The five basic stages in the development of the concept of the Buddha
From: Guang Xing (2005), The Concept of The Buddha
As we have seen, the development of the concept of the Buddha is a complex issue. It involves many key aspects of Buddhist thought such as the goal of Buddhist practice – Buddhahood, the bodhisattva ideal and the notion of nirvāna. These developments can be described as a process of evolution from the Buddha envisaged as a human teacher in early Buddhism to a philosophical and abstract concept in the Mahayana. Even in the time of the early Indian Buddhist schools, attempts were made to understand or interpret what or who the Buddha was. The interpretations of these early schools were closely connected with the historical Buddha since the life of Sakyamuni had a strong influence upon them. It is the early Mahayanists who thoroughly interpreted the notion of the Buddha in an ontological way. The dharmakāya (pháp thân) was rendered as an impersonal principle supporting all phenomena in which the historical Buddha played an insignificant role. It was on this basis that the trikāya (tam thân) theory was formulated through the analysis and synthesis of the doctrinal developments in the early and middle Mahayana sutras. Five basic stages can be identified in the development of the concept of the Buddha.
1) The first stage is the Buddha as a human teacher and guide in early Buddhism albeit with many supernatural qualities attributed to him, for example the thirty-two marks of a great man. In the earliest Buddhist literature, namely the Nikāyas and the Āgamas (A-hàm), two identities of the Buddha are clearly distinguishable: the human teacher and the superhuman being. The superhuman aspect of the Buddha falls into two categories: the miracles performed by Gautama Buddha and the miracles that occurred as a result of natural phenomena. The latter category does not affect the personality of the Buddha. The first, as analysed, is included in the six modes of higher knowledge that are attainable by a human. Although the story of the Buddha in the early sutras is deeply embedded in legends and mythology, the human identity is vividly apparent in his illness and old age as well as in the troubles of his life within and outside the community of monks.
2) In the second stage of the early Indian Buddhist schools there emerged two different interpretations of the notion of the Buddha on the basis of the two identities of the Buddha present in early Buddhism. The Sarvastivadins (Hữu bộ) established the two-body theory: the dharmakāya (pháp thân) and the rupakāya (sắc thân) based on the teachings of the Āgamas. They insisted that the dharmakāya corresponded to the real Buddha to be taken refuge in. It was thus not the impure rupakāya that was to form the object of refuge, although they essentially advocated the human version of the Buddha. The Sarvastivadins believed that what made Gautama a Buddha was his attainment of bodhi, which was comprised of purely mental qualities. According to the *Mahāvibhāsā (Đại tỳ-bà-sa, T-1545) these purely mental qualities consisted of the eighteen dharmas exclusive to the Buddha, which are known collectively as dharmakāya. This interpretation of the concept of the Buddha is rational and analytical since there is nothing innovative about it. It represents only a synthetic summary of what is taught in early Buddhism. On the other hand, the Mahasanghikas (Đại chúng bộ) interpreted the Buddha as a transcendental being on the basis of the Buddha’s superhuman qualities also revealed in the Āgamas. After all, it is well known that they took whatever was said by the Buddha as an enunciation of Dharma. This interpretation added two new dimensions to the notion of the Buddha. First, the real Buddha was perceived as exalted above mankind, omniscient and almighty. Second, the appearance of the Buddha on earth, including his daily activities, is considered a display for the sake of liberating sentient beings. The Buddha was not therefore subject to the laws of the human world.
3) The third stage is the ontological interpretation of the concept of the Buddha by the early Mahayanists on the basis of Mahasanghika Buddhology. The early Mahayanists reinterpreted the notion of the Buddha as having the nature of the tathatā (chân như), which they introduced. According to them, tathatā, which is the true nature of all things both transcendental and worldly, is the dharmakāya, for both possess the same characteristics: (1) they are intrinsically pure and eternal; (2) they are one and the same in all Buddhas of the past, present and future. Since tathatā inheres in all objects and pervades the entire universe, the dharmakāya becomes a cosmic body as well as the principle supporting all phenomena. This is why the dharmakāya is regarded as the Buddha. This understanding of the notion of the Buddha is very different from that of the early Indian Buddhist schools. The Mahayanists concentrated exclusively on the abstract notion of the Buddha, not on the historical Buddha. This provides the foundation for the Mahayanist doctrine of the concept of the Buddha.
