首 页  |  中国禅学  |  禅学三书  |  慈辉论坛  |  佛学论文  |  最新上传  |  文学频道  |  佛缘论坛  |  留言簿   |

 管理登陆        吴言生 创办              图片中心    关于本网     佛教研究所 主办


  • 学佛越久,越要防止起傲慢心[155]

  • 今日恭迎阿弥陀佛圣诞!祈愿众[111]

  • 虚云老和尚:谈“禅净四料简”[107]

  • 为什么要学佛?为什么要念佛?[101]

  • 你把这些东西看懂了 成佛有余[104]

  • 乐山大佛头部的秘密,你究竟知[101]

  • 禅的开悟[135]

  • 你是不是也在误解佛教?[144]

  • 念佛人误区:净土法门切忌唯功[117]

  • 吃饭也要有正念[138]

  • 禅学与学禅[164]

  • 切莫误解佛教[153]



  • 本站推荐

    学佛越久,越要防止

    人生不一定信佛,但

    感恩,什么是感?什


       您现在的位置: 佛学研究网 >> ZZ期刊原文 >> [专题]zz期刊原文 >> 正文


    论 如 来 藏之 空 性 义
     
    [ 作者: 释恒清   来自:期刊原文   已阅:4221   时间:2007-1-7   录入:ningguannan


    ·期刊原文

    论 如 来 藏之 空 性 义
    释 恒 清
    HENG-CHING SHIH

    七十七年一月



                      227页
     
          THE SIGNIFICANCE OF `TATHAGATAGARBHA`:
            A POSITIVE EXPRESSION OF `SUNYATA`
     
                  HENG-CHING SHIH
     
     
                 The well-known motto of Ch'an Buddhism is that
            "perceiving the true self, one becomes a Buddha."
            The "true self" signifies the Buddha nature inherent
            in all sentient beings. The discovering of the "true
            self" has become the single most important pursuit
            of the Buddhist, especially in Sino-Japanese
            Buddhism. On the contrary, early Buddhism teaches
            that ultimately no substantial self (i.e.,
            `anatman`) can be found, since the self is nothing
            but the union of the five aggregates. Modern
            Buddhologists as well as the Buddhists have been
            intrigued by the inconsistency that one single
            tradition teaches both that there is no self on the
            one hand, and that the goal of religious life is to
            discover the true self, on the other hand.
     
                 The big questions concerning these two
            contradictory doctrines include: How did they
            develop during the course of Buddhist history? How
            can they be reconciled? Are these two ideas
            actually as contradicting as they appear to be? Is
            the concept of the Buddha nature an outcome of the
            influence of other Indian religious thought upon
            Buddhism? It is out of the scope of this short
            paper to answer all these questions. Therefore, this
            paper will deal with the antecedent and synonymous
            concept of the Buddha nature, that is, `tathagata-
            garbha`(`ju lai tsang`). Specifically, this paper
            will examine the meaning and significance of the
            `tathagatagarbha` (Buddha nature) based on three
            `tathagatagarbha` texts and argue that the
     
                                 228页
     
                  `tathagatagarbha`/Buddha nature does not
            represent a substantial self (`atman`); rather, it
            is a positive language and expression of `sunyata`
            (emptiness) and represents the potentiality to
            realize Buddhahood through Buddhist practices. In
            other words, the intention of the teaching of
            `tathagatagarbha`/Buddha nature is soteriological
            rather than theoretical.
     
                 The term "`tathagatagarbha`" is generally taken
            as to mean that the "garbha" of a `Tathagata` exists
            in all sentient beings without exception, and though
            temporarily contaminated by adventitious defilement
            (`agantukaklesa`), it is the cause which eventually
            leads sentient beings to enlightenment. The notion
            of the `tathagatagarbha` can be traced to a luminous,
            inherently pure mind (pabhassar citta) found in
            the `Anguttara-nikaya` (1:5):
              Pabhassarm `idam` bhikkhave cittam `tan` ca kho
              `agantukehi` upakkilesehi `upakkilitthan` ti
              pabhassaram idam bhikkhave `cittam tan` ca kho
              `agantukehi` upakkilesehi vippamuttan ti
              Oh! `Bhiksus`. The mind is pure; it is defiled
              by The adventitious defilement.
              Oh! `Bhiksus`. The mind is pure; it obtains
              liberation
              Through the adventitious defilement.
     
