English
” * Hence Nagarjuna: the great expounder of Mahayana ‘Buddhism has touched these two aspects of the doctrine — negative and positive—inchis system. By the same term ‘ Sarva-Siinyata&’ he sometimes gives the negative aspect of his Ontological explanation, and in other place he brings out the positive side. In the beginning of Madhyamika-sastra * as well as in a ale * he said :— “ afaduaqeneagecannad | waaisrararerer aaa” * “No annihilation, no production, no destruction, no persistence, no unity, no plurality, no coming in, no going out.” In this Karika he has explained Ontological ideas from }uegative point of view. But in his ‘ Dharma-dhatu- astra ’ he has said :— aor “ Dharma-dhatu (universe) is originally pure and ermanent.”*® We also find the same expression in his 'rajiaparamita-sastra :— . . Saddharmapundarika-siitra, Part I, p, 53." * 8. B. E., Vol, XXI, p. 53. Dr. Kern’s transiation of * Dharma” here, as * Law’ s mistake. * Madhyamika Vrtti, Chap. 1, Karika, i, * Mahdprajidparamit4-sastra, Wang Bundle, Vol. I, p. 3&8. These eight kinds of negations originally occurred in ‘The siétra of the garland the Bodhisattva’ (Y4 Bundle, Vol. IV, p. 33b, Chinese Tripitaka). But Nagarjana | used these in his Mdhyamika-Sastra as well as in his PrajispSramita-sdstra. * Chang Bundle, Vol. XX, p. 672 (see Nanjio’s catelogue, No. 1070). 84. ORIGIN OF MAHAYANA BUDDHISM . “Sarva dharma’ (all existence) is originaly . pured:' These are expressions: of the positiva paint..of . view.:.:E think, such positive idea of . Nagirjuna. _undonbtedly originated from ‘ Vimala- citta-svabhava,’ of the Mabasan- eae school and ‘ Dharma- -nirvana’ or ¢ Dharma- -tathata,’ r ‘Dharma-svabhava-nityam’ of Prajiapairamita-siitras, ae “Dharma sthitiin dharma niyamatiih nitya stithimn” of Saddharmapundarika-sitra. If we goa little further and examine Mahayana- éraddhotpada- Sistra *-of Asvaghosa II, one of the most famous expounders of Mahayana doctrines flourishing in 5th century A.D., we shall find that the ideas of ‘ Vimala-, citta-svabhava’ of Mahasanghikas and ‘ Svabhava-nityam’ of Prajiiaparamita have been. clearly explained in a much more concrete. form than that of, Nagarjuna. He has established the existence of a universal mind from the existence of individual sentient minds. And that universal mind is the root or foundation of all existences in the world, either phenomenon or super-phenomenon, and it is also pure and permanent.. We should remember, here,’ that this universal mind has been called by him as, i" Bhitatathata. _-So he said :— Pe What is: ‘Mahayana? ‘It is the’soul of all sentient beings (satva-sattva), that constitutes all things in the world, phenomenal and -super-phenomenal; and throtgh this soul we can disclose What thé ‘Mahayana signifies.” 5 Again, - “What is meant by the soul as suchness (bhitatathata), is the oneness of the totality of. things (dharma-dhatu), i This “passage “haa been quoted from Prof.G. Umada'a History of Indian 3uddhism, p. 256 (in Japanese). * The original Sanskrit text has been lost. But we have two Chinese versions: he is translated by Paramartha (558 A.D.) of the Lia dynasty (602-557 A.D,). nother ig by “Siksinanda (695—700 A.D.) of the ThaA dynasty (618-907 A.D, ). vo. have also two English translations of this work one by T. Suzuki, another by tev. T. Richand, ° : 3 Mr, Ty Suzuki's Awakening of Faith, p. 53. HOW THE TERMS CAME INTO USEs 84 the gréat all-including whole, ‘the quintessence. of. the Dottrine: “For the essential nature’ of the’soul is uncréate and eternal. “All things, simply on aecount of ; our “confused subjectivity. (smrti), appear under the formé of ‘individua- tion. . If: we could overcome our confused -subjectivity, the signs of. individuation would disappear, and‘ there would be no trace'éf'a world of findividual. and - isolated} objscts.._ EF. Thérefore, pll things.in their fundamental nature: are not itdameable.or explicable. They canhot.; be adequately. éxpressed in. any .form of language....They are without the ‘rangb of apperception. [They are universals.]: They: [things in.their fundamental nature)’ have no. signs. of, destination.::! [They. ave i not.. particulars,], : They possess absolute sameness : (samata).: -'{They : are. iusiversals.]. They are subject neither to transformation, nor to destruction. “They are- nothing | but the: ‘one soul, for which suchness is another designation.” * Again, There is another statement which exactly identified with ‘Viraala-citta’ doctrine of Mahasanghika . school as following :— “While the essence of mind is eternally clean and pure, the influence of ignorance makes possible the existence of a defiled mind. Butin spite of the defiled mind, the mind [itself] is eternal, clear, pure, and, not, subject to transfermation.” ® From the above quotation, it would not probably be wrong that.Asvaghosa II’s doctrine of ¢ Bhitatathata ’ was also based upon the idea of ‘ Vimala-citta-svabhava’ of Mahisanghikas as well as ‘Svabhava-nityamn’ of. Prajiiapiramité and Saddharmapundarika-siitras, just in Mr. 