intellect is transformed into Pure Experience.

The Saddharma-puϯarīka s‰tra tells us that as long as we are entangled in the categories of the intellect we are like blind-born men completely in the dark; when we reach the limit where finite thought confesses its weakness and points towards Reality our blindness is cured but our, vision is still blurred; it is only when we embrace Pure Knowledge of the Buddha that we gain true vision. This is Reality which is Calm and Deep and Pure Knowledge of the Buddha, which transcends intellect and which is to be directly realized through pure knowledge. It is the Most Excellent and the Final Enlightenment (uttama agra bodhi) by which we become one with the Buddha.[347]

Thus, we can say that Öūnyat is the key concept of Mahyna, especially in the Mdhyamika Philosophy and it can be understood by Purnatā tathat (真 如 ), NirvÏa (涅 槃 ), Prat­itya-samutpda (緣 起,因緣生起), Paramrthat (真 諦 ), Nairtmya (遠  離 ), Satya (真  理 ), Sarvadharma±ūnyat (一  切  法  空 ), Sarva-padrtha±ūnyat ( 一 切 六 句  義  空 ), Sarvabhava±ūnyat (一 切  有  空 ) etc., which generally mean the true nature of imperical Reality.

Öūnyatā as the Dependent Origination (Pratītyasamutpāda, 緣 起, 因 緣 生 起)

The HÙdaya S‰tra of Praj–-pramit literature narrated that, at one of the Dharma sessions held on Mount GÙdhrak‰æa (靈 鷲, Vulture Peak) in RjÙgha (王 舍 ), ցkyamuni (釋 迦 牟 尼) suggested that ցriputra (舍 利 弗), who held the first seat, request Avalokite±vara Bodhisattva (觀 世 音 菩 薩 ) to give a lecture on the insight of ։nyat. In reply to ցriputra, the Bodhisattva, who was engaged in deep contemplation of Praj–-pramit surveying the distress calls of sentient beings, expounded the meaning of the Truth from the point of view of Öūnyat as under:

“ցriputra! Form (r‰pa) does not differ from the void (։nya), nor the void from form. Form is identical with void (and) void is identical with form. So also are reception (vedanā), conception (sanj–ā), mind impression (saòskra) and consciousness (vij–āna) in relation to the void. ցriputra, the void (։nya) of all things is not created, not annihilated, not impure, not pure, not increasing and not decreasing.”

(舍 利 子！色 不 異 空， 空 不 異 色；色 即 是 空，空 即 是 色。受， 想，行，識 亦 復 如 是。舍 利 子！是 諸 法 空 相，不 生，不 滅，不 垢， 不 淨，不 增，不 減).[348]

The Pli scripture declares six sense-organs, six sense-objects and six conciousness as well as five aggregates are Su––at as “Eye is void of self and anything belonging to self, form is void…, visual consciousness is void…”,[349] then HÙdaya S‰tra expands this concept by emphasis that ‘r‰pa does not differ from Öūnya’ (色 不 異 空), or ‘։nya  does not differ from rupa’ (空 不 異 色), and ‘Öūnya of all things is not created, not annihilated, not impure, not pure, not increasing and not decreasing’ (是 諸 法 空 相，不 生，不 滅，不 垢，不 淨，不 增，不 減). It means that because rupa must have no a nature of its own (svabhava), it is produced by causes or depend on anything else, so rupa is ։nyat or ‘identical with void’ (色 即 是 空)… That which is real, would contradict the fact that phenomena are bound by the relations of cause and effect, subject and object, actor and action, whole and part, unity and diversity, duration and destruction, and the relations of time and space. Anything known through experience is dependent on conditions, so it cannot be real. According to the Praj–-pramit, the perceived object, the perceiving subject and knowledge are mutually interdependent. The reality of one is dependent upon others; if one is false, the others must be false. The perceiving subject and knowledge of the external object must also be false. So what one perceives within or without is illusory. Therefore there is nothing, creation and annihilation, pure and impure, increase and decrease and so on… Thus, ‘։nya of all things is not created, not annihilated, not impure, not pure, not increasing and not decreasing’.

On the other hand, what one perceives cannot be conceived as unreal since that which is unreal can never come to exist. Thus a thing cannot be said to be either real or unreal, and accordingly any such claim would be unintelligible. In Bodhisattva Avalokite±vara’s thought, the Middle Way as ։nyat is often presented as a provisionary name for the fact that all things are causally dependent upon each other, the classic Buddhist doctrine of dependent origination or causality (Prat­tyasamutpāda). Bodhisattva Avalokite±vara (觀 世 音 菩 薩) used Prat­tyasamutpda (緣 起, 因 緣 生 起) to refute extreme views and to prove ։nyat of all things. In the teaching of the HÙdaya S‰tra, we can understand ։nyat (空 性), Middle Way (中 道), and Dependent Origination (緣 起, 因 緣 生 起) are interchangeable, and lead to the conclusion that metaphysical theories are untenable.

We may illustrate it by a following formulation: 

Table IV

X = - X, because X is composed by V, Y, Z, W…

 We are able to see here the reason why ։nyat is defined as Pratītyasamutpda. There is the intimate connection that exists between causality and Öūnyat. The one presupposes the other; the two are inseparably connected.  Öūnyat is the logical consequence of the Buddha’s view of causality and effection. Öūnyat is the central theme of the Mahyna philosophical system. This term has been used in the Praj–-pramit system to denote a stage where all viewpoints with regard to the real nature of mundane world are totally rejected. In other words, we may say that to have a viewpoint is to cling to a position and there can be various types of positions with regard to the real nature of things as Saddharma Puϯar­ka expressed under:

“… know that phenomena have no constantly fixed nature,

that the seeds of Buddhahood sprout through causation…”[350]

(知 法 常 空 性，佛 種 從 緣 生).[351]

In the invocation in verse at the beginning of the work, Ngrjuna gives the fundamentals of his philosophy in a nutshell. He describes Pratītyasamutpda by means of eight negatives. In Mdhyamika ±āstra, he says:

“Anirodhamanutpdamanucchedam±±vatam

anekrthamannrthamangamamanirgamam.”^[352]

(不  生  亦  不  滅,  不  一  亦  不  異 ,  不  常  亦  不  斷 ,  不  去  亦  不  來  ) .

There is neither origination, nor cessation, neither permanence nor impermanence, neither unity nor diversity, neither coming-in nor going-out, in the law of Pratityasamutpda. Essentially, there is only non-origination which is equated with Öūnyat. Elsewhere he also states that Pratityasamutpda (Dependent Origination) is called ։nyat. Here ։nyat referring as it does to non-origination, is in reality the Middle path which avoids the two basic views of existence and non-existence. Öūnyat is the relative existence of things, or a kind of relativity. Dr. Radhakrishnan writes in his book Indian Philosophy that “by ±‰nyat therefore, the Mdhyamika does not mean absolute non-being, but relative being”.

What then are the positive teachings of the writings on Prajñ-pramit literature? The teaching concerns the relation between conditioned and unconditioned things. Something is called ‘conditioned’ if it is what it is only in relation to something else. All the familiar things of our everyday world are conditioned in two ways:  Each one is dependent on a multiplicity of other events which surround it, and all of them are linked to suffering and ignorance through the twelve links of the chain of causation (or, more literally, of “conditioned coproduction”). The Vajrachedik-Praj–-pramit s‰tra concludes with the famous verse:

“All phenomena are like a dream, an illusion, a bubble and a shadow, like dew and lightning. Thus should you meditate upon them.”

(一 切 有 為 法， 如 夢 幻 泡 影， 如 露 亦 如 電，應 作 如 是 觀).[353]

Like dew drops and a lightening flash the things of this world are evanescent and short-lived. Each experience bursts soon, like a bubble, and it can be enjoyed only for a moment. The transformation of the earthly scene concern us, and our true welfare, no more do the changing shapes of the clouds we may watch on a hot summer day. The appearance of this world is like a hallucination which springs from a disease in the organ of vision about as real as the spots which livery people see before their eyes. Like a magical shows it deceives, deludes and defrauds us, and it is false, when measured by what we slowly learn about ultimate reality. As a lamp goes on burning only as long as fuel is fed into it, so also this world of ours continues only while craving supplies the drive. The enlightened awake to reality as it is; compared with their vision of true reality our normal experience is that of a dream, unreal and not to be taken seriously.

Finally, what we see around us can be likened to the stars. As the stars are no longer seen when the sun has risen, so also the things of this world are visible only in the darkness of ignorance, and, in the absence of reactions to them, they are no longer noticed when the true non-dual gnosis of the Absolute has taken place.[354]

That is the sole purpose of Buddha’s teaching.

“The entire Buddhist thought revolves on the pivot of Prat­tyasamutpda, the Mdhyamika system is interpretation of Prat­tyasamutpda as ±‰nyat.” [355]

Öūnyatā as the Middle Way 

The term ‘middle way’ refers to something intermediary but it has transcended any dichotomy into ‘being’ and ‘non-being,’ ‘attribute’ and ‘substance’ or ‘cause’ and ‘effect’…

In a krik (24.18), Bodhisattva Ngrjuna observes that Middle way is Dependent Origination and also means ։nyat by saying:

“What is originating co-dependently, we call emptiness. It is designation based upon (some material). Only this is the Middle Path.”

(ya¾ prat­yasamutpda¾ ±‰nyatò tò pracakãmahe). [356]

It is clear that Dependent Origination and ։nyat are one and the same thing. The other verse continues to state the same idea that:

“It is provisional designation and it is the Middle way.”

(s praj–ptir updya pratipat saiva madhyam).

“Provisional designation” refers to the verbalized form assumed by ultimate truth, and it may be said to correspond to language in which the vector leading from the sacred to the profane is grounded.

Nagrjuna’s interpretation claims that the true nature of an object cannot be ascertained by intellect and described as real or unreal.[357]

In the Vimalakīrti S‰tra (維 摩 詰 經), the Middle way which is called the not-two Dharma-gate, or the Dharma-gate of non-duality. A few passages discussed this topic in a great assembly of Bodhisattvas.

“At this time Vimalak­rti said to all the Bodhisattvas, “Good sirs, how can a Bodhisattva enter the Dharma-gate of non-duality? Each of you with your eloquence please tell it as you like. . . ”

Virtue-Top Bodhisattva said, “Defilement and purity make two. If you see the real nature of defilement, you [will realize that] purity has no form, then you conform to the character of cessation. This is entering the, Dharma-gate of non-duality. . .”

Good-Eye Bodhisattva said, “One mark and no mark are two. If one knows that one mark is no mark, and yet does not cling to no mark, he penetrates into the state of equality, and is said to have entered the Dharma-gate of non-duality. . . Pusya Bodhisattva said, “Good and evil make two. If you do not arouse good or evil, but penetrate to the limit of no-form, thus attaining the full realization, you enter the Dharma-gate of non-duality. . .”

Pure-Conviction Bodhisattva said, “The conditioned and the unconditioned dharmas make two. If one can depart from all numbers, his mind will be like empty space; with pure Wisdom he encounters no obstruction whatsoever. This is entering the Dharma-gate of non-duality...”

Narayana Bodhisattva said, “Mundane and supra-mundane are two. The very nature of mundane is empty, which is the same as the supramundane. In them there is no entering, no coming out, no overflowing and no dispersing. This is entering the Dharma-gate of non-duality. . .”

Good-Wit Bodhisattva said, “Saòsra and NirvÏa make two. When one sees the nature of saòsra, then there is no saòsra, no bondage, no liberation, no burning and no relieving. He who understands this enters the Dharma-gate of non-duality...”

Lightening-God Bodhisattva said, “Insight and ignorance make two. The true nature of ignorance is insight itself. Insight cannot be grasped; it is beyond all numbers. To be equal in them without duality is to enter the Dharma-gate of non-duality. . .”

Delight-Vision Bodhisattva said, “Form and Emptiness of form are two. However, form itself is empty, not when it ceases to be, but by its very nature. In the same way, feeling, conception, impulses and consciousness are empty. . . He who realizes this is entering the Dharma-gate of non-duality. . .”

Jewel-Seal-in-Hand Bodhisattva said, “To like NirvÏa and to dislike the world make two. If one does not like NirvÏa nor loath the world, then there is no duality. Why is this so? Because if there is bondage, then there is liberation. If from the beginning there is no such thing as bondage, who would ever seek for liberation? He who realizes that there is no bondage and no liberation will have no likes or dislikes. This is entering the Dharma-gate of non-duality. . .”

Truth-Lover Bodhisattva said, “Real and unreal make two. He who truly sees, does not even see the real, how much less the unreal? Why? Because this is not something that can be seen by the eye of the flesh. Only the Wisdom-eye can see it, and yet for this wisdom-eye there is nothing seen or unseen. This is entering the Dharma-gate of non-duality...”

Thus, each and every Bodhisattva spoke in turn; then they all asked Ma–ju±r­, “Please tell us, what is the Bodhisattva’s entering the Dharma-gate of non-duality?”

Ma–ju±r­ replied, “According to my understanding, to have no word, no speech, no indication and no cognition, departing away from all questions and answers is to enter the Dharma-gate of non-duality.” Thereupon Ma–ju±r­ asked Vimalak­rti, “We have spoken, each for himself. Now, good sir, you must tell us what is the Bodhisattva’s entering the Dharma-gate of non-duality.”

Then Vimalak­rti kept silent, without a word. Whereupon Ma–ju±r­  praised him in earnestness, “Oh great, oh marvelousl Not to have even words or letters, this is truly entering the Dharma-gate of non-duality!”

While this chapter on entering the Dharma-gate of non-duality was preached, five thousand Bodhisattvas in the assembly all entered the Dharma-gate of non-duality and reached the state of no-arising-Dharma- maturity.[358]

The same ideas in the Vajrachedik-Praj–-pramit S‰tra are expressed by the words as under:

“Subh‰ti, the Tathgata knows and sees all: these living beings will thus acquire immeasurable merits. Why? (Because) they will have wiped out notions of an ego, a personality, a being and a life, of Dharma and Not-Dharma. Why? (Because) if their minds grasp form (lakãaÏa), they will (still.) cling to the notion of an ego, a personality, a being and a life. If their minds grasp the Dharma, they will (still) cling to the notion of an ego, a personality, a being and a life. Why? (Because) if their minds grasp the Not-Dharma, they will (still) cling to the notion of an ego, a personality, a being and a life. Therefore, one should not grasp and hold on to the notion of Dharma as well as that of Not-Dharma”.

(須 菩 提！ 如 來 悉 知 悉 見；是 諸 眾 生， 得 如 是 無 量 福 德。所 以 故？ 是 諸 眾 生， 無 復 亦 相，人 相， 眾 生 相， 壽 者 相，無 法 相，亦 無 非 法 相。何 以 故？是 諸 眾 生，若 心 取 相，則 為 著 我，人，眾 生，壽 者。若 取 法 相，即 著 我，人，眾 生，壽 者。是 故 不 應 取 法，不 應 取 非 法)[359]

The notion of Dharma as well as that of Not-Dharma here means the negation of the dual, because it is produced by causes or depends on anything else, so it is falsely produced or appears as the Buddha said to Subh‰ti that “Subh‰ti, (when) the Tathgata speaks of an ego, there is in reality no ego, although common men think so. Subbuti, the Tathgata says common men are not, but are (by expediency) called, common men” (須 菩 提！如 來 說 有 我 者，即 非 有 我，而 凡 夫 之 人 以 為  有 我。須 菩 提！凡 夫 者， 如 來 說 即 非 凡 夫， 是 名 凡 夫).[360]

It is itself a means (Madhyama) between all extremes, a Middle Path (Madhyamamārga), or a moderate course of action (Madhyama pratipāda).

The Middle Way represents a characteristic attitude, rooted in a certain set of individual and social concerns, which shapes the motivation for one’s actions in the world. It is indicative of a particular sort of deconstructive philosophy which endows the Mdhyamika with its paradoxical ‘non-position’. This notion of a Middle Way is fundamental to all Buddhist teachings—it is in no sense the exclusive property of the Mdhyamika —yet it was given priority by Nāgrjuna and his followers, who applied it in a singularly relentless fashion to all problems of ontology, epistemology, and soteriology.

As we mentioned in the previous chapter,[361] the concept of a Middle Way obviously proved to be a very fruitful heuristic in early Buddhist literature, a device that could seemingly be exploited as an aid toward the explanation of virtually any important point of doctrine. One of the most crucial doctrinal issues for all Buddhists is, of course, the concept of selflessness (nairātmya), and here as elsewhere we encounter the all-pervasive influence of the Middle Way, this time interpreted by Ngrjuna as the absence of any philosophical view—the ‘view’ which is really no view at all:

“The Buddhas have indicated that there is a self, they taught that there is no self, and they also taught that there is neither any self nor any no-self.”

(tmety api praj–apitam antmetly api de±itaò/ buddhair ntm na cntm ka±cid ity api de±itaò).[362]

The Middle Way and Prat­tyasamutpda are two ways of designating the same notion, namely, ։nyat. Both aim at showing that the true state of things is incomprehensible and indescribable, beyond the reach of thought and language.[363]

Thus, in the Mahyna Buddhism, Prat­tyasamutpda and ։nyat, are equal and synonymous but it points out to another main important factor, i.e., the Dependent Origination, if understood in the empirical sense, simply refers to a mere nomenclature. This fact is further explained by Candrakīrti (月 稱) saying that wheels (of a chariot) being the components of a chariot, thus this whole structure is designated as a chariot in the worldly sense. The chariot has no independent status and since it originates dependently, it lacks its own nature. Now, these very components are by their nature unproduced. According to him this very non-production of the components of the wheel etc., is Öūnyat. Such a Öūnyat, whose characteristic is non-production, is also designated as the Middle Path.[364] Moreover, according to Candrak­rti’s explanation ։nyat (空 觀), nomenclature (upādāya praj–apti, 假 觀) and the Middle Way (Madhyama pratipadā, 中 觀) are considered to be ‘different names’ (vi±eãa sa–j–) of the Dependent Origination (Prat­tyasamutpda, 緣 觀).[365] As far as the meaning of the two terms is concerned, Candrak­rti says at another place that whatever is the meaning of Dependent Origination it is emptiness.[366] The term nomenclature based on some material is also interpreted by various scholars in different ways. This ։nyat always assumes some nomenclature, which in Buddhist philosophy is called praj–apti. Thus, it finally leads to the Middle path which is free from the two extremes of existence and non-existence.

The Madhyama pratipada is also free from the two extremes of eternalism and annihilationism. The Middle way is to see the things as they are. In the whole of the krik there are four padas viz., Prat­tyasamutpda (緣 觀), Öūnyat (空 觀), Upadaya-pratipadā (假 觀) and Madhyama pratipada (中 觀). As a matter of fact, all the four have some logical sequence in them. According to Gadjin M. Nagao all these four padas associated with each other in some way, are considered equal.[367] Thus the whole sequence can be formulated as follows:

 

Table V

Prat­tyasamutpda (緣 觀)  =   ։nyat (空 觀)                                                 =   Upādāya praj–apti (假 觀)                                                 =  Madhyama pratipada  (中 觀)

With regard to the relation between Dependent Origination (prat­tyasamutpāda) and emptiness (Öūnyatā), Ngrjuna has already stated that Dependent Origination is ։nyat; it is a designation based on some material (Vij–apti), it is Middle Path (Madhyamāpratipada).[368]

To conclude, we can say that the reason why ։nyat is considered as Prat­tyasamutpda, is of priority and posteriority in relation to each other working at different places and times having no connection with each other in a single frame work. Cause may be a priority and the effect may be posteriority as far as time frame work is concerned, but they stand wide apart from each other. This type of analysis at the empirical level leaves nothing but a phenomenal vacuum and this vacuum leads to ։nyat at the transcendental level in conceptual way. In other words, we may say that we have always a desire to go beyond the conceptual analysis of the things which bring us to the level of ։nyat, beyond which our intellect fails. Venkatramanan says,

“To these three may be added another import of ±‰nyat, viz., the sense of beyond, the thrust for the real, the thrust for fulfilment, which is the seat and spring of all the activities of man.”[369]

The significance of the identity relation between Prat­tyasamutpda and Öūnyat in Mahyna Buddhism lies in the recognition of a philosophical fact, i.e., the law of Dependent Origination at mundane level giving rise to ։nyat at the transcendental level. To put it other way, the law of Dependent origination is a metaphysical ladder to reach the high pedestal of Öūnyat at the transcendental level. And in the strict sense, Öūnyat, the Middle way and Dependent Origination, according to the Mahyna, are themselves empty. Still, they are good devices for helping rid people of attachment. They perform the same function of avoiding the extremes of absolutism and nihilism. The claim that all things are empty means that all things neither absolutely exist nor absolutely do not exist. If things in the universe existed absolutely, they would have their own nature and would not be dependent upon causal conditions, but nothing in the world is seen to be independent of causal conditions. Thus, the existence of things cannot be absolutely real. And if the existence of things were absolutely unreal or nothing, there would be no change or motion in the universe, yet myriad things are perceived to arise from causal conditions.

Öūnyatā as NirvāÏa (涅 槃)

And the next meaning, ։nyat is considered as NirvÏa. As we know in Pli Nikyas, Su––at (空) means Nibbna i.e. the attitude of emptiness, a reality beyond suffering or the state of final release. Later, the Mahynists or Mahyna teachers identified ։nyat (空 性) with NirvÏa (涅 槃) and added it some more colours.

As we have seen in Chapter Five,[370] the ethical conception of Nibbna has received the largest amount of attention in the Pli texts as well as in the writings of modern scholars. Throughout the Nikyas, Nibbna is described as the destruction (khaya, 斷  滅 ) of attachment (rāga, 貪 迷 ), hatred (dosa, 疾 妒 ) and delusion (moha, 幻 想 ), of desire (taÏhā, 愛 欲 ), impressions (saÏkhārā, 幻 覺 ), and firm grasp of wrong views (upādāna, 邪  見 ), of impurities (sava, 漏 ) and afflictions (kilesa, 煩  惱  ), of desire for existence (bhava, 有 ), birth (jāti, 生 ), old age, death (jarāmaraÏa, 老  死 ), and thus of misery (dukkha, 苦 ). In describing the positive aspect of Nibbna, the Nikyas state that it is a condition which is very happy (accantasukha, 安  樂  ), imperishable (accuta, 不  死 ), steady (acala, dhīra, 安  靜 ), tranquil (santa, 輕  安 ) and free from fear (akutobhaya, 無  畏 ). It is the state of the highest bliss (amata) and the object of Jhnas is to bring the mind into such a state that it will be above worldly pleasure and pain. It can be effected by dissociating the mind completely from all worldly matters. This is achieved by means of the trances, the highest of which is the Sa––vedayitanirodha (滅 受 想 定 ). From the foregoing discussion about the highest trance, it is evident that Nibbna is psychically Sa––vedayitanirodha provided that the adept complies with the other necessary conditions of Arhathood.

The notable passage of the Itivuttaka (如 是 語 經 ):[371] ‘Atthi, bhikkhave, abh‰tam akatam asaÏkhataò‘ shows that the early Buddhists conceived of Nibbna not as annihilation but as something positive,[372] which is, a metaphysical interpretation of Nibbna, however it is infinite and indescribable like €ksa ( 無 為 ). It is called a dhtu (realm) beyond the three dhatus,— the Apariypanna-dhtu or Lokuttara-dhtu ( 超  界  ). It is a state to be realised (sacchiktabba) within one’s own self (paccattaò veditabbo vi––‰hi). It is homogeneous (ekarasa, 同  一 ) and in it there is no individuality. It is like the disappearance of flame in the fathomless state of existence in the infinite.

The more accurate conception of Nibbna would certainly be that it is a state beyond the domain of word and thought and possible of realisation only within one’s own self, while according to Ngrjuna, the ։nyatvdins do not seek a NirvÏa where there is an end of kle±as (煩  惱 ) and skandhas ( 蘊  ). Their NirvÏa is:

“NirvÏa is that which is neither discarded nor attained; it is neither a thing destroyed nor a thing eternal; it is neither suppressed nor does it arise”.

(Aprah­Ïam asamprptam anucchinnam a±vataò, Aniruddham anutpannam etan nirvÏam ucyate). [373]

It is also said that in Pli literature, Nirupādhi±eãa (解 脫 最 後) is the state of final release where all the skandhas, and defilements have total cease. Then the Mahynists gave one more variety—the Apratiãæhita NirvÏa, the state of the Bodhisattva who shuns retiring into Final Release, although fully entitled to it, and who by his free choice devotes himself to the service of all beings. Candrak­rti in Mdhyamika-KrikvÙtti (中 觀 論 頌), defined that NirvÏa is:

“What is not abandoned nor acquired; what is not annihilation nor eternality; what is not destroyed nor created.”

(svabhvena hi vyavasthitnò kle±nò skandhnò ca svabhvasynapyitvt kuto nivÙttir, yatas tannivÙtty nirvÏam . . . yadi khalu ±‰nyavadita¾ kle±nò skandhnò v nivÙttilakãaÏam nirvÏam necchanti, kiò lakãaÏarh tarh­cchanti. ucyate;

“aprah­Ïam asamprptam anucchinnam a±±vatam; aniruddham anutpannam etan nirvÏam ucyate”).[374]

‘The function of praj– is not to transform the real, but only to create a change in our attitude towards it.’

(na praj– a±‰nyn bhvn ±‰nyn karoti; bhv eva ±‰ny¾).[375]

The change is epistemic (subjective), not ontological (objective). The real is as it has ever been. NirvÏa is not an ens (bhva, 有) or non-ens (abhva, 非 有) etc., it is the abandonment of such considerations of the real (bhvbhva-parmar±akãayo nirvÏam, 勝 義 諦 的 涅 槃).[376] This is in full accord with the teaching of Buddha asking us to abandon the existential (bhava-dÙãæi, 現 有) and non-existential (vibhava-dÙãæi, 非 現 有) views.[377]This is the true significance of the avykrta (無 記, Inexpressibles) regarding the nature of the Tathgata (如 來)—whether he exists after death or does not or both or neither.[378] NirvÏa as one with the Absolute is free from thought-determinations. And only by leaving these do we attain NirvÏa.

It is the contention of the Mahyna that the final release is possible only through ։nyat ­by the giving up of all views, stand-points and predicaments.[379]

Ngrjuna, the leading exponent of Öūnyat, has made this point very clear. He says, “Because I have no acceptance whatsoever, I am free from all faults.”

Candrakīrti, in commenting upon this verse, says that it is not to be eradicated like rāga (passion, 貪 欲) etc. nor to be attained like the fruits of a saintly life (e.g., Srotāpatti ( 修  陀 還 ), SakÙdāgāmi ( 修  陀  含 ) etc.). It is not eternal like a±ūnya (real elements).[380] It is by its nature without origin and decay, and its lakãaÏa (characteristic, 相) is that it does not admit of any description.[381] In such an indescribable thing, how can an imagination (kalpanā, 想 像) of the existence of kle±as and skandhas, and their eradication through NirvÏa find a place? So long as those activities of our imagination continue to exist, there can be no NirvÏa. NirvÏa is realised only when all prapañcas, i.e., attempts at particularization or definition cease. To the argument of the Sarvstivadins (上 座 部) that even admitting the non-existence of kle±as and skandhas at the stage where NirvÏa ( 涅 槃 ) is reached, it may be that they exist in saòsra, i.e., before the attainment of NirvÏa, — the Mahynists give the forcible reply that there is not the slightest difference between NirvÏa and Saòsra ( 輪 迴 ). So, in fact, NirvÏa requires no process of eradication. NirvÏa is really the complete disappearance (kãaya, 遍 滅 ) of all figments of the imagination. The kle±as, skandhas, etc., the disappearance of which is generally supposed to be necessary in NirvÏa,[382] have, according to the Mdhyamikas, no real existence whatsoever. Those who cannot get rid of the conception of ‘I-ness’ or ‘Mine-ness’ usually assume the existence of non-existent things.

Put it in the broad view, he told that the paths advocated by other systems can at best lead to partial release, or be a preliminary to this.[383] Consideration of the real in any particular mode, e.g. as Substance, Being, Becoming etc necessarily creates an other, the opposite, from which it is distinguished. We cannot help being attached to what we take to be real—our view—and reject others. A view, because of its restriction, determination, carries with it duality, the root of saòsra. Ngarjuna states this dialectical predicament thus: when the self is posited, an other (para) confronts it; with the division of the self and the non-self, attachment and aversion result. Depending on these all vices spring up. Attachment begets the thirst for pleasure, and thirst hides all flaws (of the objects). Blinded by this, the thirsty man imagines qualities in things, and seizes upon the means to achieve pleasure. Saòsra is thus present as long as there is the attachment to the ‘I’.[384]

The root-cause of duhkka, in the Mdhyamika system, is the indulging in views (dÙsæi, 觀 念) or imagination (kalpanā, 妄 想). Kalpan (vikalpa, 妄 想 分 別) is avidy (無 明) par excellence. The real is the indeterminate (±‰nya); investing it with a character, determining it as ‘this’ or ‘not this’, is making the Real one-sided, partial and unreal. This is unconsciously to negate the real; for all determination is negation. The dialectic then, as the ։nyat of dÙsæis, is the negation of stand-points, which are the initial negation of the real that is essentially indeterminate (nirvikalpa, niãprapa–ca, 無分別). Correctly understood, Öūnyat is not annihilation, but the negation of negation; it is the conscious correction of an initial unconscious falsification of the real.

The word emptiness or empty gains its true connotations in the process of salvation or nirvÏa and has different meanings during the process. All things may be empty in the sense that they are devoid of definite nature, characteristic or function.

Emptiness may be used to discredit theories and dismiss view-points. To claim that all things are empty may show that discursive reasonings and conceptual statements about the true nature of things are unacceptable. The term is also used to devalue and to designate things worthless, useless, to be discarded. To empty one’s mind may mean that one sees the world as suffering and transcends it.

The Mahynist conception of NirvÏa as Öūnyat is that the Mahynists deny the existence of elements altogether. Many of the aspects of their conception are brought out by the various terms used in Mahynic works. For instance, when NirvÏa is equated with ։nyat, the implication is that all things which are ordinarily supposed to exist are really nonexistent just as the mirage has no substantiality whatsoever, e.g., the pÙthiv­-dhtu (地大) is ։nya of real origination, destruction, or existence in reality.[385] When it is equated with Tathat (真 如) or Dharmat  (法 性), the implication is that all things of this world are essentially of the same nature, void of any name or substratum.[386] It is that which is neither existence nor non-existence.[387] Öunyat represents the negative and Tathat the positive aspects of the Truth. When it is called bh‰takoæ­ (實濟, true limit), it is implied that on analysis of dharmas, which are false designations, one arrives finally at the Reality, beyond which it is impossible to pass and which alone is truth. Some of the other expressions which are often used as synonyms of NirvÏa are avitathat (不非真理, not untruth); ananyatathat (獨 一, unique); aviparysatathat (不 遍, irreversible); paramrtha (真諦, the highest truth), tattva (本質, the essence); acintyadhtu (難 誦 的 本 體, incomprehensible substance), dharmadhtu (法 界, totality of things), dharmasthiti (本 體 諸 法, substratum of things); supra±nta (淳淨, perfectly calm, unruffled by origination or destruction); advaya and advayādhīkra (不 分, non-separable and non-divisible).[388]

In the third paragraph of the HÙdaya text, we read:

“Therefore, with the void (s‰nya), there is no form (r‰pa) and no perception (vedna), conception (sanj–), mind impression (saòskara) and no consciousness (vij–na); there is no eye, ear, nose, tongue, body and mind; there is no form, sound, smell, taste, touch and idea; there are [no such things as the eighteen realms of sense (dhtu) from the realm of sight up to that of the faculty of mind (vij–na); there are no such things as the twelve links in the chain of existence (nidnas) from ignorance (avidya) with also the end of ignorance up to old age and death (jaramarana) with also the end of old age and death; there are no (such things as) the four noble truths and there is no wisdom and also no gain.”

(是 故 空 中 無 色，無 受，想，行，識，無 眼，耳，劓，舌，身，意，無 色，聲，香，味，觸，法，無 眼 界，乃 至 無 意 識 界， 無 無 明，亦 無 無 明 盡，乃 至 無 老 死，亦 無 老 死 盡。 無 苦，集，亦，道，無 智，亦 無 得). [389]

In this paragraph we see that all the important and fundamental teachings of Buddhism are rejected: the five skandhas, the eighteen dhātus, the Four Noble Truths, including NirvÏa and the holy Path… are all abolished. This great view is succinct in one very famous sentence of Vajrachedik-praj–-pramit Sūtra: “They should develop a mind which does not abide in anything” (應 無 所 住 而 生 其 心).[390]

Also the same text, but in other passage, the Buddha taught Subh‰ti that:

“They will have wiped out notions of an ego, a personality, a being and a life, of Dharma and Not-Dharma. Why? (Because) if their minds grasp form (lakãaÏa), they will (still.) cling to the notion of an ego, a personality, a being and a life. If their minds grasp the Dharma, they will (still) cling to the notion of an ego, a personality, a being and a life. Why? (Because) if their minds grasp the Not-Dharma, they will (still) cling to the notion of an ego, a personality, a being and a life. Therefore, one should not grasp and hold on to the notion of Dharma as well as that of Not-Dharma. This is why, the Tathgata always said:  “Ye Bhiksus, should know that the Dharma expound is likened to a raft. Even the Dharma should be cast aside; how much more so the Not-Dharma”.

(是 諸 眾 生，無 復 我 相，人 相， 眾 生 相 壽 者 相， 無 法 相， 亦 無 非 法 相。何 以 故？是 諸 眾 生，若 心 取 相，則  為 著 我，人，眾 生， 壽 者。若 取 法 相，即 著 我，人，眾 生，壽 者。是 故 不 應 取 法，不 應 取 非 法。以 是 義 故，如 來 常  說：汝 等 毘 丘！知 我 說 法，如 箋 喻 者，法 尚 應 捨，何 況 非 法?) [391]

Because the Dharma was expressed by Buddha is not a doctrine of philosophy, if it is anything at all, it is therapeutic device cleansing of men’s innate coarse or subtle clingings. If Early Buddhism, the good deeds, the Holy Truth, Nibbna - a state of perfect rest and hapiness, and beyond the three worlds is the aims for practitioner. Then, the contention of the Mahynists is that the only Reality is NirvÏa or Dharmadhātu, or Noble Eightfold Paths everything else being a total delusion of the mind, or therapeutic method. When a patient is cured i.e. freed from clings, then the Four holy Truths… which becomes useless and abandoned behind as ‘a raft’.

At the moment, one realises this essence of Dharma, then he does not distinguish or grasp one thing from another. That is to say Saòsra is identical with NirvÏa, he becomes perfect, i.e., a Buddha, because the Mahynists hold that all beings other than Buddhas are under delusions, the nature of which varies according to their spiritual advancement. So, one must eradicate from his mind the conception not only of his own individuality but also of the substantiality of anything whatsoever perceived or cognized by him. When a being attains a state of mind, in which he cannot distinguish himself from any other thing it corresponds to an ontology of the world (relative reality) or from the (absolute reality) transcendentalism. He is said to attain NirvÏa which means the nature of absolute Öūnyatā, absolute transcendentalism in the Mahynic sense as the HÙdaya S‰tra conclude that:

 “Because of gainlessness, Bodhisattvas who rely on Praj–-pramit, have no hindrance in their hearts, and since they have no hindrance, they have no fear, are free from contrary and delusive ideas and attain the Final NirvÏa”.

(以  無  所  得  故，菩  提  薩  埵，依  般  若  波  羅   密  多  故， 心  無  罣  礙，無 罣 礙 故，無 有 恐 布, 遠 離 齻 倒 夢 想，究 竟 涅 槃). [392]

This is why Bodhisattva Vimalakirti kept silent when he was asked to describe the absolute (the Dharma-gate of non-duality).[393] This is the reason for the Buddha’s silence, and for his answer to Upa±iva‘s inquiry about NirvÏa:

“He who has gone to rest, cannot be measured;

For there (in NirvÏa) nothing can be named.

When all dharmas are abolished,

So are all passages of speech”.[394]

It is also very worthwhile, if we come to give more explanation about the relation between NirvÏa and Saòsra.

As a matter of fact, noumenon and Phenomena are not two separate sets of entities, nor are they two states of the same thing. The absolute is the only real; it is the reality of saòsra which is sustained by false construction (kalpanā, 妄 想). The absolute looked at through the thought-forms of constructive imagination is the empirical world; and conversely, the absolute is the world viewed sub specie aeternitatis, without distorting media of thought.[395]

Öūnyat means transcendentality (Paramārthatā) or non-substantiality (Nairātmya), both of the bodies (pudgala) and the elements (Dharma) composing them which stand over against and yet inform the phenomenal existence (Saòvrtisatya).

։nyat also stands for that ‘naturelessness’ (nihsvabhāvatā) through which one realises the ‘Unity of the apparently opposites’. It is in the light of the doctrines such as this that Ngrjuna sees no difference between ‘Saòsra’ and ‘NirvÏa’.

The conditioned is here equated with the unconditioned. And that unconditioned identity of the conditioned and of the unconditioned is the principal message of the Prajñ-pramit literature. This quite incomprehensible Absolute is perpetually held before us as a standard. With it we should identify, into it we should sink ourselves. We are, indeed, taught to view the world as it appears when the individual self is extinct. All hidden concern for self advancement is counteracted. One should not aim at a private and personal NirvÏa, which would exclude others and the world, but at the full omniscience of a Buddha which somehow includes both.

Personal merit must be surrendered to all beings. No personal attainment is, in any case, possible, no entity can provide lasting rest and security, no freedom is complete while constrained by the need to keep anything out.

In every way the Prajñ-pramit scriptures attempt to correct misconceptions which the practices of the Abhidharma may have fostered.[396] The Abhidharma had convinced us that there are no ‘beings’ or ‘persons’, but only bundles of dharmas. Yet, although beings are not there, they must nevertheless, from compassion, not be abandoned, and their welfare, though strictly non-existent, must be furthered by ‘skill in means’. The Abhidharma had rejected all conditioned things as perilous. Now one realises the peril of keeping, them apart from the unconditioned. The Abhidharma had cultivated wisdom as the virtue which permits one to see the ‘own being’ of dharmas.

Now the Prajñ-pramit literature in its turn regards the separateness of these dharmas as merely a provisional construction, and it is cultivated as the virtue which permits us to see everywhere just one emptiness. All forms of multiplicity are condemned as the archenemies of the higher spiritual vision and insight. When duality is hunted out of all its hiding places, the results are bound to be surprising. Not only are the multiple objects of thought identified with one mysterious emptiness, but the very instruments of thought take on a radically new character when affirmation and negation are treated as non-different, as one and the same.

Once we jump out of our intellectual habits, emptiness is revealed as the concrete fullness; no longer remote, but quite near; no longer a dead nothingness beyond, but the life-giving womb of the Buddha within us.

This doctrine of emptiness has baffled more than one inquirer, and one must indeed despair of explaining it if it is treated as a mere theoretical proposition, on a level with other theoretical statements. And yet, everything is really quite simple, as soon as one pays attention to the spiritual intention behind this doctrine. In teaching ‘emptiness’ the Prajñ-pramit S‰tras do not propound the view that only the Void exists. The bare statement that ‘everything is really emptiness’ is quite meaningless. It is even false, because the rules of this particular logic demand that the emptiness must be as well denied as affirmed.[397]

The HÙdaya S‰tra has these five stages in view when it ends with the formula: ‘Gate, gate, paragate, parasamgate, Bodhi Svaha!’ (堨 諦，堨 諦，波 羅 堨 諦,波 羅 增 堨 諦，菩 提 薩 婆 訶).[398]

1. Gate: gone from the data of common sense to the dharmas, and their emptiness.
2. Gate: gone from infatuation with conditioned dharmas to their renunication, because of their emptiness.
3. Paragate: gone beyond from NirvÏa, the real nature of conditioned dharmas.
4. Parasamgate: gone altogether beyond even beyond the difference between the world and NirvÏa, to a transcendent non-duality, in which affirmation and negation are identified in one emptiness.
5. Bodhi Svaha: means O what an awakening! The final stage of transcendental emptiness, in which the long sleep is at last over.

It will be seen that the word ։nyat in each case derives its meaning from the context created by a spiritual attitude. Outside that context it has no meaning at all.

Thus, it becomes clear that the change from H­nayna to Mahyna was a revolution from a radical pluralism (dharmavāda, 法) to a radical Absolutism (advayavāda, 不 二), from dogmatism (dÙãæivāda, 念) to criticism (±ūnyavāda, 非 念), from the plurality of the momentary elements (dharmavāda, 相) to the essential unity underlying them (dharmatāvāda, 性), from the unreality of an eternal substance (pudgala-nairātmya, 我 不 實) to the unreality of all elements (dharmanairātmya, 法 不 實).

Buddha has taught his doctrine to enable us to overcome all suffering and thus to become real Bhiksãus (bhinnakle±ho bhikãu¾) and obtain NirvÏa. But as long as the duality of the subject and the object is not transcended, neither Bhikãut nor NirvÏa can be realized.[399] Ignorance is of two kinds: Ignorance due to suffering (kle±āvaraÏa, 煩 惱 障), and Ignorance in the form of objects covering the Real (j–eyvaraÏa, 所 知 障). ։nyat is the antithesis of Ignorance of both kinds. It is Pure Knowledge.

There are some quotations as quoted below:

“NirvÏa is an illusion. Even if there is anything greater than NirvÏa, that too will be only an illusion.”[400] A Bodhisattva is a mere dream. Even the Buddha is only a name. Even the Perfect Wisdom itself is a mere name. Dreams, echoes, reflections, images, mirage, illusion, magic, void—such are all objects of intellect.[401] The Öatashasrik Praj–-pramit (八 千 頌 般 惹 經) also condemns all dharmas as illusory. They have neither origination nor decay, they neither increase nor decrease, they are neither suffering nor its cessation, they are neither affirmation nor negation, neither eternal nor momentary, neither Öūnyat nor a±ūnyat.[402] They are mere names and forms. They are My (夢 幻). And My is declared to be an inconsistent category which cannot resist dialectical scrutiny and which is ultimately found to neither existent nor non-existent.[403] All phenomena arc mere names; they are only a convention, a usage, a practical compromise.[404] The LaÏkvatra (楞 伽 經) condemns them to be like an illusion, a dream, a mirage, a hare’s horn, a barren woman’s son, a magic city, the double moon, a moving fire-brand presenting an appearance of a circle, a hair seen floating in the atmosphere by defective vision, an empty space, a sky-flower, a mere echo, a reflection, a painting, a puppet like mechanism, which can be called neither existent nor non-existent.[405]

Many Mahyna s‰tras such as the Lalitavistara (神 通 遊 戲 經),[406] the Samdhirja (三 妹 王 經)[407] and the SuvarÏaprabhsa (金 光 明 經) [408]... also join in such descriptions.

In the Complete Enlightenment S‰tra is displayed the same ideas by the following passage:

“Complete Enlightenment is universally illuminating in quiescent-extinction without duality. Hundreds of thousands of mil­lions of asamyas of Buddha worlds, as innumerable as the grains of sand of the Ganges, are like flowers in the sky, randomly arising and perishing. They are neither identical to nor separate [from the nature of Complete Enlightenment]. Since there is no bondage or liberation, one begins to realize that sentient beings have intrinsically accom­plished Buddhahood, and that birth and death and NirvÏa are like yesterday’s dream”.[409]

Or in ‘the Large sutra on Perfect Wisdom’ is also expressed the same idea:

“What is the emptiness of ultimate reality? “Ultimate reality” means NirvÏa. And that NirvÏa is empty of NirvÏa, on account of its being neither unmoved nor destroyed. For such is its essential nature”.[410]

Now, let us read a passage from the Concise Praj–-pramit S‰tra, in explanation of the nature of Emptiness.

“Subh‰ti said, “0 Kausika, a Bodhisattva who aspires to the glorious vehicle should abide in the Praj–-pramit with the teaching of Emptiness. He should not abide in form, in feeling, conception, impulses or consciousness; he should not abide in form that is transient or eternal . . . He should not abide in the fruit of Arhatship . . . not even in Buddha’s Dharmas. In this manner he should benefit and deliver infinite sentient beings.”

Whereupon ցriputra thought, “Where then should a Bodhisattva abide?”

Subh‰ti, knowing his thought said to him, “What do you think, ցriputra? Where does Tathgata abide?”

ցriputra said, “Tathgata abides nowhere. This no-abiding mind itself is the Tathgata. Tathgata does not abide in conditioned things, nor in the unconditioned. The Tathgata who abides in all dharmas is neither abiding nor non-abiding. Just so, a Bodhisattva should also rest [his mind] in this manner.”

At that time in the assembly many gods thought, “Even the languages and letters of the Yaksha demons are intelligible, but what Subh‰ti has just said is unintelligible.”

Knowing their thoughts, Subh‰ti addressed the gods, “In that, there is no speech no demonstration and no hearing.”

The gods thought, “What Subh‰ti intended to do was to make the doctrine easier for us to understand, but what he has done is to make the doctrine more subtle, profound, and obscure.”

Reading their thoughts, Subh‰ti said to the gods, “If a devotee wants to attain the state of Stream-Winner, Once-Returner, No-Returner or Arhat... he should not depart from this deep insight. ...”

The gods thought, “Who can understand and agree with what Subh‰ti has just said?”

Subh‰ti knew their thought and said, “I say sentient beings are like dreams and magical delusion. Stream-Winners ... Arhats are also like dreams and magical delusions.”

The gods said, “Subh‰ti, are you saying that the Buddha’s Dharmas are also like dreams and magical delusions?”

Subh‰ti said, “Yes, I say Buddha’s Dharmas are like dreams and magical delusions. I say NirvÏa is also like a dream and a magical delusion.”

The gods said, “0 Subh‰ti, are you really saying that even NirvÏa is like a dream and a magical delusion?”

Subh‰ti said, “0 dear gods, if there were something that was more superior even than NirvÏa, I would still say that it is like a dream and a magical delusion. 0 dear gods, there is not the slightest difference between NirvÏa and dreams and magical delusions.”[411]

The doctrine of Öūnyat is clearly expressed here. It is difficult to find parallel statements of this kind in the Vedic literature or in other sources of religious scriptures. Because it contrasts to the Upanishad doctrines of eternal Being or the theistic religions as Catholicism, Hinduism and so on…

Therefore, we can see that if Nibbna is the highest aim in Pli Nikyas, then in the process of evolution, we do come across a new departure when we find in Mahyna sūtras usually said that a fully enlightened Buddha is like illusion, is like a dream, and so is NirvÏa, and even if perchance there could be anything more distinguished than NirvÏa, even that is like a magical illusion, like a dream i.e. the NirvÏa, or Buddhhood is the aim for enlightenment, but when attained and we awaken it, then we come beyond them.

Öūnyatā as beyond the Negation or Indescribable (avāchya / anabhilāpya)

In the Mahyna s‰tras, especially the Mdhyamika, language is like a game, and our debate whether A is B or A is not B is like a magical creation.

In this case the action and the prevention are equally illusory, yet it makes sense to say that one prevents the other. Similarly, according to Ngrjuna, his own words are empty, like things created by magic or illusion, and yet he can refute the essence of all dharmas. His negation is not a negation of something real.

Ngrjuna argued:

“Just as a magically formed phantom could deny a phantom created by its own magic, so could negation and refutation.”[412]

Ngrjuna’s negation is only a tool for eliminating extreme views. If there is no extreme to be removed, there need be no such things as affirmation and negation. Words such as right and wrong or erroneous are really empty terms without reference to entities or things. The right view is actually as empty as the wrong view.

The Mdhyamika refutation of erroneous views and illumination of right views is a therapeutic device for abolishing intellectual and emotional attachment. To obtain enlightenment, one has to go beyond right and wrong, true and false, and see the empty nature. We do not negate anything. There is nothing which can be negated. Hence, we will go beyond affirmation and negation.

In the Large sūtra on Perfect Wisdom, the Buddha confirmed it that

“Furthermore, a Bodhisattva stands firm in the perfection of wisdom. When he courses in the perfection of wisdom, a Bodhisattva does not get at the Not-Beyond or at the Beyond of any dharma whatsoever. It is then that he is one who stands firm in perfect wisdom, and he likewise instigates, exhorts, and introduces all beings thereto. But all this is as though done by a magician with regard to illusory beings…”[413]

Öūnyat essentially means Indescribable (avāchya or anabhilāpya) as it is beyond the Four categories of Intellect (chatuãkoæi-vinirmukta). It is Reality which ultimately transcends existence, non-existence, both and neither. It is neither affirmation nor negation nor both nor neither. Empirically it means Relativity (prat­tya-samutpda) which is phenomena (saòsāra); absolutely it means Reality (tattva) which is release from plurality (nirvāÏa). The world is Indescribable because it is neither existent nor non-existent; the Absolute is Indescribable because it transcends and no category of intellect can adequately describe it. Everything is ։nya: appearances are Svabhva-։nya or devoid of ultimate reality and Reality is Prat­tyasamutpda or devoid of plurality.

To easily grasp the above meanings, we may illustrate the formulation of Four Categories of Intellect (chatuãkoæi-vinirmukta) by a table as under:

Existence = X,  non-Existence = -X

Either Existence or non-Existence = X / -X

Neither Existence nor non-Existence = -(X / -X)

Table VI

-[(X) / (-X) / (X / -X) / -(X / -X)]

 Ashvaghoãa (馬 鳴) said that Tathat (真 如) is neither ։nya (空) nor A±‰nya (非 空) nor both nor neither because it transcends all categories of the intellect. ‘All things in the world from beginning are neither matter nor mind (empirical ego), nor consciousness (momentary and individual), nor non-being, nor being; they are after all, inexplicable.’[414] But this does not mean that there is no reality because it is the Real itself which appears ‘The divine nature of the Absolute Reality is not unreal.’

The ։nyavadins take ‘existence’, ‘is’, ‘affirmation’, ‘being’ in the sense of absolute existence or ultimate reality; it means Eternalism. Those who maintain that the world exists are committing a great error because when we penetrate deep we find that this entire world with all its manifold phenomena is essentially relative and therefore ultimately unreal. And those who advocate non-existence or non-being are also committing a great error because they are denying even the phenomenal reality of the world. They are condemned by the ։nyavadins as nihilists (nstikas, 虛 無 主 義 者). Eternalism and Nihilism are both false. Intellect which is essentially discursive, analytic and relational involves itself in contradictions. All that can be grasped by it is essentially relative. It gives us four categories—existence, non-existence, both and neither — and involves itself in sixty-two antinomies.[415] It cannot give us Reality. Reality transcends all the categories and reconciles all the antinomies of intellect. It is to be directly realized through spiritual experience. It is the Non-dual Absolute in which all plurality is merged. We must rise above the subject-object duality of the intellect and the plurality of the phenomena.

The Buddha was not a speculative metaphysician but a practical soteriologist at heart. His chief concern was the salvation or NirvÏa of sentient beings from the sorrowful world. In teaching men to achieve NirvÏa, the Buddha was believed to be a skillful teacher. On the one hand, he knew that all words and concepts are empty, and that discursive reasoning should be avoided. But on the other hand, he understood that sentient beings are attached to mundane things and could know only discursive knowledge. In order to help them various of attachments, he employed words such as the middle way and extreme views, worldly and ultimate truths, illumination and negation, and emptiness and non-emptiness, to expound his Dharma. Actually ‘the true nature of all dharmas is entirely inexplicable and unrealizable.’[416] Thus all doctrines or verbal messages the Buddha gave are nothing but skillful means (upya, 方 便) used to achieve the goal of non-attachment.

Still men tend to be attached. This clinging or longing is likened by the Mahynists to a disease or fire, a source of suffering, delusion and ignorance in life. ։nyat is a soteriological device to expunge the disease or fire so that human beings are released from misery and so it is likened to medicine or water. The Mahyna have argued that one should properly understand the nature, purpose and function of the device, and not be bound to it. Otherwise, one cannot be transformed.

Öūnyatā as the Means of the Relative Truth (Saòvrtisatya,俗諦) and the Ultimate truth (Paramārthasatya, 真 諦)

One should also understand the doctrine of Öūnyat by means of the two fold truth, namely the conventional or relative truth (Saòvrtisatya/Vyavahāra, 俗 諦) and the ultimate or absolute truth (Paramārthasatya, 真 諦). Ngrjuna said:

“All Buddhas taught Dharma by means of the two-fold truth for the sake of sentient beings. They taught by means of, first, the conventional truth, and second, the ultimate truth.”[417]

Ngrjuna’s idea of the twofold truth reflects a difference in the manner in which one may perceive things and the point of view from which one looks at them. Worldly or conventional truth involves emotional and intellectual attachment to what one perceives, and hence objects of knowledge are considered fixed, determinate and self-existing. When one sees things from this standpoint, he is committed to linguistic conventions as well as ontological entities. The meaning of a word is believed to be the object for which the word stands. The true nature of things can be described and explained by language.

This standpoint is Saòvrtisatya, often presented as discursive knowledge.[418] However, one may see what he perceives from a different point of view, namely, the standpoint of transcendental or ultimate truth whereby he reevaluates the phenomenal world without attachment. One can know that things perceived are empty of a fixed, determinate or self-existing nature. From this standpoint, one is committed neither to ontological entities nor linguistic ideas. The meanings of words are seen as human projections. Language cannot give true nature and conceptualization is abandoned. This unattached standpoint is Paramrthasatya.[419]

The twofold truth is essentially a tactical device. This device has been established to defend Buddhism against possible charges of nihilism and absolutism, to help sentient beings know Buddha’s Dharma and to explain certain obscurities and inconsistencies in the teachings of the Buddha.[420]

With this Two Truths system, the problems of being and non-being, men versus Buddha, finite and infinite, and so forth can all be solved with consistency and ease. When Buddha says that human beings and devas exist, that karma and saòsara exist, that the Eight Fold Path and Three Bodies (Trikaya, 三 身) of Buddha exist, that a cake is a cake and a pen a pen, he is talking from the standpoint of saòvrti-satya. When he says that heaven and earth do not exist, that saòsāra and NirvÏa do not exist, that Buddhahood and Enlightenment do not exist, he is talking from the viewpoint of Paramrthasatya. The paradoxical statement of Vajrachedik-praj–-pramit Sūtra:

“The minds the Tathgata speaks of are not minds, but are (expediency) called minds”. (如 來 說 諸 心，皆 為 非 心，是 名 為 心).[421]

or also the same text, but in other passages are expressed that

“Subh‰ti, the Praj–-pramit as expounded by the Buddha, is not Praj–-pramit but is (merely) so called.”

(須 菩 提！佛 說 般 若 波 羅 密，即 非 般 若 波 羅 密，是 名 般 若 波 羅 密).[422]

 “Subh‰ti, the Tathgata says these living beings are not (really), but they are (expediency), called living beings.”

(眾 生 眾 生 者, 如 來 說 非 眾 生, 是 名 眾 生).[423]

To easily bear in mind, we may sum it up in the following formulation:

Beings = B ;  not Beings = -B .

B = -B => B

Table VII

The first B is the assertion of living beings in the mundane truth; its negation -B is the denial of living beings in the Ultimate Truth. The third B represents illusion, the nature of man’s mind, in which the merging or identification of mundane and transcendental is expressed.

Here we see the vital point that the Two Truths should never be treated as two separate entities in two distinct and divided categories. Worldly truth, though not unconditional, is essential for the attainment of the ultimate truth and nirvÏa; according to Ngrjuna’s Middle Treatise, “without worldly truth, ultimate truth cannot be obtained.”[424] Relative truth is not useless in achieving enlightenment, nor can it be said that there is no relation between worldly and ultimate truths. Transcendental truth is explained by speech, and speech is conventional and conditional. The Bodhisattva knows and practices this teaching of the twofold truth. He uses words and concepts, but realizes that they neither stand for, nor point to, anything substantial. He employs Prat­tyasamutpda to refute extreme views, and recognizes that they are all empty. It is this skill-in-means (upya, 方 便) which enables him to live in conditional and transcendental worlds simultaneously, and hence to save and benefit himself and others equally. The Twelve Gate Treatise states:

“If one does not know two truths, he cannot know self-interest, other-interest and common-interest. But, if one knows conventional truth, he then knows ultimate truth; and if he knows ultimate truth, he knows conventional truth.”[425]

The concept of the Two Truths itself is only valid when we, standing firmly on this side, try to describe the other side and its paradoxical relationship with this side. It is only an expedient device to explain away the delusory tension between the mundane and the transcendental for people who are deeply rooted in this side. The purpose of preaching the Two Truths system is to go beyond the system itself and see the non-distinctive nature of the two. When all relativities are transcended, all pairs and duals are demolished, a wondrous state of great freedom in which all polarities merge into one vast totality will be revealed. In this state of non-dual totality, one then fully realizes the meaning of ‘Form is identical with void’, and ‘void is identical with form’ (色 即 是 空，空 即 是 色)[426] of the HÙdaya Sūtra, the central to the Praj–-pramit scriptures, and on the basis of this Nāgrjuna formulated an integrated dynamic theory of praxis. His weapons in doing were a series of arguments based on formulae of negation, a broader interpretation of dependent co-arising, and also his needfulness of that aspect of the meaning of Öūnyat inherent in Öūnyat.

The law of dependent origination helps us in knowing the causes and conditions of this phenomenal world in a very subtle way. After analysing these causes and conditions of the phenomenal world, what is achieved in the transcendental sense, is nothing but Öūnyat. After this we reach a stage, which may be called a phenomenal vacuum, which is Öūnyat. On the one end is the dependent origination and on the other end is the ։nyat; and in between there is the existence of the whole of the phenomenal world. The discovery of the law of dependent origination was an attempt to analyse the mundane world and what is ultimately achieved by this process is known as the saòvrtisatya. At the other end process led to the concept of ։nyat, which at level of the paramārthasatya may be designed as the phenomenal vacuum. This stage may be interpreted as silence, i.e., beyond which our intellect can no longer work.

For the sake of clarity, a diagram about the Two Truth on Three Levels is offered under. On the ground of ‘A simplification of Chi Tsang’s Two Truths on Three Levels’,[427] we change some of his signs with reasons such as:

D = B (because B i.e. Beings), v = / (because / i.e. either), ~ = - (Because – i.e. minus, deny).

Table VIII

MUNDANE TRUTH	ULTIMATE TRUTH
1. Affirmation of being:  B	1. Denial of being: -B
2. Affirmation of either being or non-being: B / -B	2. Denial of either being or non-being: -(B / -B)
3. Either affirmation of either being or non-being or denial of either being or non-being: (B / -B) / -(B / -B)	3. Neither affirmation nor denial of either being or non-being: -[(B / -B) / -(B / -B)]

The path leading from the delusion to enlighten the true nature of Öūnyat on the basis of the Two Truths may be considered by a process of below arrows of table IX:

Table IX

To conclude this part, we may quote Ngrjuna’s words which emphasize the Two Truths system as below:

“Those who are unaware of the distinction between these two truths are incapable of grasping the profound meaning of the Buddha’s teaching.”[428]

or:

“Those who do not know these two standpoints cannot understand the teaching of the Buddha.”

(dve satye tamupshritya Buddhnm dharmadhraÏa. lokasamvÙtisaya–cha satya–cha paramrthata¾. yenayor na vijnanti vibhgam satyayor dvayo¾. te tattvam na vijnanti gambh­ram Buddha±āsane).[429]

Thus, the doctrine of emptiness is given to save, or to account for, empirical phenomena and practical affairs. Ngrjuna’s twofold truth has also been considered as two fixed sets of truth. His distinction between saòvrtisatya and paramārthasatya has been taken to imply or correspond to an ontological distinction between ‘relative reality’ and ‘absolute reality’.

The Relation between the Concepts of Suññatā and Öūnyatā

Here we start to come to an important point about the approach of Su––at (空) and Öūnyat (空 性) i.e., the relation between the concept of Su––at in Pli Nikya and Öūnyat in Mahyna s‰tras.

The teaching on Su––at is almost the same in the two systems but they appear to be different due to the difference in standpoint that is adopted by each school. The Mdhyamika primarily shows the inadequacy and incompetence of logic and reason to grasp Reality or to describe it accurately. On the other hand the primary interest of Su––at in the Theravda is in ethics and ethical culture. Its approach is not so much philosophical, or even dialectical, as preeminently ethical and religious. Hence the Theravda, following the example of the Buddha, is not disposed to go thoroughly into, all the philosophical implications of the theory of causality. It is possible to deny the reality of dukkha on the basis of the same arguments on which it denies the reality of the dukkhatā, that is, the experience of dukkha. But to do so is to do harm to its ethical ideology and emphasis on ethical striving. If there is no dukkha there is no point in undertaking ethical culture and religious endeavour. The same consideration applies to other categories such as vedan (受), magga (道) and nibbuti (解 脫).

The Theravda denies the reality of the feeler (vedaka, 受 者), the doer (kāraka, 造 作 者), and the released (nibbuta, 解 脫 者). It could have gone further and denied release (nibbuti, 解 脫), feeling (vedāna, 受) and the path (magga, 道). But this is not done for obvious ethical reasons. To deny the reality of the path is to rule out altogether the possibility of a religious life. To deny feeling is to deny the very possibility of experience. To deny release is to render all life aimless and philosophical consistency and thoroughness are, in the Theravda, subordinated to ethics and the dictates of ethics. This standpoint of the Theravdins is entirely opposed to that adopted by Ngrjuna, at least in his capacity as the author of the Kārikas. In this work, he denies not only kraka but kriy as well (ch. XVIII), not only nibbuta but nibbuti (NirvāÏa) as well (ch. XXV), not only pudgala (我) but skandha (蘊), dhtu (界) and yatana (處) as well (ch. III), and so on. His logic does not deter Ngrjuna from denying even the reality of the Buddha and his Jhna. But the Theravdin has elected to follow the middle path in a way that is more faithful than that of Ngrjuna himself.

The difference between the ։nyat (空 性) of Mahyna and the Su––at (空) of Theravda is not fundamental as may appear at first sight. All the differences are due only to a difference in approach to the facts of nature. This fact emerges all the more clearly as we go further in considering the Su––at of the Theravda. The Su––at of things has been considered in the Theravda books from a variety of standpoints, with the ethical interest foremost in every case.

1. Su––at without divisions comprehends the whole universe.
2. Su––at is twofold when it refers to substance and substantial.
3. Su––at is fourfold when it refers to the following modes: not seeing substance in oneself, not attributing substance to another (person or thing), not transferring one’s self to another, not bringing in another’s self into oneself:

(neva katthaci attnam passati, (na ca kvacani parassa ca attnaò kvaci passati), na tam parassa parassa ki–canabhave upanetabbam passati, na parassa attanam attano kincanabhave upanetabbam passati).[430]

4. Su––at is sixfold when it is applied to each of the sense organs, the six kinds of objects corresponding to them and the six kinds of consciousness arising from them, from the point of view of the following six characteristics: substance (atta), substantial (attaniya), permanent (nicca), stable (dhuva), eternal (sassata) and non‑evolutionary (avipariÏāmadhamma).[431]
5. Su––at is eightfold when it is considered from the point of view of the following: non‑essential (asāra, nissāra sarpagata, nīccasārāsāra), essentially unstable (dhuvasārāsāra), essentially unhappy or disharmonious (sukhasārāsāra), essentially non‑substantial (attasārāsāra), non‑permanent (su––aò niccena), non‑stable (su––aò dhuvena), non‑eternal (su––aò sussatena), evolutionary or fluxional (vipariÏāmadhamma). [432]
6. Su––at is tenfold from the point of view of the following modes: devoid (ritta), empty (tuccha), void (su––a), non‑substantial (anatta), godless (anissariya), unfree (akamakāri), disappointing (alabbhaniya), powerless (avasavattaka), non‑self (para), separated (vivitta).[433]
7. Su––at is twelvefold from the point of view of these other modes thus taking r‰pa as an instance one can regard it as being: (satto), no animal (jīvo), no human (naro), no youth (mānavo), no woman (itthi), no man (puriso), no substance (att), nothing substantial (attaniya), not myself (ahaò), not mine (mama), not another’s (a––assa), not anybody’s (kassaci).[434]
8. Su––at is forty‑twofold when considered from the point of view of these modes: impermanent (anicca), inconsistent (dukkha), diseased (roga), abscessed (gaϯa), evil (sallu), painful (agha), ailing (ābādhu), alien (para), decaying (paloka), distressing (iti), oppressing (upuddava), fearful (bhayu), harassing (upasagga), unsteady (cala), breaking (pabhaôga), unstable (addhuvu), unprotected (atna), unsheltered (alena), helpless (asaraÏa), refugeless (asaraÏībhūta), empty (ritta), devoid (tuccha), void (su––a), substanceless (anatta), unpleasant (anassāda), disadvantageous (ādīnava), changing (vipariÏāmadhamma), essenceless (asāraka), originat­ing pain (aghamāla), torturing (vadhaka), annihilating (vibhava), depraved (sāsava), compounded (saôkhatu), frustrating (maramisa), tending to birth (jātidhamma), tending to decay (jarādhamma), tending to disease (vydhidhummu), tending to death (maraôadhamma), tending to grief, sorrow and lamentation (sokuparidevu dukkhu domanassa upāyāsa dhamma), ori­ginating (samudaya), cesant (atthaÏgama), dissolving (nissaranÏa).[435]

When the Buddha says that one should look upon the world as being su––a he means that one should regard the world of objects and subjects in all the above ways. [436]

These are not the only ways in which Su––at is considered in the books of the Theravda. The other analyses of this concept show a more detailed and deeper insight into the understanding of Su––at. Before we can proceed to their examination it is necessary to refer at this stage to some of the divisions of ±‰nyat that occur in the books of the Mahyna.