                 When the original pure mind came to be regarded
            as something capable of growing into Buddhahood,
            there was the `tathagatagarbha` doctrine. Although
            the concept of an intrinsically pure mind exists in
            the Nikaya Buddhism, many Buddhologists, such as
            Wayman,(1)Paul,(2) Yin-shun(3) think that
            ────────────
            1. A. Wayman, "The `Mahasamghika` and the
               `Tathagatagarbha`,' Journal of International
               Association of Buddhist Studies, Vol. 1, no. 3,
               pp. 35-80.
            2. Diana Paul, A Prolegomena to the
               `Srimaladevi-sutra` and the `Tathagatagarbha`
               Theory, dissertation, Wisconsin, 1974, pp.73-80.
            3. Yun-shun, Indian Buddhism (印度之佛教), Chen-wen
               Press, Taipei, 1976, p.167.
     
                                  229页
     
            the `tathagatagarbha` thought was originated from
            the `Mahasamgika`, but was rejected by the
            `Theravada`. This theory is also held by Mizuno who
            points out that the pure mind (`pabhassarcitta`)
            articulated in the Nikaya Buddhism is not totally
            identical with the original pure mind
            (`prakrtivisuddhi-citta`) articulated in the
            `Tathagatagarbha` doctrine, for Mizuno asserts that
            the former is static whereas the latter is dynamic
            in that it is capable of eradicating defilement.(4)
            At any rate, the relationship between pure mind and
            the adventitious defilement appears to have been
            wholly adopted by the `Mahasamghika` and later by
            the `Mahayana`.
     
                 According to I-tsing's (义净) Nan-hai-chi-kuei
            Nei-fa-chuan (The record of the Buddhist kingdoms in
            the Southern Archipelago 南海寄归内法传), "the
            so-called `Mahayana` (in India) is no more than the
            two: one `Madhyamika`, the other `Yogacara`."(5)
            Although it is commonly held that the `Madhyamika`
            and `Yogacara` were the two major philosophical
            schools in Indian `Mahayana` and although it might
            be true that `tathagatagarbha` thought never formed
            an academic school in India, this does not mean that
            the `tathagatagarbha` doctrine never played a
            significant role in the development of Indian
            Buddhist thought.(6) This is attested by the fact
            that there are
            ────────────
            4. Mizuno Hiromoto (水野弘元), "心性本净意味" (The
               Meaning of the Original Pure Mind), Indogaku
               Bukkyogaku Kenkyu, Vol. 20, no. 2, pp. 8-16.
            5. T. 54, p. 205c.
            6. There is no evidence that the `Tathagatagarbha`
               formed a school in India. For one thing there
               never existed a patriarchal figure in the
               `tathagatagarbha` as `Nagarjuna` in `Madhyamika`
               and `Asanga` in `Yogacara`. However, Fa-tsang
               identified a "ju-lai-tsang yuan-chi tsang", i.e".
               "a school of `Tathagatagarbha-pratityasamut-pada`".
               Furthermore , Takasaki identifies
               `Tathagatagarbha-vada` in
     
                                  230页
     
            many `tathagatagarbha` scriptures composed in India
            approximately from the third to the sixth century,
            such as the `Tathagatagarbha-sutra`,
            `Maha-parinirvana-sutra`,
            `Anuatyapurn-atvanirdesa-sutra`,
            `Srimaladevisimhanada-sutra`, `Lankavatara-sutra`,
            Rotnagotravibhaga, Buddha-nature Treatise, etc.
     
                 Since the beginning of this century, many
            `Buddhologists` have become interested in the
            `Tathagararbha` doctrine and have shed new light on
            tathagatagarbha thought. However, their studies,
            especially on the Ratnagotravibhaga, lead to two
            different interpretations of the `tathagatagarbha`
            doctrine, i.e., `tathagatagarbha as a monistic
            doctrine, and `tathagatagarbha` as the embodiment of
            the principle of dependent co-arising
            (`pratityasamutpada`) or `sunyata`, following the
            traditional `Mahayana` Buddhist lines.
     