4) The fourth stage is the identification of the dharmakāya with many new concepts such as tathāgatagarbha (như lai tạng) and mahāparinirvāna (đại bát-niết-bàn), which were introduced by the Mahayanists along with the composition of the Mahayana sutras and sāstras. These new concepts added new dimensions to the notion of the Buddha, expanding its connotations. According to the *Mahāvaipulya-tathāgatagarbha-sutra (Đại Phương đẳng như lai tạng kinh, T-666), all sentient beings possess Buddha nature (tathāgatagarbha), although it is covered with defilements. When the defilements are eliminated, pure dharmakāya is revealed. The tathāgatagarbha is called buddhadhātu (phật giới) at the level of sentient beings, and dharmakāya at the level of Buddhahood. Buddhas are not different from sentient beings in an ultimate sense since all possess the same tathatā, but from the perspective of conventional truth they are different, as Buddhas do not have klesas (phiền não). According to the Mahayana Mahāparinirvānasutra (Đại Bát-niết-bàn kinh), however, the mahāparinirvāna of the Buddha is different from the liberation of the srāvakas (thanh văn) and pratyekabuddhas (độc giác phật) in that it has four attributes: eternity, happiness, self and purity (thường, lạc, ngã, tịnh). The attribute of eternity is the crux of the concept of mahāparinirvāna since the other three attributes are established on its basis. Therefore, the Buddha’s abiding in mahāparinirvāna does not imply that he is gone for ever, but means he eternally lives in intrinsic quiescence. Thus, in his *Buddhagotrasāstra (Phật tánh luận, T-1610), Vasubandhu (Thế Thân) asserts that terms such as Tathagata (như lai), dharmakāya (pháp thân), paramārtha (chân đế) and nirvāna (niết-bàn) are all congruent since they ontologically have tathatā as their essence. They are given different names because each of them denotes a specific aspect of Buddhahood. Thus, the notion of the Buddha in the Mahayana is entirely different from that of early Buddhism. Ontologically it is the ultimate reality and salvifically it is the transcendent being who establishes sentient beings in enlightenment.
5) The fifth stage is the formulation of the trikāya theory, the climax in the progressive development of the concept of the Buddha. The trikāya theory is a result of the complex development of Mahayana thought. From early to middle Mahayana sutras we can see that the concept of the Buddha developed considerably and acquired many transcendental qualities and attributes such as magical light and salvific power. These qualities were expanded and strengthened as Mahayanist theories developed. The *Āvatamsaka (kinh Hoa Nghiêm, T-279) compilation represents perhaps the last stage before the formulation of the trikāya theory by providing the doctrinal foundation for it. On the other hand, the debates on the transcendental qualities of the Buddha in early Indian Buddhist schools identified the problem of the short life-span of Buddha Sakyamuni in Mahayana sutras. It was an important issue to which many Mahayana sutras devoted a special treatment. This served as significant impetus for the further development of the concept of the Buddha. One of the reasons Yogacara masters such as Asanga (Vô Trước) and Vasubandhu (Thế Thân) established the trikāya theory rooted in the doctrines of the Mahayana sutras was thus to solve the complex problem concerning the ontological status of the Buddha.
From: Guang Xing (2005), The Concept of The Buddha
As we have seen, the development of the concept of the Buddha is a complex issue. It involves many key aspects of Buddhist thought such as the goal of Buddhist practice – Buddhahood, the bodhisattva ideal and the notion of nirvāna. These developments can be described as a process of evolution from the Buddha envisaged as a human teacher in early Buddhism to a philosophical and abstract concept in the Mahayana. Even in the time of the early Indian Buddhist schools, attempts were made to understand or interpret what or who the Buddha was. The interpretations of these early schools were closely connected with the historical Buddha since the life of Sakyamuni had a strong influence upon them. It is the early Mahayanists who thoroughly interpreted the notion of the Buddha in an ontological way. The dharmakāya (pháp thân) was rendered as an impersonal principle supporting all phenomena in which the historical Buddha played an insignificant role. It was on this basis that the trikāya (tam thân) theory was formulated through the analysis and synthesis of the doctrinal developments in the early and middle Mahayana sutras. Five basic stages can be identified in the development of the concept of the Buddha.
1) The first stage is the Buddha as a human teacher and guide in early Buddhism albeit with many supernatural qualities attributed to him, for example the thirty-two marks of a great man. In the earliest Buddhist literature, namely the Nikāyas and the Āgamas (A-hàm), two identities of the Buddha are clearly distinguishable: the human teacher and the superhuman being. The superhuman aspect of the Buddha falls into two categories: the miracles performed by Gautama Buddha and the miracles that occurred as a result of natural phenomena. The latter category does not affect the personality of the Buddha. The first, as analysed, is included in the six modes of higher knowledge that are attainable by a human. Although the story of the Buddha in the early sutras is deeply embedded in legends and mythology, the human identity is vividly apparent in his illness and old age as well as in the troubles of his life within and outside the community of monks.