First of all, it may be very useful for our analysis, if we can give a look at the number of Öūnyats which is often listed in Mahyna texts. The commentary Abhisamaylaòkārloka (莊 嚴 證 道 歌) of Haribhadra (師 子賢) on Aãæsha±rik Praj–-pramit (八 天 頌 般 若 波 羅 密 經) speaks of twenty modes of Öūnyat. The Madhynata-vibhaôgaæīk (中 邊分別論疏) mentions sixteen modes of Öūnyats. Dignga (陳那) in Praj–pramitpiÏdrtha speaks of sixteen modes of Öūnyat.[437] Obermiller[438] analyses the twenty modes of ։nyats on the basis of Abhisamaylaòkarloka of Haribhadra. The Aãæsha±rik Praj–-pramit adds a new dimension to the domain of Öūnyat when it says the Öūnyat of all the dharmas cannot even be described. On the Aãæsha±rik Praj–-pramit there is a commentary known as āloka written by Haribhadra. In this commentary twenty modes of Öūnyat have been mentioned and he also assigns each mode of Öūnyat to one of the ten planes of meditation (dasa-bhūmi) or to the preparatory or posterior stages. Prof. T.R.V. Murti[439] who has given a list of twenty modes of ։nyat as an appendix to the Central Philosophy of Buddhism surmises that it is a later innovation as Ngrjuna himself does not deal with them. The list as given by him is found at several places in Mahyna literature, such as the Pa–cavim±ati-sāhasrik‑praj–­pramit, the Madhynta-vibhaÏgaæīk and the AbhisamaylaÏkrloka. It is clear that Professor Murti is not aware of the list that appears in the Pli books, for otherwise he would not have said that the list found in the Mahyna literature was late in point of elaboration. The list that he has given may be quoted from the AbhisamaylaÏkrloka: [440]

1. The Unreality of Internal Elements of Existence (adhyātma±ūnyatā, 內 空 的不 實 本 質). The first mode applies to physical facts, states such as feeling, volition etc. Their nature is not described either as changing (akūæastha) or as totally undestroyable (avinā±ī); that is neither real (sat) nor unreal (asat). This constitutes their ։nyat relatively or unrelatively.
2. The Unreality of External Objects (bahirdhā±ūnyatā, 外 空 的 不 實 本 質). This relates to external forms because all forms can be external only. The external form is taken in shape of sense organs such as eye, nose etc. This is known as the Unreality of External Objects.
3. The Unreality of both together as in the sense organs or the body (adhyātmabahirdhā±ūnyatā, 內 外 空 的 不 實 本 質). Since all the dharmas are unreal and the basis of all the dharmas is also unreal, their (of dharmas and bases) knowledge is also unreal.
4. The Unreality of (the knowledge of) Unreality (Öūnyatā±ūnyatā, 非 空 的 不 實 本 質). This is an important mode of Öūnyat. The criticism that everything is relative, unreal (Öūnya) may be thought to stand out as a view; when all things are rejected, the rejection itself could not be rejected. This rejection itself is as relative, unreal as the rejected.
5. The Unreality of the Great Space (mahā±ūnyatā, 大 空 的 不 實 本 質). Hence we can say that space is notional, our conception of it is relative to this distinction of directions east, west etc., and also to the things resident in them. The ։nyat of space is termed as Great Space because it has infinite expanse.
6. The Unreality of the Ultimate Reality (parmārtha±ūnyatā, 真 空 的 不 實 本 質). By the Unreality of the Ultimate Reality is meant the unreality of NirvÏa as a separate reality.
7. The Unreality of the Conditioned (saòskÙta±ūnyatā, 俗 空/有 為 的 不 實 本 質).
8. The Unreality of the Unconditioned (asaòskÙta±ūnyatā, 無 為 的 不 實 本 質). These two unrealities make a natural pair. The conditioned is unreal and it is nothing in itself, it is neither permanent nor nonemergent. The unconditioned (asaòskÙta) can only be conceived in contradiction to the conditioned; it is neither brought out into being nor destroyed by any activity of ours.
9. The Unreality of the Limitless (atyanta±ūnyatā, 無 限 的 不 實 本 質). This mode of Öūnyat is with reference to our consciousness of the Limit and the Limitless. With regard to this unreality T.R.V. Murti says[441] that it might be thought that steering clear of the two extremes or ends of Existentialism and Nihilism, we are relying on a middle line of demarcation and that thereby the Middle or the Limitless might become invested with a nature of its own. The Limitless is nothing in itself; the Middle position is no position at all, but a review of positions.
10. The Unreality of that which is Beginningless and Endless (anavarāgra±ūnyatā, 無 始,無 終 的 不 實 本 質). This mode of ։nyat is similar in character. It applies to distinctions in time such as beginning, the middle and the end. These distinctions are subjective. We can say that nothing stands out rigidly on the beginning, the middle and the end, the times flow into each other. Consequent on the rejection of the beginning etc. the beginningless too turns out to be notional; and it should be recognised as relative or unreal on the account.
11. The Unreality of Undeniable (anavakāra±ūnyatā, 非 夫 定 的 不 實 本 質). When we reject anything as untenable, something else is kept aside as unrejectable, the undeniable, it might be thought. This eleventh mode of ։nyat brings out this aspect.
12. The Unreality of the Ultimate Essences (prakÙti±ūnyatā, 自 性 的 不 實 本 質). All the things exist in themselves. Nobody causes them either to happen or to mar them. The things are in themselves void, lack essential character of their own. There is no change in our notions not in real.
13. The Unreality of All Elements (sarvadharma±ūnyatā, 諸 法 相 的 不 實 本 質). This mode of Öūnyat only reiterates that all modes of being, phenomenal and noumenal lack essential reality and so are unreal.
14. The Unreality of all Definitions (lakãaÏa±ūnyatā, 相 的 不 實 本 質). In the early Buddhism an attempt had been made to give a precise definition of entities e.g., the impenetrability of matter, and apprehension of object of consciousness (vij–āna). This brings home to us that matter and other entities lack the essence attributed to them. All definiton is of the nature of a distinction within general class and is therefore nominal in character.
15. The Unreality of the Past, the Present and the Future (anauplambha±ūnyat, 過 去,現 在,未 來 的 不 實 本 質). The unreality or the purely nominal character of the past, the present and the future is demonstrable by the consideration that in the past itself there is no present and the future and the vice versa; and yet without such relating the consciousness of the past etc. does not arise.
16. The Unreality of Relation or Combination conceived as non-ens (abhāvasvabhāva±ūnyatā, 無 法 有 法 空 的 不 實 本 質). All the elements of the phenomenal existence are dependent on each other and they are dependent (prat­tyasamutpannatvt), and they have no nature of their own.
17. The Unreality of the Positive Constituents of Empirical Existence (bhāva±‰nyatā, 有 空 的 不 實 本 質). The five updna skandhas i.e. duhkha, samudaya, loka, dÙãæi and bhva do not stand for any objective reality, their collection is a non-entity, as it is a grouping subjectively imposed upon them. This shows that corresponding to words and concepts there is no entity.
18. The Unreality of the non-ens (of the Non-empirical) (abhāva±ūyatā, 非 無 有 的 不 實 本 質). The unconditioned conceived as the absence of the five groups is also unreal. Space, one of the unconditioned is defined as non-obstruction (anvÙtti). This is determined solely by the absence of the positive characters. The same is the case with NirvÏa, another unconditioned.
19. The Unreality of the Self-being (svabhāva±ūnyatā, 有 法 空 的 不 實 本 質). This mode of ։nyat emphasises the nature of reality as something existing in itself (svabhāva). It may be stated that svabhva is here dialectically juxtaposed to ։nyat (svabhāvasya ±ūnyatā).
20. The Unreality of Dependent Being (parabhāvasūnyatā, 第 一 有 空 的 不 實 本 質). In this case also no external factor like the agent or his instruments play any part in making up its reality.

A careful examination of the evidence in the Pli canon shows that this list cannot be so late as professor T.R.V. Murti thinks it is. As a matter of fact the Pāli records preserve for us a longer list than that of the twenty modes.

“Su––asu––aò (空), saòkhrasu––aò (有為空), vipariρmasu––aò (壞空), aggasu––aò (上空), lakkhhÏasu––aò (相空), vikkhambhanasu––aò (撤空), tadangasu––aò (類空), samucchedasu––aò (滅空), patippassadhisu––aò (輕 安 空), nissaraÏasu––aò (捨空), ajjhattasu––aò (內空), bahiddhsu––aò (外空), dubhatosu––aò (假空), sabhgasu––aò (同 分 空), visabhgasu––aò (同分分別空), esansu––aò (欲空), pariggahasu––aò (持空), paæilbhasu––aò (樂空), paæivedhasu––aò (俉 空), ekattasu––aò (惟 空), nnattasu––aò (慧空), khantisu––aò (忍空), adhiææhnasu––aò (願空), pariyoghanasu––aò (入 空), paramatthasu––aò (勝 義 諦 空).”

If this list of 25 Su––at of Patisambhidmagga belonging to Khuddhaka - Nikya is compared with what is given in the Mahyna texts it will be found that most of the items in the latter are already to be found in Theravda text. We have here not only a correspondence in ideas but also a correspondence in terminology. This suggests powerfully that at some period in early Buddhist history there had been either close association between the Theravda and the Mahyna or that both schools had derived some of the terminology from a common fund of tradition which may be described as a still earlier form of what may be called, for want of a better term, original Buddhism. This list also tells us something more to confirm our view that the Theravda teaching on Su––at is considerably well developed and that the Öūnyat of the Mdhyamika does not therefore represent a development that is altogether new in the history of Buddhist thought as has been suggested by scholars like Aiyaswami Sastri and Stcherbatsky.[442]

We have already had occasion to remark that the lists given above do not by any means exhaust the Theravda analysis of Su––at. The consideration of the many-sided nature of Öūnyat has been incorporated as an aid to meditation. We are told that Nibbna itself can be regarded as consisting of Su––at and that final release could be obtained by developing insight into this fact of the universe.[443]

There are various Interpretative Approaches to understand ։nyat as we discussed above. Considering the vast philosophical literature on the concept of ։nyat. According to T.R. Sharma in An Introduction to Buddhist Philosophy,[444] we can divide the various approaches into the following:

1. Early Pli traditions of Theravda concerning Su––at.
2. Later H­nayna traditions of interpreting Su––at.
3. Vij–navda, Mdhyamika and Praj–pramit s‰tra approaches towards ։nyat.
4. The tradition of interpreting ։nyat among the Vaipulyas‰
5. Commentarial approaches adopted in the different commentaries such as Prassanapad of Candrak­rti and €loka of Haribhadra.

The concept of ։nyat does not seem fully developed in the first two traditions mentioned above except some stray reference to Pu––at in the early Pli philosophical works of Theravda tradition. The concept of ։nyat was fully developed by the Praj–-pramit and the Mdhyamika system of philosophy. Ngrjuna seems to be its chief exponent in the sense that he laid major emphasis on his philosophy of nothingness or emptiness (ni¾svabhāva, 虛 無 主 義) to the concept of Öūnyat.

These meanings of emptiness are exemplified in the successive stages of the Su––at in Pli Nikyas and Mahyna s‰tras or the evolution of the concept of ։nyat associated with a number of levels of understanding.

In Pli Nikyas, on the first level, the Su––at in non-philosophic meaning is as non-substantiality and the ideal of Su––at that we should contemplate exactly what is negative or affirmative followings its reality. The second level is Su––at defined as anatt because of void of a self and nothing belonging to a self (anattā), and it comes to exist by the cause of 12 nidnas (Paæiccasamuppāda). The last meaning is Su––at considered as Nibbna because Nibbna is the state of final release, or trancendental emtiness, while in Mahyna s‰tras, it is said that, the world or universe is ‘a great set’ of myriad of things. All things co-exist, co-operate and interact upon one another to create innumerable phenomena. This is called the cause. The cause under different conditions produces the different effects, which lead to either good or bad or neutral retributions. It is the very universal principle, the reason of existence or the norm of existence as such. In other words, because of Öūnyat, all things can exist; without Öūnyat, nothing could possibly exist, in the HÙdaya S‰tra says, ‘The Öūnya does not differ from rūpa’.[445] Öūnyat is, therefore, as the true Nature of Empirical Reality. However, at this stage one may still be attached to conceptualization and to a monistic view of the universe. Because any conceptualization is an extreme. This is the first level of Öūnyat.

On the second level, ։nyat as the Principle of Prat­tyasamutyda, because a thing must have no a nature of its own (svabhāva), it is produced by causes or depends on anything else, so it is Öūnyat as the HÙdaya text expresses “Eye is void of self and anything belonging to self, form is void…, visual consciousness is void…”[446]

On the third level, Öūnyat means Middle way. As we know, common things, which appear to be real, are not really real. But ։nyat in this sense may be misinterpreted as non-being or nothing. People distinguish between being and non-being, existence and non-existence, permanence and impermanence, Saòsra (the cycle of life and death) and NirvÏa. All these should be regarded as extremes. Hence, the term ‘middle way’ (madhyama) is employed to revoke dualistic thinking and refers to something intermediary but it has transcended any dichotomy into ‘being’ and ‘non-being,’ ‘attribute’ and ‘substance’ or ‘cause’ and ‘effect’…The term ։nyat means that both naive realism and nihilism are unintelligible and their descriptions of the world should be discarded.

On the fourth level, ։nyat as NirvÏa and come beyond NirvÏa which is truly equated with Tathgata (如來) or Dharmat ( 法 性 ) implicating that all things of this world are essentially of the same nature, void of any name or substratum. Mahynists declared the forcible statement that there is not the slightest difference between NirvÏa (涅 槃) and Saòsāra (娑婆) because when the complete disappearance of all things is really, there is NirvÏa.

The next point, Öūnyat means beyond all Negation Indescribable which implies that monistic as well as dualistic and pluralistic views of the world are untenable. It is the negation of conceptualization, stated as a denial of both duality and non-duality. It is Reality which ultimately transcends existence, non-existence, both and neither. It is beyond the Four categories of Intellect (chatuãkoæi-vinirmukta) viz. ‘neither affirmation nor negation nor both nor neither’. At this stage, one is supposed to be free from all attachments from the rude to the subtle in mind. If there were something more superior even than NirnÏa, it is like a dream and a magical delusion. If this occurs, Öūnyat means total non-attachment.

However, if Öūnyat is the total Öūnyat, then it is meaningless. Hence on the last level, Öūnyat is the Means of the Relative Truth (Saòvrtisatya) and the Ultimate truth (Paramrthasatya). That is to say, worldly truth, though not unconditional, is essential for the attainment of the ultimate Truth and Nirvaρ. The HÙdaya S‰tra, the central of the Praj–-pramit scriptures, has expanded this significance by the emphasis words that ‘r‰pa does not differ from ։nya’ or ‘r‰pa is identical with ։nya’.[447] Relative truth is not useless in achieving enlightenment, nor can it be said that there is no relation between worldly and ultimate truths. Thus, Praj–-pramit is of the nature of knowledge; it is a seeing of things, it arises from the combination of causal factors...  From that, “Bodhisattvas have no hindrance in their hearts, and since they have no hindrance, they have no fear, are free from contrary and delusive ideas”.[448] in order that he can content himself  (自 在) with entering the world to spread the Truth of ։nyat to all walks of life without any obstacle.

Hence, the concept of ։nyat in Praj–-pramit S‰tra opens our knowledge that in Pli Nikyas, the concept of Su––at is displayed very simple with the idea of the reality and that su––at in Pa–ca Nikāya is also the form of real nature i.e. Öūnyat in Praj–-pramit texts. In other words, Su––at in Pli scriptures attached special importance to shere non-self and until the appearance and development of Mahyna, specially Praj–-pramit literature, then the field of non-self is represented in two parts: the non-substantiality of the self (pudgala nairtmya) and the non-substantiality of the dharmas (dharma nairtmya) i.e. from subjective to objective, from six internal sense-bases to six external sense-bases, from affirmation of either being or non-being to denial of either being or non-being... are empty. The negation of all things give us to insight into the reality (Öūnyatā of Öūnyatā). That is also to say, Su––at in Pli Nikyas is the foundation for the development of Praj–-pramit literature.

As far as the role of ։nyat in Mahyna texts is concerned, Edward Conze revealed that the Mahyna theorists regarded the HÙdaya Sūtra (the Heart Sūtra) which represents all of the family of Praj–-pramit literature, as ‘The Second Turning of the Wheel of the Law’.[449] Because the HÙdaya S‰tra is the shortest scripture on the doctrine of Öūnyat, it is the only s‰tra in which Bodhisattva Avalokite±vara actively participates as the chief exponent of the insight of Öūnyat.

Put it in more clear words, it is said that seven weeks after the Buddha’s Enlightenment, he gave the first discourse to group of five ascetics at the Deer forest (鹿 苑), in Isipatana (諸天墮處) entitled ‘Dhamma-cakka-pavattana-vaggo’ (經 轉 法 論) means ‘The Foundation of Kingdom of Norm’ or ‘The rolling of the Wheel of Truth’ or ‘The First Turning of the Wheel of the Law’ to void sense pleasures and self-mortification and follow the Middle Way which leads to calm, wisdom, enlightenment, Nibbna and to present the reality of sufferings (dukkha), its arising, its cessation and the path to its cessation. Suffering is an eternal problem of human beings. In one form or the other, all progressive thoughts of mankind concentrate on the problem of suffering in the sense of finding out their answer. And the Buddha’s discourse was applied it for whoever can experience the Truth by himself. That is the reason this lecture is called ‘The First Turning of the Wheel of the Law’ and in which the knowledge of Four holy Truths (四  諦)[450] is equated to vidy   (明, vijj or knowledge in Pli).

We can read a passage in the HÙdaya S‰tra:

“All Buddhas of the past, present and future obtained complete vision and perfect enlightenment (anuttara-samyak-sambodhi) by relying on Praj–-pramit. So we know that Praj–-pramit is the great supernatural Mantra, the great bright, unsurpassed and unequalled Mantra which can truly and without fail wipe out all sufferings.”

(三 世 諸 佛，依 般 若 波 羅 密 多 故，得 阿 耨 多 羅 三 貓 三 菩 提。 故 知 般 若 波 羅 密 多，是 大 神 咒，是 大 明 咒， 是 無 上 咒，是 無 等 等 咒，能 除 一 切 苦，真 實 不 虛). [451]

Accordingly, this HÙdaya S‰tra is meant to be, as Edward Conze says, ‘A restatement of the Four holy Truths for beginners on the method of bearing this teaching in mind as well as on the spiritual advantages of following it’.[452] Conze dismisses Tantric influence on this text, despite the fact that the closing section comprises a few Tantric terms ‘mantra’.

Edward Conze’s words, the term mantra (mantā in Pli, 神咒) or vidy (vijjā in Pli, 明) is not intended to mean, ‘a secret, mysterious lore of magical potency which can be compressed into a magical formula, a spell’. Rather, the term is intended to mean, ‘the knowledge of the four holy Truths which is the fundamental insight (vijjā, 明) of the Buddha’. In parallel to ‘The First Turning of the Wheel’ (dharma-cakra-pravartana-sūtra) (第 一 轉 法 論), the main subject of which is the Four holy Truths, while the Mahyna theorists regarded the Heart S‰tra as ‘The Second Turning of the Wheel of the Law’ (第 二 轉 法 論) because Avalokite±vara Bodhisattva, who was engaged in deep contemplation surveying the distress calls of sentient beings, expounded the meaning of the Four holy Truths from the point of view of ։nyat. That is to say if in Early Buddhism considered ‘Four holy Truths’ is the real truth and Nibbna is the aim for a practitioner, then in Developed Buddhism some things such as Four holy Truths, NirvÏa, or ‘even if any thing greater than NirvÏa, that too will be only an illution’ (nirvāÏamapi māyopamam svapnopamam).[453] The negation of all, neither reality in ‘attainment’ nor in ‘non-attainment’(得 不得) is the most true and proper signification of the concept of ։nyat in Mahyna texts.

From these marks, we can find out that Öūnyat in Mahyna s‰tras has its seeds in Nikyas and its evolution only means Mahynists added more colours of variety into Su––at. Thus, the teaching on Su––at is almost the same in the two systems but they appear to be different due to the difference in standpoint that is adopted by each school.

It should be noted that to obtain liberation one need not pass through these levels or even infinite stages of a gradual progression; one can achieve enlightenment instantly. Also, no matter how one gets enlightenment, when attachment is gone, emptiness should be discarded.[454] To realize this ‘non-abiding’ nature of emptiness is true wisdom. This is the achievement of moksa (解 脫, salvation).[455]

The term empty or ։nyat is mainly a soteriological device, a tool of NirvÏa or Salvation. Psychologically, ։nyat is detachment. The teaching of ։nyat is to empty the mind of cravings. Morally, this negation has a positive effect, namely, preventing one from doing evils and making one love oneself and others. It is to foster the virtue of compassion (karuÏā, 慈 悲). And epistemologically, ։nyat is an unattached insight that truth is not absolutely true. It teaches that discursive knowledge does not provide true wisdom and that enlightenment is the abandonment of conceptual thinking. Metaphysically, ։nyat means that all things are devoid of definite nature, characteristic and function, and that metaphysical views are unintelligible and should be discarded. This is not to advocate nihilism but rather to save or to account for the possibility of empirical phenomena and practical values. Spiritually, ։nyat is freedom, NirvÏa or liberation from the suffering of the world.[456]

To repeat once more: Emptiness is not a theory, but a ladder that reaches out into the infinite. A ladder is not there to be discussed, but to be climbed. If one does not even take the first steps on it, the farther rungs seem, I admit, rather remote. They come nearer only as one goes up there. Emptiness is used as a traditional term to express the complete negation of this world by the exercise of wisdom. The central idea is the total denial of, the complete emancipation from, the world around us in all its aspects and along its entire breadth. It is a practical concept, and it embodies an aspiration, not a view. Its only use is to help us get rid of this world and of the ignorance which binds us to it. It has not only one meaning, but several, which can unfold themselves on the successive stages of the actual process of transcending the world through wisdom. Not everyone, of course, is meant to understand what emptiness means. In that case it is better to pass on to something else.[457]

—˜]™–

 

CHAPTER SEVEN

THE CONDUCT OF

BODHISATTVA-CARY€

After a discussion on the development of the concepts of Bodhisattva (菩 薩) and ։nyat (空 性), the next point that merits a thorough discussion is the question of the Bodhisatta path (Bodhisattvā-cāryā, 菩 薩 行) in Mahyna S‰tras.

In Encyclopedia of Religion[458] it is stated that the English term Bodhisattva path translates the Sanskrit Bodhisattva, ‘Vehicle of the Bodhisattva’ or, more frequently, Bodhisattv-cry ‘The Practice of the Bodhisattva’ terms widely employed in Mahyna Buddhist texts.

There is not one kind of cause and condition which is used in seeking the Buddha way. The Bodhisattvas either cultivate Dharma through belief and understanding of the twelve causes and conditions, the Middle Way or through belief and understanding of the six Perfections (Pāramitās, 波 羅 密). When one talks of the Bodhisattvas or their effort to become an Enlightened One (Buddha, 佛 陀), the role of these perfections becomes much more significant. When one discusses various appearances of their practice of the Bodhisattva way, this does not refer to the physical appearances of the Bodhisattvas, but to the various practices and Dharmas they cultivated.

The Bodhisattva path (菩 薩 行) consists of three main stages. These are as under:

• The Preliminary Devotional Practices (起 信 心)
• The Thought of Enlightenment (發 菩 提 心)
• The Practice of Moral Perfections (Paramita, 須 波 羅 密).[459]

The Preliminary Devotional Practices

To begin with, one starts with doing obeisance and worship to the Buddha (佛), Dhamma (法) and Saôgha (僧). Confession of sins (Pāpāde±anā, 懺 悔) assumes an important place in the Bodhisattva path and therefore he confesses his sins to the Buddha and Bodhisattvas and begs for their help and protection.

In Mahyna, confession came to be regarded as an atonement for absolving sin and this forms the very essence of denunciation by oneself of one’s own past sins (vid‰saÏa-samudācāva: atonement). The confessors entreated the Buddhas to wash them clean with their water of mercy and to absolve their sin. In this way the confessors invoked the Buddhas and Bodhisattvas to absolve even the sin acquired by the five grave offences (pa–cānantaryakarma, 五 無 間 業). Repentance over one’s sin became an important feature in these confessional services.

In Sanskrit Buddhist literature confession of sin came to be referred to as ppde±an and this was regarded as one of the prerequisites to the awakening of the Thought of Enlightenment (Bodhicitta, 菩 提 心). In this context it is worthwhile to quote from the Bodhicaryvatra (菩 薩 行) of ցntideva (寂 天), who is flourished in the 7^th centery A.D.) which explains the process of confession as under:

“Whatever harmful acts of body, speech and mind

I have done, in a disturbed state,

Towards the three jewels of refuge,

My parents, my spiritual master and others” [460]

“I, trembling with fear,

Offer myself to Samantabhadra;

To Manjughosha, also,

I make a gift of my body

To the Protector Avalokite±vara

Who infallibly acts with compassion,

I utter a mournful cry

“please protect this miscreant”

In my search for refuge,

I cry from my heart

For Ak±agarba, Ksitigarbha,

And all the Compassionate Protectors”.[461]

The Mahāvastu (佛 本 行 集 經 異 本) places the would-be Bodhisattva developing this requirement under the stage known to it by the name Natural Career (本 行). It is the courses of conduct of Bodhisattvas, and the person passing through this stage is called at the beginning an ordinary being. The first part of the first bh‰mi (地), speaking in terms of bh‰mi (stages), can be included in this career. Bodhisattvas or rather future Bodhisattvas abiding in this stage of novitiate are to respectfully regard their parents, religious persons and elders. It is their nature (prakÙiti, 性) to practice ten right ways of behavior (da±a-ku±ala-karma-patha, 十 善 業 道) and to exhort others to give alms and acquire merit.

But as their spiritual faculty is not yet absolutely purified and developed to the standard required for the aspiration, they do not produce the thought of Enlightenment. Notwithstanding, they are fully ripe for promotion to the rank of Bodhisattva and as soon as the necessary conditions are fulfilled, they will advance to the next stage representing the second course of conduct, which is known to the Mahvastu by the name of Resolving Career (praÏidhna-caryā, 解 行).

The second element, Adhimukti, signifies the being’s aspiration for attaining Enlightenment. This aspect is not separately discussed in the text. The treatises on the Bodhisattva’s career refer to this aspiration as occurring immediately before the Bodhicitta (菩 提 心).

The word Adhimukti or Atimukti (善 思 惟)[462] occurs in the sense of inclination, zeal or fondness, but this does not seem to be connected with the term Adhimukti which technically means strong inclination attachment or earnest and zealous application. In Encyclopedia of Buddhism[463] the term derived from the intensifying directive ‘adhi’ and the root ‘muc’ (mu–cati), to release, signifies an ‘abandoning’ of the present position with a ‘going forth’ in a new direction. Such resolve, therefore, has in it a liberating force, which leads to emancipation (vimokkha, 解 脫), although with this specific connotation it would rather be considered as a perfection of determination (adhiææhāna-pramī, 願 波 羅 密).

The compilers, at least the authors of the Da±a-bh‰mika S‰tra (十 地 經) section, probably included this element in the preliminary stage.  And According to the Da±a-bh‰mika S‰tra, the future Bodhisattva (菩 薩) prepares himself to undertake a long and strenuous journey for the realisation of Bodhisattvahood (菩薩果). He concentrates on his spiritual edification. On the eve of his departure, the thought of Enlightenment is awakened in his mind due to his immaculate dispositions and transparency of his inward resolution.

The Thought of Enlightenment (菩 提 心)

Bodhicitta, or the ‘Thought of Enlightenment’ (菩 提 心), is an important concept common to Theravda (原 始 佛 教), and Mahyna Buddhism (大 乘 佛 教). Though not directly mentioned, the idea is explicit in Theravda Buddhism. It was in Mahyna, however, that the Bodhicitta concept developed along both ethical and metaphysical lines and this development is found in Tantrism (密 教), too, wherein it also came to be regarded as a state of great bliss (mahsukha, 大 樂). In Mahyna it developed along pantheistic lines, for it was held that Bodhicitta is latent in all beings and that it is merely a manifestation of the Dharmakya (法 身, Body of Law) or Bh‰tatathat (一 如, 如 如, 真 如,  suchness of existence, i.e., the Universal Spirit) in the human heart.

Though the term Bodhicitta does not occur in Pli, traces of this concept are found in Pli canonical literature where, for example, we are told how Gotama after renouncing household life resolved to strive to put an end to all the ills of existence by comprehending fully the causes of all ill.[464] It is this comprehension that came to be known as the Enlightenment (bodhi), and Gautama came to be known as the Enlightened One—the Buddha. The earliest canonical references do not say that Gautama, when he first resolved to attain Enlightenment, did so in pursuit of the welfare of others. It was after attaining Enlightenment that he decided to preach the doctrine to others for their welfare.

The early Buddhist Sanskrit texts such as the Mahāvastu (佛 本 幸 集 經 異 本) and the Lalitavistara (神 通 遊 戲 經) clearly state that though altruism is a main motive, the Bodhisattva should first set himself free and then commence to release the others from the bonds of saòsara (輪 迴), for a person who is already in bondage cannot set free another just as a blind man cannot show the way to others. But, in later Mahyna, altruism became the sole motive for the development of the Bodhicitta and this change is well represented by the character of Avalokite±vara (觀 世 音 菩 薩), the great compassionate being who abandoned his own emancipation for the sake of others.

Alongside with the development of the ethical aspect, Bodhicitta also developed on the metaphysical side. This development is seen in the works of such Buddhist philosophers as Ngrjuna (龍 樹), Vasubandhu (世 親, 天 親) and Sthiramati (天意). D.T. Suzuki quotes Ngrjuna, who explains this concept thus:

“Bodhicitta is free from all determination, i.e., it is not included in the categories of five skandhas (factors of existence), twelve yatanas (elements of sense-perception), eighteen dhtus (physical elements), it is not particular existence which is palpable. It is non-atmanic, universal. It is uncreated and its self-essence is void.” [465]

With the further development of the metaphysical aspect, the concept of Bodhicitta (菩 偍 心) became indefinable so that ultimately Buddhist teachers either had to describe it by comparison, or be content with saying that it is immeasurable (aprameya, 無 量), infinite (aparyanta, 無 限) and indestructible (akãaya, 永 久: e.g., Bodhicittatpda-s‰tra-±stra).[466] However, it should be noted that with the lapse of time these two aspects of the Bodhicitta, namely the ethical and the meta-physical aspects, blended together and Bodhicitta came to be regarded as consisting of both void (։nyat, 空 性) which is identical with praj– (智 慧) and therefore representing the metaphysical aspect) and compassion (karuρ, 慈 悲, representing the ethical aspect).[467]

Bodhicitta (菩 偍 心) is the same as Bh‰tatathat (如 如), Tathat (真 如) or Buddhatv (佛 性) and as such it is universal, being latent in all beings. This latent Bodhicitta has to be awakened and cultivated. But, Bodhicitta cannot be successfully cultivated if one resolves to do so merely for the sake of cultivating it. One should resolve to save oneself and, above all, to save others. If a person resolves to attain it merely for the sake of attaining it, it should be known that such a person will not overcome birth and death; nor will he attain Enlightenment, for the very thought of attainment then becomes an attachment. Attachment of the mind itself is called a false-belief. Thus, only a person with a proper predisposition could resolve to awaken successfully the Bodhicitta in him. One may set one’s heart on awakening the Bodhicitta by seeing a miracle performed by the Buddha or a Bodhisattva, or by studying the doctrine and scriptures or by being encouraged by the Buddhas.

The Bodhicittotapdasūtra-Öāstra (經 論 菩 提 心) enumerates ten qualities that should be cultivated by an aspirant. Thus, one who aspires to awaken the Bodhicitta should:

• Gather friends (paricinoti kalynamitrÏi),
• Worship the Buddhas (p‰jayati buddhn),
• Acquire roots of merit (saògÙhρti ku±alam‰lni),
• Search the good laws (gaveãayati praÏ­tadharmn),
• Remain ever compassionate (bhavati nityaò suratacitta¾),
• Bear all suffering that befall him (kãamate du¾khnypatitni)
• Remain kind, compassionate and honest (bhavati maitra¾ kruÏika¾),
• Remain even-minded (bhavati samacittā±aya¾),
• Rejoice in Mahyna with faith (±raddhaybhinandati mahynaò)
• Search the Buddha-wisdom (gaveãayati buddha-praj–ò).

Four other qualities, too, are mentioned in the same text. They are:

• Reflecting on the Buddhas (anuvicintayan buddhn),
• Reflecting on the defects of the body (pratyavekãamÏa¾ kya-sydinavn),
• Being compassionate towards beings (dayamana¾ sattveãu),
• Searching after the highest fruit (gaveãayannuttaniaò phalaò).[468]

In the Bodhisattva path, the most momentous moment is the generation of the thought of Enlightenment (Bodhicitta). The Bodhicitta is a combined result of wisdom and compassion and the Bodhisattva-bh‰mi (菩 薩 地 經) formulates it as follows: “All beings should I lead to NirvÏa, by means of the three vehicles. And even when I have led all beings to NirvÏa, no being at all has been led to NirvÏa”.[469]There is at the same time a popular tradition which formulates it as “For the sake of each single being I will experience for hundreds of thousands of niyutas of koæis of aeons the pains of the hells, of the animal world, of the worlds of Yama, until those beings have won NirvÏa in the realm of NirvÏa which leaves nothing behind.”[470]

Long ago in the distant past Kãtigarbha Bodhisattva (Earth Stove Bodhisattva, 地 藏 菩 薩) vowed:

“If the hells are not empty I will not become a Buddha, when living beings have all been saved, I will attain to Bodhi”.[471]

This is the vow of the Bodhisattvas.

The Bodhisattva is recorded to identify himself with all beings (i.e., the rest of beings). The technique of practising this cary is explained by ցntideva as follows:

First of all, I should make an effort

To meditate upon the equality between self and others.

I should protect all beings as I do myself

Because we are all equal in (wanting) pleasure and (not wanting) pain

Although there are many different parts and aspects such as the hand

As a body that is to be protected, they are one

Likewise, all the different sentient beings, in their pleasure and their pain

Have a wish to be happy that is the same as mine

The suffering that I experience

Does not cause any harm to others

But that suffering (is mine) because of my conceiving of (myself as) ‘I’

Thereby it becomes unbearable

Likewise, the misery of others

Does not befall me.

Nevertheless, by conceiving of (others as) ‘I’ their suffering becomes mine;

Therefore, it too should be hard to bear

Hence I should dispel the misery of others

Because it is suffering, just like my own,

And I should benefit others

Because they are sentient beings, just like myself”.[472]

There is yet another equally important aspect of the Bodhisattva path which a Bodhisattva develops after a long and strenuous endeavor and that happens to be the guarding of the Bodhicitta (Consciousness for Enlightenment). This act requires total awareness. €crya ցntideva (寂 天) in his well-read work Bodhicaryvatra (菩 薩 道) mentioned to this respect as follows:

“Those who wish to destroy the many sorrows of (their) conditioned existence,

Those who wish (all beings) to experience a multitude of joys

And those who wish to experience much happiness

Should never forsake the Awakening Mind

The moment an Awakening Mind arises

In those fettered and weak in the jail of cycle existence”[473]

“All beings wishing to be free from worldly abodes

Should firmly take hold of this precious Awakening Mind”.[474]

€crya ցntideva further explains how the general behaviour of the Bodhisattva should be:

The stock, the cat and the thief,

By moving silently and carefully,

Accomplished what they desired to do;

A Bodhisattva, too, should always behave in this way

With respect, I should gratefully accept

Unsought-after words that are of benefit,

And that wisely advise and admonish me

At all time, I should be the pupil of everyone.[475]

Also, one can say that the Bodhisattva concept is the most logical Buddhist ideal which conforms to the principles expounded by the Buddha himself in the Klma S‰tta,[476] where he says that no one should follow another blindly, but everyone should try to attain one’s own perfection without depending on another.

The Bodhisattva undergoes this suffering willingly in order to help others and, therefore, he performs the unique feat of voluntarily coming back to Saòsra again and again, thus willingly postponing his final entering into NirvÏa.[477]

Growing and popularizing doctrines of Bodhisattva included another group of performances in the preliminary functions that precede the production of the Thought of Enlightenment. This particular group of rituals and formalities is known by the name ‘Anuttara Pūj’ (無 上 供 養) which mainly consists of the worship and adoration of the Buddha (佛 陀), the Dhamma (法) and the Saôgha (僧).

This Thought of Enlightenment seems to bear two aspects: (1) Lokrhitaò, (利 他) concern over the welfare of others, and (2) €tmahitaò  (自 利) [478] desire for his own salvation. First, he would obtain the Supreme Enlightenment and get himself delivered and then he would show the path of emancipation to others. The Bodhisattva-bh‰mi (菩 薩 地) is more eloquent in this context as it explains the two objects of the Thought of Enlightenment.[479]

This self-surrender is a central point in the Bodhisattva path and the spirit of this surrender is vividly portrayed by €crya ցntideva:

“May I be the doctor, the medicine

And may I be the nurse

For all sick beings in the world,

Until everyone is healed

May a rain of food and drink descend

To clear away the pain of thirst and hunger,

And during the aeon of famine

May I myself change into food and drink

May I become an inexhaustible treasure

For those who are poor and destitute;

May I turn into all things they could need

And be placed close beside them

Without any sense of loss,

I shall give up my body and enjoyments

As well as all my virtue of the three times

For the sake of benefiting all

… May all who say bad things to me

Or cause me any other harm,

And those who mock and insult me

Have the fortune to fully awaken

May I be protector for those without one,

A guide for all travellers on the way;

May I be a bridge, a boat and a ship

For all who wish to cross (the water)

May I be an island for those who seek one,

And a lamp for those desiring light,

May I be a bed for all who wish to rest

And a slave for all who want a slave.”[480]

This thought is known to the Mahvastu (佛 本 行 集 經 異 本) as citta (心), manasa (末 那 識), manoratha or saòkalpa (思 惟). A recurrent passage repeatedly found in the Mahvastu relates how this thought and resolve come into effect. Bodhisattva expresses his enthusiastic wish to become a Perfect Buddha endowed with all characteristics for the benefit of the world:

“I, having crossed (the transmigratory existence), may help the living beings to cross. I, being liberated may liberate others. I, being comforted, may comfort others. I, being finally released, may release others.”

Making one’s mind for that greatest goal is, according to vivid elaboration of that moment, really an unparalleled event which surpasses all other meritorious acts. Nature exhibits its unusual phenomena (Adbhuta Dharma) on such rare occasions. Earthquakes take place and a light appears in the world. The entire Universe becomes happy on such occasions.[481]

A Bodhisattva-to-be who abides in this stage makes the following ten great praÏidhnas (十 種 大 願):

• Mahp‰jopasthnya Prathamaò MahpraÏidhnam Abhinirharati.

To pay homage to all Buddhas, (一 者 禮 敬 諸 佛).

• Sarvatathgatabhãitadharmanetrisaòdhraρya…Saddharmapari-grahyadvit­yaò.

To preserve the teachings of the good Doctrine of all Buddhas,        

(二 者 稱 讚 如 來).

• Tuãitabhavanavsaò dim kÙtv… yvan mahparinirvÏo- pasamkramaρya tÙt­

To approach the great nirvÏa after accomplishing all the deeds of Buddha — beginning from his residence in the heavenly abode of the Tuãita down to his attainment of great NirvÏa, (三 者 廣 修 供 養).

• Sarvabh‰mipari±odhanaò… cittotpdbhinirhrya… caturthaò.

To render all the stages immaculate in order to produce resolution or thought. (四 者 懺 悔 業 章).

• Sarvasattvadhtuparipcanya, Sarvabuddhadharmvatraρya, Sarvajñajñna-pratisthpanya… pañcamam.

To bring about the spiritual maturity of all creatures, to enable them to comprehend the Doctrine of all Buddhas and to establish the knowledge of the Omniscient, (五 者 隨 喜 功 德).

• Lokadhtuvaimtryvatnya, sastham.

To make knowable the diversity of the world-system (Lokadhtu) (六 者 請 轉 法 輪)

• Sarvabuddhaksetrapari±odhanya saptamam.

To bring about the purification of all the lands of the Buddha,

(七 者 請 佛 住 世).

• Mahynvataranya astamam.

To cause to enter into the great vehicle, (八 者 常 隨 佛 學).

• Sarvabodhisattvacarycaranya amoghasarvacestatyai navamam.

To practise all the course of conduct of the Bodhisattvas and to achieve irresistibility of the state of all efforts, (九 者 恆 順 眾 生).

• Abhisambodhimahjñnbhijñbhinirharya da±

Tni ca Mahpranidhnni da±abhir nisthpadair abhinirharati.

To accomplish perfect enlightenment, great knowledge, and intuition. (十 者 普 皆 迴 向).

The Thought of Enlightenment (Bodhicitta, 菩 提 心) and Resolve (PraÏidhāna, 菩 提) are to mark the commencement of the second career of the Bodhisattva. These two components, Bodhicitta and PraÏidhna, are closely inter-related and intermingled.

According to the Mahyna-s‰trlaôkra (大 乘 大 莊 嚴 經 論), PraÏidhna (願) is both the cause and the result of the Thought of Enlightenment. The production of the Thought of Enlightenment is possible even through paying homage to the Buddha at a st‰pa, whereas it is obligatory for one to meet a Buddha in order to make the formal Resolve.

A Bodhisatta’s career should start with his making a resolution before a Buddha (Abh­n­hārakaraÏa or MūlapraÏidhāna, 願 菩 提) to become a Buddha for the welfare and liberation of all creatures. In later literature, this abhin­hra (本 願) is preceded by a period during which the Bodhisattva practises mano-praÏidhi (意 願) when he resolves in his mind to desire to become a Buddha without declaring his intention to others. According to the Mahynist theory this would be the production of the Thought of Enlightenmment (Bodhicitta, 菩 提 心).[482] Even for the abh­n­hra (根 願) or the First Resolve to become a Buddha to be effective eight conditions (Samodna Dhamma) have to be fulfilled. These are as follows:

1. Manussottam: The aspirant should be a human being.
2. Liôga Sampatti: A male.
3. Hetu: Sufficiently developed spiritually to become an Arahant in this very life.
4. Satthra Dassanam: A recluse at the time of the declaration.
5. Pabbajj: That he should make the resolution personally before a Buddha.
6. GuÏa Sampatti: That he should possess the jh
7. Adhikāra: Be prepared to sacrifice even his life.
8. Chandat: The resolution has to be absolutely firm.[483]

Accoding to the Sarvstivdīs (一 切 有 部 者), those who attain the Bodhisattvahood, 菩 薩 果) are qualified to gain five advantages. These are as follows:

1. They are not born in woeful states, but only among gods and men,
2. They are no more reborn in a poor or a low class family,
3. They are, by virtue, a man and not a woman,
4. They are born in perfection free from physical defects,
5. They can remember the previous lives of their own and never forget them.[484]

In the Sutta Nipta Commentary (經 集 之 疏 解) it is written that a Bodhisattva, during his career, escapes from being born in eighteen inauspicious states (aææhrasa abhabbaææhnāni, 十 八 法 不 共). These are as follows:

1. He is never born blind,
2. … Deaf,
3. … Insane,
4. … Slobbery or rippled,
5. … among savages (milakkhesu),
6. … In the womb of a slave or
7. … As a heretic,
8. He never changes his sex,
9. He is never guilty of any of the five nantarika-kammas, and
10. He never becomes a leper,
11. If born as an animal, he never becomes less than a grail or more than an elephant,
12. He is never born either among various classes of petas,
13. Nor among the Klakañjakas,
14. He is born neither in the Avīci,
15. Nor in the Lokantaraka-Nirayas,
16. He is born neither as Mra,
17. Nor in the worlds where there is no perception (asaññibhva),
18. Nor, in the Suddhvsas,
19. Nor in the r‰pa-worlds,
20. Nor even in another cakkav[485]

As for the Bodhisattva’s birth among the low caste people, the passage just mentioned seems to misrepresent Buddhism in general and the Jtaka texts in particular. It is because of the fact that in the Jtaka texts it is clearly mentioned that the Bodhisattva was born as a Caϯla[486] and among low caste people as well.[487]

According to one of the Jtakas[488] Bodhisattvas  make the five great sacrifices (Mahpariccga) of giving up:

1. Wife, 2. Children, 3. Kingdom,   4. Life  and  5. Limb.

The Buddha, before whom the abh­n­hra is made, looks into the future and, if satisfied, declares the fulfillment of the wish, giving all the particulars of such fulfillment. This declaration is called VeyykaraÏa (Skt.VykaraÏa, 受 記) and is made also by all subsequent Buddhas whom the Bodhisatta meets during his career.[489]

The PraÏidhna (願) is divided into two parts in the Pli tradition. First, the Bodhisattva-to-be aspires for the bodhi, his intention being quite personal and unexpressed. This stage of aspiration is known as mano-pandhna (意 願) which seems to correspond to the state of Adhimukti or Atimukti (善 思 惟), and signifies the commencement of the psychological process that finally culminates in the production of the Thought of Enlightenment.  After that he declares it as the turning point in the Bodhisattva’s spiritual maturity at which juncture the strong and earnest wish to attain Enlightenment occupies his mind. The term ceto-panidhna (願) also occurs, but it hardly suggests any particular significance as the proclamation (vivarjana)[490] is seen declared on the same occasion. This may reflect a period when the whole scheme, including the terms and stages, were not yet fully defined or settled.[491]

The development of the Bodhicitta is the first and the most essential requirement of a person seeking recognition as a Bodhisattva and after such recognition he is permitted to take up the practices (cariy, Skt. cary, 行) of a Bodhisattva (菩 薩).[492]

D.T.Suzuki says that Bodhicitta, a form of the Dharmakya (法 身) as it manifests itself in the human heart, is present in the heart of all sentient beings, but in ordinary mortals it is dormant and miserably crippled by its unenlightened intercourse with the world of sensuality[493] as under:

‘‘NirvÏa (涅 槃), Dharmakya (法 身), Tathgata (如 來), Tathgatagarbha (如 來 藏), Paramrtha (真 諦), Buddha (佛 陀), Bodhicitta (菩 提 心), Bh‰tatathat (真 如)—all these terms signify merely so many different aspects of one and the same reality and Bodhicitta is the name given to a form of the Dharmakya (法 身, Law-body) or Bh‰tatathat (真 如, suchness of existence) as it manifests itself in the human heart, and its purification or negatively its liberation from all egoistic impurities constitutes the state of NirvÏa.” [494]

In the Bodhisattvabh‰mi (菩 薩 地 經) it is given that there are four types of causes which are instrumental for the development of Bodhicitta. These may be noted as follows:

• Four subsidiary causes (pratyayas, 緣), viz. (a) miracles shown by the Buddha; (b) teachings of the Buddha as recorded in the Bodhisattva-piæaka (菩 薩 藏); (c) compassion for suffering beings, and (d) bad time (kaãya-kla) for which beings suffer.
• Four basic causes (hetus, 因), viz. (a) inclusion in Bodhisattva-gotra, 菩 薩 種 性; (b) finding a good spiritual guide (kalyÏamitra, 善 友) who again may be of four types; (c) compassion, and (d) courage to relieve the distress of beings.
• Four kinds of power (bala, 力), viz. (a) his own power; (b) power of recruiting others for exertion to attain Bodhi; (c) power of visualization of the Buddha or listening to his discourses and coming into contact with good persons and doing good deeds, and (d) power and desire to relieve the distress of beings, who have been suffering constantly and continuously.
• There are four causes of retrogression from maintaining the Bodhicitta (菩 提 心). These are: (a) bad spiritual guide; (b) not enough compassion for the sufferings of beings; (c) fear and diffidence in removing the distress being suffered by beings continuously, and (d) lack of the four basic causes of the Bodhicitta.[495]

The Bodhisattvabh‰mi (菩 薩 地 經) states that the Bodhicitta (菩 提 心) is of two kinds, that is, (1) NairyÏika (不 退 轉 菩 提 心) and (2) AnairyÏika (退 轉 菩 提 心). By the former one attains Bodhi (Enlightenment) without retrogression, while the latter does not lead to Bodhi (Enlightenment). Again AnairyÏika is of two kinds — (a) €tyantika and (b) Antyantika. By the former it is meant that the transgression is such that Bodhisattva loses bodhi forever, while by the latter it is meant that the transgression is temporary and that is why there is every likelihood of Bodhisattvas attaining Bodhi ultimately.[496]  While according to ‘A Dictionary of Chinese Buddhist Terms’(中 英 佛 學 辭 典), Avaivartika or avinivartan­ya (不退轉) means never receding, always progressing, not backsliding, or losing ground; never retreat but going straight to NirvÏa; an epithet of every Buddha.[497]

€crya ցntideva (寂 天) pointed out that the Bodhicitta (菩 提 心) is of two kinds — (1) BodhipraÏidhicitta (菩 提 心 願, will to win Enlightenment) and (2) Bodhiprasthnacitta (菩 提 心行, going through the practices for obtaining Enlightenment). The former is compared to the one who is desirous of going, while the latter is compared to the one who is actually going. BodhipraÏidhicitta of course produces much merits like Bodhiprasthnacitta.[498]

The Bodhisattva exerts himself to the utmost to do good to all beings with a view to leading them to Bodhi (Enlightenment). He prefers to continue as a Bodhisattva even to the extent of deffering his own Buddhahood (佛 果). In this process he transfers his merits earned thereby to the sentient beings.

From the time an aspirant sets his heart on the awakening of Bodhicitta up to his declaration of these great aspirations, it forms the preparatory stage and is called bodhi-praÏidhi-citta (菩 提 心 願). The merits of Bodhicitta is so great and wonderful and is ‘Bodhisattva-maker’, so that Vasubandhu (世 親, 天 親) in his Bodhicittotpda-s‰tra-±stra (經 論 菩 提 心) compares Bodhicitta to the ocean:

“In the beginning when the great ocean manifests itself, it should be known that it is the store of all kinds of jewels, inferior, medium and superior, valuable and invaluable wish-yielding gems. Just so, at the beginning, bodhicitta, too, should be thought of as the store of gods, men, disciples, Pratyekabuddhas, Bodhisattvas, merits, meditation and wisdom.”

(Mahsamudro yaddau sanudeti j–tavya¾ so’ dhamamadhyammottanmò cintmaÏiratnamuktphalnmkaro bhavati. Bodhisattvasya cittotpda apyenvaò… tad devamanuãyÏò ±rvakapratyeka-buddhabodhisattvnaò dhynasya  praj–ya±copaptallerrharab).[499]

Moral Perfections ( Pāramīs / pāramitās, 波 羅 密)

With the development of Bodhicitta, a Bodhisattva must practise the pramits. This is the second stage of the development of Bodhicitta and is called Bodhi-prasthna-citta.[500] In other words, the germination of the Bodhicitta produces a Bodhisattva out of an individual, and to realize the complete fulfillment of this pledge, the Bodhisattva makes an entry into the most arduous and strenuous stage of the path, viz., the practice of the pramits.[501]

A Bodhisattva must practise the six / ten Pramits (波 羅 密, Perfections). The term pramit has been very significantly interpreted by various scholars. T.W. Rhys Davids and W. Stede give the meanings: ‘Completeness, perfection, highest state.’[502] Pramit has also been translated as transcendental virtue, perfect virtue, highest perfection, complete attainment, etc.[503] and H.C. Warren translates it as perfection.[504] J.S. Speyar,[505] M.S. Bhat, M.V. Talim,[506] P.V. Bapat leave the word untranslated.[507]

Pramit is derived from parama (and not from pra with the root ‘i’ to go), as the Bodhisattva Bh‰mi (菩 薩 地 經) clearly explains. The pramits are so called because they are acquired during a long period of time (parameÏa kālena samudgatā¾), and are supremely pure in their nature (paramayā svabhāva-vi±uddhyā vi±uddh¾). They also transcend the virtues or qualities of the Örvaks (聲 聞) and the Pratyeka-buddhas (辟 支 佛), and lead to the highest result (paramaò ca phalam anupryacchanti). The derivation of the term from parama is placed beyond the possibility of doubt. It simply means ‘highest condition, highest point, best state, perfection.’[508] The Tibetan equivalent is pha-rol-tu-phyin-pa. The Bodhisattva Bh‰mi connects it with Pramit.[509]

The earlier and alternative form pramī also points to the derivation from ‘parama’. The suffix – ‘tā’ was probably added to it on the analogy of the abstract substantives ending in – ‘tā’. It has been suggested that a compound like dna-pramit may be explained as “the quality or condition of a person who is a dna-pramī, who possesses the pramī or highest point of dna or charity.” In this case, the suffix - t would be added to a bahu-vrīhi compound (dnasya pramīr yasya). But the two words in such a compound as dna-pramit seem to stand in direct opposition, and it is better to construe thus:

“Dnaò eva pramit dna-pramit”.[510]

The term pramit chiefly denotes the ethical principles as the proper means of leading to spiritual goal. In this regard, R. Spence Hardy gives a very sane and apt translation. He translates it as (1) prescribed virtue,[511] (2) a class of virtue,[512] (3) primary virtue.[513] Philosophically, it is ‘the cardinal virtues’ termed by Plato as the fundamental virtues called for practice by a person concerned or ‘the categorical imperative’[514] propounded by Kant.[515] Similar in its context to R.A.P. Roger’s term ‘positive morality’ as is the highest principle for determining the true worth of actions regarding human life.[516]

The Bodhisattva’s pramit is not ideal morality nor a concept, but it is a logically practical principle determining the worth of human action in daily life. Although it is (as in the texts) prescribed for those who are the Bodhisattva’s yet it may be, no doubt, followed or practised by anybody in so far as the Buddhist principles are concerned.

According to Mahynists, the doctrine of pramits leading to Bodhisattvahood (菩 薩 果), and in the end Buddhahood (佛 果) was the new method of Buddhist practice resulting from the intention of Mahyna patriarchs of later times. Nevertheless, there are two trends of thought relating to the above point of view. The first group has considered the pramit doctrine to be one of the marks most characteristically distinguishing Mahyna from H­nayna.[517] In the contrast, there was in the research of the second one, nothing new in the six pramits. All the items were found in the old Buddhist scriptures.[518] In their views, in Buddhism, there was really no innovation, but what seemed so was in fact a subtle adaptation of preexisting ideas. Great attention has always been paid to continuous doctrinal development and to proper transmission of the teachings from teacher to teacher. [519]

These perfections were later enumerated, and there are slight differences between the Pli and the Sanskrit lists. However, their theme is the same, which is ethical perfection.[520]

Ten Pāramitās in Pāli Buddhist Texts

The canonical Pali texts mention the number of pramits (波 羅 密) in (1) the Apadna (譬 喻 經), (2) the Jtaka (本 生 經), (3) the Buddhavaòsa (佛 史) and (4) the Cariypiæaka (所 行 藏).

In the Apadna the ten pramits are evidently mentioned and the text runs as follows:

“The Bodhisattva gave the gift (dna) to the needy. He then observed sīla perfectly and fulfilled the pramit in the worldly renunciation. He then attained the Supreme Enlightenment. He was indifferent to both gain and loss, pleasure and pain. He was impartial and attained the Supreme Enlightenment”.

(Datv dattabbakaò dnaò sīlaò p‰retva asesato,

Nekkhamme pramīò patv patto sambodhī uttamaò.

Labhlbhe sukhe dukkhe samne ca vimnane,

Savatthe smako hutv patto sambodhi uttamaò).[521]

It is mentioned in the Visuddhimagga (清 淨 道 論, IX.124) that the Great Beings (Mahsattvas) are concerned about the welfare of living beings, not tolerating the sufferings of beings, wishing long duration to the higher states of happiness of beings and being impartial and just to all beings, by fulfilling the first pramit they fulfill all the pramits:

1) Dāna-pārami (布 施 波 羅 密): They give alms (Dāna) to all beings, so that they may be happy without investigating whether they are worthy or not. In the Jtaka literature, many stories are found which show how the Bodhisatta fulfilled the Dna-pramit, the former birth stories of Gautama, when he was a Bodhisatta, either in human form or non-human form, it is written that he practised such types of dna. In the Mahkapi Jtaka,[522] the Bodhisattva is a great monkey leader, who at the attack by the men of the VrÏasi king, allowed fellow monkeys to pass off safely by treading on his body, stretched as the extension of a bridge. In the Sasa Jtaka,[523] the Bodhisattva is a young hare who offers his own body in the absence of any other thing to offer, just to observe the sacred vow. The story of Prince Vessantara,[524] which is widely appreciated, shows Prince Vessantara in fulfillment of his vow to give whatever he is asked to give, not only surrenders the palladium of his father’s kingdom, but even his own wife and children…

2) S­la-pārami (持 戒 波 羅 密): By avoidance of doing them any harm, they observe morality (Sīla).

3) Kãānti-pārami (忍 辱 波 羅 密): Though having become heroes through energy, Bodhisattvas are nevertheless full of forbearance (Khanti) towards the manifold failings of beings. It is the patient endurance of suffering inflicted upon oneself by others and the forbearance of others.  Bodhisattva practices patience to such an extent that he is not provoked even when his hands and feet are cut off.

4) Vīrya-pārami (精 進 波 羅 密): For the sake of welfare and happiness of others they constantly exert their energy or perseverance (Viriya). Here Viriya does not mean physical strength though this is an asset, but strength of character, which is far superior.  It is defined as the persistent effort to work for the welfare of others both in thought and deed. Firmly establishing himself in this virtue, the Bodhisatta develops self-reliance and makes it one of his prominent characteristics. The Viriya of a Bodhisatta is clearly depicted in the Mahjanaka Jtaka.[525] Shipwrecked in the open sea for seven days, he struggled on without once giving up hope until he was finally rescued. Failures he views as steps to success, opposition causes him to double his exertion, dangers increase his courage, cutting his way through difficulties, which impair the enthusiasm of the feeble, surmounting obstacles, which dishearten the ordinary, he looks straight towards his goal.  Nor does he ever stop until his goal is reached.

5) Nekkhamòa-prami (出 離 波 羅 密): In order to bring morality to perfection, they train themselves in renunciation (Nekkhamòa). Nekkhamòa implies both renunciation of worldly pleasures by adopting the ascetic life and the temporary inhibition of Hindrances (NīvaraÏa) by Jhnas (Ecstasies). A Bodhisatta is neither selfish nor self-possessive but is selfless in his activities. He is ever ready to sacrifice his happiness for the sake of others. Though he may sit in the lap of luxury, immersed in worldly pleasures, he may comprehend their transitoriness and the value of renunciation. Realizing thus the vanity of fleeting material pleasures, he voluntarily leaves his earthly possessions, and donning the simple ascetic garb, tries to lead the Holy Life in all its purity. Here he practises the higher morality to such an extent that becomes practically selfless in all his actions. No inducement whether fame, wealth, honour, or worldly gain, could induce him to do anything contrary to his principles.

6) Paññā-pārami (智 慧 波 羅 密): In order to understand clearly what is beneficial and what is injurious to beings, they purify their wisdom (paññ).

7) Sacca-pārami (真 實 波 羅 密): Once they have promised to give or do something they do not break their promise (Sacca). So, sacca is here meant the fulfillment of one’s promise. This is one of the salient characteristics of a Bodhisattva, for he is no breaker of his word. He acts as he speaks, he speaks as he acts (Yathā vādi tathā kāri, yathā kāri tathā vādi). He makes truth his guide and holds it his bounden duty to keep his word. He ponders well before he makes his promise. In the Hiri Jtaka[526] and the Mahāsutasoma Jtaka [527] Bodhisattva practiced Viriya Pramit. A Bodhisattva is trustworthy, sincere and honest. What he thinks, he speaks. There is perfect harmony in his thoughts, words and deeds. He does not use flattery to win the hearts of others, does not exhort himself to win their admiration, does not hide his defects or vainly exhibits his virtues. The praise-worthy he praises without malice. The blameworthy he blames judiciously, not with contempt but out of compassion.  He honours the word of others as he honours his own.

8) Adiææhāna-pārami (願 波 羅 密): Adiææhna is translated as resolute determination. Without this firm determination (Adiææhāna), the other perfections cannot be fulfilled and they work for the wealth and welfare of beings. It is compared to the foundation of a building. This will-power forces all obstructions out of Bodhisattva path and no matter what may come to him, sickness, grief, or disaster, he never turns his eyes away from his goal.  For instance, the Bodhisattva Siddhrtha made a firm determination to renounce his royal pleasure and gain enlightenment. Six long years, it was a superhuman struggle. He had to endure manifold hardships and face innumerable difficulties. At a crucial moment, when he most needed their help his five favorite disciples deserted him. Yet he did not give up his effort. The Bodhisattva is a man of iron determination, whose high principles cannot be shaken to do good. None could tempt him to do anything contrary to those principles. As occasion demands, he is as soft as a flower and as firm as a rock.

9) Metta-pārami (悲 心 波 羅 密): With unshakable kindness (metta) they are helpful to all. Metta is loving kindness. In Sanskrit it is Maitr­. It is benevolent, goodwill or friendliness, wish for the happiness of all beings without exception. It is this Metta that prompts a Bodhisattva to renounce personal deliverance for the sake of others. He is permeated with boundless goodwill towards all beings, irrespective of caste, creed, colour or sex. Since he is the embodiment of universal love, he fears none, nor is he feared by any. He ever cherishes in his heart boundless goodwill towards all that live.

10) Upekkhā-pārami (捨 波 羅 密): The tenth Pramī is Upekkh or equanimity. By reason of their equanimity (Upekkhā) they do not expect anything in return. The Pli term Upekkha is composed of upa, which means justly, impartially or rightly (yuttito) and ikkha, to see, discern or view. The etymological meaning of the term is discerning rightly, viewing justly or looking impartially, that is, without attachment or aversion, without favour or disfavour. Here the term is not used in the sense of indifference or neutral feeling. The most difficult and the most essential of all perfections is this equanimity, especially for a layman who has to live in an ill-balanced world with fluctuating fortunes. Slights and insults are the common lot of humanity. So are praise and blame, loss and gain, pain and pleasure. Amidst all such vicissitudes of life a Bodhisatta tries to stand unmoved like a firm rock, exercising perfect equanimity.

In pli scriptures, these are ten Pramits as ten transcendental virtures, ten powers which Bodhisasittva practice positively out of compasion for the many, devas and humans.

Ten Pāramitās in Sanskrit Literature

According to the Buddhist Sanskrit Literature, the concept of pramit (波 羅 密) is divided into two categories, viz., (1) The chief Pramits and (2) the supplementary pramits. The former are enumerated as below:

1. Dna (布 施, Generosity and Liberality in Giving),
2. S­la (持 戒, Virtuous Conduct, Morality),
3. Kãnti (忍 辱, Forebearance),
4. V­rya (精 進, Energy),
5. Dhyna (禪 定, Rapt Musing),
6. Praj– (智 慧, Wisdom)

The four supplementary Pramits are:

1. Upya or Upya-kau±alya (方 便, Skilful-means or Skill-in- Means),
2. PraÏidhna ( 願, Aspiration, resolution),
3. Bala (力, Strength),
4. J–na (智, Knowledge).[528]

Alternately,

1. Nekkhamma (Renunciation) instead of Dhy
2. Sacca (Truthfulness) in place of Upya (Upyakau±alya).
3. Metta (Loving-kindness) instead of Bala.
4. Upekkh (Equanimity) in place of Jñ

As for the six chief pramits (波 羅 密), the same are mentioned and discussed in the following Buddhist Sanskrit texts. These are: The Lalitavistara (神 通 遊 戲 經) (340.21ff.); The Mahvastu (佛 本 幸 集 經 異 本) (III.226); The Aãæasha±rik Prajñ-pramit (八 千 頌 般 若 波 羅 密 經) (194.15); The Karuρpuϯar­ka (慈 悲 蓮 華 經) (127.1); The Avadna-Öataka (撰 集 百 緣 經) (7.4); The Mahyna-s‰trlaôkra (大 乘 大 莊 嚴 經) (99); The Dharmasaôgraha (法 數 名 集 經 異 本) (Sect.7); The Samdhi-rja S‰tra (三 妹 王 經) (Fol.1129, 3); The Bodhisattva-bh‰mika S‰tra (菩 薩 地 經) (Fol. 47 a, 6)...[529] The last four supplementary pramits, on the other hand. are mentioned in the following texts, viz., The Mahyna-s‰tralaôkra (大 乘 大 莊 嚴 經) (151.3); The Mahvyutpatti (名 義 大 集 經) (Sect.34); The Dharma-saôgraha   (法 數 名 集 經 異 本) (Sect.18) and The Da±abh‰mika S‰tra (十 地 經) (57)...[530]  As, we see, the six pramits (空 性) are mentioned and discussed in many passages of Buddhist Sanskrit literature, while the seventh, eighth, ninth and tenth pramits are mentioned only in a few passages and are not explained at great length.

Har Dayal is of the opinion that the last three pramits (in the list cited in the aforesaid context) are really superfluous.[531] He left them undiscussed unlike the rest. From this it can be easily concluded that the present day scholars of Buddhist Sanskrit Literature do not attach importance to the last four pramits and study the first six only. In fact, in most of the cases these are altogether ignored and in the list of the Mahyna pramits only the six main ones are mentioned and the rest are not even enumerated and mentioned.

The Role of Öūnyatā in Bodhisattva-caryā

As Edward Conze has said that the two great contributions which the Mahyna had made to human thought were the creation of the Bodhisattva ideal and the elaboration of the doctrine of ‘Emptiness’.[532] Here we make an attempt to example the relation between Bodhisattva and ։nyat (空 性). In other words, Bodhisattva-cary (菩 薩 行) means Boddhisattva practises ten Pramits (波 羅 密) in which ։nytā plays the essential role to lead to the effect of Bodhisattva conduct (Bodhisattva-cary).

 First of all, we come to the first pramit i.e. Dna perfection.

1) Dna Pramit (布 施 波 羅 密, Generosity and Liberality in Giving Perfection):

The word dna (布 施) literally means ‘giving’, and this seems to be the best rendering in this context.[533] In the Visuddhimagga, Buddhaghosa defines Dna as follows: Dnaò vuccati avakkhandhaò means to give with heart is really called the Dna, though the word dna literally stands for (i) charity, (ii) generosity, (iii) alms-giving, (iv) liberality, etc.[534] It is Bodhisattva’s perfection of gift when he offers, gives up or remains indifferent to his body.[535]

There are three kinds of dna (布 施, donation): donating material goods (財 施), donating the Law (Dharma, 法 施) and donating fearlessness (無 畏 施). The first means to give wealth to others. The second refers to the teaching of Law rightly and the third means to remove the anxieties or sufferings of others through one’s own efforts.