                 Obermiller, who maintains the `Tathagatagarbha`
            as monistic, in the introduction to his translation
            of the Ratnagotravibhaga, says that in this text,
            "we see that Aryasanga has come to a fully monistic
            and pantheistic conception" and that
                    The central point of this most developed
                    theory is the teaching that the fundamental
                    element of Buddhahood, the essence of the
                    Buddha in a living being represents an eternal,
                    immutable (`asamskrta`) element, which is
                    identical with the monistic Absolute and is
                    unique and undifferentiated in everything that
                     lives."(7)
            ────────────
            the `Lankavatara-sutra` and claims it is used as an
            independent school in contrast to `Atmavada`. For
            further discussion on this issue, see M. Kiyota,
            "`Tathagatagarbha` Thought─A Basis of Buddhist
            Devotionalism in East Asia," Japanese Journal of
            Religious Studies, Vol. 12, no. 2-3, pp. 207-229.
               7. Leningrad Obermiller, "The Sublime School of
                  the Great Vehicle to Salvation, Being a Manual
                  of Buddhist Monism," Acta Orientalia, Vol. IX,
                  p. 104.
     
                                 231页
     
                 Takasaki, `an` eminent scholar of the
            `tathagatagarbha` doctrine, asserts that the
            `tathagatagarbha` thought holds some monistic
            element. He says,
     
              When Buddhism developed itself into `Mahayana`
              Buddhism, it could not but take the appearance of
              Monism as a result of Absolutization of the Buddha,
              and approach the Upanishadic thinking in its
              philosophy....for explaining the possibility of
              anyone's acquiring the Buddhahood, the Monistic
              philosophy was used as the background. In this
              last point lies the significance of the
              `tathagatagarbha` theory of this text. This
              theory is in one sense an inevitable result of the
              development of Mahayanistic monism in its
              religious expression."(8)
     
            Although Takasaki notes that there is a difference
            between the nature of monism in the Ratnagotravibhaga
            and in the Upanishads, for the Absolute taught in the
            Ratnagotravibhaga is the manifestion of `sunyata`
            which is of a quite different character from the
            substantial Absolute of the Upanishads, still he
            believes "there was an influence from the
            Upanishadic thought for the `astivada` of the Ratna
            to establish its monistic doctrine."(9)
     
                 The reason for those scholars' holding the
            `tathagatagarbha` doctrine as monistic is that they
            base their interpretation on passages in various
            `tathagatagarbha` literature which assert the
            equivalence of the `tathagatagarbha` to terms with
            all-pervading character, such as `tathata`,
            `dharmakaya`, `dharmadhatu`, etc., which describe
            the `tathagatagarbha` as being eternal (nitya) and
            immutable (`atman`), which assert the fundamental
            purity
            ────────────
            8. Jikido Takasaki, A Study of the Ratnagotravibhaga
               , Rome, 1966, p. 28.
            9. Ibid. p.61.
     
                                 232页
            of the `tathagatagarbha` (equating the
            `tathagatagarbha` as `prakrtiparisuddhi-citta`, the
            original pure mind), and which assert that the
            `tathagatagarbha` functions like a first cause from
            which the phenomenal reality emanates.
     
                 However, if we examine more carefully the
            `tathagatagarbha` doctrine, we will find that it can
            be interpreted as an expression of the concept of
            `pratityasamutpada` and `sunyata`. Yamaguchi(10) and
            Ogawa(11) follow this traditional line.
     
                 Interestingly, modern Buddhologists are not
            alone in their puzzle about the question of whether
            the `tathagatagarbha` represents a kind of
            Upanishadic `atman`. Bodhisattva `Mahamati` in the
            `Lankavatarasutra` raised a question concerning this
            issue. He said to the Buddha,
     
              Now the Blessed one makes mention of the
              `tathagatagarbha` in the sutras, and it is
              described by you as by nature bright and pure, as
              primarily unspotted, endowed with the thirty-two
              marks of excellence, hidden in the body of every
              being like a gem of great value....it is described
              by the Blessed One to be eternal, permanent,
              auspicious and unchangeable. Is not this
              `tathagatagarbha` taught by the Blessed One the
              same as the ego-substance taught by the
              philosophers (tirthikas)?(12)
     
            In this passage, the Buddha clearly identified the
            `tathagatagarbha` with emptiness, markless,
            `tathata`, etc., meaning that the `tathagatagarbha`
            is without any substantial entity. Then the question
            arises: if the `tathagatagarbha` is empty by nature
            , why the Buddhas teach a `tathagatagarbha`
            possessing all positive
            ────────────
           10. Yamaguchi Susumu, Hanyo Shisoni (般若思想史),
               Tokyo, 1956.
           11. Ichijo Ogawa, Nyoraizo-Bussho no Kenkyu (如来藏‧
               佛性之研究), Kyoto, 1969.
           12. Daisetz T. Suzuki, tr. The `Lankavatara Sutra`,
               Parajna Press, Boulder, 1978, pp.68-69.
     
