English
Sv it is “said in the Suttanta :— * Sabbabhibhii sabbavid®’ham asmi. Sabbesu-dhammesu anupalitto. Sabbafijaho tanhakkhaye vimutte. wae Sayamabhififiaya kam uddiseyyam.” ' “Tam the all-conqueror, the all-knower, I am free from all conditions, I have left all, and am emancipated through the destruction of desire. Having attained to supreme wisdom by my own self, whom shall I point out (as my teacher).” | LON. Vol. L, p. 176. HOW THE TERMS CAME INiv Us? 105 This is because, et that very moment he himself found the truth, su it is said in the Nikaya :— “ Dhamma hi so bhikkhu passati. Dhammar passanto mam passati,”! “One who understands the dhamma, also understands me: and one who understands me, also understands dhamma.” The said absolute truth iseternal. Therefore, from the above quotation it is clear that as soon as Buddha discovered himself harmonized with Dharma or absolute truth, that very moment, through his Introspectional perception he realised for the first time, his own personality also to be eternal, having no. beginning and no end (anadi- ananta). | Over and above that ee ‘perception he e also; at that véry moment, penetrated into the truth that he was originally possessed of Buddha-hood. The idea of the oneness of both Buddha and Dharma is the basis of the conception of ‘Dharma-kaya Buddha’ and the historical Buddha, thereby, becomes the ‘ Nirmana-kaya Buddha’ and finally these two combined together from what is called the ‘Sambhoga-kaya Buddha.’ Regarding the Buddhalogy of Mahayanism we have already entered into a discussion where the relation between the Mahasanghika and Mahayana siitra conception upon the Buddha-kaya has been dealt with. So it is needless to re-state it fully here again. However, in order to make clear the point in issue a slight touch should be madé. As we know, in the Mahasnighika Buddhalogy the ‘Tri-kaya’ conception already existed in the bud and -it began to bloom in the Avatarhsaka-siitras and fully blossomed into flower in the ‘l'athagatayuspramana 1 Itivuttake, 92 (p. 91) 106 ORIGIN OF MAHAYANA BUDDHISM parivarta of Saddharmapundarika-sitra. So it has been said here :— “ gaqaraanmaa aaat aaa: wafa arafeafidge safeiamnaward aura: wet fea) safefaqeeara: afcfaaruarenafa aaaaie 1”? “ The ‘Tathagata then, young men of good family, does what he hastodo. ‘he Tathagata who so long ago was perfectly Enlightened is unlimited in the duration of bis life, he is everlasting. Without being extinct, the Tathagata makes a show of extinction, on behalf of those who have to be educated.” ® Thus, we arrive at a clear identification between the Buddha’s perception on his own personality and Mahayina Buddhalogy. IV.—Inter-relation among the Buddha's Ontological perception and doctrines of the Mahasanghikas as well as of Mahayana silras regarding human life and their points of agreement. In the previous sections II and ILI, we have dealt ‘with the relation subsisting between the Buddha’s Ontological perception and the conception of Mahasan- ghika schools as well as that of Mahayana sittras regarding cosmic existence and Buddhalogy. And there we have also pointed out their agreement. In this section, we shall have to discuss the conception of the ‘human life’ as thev exist in the Buddha’s Ontological perception, doctrines of Mahasanghika school as well as that of Mahayana siitras. The conception of ‘human life’ might have been explained in connection with the discussion of cosmic existence and Buddhalogy as noticed above. Because 1 Saddharmapundsarika-sitra. Part IV, pp. 318-319. 4 8.B.B., XVI, p. 302. HOW THE TERMS CAME INTO USE? 107 the ‘human life’ is one of cosmic existences and conception of the same had already been revealed in the Buddha’s Ontological perception through his personality as well as in Mahayana Buddhalogy. However, I kept silence on this point in cause of my previous discussions through fear of digressions. Therefore, I denote this special section in order to: make the point clear. First of all, we should bear in mind that the conception of ‘human life’ is one of the most important problems in Buddhism. ‘This is because every religion and philosophy owes their origin in the question of ‘ What is man’? Though there are many other ultimate questions as such -——What is the world? What connection has the man with the world? Why man is born in the world? What is the instinct of man? What is the destiny of man? Yet the question ‘Whatis man?’ is the most important one, for all other questions have a principal bearing upon it; because had there been no men on earth, why then other question would arise? - So this question must be solved first, and with its solution, all other questions may be solved automatically. Therefore, it is no exaggeration to say that all the sages of India and other countries had been engaged in solving this question. Such was the case with Buddha also and his disciples. ‘This is the reason why we attach much importance to this point. Moreover, the three problems regarding ‘ cosmic existence,’ ‘ Buddhalogy ’ and ‘human life’ are of vital importance among the early eighteen schools of Buddhism and those of Mahayana schools. And difference of opinions regarding these problems was the main cause of their separation. Let us see, first, what was Buddha’s Ontological perception on the ‘human life.’ As we know, at the moment of Buddha’s Enlightenment, he himself discovered 108 ORIGIN OF MAHAYANA BUDDHISM that he was no more an ordinary man but the Enlightened Buddha not only that, but at the same time he found his personality having no beginning, no end and even that he was originally Buddha. Such perception he obtained through the absolute truth. And again threugh this truth along with his Introspectional perception he also realised that all human lives too originally possessed Buddha-hood. If all human beings had not the germ of Buddha-hood, then it would have been quite impossible for human Siddhartha to attain Buddha-hood and there would also have been no way by which men could attain that Buddha-hood. The idea is like that of potatoes which can never produce rice and of rice which can never become potato. So, it has been stated in the Digha-Nikaya :— “ Buddho so Phagava bodhaya dhammanm deseti, Danto i, 5 damathaya 3 “ Santo __,, s samathaya 5 es Tinno,, i taranaya ” ” Parinibbuto ..,, parinibbanaya ,, xe “Enlightened is the Exalted One; he teaches the religion of Enlightenment. Self-mastered is the Exalted One; he teaches the religion of Self-mastery. Calm is the Enlightened One; he teaches the religion of Calm. Saved is the Enlightened One; he teaches the religion of Salvation. At peace is the Enlightened One; he teaches the religion of Peace.” ? If human beings had not possessed the germ of the Enlightenment, then what was the necessity of Buddha to preach Enlightenment for them. Therefore, from the above statement, it can be held beyond doubt that the conception on the ‘human life’ in the Buddha’s 2D. N. Vol. 56 (udumbarika). * Dialogues of the Buddha, Part 3, pp. 49-50, HOW THE TERMS CAME INTO USE? 09 Ontological perception was that of human beings possessing originally Buddha-hood, More concrete form of the same idea can be found in the Sarnyutta-Nikaya:— * Yee’ abbhatité sambuddh& ye ca Buddha anagata, yo c’ etarabi sambuddho bahunnam sokanasano. Sabbe saddhammagaruno viharsu viharanti ca. Atho pi viharissanti, esa Buddhana dhammata.”'! “Those perfectly Awakened Ones that are past, the Enlightened Ones that have not been, and he that has become perfectly Awakened now, the dispeller of the misery of the many, all these preceptors of the Good Law existed, do exist and will exist—this is the nature of the Buddhas.” * This statement indicates clearly that through the absolute truth, some realized their Buddha-hood in the past, some realize it in the present, while others will realize it in future, thus showing that they were originally possessetl of the germ of Buddha-hood. From the standpoint of the absolute truth, every one can be Buddha. Next, let us see what is the conception of the Mahiasanghika school on the ‘human life.’ In the Nikaya- bheda-dharmamati-chakra-Sastra (or I-pu-tsum-lun-lun) by Vasumitra® It is stated :— “The nature of mind (of being) originally was pure (vimala), but it has been encumbered by suffering which did not exist originally, therefore, the mind became impure.” * . This statement shows clearly that the original Mahasanghikas, the Ekavyavaharika, the Lokottaravada g. N. 56. 24 (Part V, p. 403). The same expression we find in the PrajiSparamité-sitra, p. 396, Bibliotheca. Indica Edition. — 3 Translated by my colleague Mr.. Sailendranath Mitra, M.A. 3’ He is Vasumitra Il and contemporary of King Kanishka EI (about 140 A.D.). * Toyo Daigaku Edition, Tokyo, p. 91. 110 ORIGIN OF MAHAYANA BUDDHISM and the Kaukkautika schools held that all individual beings originally were possessed of ‘ pure mind.’ The ‘pure mind’ here signifies what is called ‘ Buddha- sabhava’ of the Mahayana Buddhism; that is to say all human lives originally possessed the ‘nature of Buddha.’ This idea is clearly expressed in the Mahayana- avatathsaka-siitra where it is said :— “The mind (universal mind), Buddha and human life are one and the same.” ! Therefore, this Mahasanghika conception, more or less, indicates Buddha’s Ontological perception on the ‘human life’: and speaking generally, the conception of Mahasanghika can be identified with that of Buddha’s perception regarding the problem at hand. Lastly, let us see what is the conception of Mahayana siitra on the same point.