1. i) The Giving of Wealth (€misadāna, 財 施)

The giving of wealth includes both outer and inner wealth. The outer wealth refers to one’s kingdom and treasures, one’s wife and sons. Those who practise the Bodhisattva way have no mark of self and so they are able to give away their kingdom, their homes and even their wives and sons. ցkyamuni Buddha for example should have become a king, but he chose instead to become a monk. He left his wife and his newly born son. Relinquishing the glory of royalty, he went to the state of homelessness. The inner wealth, on the other hand, refers to one’s own body, head, eyes, brains and marrow, skin, blood, flesh and bones — all can be given to others.[536]

1. ii) The Giving of Law (Dharmadna, 法 施)

When the Bodhisattva feels satisfied only with the supply of material aid, without raising them from their misery or introducing them into beatitude, he uses inffective method (anupāya). Because material help is not sufficient. The best way of helping them is to establish them in goodness as follows:

“Monks, there are these two gifts, the carnal and spiritual. Of these two gifts the spiritual is prominent. Monks, there are these two sharings together, the sharing of the carnal and the sharing of the spiritual. Of these two sharings together the spiritual is pre-eminent.

Monks, there are these two acts of kindness, the carnal and the spiritual. Of these two acts of kindness the spiritual is pre-eminent.” [537]

Therefore, the Dna of this type is to speak the dharma to benefit beings, to teach and transform all living beings by explaining the Buddha-dharma to them. Of all the offerings the dharma offering is supreme. The offering of dharma is to move out the suffering of other and to propogate the Buddha-dharma for the sake of all beings as explained:

“The feeling that causes the good people’s hearts to be moved when they see others’ suffering is compassion”.

(Paradukke sati sadhunam hadayakampanam karoti’ ti karuÏa).[538]

iii) The Giving of Fearlessness (Abhayadna, 無 畏 施)

The third dna is the giving of fearlessness. When some one encounters disasters or calamities which terrify him, at that moment the Bodhisattva removes his anxieties and sufferings through one’s own efforts. Dispelling fear means to give the gift of fearlessness.

The giving of fearlessness is the best way that can give a genuine peaceful and happy environment for everyone, because a real state of fearlessness is considered as synonymous with the freedom and bliss without war, dislike, fighting, killing…etc.

According to Mahyna, the best and noblest gift among three a Bodhisattva can give to others is the gift of Dharma, other gifts are considered of a lower category than this as the Buddha once said that ‘the gift of Dhamma triumphs over all gifts’. (Sabbednaò Dhamma-dnaò jinti, 法 施 是 最 上 施) and a S‰tra preserved in Chinese translation proved it by the following passage:

“What is a bad means (anupya)? When, by the practice of the perfections the Bodhisattvas help others, but are content to supply them with merely material aid, without raising them from their misery or introducing them into beautitude, then they are using a bad means. Why? Because material help is not sufficient. Whether a dunghill be large or small, it cannot possibly be made to smell sweet by any means whatsoever. In the same way, living beings are unhappy because of their acts, because of their nature; it is impossible to make them happy by supplying them with merely material aid. The best way of helping them is to establish them in goodness”.[539]  

To illustrate Boddhisattva’s practice of Dna pramit in the Mahyna S‰tras, we can find some significant verses in Chapter One “Introduction” (品序)[540] of Saddharma-puϯarīka S‰tra (妙 法 蓮 華 經), which clearly show that the performance of Dna Pramit is the Bodhisattva’s Way. At the beginning of this S‰tra is narrated that Maitreya Bodhisattva Mahsattva (彌 勒 菩 薩 摩 訶 薩) addresses Mañjuãrī Bodhisattva Mahsattva (聞 殊 師 利 菩 薩 摩 訶 薩) that within the while hair mark emitted by the Buddha, the World-honoured One, he can see Bodhisattvas as numberless as the grains of the sands in the Gaôg river (恆 河) are giving all kinds of charity (dāna) such as gold, silver, coral, pearls, mani jewels, seashell, agate, diamonds, and other rarities, men, women servants, carriages, jeweled hand carriages, and palanquins…to beings.

Not only do these Bodhisattvas give valuable objects, but they even give their bodies, their own flesh, their hands and feet. There are Bodhisattvas who are giving their wives and children to others. They give happily. Not even once do they feel bad about giving wives and children. Bodhisattvas practice such giving in order to attain the supreme Enlightenment as is described in Saddharma-puϯarīka S‰tra:

“Again I see Bodhisattvas

who give their own flesh, hands and feet,

or their wives and children,

seeking the unsurpassed way.

I also see Bodhisattvas

who happily give

heads, eyes, bodies and limbs

in their search for the Buddha wisdom.” [541]

(又 見 菩 薩，身 肉 手 足，及 妻 子 施，求 無 上 道。又 見 菩 薩， 頭 目 身 體，欣 樂 施 與，求 佛 智 慧). [542]

In the Mahratnak‰æa S‰tra (大 寶 積 經) (one of the earliest Mahyna texts), it is stated that only those Bodhisattvas who have attained the realization of the non-arising of dharmas are able to practise extreme charity: for other people this practice may serve no purpose or even harm them and others. This means that these Bodhisattvas have attained the realization of the dharmas.[543]

Again in the text it is written that there are Bodhisattvas who with fine food and drink and broth and herbs made offerings to the Buddha and the monks, so that when those who have left home get sick, they can use them to cure their illness. There are four kinds of offerings: food and drink, clothing, bedding and medicine. The clothing given is no ordinary clothing.  It is very fine and expensive, and absolutely priceless.  They are given in charity in order to attain the Supreme Enlightenment with a million different kinds of precious sandalwood and with much fine bedding, with gardens and groves, fruits and flowers in large quantity, with flowing springs and bathing ponds. They make this offering to the Buddha, Dharma and Saôgha. All these offerings of many different kinds are given to the Triple Jewel for seeking the Supreme way that is Buddha way.

Likewise in Chapter XII entitled ‘Devadatta’ (提 婆 達 多 品),[544] ցkyamuni himself describes that during many thousands of aeons that long back when he had been a king, he had taken the strong resolution to arrive at supreme perfect Enlightenment. For that he exerted himself to fulfill the Six Perfections (âaæ Pāramitās, 六 波 羅 密). In charity he had given innumerable, immeasurable gold, money, gems, pearls, villages, towns, boroughs, provinces, kingdoms, royal capitals, wives, sons, daughters, slaves, male and female, elephants and horses. This giving is related to outer wealth. However, he had given his inner wealth also. But in his heart the thought of self-complacency did not occur.

In the same chapter in other place, the Bodhisattva Prajñk‰æa (智 積 菩 薩) says that he himself had seen the Blessed ցkyamuni, the Tathgata performing numberless charitable tasks while he was striving after enlightenment. And during many aeons he did not feel satisfied about his arduous task. He went everywhere for weal and welfare of creatures. He did not take rest but kept busy in doing his sacrificial tasks. Whenever he found any being in trouble, to help out that being he did not care even for his own body. As it is mentioned in the Saddharma Puϯarīka S‰tra:

“Bodhisattva Wisdom Accumulated said, “When I observe Shakyamuni Thus Come One, I see that for immeasurable kalpas he carried out harsh and difficult practices, accumulating merit, piling up virtue, seeking the way of the bodhisattva without ever resting. I observe that throughout the thousand-millionfold world, there is not a single spot tiny as a mustard seed where this bodhisattva failed to sacrifice body and life for the sake of living beings. Only after he had done that was he able to complete the bodhi way”[545]

(智 積 菩 薩 言：我 見 釋 迦 如 來，於 無 量 劫 難 行，苦 行，積 功 累 德，求 菩 提 道，未 曾 止 息。觀 三 千 大 千 世 界，乃 至 無 有 如 芥 子 許，非 是 菩 薩，捨 身 命 處，為 眾 生 故 然 後 得 成 菩 提 道).[546]

In Chapter XXIII entitled ‘Former Affair of the Bodhisattva Medicine King’[547] (藥 王 菩 薩 本 事 品) a story is mentioned of Bodhisattva Mahsattva Sarvasattva Priyadar±ana (一 切 眾 生 喜 見 菩 薩 摩 訶 薩, Gladly Seen by All Living Beings), who burnt his own body with the object of paying worship to the Tathgata and his Dharmaparyya of the Lotus of The True Law. His sacrificial deed is praised by all the Buddhas. That is the real worship of the Law. No worship with flowers, incense, fragrant, umbrellas, flags, banners, no worshipping with material gifts or with uragasra sandal equals. This, young men of good family, is the sublimest gift, higher than the abandoning of royalties, the abandoning of beloved children and wives. Sacrificing one’s own body, young men of good family, is the most distinguished, the chiefest, the best, the very best, the most sublime worship of the Law.

The above mentioned paragraph shows clearly that giving of one’s body is the highest degree of charity. In the same story it is mentioned that the body of Sarvasattva Priyadar±ana (一 切 眾 生 喜 見 菩 薩 摩 訶 薩) continued blazing for twelve thousand years without ceasing to burn. After the expiration of those twelve thousand years the fire was extinguished. Then the Bodhisattva Mahsattva Sarvasattva Priyadar±ana having paid such worship to the Tathgata, disappeared from that place and appeared in the house of king Vimaladatta (淨 德, Pure Virtue). In this birth Bodhisattva Mahsattva Sarvasattva Priyadar±ana made eighty four thousand st‰pas in order to pay honour to the relics of the Tathgata Candravimalas‰rya-prabhsa±rī (日 月 淨 明 德 如 來, Sun Moon Pure Bright Virtue Thus Come One). There he burnt his own hand which was marked by the one hundred auspecious signs, and so paid worship to those st‰pas containing relics of the Tathgata and while paying worship, he educated countless hundred thousands myriads of Koæis[548]of disciples from that assembly. In consequence of this all those Bodhisattvas acquired the samdhi termed Sarvar‰pa-sandar±ana (現 一 切 色 身 三 妹).

In Chapter XXIV entitled “The Bodhisattva Wonderful Sound”[549] (妙音菩薩, Bodhisattva Gadgadasvara), Bodhisattva Mahsattva Gadgadasvara preaches Dharmaparyya in various shapes to different beings according to their ability and capacity. In Chapter XXV “The Universal Gateway of the Bodhisattva Perceiver of the World’s Sounds” (觀 世 音 菩 薩 普 門 品), Bodhisattva Mahsattva Avalokite±vara (觀 世 音 菩 薩 摩 訶 薩) preaches Dharmaparyya in various shapes to different beings. This all comes under the second kind of Dna— the offering of Dharma, that is, propagating the Buddhadharma for the sake of all beings. And Bodhisattva Mahsattva Avalokite±vara (觀 世 音 菩 薩 摩 訶 薩) has given the fearlessness as follows:

“This bodhisattva and mahsattva Perceiver of the World’s Sounds can bestow fearlessness on those who are in fearful, pressing or difficult circumstances. That is why in this saha world everyone calls him Bestower of Fearlessness”.[550]

(是 觀 世 音 菩 薩 摩 訶 薩 於 布 畏 急 難 之 中 能 施 無 畏 是 故 此 娑 婆 世 界 皆 號 之 為 施 舍 無 畏 者).[551]

Each giving has three ties: (1) a perception of self (我), (2) a perception of others (他), and (3) a perception of the gift (物 施). The supramundane perfection of giving, on the other hand, consists in the three-fold purity. Here, with the insight of ։nyat (空 性), a Bodhisattva who gives a gift, does not apprehend a self, a recipient and a gift; also no reward of his giving. He surrenders that gift to all beings, but he apprehends neither beings, nor self. He dedicates that gift to Supreme Enlightenment, but he does not apprehend any Enlightenment.[552] This is called the supramundane perfection of giving (最 上 布施 波 羅 密) and numerous Bodhisattvas like Ganges sand (恆 河 沙) practice this pramit (波 羅 密).

“One could also see bodhisattvas

carrying out almsgiving, forbearances, and so forth,

their number like Ganges sands, 

due to the illumination of the Buddha’s light”.[553]

(又 見 諸 菩 薩，行 施 忍 辱 等，其 數 如 恆 河,其 由 佛 光 照).[554]

The perfection of generosity is understood in Mahyna to be non-clinging. By this is meant a special kind of wisdom permeating action that upholds the concept of emptiness. It rejects the dialing between all evasive thoughts of giver, gift and recipient. Lying in the stratum of wisdom and compassion generosity rises from the invalidation of ‘ego’ which causes misery to beings.

The doctrine of selflessness (Nairtmya) is a metaphysical expression genuinely sought to illustrate the ethical injunction and a saviour device of a supreme order. Its virtue is non-clinging.

However, we should know that Bodhisattva insights the nature of ։nyat (空 性) the selflessness of all things, the spirit of nonclinging, so that he is able to give all his possessions happily to others but not grasp it as Vajrachedik praj–-pramit S‰tra (金 剛 般 若 波 羅 密 經) taught:

 “If a Bodhisattva’s mind does not abide in forms (laksaÏas) when practising charity (dna), his merit will be inconceivable and immeasurable. Subh‰ti, what do you think? Can you think of and measure the extent of space in the East?’

‘I cannot. World Honoured One.’’

‘Subh‰ti. can you think of and measure (all) the extent of space in the South, West and North, as well as in the intermediate directions, including the zenith and nadir’

‘I cannot. World Honoured One!’

‘Subh‰ti. (when) a Bodhisattva practises charity without a mind abiding in forms, his merit is  equally inconceivable and immeasurable.’       

‘Subh‰ti a Bodhisattva’s mind should THUS abide as taught.”  

(若 菩 薩 不 住 相 布 施，其 福 德 不 可 思 量。須 菩 提！於 意 云 何？東 方 虛 空，可 思 量 不？

不 也，世 尊！

須 菩 提！南，西，北 方，思 維，上，下 虛 空 方，可 思 量 不？

不 也，世 尊！

須 菩 提！菩 薩 無 住 相 布 施，福 德 亦 復 如 是 不 可 思 量。須 菩 提！菩 薩 但 應 如 所 教 住). [555]

2) Öīla  Pāramitā (持 戒 波 羅 密, Virtuous Conduct, Morality Perfection)

The second virtue which a Bodhisattva cultivates is Öīla (持 戒). As it is mentioned in the text:

“And I see those who observe the precepts,

no flaw in their conduct,

pure as jewels and gems,

and in that manner seeking the Buddha way.”[556]

(又 見 具 戒，威 儀 無 缺，淨 如 寶 珠，以 求 佛 道).[557]

This means that there are Bodhisattvas who observe the moral precepts, and guard them as they would hold a precious pearl. Their precepts are not the slightest deficient. Their clear and lofty purity is as priceless as a jewel by which they attain the Buddha way.

Such an irreversible Bodhisattva (不 退 轉 菩 薩) observes the ten ways of wholesome action. He himself observes and instigates others to observe abstention from taking life, abstention from taking what is not given to him, abstention from wrong conduct as regards sensuous pleasures, abstention from intoxicants as tending to cloud the mind, abstention from lying speech, abstention from harsh speech, abstention from indistinct prattling, abstention from covetousness, abstention from ill-will, abstention from wrong views. Even in his dreams he never commits offences against these ten precepts, and he does not nurse such offences in his mind.[558]

The Bodhisattvabh‰mi (菩 薩 地)[559] lists three categories of morality: (1) restraint from immoral behavior; (2) cultivation of virtuous behavior; and (3) accomplishing what is most beneficial for all living beings. These three are identified as invariable concomitants of the deep-rooted tendency of conceptual thought to construct reified notions of an ultimately real self. They are diagnosed as symptomatic of an attitude inharmonious with the concept of ։nyat, (空性), and they help to forge the links of a chain which keeps the mind firmly bound to a beginningless cycle of misery.

Öantideva (寂天) in his famous work - the Öikãsamuccaya (大 乘 集 菩 薩 學 論) discusses again the most compelling pragmatic justification for virtuous behavior:

“A [Bodhisattva] cultivates the desire to abandon all sinful and unmeritorious behavior. In this context, [an action] is evil and unmeritorious if it causes the mind to become agitated and so is opposed to balanced concentration. Such [an action] is also referred to as ‘an opponent to samdhi (禪 定).’ [560]

A calm mind alone is capable of deep concentration (samdhi) which in its turn is obtained by a highly disciplined practice of meditation, like that of the ‘great seal’ (mahāmudrā, 大 首 印). If the mind is unobstructed and without fear that it can quickly grasp the inner essence of ։nyat.

Non-clinging is the basic need for attaining the state in which such mind is realized or cultivated. The theme is well elaborated in the Mah-praj–-pramit-±stra (大 智 度 論):

“The highest kind of moral conduct, its perfection, consists in the non-clinging way, not clinging to sin or merit as absolute and unconditioned. The Bodhisattva that enters deep into the truth of things, cultivating the contemplation of their ։nya-nature, beholds with his eye of wisdom that sin and merit are not absolute and unconditioned.” [561]

The perfection of morality lies in equanimity in thought and action toward the sinner and no remarkable pride to appreciate the merited. This is the non-clinging way of looking into things that provides reason to the thought of pure kind and a clear vision unblurred from biases.

3) Kãānti Pāramitā (忍辱波羅密, Forebearance Perfection)

Apart from fulfilling Öīla Pramit there are Bodhisattvas who practice Kãnti Pramit to fulfil the Bodhisattva-cary. In this context one can find very significant verses related to this topic in the Saddharma Puϯarīka S‰tra as:

“Or I see bodhisattvas

who become monks,

living alone in quietude,

delighting in chanting the s‰tras”.[562]

(或 見 菩 薩，而 作 毘 獨 處 閑 靜，樂 誦 經 典).[563]

The verses referred to above show the cultivation of the Perfection of Patience. There are Bohisattvas who have left the home life to become bhikãus and dwell deep in the forests or in mountain caves. Evil people may strike or rebuke them the Bodhisattvas must endure patiently. When evil beasts bite them, then also they must be patient and not become frightened or alarmed. They remain unperturbed and like to read and recite S‰tras.

“And I see Buddha sons

abiding in the strength of fortitude,

taking the abuse and blows

of persons of overbearing arrogance,

willing to suffer all these,

and in that manner seeking the Buddha way.”[564]

(又 見 佛 子，住 忍 辱 力，增 上 慢 人，惡 罵 唾 打，皆 悉 能 忍，以 求 佛 道).[565]

“Ma–ju±ri, what do I mean by the practices of a Bodhisattva or Mahsattva? If a Bodhisattva or Mahsattva takes his stand on perseverance, is gentle and compliant, never violent, and never alarmed in mind; and if with regard to phenomena he takes no action but observes the true entity of phenomena without acting or making any distinction, then this I call the practices of a Bodhisattva or Mahsattva”.[566]

(文 殊 師 利！云 何 名：菩 薩 摩 訶 薩 行 處？若 菩 薩 摩 訶 薩 住 忍 褥 地？柔 和 善 順 而 不 卒 暴，心 亦 不 敬，又 復 於 法 無 所 行，而 觀 諸 法 如 實 相，亦 不 行，不 分 別 是 名：菩 薩 摩 訶 薩 行 處).[567]

Maitreya Bodhisattva Mahsattva (彌 勒 菩 薩) again says to Mañju±rī Bodhisattva Mahsattva (文 殊 師 利 菩 薩) that some true disciples of the Buddha are also seen who cultivate the Perfection of Patience (kãnti Pramit, 忍 辱 波 羅 密). These Bodhisattvas exclusively cultivate the practice of patience. In cultivating patience, they calmly endure the abuse, criticism and threat from proud monks. They endure all this without getting angry. They are able to bear all this because they seek the Buddha way as in Vajraccedik Praj– Pramit (金 剛 般 若 波 羅 密 經) as under:

“Subh‰ti, the Tathgata speaks of the perfection of patience (kãnti pramit) which is not but is called the perfection of patience. Why? Because Subh‰ti, in (a) past, when my body was mutilated by Kalirja, I had at that time no notion of an ego, a personality, a being and a life. I would have been stirred by feelings of anger and hatred. Subh‰ti, I also remember that in the past, during my former five hundred lives, I was a Kãanti and held no conception of an ego, a personality, a being and a life. Therefore, Subh‰ti, Boddhisattvas should forsake all conceptions of form and resolve to develop the Supreme Enlightenment Mind (Anuttara-samyaksam-bodhi). Their mind should not abide in form, sound, smell, taste, touch and dharma. Their minds should abide nowhere. If mind abides somewhere it should be in falsehood. This is why the Buddha says Bodhisattvs’ minds should not abide in form when practising charity (dna). Subh‰ti, all Bodhisattvas should thus make offering for the welfare of all living beings.  The Tathgata speaks of forms which are not forms and of living beings who are not living beings.”

(須 菩 提！忍 辱 波 羅 密，如 來 說 非 忍 辱 波 羅 密 是 名 忍 褥 波 羅 密。何 以 故？須 菩 提！如 我 昔 為 歌 利 王 害 截 身 體， 我 於 爾 時，無 我 相，無 人 相，無 眾 生 相，無 壽 者 相。 何 以 故？我 於 往 昔 支 解 時，若 有 我 相，人 相，眾 生 相，壽 者 相，應 生 瞋 恨.須 菩 提 又 念 過 去 於 五 百 世，作 忍 仙 人 於 所 世，無 我 相，無 人 相，無 眾 生 相，無 壽 者 相。是 故 須 菩 提 菩 薩 應 離 一 切 相 發 阿 耨 多 羅 三 藐 三 菩 提 心。不 應 住 色 生，不 應 住 聲，香，味，觸，法 生 心，應 生 無 所 住 心，若 心 有 住， 即 為 非 住，是 故 佛 說 菩 提 心，不 應 住 色 布 施。須 菩 提！菩 薩 為 利 益 一 切 眾 生，應 如 是 布 施！如 來說 切 諸 相，即 是 非 相。又 說 一 切 眾 生，即 非 眾 生).[568]

Kãnti Pramit or the Perfection of Patience deserves special attention because Kãnti brings one closer to equanimity which is a feature of NirvÏic experience. Sangharakshita says “Kãnti is a composite virtue. In it are blended not only patience and forbearance, the literal meanings of the term, but also love, humility, endurance and absence of anger and of desire for retaliation and revenge”.[569]

The Bodhisattvabhumi (菩 薩 地)[570] designates three particular varieties of kãnti.

The first two are defined primarily in terms of a lack of antipathy, as the patience to forgive those who inflict injury and the patience to bear necessary and unavoidable suffering. In this context, of course, ‘injury’ must be understood as a reference to any sort of cruelty, either intentional or unintentional, as well as to physical violence. These first two kinds of patience should be practiced as social virtues, with the understanding that although the concepts of ‘self’ and ‘other’ are entirely suitable and harmless enough for practical purposes, they become pernicious and destructive when used to justify anger and resentment.

Both of these types merge into a third sort of ‘patience’, which is described in of the most refined order. Patience in this sense is not practiced as a social virtue, but with the specific aim of cultivating one’s intellectual appreciation of doctrinal and philosophical issues to the point where soteriological application of the concept of emptiness finally becomes a real possibility. This third kind of patience is defined as a quality of stamina in conjunction with a proper attitude or sensitivity. Both are considered necessary in order that the bodhisattva conducts a meaningful analysis of the various aspects. ‘Intellectual flexibility’ which culminates in a deep, noninferential understanding that all things are, from the perspective of the truth of the highest meaning, entirely unproduced (anutpattikadharma-kãānti, 無生法忍). Anutpattikadharma-kãnti means by virtue of the understanding of the true nature of things the Bodhisattva is able to be non-clinging; he is able to keep free from misconstructions (不 作 分 別) in regard to the senses and their different objects. In their mundane nature they are conditioned, non-substantial and in the ultimate comprehension, they enter the non-dual dharma. Although they are not two, they are also not one. By this comprehension the mind gives rise to faith in the truth of things and does not revert (信 心 不 轉). This is the Bodhisattva's dharmakãnti (法 忍) capacity to sustain the comprehension of the truth of things.[571] It is this capacity to have faith in the purity and the impregnability of the teachings of the Buddha by banishing all wrong notions and gaining the understanding of the truth of things that is called the endurance for dharma.[572] As his heart of faith is great, his mind is free from doubt and repentance; as his power of faith is great, his mind can accept and hold firmly the truth of things. This is the endurance for dharma.[573]

On account of the power of concentration and meditation, the mind becomes soft (柔 軟) and pure (清 淨); in this state when one hears the teaching of the true nature of things, one responds to it heartily (應 心 與 會), holds it firm in faith (信 著) and penetrates deep into it, remaining free from doubt and repentance. This is the endurance for dharma.[574] By virtue of this endurance for dharma the Bodhisattva enters the door of wisdom (入 智 慧 門), comprehends (觀) the universal reality and does not revert (不 退) or repent (不 悔).[575] Having known the true nature of Praj–-pramit, he does not give rise to imaginative constructions; his mind remains ever free from clinging and thus he has the capacity to forbear, to endure all things.[576] Therefore, the Yogācāra (瑜 伽 論) philosopher Asaôga (無 著), who stated that kãnti is ‘a most essential factor in the awakening of a bodhisattva’. And this kãnti (忍 辱) relates with the Buddha’s body of the Dharma (法 身).

‘Patience’ is the cornerstone of a way of life based on insight and attention rather than on manipulation and control. The (true) status of the Boddhisattva is the Anutpattika-dharma-kãnti. Having achieved this dharma-kãnti, he comprehends the entire world as ։nyat and remains completely non-clinging at heart. Being (firmly) established in the true nature of all things, he does not cling any more to the world with passion.

3) Vīrya Pāramitā ( 精 進 波 羅 密,  Energy Perfection)

The next perfection is characterized by enthusiasm and perseverance in every undertaking. Vīrya (精 進) is the source of energy to begin the Bodhisattva’s career and to see it through to full awakening.

There are three aspects mentioned specifically:

• Energy and stamina which serve as armor in encounters with difficulties and provide the encouragement necessary to avoid depression;
• Energy which produces enthusiasm and good spirits; and
• Energy which helps to accomplish the welfare of all living beings.[577]

As a further clarification of the meaning of the term, ցntideva offers the following verse:

“What is V­rya? —It is resolution in pursuing whatever is good. And what is referred to as the antithesis of v­rya? —Laziness, slothfulness, attachment, depression, and self-contempt.”[578]

It may be very interested if here we can add same ideas of Mahatma Gandhi as under:

“A ceaseless effort (whether it be ethical or religious) to attain self-purification can develop in us the capacity to bear”.[579]

Thus, one should strive with heroic vigour for purification. In this connection, Saddharma Puϯarika S‰tra (妙 法 蓮 花 經) depicts in detail the way Boddhisattvas practice V­rya pramit by going without eating and sleeping to study the Buddha-dharma (佛 法). They do not deliberately refrain from food in order to cultivate Buddhahood (佛 果). In fact, they just forget the idea of food and sleep. They think only of cultivating and studying the Buddha-dharma for getting Supreme Enlightenment. They go deep into the mountain valleys. It is also observed that there exist some Bodhisattvas who do not ever sleep. If they do sleep, they just sit at a place and doze off for perhaps a moment. Within the forest groves they seek with diligence the Buddha way. They, in fact, are intent on finding the road to the accomplishment of Buddhahood q.v. Saddharma Puϯarika S‰tra as under:

“If there are living beings who attend the Buddha, the World- Honored One, hear the Law, believe and accept it, and put forth diligent effort, seeking comprehensive wisdom, Buddha wisdom, wisdom that comes of itself, teacherless wisdom, the insight of the Thus Come One, powers and freedom from fear, who pity and comfort countless living beings, bring benefit to heavenly and human beings, and save them all, they shall be called [those who ride] the Great Vehicle. Because the Bodhisattvas seek this vehicle, they are called Mahsattvas.”[580]

(若 有 眾 生 從 佛 世 尊 聽 法 信 受，勤 修 精 進，求 一 切 智，佛 智，自 然 智，無 師 智，如 來 知 見，力 無 所 畏，愍 念 安 樂 無 量 眾 生，利 益 天 人，度 說 一 切，是 名 大 乘；菩 薩 求 此 乘 故，名 為 摩 訶 薩 如 彼 諸 子 為 求 鹿 車，出 於 火 宅).[581]

or in other passage in the same text:

“Ajita, these good men take no delight in being in the assembly and indulging in much talk. Their delight is constantly to be in a quiet place, exerting themselves diligently and never resting. Nor do they linger among human or heavenly beings, but constantly delight in profound wisdom, being free from all hindrances. And they constantly delight in the Law of the Buddhas, diligently and with a single mind pursuing unsurpassed wisdom.”[582]

(阿 逸 多！是 諸 善 南 子 等 不 樂 在 眾，多 有 所 說，樂 靜 處，勤 行 精 進，未 曾 休 息，亦 不 依 止 人 天 而 住。樂 智，無 有 障 礙，亦 樂 於 諸 佛 之 法，一 念 精 進， 求 無 上 慧 ).[583]

According to ցntideva (寂 天), he must cultivate this confidence in three areas:

(1) Confidence in the ability to act on his own initiative, which must grow directly from the Buddhist teachings;

(2) Self-respect as a deterrent to the afflictions of clinging, antipathy, and delusion; and

(3) The power of self-assurance which is not worn down or swayed by the opinion of others.[584]

Vīrya (精 進) is not simply the strengthening of the power of will in service to the Buddhist teachings. It is also the energy needed to remain constantly attentive and to observe all aspects of experience with extreme patience and care.

Initially a Bodhisattva’s energy is said to be generated from faith or conviction (±raddhnusārin) of emptiness. Realizing the true nature of voidness, Bodhisattva constanstly efforts to attain enlightenment as The Large S‰tra of Perfect Wisdom depicts:

“This is the foremost ‘undertaking’ of the Bodhisattva, i.e. the endeavour about emptiness. When he courses in emptiness, a Bodhisattva does not fall on the level of a Disciple or Pratyekabuddha, but purifies the Buddha-field, matures beings, and quickly knows full enlightenment. Among the ‘endeavours’ of a Bodhisattva the ‘endeavour’ about the perfection of wisdom is declared to be the highest, the best, the choicest, the most excellent, the utmost, the unsurpassed, the peerless, the unequalled, the most sublime. And why? There is nothing above that ‘endeavour’, i.e. above the ‘endeavour’ about perfect wisdom, about emptiness, the signless, the wishless”.[585]

By the non-clinging way the Bodhisattva cultivates the perfection of effort. Right effort, putting forth energy in the right way, is fundamental to the cultivation of concentration and meditation as well as of true wisdom (禪 定 實 智 慧 之 根).[586] V­rya, (精 進) effort has been also called chandas determination and absence of lassitude apramda (不 放 逸). Determination comes first; then follows effort, the putting forth of energy; and there is the aspect of the absence of langour which means to keep the effort unfailing.[587] The Bodhisattva, with his mind fixed on the Way of the Buddha from the very start, exerts himself in order to cultivate all that is good and thus he gradually achieves the perfection of effort. It is the effort put forth in order to achieve the Way of the Buddha (為 佛 道 精 進) that is called the perfection of effort.[588]

5) Dhyāna Pāramitā (禪定波羅密,  Meditation Perfection)

Meditation is a method of shaking oneself free from habitual patterns of thought and of refining both the will and the intellect through a maturing of insight into the nature of cognitive and perceptual processes as they influence everyday experience. The ultimate goal of such practice is not to eliminate emotional involvement or to divorce oneself from the external world, but to create a stable and attentive mind which can serve as a workable foundation for appreciating the significance of any experience in the wider context of the Buddhist teachings. Sensitivity in all relationships is to be enhanced, not devalued, and for this it is absolutely necessary to undermine egotism and the clinging to concepts and views of any kind.

The flow of events comes to be seen as a dynamic and constantly changing interaction between the six organs of sensation (including the mind) and their respective objective referents—an interaction which is experienced as entirely devoid of any stable, abiding ground. Apprehended in this way, the everyday procession of worldly affairs generates and sustains not only dichotomizing thought and emotion, but a deeper understanding of the philosophical literature as well. The conventional world remains just as it is, but with the steady refinement of philosophical understanding and the direct application of these concepts, one sees the meaning of emptiness unfold as a new dimension within the old order of things—a new natural interpretation that “seems to emerge from the things themselves.”

The meditator establishes himself in a great inner peace characterized in the texts as the actualization of emptiness, devoid of reified thought and therefore free from the distortions of an emotionally unbalanced, egocentric mind. This tremendous inner peace is described as the power embodied in realization of the ‘Suchness’ (如 是) or ‘Öūnyat’ (空 性) of everyday experience, the ability to see oneself and all the other things of the world with ‘perfect clarity’ just as they are in the context of their relations with each other. The highest experience of perfect, balanced concentration (samyaksamdhi, 正定) involves the transformation and harmonization of the entire personality so that one’s attitude and form of life are in complete accord with the understanding gained through study and critical reflection as The Large S‰tra on Perfect Wisdom represented the contemplation (觀) of all Dharmas (諸 法) in detail vividly under:

“…He does not settle down in any dharma, contemplates the essential original nature of all dharmas, also instigates other beings to the contemplation of all dharmas, but never bases himself on anything…

Moreover, Subh‰ti, the great vehicle of the Bodhisattva, the great being, that is the emptiness of the subject, etc. to: the emptiness of other being.

-What is the emptiness of the subject? Dharmas on the subject-side are eye, ear, nose, tongue, body, and mind. Therein the eye is empty of the eye, on account of its being neither unmoved nor destroyed. And why? Because such is its essential nature. And so for the ear, etc. to mind.

-What is the emptiness of the object? Dharmas on the object-side are forms, sounds, smells, tastes, touch objects, and mind objects. Therein from is empty of form, on account of its being neither unmoved nor destroyed. For such is its essential nature. And so for sounds, etc. to: mind objects…

-What is the emptiness of emptiness? The emptiness of all dharmas is empty of that emptiness, on account of its being neither unmoved nor destroyed. For such is its essential nature…

- What is infinite emptiness? That of which no end is got at, that infinite is empty of the infinite, on account of its being neither unmoved nor destroyed. For such is its essential nature.

- What is the emptiness without beginning or end? That of which no beginning or end is got at, of that the middle is nonexistent. And that of which neither beginning nor middle nor end is got at, of that there is no coming or going. Beginning, middle, and end are also empty of beginning, middle, and end, on account of their being neither unmoved nor destroyed. For such is their essential nature…

What is the emptiness of all dharmas? All dharmas means the five skandhas, the twelve sense fields, the six kinds of consciousness, the six kinds of contact, the six kinds of feeling conditioned by contact. Conditioned and unconditioned dharmas, these are called “all-dharmas”. Therein all dharmas are empty of all-dharmas, on account of their being neither unmoved nor destroyed. For such is their essential nature…

This is called the great vehicle of the Bodhisattva, the great being.”[589]

Saddharma-puϯarika Sūtra (妙 法 蓮 花 經) expresses that the Bodhisattvas also fulfil the fifth Pramit, i.e. Dhyna or Meditation Perfection (禪 定 波 羅 密) in order to attain Enlightenment as below:

“One could also see bodhisattvas

entering deep into meditation practices,

their bodies and minds still and unmoving,

in that manner seeking the unsurpassed way.”[590]

(又 見 諸 菩 薩，入 諸 禪 定，身 心 寂 不 動，以 求 無 上 道 ).[591]

Also in Chapter XV ‘Emerging from the Earth’ (從 地 勇 出 品) belonging to Saddharma Puϯar­ka S‰tra presented such Jhna which Bodhisattvas attained not only in one kalpa but numerous:

“It has in fact not been long since you attained the way. But this great multitude of bodhisattvas have already for immeasurable thousands, ten thousands, millions of kalpas applied themselves diligently and earnestly for the sake of the Buddha way. They have learned to enter into, emerge from and dwell in immeasurable hundreds, thousands, ten thousands, millions of samadhis, have acquired great transcendental powers, have over a long period carried out brahma practices, and have been able step by step to practice various good doctrines, becoming skilled in questions and answers, a treasure among persons, something seldom known in all the worlds”.[592]

(佛 亦 如 是，得 道 以 來，其 實 未 久，而 此 大 眾 諸 菩 薩 等，以 於 無 量 千 萬 億 劫，為 佛 道 故，勤 行 精 進 善 入 出 住 無 量 百 千 萬 億 三 妹，得 大 神 通，久 修 梵 行，喜 能 次 第 習 諸 善 法 巧 於 問 答，人 中 之 實，一 切 世 間 甚 為 俙 有 ).[593]

It is the dhyna followed by the great compassion for all beings and issuing in the oath to help all to realize the joy of contemplation through abandoning the pleasures of sense that gets the name of perfection. It is the spirit of non-clinging that gives the quality of perfection to concentration and meditation. In the non-clinging (։nyatā) cultivation, the Bodhisattva does not seize its flavour, does not seek its result (不 受 味, 不 求 報). He enters dhyna only in order to soften and subdue the mind.[594] He rises from the state of dhyna and enters again the realm of desires through the skilfulness of ։nyat and this he does in order to help all to cross the stream of birth and death. It is then that dhyna gets the name of perfection.[595] One who has attained the perfection of dhyna does not seize the characteristics of collectedness and disturbedness of mind as absolute and unconditioned, for one has comprehended the true nature of things. The ultimately true nature of the elements that obstruct the mind is also the ultimately true nature of the collected, concentrated, state of mind.[596] The dhyna that is saturated with this comprehension of the ultimate truth has attained its perfection.

6) Prajñā Pāramitā (智 慧 波 羅 密 ,Wisdom Perfection)

Saddharma Puϯar­ka S‰tra reflected that some Bodhisattvas cultivate Prajñ Pramit (智 慧 波 羅 密) for fulfilling Boddhisattva-cary. To illustrate the same the rendering of some of them may be reproduced as below :

“Again I see bodhisattvas,

profound in wisdom, firm in purpose,

who know how to question the Buddhas

and accept and abide by all they hear.

I see Buddha sons

proficient in both meditation and wisdom,

who use immeasurable numbers of similes

to expound the Law to the assembly,

delighting in preaching the Law,

converting the bodhisattvas,

defeating the legions of the devil

and beating the Dharma drum.” [597]

(復 見 菩 薩，智 志 固 能 問 諸 佛，聽 悉 受 按，又 佛 子，定 慧 具 足，以 無 量 喻，為 眾 稱 法，欣 樂 說 無 法，化 諸 菩 薩 破 魔 兵 眾，而 學 法 鼓).[598]

This means that their wisdom is extremely profound and their determination is extremely firm and solid. They are well able to question the Buddhas concerning their doubts. They ask about the dharma and having received their answers they can put what they have heard into actual practice in accordance with dharma — that is to say they accept, uphold and cultivate the Pramit. In accordance with the dharma there are others whose samdhi and wisdom power is perfected. They use an uncountable number of parables, analogies and doctrines in order to preach dharma to the multitudes. They expound the Buddha-dharma for the sake of living beings. The more they speak the more they like to speak. The dharma which they propound is extremely profound, subtle and wonderful.

Again verses of the same theme may be illustrated as under:

“Or there are Bodhisattvas

who expound the Law of tranquil extinction,

giving different types of instruction

to numberless living beings.

Or I see bodhisattvas

viewing the nature of all phenomena

as having no dual characteristics,

as being like empty space.

And I see Buddha sons

whose minds have no attachments,

who use this wonderful wisdom

to seek the unsurpassed way.” [599]

(或 有 菩 薩，說 寂 滅 法 種 種 教 詔，無 數 眾 生，或 有 菩 薩，觀 諸 法 性，無 有 二 相，獨 如 虛 空，又 見 佛 子，心 無 所 著， 以 此 妙 慧，求 無 上 道).[600]

To express this more clearly, it may be said that there are Bodhisattvas who are teaching ‘Still Extinction Dharma’ (常 寂 滅 法). ‘Still Extinction’ means that all dharmas are ։nyat appearances. Bodhisattvas use all manners of devices and teaching methods to:

• Cause living beings to turn their back on the dust and unite with Enlightenment;
• Lead living beings to a clear understanding and awakening;
• Help living beings to awaken to the fact that all insolvent with the dust of worldly affairs is a form of suffering.

There are Bodhisattvas who look at the nature of all dharmas as lacking the mark of duality. These dharmas are like empty space. There are also Buddha’s disciples whose minds have no attachment and who use wondrous wisdom to attain Supreme Enlightenment. This wondrous wisdom comes simply from their non-attachment.

The nature of praj– as ‘nondualistic knowledge’ (advāyaj–ana, 智 不 二) i.e. ։nyat is the key to its relationship with the other perfections. According to the Mahyna literature, all five perfections must be practiced for eons, during which time they are purified by perfect wisdom and so purged of all associations with the reified concepts ‘agent’ ‘action’ or ‘recipient’. Accompanied by full comprehension of the ։nyat of all things, the practice of these virtues releases one from obscuring emotional afflictions and reified thought. Actualization of ։nyat releases us from the grip of the observational language and natural interpretations that are useful in their own right but spiritually dangerous unless placed in contrast with an alternative, soteriological truth. Through their transformation all six perfections are held responsible for engendering the realization of the Buddha’s body of the Dharma, which is the truth of the highest meaning. Only at this point are they properly called ‘perfections’ and praj– is chief among them. In union with perfect wisdom each of the other qualities takes part in fostering a deep inner peace, the affective counterpart to direct awareness of conventional truth as it is in its relational, contextual nature.

Praj– is not amassed through accretion of theoretical formulas or through reference to any sublime, metaphysical, or mystical reality. It is the essential clarity and flexibility of the mind revealed when, through the discipline of the path, the Bodhisattva has completely rid himself of the tendency to cling to the contents of conceptualization and perception as though some or all of them were grounded in an a priori truth or reality. Praj– is a matter both of intellectual understanding and of action. With it the Bodhisattva not only slashes away at the thick undergrowth of reified concepts but is also conducted along the path to a point where the concept of ։nyat is actualized through his attitude and behavior in the world which is illustrated in the Large S‰tra of Perfect Wisdom as below:

“ցriputra: How is a Bodhisattva, a great being who is joining (exerting) himself, to be called “joined to perfect wisdom”?

The Lord: Here, ցriputra, a Bodhisattva, a great being, who is joined to the emptiness of form is to be called ‘joined’. And so if he is joined to the emptiness of feeling, etc.; of the eye to mind, of sight-objects to mind-objects, of eye-element, sight-object-element; eye-consciousness-element, etc. to mind-consciousness-element; of suffering, origination, stopping, path; and of ignorance, etc. to: decay and death. Joined to the emptiness of all dharmas is he to be called ‘joined’. Of whichever conditioned and unconditioned dharmas he may have formed a notion, joined to the emptiness of all those dharmas is he to be called ‘joined’. Moreover, Sriputra, a Bodhisattva, a great being, who courses in perfect wisdom, should be called ‘joined’ if he is joined to the emptiness of the essential original nature.

It is thus, ցriputra that the Bodhisattva, the great being who courses in perfect wisdom is, when joined to these seven emptinesses, to be called ‘joined’. It is thus, ցriputra, that he who courses in perfect wisdom by means of these seven emptinesses should, because of that, not even be called ‘joined’ or ‘unjoined’. And why? Because there he does not review form, etc., as ‘joined’, or as ‘unjoined’.[601]

Or another passage in the same text states a following lesson:

“ցriputra: How then should the Bodhisattva, the great being, course in perfect wisdom?

The Lord: Here the Bodhisattva, the great being, coursing in the perfection of wisdom, truly a Bodhisattva, does not review a Bodhisattva, nor the word ‘Bodhisattva’, nor the course of a Bodhisattva, (nor the perfection of wisdom, nor the word ‘perfection of wisdom’.

He does not review that ‘he courses’, nor that ‘he does not course’). He does not review form, feeling, perception, formative forces, or consciousness. And why? Because the Bodhisattva, the great being, is actually empty of the own-being of a Bodhisattva, and because perfect wisdom is by its own-being empty. And why? That is its essential original nature. (For it is not through emptiness that form, etc. is empty.) Nor is emptiness other than form, etc.”[602]

This Praj–-pramit (智 慧 波 羅 密) is also understood to mean ։nyat (空 性). As we mentioned the meanings of ։nyat in the previous Chapter, here we only sum up that ։nyat was regarded as a middle way between the dogmas of absolute Existence and absolute Non-existence.

The LaÏkvatra-s‰tra (楞 伽 經) shows that absolute Existence and Non-existence are relative terms, as each proves the necessity of the other.[603] Ngrjuna has expressed this view in his famous aphorism of eight negatives which sum up the early teaching on ։nyat, which really amounts to a systematic exposition of the old Buddhist formula of the Paæicca-samuppda (Skt. Pratītya-samutpāda, 緣 起, 因 緣 生 起). ։nyat denotes the absence of an absolute self-existent Substance or Substratum in all things and phenomena (dharma-natrtmya, 法 空).[604] It also implies the non-existence of any uncaused or self-caused entities and phenomena...

Some Buddhist philosophers go further and explain ։nyat as absolute Non-existence (abhva, 非 有). The Sata-sha±rik Praj– Pramit (一 百 千 頌 般 若 波 羅 密 經)[605] says:

“Ignorance is non-existent; the saòskras are non-existent; Consciousness, Name-and-form, the Sixfold Sphere of the Senses, Contact, Sensation, Craving, Grasping, Becoming, Birth, Old age-and-Death are all non-existent (avidyamna)... A bodhisattva does not find and discern the origination or cessation, corruption or purification, this side or the other side of any thing or phenomenon. If a clever magician or his apprentice were to create a great crowd of people in a square and preach the Perfection of Wisdom to them in order to establish them therein, then he would not thereby establish any being in the Perfection of Wisdom, because all things and beings are of such a nature that they are illusory (my-dharmat). . . All dharmas exist in that they do not exist. They are not merely empty, they are identical with Emptiness.  They are transient, painful, non-substantial, quiescent, void, signless, aimless, unproduced and unrelated. ‘There are no form, sensation, perception, volitions and consciousness , no eye, ear, nose, tongue, body and mind; no forms, sounds, odours, savours, tangible things and mental objects; no Patn, or its origin or cessation ; no eightfold Way; no past, present or future, no uncompounded elements; no Bodhisattva, no Buddha and no Enlightenment... A Bodhisattva is himself like a phantom of illusion (my-purusa).”

Thus, the Sata-shasrik Praj– Pramit expound its doctrine of negation, which is surely carried to the utmost limit. The Vajracchedik Praj– Pramit (金 剛 般 若 波 羅 密 經) text exhibits the same tendency. It declares that there are no individuals, no qualities, no ideas, no Doctrine, no beings to be delivered, no production or destruction, no Bodhisattva, no Buddha and no Bodhi.[606] 

In other words, Praj– and ։nyat are the sources of a Bodhisattva’s moral strength.

7)  Upāya Pāramitā (方 便 波 羅 密,  Skillful Perfection)

This is the most important of the four supplementary prmits. The term is a translation of upya (方 便), a mode of approach, an expedient, stratagem, device. The meaning is teaching according, to the capacity of the hearer, by any suitable method, including that of device or stratagem, but expedience beneficial to the re­cipient. Mahyna claims that the Buddha used this expedient or partial method in his teaching until near the end of his days, when he enlarged it to the revelation of reality, or the preaching of his final and complete truth. In Saddharma Puϯarika s‰tra relates some interesting parables. Among them is ‘Parable of the Lost Son’[607] in Chapter IV of Belief and Understanding (信 解 品) which may be briefly as follows:

A certain poor man lost a loved son who left his home and went out a far country. Later father became rich, his son wandering about in search of food and raiment. The father suddenly saw a young poor man whom he knew to be his son but his son was filled with fear at the thought that he had perhaps come into wrong street and might be punished for his rashness. So, he ran away in great haste. His father now exhibited his Upya-kau±alya (方 便) by letting the poor fellow go away. Then, he called two poor men of humble origin and said to them hire him as a labourer cleaning the refuge-barrel in his house. Then, the father put on dirty clothes, took a basket in his hand, and going near unto his son, said: “Work here, my man; do not go anywhere else... Look upon me as your own father...henceforward you are unto me like my son”. In this way, the father found the chance of speaking to his son, who thereupon felt happier in the house. But he continued to live in his hovel of straw and did the same menial work for twenty years. At last, the rich man fell sick and felt that his days were numbered. So, he first gave much wealth to the young man, and then he gathered together all his kinsfolk and citizens, said to them: “He is my son; I am his father. To him, I leave all my possessions”. The son was greatly astonished at this, and rejoyed exceedingly in his heart.

In this parable, father is the Buddha; the son is every pious Buddhist; the labour of cleaning the refuge-barrel is the lower teaching about NirvÏa (Liberation); the declaration of the filial relation is the higher doctrine of Mahyna.

And there are many places in the same text telling that Gautama Buddha really attained Enlightenment many aeons ago and lives for ever; he pretends to be born as a man and attain bodhi under tree. He does so in order to help mankind, and this is his Upya-kau±alya. Specially, in chapter two ‘Expedient Means’,[608] in which the meaning of Upya kau±aly is elucidated through the doctrine of Triynas (Three Vehicles), viz., Örvaka-yna (聲文乘), Pratyekabuddha-yna (辟 支 佛 乘 / 緣 覺 乘) and Boddhisattva-yna (菩 薩 乘) in order to respond to different temperaments of listeners as under:

A Bodhisattva reveals all the activities of this world, is never tired of teaching beings, and manifests himself according to the wish of beings. He is never attached to deeds, and delivers all, manifesting himself sometimes as an ignorant being, sometimes as a holy man, sometimes in the midst of Saòsāra, and sometimes in the state of NirvÏa. (Avatamsaka-sūtra)

Upya-kau±alya is the way in which the Bodhisattvas act for saving the beings from the thraldom of suffering. It starts from genuine ability to perform such action. It is not the crafty method of achieving one’s objective. It is imbued with the morality of compassionate action with the contiguous purpose of bringing forth merit (puÏya, 功 德). Mahyna preceptors have a strong faith in skilfull method of the exercise of supreme wisdom.

8) PraÏidhāna Pāramitā (願波羅密,  Resolution Perfection)

William Jamesin in his work The Varieties of Religious Experience regards the following as the psychological essence of our experience of PraÏidhna:

“It is as if there were in the human consciousness a sense of reality, a feeling of objective presence, a perception of what we may call ‘something there’ more deep and more general than any of the special and particular ‘senses by which the current psychology supposes existent realities to be originally revealed” .[609]

The very fact that men of perfect faith have appeared in the fold of every religion proves that faith is possible. And PraÏidhna, we have seen, not only needs but generates faith. In the Mahatma Gandhi’s own words, PraÏidhna is: “…the key of the morning and the belt of the evening”.[610] That is, if we start the day with it, prayer can become the spring of hope and courage to deal with routine activities. Also, closing the day with a prayer would enable us to cease worring about what has been done or left undone. Thus, on the one hand PraÏidhna helps us in sanctifyng our daily work as an offering to the Buddha and on the other in perflecting our observance of the vows. PraÏidhna, thus is a ‘necessary spiritual disciplines.’ [611]

It is so not merely because it is indispensable for the practice of truth and ahiòs (不 害) but because it helps in the observance of the other vows too.

The essence of PraÏidhna is, according to Gandhi, its conduciveness to peace and order in the individual and social life. This is borns out by the following words of his: “without prayer there is no inward peace”, “the man of prayer will be at peace with himself and with the whole world… prayer is the only means of bringing about orderliness and peace and respose in our daily acts”. [612]

As faith ripens, PraÏidhna gains in inwardness, generating noble thoughts and they get reflected in words and actions of love and truth, and of evergrowing selflessness. All this makes for increased purity of heart. Mahatma Gandhi says:

“Prayer is not exclusive. It is not restricted to one’s own caste or community. It is all inclusive. It comprehends the whole, thus means the establishment of the kingdom of Heaven on earth. ”[613]

Öantideva, in Öikãsamuccaya has explained the necessity or the value of PraÏidhna as first essential for the practice of Bodhisattva-cary as below:

“In resolution truly, 0 Blessed One, is the root of the Buddha’s qualities. He who has no resolution, from him all the Buddha’s qualities are far away. Yet when he has made his resolve, Blessed One, even if there are no Buddhas present, the voice of the Dharma comes forth from space and from the flowering trees. When a Bodhisattva has pure resolve in his vow, then all teaching and instruction pour forth from the wellsprings of his own mind.”[614]

The Boddhisattva PraÏidhna was inspired by his recognition of the terrible suffering of the world. From the point of view of the higher, soteriological truth, however, this commitment to beings who do not exist is the paramount absurdity. But Buddhist compassion cannot be appreciated without a clear understanding of the relationship between soteriological and conventional truths. The wisdom of a Boddhisattva is cultivated both through philosophical reflection and in the silence of meditation, where the world responds to this supplication for higher knowledge by revealing its intrinsic emptiness, the deepest secret of the spirit inherent in the very fabric of everyday life. His quest for knowledge culminates in a direct experience of the philosophical concepts that he has understood through study and reflection. At the same time, compassion takes root in the Bodhisattva’s original vow, and it too matures, along with wisdom, into a total affirmation of the identity of emptiness and form, culminating in his selfless concern for all those still caught up in the necessary illusion of worldly existence.

With actualization of ։nyat and a deep noninferential appreciation of the concept of dependent origination as the bridge linking the necessity of conventional truth with insight into its illusory nature, has the Boddhisattva achieved the wisdom and the reserves of strength effectively to commit himself to what might once have seemed a preposterous paradox: an ideal of sympathy for countless empty beings were trapped in an empty cycle of fear and misery.  This immense concern for the anguish of other creatures is presented as the natural expression of perfect harmony between heart and mind. Compassion is in profound accord with the knowledge gained through philosophical analysis, but it is not in the least analytical. On the contrary, this boundless love becomes manifest as the active, operational aspect of ‘wisdom as an effect’, which finds its embodiment in an impulse finally to bring together in nirvÏa all sentient beings, who have been from the beginning united not only by their spiritual ignorance and suffering in the world but also by their innermost nature, which is empty of any transcendental ground for perception, conceptualization, or clinging. The Boddhisattva ‘s vow is a vow of refined, purified love, immersed in paradox and contradiction and nurtured in a wisdom that does not ignore but incorporates and transcends the claims of reason.

The Chinese Mahyna Buddhists composed the four-fold Bodhisattva PraÏidhna in verse which has been adopted without exception by all schools in East Asia. The early original form of the four-fold vow can be traced back to the Eight Thousand Verse Wisdom S‰tra (Fasc.8),[615] Lotus S‰tra (Chap. 3), and so on, but it is clearer still in the Bodhisattva Ornament S‰tra (vol. 1 of two vols.).[616] In this S‰tra, the Bodhisattva’s vow is formulated with reference to the goals of the Four holy Truths as follows:[617]

“May I help all those who have not overcome-suffering overcome it;

May I help all those who have not understood causal aggregation understand it;

May I help all those who have not settled firmly in the path settle upon it;

May I help all those who have not realized NirvÏa realize it.”

This original form was eventually refined into the presently practiced formula of the four-fold vow in verse as follows:

“However innumerable the sentient beings might be, I vow to rescue them from suffering;

However inexhaustible the inner defilements might be, I vow to terminate them;

However unlimited the subjects of practice might be, I vow to master them;

However infinite the height of the Buddha way might be, I vow to realize it.”

(眾 生 無 邊 誓 願 度，煩 惱 無 盡 誓 願 斷，法 門 無 量 誓 願 學，佛 道 無 上 誓 願 成).[618]

According to Mahyna tradition, thre are three great Boddhisattvas- Avalokite±vara (觀 世 音 菩 薩), Ma–ju±ri (文 殊 師 利 菩 薩) and Samantabhadra  (普 賢 菩 薩) who represent respectively the great compassion, wisdom and vows of all Buddhas. In the vows of Boddhisattvas is expresses the compassionate zeal of the ideal Boddhisattva whose only concern in life is to relieve the pains and burdens of all sentient beings, and to bestow upon them true happiness through the achievement of Buddhahood.

A Bodhisattva is aspirant of the achievement of perfect wisdom in a ruesome world of beings that know no solution because of the frame of their unrestive mind. The Bodhisattva has perfect insight into the conditioned world. It is because of the luminosity which he bears toward all out of his boundless openness.

9) Bala Pāramitā (力 波 羅 密, Strength Perfection)

The Bodhisattva’s practice at this stage consists primarily in consolidating the powers that are described as an important fruit of spiritual maturity. These powers play in the realization of the Bodhisattva’s commitment to act in the world on behalf of all sentient beings. The Bodhisattva not only understands the doctrine and conceptual content of the Buddhist teachings about the ։nyat, but he is, in addition, capable of conveying his understanding and insight of it to others in innumerable ways.

Perhaps the most significant aspect of these last four stages, is their focus on the Bodhisattva’s commitment to action. Although earlier he expended enormous effort in cultivating an inferentially based understanding of the central concepts of the Mahyna, this understanding did not lead him to renounce the world and retire into the peace of NirvÏa, much less into the sterility of a purely rationalistic or idealistic abstraction. The Bodhisattva is to live and teach in the world with dignity and grace. His actions are efficient, he can waste no effort in confusion or hesitation. And the whole of everyday experience is said to reflect the strength of his vow to propagate the teachings and lead all sentient beings to liberation from suffering.

10) Jñāna Pāramitā (智 波 羅 密,  Knowledge Perfection)

The culmination of the Bodhisattva’s intellectual and spiritual journey comes with his ascent to the J–na Pramit (智 波 羅 密), then immediately preceding his transformation into a fully awakened Buddha. The most significant event at this level, and the paramount symbol of the Bodhisattva’s highest accomplishment, is entrance into a meditative state of balanced concentration immersed in nondualistic knowledge of emptiness. This event is represented by his initiation into the omniscience of a perfect Buddha, which is the quintessential perfection.

It is difficult to draw any definite distinction between Praj– Pramit (智 慧 波 羅 密) and J–na Pramit (智 波 羅 密). It is evident that nondualistic knowledge is inseperable from the Boddhisattva’s experience in all its aspects. It is this experience, in both its conceptual and perceptual aspects. J–na (智) is the essential clarity and unerring sensibility of a mind that no longer clings to reified concepts of any kind. It is direct and sustained awareness of the truth, for a Boddhisattva, that meaning and existence are found only in the interface between the components of an unstable and constantly shifting web of relationships, which is everyday life, while praj– is the strength of intellectual discrimination elevated to the status of a liberating power, a precision tool capable of slicing through obstructions that take the form of afflictions and attachments to deeply engrained hereditary patterns of thought and action. Praj– (智 慧) has an analysis quality which does not seem to figure as a specific characteristic of nondualistic knowledge developed by the Boddhisattva at J–na Pramit. In other words, J–ana Pramit (智 波 羅 密) is similar to Praj– Pramit (智 慧 波 羅 密), but J–ana (智) refers more to intellectual knowledge and Praj– (智 慧) to intuition.

As far as the degree of Pramit (波 羅 密) is concerned, Pram­ is of ba kinds: low, middle and high degrees as follows:

Dna Pramī: Given in low degree (or ordinary, good, 下 分 布 施):

With the compasion, he gives alms to his relative, wife, children... is called Given in low degree. (KaruÏopāya kosalla paritahitā putta dārassa paricago dāna Pāramī nāma).

Dna Uppapramī: Given in middle degree (or extraordinary, better, 中 分 布 施).

With the compasion, he gives his own head, eyes, arms, legs... is called Given in middle degree. (KaruÏopya kosalla paritahitā aôga paricgo dna ‰papramī nma).

Dna Paramattha pramī: Given in high degree (or superlatively extraordinary, the best, 上 分 布 施):

With the compasion, he gives his own life... is called Given in high degree.  (KaruÏopya kosalla paritahit j­vita paricgo dna paramattha pramī nma).

Therefore, 10 Pramīs will increase to 30 factors.

It is also interesting to note here that it depends on the variety of the length of a Bodhisatta’s career and the function of each Pramī.

Pa––dhika Bodhisatta (智 慧 菩 薩, Intellectual Bodhisattva): means Boddhisattas cultivate the wisdom. Therefore, they have to practice the Pram­ for at least four asaôkheyyas (阿 增 祇 劫) and one hundred thousand kappas.

Saddhdhika Bodhisatta  (信 心 菩 薩, devotional Bodhisattva): means Boddhisattas cultivate the devotion. So they have to practice Pramī for at least eight asaôkheyyas and one hundred thousand kappas.

Viriydhika Bodhisatta  (精 進 菩 薩, Energetic Bodhisattva): means Bodhisattas cultivate the diligence. Therefore they should pratice Pramī for sixteen asankheyyas and one hundred thousand kappas.

The first of these periods is the very least that is required and is intended for those who excel in wisdom (Pa––, 智 慧). The middle period is for those who excel in faith (Saddhā, 信 心); the last and the longest for those whose chief feature is perseverance (Vīriya, 精 進).[619]

It is ordinary, when it is practised by the ordinary worldly persons for the sake of happiness in this life or the next; it is extraordinary, when it is cultivated by the H­naynists for the sake of personal NirvÏa; but is of the highest degree, when it is acquired by the Mahynist Bodhisattvas for the welfare and liberation of all beings. All the Perfections can be cultivated only by means of attentive thought, resolute purpose, self-mastery, and wisdom in the choice of means.

These three kinds of Bodhisattvas correspond to J–na Yogi, Bhakti Yogi and Karma Yogi of the BrhmaÏic religious system.

Intellectual Bodhisattvas are less devotional and more energetic; devotional ones are less energetic and more intellectual; energetic ones are less intellectual and more devotional. Seldom, if ever, are these three characteristics harmoniously combined in one person. The Buddha Gautama is cited as one of the intellectual group.[620]

According to the Books, the intellectual ones attain Buddhahood within a short period, devotional ones take a longer time, and energetic ones take longer still.

Intellectual Bodhisattvas concentrate more on the development of wisdom and on the practice of meditation than on the observance of external forms of homage. They are always guided by reason and accept nothing on blind belief. They make no selfsurrender, and are not slaves either to a book or to an individual. They prefer lonely meditation.  With their silent but powerful thoughts of peace radiating from their solitary retreats they render moral help to suffering humanity.[621]

In short, the ideal of ։nyat (空 性) is applied to all the Perfections (Pāramitās, 波 羅 密). They are then ‘purified’ and exercised in their highest potency. Thus a Bodhisattva should ‘purify’ the ten Pramits repectively and all persons and things that Bodhisattva meets in practising the other Perfections should be regarded as illusory and unreal. This is the best way of exhibiting the pramits in all their glory. In other words, ։nyat and Pramits are the sources of a Bodhisattva’s moral strength. From awakeing the real nature of ։nyat, the ideal of Bodhisattva is allied with the ten Pnamits so that the fruits of the vivid natures, characteristics and effects were shown as the following diagram:

Table X 

THE ROLE OF ֈNYAT€ (EMPTINESS) IN TEN P€RAMIT€S

	Pramit	Nature	Characteristics	Effect
1	Dna Pramit 布 施 波 羅 密 (Perfection of Giving)	The spirit of nonclinging and harmony with the emptiness	Donation	Selflessness (nairtmya)
2	Ö­la Pramit 持 戒 波 羅 密 (Perfection of  Conduct or Morality)	The clear and lofty purification	Keeping disciplines	The right ways of behavior (ku±ala-karma-patha)
3	Kãnti Pramit 忍 辱 波 羅 密 (Perfection of  Forbearance)	The absence of anger and desire for retaliation and revenge	Loving-kindness and compassion	The tranquillity and softness
4	V­rya Pramit 精 進 波 羅 密 (Perfection of Energy)	Faith or conviction (Öraddhnusrin) of emptiness	Enthusiastic and positive attitude	Transferring constantly bad deeds into good ones without laziness, slothfulness, attachment, depression, and self-contempt or the uninterrupted will to win Enlightenment
5	Dhyna Pramit 禪 定 波 羅 密 (Perfection of Meditation)	The tranquillity of emptiness	Right thought and freed from distortions of an emotionally unbalanced and egocentic mind	The tremendous inner peacefulness and the maturing of insight
6	Praj– Pramit 智 慧 波 羅 密 (Perfection of Wisdom)	Intuition or transcendental idealism	Detachment of dharmas and freed from all desires and fears	Emancipation (vimokkha) or the absolute Truth of Reality
7	Upya Pramit 方 便 波 羅 密 (Perfection of Skillfulness)	Intellectual of the formation / figure of emptiness	A proper state of  flexibility or sensitivity	Spreading the truth effectively for living beings in all walks of society
8	PraÏdhna Pramit 願 波 羅 密 (Perfection of Resolution or Aspiration)	The foundation of the Faith at the triple Gems: Buddha-dharma-sangha	Going forth in a new way	Perseverance constantly of the Bodhi-citta untill to  Buddhahood
9	Bala Pramit 力 波 羅 密 (Perfection of Strength)	Active and dynamic	Actualization	Conveying understand or rationalistic or idealistic abstraction to be reality
10	J–an Pramit 智 波 羅 密 (Perfection of Knowledge)	Intellectual knowledge or Non dualistic knowledge of emptiness	The essential clarity and unerring sensibility	Omniscience of a perfect Buddha or the quintessential Perfection

Öīla-Samādhi-Paññā (戒-定-慧)

The origin of the first sixfold formula of the pramits (波 羅 密) must be sought in the early Buddhist triad, ±īla (戒, virtuous conduct), samdhi ( 定, concentration) and paññ (慧, wisdom), which are known as the three skandhas (groups constituting the factors of spiritual progress) and also to the three Öikãs [622] (branches of instruction, the threefold training and discipline). It is probable that prajñ was added to the original group of the two — ±īla and samdhi — which are mentioned together in several passages. Öīla is often said to lead to samdhi, and prajñ is not spoken of in that context. The eightfold way also ends with samdhi.[623]

The threefold ±ikだis defined as adhi-±­la (善 戒), adhi-citta (善 心) and adhi-praj– (善 慧) in the Mah Vyutpatti;[624] the prefix ‘adhi’ denotes pre-eminence and importance. Citta is here synonymous with samdhi. The last two items are identical with the fifth and sixth pramits (dhyna and praj–). Öīla is the second pramit, to which kãnti was gradually attached as an important virtue. These two were mentioned together even before the final formulation of the six Perfections.