                                 233页
     
            attributes, such as eternal (nitya), self (`atman`),
            bliss (sukha) and pure (subha)? The Buddha goes on
            to answer this question,
     
              The reason why the `Tathagatas` who are Arhats and
              fully enlightened Ones teach the doctrine pointing
              to the tathagatagarbha which is a state of
              non-discrimination and imageless, is to make the
              ignorant cast aside their fear when they listen to
              teaching of egolessness. It is like a potter who
              manufactures various vessels out of a mass of clay
              of one sort by his own manual skill and labour
              ....that the `Tathagatas` preach the egolessness
              of things which removes all the traces of
              discrimination by various skillful means issuing
              from their trancend-ental wisdom, that is,
              sometimes by the doctrine of the `tathagatagarbha`
              , sometimes by that of egolessness....Thus,
              `Mahamati`, the doctrine of the `tathagatagarbha`
              is disclosed in order to awaken the philosophers
              from their clinging to the idea of the ego.
              Accordingly, `Mahamati`, the `Tathagatas` disclose
              the doctrine of the `tathagatagarbha` which is thus
              not to be known as identical with the
              philosopher's notion of an egosubstance. Therefore
              ,  `Mahamati`, in order to abandon the
              misconception cherished by the philosophers, you
              must depend on the `anatman-tathagatagarbha`.(13)
     
            It is pointed out in this passage that the
            `tathagatagarbha` is empty in its nature yet real;
            it is `Nirvana` itself, unborn, without predicates.
            It is where no false discrimination (nirvikalpa)
            takes place. There is nothing here for the Buddhas
            or Bodhisattvas to take hold of as an `atman`. They
            have gone beyond the sphere of false discrimination
            and word. It is due to their wisdom and skillful
            means (`upaya`) that they set up all kinds of names
            and phrases in order to save
            ────────────
           13. Ibid. p.69.
     
                                 234页
     
            sentient beings from mistaken view of reality. In
            other words, it is exactly to help sentient beings
            case away their fear of `anatman` that the
            `tathagatagarbha` with positive attributes (i.e.,
            `asunya-tathagatagarbha`不空如来藏) is taught, and
            at the same time it is to get rid of the clinging of
            `atman` that the `anatman-tathagatagarbha`(无我如来
            藏) is taught. Thus it is clear that the
            `tathagatagarbha` is not an Upanishadic `atman`. Now
            let's turn to examine how Yamaguchi and Ogawa who
            hold this traditional line interpret this doctrine.
     
                 Yamaguchi points out that the statement in the
            Ratnagotravibhaga, "O Noble youth, such is the
            essential nature of the dharma (`dharmanam
            dharmata`), whether the `Tathagatas` appear in the
            world, or whether they do not, these living beings
            are always possessed of the matrix of the
            `Tathagata`" (15) is parellel to the statement found
            in the Sammyutta-nikaya "Whether the `Tathagatas`
            were to appear in the world, the theory of
            `pratitysamutpada` remains."(16) Here we see the
            `tathagatagarbha` was considered as a valid
            principle as `pratitysamutpada`. Thus Yamaguchi
            holds that the most important point in expounding
            the `tathagatagarbha` in the Ratnagotravibharga is
            that "the `pratitysamutpada` is the
            `tathagatagarbha`." (engi sunawachi nyoraizo 缘起即
            如来藏)(17).
     
                 Ogawa, following the same position, interprets
            the `tathagatagarbha` according to the commentary of
            the `Ratnagotravibhaga` by the Tibetan master,
            Dhar-ma rin-chen. He argues that the
            `tathatagatagarbha` is essentially the same as
            `sunyata`, and also it has the `sunyata` nature
            which allows the
            ────────────
           14. Ibid. p.69.
           15. Takasaki, pp.294-295.
           16. T. 2, p.84b.
           17. Yamaguchi, p.86.
     