'T, Suzuk?'s Awakoaing of Faith, p, 55-57, * Mr, T. Suzaki’s Awakening of Faith, p. 79. 86 ORIGIN OF MAHAYANA BUDDHISM the same way as Nagarjuna did. Thus, we see that the positive side of the Ontological ideas -of Mahayanism had been developed in a complete form from the time of Asvaghosa IT. - From the above discussion, we understand clearly how the doctrines of the Mahasanghikas were connected with those -of Mahayana siitras in both ‘negative’ and ‘positive’ aspects. But here we should not forget one thing. In the above, I have quoted some typical passages from Prajiaparamitaé and Saddharmapundarika-siltras among innumerable other Mahayana sitras. This is because, these two Sitras are very important and representative among others, to present the Ontological perception of the Buddha on cosmic existences. Of these two, the latter one may be regarded as touching the vital and essential chord of ‘Mahayana Buddhism. (6) The relution between the doctrine of Mahasanghika: and that of Mahayana sitras regarding the Buddha-kiya conception. First of ‘all, let us see, what is the Buddhalogy of Mahasanghikas? If we look at the Nikaya-bheda- dharmamati-chakra-sastra (or I-pu-tsun-lun-lun) of Vasumitra, we come across the following passages :— “The fundamental and common doctrines of the Mahasanghika, the Ekavyavaharika, the Lokottaravada and the Kaukkutika schools:—The four schools unani- mously maintained that (1) The’ Blessed Buddhas are all superhuman (lokottara). (2) all Tathagatas have no worldly attributes (sisrava-dharmas). (3) The words of Tathagatas are all (about) the ‘ Turning of the Wheel of Law’ (Dharma-chakrapravartana).- -" (4) Buddha preaches all doctrines (dharms) with one utterance. (5) In the teachings of Bhagavan (Buddha) there is nothing that is not in-aecordance with the truth. HOW THE TERMS CAME INTO USE? 87 (6) The physical body (riipa-kaya) of ‘Tathigata is limitless. (7) The majestic powers of: Tathagata also are limitless, (8) Lives of Buddhas, toozare limitless‘ (9) Buddha is never tired of enlightening living beings and awakening pure faith in them, etc.” The above quotation shows clearly that the conception of Mahdsanghikas regarding the Buddha-kaya is quite different from that of. ‘Sthaviravadins, upholders of Original form of Buddhism, as well as of its offshoots Sarvastivadins who, we know, hold only Buddhalogy of Riipa-kaya (or historical Buddha). But, from Vasu- mitra’s statements quoted above, we easily observed ‘that the idea of ‘ Dharma-kaya Buddha’ and ‘ Sambhoga- kaya Buddha’ have already been nianifested in the Mahasanghika schools. Besides Vasumitra’s work,: the Muhavastu, a book of Vinaya of Lokottaravadin* school of Mahistghika, also embodies the same vonception of Buddha-kaya. Professor L. De la Vallée Pouesin said in his learned article thus :— “The ‘ Buddhalogy’ of Mahavastu marks a stage between the conception of Buddha as a simple mortal (Little vehicle) and that of Buddha as a- quasi-eternal god sending illusory images down to this world '(Great- vehicle). ‘The Buddha of the Mahavastu is a superman. He feels neither hunger nor thirst ; he lives in ignorance of ‘carnal desires; his wife remains a virgin.’ It is from consideration for humanity, in order to conform to. the customs of the world (lokanuvartana), that he behaves as a man, or that he gives to men the false impression that he is behaving as a man. In technical terms, he is lokottara, ‘superior to the world.’”? Next, let us look at the Avataibsaka-siitras, regarded as one of the most important Mahayana sutras, and these 1 see Journal of Letters’ .- Calentta University, Vol. f, pp. 7-8. * HR. EL. Vol. 8, p. 2°. 8& ORIGIN OF MAHAYANA BUDDHISM originated; from my ‘point of view, as early as the time,of Prajiia paramita-sitras. These Sitras, as a whole, deal with Buddha’s Ontological perceptions just in the same light as. other Mahaygna siitray-do. But the special features of these are to indicate Buddha’s Introspectional perception on the Buddha-kaya and Human: life more definitely than that of the cosmic existence. There’ we find the following ‘passages ‘regarding the Buddhas, kaya:— | “Tathagata is all-prevailing in the Universe (Dharma Dhatu).””" Again, ' ten” -§ Buddha-kaya is‘ ‘visible everywhere in directions,”? * Again, “he Dharma-kaya of the ‘Tathagata is extensive.” * Again,. “Even single utterance of ‘Tathagata is immeasure- able,” Bo ae Again ee “Even single utterance of the Tathagata is without, measure,” >. Again, Byddha-kaya pervades, all through the Dharma-dhatu and it manifests itself before all human beings,”* Again, : .