The fourth pramit (v­rya) was placed between the ±­la section (which appertained especially to the laymen) and the dhyna-praj– section (which was really cultivated by the monks). The first pramit occupied an independent position from a very early period, when it was coupled with ±­la. Dna and ±­la were regarded as the laymen’s special duties, which paved the way to a happy rebirth. The well-known sentence, which describes Buddha’s preaching, begins thus: 

“Dna-kathaò Ö­la-kathaò sagga-kathaò.”[625]

This was the complete gospel for the layman-householder. The higher virtues of renunciation and celibacy are then mentioned in the latter part of the same sentence:

“Kmnaò  €dinavaò  okraò samkilesaò,” etc.[626]

Dna was thus the first step that an ordinary person was taught to take; and it was placed before ±īla as a distinct duty, though it is logically included in moral conduct (±īla).[627]

It may be inferred that dna and praj– were added to the central dual of ±­la and samdhi, and they were emphasised on account of the influence of BrāhmaÏism. Vasubandhu (世 身) clearly explains in the Majjhima Commentary that the six pramits are fundamentally related to the three ±ikss. The first three pramits correspond to adhi-±­la, and the fifth and sixth to adhi-citta and adhi-praj– respectively; while the fourth (v­rya) is regarded as belonging to all the three branches of discipline. (Sometimes, the third pramit is coupled with the fourth). Thus making three pairs of pramits as is illustrated by a following table:

Table XI

Adhi-±­la (善 戒) ¯ Dana / s­la / Kãanti (布 施 / 持 戒 /忍 辱)	Adhi-citta (善 心) ¯ Samadhi (禪 定)	Adhi-praj– (善 慧) ¯ Praj– (智 慧)
-------------------------------Ú------------------------------- V­rya (精 進)

In this connection, it may be pointed out that the division of the pramits (波 羅 密) into two sections (with v­rya as the common or neutral middle term) is based on the doctrine of the Twofold Equipment (sambhra, 資 糧) of a Bodhisattva.  Sambhra means ‘what is carried together’, hence ‘materials and requisite ingredients’, ‘necessary conditions’, ‘equipment’.  According to Dictionary of Chinese Buddhist Terms,[628] Sambhra supplies for body or soul, e.g. food, almsgiving, wisdom, etc. It consists of puÏya (功 德) merit acquired by good deeds in social life) and j–na (智), knowledge acquired by concentration and wisdom). ‘Merit’ leads to happiness, sense-pleasure, and welfare on earth and in the heavens; but ‘knowledge’ confers final liberation. The accumulation of ‘merit’ is therefore the aim of the layman, while the acquisition of ‘knowledge’ is the goal of the monk.

According to Vasubandhu (世 身), the first two pramits (波 羅 密, dna and ±­la) lead to merit, the last pramit (praj–) constitutes knowledge, while the other three partake of the characteristics of both kinds of sambhra (資 糧). For the sake of clarity, the XII table is given under:

Table XII             

Dna / S­la Praj– Kãanti / V­rya / Samadhi

® ® ®

Merit Knowledge Sambhra

However, the application of the results of all the pramits (波 羅 密) for the attainment of Enlightenment really abolishes the distinction between mundane merit and supra-mundane knowledge, and all the pramits may be regarded as conducive to the equipment of knowledge. In this way, Vasubandhu attempts to unify and sublimate social action and ascetic meditation in the single ideal of the quest for Bodhi (菩 提).

The six pramits are thus related to several basic concepts of early Buddhism. In fact, there is nothing new in the formula of the six pramits: all the items are found in the old Buddhist scriptures. But the Mahynists really contrast their pramits with the Thirty-seven Bodhi-pksya-dharmas ­ (三 十 七 助 道 品) which are supposed to constitute the highest ideal of the so-called Hīnayna. It is certainly surprising that the terms dna, ±īla and kãnti are absent from that curious and comprehensive catalogue of monk’s duties, which does not seem to include social sympathy and altruistic service.[629]

The early Mahynists were perhaps proud of having combined the social virtues of a righteous layman-householder with the ascetic ideals of a meditative monk in this formula of the pramits. They thus bridged the gap that yawned between popular and monastic Buddhism. They taught that a Bodhisattva should not cease to practise charity and forbearance in social life, when he ascended to the higher stages of concentration and wisdom. The six pramits were not new, but the new method of juxtaposition was devised by the Mahynists. They preferred their new formula to the Thirty-seven Bodhi-pksya-dharmas (三 十 七 助 道 品), which were regarded as too monastic and unsocial in their scope and tendency. Charity and moral conduct, which could lead a Buddhist only to the gates of a heaven of temporary pleasure in the old dispensation, were not considered to be as important as concentration and the higher wisdom. All are classed together as indispensable factors in the attainment of Enlightenment.

The pramits are extolled to the skies in many passages of Buddhist literature. They are ‘the great oceans of all the bright virtues and auspicious principles’, and confer prosperity and happiness on all creatures. They are a Bodhisattva’s best friends. They are ‘the Teacher, the Way and the Light’. They are ‘the Refuge and the Shelter, the Support and the Sanctuary’. They are indeed ‘Father and Mother to all’. Even the Buddhas are their ‘children’.[630]

Certain general characteristics are ascribed to all the pramits as a group. They are sublime, disinterested, supremely important and imperishable. They lead to welfare, happy rebirths, serenity, unremitting spiritual cultivation, successful concentration and the highest Knowledge. They are free from contamination by sensual pleasure, partiality, love of reward and culpable self-complacency. They are placed in this order, as they imply one another and form a progressive scheme of action. The practice of each pramit is impossible without the cultivation of the preceding one.

The Major Characteristics of Bodhisattvas

It is also worlthwhile to pay attention that beside the cultures of ten Pramits, there are some noble characteristics which Bodhisattvas possess while they practice the path of Bodhisattva such as:     

1. i) Boddhisattvas ‘keeping the defilement’ (留 種 子) as a course for Boddhisattva’s compassionate activities

It means when a Boddisattva hopes to reborn to help people, he must retain the seed of existence as Vij–aptimtratsiddhi (唯 識) stated that:

“[A Bodhisattva] retains the obstacle of defilement (kle±varaÏa) to sustain his vow to be reborn [into saòsra].” [631]

(留 煩 惱 障,  助 願 受 生).

A Bodhisattva is reborn, fully mindful and conscious of whatever place where he chooses to be reborn. Because he is not contaminated by the defilements owing to the fact that he has stayed with the view of prat­tyasanutpda (緣 起) for a long time, there is the ‘guarding of defilements’.

1. ii) Great Compassionate (大 慈 悲)

A Boddhisattva should practice four psycho-physical modes of living known as maitrī (慈), karuρ (悲), mudit (喜) and upekだ(捨), which are not to be viewed in discreteness or in isolation. Here also there is centricity of karuρ and the remaining three are its corelation. Maitr­ is the basis of karuρ. It stands for love, respect and care for all lives. It is concreteness of loving kindness based on the feeling that just as our life is precious to us, so also is the life of others. Mudit is altrustic sympathetic joy. It is happiness in the happiness of all. It is a consequence of karuρ. Upekだis the prerequisite of karuρ. It stands for compassion to all beings. It also means equanimity of mind apart from impartiality.

The Pali-English Dictionary defined Karuρ (慈悲) means:

“Desire of bringing welfare and good to one’s fellow-men (ahita-dukkha-apanayakammata), or the desire of removing bane and sorrow of one’s fellow men, it also denotes the exalted state of compassion for all beings (paradukkhe sati sadhunam hadaya-kampanam karoti).”[632]

Compassion is the root-motivation of the Bodhisattva who sacrifices himself selflessly for the welfare of many and out of compassion for the world. Compasion has become the principle feature of the ideal for Bodhisattva’s service to society as pointed out by Peter Harve:

“Compassion is the root-motivation of the Bodhisattva, is much emphasized. In Eastern and Northern Buddhism, the taking of Bodhisattva vows, often done after taking the precepts, is a solemn commitment which expresses the compassionate urge to aid all beings. This is to be done by constant practice for the ‘perfection’: generosity, virtue, patience, vigour meditation and wisdom. In Southern Buddhism, there is a set of ten perfections, seen as noble qualities of aid in compassionately benefitting others…”[633]     

In Sadharma Puϯarika S‰tra, the Buddha said because of the suffering of living beings in the six realms, Bodhisattva has increased boundless or unlimited compassion to lead them to better way as under:

“I see the living beings in the six paths,

how poor and distressed they are, without merit or wisdom,

how they enter the perilous road of birth and death,

their sufferings continuing with never a break,

how deeply they are attached to the five desires,

like a yak enamored of its tail,

blinding themselves with greed and infatuation,

their vision so impaired they can see nothing.

They do not seek the Buddha, with his great might,

or the Law that can end their sufferings,

but enter deeply into erroneous views,

hoping to shed suffering through greater suffering.

For the sake of these living beings

I summon up a mind of great compassion.”[634]

(我 以 佛 眼 觀，見 六 道 眾 生，貪 窮 無 福 慧，入 生 死 險 道，相 續 苦 不 斷，深 著 於 五 欲，如 犛 牛 愛 尾，以 貪 愛 自 蔽, 盲 瞑 無 所 見，不 求 大 世 佛，乃 與 斷 苦 法，入 諸 邪 見，以 苦 求 捨 苦 為 是 眾 生 故，而 起 大 悲 心).[635]

The Buddha also confirms that developing great compassion means developing the mind and in the contrast as under:

“Develop the (mind-) development that is friendliness, Rahula. For, from developing the (mind-) development that is friendliness, Rahula, that which is malevolence will be got rid of. Develop the (mind-) development that is compassion, Rahula. For, from developing the (mind-) development that is compassion, Rahula, that which is harming will be got rid of.”[636]

In Chapter XXIV entitled ‘The Bodhisattva Wonderful Sound’ (妙 音 菩 薩, Bodhisattva Gadgadasvara), through the steadiness in the meditation termed Sarvar‰pasandar±ana (現一 切 色 身 三 妹), Bodhisattva Mahsattva Gadgadasvara transforms himself in various shapes for example under the shape of Brahm, Öiva Kubera, citizen, villager, girl, boy, wife and goblin, etc. to close with all walkings of life to guide them the nature of Buddha in themselves.[637]

It is also to be noted that Bodhisattva Mahsattva Avalokite±vara is projected as a saviour and protector of all beings for example as it is also written in the verse of the Saddharma Puϯarīka S‰tra:

“Wonderful sound, Perceiver of the World’s Sounds,

Brahma’s sound, the sea tide sound—

They surpass those sounds of the world;

Therefore you should constantly think on them,

From thought to thought never entertaining doubt!

Perceiver of the World’s Sounds, pure sage—

To those in suffering, in danger of death,

He can offer aid and support.

Endowed with all benefits,

He views living beings with compassionate eyes.

The sea of his accumulated blessings is immeasurable;

Therefore you should bow your head to him!” [638]

(妙 音，觀 世 音，梵 音 海 潮 音，勝 彼 世 間 音 是 故 常 修  念，念 念 物 生 疑，觀 世 音 淨 聖，於 苦 煩 死 危，能 為 作 依 估， 具 一 切 功 德，慈 眼 現 眾 生 福 眾 海 無 量，是 故 應 頂 禮).[639]

iii) Irreversibility of position (地 位 不 退 轉)

It means Boddhisattvas seek after Great Vehicle (Mahyna, 大 乘) no other. The Great Vehicle is the Great Dharma (大 法). If one believes in the Great Dharma, one must believe in the dharma doors (法 門) of the Great Vehicle. For that one needs a heart full of faith, because the Buddha-dharma is as vast as the sea and can be entered only by means of faith (信 心). Faith is the mother of the merit and virtue which one cultivates. Therefore, belief in the Great Dharma (大 乘) is one of the charactieristics of a Mahsattva (摩 訶 薩). Great Bodhisattvas believe in all the great dharmas.

“… they shall be called [those who ride] the Great Vehicle, because the bodhisattvas seek this vehicle, they are called mahsattvas.” [640]

(...是 名；大 乘；菩 薩 求 此 乘 故，名 為 摩 訶 薩，勤 行 精 進).[641]

1. iv) Irreversibility of Thought (思 想 不 退 轉)

The Bodhisattvas are ever mindful in their practice of the Bodhisattva way, in the practice of the six perfections and thousands of conducts.

1. v) Irreversibility of Practice (修 習 不 退 轉)

They only go forward, they do not retreat. They also should be known by the attributes, tokens and signs of a Bodhisattva who is irreversible from Full Enlightenment. However, there are some kinds of Bodhisattva who have irreversibility of practice but others have not yet attained it as The Large S‰tra on Perfect Wisdom as illustrated below:

“Moreover, a Bodhisattva knows that “these Bodhisattvas have been predicted to full enlightenment, and those have not. These Bodhisattvas are irreversible, and those are not. These Bodhisattvas are in full possession of their superknowledges, and those are not.

This Bodhisattva, in full possession of his superknowledges, goes, in each of the ten directions, to world-systems numberless as the sands of the Ganges, and there he honours, respects, reveres and worships the Tathgatas; that Bodhisattva, not in full possession of the superknowledges, does not go to numberless Buddha-fields, and does not there honour, respect, revere and worship the Tathgatas. This Bodhisattva will become a recipient of the superknowledges, that one will not. This Bodhisattva good when he settles down in such ideas as “form, etc., is ill, not self, empty, signless, wishless”.[642]                 

1. vi) Irreversibility of Dharma Wheel (法 輪 不 退 轉)

The Bodhisattvas turn the wheel of dharma to teach and convert living beings. So, there is a common phrase: ‘The Dharma Wheel forever turns’. The eternal timing of the Dharma Wheel refers to the irreversible Dharma Wheel.

vii) Boddhisattvas have very ancient, deep and great roots (種 功 德 根)

For many lives and throughout many kalpas, they have sent down and nurtured roots of goodness which are extremely deep. Good roots are called ‘roots of virtue’ and they are the basis of the way of virtue. They have sent down the roots of the virtuous nature. The roots which are limitless and boundless.

As the Vajracchedik Prajñ-pramit S‰tra says that such people will have planted good roots with not just one Buddha, two Buddhas, three, four or five Buddhas, but will have planted good roots with measureless millions of Buddhas. The Mahsattvas have planted their roots of virtue, in the presence of as many Buddhas as there are grains of sand in limitless, boundless hundreds of thousands of tens of thousands of Gaôg rivers (恆 河). So they are perfected with great roots. Their extremely deep foundation is a kind of greatness, as the Saddharma Puϯarika S‰tra mentions:

“Since the far distant past, in the dwelling place of immesurable, boundless numbers of Buddhas, they must have planted good roots, carried out the Bodhisattva way, and engaged constantly in brahma practices. World-Honored One, it is hard for the world to believe such a thing!”[643]

( 其 等 久 遠 已 來，於 無 量 無 邊 諸 佛 所，殖 諸 善 根, 成 就 菩 薩 道，修 梵 行，世 尊！如 所 之 事，世 所 難 信).[644]

These great Bodhisattvas throughout limitless kalpas and in the presence of limitless Buddhas had sent down and nourished the roots of the virtuous nature. By making offerings to Triple Gems and turning the irreversible Dharma Wheel they plant and nurture their roots. The Bodhisattvas in the Saddharma Puϯarika S‰tra were constantly and at all times receiving the praise and commendation of all the Buddhas.

viii) Bodhisattvas  possess great wisdom (智 慧) 

The wisdom came as a result of having brought forth the great bodhi-heart. Bringing forth the great Bodhi-heart, the resolve to take across all living beings and they are not attached to the mark of having made them crossed over. As in the Vajraccedika Praj–a Pramit S‰tra, the Lord says to Subh‰ti, someone who has set out in the vehicle of a Bodhisattva should produce a thought in this manner. Again and again, all Bodhisattva-Mahsattvas should subdue their hearts with the vow as many beings as there are in the universe of beings, comprehended under the term ‘beings’:

“...All living beings born from eggs, wombs, humidity or by transformation, with or without form, either thoughtful or thoughtless, and neither thoughtful nor thoughtless are all led by me to final NirvÏa for the extinction of reincarnation. Although immeasurable, uncountable and unlimitable numbers of living beings are thus led to (the NirvÏa for) the extinction of reincarnation, it is true that not a living being is led there.”

(所 有 一 切 眾 生 之 類 若 卵 生，若 胎 生，若 濕 生，若 化 生；若 有 色，若 無 色，若 有 想 若 無 想，若 非 有 想，若 非 無 想， 我 皆 令 入 無 餘 涅 槃 而 亦 度 之。如 是 亦 度 無 量 無 數 無 邊 眾 生，實 無 眾 生 得 亦 度 者).[645]

Although the Buddha saves countless beings, in actuality there are no beings that he saves. Living beings save themselves. Thus it is said that crossing over living beings but not attaching oneself to the mark of doing so.

1. ix) Bodhisattvas understand the great principle (成 佛 的 原 理)

All living beings basically are Buddhas, that is the great principle of the identity of all beings in principle with the Buddha. In principle every one of us is a Buddha. The example of Bodhisattva Mahsattva Sadparibh‰ta (常 不 輕 菩 薩, Bodhisattva Never Disparaging) is suitable here as given in Chapter XX entitled ‘The Bodhisattva Never Disparaging’. His particular merit is that he respects every one. He spends his life wandering round the earth, approaching all kinds of people, whether he knew them or not to bow to them and speak words of praise, saying:

“I would never dare disparage you, because you are all certain to attain Buddhahood”.[646]

(我 不 敢 輕 於 汝 等，汝 等 皆 當 作 佛).[647]

He does not feel bad when people abuse him or insult him because of his statement. But he continues unperturbed because he considers that all these people observe the course of duty of Bodhisattvas and are to become Tathgatas (如 來).

1. x) Bodhisattvas cultivate the great conduct (修 習 大 功 行)

Beside practising the Six (or Ten) Pramits (波 羅 密), the Bodhisattva  also cultivates Catu¾-saògraha-vastu (四 攝 法, four all-embracing virtues of Bodhisattva)[648]: (a) Dna (布 施, giving) (b) Priyavacana (愛 語, kind words) (c) ArthakÙtya (利 行, helpfulness) and (d) Samnrthat (同 事, cooperation).

1. Giving: Bodhisattvas should resolve to give, to make gifts of wealth, dharma and fearlessness to all living beings in order to lead them to love and receive the truth.
2. Kind words: Bodhisattvas who must practise affectionate speech (only Bodhisattvas can do this, those who are not cannot), have no mark of self. They see all living beings as identical with themselves. For the sake of leading them to love and receive the truth, Bodhisattvas use kind, affectionate words to convert them.
3. Helpfulness: All living beings like to receive benefits. There are many ways to help others, but, in general, Bodhisattvas do deeds which cause others to have advantage with the same purpose.
4. Cooperation: Bodhisattvas can transform themselves into thousands of millions of bodies. When they see living beings suffering, they then transform themselves to that kind of body to teach the dharma. For example when ցkyamuni Buddha was practising the Bodhisattva way he turned into a deer in order to teach and transform the deer.

The Four Methods of Conversion which is the expedient means effectively of Bodhisattvas on the Bodhisattva-cary.

1. xi) Bodhisattvas pass through great kalpas (劫)

One small kalpa (小 劫) amounts as 16,800,000 years, a kalpa as 336,000,000 years and a mhkalpa as 1,334,000,000 years.[649] One thousand small kalpas form a middle kalpa. Four middle kalpas constitute a great kalpa (大 劫). The Bodhisattva traverses three great asaôkheyya kalpas (阿 僧 祇 劫). It depends on the time of Bodhisattva practices pramits and other virtues so that he proceeds step by step to each of the stages of spiritual feelings (Ten Bhūmis, 地). Therefore, there have been different kinds of Bodhisattvas as we above mentioned. However, Mahyna S‰tras declared generally that Bodhisattvas spent a very long time which was very difficult to count and we can not imagine out with the words ‘immeasurable’, ‘boundless’, ‘inconceivable number of kalpas’[650] as Saddharma Puϯarika s‰tra said that:

“…This great multitude of bodhisattvas have already for immeasurable thousands, ten thousands, millions of kalpas applied themselves diligently and earnestly for the sake of the Buddha way.”[651]

(而 此 大 眾 諸 菩 薩 等，已 於 無 量 千 萬 億 劫，為 佛 道 故, 精 進 修 習).[652]

xii) Bodhisattvas seek the great result (Anuttar Samyaksambodhi, 無 上 正 等 正 覺)

The result of Anuttar Samyaksambodhi (阿 耨 多 羅 三 藐 三 菩 提 / 無 上 正 等 正 覺) that is of supreme, equal and proper Enlightenment, the result of the realization of Buddhahood.

Mahyna S‰tras have proved these virtues and charateristics and numerous other morals which Bodhisattvas possessed. However, it depends on practices differently so that the fruit of Boddhisattvas will come out in variety.

While discussing the qualities of a Bodhisattva and a Bodhisattva- Mahsattva, it will be in the fitness of things, if the list of Bodhisattva- Mahsattvas in Mahyna S‰tras is examined thoroughly. This gives a number of hints and clues to comprehend the nature, qualities of Bodhisattvas or Bodhisattva-Mahsattvas in Mahyna. Sometimes, even the names are highly suggestive. But these nature and characters, as a matter of fact, are the symbolization of the attributes and virtues of Öakyamuni Buddha whose moral became the goal for living beings with their earnest wish to aim at. That is the reason for the Index of the list of Bodhisattvas’ names which often apprears in Mahyna S‰tras, has been done.[653]

The Relationship of Ten Pāramitās (十 波 羅 密) and Ten Bhūmis   (十 地)

In the Mahyna, there is also the important factor of Bh‰mi (地) or stages in the spiritual progress of the Bodhisattva. This concept of Bh‰mi, which are ten in number is found in such Mahyna works as the Mahvastu (佛 本 幸 集 經 異 本), Bodhisattva-bh‰mi (菩 薩 地 經), Da±abh‰mika S‰tra (十 地 經) and so on. But according to Har Dayal, N. Dutt and others, it is almost certain that bh‰mi were only seven in the beginning not in the Boddhisattva-bh‰mi, Lankvatra S‰tra (楞 伽 經) and finally the formulation of the ten bh‰mi (十 地) fixed in Praj–-pramit (般 若 波 羅 密), Mahvastu and Dasa bh‰mi as in the case the last three Pramits added later. In the Encyclopedia of Buddhism[654] stated that the concept of the state of spiritual growth of a Bodhisattva is said to be one of the unique features which distinguish Mahyna from H­nayna. The first six sastify the spiritual yearning of H­nayna, the last four that of Mahyna. The last four are the real contribution made by the Mahyna in this regard. And Har Dayal[655] suggested that seven bh‰mis in Mahyna might be considered as the consequence of the Theravda doctrine of the Four stages [the status of the Stream Entrant (Sotāpanna, 入 流,七 來), the Once-Returner (Sakadāgāmi, 一 來), the Non-Returner (Anāgāmi, 不 來), and the Liberated One (Arahanta, 阿 羅 漢) and three Vihāras. Or Radhakishman in ‘Indian philosophy’ said that the career of an aspirant to Buddhahood represented in early Buddhism by Eight-fold-path elaborated into ten bh‰mis or stages in Mahyna…

However, in the connection with the Bodhisattva practices in Pli Nikyas, we can find that nine Jhnas (禪)[656] which were nine stages of spiritual process, the Bodhisattva attained under the Bodhi-tree and Buddhahood as the ten and final stage considered the final fruit of liberation coming naturally without attempt. So, the concept of ten Bh‰mis is corelative with process of nine Jhnas in Pli Nikyas.

Generally speaking the idea of Pramit is brought into relationship with that of Bh‰mi by making the Bodhisattva cultivate one of the Pramits in each Bh‰mi (Stage). As the Bodhisattva passes from one stage to another his glory and power gradually increase until in the tenth stage he becomes almost equal to the Buddha possessing various supernatural powers. Having become the cloud of the Dharma (Dharma-megha, 法 云 地) he sends upon needy creatures the good rain which wipes the dust of the passions and causes growth of the harvest of merits.

Bh‰mi (地) means ‘earth, place, region’ and figuratively stage, level, stage of conciousness. This concept of Bh‰mi provides us with an idea of the graduation in the spiritual progress of a Bodhisattva. While the Pramits are related to the practical side of spiritual life, the Bh‰mis indicate the stages of gradual progress. It also gives us information on the ideal life to be pursued in the Mahyna. As the Bodhisattva gradually progresses in respect of certain virtues, his transition from one stage (Bhūmi) to another takes place accordingly.

The Dasa-Bh‰mika-s‰tra (十 地 經) definitely increases the number of the pramits to ten, as it teaches that a Bodhisattva practises one of the pramits in each of the ten bh‰mis (stages) of his career:[657]

“yo’ asym pratisæhito bodhisattvo bh‰yastvena jambudv­ipe±varo bhavati mahaisrydhipata pratilabdho dharmnupaks­ krt­ prabhuh satyvh mahtygena sangrah­tuku±alah sattvn‰m mtsaryamalavinir-vrttay paryanto mahtygrambhaih. Tatasarvamavirahitam buddha manasikrair-dharma manasikraih, samghamanasikrair-bodhisattva manasikrairbodhisattvacary manisikraih pramit manisi-krairbh‰mi manisikrair...”[658]

A Bodhisattva firmly established in this Bh‰mi gains sovereignty over Jambudv­pa (閻 浮 提).[659] His activities are charity, speaking in a pleasing way, rendering good to others and pursuing identical religious goals with others.[660] The perfection of charity is one of the primary performances of this bh‰mi.  But it is more probable that the number of the pramits (and the bh‰mis) was raised to ten as a consequence of the invention of the decimal system of computation in the science of arithmetic in the third or fourth century A.D.

The relationship of ten Pramits (十 波 羅 密) and Bh‰mis (十 地) will be illustrated by a diagram:

 

Table XIII 

THE RELATION BETWEEN TEN P€RAMIT€S AND TEN BHˆMIS^[661]

	Improvement of Dhammas	Achievement	Existence of Spiritual Understanding
1	Dna Pramit 布 施 波 羅 密 (Perfection of Giving)	Pramudit Bh‰mi 歡 喜 地 (State of Joyful)	Thought of Enlightenment, joying in mind and body, keen delight, no notion of self, purified ‘Root of Merits’, seeing Buddhas in many fields, living for hundred of aeons, assuming a hundred forms and performing innumerous miracles.
2	Ö­la Pramit 持 戒 波 羅 密 (Perfection of Virture Conduct or Morality)	Vimal Bh‰mi 離 垢 地 (State of Pure or Immaculate)	Being straightforward, tender hearted active, solf-controlled, calm, beneficent incorruptible, noble, magnanimous and free from desire.
3	Kãnti Pramit 忍 辱 波 羅 密 (Perfection of  Forbearance)	Prabhkar­ Bh‰mi 法 光 地 (State of Illuminating or Luminous, or Living-Giving)	Pure, constant, unworldly, dispassionate, firm, resolute, ardent, ambitious, noble and magnanimous, gaining more for Buddha-knowledge, the Four dhnas, the Four non-material Sampattis, the Four brahma Viharas and the Five abhij–s.
4	V­rya Pramit 精 進 波 羅 密 (Perfection of Energy)	Arciãmat­ Bh‰mi 焰 慧 地 (State of Radian or Effulgent)	Gaining entrance to light of Doctrine, maturing and perfect his knowledge by his firm resolution and his faith in the Triple Jewel, realizing Action, Becoming and Birth, of Transmigratory existence and Liberation, of beginning and the end, of non-existence and destruction, acquiring infinite Energy.
5	Dhyna Phaätramit 禪 定 波 羅 密 (Perfection of Meditation)	Sudurjay Bh‰mi 難 勝 地 (State of Very-difficult-to-Conquer)	Mindfulness, fortitude, discretion, skillness in the choice of the means for attaining the ends, acquiring a knowledge of arts, sciences like writing, arithmetic, medicine etc…
6	Praj– Phaätramit 智 慧 波 羅 密 (Perfection of Wisdom)	Abhimukh­ Bh‰mi 現 前 地 (State of Face-to-Face, or Turned Toward, or Showing the Face)	Understanding the ten aspects of the equality and sameness of all things and phenomena, being free from the duality of existence and non-existence, I and other, doer and knower, perfectly firm, steady, profound, pure and resolutely sets to Buddha-knowledge.
6	Upya Phaätramit 方 便 波 羅 密 (Perfection of Skillfulness)	D‰raÏgam Bh‰mi 遠 行 地 (State of Far-going, or Far-reaching)	Acquiring great wisdom in the choice of expedients for helping others, understanding all Buddhas are identical with their spiritual cosmic Body, completely fulfilling the practical meditation and metaphysical aspects.
8	PraÏdhna Pramit 願 波 羅 密 (Perfection of Revolution or Aspiration)	Acal Bh‰mi 不 動 地 (State of Immovable or Stead-fast)	Acquiring anutpattika-dharma-kãnti, ten powers (vasitas), understanding  the process of evolution and involution of the universe, pervading the whole world with the feeling of Friendliness.
9	Bala Pramit 力 波 羅 密 (Perfection of Strength)	Sdhumat­ Bh‰mi 善 慧 地 (State of Good Thought or of Holy Wisdom)	Knowing all phenomena and principles truly and certainly, becoming a great preacher, acquiring the four pratisaòvids and protecting by the dhraÏ­s.
10	J–an Pramit 智 波 羅 密 (Perfection of Knowledge)	Dharmamegh Bh‰mi 法 云 地 (State of Cloud or Cloud of Virture)	Entering the stage of abhiãeka (anointing, consecration), acquiring a glorious body, which is seen in a celestial Lotus adorned with jewels, emitting some rays which destroyed the pain and misery of all living beings, performing many miracles and numberless magical bodies, obtaining the ten ‘Deliverance’ of a Bodhisattva.

–  & —

CHAPTER EIGHT

THE BUDDHA’S MAJOR CHARACTERISTICS THROUGH BUDDHA BODY PERCEPTIONS

The concepts of ։nyat (空 性) and Bodhisattvahood (菩 薩) find their culmination in the Tathgata (如 來), who is the embodiment of the perfection of all virtues. How a Bodhisattva (菩 薩) acquires that position and how the transformation takes place are a matter of speculation for a PÙthakjana and a path of strong footing for the Bodhisattvas Mahsattvas (菩 薩 摩 訶 薩). The position of the latter, that is the Bodhisattvas Mahsattvas is so high that in certain cases they are venerated in the same way as a ‘Samyak-sambodhi’  (正 等 覺). An instance may be cited from the epithets used and the attributes paid to Venerable Avalokite±vara (觀 世 音 菩 薩). The Kraϯavyūha S‰tra (莊 嚴 經) may be cited in order to substantiate this point. It is, therefore, in the fitness of things to discuss the LakãaÏas (characteristics, 好 相) and Anuvyañjanas (minor signs of the Buddha) as well as the major characteristics of the Buddha (佛 陀) through the transference of body (kya, 身) perceptions in the history of Buddhism (佛 教) in detail.

The Buddha-kāya Concept in Pāli Scriptures

While tracing the origin and evolution of the Buddha-kya (佛 身) concept, one is led to the original explanations offered in Pli Scriptures regarding the personality of ցkyamuni (釋 迦 牟 尼 佛) who attained Buddhahood (佛 果) after years of religious austerities. ցkyamuni was an ordinary human being, a historical person who with his own karma (業) at his very birth as all other human beings, but with effort and determinate mind to eliminate all his bad karma and suffering, attained the final liberation to be an awaken one at the age of thirty-five.[662]

Then he found a system of philosophy and ethics which later on came to be known as Buddhism.

The D­gha Nakay gave expression to the conception of Buddha in the following words:

“The Blessed One is an arhat, a fully awakened one, endowed with knowledge and good conduct, happy, a knower of the world, unsurpassed, a leader able to control men, a teacher of men and gods, the awakened, the blessed. He knows thoroughly the worlds of gods, mras, recluses, brahmins and men, and having known them he makes his knowledge known to others. He preaches the dhamma (doctrines), which is excellent in the beginning, middle and end, etc.”[663]

(Bhagav arahaò sammasambuddho vijjcaraÏasampanno lokavid‰ anuttaro purisadhammasrathi satth devamanussnam buddho bhagav. So imaò lokaò sadevakaò sabrahmakaò sasamaÏa-brhmaÏaò pajaò sadevaò sayaò abhi–– sacchi katv pavedeti. So dhammseti adikalyÏaò, etc).

A description like this does not suggest that Buddha was originally more than a man, a mortal. In the cosmology of the Buddhists, the gods of the various heavens, the highest of which is Brāhmaloka (梵 天),[664] are only beings of superior merit and power, but they are inferior, in the matter of spiritual attainments, to the saints or Arahatas (阿 羅 漢). So in this description, the H­nayanists do not attribute any transcendental or theistic element to Buddha. All they say is that ցkyamuni, by pure and simple spiritual culture in this life and as a result of the accumulated merits of his previous lives, reached the highest stage of perfection and attained not only knowledge and power superior to any man and god but also the highest knowledge and power attainable.

In the Majjhima Nikya, €nanda explains why Buddha should be considered superior to the Arahatas as well, although both arrived at the same goal. He says that there is not a single bhikkhu, who can be regarded as endowed with all the qualities in all their forms as possessed by Buddha.  Moreover, a Buddha is the originator of the path not existing before, a knower and promulgator of the mrga, which is only followed by the Örvakas (聲 聞).[665]

In a land where the tendency to deify saints is so strong, it lies to the credit of the early H­naynists that they were able to retain the human conception of Buddha even a century or two after his actual existence, when the scriptures may be regarded as having been out into a definite shape. It is true, but, as he was a great personage, the Enlightened One, he was looked upon already in his lifetime by the members of his Order as a superhuman being with divine virtues:

“There are monks, these thirty-two marks peculiar to a great man, and for that great man who possesses them only two careers are open”.

(Dvttimsimni bhikkhave, mahpurisassa mahpurisa lakkhanni yehi samanngatassa mahpurisassa dveca gatiyo bhavanti anaññ: sace kho pana agpasma anagriyam pabbajati, araham hoti sammsambuddho loke vicattacchado. idha bhikkhave mahpuriso suppatitthita pdo hoti...) [666]

The texts tell us that the Buddha-body is endowed with the thirty-two marks of the Superman, and again that the Tathgata’s body is made of diamonds and has ten powers and the fourfold ‘fearlessness’. Thus, his disciples put their absolute trust in ցkyamuni (釋 迦 牟 尼 佛), and praised him with various appellatives.

ցkyamuni himself said that he was the All-knowing and the Tathgata (如  來), and acknowledged his own superhuman nature which was greatly widened and enlarged. Though his death showed his own human limitations subject to transience, his devoted followers could not but look upon ցkyamuni as a superhuman personage. Passages such as the following:

“€nanda, if the Tathgata so wishes, he can live for a kalpa or for the rest of the kalpa.” (ramaniyam €nanda rjagaham ramaniyo gijjhak‰to  pabbato.  yassa kassaci €nanda cattro iddhipd bhvit bahul­kat ynikat vatthukat anutthit paricit susamraddh, so kankamano kappam v tiææheyya kappvasesam v tathgata­­­­­ssa kho €nanda cattro idddhipd bhvit  bahul­kat,… so €kankhamno €nanda tathgato kappam v tiææheyya kappvasesam v ti.) [667]

And, ‘The Buddha put his golden foot out from the coffin’ may be regarded as the expressions of confidence of his followers who esteemed ցkyamuni as an imperishable, superhuman personality. Thus this superhuman nature of the Buddha was transmitted to later generations and enlarged with the passage of the composition of Buddha legends like the Jtakas. According to such literature the Enlightenment of the Buddha was attained not only by means of his practice of austerities for several years, but also by dint of the immeasurable good works in his previous lives, during numberless kalpas (劫 杷) and ցkyamuni is described as a superhuman being who has the thirty-two signs of perfection and the eighty marks of excellence, and eighteen exclusive properties.

As we see, these adherents considered the Buddha (佛  陀) to be a great teacher and naturally, superhuman qualities came to be attributed to him, not only after his death, but even while he was alive. These qualities both intellectual and moral and even physical sufficed to make him transform from a human being to the position of the ultimate reality of the world in later H­nayna (小 乘) and Mahyna Teachings (大 乘 佛 教).

The View of the Buddha in Early Periods (the Classification of Buddhist sects)

Such a view of the Buddha-body (佛 身) was characteristic of the period of traditional Schools, the Sthaviravdin (上 坐 部) and the Mahsôghika (大 眾 部). And the Schools developed further these views.

In the Ariyapariyesana Sutta of the Theravdins is mentioned that Buddha attained omniscience and that he did not seek Nibbna (涅 槃). He sought Samyak Sambuddhahood (正 等 覺),[668] in order to propound, preach and promulgate hitherto unknown religious and philosophical views. He became a Seer and visualized highest Truth or the Reality — the Truth which was so deep and subtle that he was at first hesitant to preach the same to the people at large, as it would do more harm to them than good.  He stated:

“I am the all-conqueror, I am omniscient, I am untouched by all worldly objects. I am perfect in this world; I am a teacher incomparable; I am the only enlightened, tranquilized and have extinguished everything.”

(sabbobibho sabbavido’hamasmi, sabbesu dhammesu anopalitto. ahaò hi arah loke, ahaò satth anuttaro, eko’mhi sammsambuddho sitibh‰to ’smi nibbuto).[669]

Such utterances may well be the basis of the Mahsnghika conception of Buddha. Buddha, it is said, at the intervention of Brahma, decided to preach his doctrines in a modified form for the benefit of the mediocre searchers after Truth to enable them to achieve their desired end. This modified teaching consists of the four €rya truths (Ariya saccas, 四 妙 諦), Eightfold Path (Aææhôgika-magga, 八 正 道), and the Law of Causation (Paticcasamuppāda, 緣 起, 因 緣 生   起), the subject-matter of His first discourse. The Mahynists took the above decision of Buddha to establish their thesis that only an omniscient Buddha could realize the highest Truth and that his disciples, who heard the first discourse (Dhamma-cakkappavattana-sutta, 轉 法 輪 經), became known as the Örvakas (聲 聞), who could attain perfection (Arahathood, 阿 羅 漢 果) only by observing the instructions contained ‘in the discourse; in other words, they would realize only absence of individual soul (anatta-pudgalanairtmya, 我 空) and not the non-existence (dharma-suñyat, 法 空) or sameness (tathat, 如 來) of all phenomenal beings and objects.

The Theravdins and Sarvstivdins along with their offshoots conceived of Buddha as a human being, who attained perfection (Buddhahood) and became omniscient at Bodhgay. Until then he was subject to all human frailties common to a pious and meritorious person. The Mahsnghiks did not subscribe to this view as they contended that how could one who was the best of all divine beings in merit and knowledge in his existence just prior to his birth as Prince Siddhrtha (士 達 多), become an ordinary human being. Hence his appearance in the mortal world was only fictitious in order to follow the ways of the world (loknuvartana). He had achieved all the perfections in his previous existences as a Bodhisattva.

The Mahsôghiks, therefore, attributed to Gautama Buddha (瞿 曇 佛) not only supra-mundane existence but also all perfections and omniscience from his so-called birth in the womb of Queen My, and not from his attainment of Bodhi at Bodhgay. It should be noted that the Mahsnghiks had in mind Buddha Gautama of Saha lokadhtu (娑 婆 世 界) and not the countless Buddhas of the innumerable lokadhtus as conceived by the Mahynists.

The Mahsnghiks and their offshoots mention specifically that:

1. Buddha’s body is entirely supra-mundane (lokottara, 出 世 間). The eighteen dhtus (界) bereft of impure dharms (無 漏). The vocal, physical are dissociated from impurities (srava-visamyukta). The body has nothing worldly (laukika); it is purity only (ansrava-mtra) and indestructible.
2. His material body (R‰pakya, 色 身) is ‘unlimited’ as a result of his unlimited past merits. Paramrtha (真 諦) explains ‘unlimited’ as ‘immeasurable’ and ‘innumerable’. It can be either large or small, and it can also be of any number. In his created body (NirmÏa-kya, 應 身) he can appear anywhere in the universe.

The Kathvatthu (論 辯 邂)[670] throws further light on the above. It states that, according to the Vetulyakas, the doctrine that the Buddha does not live in the world of men, neither should he be located anywhere and it is his created form (abhinimmito jino) that delivered the religious discourses.            The Theravdins account for this heresy by saying that it is due to the literal but wrong interpretation of the passage.[671]

“Buddha, born and enlightened in this world, overcame this world and remained untouched by the things of the world.”

(Bhagav loke jto loke sambuddho lokaò abhibhuyya viharati an‰palitto loken ti).[672]

This is supplemented by further discussions in the Kathvatthu relating to the heresies also attributed to the Vetulyakas, viz., Navattabbam:

“It should not be said that Buddha lived in the world of men” – (xviii. 1);

(Buddho bhagava manussaloke aææhs­ ti).

“Buddhas exist in all corners of the world” (xi.6)

(sabb dis Buddh tiææhant ti).

“The discourses are delivered by created forms” (xviii. 2).

(abhinimmitena desito ti).

These show that according to the opponents of the Theravdins the Buddha is omnipresent and, as such, beyond the possibility of location in any particular direction or sphere and that all the preachings of Buddhism have been done by the apparitional images of Buddha.

With his usual naivety, Buddhaghosa (佛 音) understood the Vetulyaks as holding the opinion that Buddha remained always in the Tuãita (兜 率 天) heaven, where he was before he came to this world. The discussions in the Kathvatthu (論 辯 邂) as also the terse statement of Vasumitra (和 須 密 多) leave no room for doubt about the fact that Mahsnghiks (大 眾 部) especially their offshoots, — the Vetulyakas and the Lokottaravdins (說 出 世 部) regarded Buddha as transcendental. From the discussion in the Kthvatthu[673] concerning:

“Whether Buddhas mutually differ,”

(atthi buddhanaò buddhehi hintirekat ti).

It seems that the Andhakas (按 達 羅, another offshoot of the Mahsnghiks, 大 眾 部) were still concerned with the Sambhogakya (報 身) and had not yet arrived at the conception of the Dharmakya (法 身).

Buddhaghosa says that the Andhakas hold that Buddhas differ from one another in some qualities other than attainment like Satipatthna (四 念 處), Sammappadhna (四 正 勤), etc., the Orthodox school (佛 教 原 始) holding that Buddhas may differ in respect of sar­ra (身, body), yu (壽 命, length of life), a prabhva (發 光, radiance) but not in regard to the attainments mentioned above. The discussion in the Kathvatthu (論 辯 邂)[674] shows that the Uttarpathakas held the views that Buddhas could have no karun (慈 悲, compassion) and that Buddha’s body was made of ansrava dharma (清 淨 法, pure elements).[675]

3. Buddha’s length of life (yu) is unlimited on account of his past accumulated merits. He lives as long as the sentient beings live.
4. Buddha’s divine power (tejas, prabhva, 能 力) is unlimited. He can appear in one moment all over the worlds of the universe.
5. Buddha is never tired of enlightening sentient beings and awakening pure faith (vi±uddha-sraddh) in them. The Chinese commentator explains that Buddha’s compassion (karun, 慈 悲) is limitless and so in order to enlighten beings interminably, he never enters into Nirv
6. As his mind is always in meditation, Buddha neither sleeps nor dreams.
7. Buddha can comprehend everything in one moment (eka-ksaÏikacitt, 剎 那). His mind is like a mirror. He can answer any question simultaneously without reflection. In the Kathvatthu[676] this doctrine is attributed to the Andhakas (按 達 羅), who contend that Buddha has knowledge, of all present matters (sabbasmiò paccuppanne –nam atth­ti).
8. Buddha is always aware that he has no impurities (kãaya-j–na, 盡 智) and that he cannot be reborn (anutpdaj–na, 無 再 生).

What has been stated above finds corroboration in the Mahvastu (佛 本 行 集 經 異 本) in ornate language thus: The Bodhisattva in his last existence as Siddhrtha Gautama is self-born (upapduka, 自 生) and is not born of parents; he sits cross-legged in the womb and preaches there from to the gods, who act as his protectors; while in the womb he remains untouched by phlegm and such other matters of the womb, and he issues out of the womb by the right side without piercing it. He has no lust (kma) and so Rhula (羅 候 羅) was also self-born.

Buddha’s acquisitions are all supramundane (lokottara, 出 世 間) and cannot be compared to anything worldly. His spiritual practices are supramundane and so are his merits, even his bodily movements such as walking, standing, sitting and lying are also supramundane. His eating, his putting on robes and other such acts are also supramundane. It is for following the ways of the world (loknuvartana) that he shows his Īrypathas. His feet are clean, still he washes them. His mouth smells like the lotus, still he cleanses his teeth. His body is not touched by the sun or wind or rain, still he puts on the garment and lives under a roof. He cannot have any disease and still he takes medicine to cure himself.

In the Abhidharmako±a (阿 毘 曇 俱 舍 論 頌) and its Vykhy, it is said that, according to the Mahsnghikas, Buddhas appeal at the same time in more than one world and that they are omniscient in the sense that they know all dharmas at the same time. The former statement appears also in the Kathvatthu.[677] In the Kathvatthu and the Ko±a, no special doctrines about the Bodhisattva conception are attributed to the Mahsôghiks.

Buddha follows the ways of the world just as much as he follows the transcendental ways. There is nothing common between Him and the beings of the world. If the transcendence of Buddha be admitted, then it follows that the length of his life should be unlimited and that he need not be subject to sleep or dream as he could have no fatigue.  As he is ever awake how can he have dreams?

The lokottara conception appears only in the introductory portion of the Mahvastu, and so it is evident that the text was originally H­naynic and that, in course of time, the introductory chapters were added by the Lokottaravdins. In the main text, the doctrines mentioned are essentially H­naynic, e.g., the Four Truths (Ariya saccas, 四 妙 諦), the Eightfold Path (€ææhôgika-magga, 八 正 道), the Law of Causation (Prat­tyasamutpda, 緣 起, 因 緣 生 起), Impermanence of Constituents of a Being (Skandhas, 蘊), non-existence of Soul (Antman, 無 我), Theory of the Effect of past Deeds (karma, 業) the Thirty-seven Dharmas leading to Bodhi (Bodhipakã­kadharmas, 三 十 七 (助) 道 品) and so forth. There is no mention of the non-existence of phenomenal objects (Dharma±‰nyat, 法 空), of the Three bodies of Buddha (Trikya, 三 身) and the two veils (varaÏas, 障) regarding the impurities (kle±a, 煩 惱 障) and the Truth (jñey, 所 知 障).[678] The  only Mahynic doctrines, viz., the four stages of the Practices of Bodhisattva (Bodhisattva-Carys, 菩 薩 行), the Ten gradual spiritual Stages (Dasa Bh‰mi, 十 地), countless Buddhas and their countless spheres (Ksetras, 佛 剎) appear more as later additions than as integral parts of the text.[679] The Sarvstivdins along with the Sthaviravdins contended that the living-body of the Buddha contained impure elements, while the Mahsôghika argued that the Buddha-body was free from impure elements.

According to the Samayabhedoparacanacakra (異 部 宗 輪 論) the view that the living body of the Buddha is pure is a doctrine of the Mahsôghika (大 眾 部), the Ekavyvahrika   (一 說 部), the Lokuttaravdin (說 出 世 部), and the Kurukulaka (計 引 部). This is described as follows:

1. The Buddha, the Blessed One transcends all worlds;
2. The Tathgata has no worldly substances (Laukikadharma);
3. All the words of the Tathgata preach the Dharma;
4. The Tathgata explains explicitly all things;
5. The Tathgata teaches all things as they are;
6. The Tathgata has physical form (r‰pa);
7. The Buddha’s authority is unlimited;
8. The life of the Buddha-body is limitless;
9. The Buddha is never tired of encouraging beings to develop faith;
10. The Buddha does not sleep;
11. The Tathgata is above the need to ponder questions;
12. The Buddha, being always in meditation, utters no word (nman); nevertheless, he preaches the truth for all beings by means of words and explanations.
13. The Buddha understands all matters instantaneously.
14. The Buddha gains complete understanding with his wisdom equal within a single thought-moment.
15. The Buddhas, unceasingly produce wisdom regarding destruction (of defilements: kãaya-j–na, 盡 智), and wisdom concerning non-origination (anutpda-j–na, 無 生 智) until reaching Nirv[680]

This assertion of the Mahsmghika to the effect that the living Buddha-body is a body without defilements and that the Buddha is a purely superhuman being, was according to the Abhidharma-mahvibhã±stra (大 毘 婆 沙 論),[681] supported by a passage from the texts as follows:

“Though the Tathgata remains in the world, he is supramundane and cannot be defiled by worldly elements.”

A passage of the €gamas reads,

“The life of our ցkyamuni Buddha is extremely long, because his cosmic body (dharmakya) survives the decay of his physical body,”

It seems also to support the view held by the Mahsnghikas. According to this view, it is not the Buddha’s body which perished at the age of eighty years, but his superhuman character, that is, his true body, because the former is the embodiment of the latter. Such a view may be regarded as a doctrinal development of the teaching of the superhuman nature of the Buddha with the thirty-two signs of perfection and the eighteen exclusive properties. This theory may have been a forerunner of the Mahynistic view of the Buddha-body.

The Mahvastu says:

“There is nothing in the world that would be equal to the Buddha. Everything pertaining to great sages transcends the world.”

(na hi kimcit samyaksambuddhanam lokena samam. atha khalu sarvam eva mahesinam lokottaram.)

According to the Kathvatthu and its commentary by Buddhaghosa, the same opinion was held by the Andhaka, Uttarpathaka and Vetulyaka Schools. Contrary to the above theory, the Sthaviravdins (上座部) and the Sarvstivdins (一 切 有 部) emphasized that the Buddha’s physical body contained defilements, i.e., that the Buddha’s physical body with defilement, which lasted for eighty years was his real body, while he attained the state of Nirvna and realised the Cosmic Body free from defilements.

In the opinion of the Sarvstivdins, although the Buddha has the thirty-two signs of perfection and the eighteen exclusive properties, his physical body is, like those of the ordinary people, a qualified and defiled body produced by karma (業). According to the Samayabhedoparacanacakra (異 部 宗 輪 論), the Sarvstivdins say:

“Not all the words of the Tathgata preach the Dharma; the Tathgata does not explicitly explain all things as they are; all the scriptures are not stated with explicit meanings.”

The Sarvstivdins assert that the Cosmic Body is a blissful result of the accomplishment of morality, contemplation, wisdom, emancipation and insight into emancipation and the cosmic body is nothing but an abstract, static and theoretical Buddha which forms the basis of his physical body.

The MahsÏghikas cite, to support their theory of the absence of defilement in the Buddha’s physical body, a passage from the €gama:

“Though the Tathgata remains in this world, he is supramundane and cannot be defiled by worldly elements.”

But the Sarvstivdins interpret the same passage to the effect that by the Buddha’s physical body is meant the Tathgata remaining in this world and his Cosmic Body is designated by saying that he is supramundane and cannot be defiled (Abhidharma-mahvibhã-±stra, 大 毘 婆 沙 論).[682] Such an interpretation makes clear the stand-point of the Sarvstivdins who distinguish in the abstract the Cosmic Body from the physical body. The difference of views of the Buddha-body between the MahsÏghiks and the Sarvstivdins seems to derive from the fact that the former views the physical body of the Buddha idealistically and the latter retards it realistically.[683] Of the H­nayna schools, the Sthaviravdins had very little to do with the kya conceptions. As Buddha was to them an actual man living in this world like any other human being and subject to all the frailties of body. Metaphorically they sometimes spoke of Buddha as identical with Dhamma without any metaphysical implication but these remarks gave an opportunity to the Sarvstivdins and the Mahynists to put forth their theories of Dharmakya (法 身).

The Sarvstivdins commenced speculating on the kya of Buddha, but it was the school of the MahsÏghiks that took up the question of kya in right earnest and paved the way for the speculations of the Mahynists.

In a land where the tendency to deify saints is so strong, that it lies to the credit of the early H­naynists that they were able to retain the human conception of Buddha even a century or two after his actual existence...

In the face of such descriptions of Buddha, it would have been difficult for the later H­nayna schools to sublimate the human elements in him, had it not been for certain expressions in some of the earlier works of the Piæaka, which lent themselves to other interpretations. Some of these expressions are:

1. “Buddha said to €nanda just before his Parinibbna “the dhamma and vinaya that have been preached me will be your teacher after my death”.

(Yo vo €nanda may dhammo ca vinayo ca desito paññatto so vo maò accayena satth.)[684]

The Dhamma (法) and Vinaya (律) clearly refer to the collection of doctrines and disciplinary rules delivered by the Buddha. It is also evident from the conversation of €nanda with Gopaka-Moggallna,[685] in which the former explains why the monks after Buddha’s death should not be regarded as without refuge (appatisarana, 無 處 歸 依). He says that they have now a refuge in Dhamma (dhammapatisarana), which, he points out, are the doctrines and disciplinary rules.

2. “So a ցkyaputt­yasamana may say that he is born of Bhagav, through his mouth, born of his doctrine, made of his doctrine, etc. Though in this passage Dhamma is equated to Brahm, the context shows that there is no metaphysical sense in it; it is only to draw a parallel between a BrhmaÏa and a ցkyaputt­yasamana that Dhammakya is equated to Brahmakya.”

(Bhagavato’mhi putto oraso mukhato jto dhammajo dhammanimmito dhammdydo iti. tam kissa hetu? tathgatassa h’etam adhivacanam. dhammakayo iti pi brahmakyo iti pi, dhammabh‰to it pi ti.)

“Just as a brhmaÏa would say that he is born of brahm, through his mouth.”

(Brhmano putto oraso mukhato jto brhmajo brhmanimmito brhmadydo).[686]

3. Vakkali on his death-bed became very eager to see Buddha in person; so Bhagav came to him and said:

(Alam vakkali kim te p‰tikyena diææhena. yo kho vakkali dhammaò passati so maò passati. yo maòpassati so dhammaò passati).[687]       

Just after saying this, Buddha referred to his Dhamma of impermanence (anicca, 無 常). There are in the Nikys many passages of this import, which may well be taken as precursors of the later Mahynic conceptions and probably formed the basis of their speculations. But the passages, when read as they stand, do not appear to bear any metaphysical sense. In this passage, Buddha refers to his body as p‰tikya (不 淨, body of impure matter), and to lay stress on his doctrines, he says that his dhamma should be looked upon with the same awe and reverence by his disciples as they regarded his person.

4. 4. The passage in the Aôguttara Nikya, where Buddha says that he is neither a god, nor a gandhabba, nor a man, has been taken by Marson-Oursel as showing trace of the Mahynic kya conceptions. It is not impossible to read some metaphysical ideas into the passage, though probably the compiler of the Suttas did not mean to convey them. Drona BrhmaÏa, noticing the sign of wheel in the feet of Buddha, enquired of him whether he was a deva, a gandhabba (乾 撻 婆), a yakkha (夜 叉) or a mortal. Buddha replied that he was none of these beings as he had got rid of the savas (impurities) by the continuance of which one remains a deva, gandhabba, yakkha or a mortal. Just as a lotus is born in water, grows in it but it remains above and is apart from it, so also Buddha was born in the world, grew up in it but overcame it (abhibhuyya) and lived unaffected by the same. Therefore, he asked the Brhmana not to regard him as anything but the Buddha.

Even if it be assumed that the Mahynic ideas are latent in the above-mentioned expressions, though not adequately expressed, the discussion in the Kathvatthu to establish the historical existence of Buddha as against those who denied it and the manner in which references were made to the events of Buddha’s life as depicted in the Nikyas leaves no vestige of doubt about the opinion of the Theravdins regarding the kya of Buddha.

Though the terms R‰pakya (色 身) and Dharmakya    (法身) found their way into the later Pli works from Mahyna or semi-Mahyna works, these did not bring with them any non-realistic sense.

Buddhaghoãa even as late as the fifth century A.D. refers thus to the kyas:

“That bhagav, who is possessed of a resplendent r‰pakya, adorned with eighty minor signs and thirty-two major signs of a great man, and possessed of a dhammakya purified in every way and glorified by s­la, samdhi, etc., full of splendour and virtue, incomparable and fully awakened”.

(Yo pi so bhagav asiti anuvyañjana-patimandita-dvattimsa-mahpurisalakkhaÏa-vicitra-r‰pakyo sabbkraparisuddha silakkhandhdigunaratana samiddha-dhammakyo samahattapuññamahatta ... appatipuggalo araham sammsambuddho).[688]

Though Buddhaghoãa’s conception was realistic, he was not immune from the religious bias of attributing super-human powers to Buddha. In the Aææhaslin­ (論 殊 勝 義) he says that during the three months of his absence from the world while Buddha was engaged in preaching Abhidhamma to his mother in the Tuãita (兜 率) heaven, he created some Nimmita-buddhas as exact replicas of himself. These Nimmita-buddhas could not be distinguished from the real Buddha in voice, words and even the rays of light that issued forth from his body.  The created Buddha could be detected only by the gods of the higher classes and not by the ordinary gods or men of the world.  In short, the early H­naynists conceived Buddha’s R‰pakya (色 身) as that of a human being, and his Dhammakya (法 身) as the collection of his Dhammas, doctrines and disciplinary rules collectively. [689]

The Lalitavistara (神 通 遊 戲 經) gives us a picture of Buddha more superhuman than human and yet far from the Mahynic conceptions of the Sambhogakya (報 身) and Dharmakya (法 身), though in the last two chapters it dwells on the doctrine of Tathat (真 如). In the Lalitavistara Buddha is deified but there are no traces of the Trikya (三 身) conception. It says in many places that Buddha appears in the world of men for loknuvartana (i.e., to follow the ways of the world), which, if he so desired, he could avoid by remaining in one of the heavens and attaining emancipation there. The running account of Buddha’s life is interrupted at times — probably these are afterthoughts of the compiler — by dialogues between Buddha and €nanda, in order to make the treatise appear Mahynic and not H­naynic.[690]

At one place, Buddha explains to €nanda that, unlike human beings, he did not stay in the filth of a mother’s womb but in a jewel-casket (ratnavy‰ha, 寶 藏) placed in the womb, which was as hard as a diamond but soft to the touch like the down of a Kcilindika bird (迦 亶 鄰 陀), and that his birth and other events connected with it were all superhuman. At the same time, he prophesied that there will be, in the future, men unrestrained in act, thought and speech, ignorant, faithless, proud, and believing without deliberation what is heard by them, who will not believe in the superhuman nature of his birth.

One can perceive through the poetical exaggerations of the Lalita-vistara (神 通 遊 戲 經) that it has in view the historical Buddha endowed with the major and minor signs — a human being after all, who requires to be reminded by the heavenly musicians of the acts of his past lives and his resolution to become a Buddha and rescue beings from misery, and who needs a stimulus to renounce the world in order to fulfill his resolution. In connection with the offer of houses, which were made by the gods to the Bodhisattva when he was in the womb, it is said that in order to please all the gods who offered houses, he caused his appearances by means of the Mahvy‰ha Samdhi (大 莊 嚴 定). This does not clearly reflect any idea of the NirmÏakya (應 身, 化 身) — it appears more like some of the miracles mentioned in the Nikys. In the last chapter of the Lalitavistara where Buddha’s attributes are mentioned, he is called the great druma (mahdruma, 大 鼓) because he possessed a body of Dharmakyajñna (knowledge of Dharmakya, 法 身 智).

As this chapter is very likely a Mahyna (大 乘 佛 教) addition, we may reasonably say that the Lalitavistara in its original form was a treatise of the Sarvstivdins (一 切 有   部), who viewed Buddha as a human being with superhuman attributes.

The Buddha-body Perception in Mahyna

The early Mahynists, whose doctrines are mostly to be found in the Aãædasashasrik Prajñpramit (十 八 千 頌 般 若 波 羅 密), along with the school of Ngrjuna (龍 樹) (i.e., Mdhyamika, 中 論) conceived of two kyas:

1. i) R‰pa-kya (色 身 / NirmÏakya, 應 身), denoting bodies, gross and subtle, meant for beings in general, and
2. ii) Dharma-kya (法 身), which was used in two senses, one being the body of Dharma, (i.e., collection of practices), which makes a being a Buddha, and the other the metaphysical principle underlying the universe — the Reality (Tathat, 真 如).

The Yogcra school (瑜 伽 論) distinguished the gross r‰pakya from the subtle R‰pa-kya, naming the former R‰pa or NirmÏa-kya (應 身) and the latter Sambhoga-kya   (報 身).

The Saddharma Lankvatra S‰tra (妙 法 楞 伽 經), representing the earliest stage of the Yogcra (瑜 伽 論), conceives the Sambhoga-kya as Nisyanda-buddha or Dharmanisyanda-buddha (等 流 佛, 法 等 流, the Buddha produced by the Dharma).

The S‰trlaòkra (楞伽 經), uses the term Sambhogakya for Nisyanda-buddha (等 流 佛) and Svbhvikakya (自 性 身) for Dharmakya.[691]

In the Abhisamaylaôkrakrik (現 觀 莊 嚴 論) and the recast version of the Pañca-viò±ati-shasrik Prajñpramit (二 萬 五 千 頌 般 若 波 羅 密 經), Sambhogakya denotes the subtle body which the Buddhas adopted for preaching the doctrines to Bodhisattvas, and Dharmakya the body   purified    by the practice of the bodhipkãika and other dharmas, which constitute a   Buddha. For the metaphysical Dharmakya these texts use the term Svabhva or Svbhvika-kya (自 性 身).

The Vijñaptimtratsiddhi (唯 識 論) retains the conception of the Krik but adopts a new term Svasambhogakya (自 受 用 身) to denote the Dharmakya of the Krik and distinguishes the Sambhogakya by naming it Parasambhogakya   (他 受 用 身).

The Prajñ-pramits (般 若 波 羅 密 經) also maintain the conception that the Dharmakya is produced by Dharmas, the highest of which is according to them, the prajñpramit, the knowledge which helps a person to realise the Dharma-։nyat (法 空). The Aãædasashasrik Prajñ-pramit S‰tra (十 八 千 頌 般 若 波 羅 密 經), takes up the question, whether the honour shown to the relics of the Tathgata-kya (如 來 身) is more meritorious than the honour shown to the Prajñ-pramit e.g., by making a copy of it. The answer given is that the relics depend on the body purified by the praj–-pramit, and therefore it is the source of Buddhas. The source deserves more honour than the remnants of the fruit (relics of Buddha) produced therefrom, and therefore it is more meritorious to honour the Prajñ-pramit than the relics. It adds that all teachings of Buddha issue from the Prajñ-pramit, and the DharmabhÏakas (法 師) preserve and propagate them; so the Dharmabhnaks should also be respected. They are protected by the Dharmakya, the Prajñ-pramit.

Sarvajñat (omniscience, 一 切 智) is pervaded (paribhvita) by the prajñ-pramit from Sarvajñat issues the body of Tathgata, the relics of whom are worshipped; hence Prajñ-pramit deserves greater honour.[692]

The Mahyna finds the true body of the Buddha in the unconditioned voidness, i.e. the Cosmic Body which transcends even the Buddha’s physical body. It also believes that the Cosmic Body or the unconditioned voidness reveals itself as a temporary physical body with the merciful intention of view conveying the truth to beings. Such a view may have been derived from the idealistic view of the MahsÏghikas who consider the physical body of the Buddha as superhuman. However, the characteristic of the doctrine of Mahyna consists in the fact that the Mahyna finds the true body of the Buddha in voidness or absolute truth without being limited to the Idea of transcendental undefiled Cosmic Body as the true body of the Buddha advocated by the MahsÏgh­ka.

In the Vajrachedik-praj–-pramit S‰tra (金 剛 般 若 波 羅 密 經) which says:

“He who sees me by outward appearance, (and) seeks me in sound, treads the hetetodox path, (and) cannot perceive the Tathāgata.”

(若 以 色 見 我，以 音 聲 求 我，是 人 行 邪 道，不 能 見 如 來). [693]

and in the Aãædasashasrik Prajñpramit (十 八 千 頌 般 若 波 羅 密 經) which says:

“Indeed, the Tathgata cannot be seen as a physical body, the cosmic body in the Tathgata”.

(Na hi tathāgato r‰pa-kyato draãæavya¾ dharmakyas Tathgata)

and in the Saddharma-puϯar­ka S‰tra (妙 法 蓮 花 經) which says:

“Tathgata is the eternal imperishable Buddha who has immeasurable life, and displays extinction only as an expedience.”

This is shown the Mahynistic view of the Buddha-body that the Buddha is identified with absolute truth or ։nyat. As mentioned above, “Those who perceive the dharma, perceive me” said ցkyamuni to his disciples, and now in Mahyna the Dharma is identified with voidness, absolute truth, the wisdom of the imperceptible voidness or Prajñ-pramit. And, in Mahyna Buddhism it is emphasized that the Cosmic Body or the unlimited and imperishable substance of Enlightenment which is absolute truth and voidness, transcending the physical body of the Buddha, is identified with the blissful or matured body (Vipka-kya, Nisyanda-kya, 異 熟 身) which is the result of the perfection of his vows and practices in previous lives. This theory comes from the Buddha legends in which the superhuman nature of ցkyamuni is given.In the suttas of various Buddhas, such as the larger Sukhvat­vy‰ha (無 量 壽 經), the Akãobhyatathgatasya-vy‰ha (阿 畜 佛 國  經), Amitbha (阿 彌 陀 佛), Akãobhiya (阿 畜 坒 佛) and other Buddhas are described as the Cosmic Body, but with the characteristics of the Blissful Body which has form and virtue, coming from the perfection of its vows and practices. Therefore, in Mahyna Buddhism there are several theories of the Buddha body; one is the theory of the twofold body which assumes the Cosmic Body with which the Blissful Body is combined, (the Reward-Body), and Incarnated Body; the second is the theory of threefold body of the Cosmic Body, the Blissful Body and the Incarnated Body and the third is the theory of the fourfold body based on the above mentioned theories, and so forth.