2) In the second stage of the early Indian Buddhist schools there emerged two different interpretations of the notion of the Buddha on the basis of the two identities of the Buddha present in early Buddhism. The Sarvastivadins (Hữu bộ) established the two-body theory: the dharmakāya (pháp thân) and the rupakāya (sắc thân) based on the teachings of the Āgamas. They insisted that the dharmakāya corresponded to the real Buddha to be taken refuge in. It was thus not the impure rupakāya that was to form the object of refuge, although they essentially advocated the human version of the Buddha. The Sarvastivadins believed that what made Gautama a Buddha was his attainment of bodhi, which was comprised of purely mental qualities. According to the *Mahāvibhāsā (Đại tỳ-bà-sa, T-1545) these purely mental qualities consisted of the eighteen dharmas exclusive to the Buddha, which are known collectively as dharmakāya. This interpretation of the concept of the Buddha is rational and analytical since there is nothing innovative about it. It represents only a synthetic summary of what is taught in early Buddhism. On the other hand, the Mahasanghikas (Đại chúng bộ) interpreted the Buddha as a transcendental being on the basis of the Buddha’s superhuman qualities also revealed in the Āgamas. After all, it is well known that they took whatever was said by the Buddha as an enunciation of Dharma. This interpretation added two new dimensions to the notion of the Buddha. First, the real Buddha was perceived as exalted above mankind, omniscient and almighty. Second, the appearance of the Buddha on earth, including his daily activities, is considered a display for the sake of liberating sentient beings. The Buddha was not therefore subject to the laws of the human world.
3) The third stage is the ontological interpretation of the concept of the Buddha by the early Mahayanists on the basis of Mahasanghika Buddhology. The early Mahayanists reinterpreted the notion of the Buddha as having the nature of the tathatā (chân như), which they introduced. According to them, tathatā, which is the true nature of all things both transcendental and worldly, is the dharmakāya, for both possess the same characteristics: (1) they are intrinsically pure and eternal; (2) they are one and the same in all Buddhas of the past, present and future. Since tathatā inheres in all objects and pervades the entire universe, the dharmakāya becomes a cosmic body as well as the principle supporting all phenomena. This is why the dharmakāya is regarded as the Buddha. This understanding of the notion of the Buddha is very different from that of the early Indian Buddhist schools. The Mahayanists concentrated exclusively on the abstract notion of the Buddha, not on the historical Buddha. This provides the foundation for the Mahayanist doctrine of the concept of the Buddha.
4) The fourth stage is the identification of the dharmakāya with many new concepts such as tathāgatagarbha (như lai tạng) and mahāparinirvāna (đại bát-niết-bàn), which were introduced by the Mahayanists along with the composition of the Mahayana sutras and sāstras. These new concepts added new dimensions to the notion of the Buddha, expanding its connotations. According to the *Mahāvaipulya-tathāgatagarbha-sutra (Đại Phương đẳng như lai tạng kinh, T-666), all sentient beings possess Buddha nature (tathāgatagarbha), although it is covered with defilements. When the defilements are eliminated, pure dharmakāya is revealed. The tathāgatagarbha is called buddhadhātu (phật giới) at the level of sentient beings, and dharmakāya at the level of Buddhahood. Buddhas are not different from sentient beings in an ultimate sense since all possess the same tathatā, but from the perspective of conventional truth they are different, as Buddhas do not have klesas (phiền não). According to the Mahayana Mahāparinirvānasutra (Đại Bát-niết-bàn kinh), however, the mahāparinirvāna of the Buddha is different from the liberation of the srāvakas (thanh văn) and pratyekabuddhas (độc giác phật) in that it has four attributes: eternity, happiness, self and purity (thường, lạc, ngã, tịnh). The attribute of eternity is the crux of the concept of mahāparinirvāna since the other three attributes are established on its basis. Therefore, the Buddha’s abiding in mahāparinirvāna does not imply that he is gone for ever, but means he eternally lives in intrinsic quiescence. Thus, in his *Buddhagotrasāstra (Phật tánh luận, T-1610), Vasubandhu (Thế Thân) asserts that terms such as Tathagata (như lai), dharmakāya (pháp thân), paramārtha (chân đế) and nirvāna (niết-bàn) are all congruent since they ontologically have tathatā as their essence. They are given different names because each of them denotes a specific aspect of Buddhahood. Thus, the notion of the Buddha in the Mahayana is entirely different from that of early Buddhism. Ontologically it is the ultimate reality and salvifically it is the transcendent being who establishes sentient beings in enlightenment.
5) The fifth stage is the formulation of the trikāya theory, the climax in the progressive development of the concept of the Buddha. The trikāya theory is a result of the complex development of Mahayana thought. From early to middle Mahayana sutras we can see that the concept of the Buddha developed considerably and acquired many transcendental qualities and attributes such as magical light and salvific power. These qualities were expanded and strengthened as Mahayanist theories developed. The *Āvatamsaka (kinh Hoa Nghiêm, T-279) compilation represents perhaps the last stage before the formulation of the trikāya theory by providing the doctrinal foundation for it. On the other hand, the debates on the transcendental qualities of the Buddha in early Indian Buddhist schools identified the problem of the short life-span of Buddha Sakyamuni in Mahayana sutras. It was an important issue to which many Mahayana sutras devoted a special treatment. This served as significant impetus for the further development of the concept of the Buddha. One of the reasons Yogacara masters such as Asanga (Vô Trước) and Vasubandhu (Thế Thân) established the trikāya theory rooted in the doctrines of the Mahayana sutras was thus to solve the complex problem concerning the ontological status of the Buddha.
*
No comments:
Post a Comment