In the SuvarÏaprabhsa (金 光 明), Ruciraketu (妙 懂) and Kauô¯inya (橋 陳 如) Brhmana play the role of skeptics. The former enquires why ցkyamuni, who performed so many meritorious deeds, should have such a short span of life as eighty years. The latter seeks a mustard-like relic of Buddha’s body to worship and thus go to heaven. Ruciraketu is told by the Buddhas of all lokadhtus that they did not know any man or god who could calculate the length of ցkyamuni’s life. They said that it might be possible to count the drops of water in a sea but it would be impossible to ascertain the length of his life. Kauϯinya BrhmaÏa, who only feigned ignorance, was told by Litcchavikumra that, just as it is absurd to expect coconuts from a rose-apple tree, so it is absurd to expect a relic from the Buddhakya (佛 身). The Tathgatas have no origin, they are ever existing and inconceivable. It is only the Nirmitakya that is shown to them. How can a body which has no bone or blood, leave a dhtu, Buddhas have only Dharmakya and there is only the Dharmadhtu (法 界).

NirmÏakya (應 身)

The Mahynic texts tried to show on the one hand, that the H­naynists were wrong in their belief that ցkyamuni was really a man of flesh and blood and that relics of his body existed, while on the other hand, they introduced two conceptions of NirmÏakya (應 身) and Buddhakya. Whatever is said to have been done by ցkyamuni is accounted for by those texts as the apparent doings of a created body of the Buddhakya, a shadowy image created to follow the ways of the world (loknuvartana), in order to bring conviction in the heart of the people that the attainment of Buddhahood was not an impossibility. As the Buddhas possess the knowledge of all that is to be done (kÙrtynusthnajñna, 成 所 作 智) they can take any form they desire for the enlightenment of the various classes of beings. The Mahynic conception of NirmÏakya is essentially same as that of the Mahsnghiks.

The Prajñ-pramits in their quaint way refer to the NirmÏakya or R‰pakya. The Pañcavim±ati-sha±rik Prajñpramit (二 萬 五 千 頌 般 若 波 羅 密 經) says that of a Bodhisattva, after acquiring all the necessary Dharmas and practising Prajñ-pramit, becomes a Sambuddha, he then renders service to beings of all lokadhtus (世 界, worlds) of the ten corners at all times by NirmÏamegha (應 化 云, NirmÏa clouds). This is called the NairmÏikakya.

From the Chinese sources we are informed that Ngrjuna, in his commentary on the Prajñ-pramit, names it as Mah Prajñ-pramit ±stra, and speaks of two kyas, r‰pakya and dharmakya. The former is the body born of parents, possessing the qualities of sentient beings, and is subject to human frailties. It was born in Kosala (橋 薩 羅) while his Dharmakya was born at Rjagrha (王舍). The material body was necessary for ‘earthly truth’. It was for the deliverance of beings that Buddha assumed different kyas, different names, birth-places and the ways of emancipation. This interpretation of r‰pa and dharmakyas is also followed in the Chinese ParinirvÏa S‰tra (般 涅 槃 經) and Sandhinirmocana S‰tra (深 密 經).

Some of the Yogcra (瑜 伽 論) texts furnish us with the following information regarding the conception of NirmÏakya as prevailing among the Yogcrins:

The S‰trlaòkra explains the NirmÏakya to be those forms, which are assumed by Buddhas to render service to beings of the various worlds. It generally refers to the human form that Buddha takes in order to make a show of his acquiring the ordinary arts and crafts required by an average man, living a family life and then retiring from it, and ultimately attaining NirvÏa by recourse to ascetic practices.

The Vij–ptimtratsiddhi (唯 識 論) tells us that the NirmÏakya is meant for Örvakas (聲 聞), Pratyekabuddhas (辟 支 佛, 緣 覺), PÙthagjanas (人, common men) and Bodhisattvas (菩 薩), who are not yet in one of the ten Bh‰mis (地). It may appear in all lands whether pure or impure.

The Chinese commentaries on the Siddhi (法 成 就) mention various ways, in which Buddha can transform his body or another’s body or voice, and his or other’s mind, to suit his purpose. Not only could he transform his body or another’s body or voice, and his or other’s mind, to suit his purpose. Not only could he transform himself into ցkyamuni (釋 迦 牟 尼 佛), or Sriputra into a young girl, but also could create an altogether new apparition body, not, of course, a living, thinking being. Often he assumed the voice of Brahm or expressed himself through the mouth of Sriputra (舍 利 弗) or Subh‰ti (須 菩 提), and it was for this reason that we find Sriputra or Subh‰ti explaining some of the abstruse Mahyna teachings, which they themselves were not expected to understand. The third way in which he could transform his voice was to produce sounds from the sky. His thoughts were supramundane (lokottara, 出 世 界) and pure (ansrava, 清 淨). He could produce in mind any thought he liked; in fact, he appeared in his Nirmitakya as ցkyamuni with a mind (citta) suited to the ways of the world. He could also impose his thoughts on the minds of others.

The Saddharma Lankvatra S‰tra (妙 法 楞 伽 經) explains the relation of NirmÏakya to Dharmakya in the same way as the Krik. It states that NirmitaBuddhas are not produced by actions; the Tathgata is neither in them nor outside them:

“Sarve hi nirmitabuddh na karmaprabhav na tesu Tathgato na cnyatra tebhya Tathgato”.

It is only when the sons of the Jina (禪 那) realise the visible world to have no existence apart from the citta that they obtain the NirmÏakya free from kriy (作) and saòskra (行), and endowed with bala (力), abhijñ (勝 智) and va±ita (生). Like the Siddhi, it says that the Tathgatas by creating NirmÏakya perform the various duties of a Tathgata (TathgatakÙtya, 如 來 使 命). It gives also the interesting information that VajrapÏi (金 剛 首 菩 薩) serves as an attendant on the NirmitanirmÏa Buddhas, and not on the real Buddhas and that the function of such a Buddha is to preach and explain the characteristics of dna (布 施), s­la (持 戒), dhyna (禪 定), vimokãa (解 脫) and vijñna (惟 心).

The NirmÏa Kya usually translated as apparitional body is really a body assumed by Buddha in fulfillment of his resolve to save beings from misery. The manifestation of the body of bliss in the empirical world as Gautama (ցkyamuni) or other previous and succeeding Tathgatas is the NirmÏakya of Buddha.[694] The advent of a Buddha in the world is not an accident, the lucky chance of a human being happening to attain enlightenment. It is a deliberate descent of the Divinity, incarnating itself as human being; his various (twelve principal) acts from birth to passing away into ParinirvÏa are make-believe acts, designed to create a sense of kinship with human beings.[695] Gautama is one of the Buddhas; and the Bodhisattvas are other forms chosen by divinity to help man and other beings. As Haribhadra says:

“When some living being requires the explanation of the Doctrine or some other kind of help, then the Lord, by the force of his previous vows, fulfils the purpose of this living being manifesting himself in this or that form”.[696]

Buddha is the Providence that takes the keenest interest in beings. The particulars with regard to the kya conception cannot be logically demonstrated. They are to be taken as revealed to the elect and communicated by them to others.

In the H­nayna religion, the Gautama Buddha is an exalted human being, distinguished from the ordinary mankind by his unique and unaided attainment. He was not certainly God before he attained Bodhi. The historicity of the Buddha (ցkyamuni) is indispensable for that religion. In Mahyna, though Gautama is a historical person, he is not the only Buddha, and his occurrence is one of the innumerable acts of divine dispensation. The Mahyna religion escapes the predicament of having to depend on any particular historical person as the founder of its religion.

Sambhogakya (報 身)

The R‰pakya or NirmÏakya was meant for the Örvakas (聲 聞), Pratyeka-buddhas (辟 支 佛, 緣 覺), PÙthagjanas (人) and Bodhisattvas, who were not in one of the ten bh‰mis, so another kya had to be devised, a very suitable kya for the benefit of all Bodhisattvas. This is called Parasambhogakya (他 受 用 身) as distinguished from Svasambhogakya (自 受 用 身), a similar subtle body perceived by the Buddhas alone.

It is this Parasambhogakya (他 受 用 身), which plays the role of a preacher of the various Mahyna S‰tras (大 乘 經 典), the scenes being mostly laid either at GÙdhrak‰æa (靈 鷲), the only place where the three dhtus are considered pure and suitable for the appearance of a Sambhogakya (報 身), or in the Sukhvati-vy‰ha s‰tra (彌 陀 經 / 無 量 壽 經), or in one of the heavens.

It will be observed from the description of the appearance of Buddha and his manner of preaching the S‰tras that the Mahynists were not yet able to forget or rise above the human conception of Buddha of the H­naynists. They still gave ցkyamuni the role of the presiding Buddha of the universe, to whom flocked reverently with flowers, incense, etc., all the Bodhisattvas, Örvakas and GÙhapatis of the various lokadhtus of the ten directions, to hear from him the Praj–paramit, (般 若 波 羅 密 經) the Saddharmapundar­ka  (妙 法 蓮 花 經) or the Gandavy‰ha / Avaòsaka-s‰tra (華 嚴 經).[697]

These Bodhisattvas again had their own tutelary Buddhas, who, according to the Mahyna metaphysics, possessed the same Dharmakya as that of ցkyamuni. They also came or were sometimes sent by their Buddhas, with messages of greetings and flowers as tokens of their regard, to ցkyamuni Buddha whose Buddhakãetra was then the Saha lokadhtu (娑 婆 世 界). Sometimes the descriptions go so far as to say that the Buddhas themselves came to hear discourses from ցkyamuni Buddha, and the concourse of Buddhas and Bodhisattvas became so great that the Sah lokadhtu had to be cleared of all oceans, mountains, seas, rivers, and cities, as well as of gods, men and other beings.

As we read in the H­nayna texts monks used to come to meet Buddha, bringing with them one or two smaneras (沙 彌), so also we read in the Saddharmapuϯar­ka that on account of insufficiency of space the countless Buddhas could not have with them more than one or two Bodhisattvas as attendants (upasthpakas, 持 者).

According to the Satashasrik Praj–pramit  (一百 千 頌 般 若 波 羅 密 經) and the Pa–cavim±ati-sha±rik Praj–pramit (二萬 五 千 頌 般 若 波 羅 密 經), it is an exceedingly refulgent body, from every pore of which steamed forth countless brilliant rays of light, illuminating the lokadhtus (世 界) as innumerable as the sands of the Ganges. When this body stretched out its tongue, Innumerable rays of light issued forth from it, and on each ray of light was found a lotus of thousand petals on which was seated a Tathgatavigraha (an image of the Tathgata, a sort of NirmÏakya), preaching to Bodhisattvas, GÙhasths (householders), Pravrajitas (recluses) and others the dharma consisting of the Pramits.

After Siòhavikr­dita samdhi (師 子 遊 戲 三 昧), his body illuminated the Trishasra-mahshasra lokadhtu (三 千 大 千 世 界) just as the bright clear Sun or the full moon illuminates the world. Buddha then shows his PrakÙtytmabhva (真自性, real form) to all the worlds. The several classes of gods as well as the men of the four continents, Jambudv­pa (閻 浮 提), Aparagodna (西 牛 化), etc., see this Prakrtytmabhva (真自性) and think that the Tathgata is sitting before them and preaching the doctrine. From this body again issues forth some rays of light, by which all beings of all lokadhtus see ցkyamuni Buddha preaching the Praj–pramit to his sangha of monks and congregation of Bodhisattvas.

The Saddharma Lankvatra S‰tra (妙 法 楞 伽 經) presents us first with this conception, calling it Nisyanda (等 流 法) or Dharmatnisyanda Buddha (等 流 佛) and it seems that the term Sambhogakya was not yet current. We have seen that in H­nayna works also, it is pointed out that the super-excellent body of Buddha, endowed with the major and minor signs of great men, was due to the countless meritorious deeds performed by him in his previous lives.

The Chinese rendering of Sambhogakya by Pao shen  (報 身) in which Pao ‘報’ means fruit or reward, also indicates that Sambhoga (報 身) had no other sense than ‘vipka’ (異 熟) or ‘nisyanda’ (等 流). The later Yogcrins called it Parasambhogakya (他 受 用 身) in order to distinguish it from other kya called by them Svasambhoga (自 受 用 身). Though the Aãæashasrik does not distinguish Sambhogakya from the NirmÏakya, it refers to the super-excellent body of Buddha as the result of his meritorious acts in previous lives. The Lankvatra (楞 伽 經), by using the expression Vipka or Vipkastha (異 熟), shows a stage of transition from the H­naynic conception of Vipkaja-kya (異 熟 身) to that of the Mahynic Parasambhogakya (他 受 用 身).

The Body of Bliss (Sambhoga - 報身) is so called because it represents (an existence characterised by) the full enjoyment of the Truth of the great Vehicle, as it is said: ‘Perfectly enjoying the Truth or since it takes delight in the Truth’.[698] The body of Bliss is the reflection of the Cosmic Body in the empirical world in a corporeal form. Buddha appears here as a Supreme God, abiding in the Akaniãæha (色 究 竟 天) heaven, surrounded by a host of Bodhisattvas. He is endowed with 32 principal and 80 secondary marks of excellence.[699] This body is the result of the previous virtuous deeds. The descriptions given of Buddha in the opening sections of the Mahyna S‰tras are of this body. The Satashasrik Praj–pramit may be cited as a good example of this. For pages on end there are descriptions of every part of Buddha's body, of rays proceeding from his head, hands and feet and even fingers, reaching up to the extremities of the world.[700] Only the Bodhisattvas who have reached the tenth stage can perceive-the body of Bliss, and not others, is the opinion of some Mdhyamika teachers.[701]

Dharmakya (法 身)

The three kyas belong strictly, to the realm of SamvÙti, worldly and transcendental, and as such they were treated as R‰pa or NirmÏa-kya by the early Mahynists, including Ngrjuna. The only real kya of Buddha is the Reality as conceived by the Mahynists, and is not different from the things of beings of the universe. Though an attempt to define it by the current words and expressions is bound to be not only incorrect but misleading, the Mahynic texts tried to give an idea of it as far as the language permitted.

The Krik[702] and the Siddhi (等 流 法) call it Svabhvika or Svabhvakya (自 性 身). It is, according to them immeasurable and illimitable. It fills all space. It is the basis of the Sambhoga and NirmÏa kyas. It is devoid of all marks (mahp‰rÏa-laksanas, 大 滿 相) and is inexpressible (niãprapa–ca, 戲 論). It is possessed of eternal, real and unlimited guÏas (功 德). It has neither citta nor r‰pa, and again Dharmakya Buddhas may have their individual Sambhogakya but they have all one Dharmakya. It can only be realised within one’s own self (pratytmavedya, 自 證) and not described, for that would be like the attempt of a blind man to describe the Sun, which he has never seen.

The Aãæashasrik and other Prajñpramits, though unrelenting in their negation of every possible statement about the reality, never assert that Tathat (真 如) or ։nyat (空 性) or Dharmakya (法 身) in its real sense is also non-existing. The statements like:

“Suchness is immutable, unchangeable, beyond concept and distinctions.”

(tathatvikr   nirvikrvikalp   nirvikalp).

show rather a positive conception of the reality than a purely negative one. In regard to the Dharmakya also the Aãæashasrik makes similar statements.  It says that:

“He who knows that the dharmas, existing in the world or preached by the Tathgata, have no more existence than things seen in a dream and does not enquire whence the Tathgata comes and where he goes, realises the Tathgata through dharmat.”

The Buddhakya, that people speak of, arises through cause and condition like the sound of flute; it involves really no appearance or disappearance. Those, who run after the form and voice of the Tathgata and conceive of his appearance and disappearance are far from the Truth. Nor further statements than this can be made about the Reality, for that would be again prapañca.

When the Aãæashasrik asserts that the Tathgata does not exist, it refers to that Tathgata as conceived by one on reading the Mahyna texts. Even the Bodhisattvas, unless and until they reach the tenth bh‰mi, cannot extricate themselves from a conception of the Tathgatakya, however, subtle it may be (e.g., the Svasambhogakya). They are still under a delusion and it is delusion that the Prajñpramit endeavours to remove by asserting that there is no Tathgata. The Vajracchedik to which the Aãæshasrik as well as the Bodhicaryvatra (菩 薩 藏 經)[703] refer,

“He who endeavoured to see me through my form and voice could not see me because a Buddha is to be seen in the sense of dharmat (nature of dharmas), for the leaders (of men) have only dharmakya. That dharmat is unknowable so also is the Tathgata”.

(dharmato buddha draãæavya dharmakya h­ nayakyah, dharmat cpy avijñey na s saky vijnituò).

The conception of Dharmakya was of special interest to the Yogcrins. The Lankvatra in describing it says that Dharmat (自 性 法) of Buddha is without any substratum (nirlamba) and lies beyond the range of functioning organs of sense, proofs or signs and hence beyond the vision of Örvakas, Pratyekabuddhas or the non-Mahynists. It is to be realised only within one’s own self.

The ։trlankra calls it Svbhvika-dharmakya (自 性 身). It is one and the same kya in all Buddhas, very subtle, unknowable and eternal. The Trim±ik (惟 識 三 十 論 頌) explains the Dharmakya as the transformed sraya (所 依, substratum) - the layavijñna (阿 賴 耶 識) the transformation being effected by knowledge (jñna, 成 智) and the suppression of the two evils (dausæhulyas, 二 障), viz., kle±varaÏa (煩 惱 障) and jñeyvaraÏa (所 知 障).

The €1oka on the Abhisamaylankrakrik (現 觀 莊 嚴 論) also explains the Dharmakya in a similar way. There are two kinds of Dharmakya, one being the Bodhipkãika (菩 提 分) and the other dharmas, which are themselves pure and productive of clear knowledge (niãprapañca-jñntman, 真 智 不 戲 論) and the other the transformed sraya (所 依) of the same which is then called Svabhvakya (自 性 身).

The goal of Bodhisattvs is to realise the Dharmakya. Every being has the Dharmakya, or the Dharmakya comprises all beings of the world, but as they are blinded by avidy, they do not realise this fact. What the Bodhisattva alms at is the removal of this avidy (無 明) and the realisation of the fact that he is the same as the Dharmakya.

As the Dharmakya, Buddha fully realises his identity with the Absolute (dharmata, ±‰nyat, 性 空) and unity (samat, 大) with all beings. It is the oneness with the Absolute that enables Buddha to intuit the Truth, which it is his sacred function to reveal to phenomenal beings.

This is the fountain-source of his implicit strength which he concretizes in the finite sphere. The Sambhoga-kya is the concrete manifestation to himself (svasambhoga) and to the elect (parasam-bhoga) the power and splendour of god-head. In furtherance of the great resolve to succour all beings, Buddha incarnates himself from time to time in forms best calculated to achieve this end (nirmÏakya).

The Praj–-pramit texts repeatedly ask us to consider Buddha as Dharmakya, and not in the overt form which appears to us.[704] Dharmakya is the essence, the reality of the universe. It is completely free from every trace of duality. It is the very nature of the universe and is therefore also called the svbhvika-kya.[705] The Dharmakya[706] is still a Person, and innumerable merits and powers etc. are ascribed to him.[707]

The Relation among NirmāÏa-kāya, Sambhoga-kāya and Dharma-kāya

The three-body gospel of Nirmôa-kya, Sambhoga-kya and Dharma-kya grew out to be a developed form of Mahyna principle. The three-body represents as: the Nirmôa-kya is the assumed or apparitional body, a form verily of the historical Buddha which is to be revered as such. Being so much under stress his disciples came to venerate ‘The Lord of Compassion’ as Supra-historical and one who was never apart from them. The transformation body of the enlightened one is supposedly beyond time and space, formless, without colour or confrontation, unlimited in scope and primordial, the Tathgata.

The suprahistorical body of the Buddha manifested again and again out of compassion for the sentient beings of the Saha loka, the world of living beings.

The transformed body of the Buddha appeared in two other forms of the Sambhoga-kya and Dharma-kya. Sambhoga-kya is bliss-body, enjoyment body which latter does not mean physical pleasure of sensuous kind, but it is so called because of the merit of enjoying various virtues Sambhoga-kya is also spiritually known to be formless and without colour.

The accomodating body of the Buddha called Dharma-kya is the truth body. It is Dharma or Law itself. As truth it is also divinely conceived to be formless and colourless.

In order to understand the above doctrine, one may reverse their order. Without Dharma-kya as basis, the two others Sambhoga-kya and NirmÏa-kya cannot be. Similarly without Sambhoga-kya the transformation body is incomprehensible.

The Awakened one in his transformed body of the historical Buddha is still one with the formless Dharma-kya and invisible NirmÏ-kya. Mahyna equates Dharma-kya with ։nyat or Emptiness. This is truth and wisdom that is perfect. It has rightly been cognized that emptiness or ։nyat is neither the negative or static state, but ever emptying it is a constant and dynamic activity that is involved into truth, Dharma. Sambhoga-kya accomplished by fulfillment of Dharma bears a physical form, though it is ultimately formless and colourless. The Dharma-kya is the ultimate truth which is emptying itself and is boundless openness.

˜ ] ™

CHAPTER EIGHT

THE BUDDHA’S MAJOR CHARACTERISTICS THROUGH BUDDHA BODY PERCEPTIONS

The concepts of ։nyat (空 性) and Bodhisattvahood (菩 薩) find their culmination in the Tathgata (如 來), who is the embodiment of the perfection of all virtues. How a Bodhisattva (菩 薩) acquires that position and how the transformation takes place are a matter of speculation for a PÙthakjana and a path of strong footing for the Bodhisattvas Mahsattvas (菩 薩 摩 訶 薩). The position of the latter, that is the Bodhisattvas Mahsattvas is so high that in certain cases they are venerated in the same way as a ‘Samyak-sambodhi’  (正 等 覺). An instance may be cited from the epithets used and the attributes paid to Venerable Avalokite±vara (觀 世 音 菩 薩). The Kraϯavyūha S‰tra (莊 嚴 經) may be cited in order to substantiate this point. It is, therefore, in the fitness of things to discuss the LakãaÏas (characteristics, 好 相) and Anuvyañjanas (minor signs of the Buddha) as well as the major characteristics of the Buddha (佛 陀) through the transference of body (kya, 身) perceptions in the history of Buddhism (佛 教) in detail.

The Buddha-kāya Concept in Pāli Scriptures

While tracing the origin and evolution of the Buddha-kya (佛 身) concept, one is led to the original explanations offered in Pli Scriptures regarding the personality of ցkyamuni (釋 迦 牟 尼 佛) who attained Buddhahood (佛 果) after years of religious austerities. ցkyamuni was an ordinary human being, a historical person who with his own karma (業) at his very birth as all other human beings, but with effort and determinate mind to eliminate all his bad karma and suffering, attained the final liberation to be an awaken one at the age of thirty-five.[708]

Then he found a system of philosophy and ethics which later on came to be known as Buddhism.

The D­gha Nakay gave expression to the conception of Buddha in the following words:

“The Blessed One is an arhat, a fully awakened one, endowed with knowledge and good conduct, happy, a knower of the world, unsurpassed, a leader able to control men, a teacher of men and gods, the awakened, the blessed. He knows thoroughly the worlds of gods, mras, recluses, brahmins and men, and having known them he makes his knowledge known to others. He preaches the dhamma (doctrines), which is excellent in the beginning, middle and end, etc.”[709]

(Bhagav arahaò sammasambuddho vijjcaraÏasampanno lokavid‰ anuttaro purisadhammasrathi satth devamanussnam buddho bhagav. So imaò lokaò sadevakaò sabrahmakaò sasamaÏa-brhmaÏaò pajaò sadevaò sayaò abhi–– sacchi katv pavedeti. So dhammseti adikalyÏaò, etc).

A description like this does not suggest that Buddha was originally more than a man, a mortal. In the cosmology of the Buddhists, the gods of the various heavens, the highest of which is Brāhmaloka (梵 天),[710] are only beings of superior merit and power, but they are inferior, in the matter of spiritual attainments, to the saints or Arahatas (阿 羅 漢). So in this description, the H­nayanists do not attribute any transcendental or theistic element to Buddha. All they say is that ցkyamuni, by pure and simple spiritual culture in this life and as a result of the accumulated merits of his previous lives, reached the highest stage of perfection and attained not only knowledge and power superior to any man and god but also the highest knowledge and power attainable.

In the Majjhima Nikya, €nanda explains why Buddha should be considered superior to the Arahatas as well, although both arrived at the same goal. He says that there is not a single bhikkhu, who can be regarded as endowed with all the qualities in all their forms as possessed by Buddha.  Moreover, a Buddha is the originator of the path not existing before, a knower and promulgator of the mrga, which is only followed by the Örvakas (聲 聞).[711]

In a land where the tendency to deify saints is so strong, it lies to the credit of the early H­naynists that they were able to retain the human conception of Buddha even a century or two after his actual existence, when the scriptures may be regarded as having been out into a definite shape. It is true, but, as he was a great personage, the Enlightened One, he was looked upon already in his lifetime by the members of his Order as a superhuman being with divine virtues:

“There are monks, these thirty-two marks peculiar to a great man, and for that great man who possesses them only two careers are open”.

(Dvttimsimni bhikkhave, mahpurisassa mahpurisa lakkhanni yehi samanngatassa mahpurisassa dveca gatiyo bhavanti anaññ: sace kho pana agpasma anagriyam pabbajati, araham hoti sammsambuddho loke vicattacchado. idha bhikkhave mahpuriso suppatitthita pdo hoti...) [712]

The texts tell us that the Buddha-body is endowed with the thirty-two marks of the Superman, and again that the Tathgata’s body is made of diamonds and has ten powers and the fourfold ‘fearlessness’. Thus, his disciples put their absolute trust in ցkyamuni (釋 迦 牟 尼 佛), and praised him with various appellatives.

ցkyamuni himself said that he was the All-knowing and the Tathgata (如  來), and acknowledged his own superhuman nature which was greatly widened and enlarged. Though his death showed his own human limitations subject to transience, his devoted followers could not but look upon ցkyamuni as a superhuman personage. Passages such as the following:

“€nanda, if the Tathgata so wishes, he can live for a kalpa or for the rest of the kalpa.” (ramaniyam €nanda rjagaham ramaniyo gijjhak‰to  pabbato.  yassa kassaci €nanda cattro iddhipd bhvit bahul­kat ynikat vatthukat anutthit paricit susamraddh, so kankamano kappam v tiææheyya kappvasesam v tathgata­­­­­ssa kho €nanda cattro idddhipd bhvit  bahul­kat,… so €kankhamno €nanda tathgato kappam v tiææheyya kappvasesam v ti.) [713]

And, ‘The Buddha put his golden foot out from the coffin’ may be regarded as the expressions of confidence of his followers who esteemed ցkyamuni as an imperishable, superhuman personality. Thus this superhuman nature of the Buddha was transmitted to later generations and enlarged with the passage of the composition of Buddha legends like the Jtakas. According to such literature the Enlightenment of the Buddha was attained not only by means of his practice of austerities for several years, but also by dint of the immeasurable good works in his previous lives, during numberless kalpas (劫 杷) and ցkyamuni is described as a superhuman being who has the thirty-two signs of perfection and the eighty marks of excellence, and eighteen exclusive properties.

As we see, these adherents considered the Buddha (佛  陀) to be a great teacher and naturally, superhuman qualities came to be attributed to him, not only after his death, but even while he was alive. These qualities both intellectual and moral and even physical sufficed to make him transform from a human being to the position of the ultimate reality of the world in later H­nayna (小 乘) and Mahyna Teachings (大 乘 佛 教).

The View of the Buddha in Early Periods (the Classification of Buddhist sects)

Such a view of the Buddha-body (佛 身) was characteristic of the period of traditional Schools, the Sthaviravdin (上 坐 部) and the Mahsôghika (大 眾 部). And the Schools developed further these views.

In the Ariyapariyesana Sutta of the Theravdins is mentioned that Buddha attained omniscience and that he did not seek Nibbna (涅 槃). He sought Samyak Sambuddhahood (正 等 覺),[714] in order to propound, preach and promulgate hitherto unknown religious and philosophical views. He became a Seer and visualized highest Truth or the Reality — the Truth which was so deep and subtle that he was at first hesitant to preach the same to the people at large, as it would do more harm to them than good.  He stated:

“I am the all-conqueror, I am omniscient, I am untouched by all worldly objects. I am perfect in this world; I am a teacher incomparable; I am the only enlightened, tranquilized and have extinguished everything.”

(sabbobibho sabbavido’hamasmi, sabbesu dhammesu anopalitto. ahaò hi arah loke, ahaò satth anuttaro, eko’mhi sammsambuddho sitibh‰to ’smi nibbuto).[715]

Such utterances may well be the basis of the Mahsnghika conception of Buddha. Buddha, it is said, at the intervention of Brahma, decided to preach his doctrines in a modified form for the benefit of the mediocre searchers after Truth to enable them to achieve their desired end. This modified teaching consists of the four €rya truths (Ariya saccas, 四 妙 諦), Eightfold Path (Aææhôgika-magga, 八 正 道), and the Law of Causation (Paticcasamuppāda, 緣 起, 因 緣 生   起), the subject-matter of His first discourse. The Mahynists took the above decision of Buddha to establish their thesis that only an omniscient Buddha could realize the highest Truth and that his disciples, who heard the first discourse (Dhamma-cakkappavattana-sutta, 轉 法 輪 經), became known as the Örvakas (聲 聞), who could attain perfection (Arahathood, 阿 羅 漢 果) only by observing the instructions contained ‘in the discourse; in other words, they would realize only absence of individual soul (anatta-pudgalanairtmya, 我 空) and not the non-existence (dharma-suñyat, 法 空) or sameness (tathat, 如 來) of all phenomenal beings and objects.

The Theravdins and Sarvstivdins along with their offshoots conceived of Buddha as a human being, who attained perfection (Buddhahood) and became omniscient at Bodhgay. Until then he was subject to all human frailties common to a pious and meritorious person. The Mahsnghiks did not subscribe to this view as they contended that how could one who was the best of all divine beings in merit and knowledge in his existence just prior to his birth as Prince Siddhrtha (士 達 多), become an ordinary human being. Hence his appearance in the mortal world was only fictitious in order to follow the ways of the world (loknuvartana). He had achieved all the perfections in his previous existences as a Bodhisattva.

The Mahsôghiks, therefore, attributed to Gautama Buddha (瞿 曇 佛) not only supra-mundane existence but also all perfections and omniscience from his so-called birth in the womb of Queen My, and not from his attainment of Bodhi at Bodhgay. It should be noted that the Mahsnghiks had in mind Buddha Gautama of Saha lokadhtu (娑 婆 世 界) and not the countless Buddhas of the innumerable lokadhtus as conceived by the Mahynists.

The Mahsnghiks and their offshoots mention specifically that:

1/ Buddha’s body is entirely supra-mundane (lokottara, 出 世 間). The eighteen dhtus (界) bereft of impure dharms (無  漏). The vocal, physical are dissociated from impurities (srava-visamyukta). The body has nothing worldly (laukika); it is purity only (ansrava-mtra) and indestructible.

2/ His material body (R‰pakya, 色 身) is ‘unlimited’ as a result of his unlimited past merits. Paramrtha (真 諦) explains ‘unlimited’ as ‘immeasurable’ and ‘innumerable’. It can be either large or small, and it can also be of any number. In his created body (NirmÏa-kya, 應 身) he can appear anywhere in the universe.

The Kathvatthu (論 辯 邂)[716] throws further light on the above. It states that, according to the Vetulyakas, the doctrine that the Buddha does not live in the world of men, neither should he be located anywhere and it is his created form (abhinimmito jino) that delivered the religious discourses. The Theravdins account for this heresy by saying that it is due to the literal but wrong interpretation of the passage.[717]

“Buddha, born and enlightened in this world, overcame this world and remained untouched by the things of the world.”

(Bhagav loke jto loke sambuddho lokaò abhibhuyya viharati an‰palitto loken ti).[718]

This is supplemented by further discussions in the Kathvatthu relating to the heresies also attributed to the Vetulyakas, viz., Navattabbam:

“It should not be said that Buddha lived in the world of men” – (xviii. 1);

(Buddho bhagava manussaloke aææhs­ ti).

“Buddhas exist in all corners of the world” (xi.6)

(sabb dis Buddh tiææhant ti).

“The discourses are delivered by created forms” (xviii. 2).

(abhinimmitena desito ti).

These show that according to the opponents of the Theravdins the Buddha is omnipresent and, as such, beyond the possibility of location in any particular direction or sphere and that all the preachings of Buddhism have been done by the apparitional images of Buddha.

With his usual naivety, Buddhaghosa (佛 音) understood the Vetulyaks as holding the opinion that Buddha remained always in the Tuãita (兜 率 天) heaven, where he was before he came to this world. The discussions in the Kathvatthu (論 辯 邂) as also the terse statement of Vasumitra (和 須 密 多) leave no room for doubt about the fact that Mahsnghiks (大 眾 部) especially their offshoots, — the Vetulyakas and the Lokottaravdins (說 出 世 部) regarded Buddha as transcendental. From the discussion in the Kthvatthu[719] concerning:

“Whether Buddhas mutually differ,”

(atthi buddhanaò buddhehi hintirekat ti).

It seems that the Andhakas (按 達 羅, another offshoot of the Mahsnghiks, 大 眾 部) were still concerned with the Sambhogakya (報 身) and had not yet arrived at the conception of the Dharmakya (法 身).

Buddhaghosa says that the Andhakas hold that Buddhas differ from one another in some qualities other than attainment like Satipatthna (四 念 處), Sammappadhna (四 正 勤), etc., the Orthodox school (佛 教 原 始) holding that Buddhas may differ in respect of sar­ra (身, body), yu (壽 命, length of life), a prabhva (發 光, radiance) but not in regard to the attainments mentioned above. The discussion in the Kathvatthu (論 辯 邂)[720] shows that the Uttarpathakas held the views that Buddhas could have no karun (慈 悲, compassion) and that Buddha’s body was made of ansrava dharma (清 淨 法, pure elements).[721]

3/ Buddha’s length of life (yu) is unlimited on account of his past accumulated merits. He lives as long as the sentient beings live.

4/ Buddha’s divine power (tejas, prabhva, 能 力) is unlimited. He can appear in one moment all over the worlds of the universe.

5/ Buddha is never tired of enlightening sentient beings and awakening pure faith (vi±uddha-sraddh) in them. The Chinese commentator explains that Buddha’s compassion (karun, 慈 悲) is limitless and so in order to enlighten beings interminably, he never enters into Nirvna.

6/ As his mind is always in meditation, Buddha neither sleeps nor dreams.

7/ Buddha can comprehend everything in one moment (eka-ksaÏikacitt, 剎 那). His mind is like a mirror. He can answer any question simultaneously without reflection. In the Kathvatthu[722] this doctrine is attributed to the Andhakas (按 達 羅), who contend that Buddha has knowledge, of all present matters (sabbasmiò paccuppanne –nam atth­ti).

8/ Buddha is always aware that he has no impurities (kãaya-j–na, 盡 智) and that he cannot be reborn (anutpdaj–na, 無 再 生).

What has been stated above finds corroboration in the Mahvastu (佛 本 行 集 經 異 本) in ornate language thus: The Bodhisattva in his last existence as Siddhrtha Gautama is self-born (upapduka, 自 生) and is not born of parents; he sits cross-legged in the womb and preaches there from to the gods, who act as his protectors; while in the womb he remains untouched by phlegm and such other matters of the womb, and he issues out of the womb by the right side without piercing it. He has no lust (kma) and so Rhula (羅 候 羅) was also self-born.

Buddha’s acquisitions are all supramundane (lokottara, 出 世 間) and cannot be compared to anything worldly. His spiritual practices are supramundane and so are his merits, even his bodily movements such as walking, standing, sitting and lying are also supramundane. His eating, his putting on robes and other such acts are also supramundane. It is for following the ways of the world (loknuvartana) that he shows his Īrypathas. His feet are clean, still he washes them. His mouth smells like the lotus, still he cleanses his teeth. His body is not touched by the sun or wind or rain, still he puts on the garment and lives under a roof. He cannot have any disease and still he takes medicine to cure himself.

In the Abhidharmako±a (阿 毘 曇 俱 舍 論 頌) and its Vykhy, it is said that, according to the Mahsnghikas, Buddhas appeal at the same time in more than one world and that they are omniscient in the sense that they know all dharmas at the same time. The former statement appears also in the Kathvatthu.[723] In the Kathvatthu and the Ko±a, no special doctrines about the Bodhisattva conception are attributed to the Mahsôghiks.

Buddha follows the ways of the world just as much as he follows the transcendental ways. There is nothing common between Him and the beings of the world. If the transcendence of Buddha be admitted, then it follows that the length of his life should be unlimited and that he need not be subject to sleep or dream as he could have no fatigue.  As he is ever awake how can he have dreams?

The lokottara conception appears only in the introductory portion of the Mahvastu, and so it is evident that the text was originally H­naynic and that, in course of time, the introductory chapters were added by the Lokottaravdins. In the main text, the doctrines mentioned are essentially H­naynic, e.g., the Four Truths (Ariya saccas, 四 妙 諦), the Eightfold Path (€ææhôgika-magga, 八 正 道), the Law of Causation (Prat­tyasamutpda, 緣 起, 因 緣 生 起), Impermanence of Constituents of a Being (Skandhas, 蘊), non-existence of Soul (Antman, 無 我), Theory of the Effect of past Deeds (karma, 業) the Thirty-seven Dharmas leading to Bodhi (Bodhipakã­kadharmas, 三 十 七 (助) 道 品) and so forth. There is no mention of the non-existence of phenomenal objects (Dharma±‰nyat, 法 空), of the Three bodies of Buddha (Trikya, 三 身) and the two veils (varaÏas, 障) regarding the impurities (kle±a, 煩 惱 障) and the Truth (jñey, 所 知 障).[724] The  only Mahynic doctrines, viz., the four stages of the Practices of Bodhisattva (Bodhisattva-Carys, 菩 薩 行), the Ten gradual spiritual Stages (Dasa Bh‰mi, 十 地), countless Buddhas and their countless spheres (Ksetras, 佛 剎) appear more as later additions than as integral parts of the text.[725] The Sarvstivdins along with the Sthaviravdins contended that the living-body of the Buddha contained impure elements, while the Mahsôghika argued that the Buddha-body was free from impure elements.

According to the Samayabhedoparacanacakra (異 部 宗 輪 論) the view that the living body of the Buddha is pure is a doctrine of the Mahsôghika (大 眾 部), the Ekavyvahrika   (一 說 部), the Lokuttaravdin (說 出 世 部), and the Kurukulaka (計 引 部). This is described as follows:

1/ The Buddha, the Blessed One transcends all worlds;

2/ The Tathgata has no worldly substances (Laukikadharma);

3/ All the words of the Tathgata preach the Dharma;

4/ The Tathgata explains explicitly all things;

5/ The Tathgata teaches all things as they are;

6/ The Tathgata has physical form (r‰pa);

7/ The Buddha’s authority is unlimited;

8/ The life of the Buddha-body is limitless;

9/ The Buddha is never tired of encouraging beings to develop faith;

10/ The Buddha does not sleep;

11/ The Tathgata is above the need to ponder questions;

12/ The Buddha, being always in meditation, utters no word (nman); nevertheless, he preaches the truth for all beings by means of words and explanations.

13/ The Buddha understands all matters instantaneously.

14/ The Buddha gains complete understanding with his wisdom equal within a single thought-moment.

15/ The Buddhas, unceasingly produce wisdom regarding destruction (of defilements: kãaya-j–na, 盡 智), and wisdom concerning non-origination (anutpda-j–na, 無 生 智) until reaching Nirvna.[726]  

This assertion of the Mahsmghika to the effect that the living Buddha-body is a body without defilements and that the Buddha is a purely superhuman being, was according to the Abhidharma-mahvibhã±stra (大 毘 婆 沙 論),[727] supported by a passage from the texts as follows:

“Though the Tathgata remains in the world, he is supramundane and cannot be defiled by worldly elements.”

A passage of the €gamas reads,

“The life of our ցkyamuni Buddha is extremely long, because his cosmic body (dharmakya) survives the decay of his physical body,”

It seems also to support the view held by the Mahsnghikas. According to this view, it is not the Buddha’s body which perished at the age of eighty years, but his superhuman character, that is, his true body, because the former is the embodiment of the latter. Such a view may be regarded as a doctrinal development of the teaching of the superhuman nature of the Buddha with the thirty-two signs of perfection and the eighteen exclusive properties. This theory may have been a forerunner of the Mahynistic view of the Buddha-body.

The Mahvastu says:

“There is nothing in the world that would be equal to the Buddha. Everything pertaining to great sages transcends the world.”

(na hi kimcit samyaksambuddhanam lokena samam. atha khalu sarvam eva mahesinam lokottaram.)

According to the Kathvatthu and its commentary by Buddhaghosa, the same opinion was held by the Andhaka, Uttarpathaka and Vetulyaka Schools. Contrary to the above theory, the Sthaviravdins (上座部) and the Sarvstivdins (一 切 有 部) emphasized that the Buddha’s physical body contained defilements, i.e., that the Buddha’s physical body with defilement, which lasted for eighty years was his real body, while he attained the state of Nirvna and realised the Cosmic Body free from defilements.

In the opinion of the Sarvstivdins, although the Buddha has the thirty-two signs of perfection and the eighteen exclusive properties, his physical body is, like those of the ordinary people, a qualified and defiled body produced by karma (業). According to the Samayabhedoparacanacakra (異 部 宗 輪 論), the Sarvstivdins say:

“Not all the words of the Tathgata preach the Dharma; the Tathgata does not explicitly explain all things as they are; all the scriptures are not stated with explicit meanings.”

The Sarvstivdins assert that the Cosmic Body is a blissful result of the accomplishment of morality, contemplation, wisdom, emancipation and insight into emancipation and the cosmic body is nothing but an abstract, static and theoretical Buddha which forms the basis of his physical body.

The MahsÏghikas cite, to support their theory of the absence of defilement in the Buddha’s physical body, a passage from the €gama:

“Though the Tathgata remains in this world, he is supramundane and cannot be defiled by worldly elements.”

But the Sarvstivdins interpret the same passage to the effect that by the Buddha’s physical body is meant the Tathgata remaining in this world and his Cosmic Body is designated by saying that he is supramundane and cannot be defiled (Abhidharma-mahvibhã-±stra, 大 毘 婆 沙 論).[728] Such an interpretation makes clear the stand-point of the Sarvstivdins who distinguish in the abstract the Cosmic Body from the physical body. The difference of views of the Buddha-body between the MahsÏghiks and the Sarvstivdins seems to derive from the fact that the former views the physical body of the Buddha idealistically and the latter retards it realistically.[729] Of the H­nayna schools, the Sthaviravdins had very little to do with the kya conceptions. As Buddha was to them an actual man living in this world like any other human being and subject to all the frailties of body. Metaphorically they sometimes spoke of Buddha as identical with Dhamma without any metaphysical implication but these remarks gave an opportunity to the Sarvstivdins and the Mahynists to put forth their theories of Dharmakya (法 身).

The Sarvstivdins commenced speculating on the kya of Buddha, but it was the school of the MahsÏghiks that took up the question of kya in right earnest and paved the way for the speculations of the Mahynists.

In a land where the tendency to deify saints is so strong, that it lies to the credit of the early H­naynists that they were able to retain the human conception of Buddha even a century or two after his actual existence...

In the face of such descriptions of Buddha, it would have been difficult for the later H­nayna schools to sublimate the human elements in him, had it not been for certain expressions in some of the earlier works of the Piæaka, which lent themselves to other interpretations. Some of these expressions are:

1. “Buddha said to €nanda just before his Parinibbna “the dhamma and vinaya that have been preached me will be your teacher after my death”.

(Yo vo €nanda may dhammo ca vinayo ca desito paññatto so vo maò accayena satth.)[730]

The Dhamma (法) and Vinaya (律) clearly refer to the collection of doctrines and disciplinary rules delivered by the Buddha. It is also evident from the conversation of €nanda with Gopaka-Moggallna,[731] in which the former explains why the monks after Buddha’s death should not be regarded as without refuge (appatisarana, 無 處 歸 依). He says that they have now a refuge in Dhamma (dhammapatisarana), which, he points out, are the doctrines and disciplinary rules.

2. “So a ցkyaputt­yasamana may say that he is born of Bhagav, through his mouth, born of his doctrine, made of his doctrine, etc. Though in this passage Dhamma is equated to Brahm, the context shows that there is no metaphysical sense in it; it is only to draw a parallel between a BrhmaÏa and a ցkyaputt­yasamana that Dhammakya is equated to Brahmakya.”

(Bhagavato’mhi putto oraso mukhato jto dhammajo dhammanimmito dhammdydo iti. tam kissa hetu? tathgatassa h’etam adhivacanam. dhammakayo iti pi brahmakyo iti pi, dhammabh‰to it pi ti.)

“Just as a brhmaÏa would say that he is born of brahm, through his mouth.”

(Brhmano putto oraso mukhato jto brhmajo brhmanimmito brhmadydo).[732]

3. Vakkali on his death-bed became very eager to see Buddha in person; so Bhagav came to him and said:

(Alam vakkali kim te p‰tikyena diææhena. yo kho vakkali dhammaò passati so maò passati. yo maòpassati so dhammaò passati).[733]       

Just after saying this, Buddha referred to his Dhamma of impermanence (anicca, 無 常). There are in the Nikys many passages of this import, which may well be taken as precursors of the later Mahynic conceptions and probably formed the basis of their speculations. But the passages, when read as they stand, do not appear to bear any metaphysical sense. In this passage, Buddha refers to his body as p‰tikya (不 淨, body of impure matter), and to lay stress on his doctrines, he says that his dhamma should be looked upon with the same awe and reverence by his disciples as they regarded his person.

4. 4. The passage in the Aôguttara Nikya, where Buddha says that he is neither a god, nor a gandhabba, nor a man, has been taken by Marson-Oursel as showing trace of the Mahynic kya conceptions. It is not impossible to read some metaphysical ideas into the passage, though probably the compiler of the Suttas did not mean to convey them. Drona BrhmaÏa, noticing the sign of wheel in the feet of Buddha, enquired of him whether he was a deva, a gandhabba (乾 撻 婆), a yakkha (夜 叉) or a mortal. Buddha replied that he was none of these beings as he had got rid of the savas (impurities) by the continuance of which one remains a deva, gandhabba, yakkha or a mortal. Just as a lotus is born in water, grows in it but it remains above and is apart from it, so also Buddha was born in the world, grew up in it but overcame it (abhibhuyya) and lived unaffected by the same. Therefore, he asked the Brhmana not to regard him as anything but the Buddha.

Even if it be assumed that the Mahynic ideas are latent in the above-mentioned expressions, though not adequately expressed, the discussion in the Kathvatthu to establish the historical existence of Buddha as against those who denied it and the manner in which references were made to the events of Buddha’s life as depicted in the Nikyas leaves no vestige of doubt about the opinion of the Theravdins regarding the kya of Buddha.

Though the terms R‰pakya (色 身) and Dharmakya    (法身) found their way into the later Pli works from Mahyna or semi-Mahyna works, these did not bring with them any non-realistic sense.

Buddhaghoãa even as late as the fifth century A.D. refers thus to the kyas:

“That bhagav, who is possessed of a resplendent r‰pakya, adorned with eighty minor signs and thirty-two major signs of a great man, and possessed of a dhammakya purified in every way and glorified by s­la, samdhi, etc., full of splendour and virtue, incomparable and fully awakened”.

(Yo pi so bhagav asiti anuvyañjana-patimandita-dvattimsa-mahpurisalakkhaÏa-vicitra-r‰pakyo sabbkraparisuddha silakkhandhdigunaratana samiddha-dhammakyo samahattapuññamahatta ... appatipuggalo araham sammsambuddho).[734]

Though Buddhaghoãa’s conception was realistic, he was not immune from the religious bias of attributing super-human powers to Buddha. In the Aææhaslin­ (論 殊 勝 義) he says that during the three months of his absence from the world while Buddha was engaged in preaching Abhidhamma to his mother in the Tuãita (兜 率) heaven, he created some Nimmita-buddhas as exact replicas of himself. These Nimmita-buddhas could not be distinguished from the real Buddha in voice, words and even the rays of light that issued forth from his body.  The created Buddha could be detected only by the gods of the higher classes and not by the ordinary gods or men of the world.  In short, the early H­naynists conceived Buddha’s R‰pakya (色 身) as that of a human being, and his Dhammakya (法 身) as the collection of his Dhammas, doctrines and disciplinary rules collectively. [735]

The Lalitavistara (神 通 遊 戲 經) gives us a picture of Buddha more superhuman than human and yet far from the Mahynic conceptions of the Sambhogakya (報 身) and Dharmakya (法 身), though in the last two chapters it dwells on the doctrine of Tathat (真 如). In the Lalitavistara Buddha is deified but there are no traces of the Trikya (三 身) conception. It says in many places that Buddha appears in the world of men for loknuvartana (i.e., to follow the ways of the world), which, if he so desired, he could avoid by remaining in one of the heavens and attaining emancipation there. The running account of Buddha’s life is interrupted at times — probably these are afterthoughts of the compiler — by dialogues between Buddha and €nanda, in order to make the treatise appear Mahynic and not H­naynic.[736]

At one place, Buddha explains to €nanda that, unlike human beings, he did not stay in the filth of a mother’s womb but in a jewel-casket (ratnavy‰ha, 寶 藏) placed in the womb, which was as hard as a diamond but soft to the touch like the down of a Kcilindika bird (迦 亶 鄰 陀), and that his birth and other events connected with it were all superhuman. At the same time, he prophesied that there will be, in the future, men unrestrained in act, thought and speech, ignorant, faithless, proud, and believing without deliberation what is heard by them, who will not believe in the superhuman nature of his birth.

One can perceive through the poetical exaggerations of the Lalita-vistara (神 通 遊 戲 經) that it has in view the historical Buddha endowed with the major and minor signs — a human being after all, who requires to be reminded by the heavenly musicians of the acts of his past lives and his resolution to become a Buddha and rescue beings from misery, and who needs a stimulus to renounce the world in order to fulfill his resolution. In connection with the offer of houses, which were made by the gods to the Bodhisattva when he was in the womb, it is said that in order to please all the gods who offered houses, he caused his appearances by means of the Mahvy‰ha Samdhi (大 莊 嚴 定). This does not clearly reflect any idea of the NirmÏakya (應 身, 化 身) — it appears more like some of the miracles mentioned in the Nikys. In the last chapter of the Lalitavistara where Buddha’s attributes are mentioned, he is called the great druma (mahdruma, 大 鼓) because he possessed a body of Dharmakyajñna (knowledge of Dharmakya, 法 身 智).

As this chapter is very likely a Mahyna (大 乘 佛 教) addition, we may reasonably say that the Lalitavistara in its original form was a treatise of the Sarvstivdins (一 切 有   部), who viewed Buddha as a human being with superhuman attributes.

The Buddha-body Perception in Mahyna

The early Mahynists, whose doctrines are mostly to be found in the Aãædasashasrik Prajñpramit (十 八 千 頌 般 若 波 羅 密), along with the school of Ngrjuna (龍 樹) (i.e., Mdhyamika, 中 論) conceived of two kyas:

1. i) R‰pa-kya (色 身 / NirmÏakya, 應 身), denoting bodies, gross and subtle, meant for beings in general, and
2. ii) Dharma-kya (法 身), which was used in two senses, one being the body of Dharma, (i.e., collection of practices), which makes a being a Buddha, and the other the metaphysical principle underlying the universe — the Reality (Tathat, 真 如).

The Yogcra school (瑜 伽 論) distinguished the gross r‰pakya from the subtle R‰pa-kya, naming the former R‰pa or NirmÏa-kya (應 身) and the latter Sambhoga-kya   (報 身).

The Saddharma Lankvatra S‰tra (妙 法 楞 伽 經), representing the earliest stage of the Yogcra (瑜 伽 論), conceives the Sambhoga-kya as Nisyanda-buddha or Dharmanisyanda-buddha (等 流 佛, 法 等 流, the Buddha produced by the Dharma).

The S‰trlaòkra (楞伽 經), uses the term Sambhogakya for Nisyanda-buddha (等 流 佛) and Svbhvikakya (自 性 身) for Dharmakya.[737]

In the Abhisamaylaôkrakrik (現 觀 莊 嚴 論) and the recast version of the Pañca-viò±ati-shasrik Prajñpramit (二 萬 五 千 頌 般 若 波 羅 密 經), Sambhogakya denotes the subtle body which the Buddhas adopted for preaching the doctrines to Bodhisattvas, and Dharmakya the body   purified    by the practice of the bodhipkãika and other dharmas, which constitute a   Buddha. For the metaphysical Dharmakya these texts use the term Svabhva or Svbhvika-kya (自 性 身).

The Vijñaptimtratsiddhi (唯 識 論) retains the conception of the Krik but adopts a new term Svasambhogakya (自 受 用 身) to denote the Dharmakya of the Krik and distinguishes the Sambhogakya by naming it Parasambhogakya   (他 受 用 身).

The Prajñ-pramits (般 若 波 羅 密 經) also maintain the conception that the Dharmakya is produced by Dharmas, the highest of which is according to them, the prajñpramit, the knowledge which helps a person to realise the Dharma-։nyat (法 空). The Aãædasashasrik Prajñ-pramit S‰tra (十 八 千 頌 般 若 波 羅 密 經), takes up the question, whether the honour shown to the relics of the Tathgata-kya (如 來 身) is more meritorious than the honour shown to the Prajñ-pramit e.g., by making a copy of it. The answer given is that the relics depend on the body purified by the praj–-pramit, and therefore it is the source of Buddhas. The source deserves more honour than the remnants of the fruit (relics of Buddha) produced therefrom, and therefore it is more meritorious to honour the Prajñ-pramit than the relics. It adds that all teachings of Buddha issue from the Prajñ-pramit, and the DharmabhÏakas (法 師) preserve and propagate them; so the Dharmabhnaks should also be respected. They are protected by the Dharmakya, the Prajñ-pramit.

Sarvajñat (omniscience, 一 切 智) is pervaded (paribhvita) by the prajñ-pramit from Sarvajñat issues the body of Tathgata, the relics of whom are worshipped; hence Prajñ-pramit deserves greater honour.[738]

The Mahyna finds the true body of the Buddha in the unconditioned voidness, i.e. the Cosmic Body which transcends even the Buddha’s physical body. It also believes that the Cosmic Body or the unconditioned voidness reveals itself as a temporary physical body with the merciful intention of view conveying the truth to beings. Such a view may have been derived from the idealistic view of the MahsÏghikas who consider the physical body of the Buddha as superhuman. However, the characteristic of the doctrine of Mahyna consists in the fact that the Mahyna finds the true body of the Buddha in voidness or absolute truth without being limited to the Idea of transcendental undefiled Cosmic Body as the true body of the Buddha advocated by the MahsÏgh­ka.

In the Vajrachedik-praj–-pramit S‰tra (金 剛 般 若 波 羅 密 經) which says:

“He who sees me by outward appearance, (and) seeks me in sound, treads the hetetodox path, (and) cannot perceive the Tathāgata.”

(若 以 色 見 我，以 音 聲 求 我，是 人 行 邪 道，不 能 見 如 來). [739]

and in the Aãædasashasrik Prajñpramit (十 八 千 頌 般 若 波 羅 密 經) which says:

“Indeed, the Tathgata cannot be seen as a physical body, the cosmic body in the Tathgata”.

(Na hi tathāgato r‰pa-kyato draãæavya¾ dharmakyas Tathgata)

and in the Saddharma-puϯar­ka S‰tra (妙 法 蓮 花 經) which says:

“Tathgata is the eternal imperishable Buddha who has immeasurable life, and displays extinction only as an expedience.”

This is shown the Mahynistic view of the Buddha-body that the Buddha is identified with absolute truth or ։nyat. As mentioned above, “Those who perceive the dharma, perceive me” said ցkyamuni to his disciples, and now in Mahyna the Dharma is identified with voidness, absolute truth, the wisdom of the imperceptible voidness or Prajñ-pramit. And, in Mahyna Buddhism it is emphasized that the Cosmic Body or the unlimited and imperishable substance of Enlightenment which is absolute truth and voidness, transcending the physical body of the Buddha, is identified with the blissful or matured body (Vipka-kya, Nisyanda-kya, 異 熟 身) which is the result of the perfection of his vows and practices in previous lives. This theory comes from the Buddha legends in which the superhuman nature of ցkyamuni is given.In the suttas of various Buddhas, such as the larger Sukhvat­vy‰ha (無 量 壽 經), the Akãobhyatathgatasya-vy‰ha (阿 畜 佛 國  經), Amitbha (阿 彌 陀 佛), Akãobhiya (阿 畜 坒 佛) and other Buddhas are described as the Cosmic Body, but with the characteristics of the Blissful Body which has form and virtue, coming from the perfection of its vows and practices. Therefore, in Mahyna Buddhism there are several theories of the Buddha body; one is the theory of the twofold body which assumes the Cosmic Body with which the Blissful Body is combined, (the Reward-Body), and Incarnated Body; the second is the theory of threefold body of the Cosmic Body, the Blissful Body and the Incarnated Body and the third is the theory of the fourfold body based on the above mentioned theories, and so forth.

In the SuvarÏaprabhsa (金 光 明), Ruciraketu (妙 懂) and Kauô¯inya (橋 陳 如) Brhmana play the role of skeptics. The former enquires why ցkyamuni, who performed so many meritorious deeds, should have such a short span of life as eighty years. The latter seeks a mustard-like relic of Buddha’s body to worship and thus go to heaven. Ruciraketu is told by the Buddhas of all lokadhtus that they did not know any man or god who could calculate the length of ցkyamuni’s life. They said that it might be possible to count the drops of water in a sea but it would be impossible to ascertain the length of his life. Kauϯinya BrhmaÏa, who only feigned ignorance, was told by Litcchavikumra that, just as it is absurd to expect coconuts from a rose-apple tree, so it is absurd to expect a relic from the Buddhakya (佛 身). The Tathgatas have no origin, they are ever existing and inconceivable. It is only the Nirmitakya that is shown to them. How can a body which has no bone or blood, leave a dhtu, Buddhas have only Dharmakya and there is only the Dharmadhtu (法 界).

NirmÏakya (應 身)

The Mahynic texts tried to show on the one hand, that the H­naynists were wrong in their belief that ցkyamuni was really a man of flesh and blood and that relics of his body existed, while on the other hand, they introduced two conceptions of NirmÏakya (應 身) and Buddhakya. Whatever is said to have been done by ցkyamuni is accounted for by those texts as the apparent doings of a created body of the Buddhakya, a shadowy image created to follow the ways of the world (loknuvartana), in order to bring conviction in the heart of the people that the attainment of Buddhahood was not an impossibility. As the Buddhas possess the knowledge of all that is to be done (kÙrtynusthnajñna, 成 所 作 智) they can take any form they desire for the enlightenment of the various classes of beings. The Mahynic conception of NirmÏakya is essentially same as that of the Mahsnghiks.

The Prajñ-pramits in their quaint way refer to the NirmÏakya or R‰pakya. The Pañcavim±ati-sha±rik Prajñpramit (二 萬 五 千 頌 般 若 波 羅 密 經) says that of a Bodhisattva, after acquiring all the necessary Dharmas and practising Prajñ-pramit, becomes a Sambuddha, he then renders service to beings of all lokadhtus (世 界, worlds) of the ten corners at all times by NirmÏamegha (應 化 云, NirmÏa clouds). This is called the NairmÏikakya.

From the Chinese sources we are informed that Ngrjuna, in his commentary on the Prajñ-pramit, names it as Mah Prajñ-pramit ±stra, and speaks of two kyas, r‰pakya and dharmakya. The former is the body born of parents, possessing the qualities of sentient beings, and is subject to human frailties. It was born in Kosala (橋 薩 羅) while his Dharmakya was born at Rjagrha (王舍). The material body was necessary for ‘earthly truth’. It was for the deliverance of beings that Buddha assumed different kyas, different names, birth-places and the ways of emancipation. This interpretation of r‰pa and dharmakyas is also followed in the Chinese ParinirvÏa S‰tra (般 涅 槃 經) and Sandhinirmocana S‰tra (深 密 經).

Some of the Yogcra (瑜 伽 論) texts furnish us with the following information regarding the conception of NirmÏakya as prevailing among the Yogcrins:

The S‰trlaòkra explains the NirmÏakya to be those forms, which are assumed by Buddhas to render service to beings of the various worlds. It generally refers to the human form that Buddha takes in order to make a show of his acquiring the ordinary arts and crafts required by an average man, living a family life and then retiring from it, and ultimately attaining NirvÏa by recourse to ascetic practices.

The Vij–ptimtratsiddhi (唯 識 論) tells us that the NirmÏakya is meant for Örvakas (聲 聞), Pratyekabuddhas (辟 支 佛, 緣 覺), PÙthagjanas (人, common men) and Bodhisattvas (菩 薩), who are not yet in one of the ten Bh‰mis (地). It may appear in all lands whether pure or impure.

The Chinese commentaries on the Siddhi (法 成 就) mention various ways, in which Buddha can transform his body or another’s body or voice, and his or other’s mind, to suit his purpose. Not only could he transform his body or another’s body or voice, and his or other’s mind, to suit his purpose. Not only could he transform himself into ցkyamuni (釋 迦 牟 尼 佛), or Sriputra into a young girl, but also could create an altogether new apparition body, not, of course, a living, thinking being. Often he assumed the voice of Brahm or expressed himself through the mouth of Sriputra (舍 利 弗) or Subh‰ti (須 菩 提), and it was for this reason that we find Sriputra or Subh‰ti explaining some of the abstruse Mahyna teachings, which they themselves were not expected to understand. The third way in which he could transform his voice was to produce sounds from the sky. His thoughts were supramundane (lokottara, 出 世 界) and pure (ansrava, 清 淨). He could produce in mind any thought he liked; in fact, he appeared in his Nirmitakya as ցkyamuni with a mind (citta) suited to the ways of the world. He could also impose his thoughts on the minds of others.

The Saddharma Lankvatra S‰tra (妙 法 楞 伽 經) explains the relation of NirmÏakya to Dharmakya in the same way as the Krik. It states that NirmitaBuddhas are not produced by actions; the Tathgata is neither in them nor outside them:

“Sarve hi nirmitabuddh na karmaprabhav na tesu Tathgato na cnyatra tebhya Tathgato”.

It is only when the sons of the Jina (禪 那) realise the visible world to have no existence apart from the citta that they obtain the NirmÏakya free from kriy (作) and saòskra (行), and endowed with bala (力), abhijñ (勝 智) and va±ita (生). Like the Siddhi, it says that the Tathgatas by creating NirmÏakya perform the various duties of a Tathgata (TathgatakÙtya, 如 來 使 命). It gives also the interesting information that VajrapÏi (金 剛 首 菩 薩) serves as an attendant on the NirmitanirmÏa Buddhas, and not on the real Buddhas and that the function of such a Buddha is to preach and explain the characteristics of dna (布 施), s­la (持 戒), dhyna (禪 定), vimokãa (解 脫) and vijñna (惟 心).

The NirmÏa Kya usually translated as apparitional body is really a body assumed by Buddha in fulfillment of his resolve to save beings from misery. The manifestation of the body of bliss in the empirical world as Gautama (ցkyamuni) or other previous and succeeding Tathgatas is the NirmÏakya of Buddha.[740] The advent of a Buddha in the world is not an accident, the lucky chance of a human being happening to attain enlightenment. It is a deliberate descent of the Divinity, incarnating itself as human being; his various (twelve principal) acts from birth to passing away into ParinirvÏa are make-believe acts, designed to create a sense of kinship with human beings.[741] Gautama is one of the Buddhas; and the Bodhisattvas are other forms chosen by divinity to help man and other beings. As Haribhadra says:

“When some living being requires the explanation of the Doctrine or some other kind of help, then the Lord, by the force of his previous vows, fulfils the purpose of this living being manifesting himself in this or that form”.[742]

Buddha is the Providence that takes the keenest interest in beings. The particulars with regard to the kya conception cannot be logically demonstrated. They are to be taken as revealed to the elect and communicated by them to others.

In the H­nayna religion, the Gautama Buddha is an exalted human being, distinguished from the ordinary mankind by his unique and unaided attainment. He was not certainly God before he attained Bodhi. The historicity of the Buddha (ցkyamuni) is indispensable for that religion. In Mahyna, though Gautama is a historical person, he is not the only Buddha, and his occurrence is one of the innumerable acts of divine dispensation. The Mahyna religion escapes the predicament of having to depend on any particular historical person as the founder of its religion.

Sambhogakya (報 身)

The R‰pakya or NirmÏakya was meant for the Örvakas (聲 聞), Pratyeka-buddhas (辟 支 佛, 緣 覺), PÙthagjanas (人) and Bodhisattvas, who were not in one of the ten bh‰mis, so another kya had to be devised, a very suitable kya for the benefit of all Bodhisattvas. This is called Parasambhogakya (他 受 用 身) as distinguished from Svasambhogakya (自 受 用 身), a similar subtle body perceived by the Buddhas alone.

It is this Parasambhogakya (他 受 用 身), which plays the role of a preacher of the various Mahyna S‰tras (大 乘 經 典), the scenes being mostly laid either at GÙdhrak‰æa (靈 鷲), the only place where the three dhtus are considered pure and suitable for the appearance of a Sambhogakya (報 身), or in the Sukhvati-vy‰ha s‰tra (彌 陀 經 / 無 量 壽 經), or in one of the heavens.

It will be observed from the description of the appearance of Buddha and his manner of preaching the S‰tras that the Mahynists were not yet able to forget or rise above the human conception of Buddha of the H­naynists. They still gave ցkyamuni the role of the presiding Buddha of the universe, to whom flocked reverently with flowers, incense, etc., all the Bodhisattvas, Örvakas and GÙhapatis of the various lokadhtus of the ten directions, to hear from him the Praj–paramit, (般 若 波 羅 密 經) the Saddharmapundar­ka  (妙 法 蓮 花 經) or the Gandavy‰ha / Avaòsaka-s‰tra (華 嚴 經).[743]

These Bodhisattvas again had their own tutelary Buddhas, who, according to the Mahyna metaphysics, possessed the same Dharmakya as that of ցkyamuni. They also came or were sometimes sent by their Buddhas, with messages of greetings and flowers as tokens of their regard, to ցkyamuni Buddha whose Buddhakãetra was then the Saha lokadhtu (娑 婆 世 界). Sometimes the descriptions go so far as to say that the Buddhas themselves came to hear discourses from ցkyamuni Buddha, and the concourse of Buddhas and Bodhisattvas became so great that the Sah lokadhtu had to be cleared of all oceans, mountains, seas, rivers, and cities, as well as of gods, men and other beings.

As we read in the H­nayna texts monks used to come to meet Buddha, bringing with them one or two smaneras (沙 彌), so also we read in the Saddharmapuϯar­ka that on account of insufficiency of space the countless Buddhas could not have with them more than one or two Bodhisattvas as attendants (upasthpakas, 持 者).

According to the Satashasrik Praj–pramit  (一百 千 頌 般 若 波 羅 密 經) and the Pa–cavim±ati-sha±rik Praj–pramit (二萬 五 千 頌 般 若 波 羅 密 經), it is an exceedingly refulgent body, from every pore of which steamed forth countless brilliant rays of light, illuminating the lokadhtus (世 界) as innumerable as the sands of the Ganges. When this body stretched out its tongue, Innumerable rays of light issued forth from it, and on each ray of light was found a lotus of thousand petals on which was seated a Tathgatavigraha (an image of the Tathgata, a sort of NirmÏakya), preaching to Bodhisattvas, GÙhasths (householders), Pravrajitas (recluses) and others the dharma consisting of the Pramits.

After Siòhavikr­dita samdhi (師 子 遊 戲 三 昧), his body illuminated the Trishasra-mahshasra lokadhtu (三 千 大 千 世 界) just as the bright clear Sun or the full moon illuminates the world. Buddha then shows his PrakÙtytmabhva (真自性, real form) to all the worlds. The several classes of gods as well as the men of the four continents, Jambudv­pa (閻 浮 提), Aparagodna (西 牛 化), etc., see this Prakrtytmabhva (真自性) and think that the Tathgata is sitting before them and preaching the doctrine. From this body again issues forth some rays of light, by which all beings of all lokadhtus see ցkyamuni Buddha preaching the Praj–pramit to his sangha of monks and congregation of Bodhisattvas.

The Saddharma Lankvatra S‰tra (妙 法 楞 伽 經) presents us first with this conception, calling it Nisyanda (等 流 法) or Dharmatnisyanda Buddha (等 流 佛) and it seems that the term Sambhogakya was not yet current. We have seen that in H­nayna works also, it is pointed out that the super-excellent body of Buddha, endowed with the major and minor signs of great men, was due to the countless meritorious deeds performed by him in his previous lives.

The Chinese rendering of Sambhogakya by Pao shen  (報 身) in which Pao ‘報’ means fruit or reward, also indicates that Sambhoga (報 身) had no other sense than ‘vipka’ (異 熟) or ‘nisyanda’ (等 流). The later Yogcrins called it Parasambhogakya (他 受 用 身) in order to distinguish it from other kya called by them Svasambhoga (自 受 用 身). Though the Aãæashasrik does not distinguish Sambhogakya from the NirmÏakya, it refers to the super-excellent body of Buddha as the result of his meritorious acts in previous lives. The Lankvatra (楞 伽 經), by using the expression Vipka or Vipkastha (異 熟), shows a stage of transition from the H­naynic conception of Vipkaja-kya (異 熟 身) to that of the Mahynic Parasambhogakya (他 受 用 身).

The Body of Bliss (Sambhoga - 報身) is so called because it represents (an existence characterised by) the full enjoyment of the Truth of the great Vehicle, as it is said: ‘Perfectly enjoying the Truth or since it takes delight in the Truth’.[744] The body of Bliss is the reflection of the Cosmic Body in the empirical world in a corporeal form. Buddha appears here as a Supreme God, abiding in the Akaniãæha (色 究 竟 天) heaven, surrounded by a host of Bodhisattvas. He is endowed with 32 principal and 80 secondary marks of excellence.[745] This body is the result of the previous virtuous deeds. The descriptions given of Buddha in the opening sections of the Mahyna S‰tras are of this body. The Satashasrik Praj–pramit may be cited as a good example of this. For pages on end there are descriptions of every part of Buddha's body, of rays proceeding from his head, hands and feet and even fingers, reaching up to the extremities of the world.[746] Only the Bodhisattvas who have reached the tenth stage can perceive-the body of Bliss, and not others, is the opinion of some Mdhyamika teachers.[747]

Dharmakya (法 身)

The three kyas belong strictly, to the realm of SamvÙti, worldly and transcendental, and as such they were treated as R‰pa or NirmÏa-kya by the early Mahynists, including Ngrjuna. The only real kya of Buddha is the Reality as conceived by the Mahynists, and is not different from the things of beings of the universe. Though an attempt to define it by the current words and expressions is bound to be not only incorrect but misleading, the Mahynic texts tried to give an idea of it as far as the language permitted.

The Krik[748] and the Siddhi (等 流 法) call it Svabhvika or Svabhvakya (自 性 身). It is, according to them immeasurable and illimitable. It fills all space. It is the basis of the Sambhoga and NirmÏa kyas. It is devoid of all marks (mahp‰rÏa-laksanas, 大 滿 相) and is inexpressible (niãprapa–ca, 戲 論). It is possessed of eternal, real and unlimited guÏas (功 德). It has neither citta nor r‰pa, and again Dharmakya Buddhas may have their individual Sambhogakya but they have all one Dharmakya. It can only be realised within one’s own self (pratytmavedya, 自 證) and not described, for that would be like the attempt of a blind man to describe the Sun, which he has never seen.

The Aãæashasrik and other Prajñpramits, though unrelenting in their negation of every possible statement about the reality, never assert that Tathat (真 如) or ։nyat (空 性) or Dharmakya (法 身) in its real sense is also non-existing. The statements like:

“Suchness is immutable, unchangeable, beyond concept and distinctions.”

(tathatvikr   nirvikrvikalp   nirvikalp).

show rather a positive conception of the reality than a purely negative one. In regard to the Dharmakya also the Aãæashasrik makes similar statements.  It says that:

“He who knows that the dharmas, existing in the world or preached by the Tathgata, have no more existence than things seen in a dream and does not enquire whence the Tathgata comes and where he goes, realises the Tathgata through dharmat.”

The Buddhakya, that people speak of, arises through cause and condition like the sound of flute; it involves really no appearance or disappearance. Those, who run after the form and voice of the Tathgata and conceive of his appearance and disappearance are far from the Truth. Nor further statements than this can be made about the Reality, for that would be again prapañca.

When the Aãæashasrik asserts that the Tathgata does not exist, it refers to that Tathgata as conceived by one on reading the Mahyna texts. Even the Bodhisattvas, unless and until they reach the tenth bh‰mi, cannot extricate themselves from a conception of the Tathgatakya, however, subtle it may be (e.g., the Svasambhogakya). They are still under a delusion and it is delusion that the Prajñpramit endeavours to remove by asserting that there is no Tathgata. The Vajracchedik to which the Aãæshasrik as well as the Bodhicaryvatra (菩 薩 藏 經)[749] refer,

“He who endeavoured to see me through my form and voice could not see me because a Buddha is to be seen in the sense of dharmat (nature of dharmas), for the leaders (of men) have only dharmakya. That dharmat is unknowable so also is the Tathgata”.

(dharmato buddha draãæavya dharmakya h­ nayakyah, dharmat cpy avijñey na s saky vijnituò).

The conception of Dharmakya was of special interest to the Yogcrins. The Lankvatra in describing it says that Dharmat (自 性 法) of Buddha is without any substratum (nirlamba) and lies beyond the range of functioning organs of sense, proofs or signs and hence beyond the vision of Örvakas, Pratyekabuddhas or the non-Mahynists. It is to be realised only within one’s own self.

The ։trlankra calls it Svbhvika-dharmakya (自 性 身). It is one and the same kya in all Buddhas, very subtle, unknowable and eternal. The Trim±ik (惟 識 三 十 論 頌) explains the Dharmakya as the transformed sraya (所 依, substratum) - the layavijñna (阿 賴 耶 識) the transformation being effected by knowledge (jñna, 成 智) and the suppression of the two evils (dausæhulyas, 二 障), viz., kle±varaÏa (煩 惱 障) and jñeyvaraÏa (所 知 障).

The €1oka on the Abhisamaylankrakrik (現 觀 莊 嚴 論) also explains the Dharmakya in a similar way. There are two kinds of Dharmakya, one being the Bodhipkãika (菩 提 分) and the other dharmas, which are themselves pure and productive of clear knowledge (niãprapañca-jñntman, 真 智 不 戲 論) and the other the transformed sraya (所 依) of the same which is then called Svabhvakya (自 性 身).

The goal of Bodhisattvs is to realise the Dharmakya. Every being has the Dharmakya, or the Dharmakya comprises all beings of the world, but as they are blinded by avidy, they do not realise this fact. What the Bodhisattva alms at is the removal of this avidy (無 明) and the realisation of the fact that he is the same as the Dharmakya.

As the Dharmakya, Buddha fully realises his identity with the Absolute (dharmata, ±‰nyat, 性 空) and unity (samat, 大) with all beings. It is the oneness with the Absolute that enables Buddha to intuit the Truth, which it is his sacred function to reveal to phenomenal beings.

This is the fountain-source of his implicit strength which he concretizes in the finite sphere. The Sambhoga-kya is the concrete manifestation to himself (svasambhoga) and to the elect (parasam-bhoga) the power and splendour of god-head. In furtherance of the great resolve to succour all beings, Buddha incarnates himself from time to time in forms best calculated to achieve this end (nirmÏakya).

The Praj–-pramit texts repeatedly ask us to consider Buddha as Dharmakya, and not in the overt form which appears to us.[750] Dharmakya is the essence, the reality of the universe. It is completely free from every trace of duality. It is the very nature of the universe and is therefore also called the svbhvika-kya.[751] The Dharmakya[752] is still a Person, and innumerable merits and powers etc. are ascribed to him.[753]

The Relation among NirmāÏa-kāya, Sambhoga-kāya and Dharma-kāya

The three-body gospel of Nirmôa-kya, Sambhoga-kya and Dharma-kya grew out to be a developed form of Mahyna principle. The three-body represents as: the Nirmôa-kya is the assumed or apparitional body, a form verily of the historical Buddha which is to be revered as such. Being so much under stress his disciples came to venerate ‘The Lord of Compassion’ as Supra-historical and one who was never apart from them. The transformation body of the enlightened one is supposedly beyond time and space, formless, without colour or confrontation, unlimited in scope and primordial, the Tathgata.

The suprahistorical body of the Buddha manifested again and again out of compassion for the sentient beings of the Saha loka, the world of living beings.

The transformed body of the Buddha appeared in two other forms of the Sambhoga-kya and Dharma-kya. Sambhoga-kya is bliss-body, enjoyment body which latter does not mean physical pleasure of sensuous kind, but it is so called because of the merit of enjoying various virtues Sambhoga-kya is also spiritually known to be formless and without colour.

The accomodating body of the Buddha called Dharma-kya is the truth body. It is Dharma or Law itself. As truth it is also divinely conceived to be formless and colourless.

In order to understand the above doctrine, one may reverse their order. Without Dharma-kya as basis, the two others Sambhoga-kya and NirmÏa-kya cannot be. Similarly without Sambhoga-kya the transformation body is incomprehensible.

The Awakened one in his transformed body of the historical Buddha is still one with the formless Dharma-kya and invisible NirmÏ-kya. Mahyna equates Dharma-kya with ։nyat or Emptiness. This is truth and wisdom that is perfect. It has rightly been cognized that emptiness or ։nyat is neither the negative or static state, but ever emptying it is a constant and dynamic activity that is involved into truth, Dharma. Sambhoga-kya accomplished by fulfillment of Dharma bears a physical form, though it is ultimately formless and colourless. The Dharma-kya is the ultimate truth which is emptying itself and is boundless openness.

˜ ] CHAPTER NINE

THE CONCLUSION

The Identity in Pāli Nikāyās and Mahāyāna Sūtras

The differences in the concepts of Bodhisatta / Bodhisattva (菩 薩) and Su––at / ։nyat (空 性) in Pli texts (杷 厘 經 藏) and Mahyna canon (大 乘 經 典) are not merely verbal but real. In Pli Nikyas, the Buddhist gospel is represented in a simple style easily understood by all. On the contrary, the themes are expressed in elaborated manner and ornate style, often polemical in their presentation and uncolloquial form. The simple ways of Pli Nikyas appear very near the oral transmissions of the early ages of Buddhism. It is a matter of serious consideration if the gospel of the Pli s‰tras is more akin to the original teachings of the Buddha. But it cannot be doubted that the Mahyna works are definitely of a developed stage in which metaphysical reasoning is super-imposed on the customary doctrines. The negative delineation of the doctrine of emptiness (։nyat) in Praj–-Pramit literature (般 若 波 羅 密 經) and the multi-symbolism of Mahyna literature call up on a more profound study of the canon and its commentaries to follow the sophisticated style and basic formularies of the later school of thought.

In general, such verbal distinctions have led the scholars to form opinions in their own way about the identity in Pli Nikys and Mahyna S‰tras such as:

• The doctrines (法 話) of Mahyna S‰tras, along with those of the Pli Nikyas are essentially the same in origin (同 原), nature (同 本 質) and purpose (同目的), because what are often distinguished as Praj– pramit literature (般 若 波 羅 密 經), the Saddharma-Puϯar­ka (妙 法 蓮 花 經), Laôkvatara (楞 伽 經), Lalitavistara (神 通 遊 戲 經), Samdhirja (三 妹 王 經), Da±abh‰mi (十 地 經), Sukhvat­ (無 量 壽 經), Vimalak­rti (維 摩 詰 經)... always have their reference in the Early Buddhist literature - Pli Nik
• The doctrine of Absolute Emptiness (։nyta, 空 性) in Mahyna is indeed came from Su––at in Pli Nikyas which is also the first basic lesson of Non-self (antman, 無 我) and Dependent-origination (Prat­tyasamutpda, 緣 起, 因 緣 生 起). Thus, Su––at (։nyta) means nothing but Non-self, Dependent-origination, the Four Noble Truths and the way of S­la - Samdhi - Praj– (戒 定 慧) are those which are very fundamental and original for all different forms of Buddhism. All other Buddhist ideas stemmed out or developed from these doctrines in order to suit different characters and temperaments of all walks of life.
• Antma and Paæiccasamuppda in Pli Nikyas are referred to as true Reality of all phenomena in Mahyna S‰
• The way of Boddhisattva practices of ten Pramits (十 波 羅 密) in Mahyna texts is the same ten Pram­s in Pli scriptures. In other words, the six Pramits (六 波 羅 密) of Boddhisattva-cary (菩 薩 行) which most of the Mahyna S‰tras mention and advocate, is none other than the traditional way of S­la-samdhi-praj– (戒 定 慧) with the Thirty-seven Dharmas conducive to Enlightenment (三 十 七 助 道) in Pli texts.
• The conception of Ten Bh‰mis (十 地) of Mahyna is correlative with the simplicity, popularisation of the spiritual process of nine Jhnas (九 禪) mentioned in Pli Nik[754]

The roots of Mahyna doctrines predominantly lie in the s‰tras of the early school of Theravda. Hence, it is not correct to say that Mahyna (菩 薩 乘) is superior or greater in appraisal to Örvakayna (聲 聞 乘). A grosser change of more generous tendency of liberation in Mahyna as compared with the so-called selfish endeavor of emancipation in Örvakayna must be discarded at once. What is to be accepted is that Buddha taught according to the capacity and temperament of men and women. He never herded all into a particular wisdom. And this leaves no ground for disbelief into the sublimity of the two ideologies. The Mahyna scriptures are as sublime as the philosophy of Pli Nikyas.

As a matter of fact, the Dharma was expressed by Buddha is not a doctrine of philosophy, if it is anything at all, it is therapeutic device cleansing of men’s innate coarse or subtle clinging. Just as when a patient is cured i.e. freed from clings, then what the Buddha taught becomes useless and abandoned behind as ‘a raft’:

“Just as a raft, after being fashioned out of grass, sticks, branches and leaves, serves to cross over great stretches of water and is then abandoned, so the Dharma, by means of which we ferry over the water of birth and death to the other shore, nirvana, is not something to be taken with us but something to be left behind”.

“Ye Bhiksus, should know that the Dharma expounded is likened to a raft. Even the Dharma should be cast aside; how much more so the Not-Dharma”. (汝 等 毘 丘！知 我 說 法，如 箋 喻 者，法 常 應 捨，何 況 非 法). [755]

Therefore, if Mahyna or H­nayna is merely therapeutic device, skillful means (Upya-kau±alya, 方 便) to develop spirituality to  highest perfection, or the Buddha’s teaching is only one aim to liberation as the sea’s taste has only one – salt, then there is not any higher or lower. In this regard, we would like to suggest that Buddhist terms of H­nayna (小 乘) and Mahyna (大 乘) should be transferred to the words of Early Buddhist Tradition (初 期 傳 統 佛 教) and Developed Buddhist Tradition (後 期 / 發 展 傳 統 佛 教).

The Application from the Concept of Boddhisattva

The Doctrine of Boddhisattva in the Individual and Society Improvement

The one common motif of the Boddhisatta in Pli scriptures or Bodhisattva in Mahyna texts is the sublime way of inducing in men, the urge for living and letting others live. For inculcation of this higher aspiration in both these systems the same ideas of self-reliance, self-examination, self-awareness, self-responsibility are made to work. The urge is for being earnest, optimistic, thoughtful and careful in every situation.

The ideal of the Bodhisattva impinges on a constant and dynamic watch over one’s action for realization of the goal. The ideal closely pursued gives spiritual strength and wisdom by which one must cross the shore of misery.

The Bodhisattva is a compassionate being. He teaches one to be kind to all other sentient beings. The cause of human degeneration is selfishness, born of ignorance and conceit that destroy the sacredness of our destined role. It is not understanding the way of extricating oneself from the mire of brutal systems that we fall prey, again and again, to our helpless state of misery. If we could imbibe the ideal of the Bodhisattva in our customary life we can awaken our hidden energy to many useful purposes. It is we who can manage the state in a viable way to make our future bright.

The Doctrine of Boddhisattva in the Gnosiology

A knowledge of the Pli Nikyas and Mahyna Sutras is as much necessary to live up to the Bodhisattva ideal as the Mahyna texts on Praj– Pramit where a simple study does not satisfy the nosegies of a learned person. We can study the themes from every corner of semantics and symbolical analysis as well as awaking them. This is also the requirement of persons who are engaged in propagation of Buddhist teachings.

The Application of the Concept of ։nyat

The Doctrine of ։nyat  and the View of Individual and Universe

The signification of ։nyat which was taught by the Buddha, lies in the doctrine of anatta and Prat­tyasamutpda. It has been for us a perfect view about the individual and world. Therefore, it is an undisputed fact that Buddhism never pessimistic and weary in any circumstances of ages, regime in the past, present or future, in the West civilization or our Asian countries. Following the doctrine of ։nyat, Buddhism usually opens a way to liberation. Buddhism does not promise man heaven or a remote paradise or sin realm. Buddhism only guides man should know clearly who he is, why he gets suffering and shows him the way of freedom. According to Buddhism, deliberation does not mean that it helps man to escape from this life to dream to the promised lands, liberation in Buddhism is to guide man face daily life, himself, five aggregations to reflect on them, to unveil their form of true reality. It means that the liberation is built on the enlightenment and comprehension of true wisdom. With such a wisdom, a Bodhisattva freed from all bonds, gains more determinable, effort, enthusiastic to work and serve mankind without hope or desire for any reward or return from his noble action.

As far as progress of material-civilization is concerned, man can fly up to the moon, the Mars or dive to the bottom of the ocean, invent the atom-bomb, scientific-technology, computer-space-scientific-technology. The more achievements they gain in the world, the more crisis men suffer in life.

If the history of humankind is the history to seek for the object of the freed and bliss truth, then the doctrine of ։nyat is the very object for that purpose.

The doctrine of ։nyat is the basis, the great confidence not only for the 21^th century but also for next ones in the view to build, upgrade and improve man and society as well as return to man and society whatever was lost by their unintention or intention.

։nyat  is a door for us to abide in deliberation, true nature.

The Doctrine of ։nyat and Science

It is very interesting to note here that having studied the concept of ։nyat in Buddhism, the scientists come to admit the fact that ։nyat corresponds with science, because both of them have some similar views.[756]

It is said that the nuclear scientist who discovered the principle that matter can be harnessed into energy and that energy and matter appear to be two, but they are one unit, had the truth known from the Buddhist doctrine of emptiness. That substantiates  impermanence.

A comparative study of the doctrine of ։nyata and some specific nuances of science evince remarkable similarity. It is a great success of the modern scientist in his long career of dealing with movement and change to have evolved the principle of interchangeability of matter into energy. This is like the affirmation of the HÙdaya S‰tra which rationalises that ‘r‰pa’ is not different from ar‰pa or ‘։nyata’, the form and emptiness being identical: ‘Form (r‰pa) is no different from the void (s‰nya), nor the void from form. Form is identical with the void (and) void is identical with form’ (色 不 異 空, 空 不 異 色. 色 即 是 空，空 即 是 色).[757]

Modern science accepts ‘matter’ as ‘energy’ and ‘energy’ means ‘material object’. This is metaphorically illustrated in the example of the power of waterfall running turbine to generate electricity. Electricity furnishes the amount of energy for propulsion of electronic appliances. This principle in Buddhist idiom strengthens the conviction that we owe our existence in the world to our naturalness in the reality of emptiness, as Ngrjuna emphatically asserts:

“With ։nyat, all is possible; without it, all is impossible.”[758]

Mahyna holds that all phenomena has two signs: (i) one is inward, (ii) the other is the outward. The outward sign is open to our five-fold internal organs. The sixth sense reveals the inward essence. The immense varieties and dimensions in the world’s compass have their inherent nature of undiluted reality, the perceptive suchness (Tatht). When we apply this to interaction of electricity, we see it into basic nature neither appearing nor disappearing, but remaining appearing and disappearing in accordance with the Causal Law.

In the successive stages in the progress of science since the time of Anaxagoras, the stellar society and numerous cosmic systems are vividly told in Buddhist books. The new science has acceded to a dynamic concept of matter against static law of old classical physics. A vitalistic view in science in opposition to Darwin’s hypothesis has come to uphold all evolutionary processes, reaching from the lowest to the highest organism that illustrates a gradual unfolding in the sensuous world of a pre-existing power of mind.[759]

The Doctrine of ։nyat in Mutual Understanding among Religions

All theological religions take the ultimate reality in the substantival godhead, the omniscient, the omnipotent and the omnipresent God. In Judaism, he is called Yahweh; in Islam, he is Allah, I±vara (Öiva, ViãÏu, Brahm) are his designations in Hinduism. The Christians know him as Father in heaven. These are the emanations of the Primordial Buddha or fundamental principle of life (Sambhogkya, the divine attaining ultimate Reality).

It is to be conceded that the ultimate truth in all these universal religious orders which is designated by different names in their systems are supposedly formless, unlimited, without colour or emptiness (։nyat).

A study of the various theological systems and the ։nyat doctrine, as in Mahyna Buddhism leads one to comprehend the ground for a dynamic unity in religious pluralism without even discarding absolutism of each theological system.

The absolute ։nyat does not deny but rather allows each religious claim to obsoluteness in terms of the godhead. It is to be relied up on that the various religious ways are grasped as manifestations of the radial absolute emptiness doctrine.

It would be easy to transfix a ground for all religions as the basis for a dynamic universal unity, the condition for it being the breaking through their traditional form of personal God-Centeredness and acceptance of emptiness to be the underlying unitary principle of life, such as Brahman. Instead of wrangling for formalism, it behooves to reason that a thorough historical and cultural understanding is evolved to smother conflicts among religious systems.

A sound proposal is offered by the Buddhist trikya doctrine and the absolute ։nyat principle as the summum bonum of dharma-kya which alone must develop real mutual understanding among religions.

Philosophy today inclines all perceptive men to dissolve their superficial differences, born on account of their traditional formalism and share the vision of relativity of inner awareness and manifestation of appearance to foster better understanding and spiritual unity on earth.  

–  &  —

 

THE BODDHISATTVAS’ NAMES

IN SANSKRIT AND CHINESE[760]

 

€kśagarbha Bodhisattva	虛 空 藏 菩 薩	Xu kong zang pu sa
Akãayamati Bodhisattva	無 盡 意 菩 薩	Wu jin yi pu sa
Anantacritra Bodhisattva	無 邊 菩 薩	Wu bian pu sa
Anantavikrmin Bodhisattva	無 量 力 菩 薩	Wu liang li pu sa
Aniksiptadhura Bodhisattva	不 休 息 菩 薩	Bu xiu xi pu sa
Avalokite±vara Bodhisattva	觀 世 音 菩 薩	Guang shi yin pu sa
Bhadrapla Bodhisattva	賢 首 菩 薩	Ba tuo po lo pu sa
Bhaiãajyarja Bodhisattva	藥 王 菩 薩	Yao wang pu sa
Bhaiãajyasamudgata Bodhisattva	藥 上 菩 薩	Yao shang pu sa
Buddhaghosa Bodhisattva	佛 音 菩 薩	Fo yin pu sa
Dhcaôiòdhara Bodhisattva	持 地 菩 薩	Chi de pu sa
DhÙtiparip‰rna Bodhisattva	堅 滿 菩 薩	Jian man pu sa
Gadgadasvara Bodhisattva	妙 音 菩 薩	Miao yin pu sa
Kãitigarbha Bodhisattva	地 藏 菩 薩	Di zang pu sa
Ma–ju±ri Bodhisattva	文 殊 師 利菩 薩	Wen su shi li pu sa
Mahpratibhna Bodhisattva	大 樂 說 菩 薩	Da yue pu sa
Mahsthmaprpta Bodhisattva	大 勢 至 菩 薩	Da shi zhi pu sa
Mahvikrmin Bodhisattva	大 力 菩 薩	Da li pu sa
Maitreya Bodhisattva	彌 勒 菩 薩	Di lie pu sa
Nakãatrarjasaòkusuinit-bhij–a Bodhisattva	宿 王 華 菩 薩	Su wang hua pu sa
Nityodyukta Bodhisattva	精 進 菩 薩	Chang jing jin pu sa
P‰rÏacandra Bodhisattva	滿 月 菩 薩	Man yue pu sa
Padma±r­ Bodhisattva	華 德 菩 薩	Hua de pu sa
Prabh‰taratna Bodhisattva	多 寶 菩 薩	Duo bao pu sa
Prajñk‰æa Bodhisattva	智 積 菩 薩	Zhi ji pu sa
Pralna±‰ra Bodhisattva	勇 施 菩 薩	Yong shi pu sa
Ratnkara Bodhisattva	寶 積 菩 薩	Bao ji pu sa
Ratnacandra Bodhisattva	寶 月 菩 薩	Bao yue pu sa
RatnapÏi Bodhisattva	寶 掌 菩 薩	Bao zhang pu sa
Ratnaprabha Bodhisattva	寶 光 菩 薩	Bao guang pu sa
Ratnavi±uddha Bodhisattva	寶 淨 菩 薩	Bao jing pu sa
Sadparibh‰ta Bodhisattva	常 不 輕 菩 薩	Chang bu qing pu sa
Samantabhadra Bodhisattva	普 賢 菩 薩	Pu xian pu sa
Sarvasattvapriyadar±ana Bodhisattva	一 切 眾 生 喜 見 菩 薩	Yi qie zhong sheng xi jian pu sa
Supratisæhitacariora Bodhisattva	安 立 行 菩 薩	An li xing pu sa
Trailokyarikrmin Bodhisattva	越 三 界 菩 薩	Yue san jia pu sa
Vairocanar±mipratimaô¯itadhvajarjan Bodhisattva	光 照 莊 嚴 相 菩 薩	Guang zhao zhuang yan xiang pu sa
VajrapÏ­ Bodhisattva	金 剛 手 菩 薩	Jin gang shou pu sa
Vi±iãæacritra Bodhisattva	上 行 菩 薩	Shang xing pu sa
Vi±usshacritra Bodhisattva	淨 行 菩 薩	Jing xing pu sa
Vimalagarbha Bodhisattva	淨 藏 菩 薩	Jing zang pu sa
Vimalanetra Bodhisattva	淨 眼 菩 薩	Jing yan pu sa

**************

 

BIBLIOGRAPHY

 

I. PRIMARY SOURCES

• A Commentary on the Twelve Gate Treatise, Shih-erh-men-lun-su, Chi-Tsang, (T 1825).
• A Treasury of Mahāyāna Sūtras — Selections from the Mahāratnakūæa Sūtra, ed. by G.C.C. Chang, Tr. from the Chinese by the Buddhist Association of the United Sates, Pennsylvania and London, 1983.
• Aãæasāhasrikā-praj–āpāramitā-sūtra or The Eight Thousand Verse Praj–ā Sūtra (八 千 頌 般 若 波 羅 密 經) extant in the following three translations:

1) Hsiao-pi’n-pan-jo-po-lo-mi-ching (小 品 般 若 波 羅 密 經) translated by Kumāraj­va from Aãæasāhasrikā-praj–āpāramitā-sūtra (8000 Verse praj–ā sūtra) in 408; Taisho. 8. (No. 227); Taisho. 8. (No. 227);

2) Mo-ho-pan-jo-po-lo-mi-ching (大 品 般 若 經) (The Large Praj–ā Text) or (般 若 波 羅 密 經) translated by Kumāraj­va from (27 fascs.) translated by Kumāraj­va from the Pa–caviò±atisāhasrikā - praj–āpāramitā - sūtra. Taisho.8, (No. 223) in the year of 409 simultaneously with 大 智 度 論.

3) Pa–caviò±atisāhasrikā - praj–āpāramitā - sūtra (The Twenty-five thousand Verse Praj–ā text, 二 萬 五 千 頌 般 若 波 羅 密 經).

• Aôguttara Nikāya, ed. R. Morris & E. Hardy, 5 vols., London: PTS, 1885-1900; ed. Mrs. Rhys Davids, tr. by F.L. Woodward, The Book of the Gradual Sayings, London: PTS, rpt. 1955-1970.
• Apadāna, ed. by Marry E. Lilley, London, 1925.
• Aãæasāhasrikāpraj–apāramitā, R. Mitra, Calcutta, 1888.
• 般 若 波 羅 密 多 心 經, 佛 學 業 書, 台 鸞, 一 九 九 八, into Chinese from Sanskrit by Hsuan Tsang, tr. into English by Upasaka Lu Kuan-yu, The Heart Sūtra (The Praj–ā-pāramitā HÙdaya Sūtra), Taiwan: Buddhist Culture Service, 1994.
• 菩 薩 瓔 珞 本 業 經 or the Sūtra on the Original Action of the Garland of the Boddhisattva (2 fasc.) translated by BuddhasmÙti (Chu-fo-nien) in 376-378.
• Bodhisattva Vows, Isitituto Lama Tzong Khapa, Education Departement, The Presevation of the Mahāyāna Tradition International Office, September 1997.
• Bodhicaryāvātāra (€cārya Öāntideva), Tr. by Stephen Batchlor, A Guide to the Bodhisattva‘s Way of Life, New Delhi, 1998.
• Bodhisattvabhūmi¾, by N. Dutt, Vol. II, K.P. Jayaswal Research Institute, Patna 1978.
• Bodhisattvabhūmi, Skt. Ed. Wogihara, 1971, Eng. tr. (of part 1:4 Tattvārthapaæalam), Willis, 1979.
• Buddhavaòsa, ed. by R.Morris, II, London, 1882.
• Chung-kuan-lun-su (A Commentary on the Middle Treatise), Chi-Tsang, T 1842.
• D­gha Nikāya, 3 vols, ed. T.W. Rhys Davids & J.E. Carpenter, London: PTS, 1890-1911; T.W. & C.A.F. Rhys Davids, The Dialogue of the Buddha, 3 vols, Motilal, 2000.
• Dhammapada (Pāli text and Translation), tr. Ven. Nārada Maha Thera, Maha Bodhi Information and Publications Division, Maha Bodhi Society of India, Isipatana Deer Park, Sarnath Centre, 2000.
• 妙 法 蓮 華 經, 佛 教 經 典 會, 佛 教 慈 慧 服 務 中 心， 香 港， 一 九 九 四, by Burton Watson, The Lotus Sutra, Colombia University Press, New York, 1993.
• Divyāvadāna, ed. E.B. Cowell & R.A. Neil, Cambridge, 1886.
• Existence and Enlightenment in the Laôkāvatāra-sūtra (A Study in the Ontology and Epistemology of the Yogācāra School of Mahāyāna Buddhism), Florin Giripescu Sutton, Sri Satguru publications, Delhi-7, 1992.
• Kathāvatthu, I-II, ed. A.C. Taylor, London: PTS, 1894-95.
• 金 剛 般 若 波 羅 密 經, 佛 學 業 書, 台 鸞, 一 九 九 八, into Chinese from Sanskrit by Kumarajiva , tr. into English by Upasaka Lu Kuan-yu, The Diamond Sūtra (The Vajracchedikā Praj–ā-pāramitā Sūtra), Taiwan: Buddhist Culture Service, 1994.
• LaÏkāvatāra-sūtra, ed. by B. Nanjio, Kyoto, 1923.
• Lalitavistara, P.L.Vaidya, BST, I, 1958.
• Lankāvatāra-sūtra, ed. B. Nanjio, tr. D.T. Suzuki, Kyoto, 1956.
• Mādhyamika Kārikās of Nāgārjuna, by L. de la V. Poussin, (Bib. Budd. Iv).
• Mūlamadhyamakakarika of Nāgārjuna, Skt. ed., tr. David J. Kalupahana, The Philosophy of the Middle Way, Delhi, 1996.
• Mūlamādhyamika-kārikā of Nagārjuna, David J. Kalupahana, Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass, 1996.
• MādhyamikavÙtti, L. de la Vallee Poussin, Bibliotheca Buddhica, Vol. IV, 1902-13.
• Madhyānta-vibhaôga, Tr. Th. Stcherbatsky, Leningrad, 1937.
• Mahāpraj–ā-Pāramitā Sūtra, ed., tr. Edward Conze, The Large Sūtra on Perfect Wisdom, Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass, rpt. 1990.
• Mahāvastu, I-III, ed. E. Senart, Paris, 1882-97.
• Mahāyāna Sūtrālaôkāra of Asaôga (A Study in Vij–ānavāda Buddhism), Yajneshwar S. Shastri, Sri Satguru publications, Delhi-7, 1989.
• Mahāyāna SūtrālaÏkāra, editeù et traduit par S. Leùvi, Pari, 1907, 1911.
• Majjhima Nikāya, 4 Vols, ed. V. Trenckner, R. Chalmers & Mrs. Rhys Davids, London: PTS 1888-1925; ed. Mrs. Rhys Davids, tr. by F.L. Woodward, The Middle Length Sayings, 3 1995-1994 & 1993, London: PTS.
• Milindapa–ha, V. Trenckner, London: PTS, 1962.
• Nāgārjuna’s Philosophy as presented in the Mahā-praj–āpāramitā Öāstra, by K. Venkata Ramanan, Bharatiya Vidya Prakashan, Varanasi 1, 1971.
• Nāgārjuna’s Twelve Gate Treatise, viii, Boston: D. Reidel Publishing Company, 1982.
• 佛 學 業 書, (Bilingual Buddhist Series), Buddhist Culture Service, 台 鸞, 一 九 九 八.
• Praj–āpāramitāpiϯārtha, I-II, ed. G. Tucci (Minor Sanskrit Texts on the Praj–āpāramitā), Journal of Royal Asiatic Society, 1947.
• Ratana Sutta (Great Book of Protections), with translation by Lionel Lokuliyana, published by Ven. Weragoda Sarada Maha Thero, Singapore, Singapore Meditation Centre, 1993.
• Saòyutta Nikāya, M. L. Feen & Mrs. Rhys Davids, 5 vols., London: PTS: 1884-1898; ed. Mrs. Rhys Davids, tr. by F.L. Woodward, The Book of the Kindred Sayings, London: PTS, rpt. 1950-1956.
• Selected Sayings from the Perfection of Wisdom, Edward Conze, Boulder, 1978.
• Sūtra of the Past Vows of Earth Bodhisattva, The Collected Lectures of Tripitaka Master Hsuan Hua, tr. Bhiksu Heng Ching, Buddhist Text Translation Society, The Institute for Advanced Studies of World Religious, NY, 1974.
• Sutta Nipata, V. Fausboll, London: PTS, reprint Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass, 1992; Tr. K. R. Norman, The Group of the Discourses, London: PTS: 1984.
• Öikãāsamuccaya, Öāntvideva, Skt. ed., Vaidya 1961, Eng. tr. C. Bendall & W.H.D. Rouse, 1922.
• Ta-chih-tu-lun (大 智 度 論, 100 fasc.s), translated by Kumāraj­va from the Mahāpraj–āpāramitopade±a-±āstra ascribed to Nāgārjuna. Taisho, 25, (No. 1509). The treatise was Nāgārjuna’s commentary on the Pa–caviò±atisāhasrikā- praj–āpāramitā-sūtra (the 25,000 Öloka Text), and Kumāraj­va produced both the text and this treatise in 409.
• The Bodhisattvapiæaka (Its Doctrines, Practices and their Position in Mahāyāna Literature), Ulrich Pagel, The Institude of Buddhist Studies, Tring, U.K., 1995.
• The Complete Enlightenment, Trong. & Com. By Cha’n Master Sheng-yen, London, 1999.
• The Diamond that cust through Illusion, Thich Nhat Hanh, California: Parallel Press: 1991.
• The Geneology of The Buddhas, Translation of the Buddhavaòsa, M.S. Bhat, M.V. Talim, Bombay, 1969.
• The Itivuttaka, ed. E. Windish; London: PTS, 1889, Tr. F.L.Woodward; Ivivuttaka: As It Was Said, London: Oxford University Press, 1948.
• The Jātaka, V. Fausboll, London: PTS, 1962; ed. E. B. Cowell, tr. by Robert Chalmers, Stories of the Buddha’s Former Births, 6 Vol., Low Price Publications, Delhi 52, rpt. 1993.
• The Mahā-praj–ā-pāramitā-±āstra of Nāgārjuna (tr. Kumāraj­va), T. 1509, Vol.25
• The Meaning of the Twofold Truth, Erh-ti-i, Chi-tsang, T 1854.
• The Prajnāpāramitā Literature, Edward Conze, Tokyo, 1978.
• The Sata-sāhasrikā Praj–ā Pāramitā, P. Ghose, Calcutta, 1902-13
• Thera-gāthā, H. Bendall, Journal of Royal Asiatic Society, 1883.
• Theri-gātha, R. Pischel, London: PTS, 1883.
• Vigrahavyāvartanī of Nāgārjuna, ed., tr. Kamaleswar Bhattacharya et al., The Dialectical methhod of Nāgārjuna, Delhi, 1990.
• Vinaya-piæaka, ed. H. Oldenberg, vol. I, London, 1879.
• Visuddhimagga, ed. Henry Clarke Warren and Dharmānanda, Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass, 1989; Bhikku „ānamoli, The Path Of Purification, Bhadantācariya Buddhaghoãa, Ch. XX, Singapore Buddhist Meditation Centre, Singapore, reprint by The Corporate Body of the Buddhist Educational Foundational, Taiwan.

 II. SECONDARY SOURCES

• Albert Einstein, Ideas and Opinions, Rupa & Co.London, 1973.
• Alfonso Verdu, Early Buddhist Philosophy, Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass, 1995.
• Bapat, P.V., 2500 Years of Buddhism, Ministry of Information and Broadcasting Government of India, 1919.
• Bapat, P.V., Vimuttimagga and Visuddhimagga, Poona, 1937.
• Beatrice Lane Suzuki, Mahayana Buddhism, London, Fourth edition 1980.
• Bhandarkar, R.G., Sects, (Vaiãônavism, Öaivism and Minor Religious Systems), Strassburg, 1913.
• Bimal Krishna Matilal, Epistemology, Logic, and Grammar in Indian Philosophical Literature, Paris: Mouton, 1971.
• Bimala Chum Law, A History of Pāli Literaturere, I, Indological Book House, 1983.
• Buddhadasa P. Kirthisinghe ed., Buddhism and Science, Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass, 1996.
• Egerton, Buddhism and Science, Sārnātha, 1959.
• Charles Elliot, Buddhism and Hinduism, II, London, 1968.
• Chatterjee, S., and Datta, D.M., An Introduction to Indian Philosophy, Calcutta, 1954.
• Choong Mun-Keat, The Notion of Emptiness in Early Buddhism, Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass, 2000.
• Chopra, N., Contribution of Buddhism to World Civilization and Culture, Delhi: S. Chand & Co. 1983.
• Daisetz Teitaro Suzuki, Outlines of Mahayana Buddhism, New York, sixth reprint: 1977.
• Daisetz Teitaro Suzuki, Studies in the Lankavatara Sutra (One of the most important Texts of Mahāyāna Buddhism in which almost all its principal Tenets are presented, including the teaching of Zen), Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass, 2000.
• Damien Koewn, The Nature of Buddhist Ethics, London: The Machillan Press, 1992.
• Dasgupta, S. N., A History of Indian Philosophy, I, Cambridge, 1963.
• Davids, T. W. Rhys, Buddhist India, Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass, rpt.1993.
• Davids, T.W. Rhys, The History and Literature of Buddhism, Susil Gupta Ltd, Calcutta, 1952.
• Dutt, N., Aspects of Mahayana Buddhism and Its Relation to Hinayana, London: Luzac & Co: 1930.
• Dutt, N., Mahayana Buddhism, Delhi, 1978.
• Donald S. Lopez, Jr., and Steven C. Rockefeller, The Christ and the Boddhisattva, Sri Satguru Publications, Delhi-7, 1992.
• Edmunds, A.J., Gospels (Buddhist and Christian Gospels), Tokyo, 1905.
• Edward Conze ed., Buddhist Scripture, England, 1959.
• Edward Conze, A short History of Buddhism, George Allen & Unwin LTD, London, 1980.
• Edward Conze, Buddhism: Its Essence and Development, Delhi, 1994.
• Edward Conze, Text, Sources, and Bibliography of the Praj–ā-pāramitā-hÙdaya, Journal of Royal Asiatic Society, 1948.
• Edward Conze, Thirty Years of Buddhist Studies, Bruno Cassier (Publisher) LTD, Oxford, London, 1967.
• Edward J. Kormondy, Concept of Ecology, Prenticehall of India, Private Limited, New Delhi: 110001, 1991.
• Ehrlich, Paul R. and Ehrlich, Anna H., Population Resources Environmental, San Francisco: Freeman, 1972.
• Fernando Tola Carmen Dragonetti, On Voidness (A Study of Buddhist Nihilism), Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass, 1995.
• Fritjof Capra, The Turning Point, London: Flamingo, 9^th 1982.
• Fukui, Bunyū: A Historical Study on the Praj–ā Heart Sūtra, Tokyo: Shunjūsha, 1987.
• Sutton, Existence and Enlightenment in the Lankavatara Sutra, New York, 1991.
• Gandhi, M.K., In Search of the Suprems, vol. I, Navajivan publishing House, Ahmedabad, 1962.
• Gandhi, M.K., Prayer, Navajivan publishing House, Ahmedabad.
• Garbe, R., Christentum, (Indien und das Christenthum), Tubingen, 1914.
• Garma C.C. Chang, Buddhist Teaching of Totality, Great Britain: The Pennsylvania State University, 1972.
• Gunapala Dharmasiri, Fundamentals of Buddhist Ethics, The Buddhist Research Society, Singapore, 1986.
• Hajime Nakamura, Indian Buddhism, A Bibliographical Survey, Delhi: MLBD, rpt. 1983.
• Har Dayal, The Bodhisattva Doctrine in Buddhist Sanskrit Literature, Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass, rpt. 1999.
• Hardy, R. S., A Manual of Buddhism, Varanasi, 1967.
• Henepola Gunaratana, The Path of Serenity and Insight, Delhi: Motilal Banarasidass, 1985.
• Hsueh Li Cheng, Empty Logic, Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass, 1991.
• Huntington, C.W. with Geshe Namgyal Wangchen, The Emptiness of Emptiness, Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass, 1992.
• Huntington, C.W., An Introduction to Early Indian Mādhyamika, London, 1957.
• I-Ching, ‘Öūnyatā and Paradigm-Shift: Dialogue between Buddhism and Science’ included in Öramaôa Vidyā Studies in Buddhism, Prof. Jagannath Upadhyaya Commemoration Volume I, Sarnath, Varanasi, India: Central Institute of Higher Tibetan Studies, 1987, pp. 81-100.
• Isaline, B. Horner, The Early Buddhist Theory of Man Perfected: A Study of the Arahanta, London: Williams & Northgate Ltd., 1979.
• Jayatillaka, K.N., Early Buddhist Theory of Knowledge, Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass, 1963.
• Junjiro Takakusu, The Essentials of Buddhist Philosophy, Honolulu, 1947.
• K’uei-chi (632-682), Suttle Complement on the Mahāpraj–āpāramitā-hÙdaya-sūtra, Taisho. 33 (No. 1710).
• Kanai Lal Hazra, The Rise and Decline of Buddhism in India, Munshiram, M.Publishers, 1995.
• Karunaratane, W.S., The Theory of Causality, Colombo, 1978.
• Karunaratne, W.S., Buddhism: its Religion and Philosophy, Buddhist Research Society, Singapore, 1988.
• Kern, H., Manual of Indian Buddhism, published in Karl J. Trubner’s Classical Research Series-Strassburg 1898, ed. C.Mani, Bharti Ya Kala Prakashah, Delhi, rpt. 1992.
• Kimura Taiken, Japanese ed., tr. by T. Quang Do, Dai thua Phat giao Tu tuong luan, Sai gon, 1969.
• Kimura Taiken, Japanese ed., tr. by T. Quang Do, Tieu thua Phat giao Tu tuong luan, tap II, Sai gon, 1979.
• Kogen Mizuno with a foreword by J.W. de Jong, Essentials of Buddhism, Tokyo, 1996.
• Kogen Mizuno, Basic Buddhist Concepts, Charles S. Terry and Richard L. Gage, Tokyo, 4^th rpt. 1994.
• Krishnamurti, J., Education and the Signification of Life, Krishnamurti Foundation India, 1994.
• A. de Silva, The Four Essential Doctrines of Buddhism, Colombo, 1948.
• La Vallee Poussin, L. de, Encyclopedia of religion and ethics 2: 739-753, 1916.
• Leslie S. Kawamura ed. & introduced, The Boddhisattva Doctrine in Buddhism, Sri Satguru Publications, Delhi-7, 1997.
• Mc. Govern, An Introduction to Mahayana Buddhism, London, 1922.
• Marion L. Matics (Tr.), Entering the Path of Enlightenment, London, George Allen and Unwin, 1970.
• Masao Abe, Buddhism and Interfaith Dialogue, Ed. Steven Heine, Hong Kong, 1995.
• McMrindle, J.M., India (Ancient India), London, 1877.
• Minh Chi - Ha Thuc Minh, Dai Cuong Triet Hoc Dong Phuong, Truong Dai hoc Tong Hop, TPHCM, 1993.
• Mittal, K. K., Vij–avada (Yogacara) and its Tradition, Delhi, 1993.
• Mittal, K.K., Sunyavada, Delhi, 1993.
• Murti, T.R.V., The Central Philosophy of Buddhism: A Study of the Mādhyamika System, Delhi: Harper Collins, 1998.
• Musashi Tachikawa, An introduction to the philosophy of Nāgārjuna, Delhi, 1997.
• Myers, P.V.N., General History, Boston, 1919.
• Nakamura, H., Indian Buddhism, Delhi: Motial Banarsidass, rpt. 1996.
• Nalinaksha Dutt, Buddhist Sects in India, Motilal Banarsidass, 2^nd 1978.
• Nathan Katz, Buddhist Images of Human Perfect, Motilal Banarsidass,
• Obermiller, E., A Study of the Twenty Aspects of Öūnyatā, Idian Historical Quarterly, Vol. IX, 1933.
• Pande, Govind Chandra, Studies in the Origins of Buddhism, Delhi: Motilal Banarsidas, 1995.
• Paul Williams, Mahāyāna Buddhism-The Doctrinal Foundation, New York, 4^th 1998.
• Paul Williams, Studies on the philosophy of the Bodhicaryavatara: Altruism and Reality, Delhi: Motilal Banarsidas, 2000.
• Peter Harvey, An Introdution to Buddhism, Delhi: Munshiram Manoharlal, 1990.
• Prabhu, R.K. and Rao, U.R., The Mind of Mahatma Gandhi, Navajivan publishing House, Ahmedabad, 1969.
• Radhakrishnan, Indian Philosophy, 2 Vols., Delhi, 1993.
• Rahula, S. Walpola, What the Buddha taught, Buddhist Cultural Centre, Srilanka, 1996.
• Ramanan, V., Nagarjuna’s philosophy, Delhi, 1978.
• Richard F. Gombrich, How Buddhism Began, Munshiram Manoharlal Publishers Pvt. Ltd. 1997.
• Richard, G., Sunyata: Objective referent or via negative? Religious studies 14 (2): 251-260, 1978.
• Rogers, R.A., A Short History of Ethics, London, 1962.
• S Rinpoche, C. Mani ed. with Introduction by T.R.V. Murti, Mādhyamika Dialectic and the Philosophy of Nāgārjuna, (The Dalai Lama Tibetan Indology Studies vol. I), Sarnath, 1977.
• Sangharakshita, The Eternal Legacy, Tharpa Publications, London, 1985.
• Sharma, T. R., An Introduction to Buddhist Philosophy, Delhi: Eastern Book Linkers, 1994.
• Shohei Ichimua, Buddhist Critical Spirituality: Praj–ā and Öūnyatā, Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass, 2001.
• Sir Charles Eliot, Hinduism and Buddhism, Routledge & Kegan Paul LTD, London, rpt.1971.
• Sorensen, S., An Index to the Names in the Mahābhārata, London, 1904.
• Sorokin, Pitirim A., Social and Cultural Dynamics, 4 vols., New York: American Book Company, 1937-41.
• Stcherbatsky, Madhyānta-vibhāga, Discrimination between Middle and Extremes, Calcata, 1971.
• Streng, F., Emptiness: A Study in Religious Meaning, Nashville, 1967.
• Sue Hamilton, Early Buddhism: A New Approach, The I of the Beholder, Great Britain: 2000.
• Suzuki, D.T., Mahayana Buddhism, London, 1956.
• Suzuki, D.T., Outlines of Mahayana Buddhism, New York, 1977.
• Suzuki, D.T., Studies in The LaÏkāvatāra Sutra, Routledge & Kegan Pual LTD., London, rpt. 1975.
• Thomas, E.J., Buddhism, London, 1934.
• Toynbee, A. Daisaku Ikeda, Man Himself Must Choose, I. Ltd., Tokyo & Usa, 1976.
• Trevor Ling, Buddha, Marx and God, The Macmillan Press LTD, London: 1979.
• Ty kheo Thich Minh Chau (tr.), Chuyen Tien Than Duc Phat, Vien Nghien Cuu Phat Hoc Viet Nam, 1991.
• Vaidya, P.L., Dasānvhikasūtra Buddhist Sanskrit Texts No.7, Darbhanga, Mithila Institute of Post-graduate Studies & Research in Sanskrit Learning, 1967.
• Dr. K. Sri Dhammananda, Buddhism as a Religion, Malaysia, 2000.
• K. Sri Dhammananda, What Buddhists Believe, Malaysia, 1999.
• Narada Maha Thero, Vision of the Buddha, Singapore, Singapore Buddhist Meditation Centre.
• Narada Mahathera, The Buddha, in ‘Gems of Buddhist Wisdom’, The Corporate Body of the Buddha Educational Foundation, Taiwan, 1996.
• Sumangala Thera, Buddhism in Analysis, Colombo, 1979.
• Venkatramanan K., Nāgārjuna’s Philosophy, Delhi, 1978.
• Walpola Rahula, Zen and The Taming of The Bull, London, 1978.
• Wang Chi Buu, A Scientist’s Report on Study of Buddhist Scripture, Corporate Body of the Buddha Education Foundation, Taipei, Taiwan, R.O.C.
• Warder, A.K., Indian Buddhism, Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass, rpt. 1997.
• Warren, H.C., Buddhism in Translation, Cambridge, 1922.
• Watanabe, H.B., Philosophy and its Development in the Nikāyas and Abhidhamma, Delhi, 1996.
• William James, The Varieties of Religious Experience, Longmans, Green and Co., 1941.

III. DICTIONARIES, ENCYCLOPEADIAS AND PERIODICALS 

• A Dictionary of Chinese Buddhist Terms (中 英 佛 學 辭 典), with Sanskrit and English Equivalents, Compiled by William Edward Soothill and Lewis Hodous, Taiwan, 1994.
• A Sanskrit English Dictionary, Etymologically and Philologically Arranged with Special reference to Cognate Indo-European Languages, 14^th, Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass, 1997.
• Dictionary of Buddhist Hybrid Sanskrit, Edgerton Franklin, New Haven: Yale University Press, 1953.
• Dictionary of Pāli Proper Names, P. Malalasekera, 2 vols, London: Pāli Text Society, vol. II, 1960.
• Encyclopaedia of Buddhism, G.P. Malalasekera, Government of Ceylon, Colombo, 1971.
• Journal of Dharma, Dharma Research Association, Bangalore, 1997.
• Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society, London, 1906.
• Manual of Buddhist Terms and Doctrines, Nyanatiloka, The Corporate Body of the Buddha Educational Foundation, Taiwan, 1970.
• Oxford Advanced Learner’s Dictionary, A.P. Cowie (ed.), Oxford University Press, Great Britan, 4^th 1991.
• Pāli-English Dictionary by T.W. Rhys Davids and William Stede, Motilal Banarsidass Publishes, Pvt, Ltd. Delhi, 1993.
• The Encyclopaedia of Religion, Mircea Eliade, Vol. II, Collier Macmillan Publishers, London, 1987.
• The Journal ‘The Maha Bodhi’, vol. 80 –Oct. & Nov., Delhi, 1972.
• Tu Dien Phat Hoc Han Viet, (Dictionary of Vietnamese-Chinese Buddhist Terms) Phan vien phat hoc xuat ban, Viet Nam: Ha Noi, 1992.

INDEX

A

€gama (阿 含) 369

€ksa (無為) 214

€kśagarbha Bodhisattva (虛 空 藏 菩 薩) 130       

€ki–ca––yatana (無 所 有 處 定) 77, 170

€lra Klma (尉 陀 迦 羅 羅) 77

€layavijñna  (阿 賴 耶 識) 392

€loka (無 色 界) 191, 252

€nanda (阿 難) 92, 136, 142-8, 153-4, 160, 164, 169-71, 176-7, 239, 359-60, 372, 376

€srava-visamyukta (無 漏) 114, 363

€sraya (所 依) 392

€tmahitaò (自 利) 272

€varaÏas (障) 368, 392

€veÏika-dharmas (不 共 法) 57

€yatana (處) 145-5, 165, 242

€yu (壽 命) 365

Aãædasashasrik Praj–pramit (十八千頌 般 若 波 羅 密 經)  182, 377-8, 380

Aãæashasrik Prajñ-pramit    (八千頌般 若波羅 密 經) 182, 291, 388, 390-1

Aææhôgika-magga  (八正道) 362

Aææhrasa abhabbaææhnni (十八不共法) 57

Aææhaslin­ (殊 勝 義 論) 375

Aôguttara Nikya (增 支 部 經) 37

Abh­n­hra (根 原) 276-7

Abhva-±‰yat (非 無 有 的 不 實 本 質) 250

Abhva (非 有) 190, 216

Abhva-svabhva-±‰nyat (無 法 有 法 空 的 不 實 本 質) 249

Abhayadna (無 畏 施) 294

Abhi––a (勝 智) 384

Abhidhamma / Abhidharma (阿 毘 曇 論) 101-2, 225-6

Abhidharmako±a (俱 舍 論) 367

Abhidharma-mahvibhs-±stra (大 毘 婆 沙 論) 369, 371

Abhimukh­ Bh‰mi (現 前 地) 355

Abhisamay€laòkrkarik (現 觀 莊 嚴 論) 378, 392

Abhisamaylaòkrloka (莊 嚴 證 道 歌 論) 245 

Acal Bh‰mi (不 動 地) 356

Acala, dh­ra (安 靜) 215

Accantasukha (安 樂) 215

Accuta (不 死) 215

Acintyadhtu (難 誦 的 本 體) 220

Adhiææhnasu––aò (願 空) 251

Adhi-±īla (善 戒)  337

Adhi-citta (善 心)  337

Adhimukti / Atimukti (善 思 惟) 264, 278

Adhi-prajñ (善 慧)  337

Adhytma-±‰nyat (內 空 的不 實 本 質) 246

Adhytma-bahirdh-±‰nyat (內 外 空 的 不 實 本 質)  247

Adhyardhasatiku Praj–pramit (一 百 五 十 頌 般 若 波 羅 密 經) 182

Advaya / advaydh­kra  (不分) 220

Advayavda (說 不 二) 226

Aggasu––aò (最 上 空) 251

Ajjhattasu––aò (內 空) 251

Akãaya, Dhuva (永 久) 267

Aklika (無 生 不 滅) 70

Akãobhiya (阿 畜 坒 佛) 380

Akãobhya-tathgatasya-vy‰ha    (阿畜 佛 國 經) 380

Akaniãæha (色 究 竟 天) 389

Alatacakka (熱 輪 車) 194

Amata (道 果 無 生 不 滅) 214

Ambu‑candra (球 周) 194

Amitbha Buddha (阿 彌 陀 佛) 118, 121, 380

Angmi (不 來) 54

Ansrave dhatu, (無 漏 界)  114, 363, 365, 383

Anantavikrmin Bodhisattva (無 量 力 菩 薩) 132

Ananyatathat (獨 一) 220

Anatt (無 我)  145-6, 149-54, 158-61, 165, 195, 253

Anauplambha-±‰nyat (過 去,現 在,未 來 的 不 實 本 質) 249

Anavakra-±‰nyat (非 夫 定 的 不 實 本 質) 248

Anavargra-±‰nyat (無 始, 無 終 的 不 實 本 質) 248

Andhakas (按 達 羅) 115, 365-6

Anidasscananaò (無 屬 性) 172

Aniksiptadhura Bodhisattva (不 休 息 菩 薩) 132

Animitt dhtu (法 無 相) 138, 157

Anitya / Anicc (無 常) 105, 140, 145, 153, 159, 195

Anna Kondanna / A jnata Kaundinya (阿 惹 橋 陳 如) 78

Anutpdaj–na (無 再 生)  366

Anutpda-j–na (無 生 智)  369

Anutpattikadharma-kãnti (無 生 法 忍) 308

Anuttar Samyaksambodhi (阿 耨 多 羅 三 藐 三 菩 提 , 無 上 正 等 正 覺)  45, 351

Anuttara P‰j (無 上 供 養)  272

Apadna (譬 喻 經 ) 285

Aparagodna  (西 牛 貨 州) 387

Apariypanna-dhtu / Lokuttara-dhtu (超界)  214

Aparyanta (無 限) 267

Appanihita (無 貪) 155

Appatisarana (無 處 歸 依) 372

Apramda (不 放 逸) 313

Aprameya, Avatra (無 量) 114, 267

Ar‰pa dhtu (無 色 界) 162

Arahanta (阿 羅 漢) 46, 48, 51-4, 58, 66, 69-0, 103, 105-12, 114, 172, 188, 352, 359

Arahathood ( 阿 羅 漢 果) 362

Arati (不 如 意) 83

Arciãmat­ Bh‰mi  (焰 慧 地) 355

Ariya sacca  (四 妙 諦) 362, 368

ArthaèÙtya  (利 行) 349

Asaôga  (無 著) 309

Asaôkhata  (無為) 69

Asaôkheyya kalpas (阿 增 祇 劫)  333, 350

AsaòskÙta-±‰nyat (無 為 的 不 實 本 質) 248

AsaòskÙta±unyat (非 無 為) 191

Ashvaghoãa (馬 鳴) 190, 233

Asmi-mna (我 慢) 151

Asravas (漏 惑) 214

Assaji / Asvajit (圠 坒 / 馬 勝) 53

Attnuditthi (我見) 150

Atyanta-±‰nyat (無 限 的 不 實 本 質) 248

Avadna-Öataka (阿 杷 陀 那, 譬 喻 集) 291

Avadna-Cataka (撰 集 百 緣 經)  291

Avaivartika / Avinivartan­ya (不 退 轉) 280, 302, 346

Avalokite±vara Bodhisattva (觀 世 音 菩 薩) 118, 128-9, 132, 185, 200, 202, 256, 258, 263, 266, 300, 330, 344, 357

Avasavattana (不 支 浿) 150

Avijj (無 明) 94-5, 162, 166, 172

Aviparysatathat (無 遍) 220

Avitathat (不 非 真 理) 220

Avykrta (無 記) 216

B

Bahiddhsu––aò (外 空) 72

Bahirdh-±‰nyat (外空的不實本質) 247

Balni (十 力) 56, 78 

Bala (力) 279, 290-1, 330

Bh­ (驚 駭)  83

Bhgavatas (帗 伽 盛)  118

Bh‰mi (地) 263, 350-1, 353, 383

Bh‰takoæ­ (實濟) 220

Bh‰tatathat (一 如, 如 如, 真 如) 265, 267, 279

Bhvbhva-parmar±akãayo

nirvÏam     (勝 義 諦 的 涅 槃) 217, 251

Bhva-±‰nyat (有空的不實本質) 250

Bhva (有) 190, 216, 250

Bhaddiya /  Bhadhrika (帗 提 / 婆 提) 78

Bhadrapla Bodhisattva (賢 首 菩 薩) 132

Bhagavat / Bhagav (世 尊) 56, 62, 108-0, 358, 364, 373-4

Bhaiãajyarja Bodhisattva (藥 王 菩 薩) 132, 298

Bhakti, Saddh (信) 36, 115-0, 333 

Bhava-dÙãæ (現 有)  216

Bhikãus / bhikkhu (比 丘) 72, 227, 359

Boddhisattva-yna (菩 薩 乘) 325

Bodhi (菩提) 37, 42, 44-5, 64, 103, 111, 123, 162, 185, 200, 226

Bodhicaryvatra (菩 薩 藏 經) 43, 263, 271, 291

Bodhicitta (菩 提 心) 35, 103, 263-8, 270, 275, 278-82

Bodhicittotpda-s‰tra-Öastra (菩提心論 經) 281

Bodhipkãika (菩 提 分) 378, 392 Bodhipakã­kadharmas (三十七助道品)  340

BodhipraÏidhicitta (菩 提 心 願) 280-1

Bodhiprasthnacitta (菩 提 心 行)  280-1

Bodhiruci (菩 提 留 志 ) 184

Bodhisatta (菩 薩) 19, 29, 31, 36-7, 44, 59-0, 62-5, 71-4, 77-9, 92-3, 95, 97, 99, 112, 127, 176, 261, 275, 278, 286-7, 290, 333, 396

Bodhisattva (菩 薩) 19, 34-9, 41-6, 50, 54-9, 61, 64, 68-0, 72, 99, 100-3, 105-8, 112, 115-35, 185, 188, 190-2, 200, 202, 205-8, 215, 223, 227, 229, 232, 238, 255-6, 258, 261-331, 333-6, 338, 340-56, 363, 366-8, 377-8, 382-92, 396, 399-01

Bodhisattva-bh‰mika S‰tra (菩 薩 地 經) 269, 272, 279, 280, 282, 291, 303, 307, 353

Bodhisattva-cry (菩薩行) 261-3, 292, 368, 397

Bodhisattva-gotra (菩 薩 種 性) 279

Bodhisattvahood (菩薩果) 33, 265, 267, 284

Bodhisattva-piæaka (菩 薩 藏) 279

BrhmaÏa (婆 羅 門) 119, 358, 373, 381

Brhmanism (婆 羅 門 教)  119

Brahmacariya (梵 行)  106

Brahmaloka (梵 天)  359

Buddha (佛 陀) 1, 16, 19, 21-3, 26, 28-32, 34-9, 43-7, 50-74, 92-3, 96-80, 110-9, 122, 128-32, 136-7, 140-2, 145-6, 149, 153-6, 158-9, 161-71, 173-8, 180, 183, 187-0, 193-8, 200, 202, 205, 208, 210, 216, 221-35, 237, 240-3, 245, 256-8, 261-2, 266-9, 271-81, 283, 293-02, 305-6, 308-13, 316-0, 323-8, 330, 332, 334-8, 341, 343-94, 396, 398-02, 404

Buddhaghoãa (佛 音) 274-5

Buddhahood (佛果) 43, 54, 102, 112, 114, 204, 229, 236, 281, 284, 310-1, 330, 334, 336, 349, 351-2, 358, 361, 363, 382

Buddha-kãetra (佛 剎) 113,

Buddha-kya (佛 身) 358

Buddhatva (佛 性) 267

Buddhavaòsa (佛史) 285

Buddhism (佛 教) 15, 17-0, 23-4, 26-34, 36-8, 45-7, 50-3, 55, 58, 63, 67-8, 70, 97, 99-06, 111-2, 116-24, 127-0, 135, 140, 152-3, 159, 162, 166, 168-9, 173, 181, 187-9, 195, 210, 212, 221-2, 236, 249, 251, 258, 264-6, 277, 284, 339-0, 342-3, 353-8, 364, 380-1, 396-7, 400-1, 404                                        

C

C‰la-su––at-sutta (小 空 經) 148, 152, 155, 176

Cakkavatt­ / Cakravartin (轉 論 王) 64

Cariypiæaka (所 行 藏) 285

Catu¾-saògraha-vastu (四 攝 法) 341

Channa (沙 匿) 77

Chatuãkoæi-vinirmukta (四 否 定 類) 192, 232, 255

Citta (心) 103, 108, 110

D

D­gha Nikya (長 部 經) 66

Dna Pramī (下 分 布 施) 332

Dna Paramattha pramī (上 分 布 施) 333

Dna Uppapramī (中 分 布 施) 333

Dna (布 施) 283, 285-6, 290-6, 300-1, 306, 332-5, 337-41, 349, 355

Dnapala (陀 那 杷 羅 ) 184

D‰raôgam Bh‰mi (遠 行 地) 189

DÙsæi (觀 念) 219

Da±a-bh‰mika S‰tra (十 地 經) 265, 291, 352-3

Da±a-ku±ala-karma-patha (十善 業 道) 264

Dasabala Kassapa / Dasabala Kasyapa (十 力 迦 葉)  78

Dasasahasrik Praj–-pramit    (十 千 頌 般 若 波 羅 密   經) 182

Dausthulyas (二 障) 392

Devas (諸 天) 46-8, 62

Dhtus, Loka (界) 63, 65-6, 137, 154-5, 158, 161, 214, 220-1, 242, 250, 274, 277, 363, 381-2, 386-8

Dhamma-cakka-pavattana-vaggo (經 轉 法 論) 256

Dhammadinn (法 那) 109

Dhammapada (法 句 經) 21, 25, 65, 70, 83, 158, 175

Dhammapatisarana (歸 依 法) 373

Dharma- nairtmya (法 空) 36, 192, 196, 322, 362, 368, 378

Dharma / Dhamma (法) 28-0, 40-50, 53-6, 64, 69-1, 84-5, 87, 102, 104, 114-6, 127-9, 131, 159, 162, 168, 177, 180, 189-0, 193-4, 196, 200, 206-9, 220-32, 234-6, 246, 248, 256, 258, 261-2, 272, 274-5, 294-8, 306, 308-9, 314-5, 318-23, 327, 336, 345-7, 349, 350, 353, 356, 358, 365, 367-8, 371-3, 377-8, 380-1, 389, 393-4, 398

DharmabhÏaka (法 師) 379

Dharmacandra (法月) 184

Dharma-dna (法 施) 293

Dharmadhtu (法 界) 381

Dharmagupta (達 摩 鋦 多) 184

Dharmakãnti (法 忍) 308

Dharma-kya (法 身) 114-5, 377, 393-5, 404

Dharma-kya-jñna (法 身 智) 377

Dharmamegh Bh‰mi (法 云 地) 356

Dharmaparyya (法 門) 298-0

Dharma-saôgraha (法數名集經異本) 291

Dharmasthiti (本 體 諸 法) 220

Dharmatnisyanda Buddha (法 性 等 流佛) 388

Dhyna (禪 定) 290-1, 316-7, 338-8, 355, 384

Dignga (陳 那) 191-2, 245

Dveãa (瞋) 105

Dosa (疾 妒) 51, 214

Dubhatosu––aò (假 空) 251

Duhkha (苦) 140

E

Ekarasa (同 一)  175, 215

Ekattasu––aò (惟 空) 215

Ekavyvahrika  (一 部 說) 368

Esansu––aò (欲 空) 251

F

Fa-cheng (施 護) 184

G

GÙdhrak‰ta (靈 鷲) 200, 386

GÙhasthas (人) 386

Gadgadasvara Bodhisattva (妙 音 菩 薩) 299, 344

Gandavy‰ha /€vaòsaka-s‰tra     (華 嚴 經) 102, 129, 189, 386

Gandharvas / gandhabba‑nagara (乾 撻 婆) 194, 295

Ganga (恆 河) 35, 300-1, 347

Gautama / Gotama Buddha (瞿 曇 佛) 28, 55, 58-9, 61-2, 64-7, 70, 72, 74, 98-9, 113, 115-6

Gotama Boddhisatta (瞿 曇 菩 薩) 31, 77-8, 83-4

Gotama Siddhattha (瞿 曇 士 達 多) 59-0, 67, 69, 75-6, 82, 93, 96

GuÏas (功 德) 390

H

HÙdaya S‰tra (心 經) 197, 200-2, 220, 223, 226, 239, 253-7, 402

H­nayna (小 乘) 105-6, 189, 192, 226, 252, 261, 271-2, 285, 352, 387-8, 399

Haribhadra (師 子 賢) 191, 245-6, 252, 385

Hsuan-tsang (玄 莊) 184, 186

I

Isipatana (諸 天 墮 處) 256

Itivuttaka (如 是 語 經) 173, 214, 294

I-tsing (義 淨) 184

J

J–na (智) 291, 331-4, 339

J–na-sambhra (智 資) 128

Jtaka (本 生 經) 59, 71-3, 121, 127, 277, 285-8, 361

Jti (生) 214

Jambudvīpa (閻 浮 提) 354, 387 

JarmaraÏa (老 死) 221

Jina (禪 那) 384

Jñntman (真 智) 392

Jñna (成 智)  291, 392

JñeyvaraÏa (所 知 障) 392

K

Kãnti (忍 辱) 290, 304, 306-0, 355

KãaÏika / KãaÏika (剎 那) 105, 366

Kãaya (遍 滅) 217

Kãaya-j–na (盡 智) 366, 369

Kcilindika (迦 亶 鄰 陀) 376

Klma s‰tra (迦 羅 摩 經) 24

Kma dhtu (欲 界) 175

Krma (業) 30, 175

Kraϯavy‰ha S‰tra (莊 嚴 經) 357

Kraka (造 作 者) 242

Kãtigarbha Bodhisattva (地 藏 菩 薩) 130

KÙtynusthnajñna (成 所 作 智) 382

Kakusandha (拘 留 尊) 66-7

Kalpa (劫 杷) 66-7

Kalpan vikalpa (妄 想 分 別)  119

Kalpan (妄 想) 119, 216

KalyÏamitra (善 友) 279

Karuρ (悲) 158, 267, 342

Karuρpuϯarka (慈 悲 蓮 華 經) 291

Kassapa (迦 葉) 78

Kathvatthu (辯 邂 論) 364-7, 370, 374

Khandha (蘊) 155, 162, 164

Khantisu––a (忍 空) 251

Khaya (斷 滅) 214

Khuddhaka Nikya (小 部 經) 251

Khupips (餓 渴) 83

Kle±varaÏa (煩 惱 障) 227, 341, 368, 392

KoÏagamana (拘 那 含 牟 尼) 66

Kosala (橋 薩 羅 ) 382

Kriy (作) 242, 384

Ksetrs (剎) 113, 368

Kumarajiva (摎 摩 羅 什) 183-4, 186

Kurukulaka (計 引 部) 368

Kāma (快 樂) 83, 367

L

Lbha (成 達) 83

LaÏkvatra / S‰trlaòkra S‰tra (楞 伽 經) 189, 228, 322, 352, 377, 388, 379

LakãaÏa-±‰nyat (相 的 不 實 本 質) 249

LakãaÏa / lakkhana / Nimit (相) 151-2, 208, 217, 221, 357

LakkhhÏasu––aò (相 空) 250

Lalitavistara (神 通 遊 戲 經) 47, 113, 189, 228, 266, 291, 375-7, 397

Lokrhitaò (利 他) 272

Lokadhtus (世 界) 381-2, 363, 386-8

Lokottara (出 世 間) 34, 113

Lokottaravda (說 出 世 部) 365, 368

M

Mdhyamika-KrikvÙtti (中 觀 論 頌) 215, 277, 358

Mra (魔 王) 53, 62

My (幻 覺) 227, 323

Ma–ju±ri Bodhisattva (文 殊 師 利 菩 薩) 128, 305, 330

Madhynata-vibhaôgaæ­k (中 邊 分 別 論 疏 ) 245

Madhyama pratipada (中 觀 論) 209-12, 254

Magga (道) 92, 242

Mahdruma (大 鼓) 381 

Mahkassapa  (大 迦 葉) 109

Mahmya (摩 耶) 75

Mahmudr (大 首 印) 303

Mahnma-kuliya (摩 訶 南 拘  厘) 78

Mahp‰rÏa-laksaÏas  (大 滿 相) 390

Mah-praj–-pramit-±stra (大 智 度 論) 303

Mahratnak‰æa S‰tra (大 寶 積 經) 296

MahsÏghika (大 眾 部) 115, 371, 379

Mahsattva (摩 訶 薩) 132-3, 285, 295, 298-9, 305, 311, 344-5, 347-8, 351

Mahsthmaprpta Bodhisattva  (大 勢 志 菩 薩) 130

Mah-Su––at-S‰tra (大 空  經) 140, 146

Mahsukha (大 樂) 265

Mahvastu (佛 本 幸 集 經 異 本) 47, 264, 273, 291, 352, 366, 369, 370

Mahvikrmin Bodhisattva (大 力 菩 薩) 132

Mahvy‰ha Samdhi (大 莊 嚴 定) 376

Mahvyutpatti (名 義 大 集 經) 291

Mahyna Buddhism (大 乘 佛 教) 19-0, 32, 45, 58, 67, 101-7, 112, 114, 118, 122, 124-5, 128-0, 187, 189-0, 193-5, 200, 202, 210, 212-4, 216, 226, 234, 245, 256, 259, 265-6, 268, 284, 295, 324, 330, 345, 351-2, 379, 380, 384-5, 403

Mahyna-s‰trlaôkra (大 乘 大 莊 嚴 經) 114, 132, 275, 291

Mahyna-sutras (大 乘 經 典) 19, 31, 47, 102, 114-5, 117, 121, 124, 131-4, 161, 180, 192, 228, 230-1, 241, 245-6, 251, 253, 259, 261-2, 292, 296, 320, 325, 329, 331, 350-4, 361, 374, 376, 397, 386, 389, 391, 393-4, 396, 398-401

Maitreya Bodhisattva (彌 勒 菩 薩) 296, 305

Maitreya Buddha (彌 勒 佛) 130

Majjhima Nikya (中 部 經) 338, 359

Makkha-thambha (匪 謗, 固 執) 83

Manasikaroti ekattam (同作意) 143, 147, 152

Mano-praÏidhi (意 願) 275

Marici (焰 喻) 193

Maurya (孔爵) 100, 119

Metta (慈) 289, 291

Milindapa–ha (那 仙 問 答 經) 111

Mogallna (目 犍 蓮) 109

Moha (痴) 105

Mudit, Pīti (喜) 158, 342

N

Ngrjuna (龍 樹) 43, 128, 131, 193-4, 197, 203, 205, 209, 212, 215-6, 224, 231, 235, 237, 240-2, 266, 322, 377, 382, 389

Nma-r‰pa-pariccheda (心 法 分 別) 162

Nnattasu––aò (慧 空) 251

Nibbna (涅 槃) 50, 52-3, 61, 64, 78, 84, 142, 159, 170-6, 213-5, 230, 252-3, 257-8, 322, 361, 372

N­rvÏa (涅 槃) 192, 200, 207, 213, 215-7, 219-24, 226-7, 229, 230-1, 234, 236-7, 247, 250, 254, 258-9, 269, 274, 279-0, 325, 329, 331, 334, 348, 383

Nstikas (虛 無 主 義 者) 233

N­varaÏas   (纏 蓋 ) 51

N’eva sa–– n’sa––yatana (非 想 非 非 想 處) 78

Nairtmya (遠 離) 200

Nekkhamòa (出 世) 287

Niãprapa–ca (戲 論) 119, 390

Nibbuta (解 脫 者) 167, 242

Nidnas (因 緣) 162-3, 221, 253

NirmÏa kya (應身, 貨身) 363, 376-7, 381-2, 384, 390

NirmÏamegha (應 化 云) 382

Nirupdhi±eãa  (解 脫 最 後) 215

Nirupadhi±eãa Nibbna (無 餘 涅 槃) 174

Nirvikalpa, niãprapa–ca (無分  別) 219, 390

NissaraÏasu––aò (捨 空) 250

Nisyanda (等 流) 377, 388

P

PÙiyavacana (愛 語) 349

Pli  / Pa–ca Nikyas / Suttas (杷厘 經 藏)  27-8, 52, 74, 96, 101, 111, 128, 140, 149, 188, 192, 256, 276, 396-7, 400

Ppde±an (懺 悔) 262

P‰rÏacandra Bodhisattva (滿 月 菩 薩) 132

Pramit, Pārami (波 羅 密)  45, 73, 103, 132, 282-9, 291-2, 295, 300-1, 304, 306, 316, 318, 322, 332, 335-6, 398

PÙthagjana (凡 夫) 209

PÙthiv­-dhtu (地 大) 220

P‰tikya (不 淨) 201, 373

Pa––dhika Bodhisatta (智 慧 菩 薩) 333

Pa–cavim±ati-shasrik Praj–-pramit     (二 萬 五 千 頌 般 若 波 羅 密 經 )  182, 246, 378, 382, 387

Paæiccasamuppda (緣 起) 161-2, 164-9, 387

Paæilbhasu––aò (樂 空) 251

Paæivedhasu––aò (俉 空) 251

Paccaya-pariggaha (隨 緣) 155

Pacceka (Pratyeka)-buddha (辟 支 佛) 45-6, 54-5, 58

Parabhva (真 體) 190

Parabhva-s‰nyat (第 一 有 空 的 不 實 本 質) 250

Paramrtha-satya (真 諦) 149, 155, 192-3, 200, 235

Paramaò sukkhaò (最 上 安 樂) 69

Paramatthasu––aò (勝 義 諦 空) 251

Parasambhogakya (他受用身) 378, 386

Pariggahasu––aò (持 空) 251

ParinirvÏa S‰tra (般 涅 槃 經) 132, 383

Pariyoghanasu––aò (入 空) 251

Parmrtha-±‰nyat (真 空 的 不 實 本 質) 247

Pataliputra (華 侍 成) 123, 188

Patippassadhisu––aò (輕 安 空) 251

Phassa (觸) 162, 165, 306

Phena (浮 水) 194

PraÏidhna (願) 274-6, 278, 290, 326-7, 329

Prabhkar­ Bh‰mi (法 光 地) 355

Prabhva (發 光) 265

Praj– (智 慧) 21, 95, 186, 216, 267-8, 281, 290, 320, 323, 332, 337-9

Praj– (大 慧) 186

Praj–cakra (慧 眼) 186

Praj–-pramit S‰tras (般 若 波 羅 密 經) 102, 181, 183-5, 189-91, 198, 200-2, 229, 239, 252, 255-7, 309, 352, 386, 393, 396-7, 400

Praj–-pramit (智 慧 波 羅 密) 255, 257, 290, 301, 309, 320, 322-3, 332, 336, 338-9, 352, 355, 378, 388, 397

PrakÙti-±‰nyat (自 性 的 不 實本 質) 249

PrakÙtytmabhva (真自性) 387

Pralna±‰ra Bodhisattva (勇 施 菩 薩) 132

Pramudit Bh‰mi (歡 喜 地) 355

Prat­tya-samutpda (緣 起, 因 緣 生 起) 135, 149, 155, 180, 192, 200, 202, 322, 332, 342, 362, 368, 397

Pratytmavedya (自 證) 391

Pratyayas (緣) 379

Pretas (餓 餽) 113

PuÏya (功 德) 326

PuÏya-sambbhra (福 資) 128

Pudgalanairtmya (我 空) 189-0, 192

Purnat tathat, Tathat (真如) 28, 200, 220, 233, 265-7, 279, 362, 375, 377, 390

R

Rga (貪 欲) 214

Rhula (羅 侯 羅) 75, 387

RjÙgha (王 舍) 200

R‰pa dhtu (色 界) 175

R‰pa kya (色身) 115, 363, 374-5, 377, 380, 382-3, 385, 389

R‰pa (色) 89, 145, 147, 153, 162, 175, 190, 200-1, 220, 244, 255, 277, 369, 390, 402

Ratnkara Bodhisattva (寶 積 菩 薩) 133

Ratnacandra Bodhisattva (寶 月 菩 薩) 132

RatnapÏi Bodhisattva (寶 掌 菩 薩) 132

Ratnaprabha Bodhisattva (寶 光 菩 薩) 132

Ratnavy‰ha (寶 藏) 377

Ratra-guna-samuccaya-gth (寶 積 經) 182, 296

Ruciraketu (妙 懂) 381

S

Sdhana, Siddhi (法 成 就) 383-4, 390

Sdhumat­ Bh‰mi (善 慧 地) 356

S­la (戒) 126, 268, 290, 338-9, 374, 384, 387

Smaneras (沙 彌) 387

Srdhadvishasrik (二 千 五 百 頌 般 若 波 羅 密 經 ) 182

Sa––vedayitanirodha (滅 受 想 定) 214

Saôg­ti (結 集)  27, 100

Saôgha (增 伽) 70, 100, 262

Saòkhra-su––aò (有 為 空) 250

Saòsra (輪 迴) 23, 28, 47, 52-3, 165, 207, 217-8, 223-4, 254, 271, 341, 384

Saòskra (行) 162, 191, 200, 246

SaòskÙta-±‰nyat (俗 空/有 為 的 不 實 本 質) 247

SaòskÙta (有 為) 90

SaòvÙti-satya (俗 諦) 149, 192, 236

Saòyutta Nikya (相 應 部 經) 53, 153-5, 170

Sabhgasu––aò (同 分 空) 251

Sadparibh‰ta Bodhisattva (常 不 輕 菩 薩) 132

Saddhdhika Bodhisatta (信 心 菩 薩) 333

Saddhnusr­ (隨 信 行) 104

Saddharma Lankvatra S‰tra     (妙 法 楞 伽 經) 377, 384, 388

Saddharma puϯar­ka S‰tra (妙 法 蓮 華 經) 113, 128-9, 132, 189, 199, 203, 274, 295-6, 298, 304, 310-1, 315-7, 324, 344, 347, 350, 379, 384, 386-8, 397

Saha lokadhtu (沙 婆 世 界) 363, 387

Sakadgmi (一 來) 54, 352

Sakkra (名 譽) 83

Samdhi (定) 138, 143, 170-1, 299, 303, 314, 318, 336-8, 397

Samdhi-rja S‰tra (三 妹 王 經) 291

Samnrthat (同 事) 349

Samantabhadra Bodhisattva (普 賢 菩 薩) 130, 330

Samatha (觀) 151, 154-6

Samayabhedoparacanacakra (異 部 宗 輪 論) 368, 370

Sambhra (資 糧) 338-9

Sambhoga-kya (報 身) 377, 392-4

Sambojjhanga (七 覺 支) 51

Sammappadhna (四 正 勤) 365

Samucchedasu––aò  (滅 空) 250

Samyaksamdhi (正 定) 314

Sandhinirmocana S‰tra (深 密 經) 383

Santna (流) 105

Santa (輕 安) 214

Saptasatik Praj–-pramit (七 百 頌 般 若 波 羅 密 經) 182

Sarnath (鹿 苑) 123, 258

Sarvstivda (一 切 有 部) 100, 128, 276, 370

Sarvabhava±‰nyat (一 切 有 空) 200

Sarvadharma-±‰nyat (諸 法 相 的 不 實 本 質) 249

Sarvadharma±‰nyat (一 切 法   空) 200

Sarvajñat (一 切 智) 379

Sarva-padrtha±‰nyat (一切六句義空) 200

Sarvar‰pa-sandar±ana (現 一 切 色 身 三 昧) 299

Sarvasattvapriyadar±ana Bodhisattva (一 切 眾 生 喜 見 菩 薩) 298-9

Sata-shasrik Praj–-pramit   (一 百 千 頌 般 若 波 羅 密 經) 182

Satipatthna (四 念 處) 150, 152, 365

Satth / ցst (道 師)  69

Sattva (有情) 38-9, 42-3

Satya (真 理) 200

Siòhavikr­dita samdhi (師子遊戲三昧) 387

Siddhattha / Sidhārtha (士 達 多) 59-0, 64, 67, 70, 75-6, 82, 93

Sikhī (施 氣) 66

Siloka (讚 歎) 83

Sotpanna (入 流,七 來) 54, 352

Sthavira (上 座 部) 102

Sthiramati (天 意) 266

Su––at (空) 134, 136, 138, 140-5, 147, 151, 157-8, 165-6, 169, 171-9, 192, 195, 201, 213, 243, 251, 253, 256-8, 397

Su––atassnimittassa lbhin­ (空 與 無 相 定)  172

Subh‰ti (須 菩 提) 183, 187, 208-9, 221, 229-01, 237, 301-2, 306, 315, 348, 383

Suddhodana (淨 梵) 64

Sudurjay Bh‰mi (難 勝 地) 355

Sukhvat­ Vy‰ha (彌 陀 經 / 無 量 壽 經) 102, 380, 397

Supinanta (夢) 194

Supra±nta (淳 淨) 220

Sutta Nipta Commentary (經集之疏解) 276

Sutta Piæaka (經 藏) 111

SuvarÏaprabhsa (金 光 明 經) 228, 381

Svbhvika / Svabhvakya (自 性 身) 377-8, 390, 392-3

Svabhva-±‰nyat (有 法 空 的 不 實 本質) 232, 249

Svabhva (實 體) 190, 250, 378

Svasambhogakya (自 受 用 身) 378, 386, 391

ցkyamuni (釋 迦 牟 尼 佛) 55-6, 104, 200, 293, 297, 350, 358-9, 360-1, 369, 380-4, 386-8

ցntideva (寂 天) 263, 269-72, 280, 310, 311

։nyat-±‰nyat (非空的不實本質) 247

։nyat (空 性) 21, 27, 29, 31, 112, 134, 166, 180, 189-93, 197-205, 210-7, 220, 224, 226-7, 234, 239, 242-3, 246-59, 261, 267, 292, 300-1, 303-4, 309, 317, 319-23, 331, 335, 358, 378, 380, 390, 394, 396, 400-4

։nyatvdins (空 論 者) 190, 215

ցriputta (舍 利 弗) 53

Öaivas (濕 婆) 118-9

Örvakas (聲 聞) 46, 53, 58, 283, 359, 362, 383, 386

Örvaka-yna (聲 聞 乘) 235, 398

Öikãs (式 叉) 337

T

TaÏh (愛 欲) 108-9, 162, 164, 214

Tadangasu––aò (類 空) 250

Tathgata (如 來) 56, 110-1, 167-8, 170, 174, 178, 208-9, 216, 221, 229, 236, 254, 274, 279, 297-9, 306, 346, 349, 357, 360, 369-73, 378-82, 387-8, 390-3

Tathgata-kya (如 來 身) 378

Tattva (本 質) 220, 232, 241

Th­namiddha (睡 眠) 83

Theravāda (原 始 佛 教) 33-5, 51, 65, 67, 265

Tissovijja (三 明) 95

Trailokyarikrmin Bodhisattva    (越 三 界 菩 薩) 132

Trikya (三 身) 236, 268, 375

Trim±ik (惟 識 三 十 論 頌) 392

Tripiæaka / Tipiæka (三 藏) 101

Trisahasra-mahshasra lokadhtu (三 千 大 千 世 界) 298, 387 

Triyna (三 乘) 325

Tuãita (兜 率 天) 127, 274, 365, 375

U

Uddaka Rmaputta (尉 陀 迦 羅 摩) 78

Updna (取) 162, 164, 250

Updhi (貪 生) 150

Upya / Upyakau±alya (方 便) 162, 234, 238, 290-1, 295, 323-5, 336, 355

Upadaya-pratipad (假 觀) 211-2

Upanisads (幽 杷 尼 色) 115

Upapduka (自 生) 366

Upasthpakas (侍 者) 387

Upekだ(捨) 342

V

V­rya (精 進) 290, 310, 336, 338-9, 355

Vsudeva (帕 子 仙) 118

Va±ita (生) 384

Vairocana (毘 爐 枷 那 佛) 121

Vaisradyni (四 信) 57

Vajrachedik-praj–-pramit S‰tra (金 剛 般 若 波 羅 密  經) 134, 180, 190, 197, 204, 208, 221, 236, 379

VajrapÏ­ Bodhisattva (金 剛 手 菩 薩) 130

Vajrayna (金 剛 乘) 135

Vastu (事 健) 190

Vasubandhu (世親, 天親) 266, 281, 338-9

Vasumitra (和 須 密 多) 365

Vedaka (受者) 242

Vedan (受) 81, 87-91, 145, 153

Vessabhū (毘 舍 浮) 66-7

Vi––Ïa (識) 90, 145, 153, 173-5

 Vi––Ïassa nirodho (識 的 滅 盡) 173

Vibhava-dÙãæi (非 現 有) 216

Vicikicch (疑 問) 24

Vijj (明) 257-8

Vijñna (惟 心) 384

Vijñaptimtratsiddhi (唯 識 論) 378

Vikkhambhanasu––aò (撤 空) 250 

Vimala Bh‰mi (離 垢 地) 355

Vimalak­rti (維 摩 詰 經) 102, 189, 206-8, 397

Vimalamitra (無 垢 有) 186

Vimokkha / vimokkha-mukh (解 脫)  167, 175, 215, 242, 259, 264, 384

Vinaya-piæaka (律 藏) 27

Vikalpa (妄 想 分 別) 189, 219

Vipka (異 熟) 388

Vipka-kya, Nisyanda-kya (異 熟 身) 380

Vipariρmasu––aò (壞 空) 250

Vipassan (明 察 慧) 87, 151, 155

Vipassī (毘 婆 施) 65-7

Viriydhika Bodhisatta (精 進 菩 薩) 333

Visabhgasu––aò (同 分 分 別  空) 251

Visuddhimagga (清 淨 道 論) 42, 285

Y

Yakkha (夜 叉) 65, 374

Yasa (有 名) 83

Yasodhar (耶 瑜 陀 羅) 75

Yathbh‰ta (如 實) 51, 95, 145, 153-4

Yogcra (瑜 伽 論) 134, 192, 377, 383

Yogcrins (瑜 伽 者) 191, 383, 388, 391

 

 

AUTHOR

 

Dr. Bhikṣuṇī Giới Hương (world name Śūnyatā Phạm) was born in 1963 in Bình Tuy, Vietnam and ordained at the age of fifteen under the great master, the Most Venerable Bhikṣuṇī  Hải Triều Âm. In 1994, she received a Bachelor’s Degree in Literature from Sài Gòn University. She studied in India for ten years and in 2003, graduated with a PhD in Buddhist Philosophy from the University of Delhi, India. In 2005, she settled down in the United States and in 2015, she earned a second Bachelor's Degree in Literature at the University of Riverside, California. Currently, she works as a lecturer at the Vietnam Buddhist University in HCM City.

She favors quietly reflecting on Dharma, and that leads her to write, as well as translate, Buddhist books and lyrics for music albums on her Bảo Anh Lạc Bookshelf.

In 2000, she established Hương Sen Temple, Bình Chánh, Sài Gòn, Việt Nam. In 2010, she founded Hương Sen Temple in Perris, California, USA, where she serves as abbess.

Contact:

Huong Sen Buddhist Temple

Bhikṣuṇī Gioi Huong
19865 Seaton Avenue,

Perris, CA 92570, USA
Tel: 951-657-7272 , Cell: 951-616-8620

Zalo/viber in Sri Lanka: +1 951 449 1734

Email: This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it., 

This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.

Fanpage: Huong Sen
Web: www.huongsentemple.com

BẢO ANH LẠC BOOKSHELF

 

• THE VIETNAMESE BOOKS
• Bồ-tát và Tánh Không Trong Kinh Tạng Pali và Đại Thừa (Boddhisattva and Sunyata in the Early and Developed Buddhist Traditions), Thích Nữ Giới Hương, Delhi-7: Tủ Sách Bảo Anh Lạc, 2005. Tổng Hợp Tp HCM Publishing: the 2nd & 3rd reprint in 2008 & 2010.
• Ban Mai Xứ Ấn (The Dawn in India) – Tuyển tập các Tiểu Luận Phật Giáo (Collection of Buddhist Essays), (3 tập), Thích Nữ Giới Hương, Delhi-7: Tủ Sách Bảo Anh Lạc, 2005; Văn Hóa Sài Gòn Publishing: the 2nd, 3rd, and 4th reprint in 2006, 2008 & 2010.
• Vườn Nai – Chiếc Nôi (Phật Giáo Deer Park–The Cradle of Buddhism), Thích Nữ Giới Hương, Delhi-7: Tủ Sách Bảo Anh Lạc, 2005. Phương Đông Publishing: the 2nd, 3rd and 4th reprint in 2006, 2008 & 2010.
• Quy Y Tam Bảo và Năm Giới (Take Refuge in Three Gems and Keep the Five Precepts), Thích Nữ Giới Hương, Tủ Sách Bảo Anh Lạc, Wisconsin, USA, 2008.

Phương Đông Publishing: the 2nd, 3rd and 4th reprint in 2010, 2016 &2018.

• Vòng Luân Hồi (The Cycle of Life), Thích Nữ Giới Hương, Phương Đông Publishing: Tủ Sách Bảo Anh Lạc, 2008. Văn Hóa Sài Gòn Publishing: the 2nd, 3rd and 4th reprint in 2010, 2014 & 2016.
• Hoa Tuyết Milwaukee (Snowflake in Milwaukee), Thích Nữ Giới Hương, Văn Hoá Sài gòn Publishing: Tủ Sách Bảo Anh Lạc, 2008.
• Luân Hồi trong Lăng Kính Lăng Nghiêm (The Rebirth in Śūrangama Sūtra), Thích Nữ Giới Hương, Văn Hóa Sài gòn Publishing: Tủ Sách Bảo Anh Lạc, 2008. Publishing Phương Đông: the 2nd, 3rd and 4th reprint in 2012, 2014 &2016.
• Nghi Thức Hộ Niệm, Cầu Siêu (The Ritual for the Deceased), Thích Nữ Giới Hương, Delhi-7: Eastern Book Linkers, 2008.
• Quan Âm Quảng Trần (The Commentary of Avalokiteśvara Bodhisattva), Thích Nữ Giới Hương, Tổng Hợp Publishing: Tủ Sách Bảo Anh Lạc, 2010. Publishing Phương Đông: the 2nd, 3rd, 4th & 5 reprint in 2010, 2014, 2016 & 2018.
• Nữ Tu và Tù Nhân Hoa Kỳ (A Nun and American Inmates), Thích Nữ Giới Hương, Văn Hóa Sài gòn Publishing: Tủ Sách Bảo Anh Lạc, 2010. Hồng Đức Publishing: the 2nd, 3rd, 4th, 5th & 6th reprint in 2011, 2014, 2016, 2018 & 2020.
• Nếp Sống Tỉnh Thức của Đức Đạt Lai Lạt Ma Thứ XIV (The Awakened Mind of the 14^th Dalai Lama), 2 tập, Thích Nữ Giới Hương, Hồng Đức Publishing: Tủ Sách Bảo Anh Lạc, năm 2012. The 2nd, 3rd and 4th reprint in 2010, 2016 &2018.
• A-Hàm: Mưa pháp chuyển hóa phiền não (Agama – A Dharma Rain transforms the Defilement), 2 tập, Thích Nữ Giới Hương, Hồng Đức Publishing: Tủ Sách Bảo Anh Lạc, năm 2012. The 2nd, 3rd and 4th reprint in 2010, 2016 &2018.
• Góp Từng Hạt Nắng Perris (Collection of Sunlight in Perris), Thích Nữ Giới Hương, Hồng Đức Publishing: Tủ Sách Bảo Anh Lạc.
• Pháp Ngữ của Kinh Kim Cang (The Key Words of Vajracchedikā-Prajñāpāramitā-Sūtra), Thích Nữ Giới Hương, Hồng Đức Publishing: Tủ Sách Bảo Anh Lạc, năm 2014. The 2nd, 3rd and 4th reprint in 2015, 2016 &2018.
• Tập Thơ Nhạc Nắng Lăng Nghiêm (Songs and Poems of Śūraṅgama Sunlight), Thích Nữ Giới Hương, Hồng Đức Publishing: Tủ Sách Bảo Anh Lạc. 2014.
• Nét Bút Bên Song Cửa (Reflections at the Temple Window), Thích Nữ Giới Hương, Hồng Đức Publishing: Tủ Sách Bảo Anh Lạc.
• Máy Nghe MP3 Hương Sen (Hương Sen Digital Mp3 Radio Speaker): Các Bài Giảng, Sách, Bài viết và Thơ Nhạc của Thích Nữ Giới Hương (383/201 bài), Hương Sen 2019.
• DVD Giới Thiệu về Chùa Hương Sen, USA (Introduction on Huong Sen Temple). Hương Sen Press Publishing. Thích Nữ Giới Hương & Phú Tôn. 2019.
• Ni Giới Việt Nam Hoằng Pháp tại Hoa Kỳ (Sharing the Dharma - Vietnamese Buddhist Nuns in the United States), Thích Nữ Giới Hương, Hồng Đức Publishing.
• Tuyển Tập 40 Năm Tu Học & Hoằng Pháp của Ni sư Giới Hương (Forty Years in the Dharma: A Life of Study and Service—Venerable Bhikṣuṇī Giới Hương), Thích Nữ Viên Quang, TN Viên Nhuận, TN Viên Tiến, and TN Viên Khuông, Xpress Print Publishing, USA. 2020.
• Tập Thơ Nhạc Lối Về Sen Nở (Songs and Poems of Lotus Blooming on the Way), Thích Nữ Giới Hương, Hồng Đức Publishing. 2020.
• Nghi Thức Công Phu Khuya – Thần Chú Thủ Lăng Nghiêm (Śūraṅgama Mantra), Thích Nữ Giới Hương biên soạn, Hương Sen Press, USA. 2021.
• Nghi Thức Cầu An – Kinh Phổ Môn (The Universal Door Sūtra), Thích Nữ Giới Hương biên soạn, Hương Sen Press, USA. 2021.
• Nghi Thức Cầu An – Kinh Dược Sư (The Medicine Buddha Sūtra), Thích Nữ Giới Hương biên soạn, Hương Sen Press, USA. 2021.
• Nghi Thức Sám Hối Hồng Danh (The Sūtra of Confession at many Buddha Titles), Thích Nữ Giới Hương biên soạn, Hương Sen Press, USA. 2021.
• Nghi Thức Công Phu Chiều – Mông Sơn Thí Thực (The Ritual Donating Food to Hungry Ghosts), Thích Nữ Giới Hương biên soạn, Hương Sen Press, USA. 2021.
• Khóa Tịnh Độ – Kinh A Di Đà (The Amitabha Buddha Sūtra), Thích Nữ Giới Hương biên soạn, Hương Sen Press, USA. 2021.
• Nghi Thức Cúng Linh và Cầu Siêu (The Rite for Deceased and Funeral Home), Thích Nữ Giới Hương biên soạn, Hương Sen Press, USA. 2021.
• Nghi Lễ Hàng Ngày - 50 Kinh Tụng và các Lễ Vía trong Năm (The Daily Chanting Rituals and Annual Ceremonies), Thích Nữ Giới Hương biên soạn, Hương Sen Press, USA. 2021.
• Hương Đạo Trong Đời 2022 (Tuyển tập 60 Bài Thi trong Cuộc Thi Viết Văn Ứng Dụng Phật Pháp 2022 - A Collection of Writings on the Practicing of Buddhism in Daily Life in the Writing Contest 2022), Thích Nữ Giới Hương biên soạn, Hồng Đức Publisher. 2022.
• Hương Pháp 2022 (Tuyển Tập Các Bài Thi Trúng Giải Cuộc Thi Viết Văn Ứng Dụng Phật Pháp 2022 - A Collection of the Winning Writings on the Practicing of Buddhism in Daily Life in the Writing Contest 2022) Thích Nữ Giới Hương biên soạn, Hồng Đức Publisher. 2022.
• Giới Hương - Thơm Ngược Gió Ngàn (Giới Hương – The Virtue Fragrance Against the Thousand Winds), Nguyên Hà.
• Pháp Ngữ Kinh Hoa Nghiêm (Buddha-avatamsaka-nāma-mahāvaipulya-sūtra) (2 tập).
• Tinh Hoa Kinh Hoa Nghiêm (The Core of Buddha-avatamsaka-nāma-mahāvaipulya-sūtra).
• Phật Giáo – Tầm Nhìn Lịch Sử Và Thực Hành (Buddhism: A Historical and Practical Vision). Hiệu đính: Thích Hạnh Chánh và Thích Nữ Giới Hương.
• Nhật ký Hành Thiền Vipassana và Kinh Tứ Niệm Xứ (Diary: Practicing Vipassana and the Four Foundations of Mindfulness Sutta)
• Nghi cúng Giao Thừa (New Year's Eve Ceremony)
• Nghi cúng Rằm Tháng Giêng (the Ceremony of the First Month’s Full Moon)
• Nghi thức Lễ Phật Đản (The Buddha Birthday’s Ceremony)
• Nghi thức Vu Lan (The Ullambana Festival or Parent Day)
• Lễ Vía Quan Âm (The Avolokiteshvara Day)
• Nghi cúng Thánh Tổ Kiều Đàm Di (The Death Anniversary of Mahapajapati Gotami)
• Nghi thức cúng Tổ và Giác linh Sư trưởng (The Ancestor Day)

• THE ENGLISH BOOKS
• Boddhisattva and Sunyata in the Early and Developed Buddhist Traditions, Bhikṣuṇī Gioi Huong, Delhi-7: Eastern Book Linkers, 1^st print 2004, 2^nd reprint 2005 & Vietnam Buddhist University: 3^rd reprint
• Rebirth Views in the Śūraṅgama Sūtra, Bhikṣuṇī Giới Hương, Fifth Edition, Hồng Đức Publishing: Tủ Sách Bảo Anh Lạc. 2018.
• Commentary of Avalokiteśvara Bodhisattva, Bhikṣuṇī Giới Hương, Fourth Edition, Hồng Đức Publishing: Tủ Sách Bảo Anh Lạc. 2018.
• The Key Words in Vajracchedikā Sūtra, Thích Nữ Giới Hương, Hồng Đức 2020.
• Sārnātha-The Cradle of Buddhism in the Archeological Hồng Đức Publishing. 2020.
• Take Refuge in the Three Gems and Keep the Five Precepts, Thích Nữ Giới Hương, Hồng Đức Publishing. 2020.
• Cycle of Life, Thích Nữ Giới Hương, Hồng Đức 2020.
• Forty Years in the Dharma: A Life of Study and Service—Venerable Bhikṣuṇī Giới Hương. Thích Nữ Viên Quang, TN Viên Nhuận, TN Viên Tiến, and TN Viên Khuông, Xpress Print Publishing, USA. 2020.
• Sharing the Dharma -Vietnamese Buddhist Nuns in the United States, Thích Nữ Giới Hương, Hồng Đức Publishing.
• A Vietnamese Buddhist Nun and American Inmates. 5th Edition. Bhikṣuṇī Thích Nữ Giới Hương. Hương Sen Press Publishing, USA. 2021.
• Daily Monastic Chanting, Bhikṣuṇī Thích Nữ Giới Hương composed. Hương Sen Publisher. 2023.
• Weekly Buddhist Discourse Chanting, vol 1, Bhikṣuṇī Thích Nữ Giới Hương composed. Hương Sen Publisher. 2023.
• Practice Meditation and Pure Land, Bhikṣuṇī Thích Nữ Giới Hương composed. Hương Sen Publisher. 2023.
• The Ceremony for Peace, Bhikṣuṇī Thích Nữ Giới Hương composed. Hương Sen Publisher. 2023.
• The Lunch Offering Ritual, Bhikṣuṇī Thích Nữ Giới Hương composed. Hương Sen Publisher. 2023.
• The Ritual Offering Food to Hungry Ghosts, Bhikṣuṇī Thích Nữ Giới Hương composed. Hương Sen Publisher. 2023.
• The Pureland Course of Amitabha Sutra, Bhikṣuṇī Thích Nữ Giới Hương composed. Hương Sen Publisher. 2023.
• The Medicine Buddha Sutra, Bhikṣuṇī Thích Nữ Giới Hương composed. Hương Sen Publisher. 2023.
• The New Year Ceremony, Bhikṣuṇī Thích Nữ Giới Hương composed. Hương Sen Publisher. 2023.
• The Great Parinirvana Ceremony, Bhikṣuṇī Thích Nữ Giới Hương composed. Hương Sen Publisher. 2023.
• The Buddha’s Birthday Ceremony, Bhikṣuṇī Thích Nữ Giới Hương composed. Hương Sen Publisher. 2023.
• The Ullambana Festival (Parents’ Day), Bhikṣuṇī Thích Nữ Giới Hương composed. Hương Sen Publisher. 2023.
• The Marriage Ceremony, Bhikṣuṇī Thích Nữ Giới Hương composed. Hương Sen Publisher. 2023.
• The Blessing Ceremony for The Deceased, Bhikṣuṇī Thích Nữ Giới Hương composed. Hương Sen Publisher. 2023.
• The Ceremony Praising Ancestral Masters, Bhikṣuṇī Thích Nữ Giới Hương composed. Hương Sen Publisher. 2023.
• The Enlightened Buddha Ceremony, Bhikṣuṇī Thích Nữ Giới Hương composed. Hương Sen Publisher. 2023.
• The Uposatha Ceremony (Reciting Precepts), Bhikṣuṇī Thích Nữ Giới Hương composed. Hương Sen Publisher. 2023.
• Buddhism: A Historical And Practical Vision. Edited by Ven. Dr. Thich Hanh Chanh and Ven. Dr. Bhikṣuṇī TN Gioi Huong. Eastern Book Linkers: Delhi 7. 2023.
• Contribution of Buddhism For World Peace & Social Harmony. Edited by Ven. Dr. Buddha Priya Mahathero and Ven. Dr. Bhikṣuṇī TN Gioi Huong. Tôn Giáo Publishing. 2023.
• Global Spread of Buddhism with Special Reference to Sri Lanka. Buddhist Studies Seminar in Kandy University. Edited by Prof. Ven. Medagama Nandawansa and Dr. Bhikṣuṇī TN Gioi Huong. Tôn Giáo Publishing.
• Buddhism In Sri Lanka During The Period of 19^th to 21st Centuries. Buddhist Studies Seminar in Colombo. Edited by Prof. Ven. Medagama Nandawansa and Dr. Bhikṣuṇī TN Gioi Huong. Tôn Giáo Publishing. 2023
• Diary: Practicing Vipassana and the Four Foundations of Mindfulness Sutta. Thích Nữ Giới Hương, Tôn Giáo Publishing. 2024.

• THE BILINGUAL BOOKS (VIETNAMESE-ENGLISH)
• Bản Tin Hương Sen: Xuân, Phật Đản, Vu Lan (Hương Sen Newsletter: Spring, Buddha Birthday and Vu Lan, annual/ Mỗi Năm). 2019 & 2020.
• Danh Ngôn Nuôi Dưỡng Nhân Cách - Good Sentences Nurture a Good Manner, Thích Nữ Giới Hương sưu tầm, Hồng Đức Publishing. 2020.
• Văn Hóa Đặc Sắc của Nước Nhật Bản-Exploring the Unique Culture of Japan, Thích Nữ Giới Hương. Hồng Đức Publishing. 2020.
• Sống An Lạc dù Đời không Đẹp như Mơ - Live Peacefully though Life is not Beautiful as a Dream, Thích Nữ Giới Hương. Hồng Đức Publishing. 2020.
• Hãy Nói Lời Yêu Thương-Words of Love and Understanding, Thích Nữ Giới Hương. Hồng Đức Publishing. 2020.
• Văn Hóa Cổ Kim qua Hành Hương Chiêm Bái -The Ancient- Present Culture in Pilgrim, Thích Nữ Giới Hương. Hồng Đức 2020.
• Nghệ Thuật Biết Sống - Art of Living. Thích Nữ Giới Hương, Hồng Đức Publishing. 2020.
• Dharamshala - Hành Hương Vùng Đất Thiêng, Ấn Độ, Dharamshala - Pilgrimage to the Sacred Land, Indi Thích Nữ Giới Hương, Tôn Giáo Publishing. 2024.

 

• THE TRANSLATED BOOKS

• Xá Lợi Của Đức Phật (Relics of the Buddha), Tham Weng Yew, Thích Nữ Giới Hương chuyển ngữ, Delhi-7: Tủ Sách Bảo Anh Lạc, 2005. Delhi 2006: 2nd reprint. Tổng Hợp Tp HCM Publishing: the 3rd and 4th reprint in 2008 & 2016.
• Sen Nở Nơi Chốn Tử Tù (Lotus in Prison), many authors, Thích Nữ Giới Hương translated from English into Vietnamese, Văn Hóa Sài gòn Publishing: Tủ Sách Bảo Anh Lạc, 2010. The 2nd, 3rd and 4th reprint in 2012, 2014 & 2016.
• Chùa Việt Nam Hải Ngoại (Overseas Vietnamese Buddhist Temples), Võ Văn Tường & Từ Hiếu Côn, vol 2. Translated into English: Thích Nữ Giới Hương. Hương Quê Publishing. 2016.
• Việt Nam Danh Lam Cổ Tự (The Famous Ancient Buddhist Temples in Vietnam), Võ Văn Tường. Translated into English: Thích Nữ Giới Hương. Phương Nam 2016.
• Hương Sen, Thơ và Nhạc – (Lotus Fragrance, Poem and Music), Nguyễn Hiền Đứ Translated into English: Thích Nữ Giới Hương. Hồng Đức Publishing. 2020.
• Phật Giáo-Một Bậc Đạo Sư, Nhiều Truyền Thống (Buddhism: One Teacher – Many Traditions),Đức Đạt Lai Lạt Ma 14^th & Ni Sư Thubten Chodren, Translated into Vietnamese: Dr. Thích Nữ Giới Hương, Prajna Upadesa Foundation Publshing. 2018.
• Cách Chuẩn Bị Chết và Giúp Người Sắp Chết-Quan Điểm Phật Giáo (Preparing for Death and Helping the Dying – A Buddhist Perspective), Sangye Khadro, Translated into Vietnamese: Thích Nữ Giới Hương. Hồng Đức Publishing. 2020.

2.BUDDHIST MUSIC ALBUMS

from POEMS of THÍCH NỮ GIỚI HƯƠNG

1.      Đào Xuân Lộng Ý Kinh (The Buddha’s Teachings Reflected in Cherry Flowers), Poems: Thích Nữ Giới Hương. Music: Nam Hưng, Vol. 1. 2013.

2. Niềm Tin Tam Bảo (Trust in the Three Gems), Poems: Thích Nữ Giới Hương. Music: Hoàng Y Vũ and Hoàng Quang Huế, Vol. 2. 2013.
3. Trăng Tròn Nghìn Năm Đón Chờ Ai (Who Is the Full Moon Waiting for for Over a Thousand Years?). Poems: Thích Nữ Giới Hương. Music: Võ Tá Hân, Hoàng Y Vũ, Khánh Hải, Khánh Hoàng, Hoàng Kim Anh, Linh Phương và Nguyễn Tuấn, Vol. 3. 2013.
4. Ánh Trăng Phật Pháp (Moonlight of Dharma-Buddha). Poems: Thích Nữ Giới Hương. Music: Uy Thi Ca and Giác An, Vol. 4. 2013.
5. Bình Minh Tỉnh Thức (Awakened Mind at the Dawn) (Piano Variations for Meditation). Poems: Thích Nữ Giới Hương. Solo Pianist: Linh Phương, vol. 5. 2013.
6. Tiếng Hát Già Lam (Songs from the Temple). Poems: Thích Nữ Giới Hương. Music: Nam Hưng, vol. 6. 2015.
7. Cảnh Đẹp Chùa Xưa (The Magnificent, Ancient Buddhist Temple). Poem: Thích Nữ Giới Hương. Music: Võ Tá Hân, Nam Hưng, Hoàng Quang Huế, vol. 7. 2015.
8. Karaoke Hoa Ưu Đàm Đã Nở (An Udumbara Flower Is Blooming). Poem: Thích Nữ Giới Hương. Musician: Nam Hưng, Hương Sen Temple. 2015.
9. Hương Sen Ca (Hương Sen’s Songs), Thơ: Thích Nữ Giới Hương. Nhạc: Nam Hưng, vol. 9, năm 2018.
10. Về Chùa Vui Tu (Happily Go to Temple for Spiritual Practices), Poem: Thích Nữ Giới Hương. Music: Nam Hưng and Nguyên Hà. Volume 10.
11. Gọi Nắng Xuân Về (Call the Spring Sunlight), Poem: Thích Nữ Giới Hương. Music: Nam Hưng, Hương Sen Temple. Volume 11. 2020.

Please consult the Bảo Anh Lạc Bookshelf at this website:

http://huongsentemple.com/index.php/en/about-us/b-o-anh-l-c-bookshelf

                              ***

VIETNAM BUDDHIST UNIVERSITY SERIES

Advisor: Most Ven.Prof. Thich Tri Quang

Editor: Ven.Dr. Thich Nhat Tu

ISBN: 1 74189 933 8

As a not-for-profit Publisher, VBU PUBLICATIONS is the publishing division of Vietnam Buddhist University, dedicated to publishing fine books on Buddhist Philosophy and socially engaged Buddhism in English, Chinese and Vietnamese, for the benefit of all sentient beings and dependent upon the kindness and generosity of sponsors in order to do so. We are committed to making Buddhadhamma and authentic Buddhist works from all the major Buddhist traditions accessible to everyone.

This collection is jointly published by Vietnam Buddhist University and Buddhism Today Foundation.

Publishers

VIETNAM BUDDHIST UNIVERSITY PUBLICATIONS

750 Nguyen Kiem, Phu Nhuan, TP.HCM, Vietnam

Tel (Only in Vietnamese): +84-8-3847-8779 • Fax: +84-8-3847-8779

Email: This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. • Website: www.vbu.edu.vn

BUDDHISM TODAY PUBLICATIONS

(A non-profit charitable organization and a part of Buddhism Today Foundation)

92 Nguyen Chi Thanh, P3, Q10, TP.HCM, Vietnam

Tel (In English and Vietnamese): +84-908-153-160; +84-8-3830-9570

Email: This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.  •  Website: www.buddhismtoday.com

                           ***

BECOME A FRIEND OF VBU PUBLICATIONS

We invite our community of readers to support the publication and distribution of books by joining Friends of VBU Publications.

Donations of any amount are gratefully welcome. Friends of VBU Publications is a direct way you can help us sustain our commitment to reaching a wide audience and to preserve Buddha’s Teachings for general public.

If you would like to sponsor the publication of a book, please write or email us for more information. If you would like to make a contribution or all donations to VBU Publications, you may send it to Vietnam Buddhist University office as mentioned above.

 

[1] Trevor Ling, Buddha, Marx and God, London; 1979, pp. 5-6.

[2] Fritjof Capra, The Turning Point, London, 1982, p.1.

[3] Ibid., pp. 2-3.

[4] See Ven. K. Sri Dhammananda, What Buddhists Believe, CBBEF, Taipei, 2000, p. 285.

[5] Loc. cit.

[6] Loc. cit.

[7] Edward J. Kormondy, Concept of Ecology, New Delhi, 1991, p. 246.

[8] Fritjof Capra, The Turning Point, p. 3.

[9] Paul R. Ehrlich, and Anna H. Ehrlich, Population Resources Environmental, San Francisco, 1972, p. 147.

[10] Loc.cit.

[11] Trevor Ling, Buddha, Marx and God, p. 5.

[12] Erich Fromm, Psychoanalysis and Zen Buddhism, p. 79.

[13] Trover Ling, op.cit., p.6.

[14] Minh Chi - Ha Thuc Minh, Dai Cuong Triet Hoc Dong Phuong, Truong Dai hoc Tong Hop, Tp. HCM, 1993, pp. 32-3.

[15] J. Krishnamurti, Education and the Signification of Life, Krishnamurti Foundation India, 1994, p.19.

[16] Ibid., p. 17.

[17] Pitirim A. Sorokin, Social and Cultural Dynamics, 4 vols., New York, 1937-41.

[18] Buddhadasa P. Kirthisinghe ed., Buddhism and Science, Delhi, 1996, p. 18.

[19] A. Toynbee, Daisaku-Ikeda, Man Himself Must Choose, Tokyo, 1976, p. 288-0.

[20] Ven. K. Sri Dhammananda, Buddhism as a Religion, Malaysia, 2000, p. 7.

[21] Loc. cit.

[22] Dhammapada, verse 183, pp. 97-8.

[23] Masao Abe, Buddhism and Interfaith Dialogue, ed. by Steven Heine, Hong Kong, 1995, pp. 17-8.

[24] Albert Einstein, Ideas and Opinions, London, 1973, p. 46.

[25] See detail in Buddha, Marx and God, op. cit., pp. 8-9.

[26] Wang Chi Buu, “A Scientist’s Report on Study of Buddhist Scripture”, Corporate Body of the Buddha Education Foundation, Taipei, Taiwan, R.O.C.

[27] Edward Conze, Buddhism: Its Essence and Development, Delhi, 1994, p. 130.

[28] Edward Conze, Thirty Years of Buddhist Studies, London, 1967, p. 54.

[29] Dha, verse 60, p. 33-4.

[30] K.N. Jayatillaka, Early Buddhist Theory of Knowledge, London, 1963, p. 391.

[31] Quoted in Damien Koewn, The Nature of Buddhist Ethics, London, 1992, p vii.

[32] The Book of Gradual Sayings, I, 171-2.

[33] Anguttana Nikāya, I, 189.

[34] Dha, verse 160, pp. 83-4.

³⁵ Ibid., verse 165, pp. 87-8.

[36] Prof. Masao, Buddhism and Interfaith Dialogue, ed by Steven Heine, Hong Kong, 1995, p. 6-7.

^[37] The earliest split of Buddhism is defined in terms of Theravāda and Mahāsanghika. But in later centuries an ideological divide took place, which divided the Buddhists into two camps — Mahāyāna and Hinayāna.

[38]The term ‘Hinayāna’ has been quite often used in retrospectively.

[39] Bhikkhu Telwatte Rahula, A Critical Study of the Mahāvastu, pp. 49-62.

[40] E.J.Thomas, Buddhism, London, 1934, p. 256.

[41] Ibid., p. 351.

[42] T.W. Rhys-Davids and Welliam Stede, Pali - English Dictionary, I, 14.

[43] A, IV, 23.

[44] Buddhist Scriptures, 20.

[45] The Sôkhya S‰tra I.71, vide S. Chatterjee and D.M. Datta, An Introduction to Indian Philosophy, Calcutta, 1954, p. 272.

[46] Encyclopaedia of Buddhism, III, 224.

[47] Encyclopaedia of Religion and Ethics, op.cit., vol. II,  p. 739.

[48] PED, I, 132.

[49]  BDBSL, pp. 4-9.

[50]

1. Sattva may mean ‘Wesen, Charakter’, ‘essence, nature, true essence’ (Skt. Dicy. Pbg. & Skt. Dicy. M.W). The Pli word satta may also mean ‘substance’ (Pali Dicy.s.v). The great modern lexicographers seem to interpret sattva in this sense. Thus, according to Bohtlingk and Roth, bodhisattva means: ‘(adj) dessen Wesen Erkenntniss ist; (mas) der im Besitz des Wesens der Bodhl’ Monier Williams translates: ‘one who has bodhl or perfect wisdom as his essence’ (p. 688b). E. Burnouf seems to interpret the word in the same way as Bohtlingk and Roth: ‘celui qui possede 1’essence de la bodhi.’   P. Oltramare follows Monier Williams and translates: ‘un etre dont I’essence consiste dans I’eveil’. (‘Bouddhique,’ p. 250). C. F. Koeppen: ‘Derjenige, dessen Wesenheit die hochste Weisheit (bodhi) geworden’ (‘Buddha’, ii, 18). C. Eliot: ‘One whose essence is knowledge’ (Eliot, ii, 7). H. Hackmann: ‘He whose essence is becoming Enlightenment’ (‘Buddhism,’ p. 52). It may be added that the modern Hindi word ‘sat,’ which is derived from Skt. ‘sattva’, means ‘essence, extract’.
2. ‘Sattva’ (masculine) may mean ‘any living or sentient being’ (Skt. Dicy. M.W), ‘ein lebendes Wesen’ (Skt. Dicy. Pbg). The Pali word satta may mean ‘a living being, creature, a sentient and rational being, person’ (Pali Dicy. s.v). Most modern scholars adopt this interpretation. M. Wintermtz: ‘Ein Eneuchtungswesen’ (‘Lit.’ ii, 183). de la Vallee Poussln: ‘On peut Ie traduire ‘creature ‘ou’ etre vivant’ (‘Opinions’, p. 169, line 8).M. Walleser: ‘Weisheitswesen’ (Pr. Pa. tr., p. 5). H. Kern: ‘A sentient or reasonable being, possessing bodhi’ (‘Manual,’ p. 65, line 11).T. W. Khys Davids and W. Stede: ‘a bodhi-bemg, i.e. abeing destined to attain fullest Enlightenment’ (Pali Dicy. s.v). L. D. Barnett: ‘Creature of Enlightenment’ (‘Path’, p. 20). S. Lefmann: ‘Bodhisattva bedeutet einen, dessen Wesen Erweckung oder Erleuchtung ist’ (La!. V. tr., p. 50). M. Anesaki: ‘A being seeking for bodhi’ (ERE., v, 450). E. J. Thomas: ‘a being of (or destined for) Enlightenment’ (‘Buddha’, p. 2, note I). P. Masson-Oursel: ‘un etre d’illumination’ (‘Esquisse’, P. 127). R. Pischel: ‘Ein Wesen, das bestimmt ist, einst ein Buddha zu werden’ (‘Buddha’, p. 50). D. T. Suzuki: ‘Intelligence-Being’ (‘Outlines’, p. 277). Csoma de Kors: ‘Purified, mighty soul’ (Csoma, p. 6). The author of the Samādhl-rāja-sutra interprets sattva as ‘being, creature’, but thinks that the word bodhlsattva means ‘one who admonishes or exhorts all beings’ (bodhettisattvan. Sam. Ra. fol. 25a, 4). P. Ghosa seems to interpret sattva as ‘living being’, but analyses the whole word in a peculiar way: ‘bodhih sa casau maha-krp-Sfayena sattv-alambanat sattvaf cet’t bodhisattva¾.’ This would mean that the person is both bodhi and sattva.
3. ‘Sattva’ may mean ‘spirit, mind, sense, consciousness’, ‘Geist’ (Skt. Dicy. M.W. and Pbg). The Pli word satta may also mean ‘soul’ (Pali Dicy. s.v). According to L. de la Vallee Poussin, the Indian lexicographers also explain sattva as a synonym for citta (thought) or vyavasaya (decision, determination). Prajnakaramati says: ‘tatra(bodhau) sattvam abhiprayo’syete bodhisattvah.’ Ghosa cites an old commentator, who also interprets sattva as meaning abhlpraya (intention, purpose): ‘bodhau sattvam abhiprayo yes am te bodhisattvah’ (Pr. Pa. Qata., p. 2, note 2). Thus the word would mean: ‘one whose mind, intentions, thoughts or wishes are fixed on bodhi’. P. Oltramare rejects this interpretation as far-fetched and inaccurate; but L. de la Vallee Poussin seems to be inclined to accept it, while he at the same time admits that the original meaning of the word may have been derived from the idea of ‘ essence, own nature’.
4. Sattva may mean ‘embryo’ (Skt. Dicy. M.W). H. S. Gour translates: ‘In whom knowledge is latent and undeveloped’ (‘Buddhism,’ p. XI).
5. Sattva may have the same meaning as it has in the Yoga- s‰tras, where it is opposed to purusa and means ‘mind, intelligence’. This interpretation is offered by E. Senart, who believes that Buddhism was profoundly influenced by the Yoga He says: ‘Sattva ne designe pas seulement Ie premier des trois gunas, soit seul, soit complete par buddhi ou citta; il designe I’esprit, mais en tant que 1’esprit resume et exprime la prakrti et les gunas qui la constituent... 1’esprit actif, conscient, qui relevent de la prakrti. Explique par cette acception de sattva et comme bahuvrlhi, bodhisattva designerait Ie futur Buddha, provisoirement retenu dans les liens de 1’existence, comme ‘possedant Ie sattva de la bodhi’, c’est-a-dire une illumination encore liee aux conditions inferieures des gunas, partant imparfaite.’ It is true that sattva occurs frequently in the Yoga-s‰tras, and G. Jha translates it as ‘thinking principal or mind’: (Yo.Su. II, 41, p. 109, ‘Sattva-fuddhl-saumanasy-aikagry-endrlya-jay-atma-darfana-yogyatvani ca’). E. Senart points out that sattva is declared to be distinct from purusa in the Yoga-s‰tras (III, 55, ‘Sattva-purusayoh fuddhi-samye kaivalyam,’ p. 174). He thus prefers the interpretation cited above, but I must confess that I do not really understand what he means by ‘Ie sattva de la bodhi’. H. Kern is of opinion that the first word bodhi may be related to the buddhi of the Yoga system, especially as the word buddhisattva is found in the literature of Yoga. A bodhlsattva would thus be a personification of potential intelligence.
6. Sattva may be a wrongly Sanskritized form of the Pall word satta, which may correspond to Skt. Thus Pali bodhisatta, from which the Sanskrit word is derived, would mean bodhi-sakta, ‘one who is devoted or attached to bodhi’. Sakta (from the root sanj) means ‘clung, stuck or attached to, joined or connected with, addicted or devoted to, fond of, intent on’ (Skt. Dicy. M.W). According to the Pali Dictionary, the Pali word satta may correspond to several Sanskrit words: sattva, sapta, sakta, and sapta. It has been suggested that the Pali word sutta is also related to Skt. sukta, and not to Skt. sutra, as the latter word is a very inappropriate designation for the lengthy and prolix Buddhist discourses. The Buddhists attached great importance to subhaslta (good sayings), and the Pli word sutt’i does correspond to Skt. sukt’i (Pali Dicy. s.v). However that may be, it may be plausibly argued that Skt. bodhi-sakta is a possible equivalent of Pali bodhisatta. The opinion of the Buddhist writers, who adopted the rendering sattva, need not be considered absolutely decisive in this question, as they have certainly given us other wrongly Sanskritized forms, e.g. smrty-upasthana (for Pāli sati-paææthana), samyak-prahāna (for Pāli sammappadhdna), etc. Bodhisattva may also belong to this class of wrongly Sanskritized terms. P. Oltramare rejects this interpretation, as the verb sanj is not used to denote attachment to moral and spiritual ideals, and the later writers could not make such ‘a strange mistake ‘in translating Pli into Sanskrit.
7. Sattva may mean ‘strength, energy, vigour, power, courage’ (Skt. Dicy. M.W. p. 1052). The word bodhisattva would then mean, ‘one whose energy and power is directed towards ’ Sattva in this sense occurs frequently in Ksemendra’s Avadana-kalpa-lata: ‘sattv-abdhih’ (II, p. 713, verse 42), ‘sattv-ojjvalam bhagavataf caritam nifamya’ (II, p.85, verse 74); ‘kumarah sattva-sagarah’ (II, p. 723, verse 21), sattva-nidhir (II, p. 945, verse 21); ‘bodhisattvah sattva-vibhusitah (II, p. 113, verse 8). The word also seems to have the same signification in the B. Ct. (IX, 30—‘bodhisattvah parlpurna-sattvah’). E. B. Cowell translates, ‘whose perfection was absolute’; but this rendering does not explain the precise meaning of sattva. The Tibetan lexicographers translate bodhisattva as byan-chub sems-dpah. In this compound, byan-chub means bodhi, sems means ‘mind’ or ‘heart’, and dpah signifies ‘hero, strong man’ (= Skt. sura, vira). (Tib. Dicy. Jaschke, 374b and 325b; Tib. Dicy. Das, 883b, 787b and i276b).   This interpretation seems to combine two meanings of saliva., viz. ‘mind’ and ‘courage’ (Nos. 3 and 7 above). But it does not make the etymology of the compound word bodhisattva in any way clearer or more intelligible.   It may be inferred that the Tibetan translators associated the ideas of ‘mind’ and ‘courage’ with the word sattva. According to E. J. Eitel, the Chinese interpret bodhisattva as ‘he whose essence has become bodhi’ (p. 34a).

[51] Loc.cit.

[52] Loc.cit.

[53] Bhikkhu сÏamoli (Tr.), The Path of Purification (Visuddhi-magga), Sri Lanka, Buddhist Publication Society, 1975, IX, 53, p. 310.

[54] For details see S.N.Dasgupta, A History of Indian Philosophy, Vol. I, Cambridge, 1963, pp. 445-52.

[55] S. Radhakrishnan, Indian Philosophy, Vol.II, London, 1966, pp. 475-85.

[56] PED, I, 114.

[57] DPPN, II, 322 ff.

[58] Bs, 30.

[59] Ibid., 20.

[60] BDBSL, 6.

[61] Loc. cit.

[62] Cf. Edward Conze (tr), Asthasrika Pran.

[63] BDBSL, 8.

[64] Loc.cit.

[65] Loc.cit.

[66] T.R.V. Murti, The Central Philosophy of Buddhism, London, 1960, p. 264.

[67] Charles Elliot, Buddhism and Hinduism, Vol. II, London, 1968, p.1.

[68] H. Kern, Manual of Indian Buddhism, Delhi, rpt. 1974, p. 65.

[69] DCBT, pp. 337.

[70] DB, III, 77f.

[71] See EB, V, 349-350.

[72] BGD, Vol. I, Chapter Three Dhammas, iv, Sakka, 127.

[73] A, I, 143-5.

[74] EB, II, 41.

[75] Isaline B. Horner, the Early Buddhist Theory of Man Perfected: A Study of the Arahanta, London: Williams & Northgate Ltd., 1979, p.52.

[76] Theragāthā, ed. H. Bendall, JRAS, 1883, p.111.

[77] A, III, 376.

[78] Ibid., loc.cit.

[79]  S, II, 217.

[80] S, I, 12; II, 120-6, IV, 252.

[81] A, IV, 145.

[82] M, II, 29.

[83] DB, III, No. 29 Pasadika Sutta, 125.

[84] D, III, 138.

[85] BIHP, 259; The Boddhisattva Ideal, Ven. Narada Maha Thera, the Journal ‘The Maha Bodhi’, vol. 80 – Oct. & Nov., Delhi, 1972, p. 481.

[86] Tu Dien Phat Hoc Han Viet (A Dictionary of Vietnamese-Chinese Buddhist Terms), Phan vien Phat hoc xuat ban, Viet Nam: Ha Noi, 1992, p. 446.

[87] BDBSL, 3.

[88] EB, III, 357.

[89] Vinayapitaka, ed.  H. Oldenberg, vol. I, London, 1879, p. 8.

[90] A, II, 38-9.

[91] Ten balāni:

1. A Buddha possesses the knowledge of correct and faulty conclusions.
2. He knows fully and truly the consequences of all actions in the past, the present and the future with regard to their causes and circumstances.
3. He is cognisant of the various aspirations or dispositions of the different types of persons.
4. He knows the true nature of the various dhātus (elements) in the universe.
5. He understands the higher or lower powers of different creatures.
6. He knows the Way that leads everywhere.
7. He realises the defilement, purification and origination of all the forms of Musing, Deliverances, Concentration and Ecstatic Attainment.
8. He remembers all his previous existences.
9. He discerns the process of the death and rebirth of all beings.
10. He knows that his āsravas (Intoxicants: sins and errors) have been destroyed. (See A, V, 33.7 ff.; M, I, 69 ff.; DCBT, 46; BDBSL, 20)

[92] The Four Vaisāradyas:

1. He knows that he has attained perfect Enlightenment and understands all principles and phenomena (dharm¾).
2. He knows that he has destroyed all the sravas (Intoxicants).
3. He knows that the obstacles to the higher life, which he has described, really constitute serious hindrances.
4. He knows that the Way, which he teaches for the cessation of Pain and Evil (du¾kha), really leads to that goal (see M, I, 71; A, II, 9)

[93] The Eighteen €veÏika-dharmas distinguish a Buddha from all other beings as follows:

1. He is free from errors and faults.
2. He is not noisy or loquacious.
3. He never loses Mindfulness.
4. His mind is always composed and collected.
5. He has no notion of multiplicity (i.e. he considers the universe under its aspect of unity and not with reference to the diversity of phenomena and objects).
6. His equanimity is not due to want of judgment.
7. His Will and Resolution never falter.
8. His Energy is never diminished.
9. His Mindfulness is never relaxed.
10. His Concentration always remains the same.
11. His Wisdom never fails.
12. His Deliverance knows no change.
13. All his actions, performed with the body, are preceded by Knowledge and continue to be in accordance with Knowledge.
14. All his words and utterances are preceded by Knowledge and continue to be in accordance with Knowledge.
15. All his thoughts are preceded by Knowledge and continue to be in accordance with Knowledge.
16. He has absolute and infallible Knowledge and Insight with regard to the past time.
17. He has absolute and infallible Knowledge and Insight with regard to the future.
18. He has absolute and infallible Knowledge and Insight with regard to the present (time).

(see Divy-āvadāna, ed. E.B.Cowell & R.A. Neil, Cambridge, 1886, p. 148; DCBT, 45)

[94] DCBT, pp. 337.

[95] MLS, I, No. 36 Mahasaccaka Sutta, 295.

[96] M, I, 240.

[97] MLS, I, No. 26. Ariyapariyesana Sutta, 207.

[98] M, I, 163.

[99] EB, III, 229.

[100] MLS, III, No. 123  Acchariyabhutadhamma-sutta , 165.

[101] M, III, 119-120.

[102] DB, II, No. 14  Mahapadana Sutta,  8-9.

[103] D, II, 12.

[104] EB, III, 229.

[105] This seems to be what is meant by a ‘virgin birth’. See MLS, the Acchariya-abbhuta-dhamma-sutta, III, 165 ff; Mahvastu, ed. E. Senart, Paris, 1882-97, II, p.6 and Lalitavistara, ed. P.L.Vaidya, PST, I, pp. 29-30.

[106] GD, Nlaka sutta, verse No. 693, p.125.

[107] Sn, Nlakasuttam Nitthitam, verse No. 693, p.125.

[108] EB, III, 228.

[109] Dha, Verse No. 183, p. 97-8.

[110] DPPN, II, 578.

[111] Loc.cit.

[112] DB, II, No. 14 Mahapadana Sutta, 5.

[113] D, II, 2.

[114] DB, II, No. 14 Mahapadana Sutta, 8 (also see DB, II, No. 17, the Mahasudassana suttanta, 192; No. 19, the MahāGovinda suttanta, 253).

[115] D, II, 12.

[116] The Buddhavaòsā, ed. R. Morris, vol 38, London: PTS, 1882, pp. 240-1.

[117] Kalpa (劫 杷): the period of time between the creation and recreation of a world or universe; also the kalpas of formation, existence, destruction, and non-existence, which four as a complete period are called mahkalpa (大劫). Each great kalpa is subdivided into four asaÏkhyeya (阿 增 祇 劫 i.e. numberless, incalculable):

1. Kalpa of destruction (壞 劫) saòvarta.
2. Kalpa of utter annihilation or empty kalpa (增滅劫,空劫) saòvartasiddha.
3. Kalpa of formation (成劫) vivar.
4. Kalpa of existence (住劫) vivartasiddha.

Or they may be taken in the order (成住壞空). Each of the four kalpas is subdivided into twenty antarakalpas or small kalpas (小劫), so that a mahkalpa consists of eighty small kalpas. Each small kalpa is divided into a period of increase (增) and decrease (減); the increase period is ruled over by the four cakravart­ in sucession i.e. the four ages of iron, copper, silver, gold, during which the length of human life increases by one year every century to 84,000years, and the length of the human body to 8,400 feet. Then comes the kalpa of decrease divided into periods of the three woes, pestilence, war, famine, during which the length of human life is gradually reduced to ten years and the human body to 1 foot in height. There are other distinctions of the kalpas. One small kalpa amounts as 16,800,000 years, a kapal as 336,000,000 yeas and a mahkalpa as 1,334,000,000 years. There are many ways of illustrating the length of a kalpa, e.g. pass a soft cloth over a solid rock 40 li in size once in a hundred years, when finally the rock has been thus worn away a kalpa will not yet have passed; or a city of 40 li, filled with mustard seeds, one being removed every century till all have gone, a kalpa will not yet have passed; quoted in DBCT, 232.

[118] T.W. Rhys Davids, Buddhist India, Motilal, rpt.1993, p.188.

[119] DB, II, 266 ff.

[120] D, II, 230.

[121] MLS, II, No. 83 Makhdeva Sutta, 268.

[122] M, II, 74-5.

[123] Ty kheo Thich Minh Chau (tr.), Chuyen Tien Than Duc Phat (Jtaka), Vien Nghien Cuu Phat Hoc Viet Nam, 1991, p. 5-6.

[124] SBFB, I, Story No. 3, p. 12; No. 12, p. 39; No. 43, p. 114 respectively.

[125] J, I, pp. 111, 149, 245 respectively.

[126] Unlike the Christian Era, the Buddha Era is reckoned from the death of the Buddha which occurred in 543 B.C. (in his 80^th year) and not from his birth.            

[127] Dha, verse 146, pp. 77-8.

[128] MLS, Vol. I, London: PTS, 1954, p. 288.

[129] Ibid, p. 210.

[130] MLS, I, No. 36 the Mahsaccakasutta, 300-301.

[131] M, I, 245-246.

[132] Ibid. loc.cit.

[133] M, I, 246.

[134] Since Bodhisatta Siddhattha has attained Bodhi or Enlightenment under that tree, it is described as Bodhi-tree or Bodhisattva-tree by the faithful disciples of the Buddha. It is still known by the same name.

[135] MLS, I, No. 26, Ariyapariyesana Sutta, 210-211.

[136] M, I, 166-167.

[137] Dha, Verse No. 163, pp. 85-6.

[138] MLS, I, No. 26, Ariyapariyesana Sutta, 211-212.

[139] M, I, 167.

[140] MLS, III, No. 111, The Anupada Sutta, 78-80.

[141] Ibid. loc.cit.

[142] M, III, 25-28.

[143] BGS, IV, Chapter Nine Dhammas, x, 295.

[144] A, IV, 448.

[145] MLS, I, No. 4, the Bhayabheravasutta, 28-29.

[146] M, I, 22-23.

[147] MLS, I, No.4, the Bhayabheravasutta,  28-29.

[148] P.V. Bapat, 2500 Years of Buddhism, Ministry of Information and Broadcasting Government of India, 1919, p. vii.

[149] Ven. Narada Mahathera, The Buddha, in ‘Gems of Buddhist Wisdom’, The Corporate Body of the Buddha Educational Foundation, Taiwan, 1996, pp.112-3.

[150] Ibid. loc.cit.

[151] Beatrice Lane Suzuki, Mahayana Buddhism, London, Fourth edition 1980, p. 35.

[152] D.T. Suzuki, Studies in The LaÏkvatra Sutra, Routledge & Kegan Pual Ltd., London, rpt. 1975, p. 214.

[153] BDSBL, 2-3.

[154] Isaline Blew Horner, The early Buddhist Theory in Man Perfected: A Study of the Arahanta, London: Williams & Northgate Ltd., 1936, London, 1979.

[155] BKS, III, 69-70.

[156] Commentary: the fivefold mass consists of saddhā (faith), hiri-ottappaÏ (Cocentration), saccaÏ (āraddha) viriya (energy), sati (mindfulness), pa––a (insight).

[157] Commentary: Satta-bojjhangā or the seven factors of enlightenment are mindfulness, Dhamma-testing, energy, zest, calm down, concentration, and poise (see A, VI, 14).

[158] The three sikkhā: adhi-±ila, citta, pa––a, the higher morals, mind and wisdom.

[159] The tenfold-potenccy (Dasa-balani) of a Tathāgata or an Arahant are:

1. The power of comprehension as it really is casual occasion as such and what is not causal occasion as such,
2. The power of comprehension as it really is the acquiring of deeds for oneself, past, future and present, both in their causal occasion and their result,
3. The power of comprehension as it really is the course leading to all boums,
4. The power of comprehension as it really is the world with its various and diverse features,
5. The power of comprehension as they really are the divers characters of beings,
6. The power of comprehension as it really is the higher or lower states of faculties of other beings, of other persons,
7. The power of comprehension as they really are the defilement of, the purification of, the emergence from attainments in meditation,
8. The power of memory of his manifold former birth habitations
9. A Tathāgata or an arahant, with his purified deva vision, surpassing that of men, sees beings as they are deceasing and uprising- he comprehends that beings are mean, excellent, comely, ugly, well-going according to the consequences of their deeds, and thinks.
10. A Tathāgata or an arahanta, by destruction of the cankers, enters on and abides in freedom of mind, freedom through wisdom that are cankerless, having released them here and now through his own super-knowledge…(See MLS, I, 69-70).

[160] S, III, 83-4.

[161] BKS, II, 35-7.

[162] DB, I, No. 12, SoÏadaϯa Sutta, 145.

[163] D, I, p. 111.

[164] MLS, II, No. 91 Brahmyusutta, 330.

[165] M, II, Brāhmayusutta, 144.

[166] BKS, III, Chapter i, iv, 58.

[167] S, III, 66.

[168] BIHP, 96.

[169] Milindapa–ha, ed. V. Trenckner, PTS, 1962, p. 226.

[170] Walpola Rahula, Zen and The Taming of The Bull, London 1978, p. 74.

[171] Edward Conze, Thirty Years of Buddhist Studies, Bruno Cassier (Publisher) LTD, Oxford, London, 1967, p. 54.

[172]‘Koæis: A million. Also explained by 100,000; or 100 laksa, i.e., 10 millions ‘quoted in DCBT’, p. 261.

[173]Lalita Vistara, Ed. S. Lefmann, Halle A..S., 1902-8, 402.10; Saddharma Puϯar­ka, 228.4; Sukhāvat­ Vyūha, p.10; in BDBSL, 25.

[174]Kãetra: land, field, country, place; also a universe consisting of three thousand large chiliocosms; also, a spire or flagstaff on a pagoda, a monastery, but this interprets ‘Caitya’; quoted in DCBT, 250b.

[175] SuvarÏa-prabhsa, Manuscript No. 8, Hodgson Collection, Royal Asiatic Society, London, fol.5a. 1 ff.

[176]  DCBT, 77b.

[177] Mahyna S‰trlaÏkra, editeù et traduit par S. Leùvi, Paris, 1907, 1911, p. 48, ­­, 83. 2.

[178] EB, II, 678.

[179] EB, II, 680.

[180] Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society, London, 1906, p. 493; see also BDBSL, 33.

[181] BDBSL, 30.

[182] Cf. S. Sorensen, An Index to the Names in the Mahābhārata, London, 1904, p. 203.

[183] R.G. Bhandarkar, Sects, (Vaiãônavism, Öaivism and Minor Religious System), Strassburg, 1913, pp. 116-117.

[184] J.M.McCrindle, India (Ancient India), London, 1877, p. 200, II, 5 ff.

[185] Ibid., p. 518.

[186] Kanai Lal Hazar, The Rise and Decline of Buddhism in India, Munshiram, M.Publishers, 1995, p. 47.

[187] Nalinaksha Dutt, Mahayana Buddhism, Motilal Banarsidass, Delhi, 1978 (Revised Edittion), p. 2.

[188] BDBSL, 38.

[189] Sir Charles Eliot, Hinduism and Buddhism, Routledge & Kegan Paul Ltd, London, rpt. 1971, I, p. xxxiii.

[190] Cambridge History of India, I, Cambridge, 1922, p. 225.

[191] N.Dutt, Mahāyāna Buddhism, Calcuta, 1973, p. 2.

[192]  BDBSL, 39.

[193] R.G.Bhandarkar, Sects, Op.cit., pp.153,157.

[194] Rājat, I, 136, 140-4; see kãemendra’s SamayamātÙk, v.61 re. KÙty±ama-vihara.

[195] R.Garbe, Christenthum,  (Indien und das Christenthum), Tubingen, 1914, p. 150; A.J.Edmunds, Gospels, (Buddhist and Christian Gospels), Tokyo, 1905,  p. 42; also see BDBSL, 41.

[196] Kozen Mizuno, Basic Buddhist Concepts, Tokyo, fourth reprint 1994, p. 30.

[197] R.G. Bhandarkar, Sects, p. 153.

[198] V.A. Smith, Ashoka, pp. 140 ff.

[199] Ibid., p. 335. P.V.N. Myers, General History, Boston, 1919, p. 61.

[200] EB, III, 231.

[201] BDBSL, 43.

[202] N.Dutt, Mahāyāna Buddhism, Delhi: Motilal,  p. 1.

[203] H. Nakamura, Indian Buddhism, Motilal Banarsidass, rpt. Delhi, 1996, p. 99.

[204] A.K Warder, Indian Buddhism, Motilal Banarsidass, rpt. Delhi, 1997, p. 352.

[205] Mircea Eliade, The Encyclopaedia of Religion, Vol. 2, Collier Macmillan Publishers, London, 1987, p. 458.

[206] Prof. Rhys Davids supposed it to be composed some time before the date of Asoka (see “Buddhists India by T.W. Rhys Davids”, page. 169). Meanwhile, Bimala Chum Law assigned pre-Asoka's age (see also “A History of Pali Literature by Bimala Chum Law”, p. 28). Gombrich considered it to be at least the third century B.C (see “How Buddhism Began by Richard F Gombrich, Munshiram Manoharlal Publishers Pvt. Ltd., 1997, p. 9)

[207] MLS, I, 207.

[208] Bimala Chum Law, A History of Pali Literaturere, Vol. I, Indological Book House, India, 1983, p. 42.

[209] N. Dutt, Buddhist Sects in India, Motilal Banarsidass, 1978 (Second Edition), pp. 58-9.

[210] N. Dutt, Aspects of Mahyna Buddhism in its Relation to H­nayna Buddhism, London: Luzac & Co: 1930. s..v. Mahsanghik.

[211] MLS, III, 165.

[212] Isaline B. Horner, The Early Buddhist Theory of Man Perfected, London, 1979, p. 191.

[213] LS, 14.

[214] Edward Conze (tr.), The Diamond S‰tra and The Heart S‰tra, London, 1957, p. 23.

[215] Edward Conze (tr.), Aãæashasrik Prajñ-pramit, p. 7.

[216] LS, 221.

[217] LS, 4 & also see L. Hurvitz, Scripture of The Lotus Blossom of the Five Dharma, New York, 1976, pp.1-2.

[218] Edward Conze, Buddhism: Its Essence and Development, Delhi, 1994, p. 130.

[219] Oxford Advanced Learner’s Dictionary, A.P. Cowie (Ed.), Oxford University Press, Great Britain, 4^th rpt. 1991, pp. 394-5.

[220] MLS, III, No. 121 Cūlasunnata Sutta, 147.

[221] M, III, 104.

[222] BGS, IV, 108.

[223] S, IV, 173.

[224] DB, I, No.1 Brāhmajala Sutta, 30-1.

[225] D, I, 17.

[226] Sutta-nipat, Verse 1119.

[227] MLS, II, No. 71 Tevijjavacchagotta Sutta, 162.

[228] M, I, No. 46 Mahāvedalla Sutta, 483.

[229] MLS, I, 359-360.

[230] M, I, 298.

[231] Culla Niddesa, II, Patisambhidmagga I, Para, 45, 91; 11 Para, 36, 48, 177.

[232] MLS, III, No. 121 Culasunnata Sutta, 147.

[233] M, II, 104.

[234] Ibid. 148.

[235] M, III, 104.

[236] Ibid. 149.

[237] M, III, 105-6.

[238] Ibid, 155.

[239] M, III, 111-2.

[240] Ibid, 156.

[241] M, III, 113.

[242] BKS, IV, Chaper x, ii, Anurada, 271.

[243] S, IV, 382-3.

[244] MLS, III, No. 121 Culasunnata Sutta, 147-8.

[245] M, III, 104-5.

[246] Vi, II, p. 628.

[247] Journal of Buddhist Studies, IV: 10.

[248] Updhi: a condition, peculiar, limited, special; quoted in DCBT, 330a.

[249] LakãaÏa (相) also, nimitta. A ‘distinctive mark, sign’ ‘indication, characteristic’, ‘designation’. Eteranal appearance; the appearance of things; form; a phenomenon in the sense of appearace, mutual; to regard; quoted in DCBT, 309a.

[250] BKS, IV, Chapter 1, 85. ii, 29.

[251] S, IV, 54.

[252] BKS, III, Chapter 1, i. Nakulapita, iv, 21.

[253] S, III, 22.

[254] BKS, IV, Chapter 1, 85 ii, 29.

[255] S, IV, 54.

[256] Patisambhidmagga, II, 48.

[257] M, I, 298.

[258] MLS, I, No. 43 Mahavedalla Sutta, 358.

[259] M, I, 297.

[260] Dha, verse 279, pp.145-6.

[261] S, 21-2; quoted in Early Buddhist Philosophy, Alfonso Verdu, Delhi: Motilal, 1995, p. 11.

[262] S, IV, Chapter 1, 85 ii, 28.

[263] S, IV, 54.

[264] Culla Niddesa, II, Patisambhidmagga I, Para, 45, 91; 11 Para, 36, 48, 177.

[265] Sn, xxv, 334.

[266] BKS, II, p. 2; IV, 53-4; DB, II, 52.

[267] S, II, 1.

[268] BKS, II, 23.

[269] S, II, 28.

[270] BKS, IV, Chapter 1 (d), 107. iv, The World, 53-4.

[271] S, IV, 87.

[272] MLS, III, 151-2.

[273] DB, II, No. 15 Mahanidana Sutta, 50-1.

[274] D, II, 55.

[275] Vi, II, 695.

[276] Ibid, 578.

[277] Ibid, 695.

[278] Ibid, 695.

[279] Ibid, 512-3.

[280] Ibid, 513.

[281] Vinaya, Tr. by I.B. Horner, I, 10-17.

[282] Sn, III, 134. 30-135.19 and Sn, II, 17.8-30.

[283] BKS, II, 23.

[284] MLS, III, No. 121 Cūlasunnata Sutta, 147.

[285] M, III, 104.

[286] M, III, 293 ff.

[287] A, V, 301.

[288] S, IV, 360.

[289] Aki–canyatana: the contemplation of the state of nothingness, or the immaterial, in which ecstasy gives place to serenity; quoted in DCBT, 379a.

[290] MLS, III, No. 121 Cūlasunnata Sutta, 149.

[291] M, III, 105.

[292] MLS, III, No. 121 Cūlasunnata Sutta, 150.

[293] M, III, 107.

[294] MLS, III, No. 121 Cūlasunnata Sutta, 151.

[295] M, III, 107-8.

[296] MLS, III, No. 121 Cūlasunnata Sutta, 151.

[297] M, III, 108.

[298] Theri-gatha, ed. R. Pischel, London:  PTS, 1883, p. 46.

[299] S, IV, p. 368 ff.

[300] A, V, 107.

⁸⁴ Ibid., 148.

 

[302] Sn, 734.

[303] Udna viii, 3 and 2 cf. also Itivuttaka, p. 37 (43).

[304] S, IV, p. 368 ff.

[305] BGS, I, Chapter 2, v, 6, 68-9.

[306] A, I, 72-73.

[307] Dha, verses 92, pp. 49-50.

[308] Loc.cit.

[309] MLS, III, No. 121 Cūlasunnata Sutta, 152.

[310] M, III, 109.

[311] BGS, I, Chapter 2, v, 6, 68-9.

[312] A, I, 14.

[313] MLS, III, No. 151 Pindapataparisuddhi Sutta, 343.

[314] M, III, 294.

[315] Edward Conze, The Prajnpramit Literature, Tokyo, 1978, p.1; Conze 1960: 9 ff.; 1968; 11ff.; also see Mahyna Buddhism - The Doctrinal Foundation, Paul Williams, New York, 4th rpt. 1998, p. 41.

[316] Praj–a Pramit Text: 20-24, also see EL, ff. 132.

[317] SSPW, 14.

[318] Shohei Ichimura, Buddhist Critical Spirituality: Praj– and ։nyat, Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass, 2001, p. 258.

[319] The Diamond that cut through Illusion, Thich Nhat Hanh, California: Parallel Press: 1991, p. 1.

[320] EL, p. 151.

[321] 般 若 波 羅 密 多 心 經, 佛 學 業 書, 台 鸞, 一 九 九 八, p. 135.

[322] EL, 152.

[323] DCBT, pp. 337-8.

[324] During the late fourth century B.C., the Buddhist organi­zation was divided into two schools: the MahsaÏgika (the majority or great assembly) and the Sthaviras (the school of elders). Soon afterwards, during the third century B.C., some eight schools of dissenters arose from the MahsaÏgika. During the second and third centuries B.C., some ten schools of dissenters arose from the Sthaviras. These eighteen schools were later referred to as H­nayna. The traditions surrounding these schools are unreliable, con­tradictory and confused. See Edward Conze's Buddhist Thought in India (Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, 1967), pp. 119-120.

[325] The Pali canon was compiled and edited by three monastic councils. The First Council assembled just a few months after the death of Buddha (483 B.C.) in Rjagaha, the Second about a hundred years later (around 383 B.C.) in Vesali, and the Third in 225 B.C. in Pataliputra. The canon is divided into three collections called "Baskets" (piæaka). The first collection, the Vinayapiæaka, contains the rules for monastic discipline (vinaya), the second, the Suttaptaka, the sermons (sutta) of the Buddha and his disciples, and the third, the Abhidhammapiæaka, the codifications and anal­yses of the teachings. There are certain extra-canonical Pali works such as the Milindapa–ha, the Visuddhimagga and the scholastic manual Abhidhammatthasangaha. The Sarvastivada scriptures were written in Sanskrit.

[326] There is no canon of the Mhayna because the Mhayna represents no unity of sects. There are only separate s‰tras which are called Mahyna s‰tras, originally written in Sanskrit. Many of these Sanskrit originals have been lost, and are preserved mainly in their Chinese and Tibetan… translations. The earlist Mahyna literature is the Praj– or "wisdom" literature and other Mhayna scriptures are too numerous to mention. And as illustrated above, we touch upon the Vajrachedika-praj–-pramit S‰tra, the HÙdaya S‰tra belonging to Prj–-pramit scriptures. However, sometimes we also take some quotations from the Vimalak­rti and Saddharma Puϯar­ka S‰tras.

[327] See T.R.Sharma, An Introduction to Buddhist Philosophy, Delhi: Eastern Book Linkers, 1994, p. 24.

[328] Murti, T.R.V., ed. Srinpoche C. Mani, Mdhyamika Dialectic and the Philosophy of Ngrjuna, (The Dalai Lama Tibetan Indology Studies vol. I), Sarnath, 1977, p. x.

[329] Praj–pramitpiϯrtha, I-II, ed. G. Tucci (Minor SaÏskrit Texts on the Praj–pramit), JRAS, 1947, 6.18, pp. 263-4: 1. bodhisattva։nyat, 2. bhoktÙ։nyat, 3. adhytmika։nyat, 4. vastu։nyat’ 5. r‰pa։nyat, 6. prakÙti։nyat, 7. vij–Ö‰nyat, 8. sattva։nyat, 9. saòskra։nyat, 10. dharma։nyat, 11. tma։nyat, 12. pudgalanaira։nyat, 13. saòskÙta։nyat, 14. asaòskÙta։nyat, 15. svadya։nyat, 16. nirvadya։nyat.

[330] Ibid., p. 263: Bodhisattvaò na pa±ym­ty uktavÏs tattvato muni¾ / bhoktdhytmikavastunò kathit tena ։nyat//

[331] Prof. Stcherbatsky, Madhynta-vibhga, Discrimination between Middle and Extremes, Calcutta, 1971.

[332] Bhvaviveka, Praj–prad­pa, on Madhyamaka±stra.

[333] Obermiller, E, A Study of the Twenty Aspects of ։nyat, Idian Historical Quarterly, Vol. IX, 1933.

[334] Murti, T.R.V., The Central Philosophy of Buddhism: An Study of the Mdhyamika System, Delhi: Harper Collins, 1998.

[335] Shohei Ichimura, Buddhist Critical Spirituality: Praj– and ։nyat, Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass, 2001, p. 218.

[336] DCBT, p. 259.

[337] MdhyamikavÙtti, ed. L. de la Vallee Poussin, Bibliotheca Buddhica, Vol. IV, 1902-13, pp. 173, 177.

[338] Garma C.C. Chang, Buddhist Teaching of Totality, Great Britain: The Pennsylvania State University, 1972, pp. 100-1.

[339] Aspects of Mahyna Buddhism, p. 26: This view is endorsed by P.T. Raju Idealistic Thought of India, p. 207; also see Buddhism its religion and philosophy, prof. W.S.Karunaratne, Buddhist Research Society, Singapore, 1988, p. 44.

[340] LS, Chapter II, p. 24.

[341] 妙 法 蓮 華 經, 佛 教 經 典 會, 佛 教 慈 慧 服 務 中 心， 香 港, 一 九九 四, p. 47.

[342] 般 若 波 羅 密 多 心 經, p. 134. ‘Form (r‰pa) is no different from the void (s‰nya)’ translated into ‘Form (r‰pa) does not different from the void (s‰nya).

[343] The Middle Treatise (T. 1564 in Vol. 30, tr. by Kumraj­va in 409 A.D.), xxiv: 14; Ngrjuna’s Twelve Gate Treatise, viii, Boston: D. Reidel Publishing Company, 1982; also see Empty Logic, Hsueh Li Cheng, Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass, 1991, p. 43.

[344] 金 剛 般 若 波 羅 密 經, 佛 學 業 書, 台 鸞, 一 九 九 八, p. 121.

[345] M‰laMdhyamika-krik of Nagrjuna, David J. Kalupahana, Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass, 1996, xxii, p. 16.

[346] 般 若 波 羅 密 多 心 經, p. 134.

[347] LS, pp. 29, 39, 116, 134.

[348] 般 若 波 羅 密 多 心 經, p. 134.

[349] BKS, IV, 29.

[350] LS, 42.

[351] 妙 法 蓮 華 經, p. 46.

[352] ։ny Dharma, Sinhalese edition, p. 57.

[353] 金 剛 般 若 波 羅 密 經, p. 132.

[354] SSPW, 20.

[355] CPB, 166.

[356] Candrak­ti on Mdhyamika±stra.

[357] For the detailed discussions of this, see Bimal Krishna Matilal, Epistemology, Logic, and Grammar in Indian Philosiphical Literature, Paris: Mouton, 1971, pp. 148-151; ‘A Critique of the Mdhyamika Position’, The Problem of Two Truths, ed. by Mervyn Sprung, pp. 56-57.

[358] Garma C.C. Chang, Buddhist Teaching of Totality, Great Britain: The Pennsylvania State University, 1972, pp. 95-6.

[359] 金 剛 般 若 波 羅 密 經,pp. 113-4.

[360] Ibid., p. 129.

[361] Chapter V, pp. 136-143.

[362] Madhyamaka±stra.

[363] Nagrjuna, The Middle Treatise, xviii: 7.

[364] Cf. Candrak­ti, Prasannapad on Mdhyamika±stra (24.18) op.cit. p. 220: y ceyaò svabhva±unyat s praj–aptir updya, saiya ±unyat updya praj–aptir iti vyavasthpyate. cakrdiny updya rathÏgni ratha¾ praj–ayate / tasya v savÏgny updya praj–ap, s svabhvennutpattih, y ca svabhvnanutpattih s ±unyat. saiva svabhvnutpattilakãaρ ±‰nyat madhyam pratipat iti vyayateasthpyate.

[365] Cf. Ibid.: tad evaò prat­tyasamutpdasyaivait vi±esasaòj– ±‰nyat updya praj–aptih, madhyam pratipad iti.

[366] Cf. Candrak­rti on Mdhyamika±astra.

prat­tyasamutpda±abdasya yo’ arthah sa eva’ ±‰nyat±abdrthah.

[367] Ibid., p.31. (It may also be pointed out here that in the Sino-Japanese tradition, according to the Tien-tai school, all the three except the prat­tyasamutpda constitute the so-called 'threefold Truth", the truth of the empty (k'ung), the provisional (chia) and the middle (chung). Cf. Takakusu, The Essentials of Buddhist Philosophy (Honolulu Office Appliance Co., Third Ed. p. 129 (quoted by Gadjin M. Nagao, p. 42).

[368] Mdhyamika±stra.

[369] Venkatramanan K., Ngrjuna’s philosophy, Delhi, 1978, p. 339 (a).

[370] pp. 143-151.

[371] Itivuttaka, ed. E. Windish, London: PTS, 1889, p. 37.

[372] Kathvatthu, I-II, ed. A.C. Taylor, London: PTS, 1894-95, p. 124; also see Milindapa–ha, ed. V. Trenckner, London: PTS, 1962, p. 316.

[373] Quoted in Mahayana Buddhism, Nalinaksha Dutt, Calcutta, 1976, p. 237.

[374] MdhyamikaKrikvÙtti (Prasannapad) by Canrak­rti, commentary on Mdhayamika kriks, Bib. Budd. IV, p. 521.

[375] Loc.cit.

[376]Eta evaò na kasyacin nirvÏe prahÏaò npi kasyacin nirodha iti vij–eyam. tata± ca sarua.kalpanksayar‰pam eva nirvÏam. tathoktam €rya Ratnvalym: na cbhvo'pi nirvÏam kuta evsya bhvat; bhavbhva-parmar±a-kãayo nirvÏam ucyate. MKV. p. 524.

[377] MK, xxv, 10.

[378] Cf. Vadnta Paribhã, chapter I.

[379] ‘muktis tu ±‰nyatdÙsæes tadarth±esabhvan’. A dictum of Ngrjuna quoted in BCAP. p. 438 and also in Subhsita Samgrha. Also in GuÏaratna's commentary (p. 47) on Sa¯¯ar±ana Samuccaya. buddhaih pratyeka-buddhai± ca ±ravakai± ca nisevit; mrgas tvam ek moksasya nstyanya iti ni±cayah. ASP. IX, 41. na vinnena mrgeÏa bodhir itygamo yatah, GBWL, IX, 41.

[380] Prof. Stcherbatsky suggests in the footnote that A±‰nya = NirvÏa of the H­naynists = Pradhna of Sòkhya.

[381] Prof. Stcherbatsky translates ‘prapa–ca’ by plurality and then sometimes even streches this sense of the word.

[382] MadhyamakavÙtti, ed. L. de la Vallee Poussin, BB. iv, 1902-13,  p. 445.

[383]"Ekaò hi ynaò dvit­yaò na vidyate". See also €ãtaShasrikPraj–pramit, ցnti Deva, Bib. Ind., p. 319. ekaò eva hi ynaò bhavati yad uta buddha-ynaò. bodhisattvnaò yath yusmatah subh‰ter nirde±ah.

It is explicitly stated in the Abhisamay€laòkr€loka, Haribhadra, G.O.S. Baroda, p. 120 that it is the opinion of Ngrjuna and his followers that the votaries of other paths do not gain final release, that they remain in a lower state, but are, at the end of the period, enlightened by the Buddha.

€rya Ngrjuna-pdis tanmatanusriÏa± caikayna-nayavdina huh:

labdhv bodhi-dvayaò hy ete bhavd uttrastamnash; bhavanty yuh-ksayt tusæh prpta-nirvaÏa-saòj–iah. na tesaò asti nirvÏaò kim tu janma-bhavatraye; dhtau na vidyate tesò te'pi tisæhanty ansrave. aklisæa-j–na-hnya pa±cd buddhaih prabodhith; sambhÙtya bodhi-sambhraòs te'pi syur lokanyakh. Abhisamay€laòkr€loka, Haribhadra, G.O.S. Baroda , p. 120.               

The Catuh Stava (I, 21, quoted by Advayavajra, p. 22) has a verse of this import: “dharmadhtor asambhedd ynabhedo'sti na prabho; ynatritayam khytaò tvay sattvvatratah”.

[384] Ratnval­ of Ngrjuna as quoted in BodhiCary€vatraPa–jik by Praj–karamati, Bib. Ind., p. 492.

[385] Ö, 246.

[386] LaÏkvatra-s‰tra, ed. B. Nanjio, Kyoto, 1923, p. 226.

[387] Ö, 263.

[388] Cf. S, II, pp.25 ff; “Iti kho, bhikkhave, y tatra Tathat avutatthat ana––aTathgata idapaccayat, ayaò vuccati, bhikkhave, paæicca-samuppdo”.

[389]  般 若 波 羅 密 多 心 經, p. 134-5.

[390]  金 剛 般 若 波 羅 密 經, p. 116.

[391] Ibid., p. 113-4.

[392] 般 若 波 羅 密 多 心 經, p. 134-5.

[393] Garma C.C. Chang, Buddhist Teaching of Totality, Great Britain: The Pennsylvania State University, 1972, p. 97.

[394] Ibid., p. 98.

[395] MK, xxv, 9.

[396] For more detail, see Basic Buddhist Concepts, Kogen Mizuno, tr. Charles S.Terry and Richard L. Gage, Tokyo, 1994, pp.13-35; and 2500 Years of Buddhism, P.V. Bapat, Ministry of Information and Broadcasting Government of India, 1919, pp. 31- 42.

[397] SSPW, 21.

[398] 般 若 波 羅 密 多 心 經, p. 135.

[399] SSPW, 45.

[400] nirvÏamapi myopamam svapnopamam. Aãæashasrikpraj–apramit, ed. R. Mitra, Calcutta, 1888, p. 40.

[401] Ibid., p. 25, 39, 196, 198, 200, 205, 279, 483, 484.

[402] Ibid., p. 119, 120, 185, 262.

[403] nāmar‰pameva my myaiva nmar‰pam. Ibid., p 898; myy¾ padam na vidyate. Ibid., p. 1209.

[404] yachcha praj–aptidharmam tasya notpdo na nirodho nyatra saòj–saòketamtreÏa vyavahriyate. Ibid., p 325.

[405] Lankvatras‰tra, ed. B. Nanjio, Kyoto, 1923, p. 22, 51, 62, 84, 85, 90, 95, 105.

[406] See Lalitavistara, ed. P.L. Vaidya, BST, I, 1958, p. 176, 177 & 181.

[407] See Samdhi-rja, Sanskrit Manuscript No. 4, Hodgson collection, Royal Asiatic Society, London, p. 27 & 29.

[408] See SuvarÏa-prabhsa, Manuscript No. 8, Hodgson collection, Royal Asiatic Society, London, p.31, 32 & 44.

[409] The Complete Enlightenment, Trong. & Com. By Cha’n Master Sheng-yen, London, 1999, p. 26.

[410] LSPW, 145.

[411] Garma C.C. Chang, Buddhist Teaching of Totality, Great Britain: The Pennsylvania State University, 1972, pp. 94-5.

[412] Ngrjuna, Hui Cheng lun (The Refutation Treatise), T. 1631, p. 24.

[413] LSPW, 140.

[414] Suzuki, The Awakening of Faith in the Mahyna, p. 111-12.

[415] D, I; LS, 48.

[416] LS, p. 7.

[417] The Twelve Gate Treatise, viii. xxiv: 8, See Chi-tsang, the Meaning of the Twofold Truth, pp. 77-115, and The Profound Meaning of the Treatises, pp. 1-14.

[418] For a detail discussion of this, see Mervyn sprung, ed. op. Cit., pp. 17, 38, 43 and 57, and N. Dutt, Aspects of Mahyna Buddhism and Its Relation to H­nayna, London, 1930, pp. 216-127.

[419] For a detail discussion, see Chi-tsang, op.cit. See also Mervyn Sprung, Ibid., pp.17, 43 & 58.

[420] Chi-tsang, op. cit.

[421]金 剛 般 若 波 羅 密 經, p.126.

[422] Ibid. 118.

[423] Ibid. 128.

[424] Ibid, xxiv, 10; the Twelve Gate Treatise, viii.

[425] The Twelve Gate treatise, viii. Chi-tsang commented that ‘to know ultimate truth is to benefit oneself (self-interest); to know conventional truth is to be able to benefit others (other-interest); to know both truths simultaneously is to benefit all equally (common-interest). Therefore it established the twofold truth’. A Commentary on the Twelve Gate Treatise (T. 1825), p. 206. See also The Profound Meaning of Three Treatise, p.11 and The meaning of the Twofold Truths, pp. 81, 82c, 85c & 86.

[426] 般 若 波 羅 密 多 心 經, p. 134.

[427] Garma C.C. Chang, The Buddhist Teaching of Totality, Britain: The Pennsylvania University, 1972, p. 109.

[428] The Middle Treatise, xxiv: 9; The Twelve Gate Treatise, viii.

[429] Ibid, XXIV, 8-9.

[430] Visuddhimagga II, ed. H.C. Warren and D. Kosambi, HOS, 41, 1950, p. 654.

[431] Loc. cit.

[432] Loc. cit.

[433] Ibid., 655.

[434] Loc. cit.

[435] Loc. cit.

[436] Ibid. 655‑6.

[437] Praj–pramitpiϯrtha, I-II, ed. G. Tucci (Minor Sanskrit Texts on the Praj–pramit ), JRAS, 1947, 6.18, pp. 263-4: 1. bodhisattva։nyat,  2. bhoktÙ։nyat, 3. adhytmika։nyat, 4. vastu։nyat, 5. r‰pa։nyat,      6. prapti։nyat, 7. vij–na։nyat, 8.sattva։nyat, 9. saòskra։nyat,  10. dharma։nyat, 11. tma։nyat, 12. pudgalanairatmya։nyat, 13. saòskÙta։nyat, 14. asaòskÙta։nyat, 15. svadya։nyat, 16. nirvadya։nyat.                 

[438] Obermiller, E., A Study of the Twenty Aspects of ։nyat, Indian Historical Quarterly, Vol. ix, 1933, pp. 170-187.

[439] CPB, pp. 351-356.

[440] Loc. cit.

[441] CPB, 354.

[442] Madhynta-vibhanga, Trans. Th. Stcherbatsky, Leningral, 1937, p.v. also see Buddhism: its Religion and Philosophy, Prof. W.S. Karunaratne, Buddhist Research Society, Singapore, 1988, p. 44.

To illustrate it, the words of Th. Stcherbatsky read as follow: “The term ։nyat is an innovation of the Mahyna, an innovation made necessary by the course of philosophic development. Its germs are found in the H­nayna, but the Mahyna has given it quite a new interpretation, an interpretation in which the two main schools of Buddhism radically diverged”.

[443] Visuddhimagga II, 658.

[444] T.R. Sharma, An Introduction to Buddhist Philosophy, Delhi: Eastern Book Linkers, 1994, pp. 75-6.

[445] 般 若 波 羅 密 多 心 經, p. 134.

[446] BKS, IV, 29.

133般 若 波 羅 密 多 心 經, p. 134.

[448] Ibid., 135.

[449] Shohei Ichimura, Buddhist Critical Spirituality: Praj– and ։nyat, Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass, 2001, pp. 108-9.

[450] Loc. cit.

[451]般 若 波 羅 密 多 心 經, p. 135.

[452] Edward Conze, Text, Sources, and Bibliography of the Praj–-pramit-hÙdaya, JRAS, 1948, p. 47.

[453] Aãæashasrikpraj–apramit, ed. R. Mitra, Calcutta, 1888, p. 40.

[454] Chi- tsang, Chung-kuan-lun-su (A Commentary on the Middle Treatise), T. 1842, p.11.

[455] The Middle Treatise, xviii: 5.

[456] Hsueh-li Cheng, Ngrjuna’s Twelve Gate Treatise, Boston: D. Reidel Publishing Company, 1982, pp.13-14.

[457] SSPW, 24.

[458] Encyclopedia of Religion, ed. Mircea Eliade, Vol. II, Collier Macmillan publishing Company, London, 1987, p. 165.

[459] G. Dhammsiri, Fundamentals of Buddhist Ethics, The Buddhist Research Society, Singapore, 1986, 113-128.

[460] GBWL, 13.

[461] Ibid., 16.

[462] Adhimukti: (阿提目多迦) means entire freedom of mind, confidence, interpreted by 善 思 惟. Quoted in DCBT, p. 288.

[463] EB, I, 201.

[464] See M. I, 163 & A. I, 145.

[465] D. T. Suzuki, Outlines of Mahayana Buddhism, New York, 1977, p. 297.

[466] Ibid., p. 209 ff.

[467] See AbhisamaylaÏkrloka, Gaekwad’s Oriental series, Baroda, LXII, p. 19 where it is said ։nyatkaruρ-garbhaò bodhicittaò.

[468] Quoted in EB, III, 186.

[469] LSPW, 124.

[470] Ibid. loc. cit.

[471] S‰tra of the Past Vows of Earth Stove Bodhisattva, The Collected Lectures of Tripiæaka,  Hsuan Hua, tr. Bhiksu Heng Ching, Buddhist Text Translation Society, The Institute for Advanced Studies of World Religious, NY, 1974, p. 20.

[472] GBWL, 104.

[473] Ibid., 2.

[474] Ibid., 3.

[475] Ibid., 46.

[476] BGS, I, 171-2, also see Chapter I, pp. 23-4.

[477] Ibid. loc. cit.

[478] DCBT, p. 218.

[479] E.J.Thomas, Buddhism, London, 1934.

[480] GBWL, 20-22.

[481] E.J.Thomas, Buddhism, London, 1934.

[482] BDBSL, 168.

[483] Buddhavaòsa , ed. by R.Morris , II, London, 1882, p. 59.

[484] Bs, 3.

[485] Vide as cited in G.P. Malalasekere, Op. Cit., p. 323.

[486] SBFB, IV, The Mtaòga Jtaka, Story No. 497, p. 235 ff; The Cittasambh‰ta Jtaka, Story No. 498, p. 244  ff.

[487] SBFB, IV, The Amba Jtaka, Story No. 474, p. 124 ff.; The Chavaka Jtaka, story No. 309, p. 18 ff.

[488] SBFB, V, Sarabhanga-Jtak, Story No. 552, p. 64 ff.

[489] E.J. Thomas, Buddhism, London, 1934.

[490] DCBT, p. 429.

[491] E.J. Thomas, Buddhism, London, 1934.

[492] N.Dutt (ed.), Bodhisattvabh‰mi¾, Vol. II (Patna), K.P. Jayaswal Research Institute, 1978, p. 9.

[493] D.T.Suzuki, Outlines of Mahyna Buddhism, New York, 1977, p. 302.

[494] Ibid., 299.

[495] N.Dutt, Op. cit., p. 10.

[496] Loc. cit.

[497] DCBT, p. 109.

[498] GBWL, 145.

[499] EB, III, 184.

[500] EB, III, 186 (also see  Öiks. p. 8; Bc. ch. i, v. 15).

[501] Gunapala Dharmasiri, Fundamentals of Buddhist Ethics, The Buddhist Research Society, Singapore, 1986, p. 120.

[502] PED, 77.

[503] BDBSL, 165.

[504] Buddhist Dictionary, Colombo, 1956, p.116; H.C. Warren, Buddhism in Translation, Cambridge, 1922, p. 23.

[505] Ed. by J.S. Speyar, The Jtakaml (Tr.), Delhi 1971, p. 93.

[506] M.S. Bhat, M.V.Talim, The Geneology of The Buddhas, Translation of the Buddhavaòsa, Bombay, 1969, p. 10.

[507] P.V. Bapat, Vimuttimagga and Visuddhimagga, Poona, 1937, pp. 64-80.

[508] Ibid., 166.

[509] Ibid. loc. cit.

[510] Loc. cit.

[511] R.S. Hardy, A Manual of Buddhism, Varanasi, 1967, p. 49.

[512] Ibid., p. 98.

[513] Ibid., p. 101.

[514] R.A. Rogers, A Short History of Ethics, London, 1962, p. 66.

[515] Ibid., p. 194.

[516] Ibid., p. 2.

[517] D.T.Suzuki, Study in The Lankavatara S‰tra, Routledge and Kegan Paul, Ltd, London, 1975, p. 366.

[518] BDBSL, 170-1.

[519] E. Conze, A short History of Buddhism, George Allen & Unwin LTD, London, 1980, also see Edward Conze, Thirty Years of Buddhist Studies, Bruno Cassier (Publisher) LTD, Oxford, London, 1967, p. 70.

[520] BDBSL, 168.

[521] Ed by Marry E. Lilley, Apadna, London, 1925, p. 56.

[522] SBFB,V, Mahkapi Jtaka, Story No. 516, p. 37 ff.

[523] SBFB, III, Sasa Jtaka, Story No. 316, p. 34 ff.

[524] SBFB, VI, Vessantara Jtaka, Story No. 547, p. 246 ff.

[525] SBFB, VI, Mahjanaka Jtaka, Story No. 539, p. 16 ff.

[526] SBFB, III, Hiri Jtaka, Story No. 363, p. 129 ff.

[527] SBFB, VI, Mahāsutasoma Jtaka, Story No. 537, p. 246 ff.

[528] BDBSL, 168.

[529] Ibid., pp.167-8, 356, Note 7.

[530] Loc. cit.

[531] Ibid.,169.

[532] Edward Conze, Thirty Years of Buddhist Studies, Bruno Cassier (Publisher) LTD, Oxford, London, 1967, p. 54.

[533] BDBSL, 172.

[534] PED, 153.

[535] Ö, 182.

[536] Ibid., 132.

[537] Itivuttaka: As It Was Said, tr. F. L. Woodward, M.A., PTS, London: Oxford University Press, 1948, p. 185.

[538] EB, IV, 201.

[539] Quoted by Henri de Lubac, Aspects of Buddhism, p. 24.

[540] LS, p. 3 ff.

[541] LS, 9.

[542] 妙 法 蓮 華 經, 佛 教 經 典 會, 佛 教 慈 慧 服 務 中 心，香 港，一 九九 四, p. 16.

[543] See G.C.C.Chang (ed.) A Treasury of Mahyna S‰tras — Selections From the Mahratnak‰æa S‰tra Tr. From the Chinese by the Buddhist Association of the United Sates, Pennsylvania and London, 1983, p. 267.

[544] LS, p. 182 ff.

[545] LS, 187.

[546] 妙 法 蓮 華 經, pp. 177-8.

[547] LS, p. 281 ff.

[548] ‘Koæis: A million. Also explained by 100,000; or 100 lakãa, i.e. 10 millions’.  Quoted in DCBT, p. 261.

[549] LS, p. 298 ff.

[550] LS, 302.

[551] 妙 法 蓮 華 經, p.  287.

[552] Quoted in Edward Conze, Selected Sayings From The Perfection of Wisdom, Boulder, 1978, pp. 66-7.

[553] LS, 61.

[554] 妙 法 蓮 華 經, p. 18.

[555] 金 剛 般 若 波 羅 密 經, 佛 學 業 書, 台 鸞, 一 九 九 八, p. 112.

[556] LS, 10-11.

[557] 妙 法 蓮 華 經, p. 18.

[558] Edward Conze, Selected Sayings from the Perfection of Wisdom, Boulder, 1978, p. 67.

[559] BB, 140.

[560] Ö, 27-30, 66.

[561] The Mah-praj–-pramit-±stra of Ngrjuna (tr. Kumraj­va), T. 1509, Vol. 25, p. 163c.

[562] LS, 9.

[563] 妙 法 蓮 華 經, p. 17.

[564] LS, 11.

[565] 妙  法  蓮  華  經, p. 18.

[566] LS, 197.

[567] 妙 法 蓮 華 經, p. 185.

[568]  金 剛 般 若 波 羅 密 經, pp. 120-1.

[569] Gunapala Dharmasiri, Fundamentals of Buddhist Ethics, Singapore, The Buddhist Research Society, 1986, p. 207.

[570] BB, 189.

[571] The Mah-praj–pramit-±stra of Ngrjuna (tr. Kumraj­va), T. 1509, Vol. 25, p. 168 b.

[572] Ibid., p. 170c.

[573] Ibid., p. 171c.

[574] Loc. cit.

[575] Ibid., p. 172a.

[576] Ibid., pp. 172a, 97b, 168b ff., 415b, 417c.

[577] BB, p. 200 ff.

[578] EE, 73.

[579] R.K.Prabhu and U. R. Rao, The Mind of Mahatma Gandhi, Navajivan publishing House, Ahmedabad, 1969, p. 31.

[580] LS, 61.

[581] 妙 法 蓮 華 經, pp. 65-66.

[582] LS, 219.

[583] 妙 法 蓮 華 經, pp. 205-206.

[584] EE, 74.

[585] LSPW, 65.

[586] The Mah-praj–pramit-±stra of Ngrjuna (tr. Kumraj­va), T. 1509, Vol. 25, p. 172 b.

[587] Ibid., p. 173c.

[588] Ibid., p. 174c.

[589] LSPW, 143-146.

[590] LS, 19.

[591] 妙  法  蓮  華  經, p. 26.

[592] LS, 221.

[593] 妙 法 蓮 華 經, p. 207.

[594] The Mah-praj–pramit-±stra of Ngrjuna (tr. Kumraj­va), T. 1509, Vol. 25, p. 187c.

[595] Loc.cit.

[596] The Mah-praj–pramit-±stra of Ngrjuna (tr. Kumraj­va), T. 1509, Vol. 25, p. 189 b, c.

[597] LS, 10.

[598] 妙 法 蓮 華 經, p.18.

[599] LS, 11-12.

[600] 妙 法 蓮 華 經, p. 19.

[601] LSPW, 60.

[602] Ibid., 56.

[603] LaÏkvatra-s‰tra, ed by B. Nanjio, Kyoto, 1923, p. 54.

[604] Ibid., I & Mahyna- s‰trlaÏkra, Pari, 1907, 1911, p. 149-2.

[605] The Öata-shasrik Praj– Pramit, ed. by P. Ghosa, Calcuta, 1902-13, pp. 136, 141, 842, 1197, 1216, 1360, 1440, 1643.

[606] See in BDBSL, 245 & 金 剛 般 若 波 羅 密 經, op.cit.  p. 21.5, 441.ii, 42.8, 43.16, 23.7, 38.9, 37.13.

[607] LS, 80 ff.

[608] LS, 23 ff.

[609] William Jamesin, The Varieties of Religious Experience, Longmans, Green and Co., 1941, p. 58.

[610] Gandhi, M. K., In Search of the Suprems, vol. I, Navajivan publishing House, Ahmedabad, 1962, p. 173.

[611] Ibid, 176.

[612] Loc.cit.

[613] Gandhi, M. K., Prayer, Navajivan publishing House, Ahmedabad, p. 20.

[614] EE, 100.

[615] Asæashassrik-praj–pramit S‰tra (八 千 頌 般 若 波 羅 密 經).

[616] 菩 薩 瓔 珞 本 業 經 or the S‰tra on the Original Action of the Garland of the Boddhisattva (2 fasc.) translated by BuddhasmÙti (Chu-fo-nien) in 376-378. Taisho. 24 (no. 1485), 1010 ff. ‘Garland’ (ml) mentioned in the title is the jewel-ornament consisting of crown, necklet, and bracelets of the Boddhisattvas. This S‰tra was composed to manifest the original Action of the Boddhisattvas.

[617] Cf. The Mochizuki Bukkyo Daijjten, Vol. 2, p. 1755b. (四 弘 誓 願) Su hung shih yuan or shigu-seigan).

[618] Shohei Ichimura, Buddhist Critical Spirituality: Praj– and ։nyat, Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass, 2001, p. 112.

[619] Ven. Narada Maha Thero, Vision of the Buddha, Singapore, Singaspore Buddhist Meditation Centre, pp. 289-296.

[620] Loc. cit.

[621] Loc. cit.

[622] ‘Three Öikss i.e., Learning, study’ quoted in DCBT, p. 212.

[623] BDBSL, 167.

[624] Section 36.

[625] D, Ambaææha sutta, VII, 220.

[626] D, I, 110-112, 148-149.

[627] BDBSL, 166.

[628] DCBT, p. 413.

[629] Gunapala Dharmasiri, Fundamentals of Buddhist Ethics, Singapore, The Buddhist Research Society, 1986, p. 21.

[630] BDBSL, 245.

[631] Chen Wei Shi Lun, Shindo Edition, chapter 9, p. 31, line 10.

[632] PED, 197.

[633] Peter Harvey, An Introdution to Buddhism, Delhi: Munshiram Manoharlai, 1990, p. 200.

[634] LS, 42.

[635] 妙 法 蓮 華 經, p. 47.

[636] MLS, II, 95.

[637] LS, 298 ff.

[638] LS, 305-6.

[639] 妙 法 蓮 華 經, p. 290.

[640] LS, 61.

[641] 妙 法 蓮 華 經, pp. 65-6.

[642] LSPW, 78.

[643] LS, 221.

[644] 妙 法 蓮 華 經, p. 207.

[645] 金 剛 般 若 波 羅 密 經,p. 111.

[646] LS, 167.

[647]妙 法 蓮 華 經, pp. 253-4.

[648] DCBT, 175.

[649] See note 82, p. 31, chapter II.

[650] LS, 14.

[651] LS, 221.

[652] 妙 法 蓮 華 經, p. 207.

[653] See in the end of this research work, p. 347-9.

[654] EB, III, 74-75.

[655] BDBSL, 270-271.

[656] See Chapter III, p. 73.

[657] BDBSL, 167.

[658] P.L.Vaidya, DasaBhumikas‰tra Buddhist Sanskrit Texts No. 7, Darbhanga, Mithila Institute of Post-   graduate Studies & Research in Sanskrit Learning, 1967, p. 3.

[659] “One of the four continents, situated south of Mountaint Meru, comprising the world knows to the early Indians” quoted in DCBT, p. 298.

[660] This refers to the four Sangraha-vastus.

[661] BDBSL, 284-251.

[662] Sn, pp. 76 ff; M, I, pp. 166 ff, 246 ff.

[663] D. I, pp. 87-88; LS, pp. 144, 376; cf. Lalitavistara ed. P.L. Vaidya, BST, I, 1958, p. 3.

[664] In the Mahynic works also, as for instance, in the Dasa., it is stated that a Bodhisattva can become a Mahbrahma in the ninth bh‰mi if he so wished.

[665] M, III, 8.

[666] D, Lakkhana Sutta, ix, 236.

[667] D, Mahparinibbna Sutta, xiii, 182.

[668] DCBT, pp. 337.

[669] M, Ariyapariyesana Sutta, I, 171.

[670] Kathvatthu, ed. A.C. Taylor, London: PTS, 1894-95, XVII. 1 & 2.

[671] Nalinaksha Dutt, Buddhist Sects in India, Delhi: Motilal, rpt. 1998, p. 105.

[672] S, III, 140.

[673] Kathvatthu, op. cit.,  XXI, 5.

[674] Ibid., XXVII. 3.

[675] Nalinaksha Dutt, Buddhist Sects in India, Delhi: Motilal, 1998, pp. 106-10.

[676] Kathvatthu, op. cit., V. 9.

[677] Ibid, XXI, 6.

[678] Jñeya: cognizable, the region or basis of knowledge; quoted in DCBT, 452b.

[679] Nalinaksha Dutt, Buddhist Sects in India, Delhi: Motilal, 1998, p. 81.

[680] EB, III, 424.

[681] Vol. 76.

[682] Vol. 76.

[683] EB, III, 423-6.

[684] D, Mahparinibbna Sutta, 242.

[685] M, III, p. 7 ff.

[686] N. Dutt, Mahyna Buddhism, Calcutta, 1976, p. 159.

[687] S, Vakkalia sutta, III, p. 110 ff.

[688] PP, 234.

[689] N. Dutt, Op. Cit., 142.

[690] Ibid., 144.

[691] N. Dutt, Op. Cit: 136-7.

[692] N. Dutt, Op. Cit, 145.

[693]  金 剛 般 若 波 羅 密 經, 佛 學 業 書, 台 鸞, 一 九 九 八, p. 130.

[694]Yena ցkyamuni-tathgatdir‰peρsaòsraò sarvaloka-dhtuãu sat-tvnò sam­hitara arthaò samaÏkaroty asau kya¾, prabandhataynuparato nairmÏiko buddhasya bhagavata¾ . . . tath coktam: karoti yena citrÏi hitni jagata¾ samam; bhavt so'nupacchinna¾ kyo nairòniko mune¾. Abhisamay€laòkr€loka of Haribhadra, G.O.S., Baroda, p. 532.

[695] See Buston, pp. 133ff. Uttaratantra of Asaôga, pp. 245ff. (Obermiller’s Trans. Acta Orientalia, vol. IX, 1931).

[696] Abhisamay€laòkr€loka of Haribhadra, G.O.S., Baroda, p. 525.

[697] N. Dutt, Op. Cit., 157.

[698] Buston, Vol. I, p. 129.

[699] dvtriò±al lakãaρsitivya–jantm muner ayam;

 smbhogiko mata¾ kyo mahynopabhogata¾.

 Abhisamay€laòkr€loka of Haribhadra, G.O.S., Baroda, p. 526.

[700] Öata Shasrik, pp. 2 ff.

[701] This is the view of Dharmamitra the Mdhyamika, as we learn from Buston Vol. I (pp. 131 ff.). His work is called Prasphuæapda, and is preserved only in Tibetan.

[702] Krik (kraka): concise statement in verse of, doctrine; quoted in A Sanskrit English Dictionary, Etymologically and Philologically Arranged with Special reference to Cognate Indo-European Languages, print 14 times, Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass, 1997, p. 274.

[703] GBWL, 42.

[704]ye mò r‰peÏa cdrkãur ye mò ghoãeÏa anvayu¾

mithyprahÏa-prasÙt na mò drakãyanti te jan¾

dharmato Buddh draãæavy dharmakya hi nyak¾

dharmat cpy avij–ey na s ±aky vijnitum

Vajracchedik. p. 43, quoted in MKV. p. 448; Bodhicaryvtra, €crya ցntideva, p. 421.

uktaih hy etad Bhagavata:

dharmakya Buddh Bhagavanta¾ m khalu punar imaò bhikãava¾

satkyaò kyaò manyadhvaò dharma-kya pariniãpattito mm bhikãavo drakãyanty eãa ca Tathgatakya¾.

AãæaShasrik - Prajn - pramit, (Bib. Indica), p. 94. mukhyato dharmakyas tathgata¾.   Abhisamayālaòkrāloka of Haribhadra, G.O.S., Baroda. p. 181. See also pp. 205, 521ff.

[705] sarvkrm vi±uddhiò ye dharm¾ prpt nirsrav¾;

svbhviko mune¾ kyas teãm prakÙti-lakãaÏa¾. Abhisamay€laòkr€loka of Haribhadra, G.O.S., Baroda, p. 523.

[706] Outlines of Mahyna, pp. 223 - 4.

[707] Abhisamay€laòkr€loka of Haribhadra, G.O.S., Baroda, pp. 523 ff.

[708] Sn, pp. 76 ff; M, I, pp. 166 ff, 246 ff.

[709] D. I, pp. 87-88; LS, pp. 144, 376; cf. Lalitavistara ed. P.L. Vaidya, BST, I, 1958, p. 3.

[710] In the Mahynic works also, as for instance, in the Dasa., it is stated that a Bodhisattva can become a Mahbrahma in the ninth bh‰mi if he so wished.

[711] M, III, 8.

[712] D, Lakkhana Sutta, ix, 236.

[713] D, Mahparinibbna Sutta, xiii, 182.

[714] DCBT, pp. 337.

[715] M, Ariyapariyesana Sutta, I, 171.

[716] Kathvatthu, ed. A.C. Taylor, London: PTS, 1894-95, XVII. 1 & 2.

[717] Nalinaksha Dutt, Buddhist Sects in India, Delhi: Motilal, rpt. 1998, p. 105.

[718] S, III, 140.

[719] Kathvatthu, op. cit.,  XXI, 5.

[720] Ibid., XXVII. 3.

[721] Nalinaksha Dutt, Buddhist Sects in India, Delhi: Motilal, 1998, pp. 106-10.

[722] Kathvatthu, op. cit., V. 9.

[723] Ibid, XXI, 6.

[724] Jñeya: cognizable, the region or basis of knowledge; quoted in DCBT, 452b.

[725] Nalinaksha Dutt, Buddhist Sects in India, Delhi: Motilal, 1998, p. 81.

[726] EB, III, 424.

[727] Vol. 76.

[728] Vol. 76.

[729] EB, III, 423-6.

[730] D, Mahparinibbna Sutta, 242.

[731] M, III, p. 7 ff.

[732] N. Dutt, Mahyna Buddhism, Calcutta, 1976, p. 159.

[733] S, Vakkalia sutta, III, p. 110 ff.

[734] PP, 234.

[735] N. Dutt, Op. Cit., 142.

[736] Ibid., 144.

[737] N. Dutt, Op. Cit: 136-7.

[738] N. Dutt, Op. Cit, 145.

[739]  金 剛 般 若 波 羅 密 經, 佛 學 業 書, 台 鸞, 一 九 九 八, p. 130.

[740]Yena ցkyamuni-tathgatdir‰peρsaòsraò sarvaloka-dhtuãu sat-tvnò sam­hitara arthaò samaÏkaroty asau kya¾, prabandhataynuparato nairmÏiko buddhasya bhagavata¾ . . . tath coktam: karoti yena citrÏi hitni jagata¾ samam; bhavt so'nupacchinna¾ kyo nairòniko mune¾. Abhisamay€laòkr€loka of Haribhadra, G.O.S., Baroda, p. 532.

[741] See Buston, pp. 133ff. Uttaratantra of Asaôga, pp. 245ff. (Obermiller’s Trans. Acta Orientalia, vol. IX, 1931).

[742] Abhisamay€laòkr€loka of Haribhadra, G.O.S., Baroda, p. 525.

[743] N. Dutt, Op. Cit., 157.

[744] Buston, Vol. I, p. 129.

[745] dvtriò±al lakãaρsitivya–jantm muner ayam;

 smbhogiko mata¾ kyo mahynopabhogata¾.

 Abhisamay€laòkr€loka of Haribhadra, G.O.S., Baroda, p. 526.

[746] Öata Shasrik, pp. 2 ff.

[747] This is the view of Dharmamitra the Mdhyamika, as we learn from Buston Vol. I (pp. 131 ff.). His work is called Prasphuæapda, and is preserved only in Tibetan.

[748] Krik (kraka): concise statement in verse of, doctrine; quoted in A Sanskrit English Dictionary, Etymologically and Philologically Arranged with Special reference to Cognate Indo-European Languages, print 14 times, Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass, 1997, p. 274.

[749] GBWL, 42.

[750]ye mò r‰peÏa cdrkãur ye mò ghoãeÏa anvayu¾

mithyprahÏa-prasÙt na mò drakãyanti te jan¾

dharmato Buddh draãæavy dharmakya hi nyak¾

dharmat cpy avij–ey na s ±aky vijnitum

Vajracchedik. p. 43, quoted in MKV. p. 448; Bodhicaryvtra, €crya ցntideva, p. 421.

uktaih hy etad Bhagavata:

dharmakya Buddh Bhagavanta¾ m khalu punar imaò bhikãava¾

satkyaò kyaò manyadhvaò dharma-kya pariniãpattito mm bhikãavo drakãyanty eãa ca Tathgatakya¾.

AãæaShasrik - Prajn - pramit, (Bib. Indica), p. 94. mukhyato dharmakyas tathgata¾.   Abhisamayālaòkrāloka of Haribhadra, G.O.S., Baroda. p. 181. See also pp. 205, 521ff.

[751] sarvkrm vi±uddhiò ye dharm¾ prpt nirsrav¾;

svbhviko mune¾ kyas teãm prakÙti-lakãaÏa¾. Abhisamay€laòkr€loka of Haribhadra, G.O.S., Baroda, p. 523.

[752] Outlines of Mahyna, pp. 223 - 4.

[753] Abhisamay€laòkr€loka of Haribhadra, G.O.S., Baroda, pp. 523 ff.

[754] See Ch.VII, p. 295.

[755] 金 剛 般 若 波 羅 密 經, 佛 學 業 書, 台 鸞, 一 九 九 八,  pp. 113-4.

[756] See Buddhism and Science, Buddhasa P. Kirthisinghe ed., Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass, Rpt. 1996, pp. 8-11, 17 ff., 40 ff., 92ff., 103ff., 146ff.

[757] 般 若 波 羅 密 多 心 經, 佛 學 業 書, 台 鸞, 一 九 九 八, p. 134.

[758] The Middle Treatise (T 1564 in Vol. 30, tr. by Kumraj­va in 409 A.D.), xxiv: 14; Ngrjuna’s Twelve Gate Treatise, viii, Boston: D. Reidel Publishing Company, 1982; also see Empty Logic, Hsueh Li Cheng, Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass, 1991, p. 43.

[759] C. Egerton, Buddhism and Science, Sarnath, 1959, p. 9.

[760] See 妙 法 蓮 華 經 ， 佛 教 經 典 八 ， 佛 教 慈 悲 復 務 中 心 ， 香 港 ， 一 九 九 四.

 

PLEASE READ THE WHOLE BOOK BODHISATTVA AND ŚUNYATA: Boddhisattva_and_Sunyata_-_2022.pdf

Boddhisattva_and_Sunyata-TN_Gioi_Huong.pdf