                                 235页
     
            mind to understand `sunyata`. The crucial point of
            this interpretation centers on the passage "all
            sentient beings are possessed of the
            `tathagatagarbha`" in the Ratnagotravibhaga. It
            expounds three `svabhavas` of the `tathagatagarbha`
            to justify the above passage. According to Dhar-ma
            rin-chen, the three `svabhavas` are ways of
            explaining the `tathagatagarbha` form three
            perspectives: from the perspective of the result
            level of the `Tathagata`, from the perspective of
            the nature of the `Tathagata` and form the
            perspective of the cause of the `Tathagata.`(18)
     
                 (1) `Dharmakaya-svabhava`: from the
            perspective of the result level of the `Tathagata`.
            The `Dharmakaya-svabhava` means that the
            `Dharmakaya` of the `Tathagata` penetrates all
            sentient beings. According to Takasaki, this first
            `svabhava` is derived from the `
            Tathagatotpattisambhavambhava-parivarta` of the
            `Avatamsaka-sutra` as cited in the Ratnagotravibhaga
            : "There is no one among the groups of sentient
            beings in whose body the wisdom of the `Tathagata`
            does not penetrate at all."(19) It seems that when
            "the `dharmakaya` of the `Tathagata` pervades" is
            taken to mean that there is no part of the universe
            where the substantial entity is not present, it
            could fall into a monistic interpretation. However,
            according to Dhar-ma rin-chen, the `Dharmakaya` is
            explained as having two aspects: 1) `Dharma-dhatu`,
            the perfectly pure realm of ultimate truth itself,
            in which "dharma" means "teaching" and "`dhatu`"
            means "cause". Therefore, the `Dharmadhatu` refers
            to the supreme truth which is the cause of the
            teaching, and 2)
            ────────────
           18. John Makransky, "Rgyal Tshab Rje's Interpretation
               of the Three Meanings of `Tathagatagarbha` with
               Reference to the `Tathagatagarbhasutra`, the
               Ratnagotravibhaga and some Philosophical and
               Historical Developments," unpub. paper.
           19. Takasaki, p.35 and p.189.
     
                                 236页
     
            arya-dharma which means the teaching in its form as
            conventional truth. This conventional teaching is
            the nature outflow (`nisyanda`) of wisdom. Thus we
            see whereas the former aspect of the `Dharmadhatu`
            refers to the truth realized by the Buddha, the
            static aspect of the `Tathagata's` enlightenment,
            the later refers to the dynamic aspect of the
            `Tathagata's` enlightenment, i.e., teaching the
            Dharma. This is to say that the Buddhadharma, or the
            teaching, spontaniously flows out of the
            `Tathagata's` compassion for the benefit of sentient
            beings. Therefore, when the Ratnagotravibhaga states
            that "all beings possess the `tathagatagarbha`"
            (because the `Dharmakaya` of the `Tathagata`
            penetrates all sentient beings), it simply means
            that sentient beings are able to hear the pure
            dharmas and are everywhere and constantly permeated
            by them, as the nesessary outflow of the
            `Dharmadhatu`.(20) In other words, the universality
            of the `Tathatagatagarbha` expressed here refers to
            the potential capacity within living beings to be
            effected by the teaching of the Buddha and hence
            does not have a notion of a substantial entity.
     
                 2) `Tathata-svabhava`: from the perspective of
            the nature of the `Tathagata`. This
            `tathata-svabhava` means that the `tathata` of the
            `Tathagata` is not different from the `tathata` of
            the sentient beings. The underlying principle of
            this identity of the `tathata` of the `Tathagata`
            and that of sentient being is `sunyata`. Since the
            ultimate nature of both the `Tathagata` and sentient
            beings are `sunyata`, they are seen to be
            undifferentiated. The only difference is that when
            the `tathata` is associated with defilement, it is
            called the "`tathagatagarbha`" or `samala tathata`
            (of sentient beings), and when the defilement
            ────────────
           20. Ogawa, pp. 75-77.
     
                                 237页
     
            is removed, it becomes `nirmala tathata` (of the
            `Tathagata`). Yet they are essentially identical.
            Therefore, one says that all sentient beings possess
            the `tathagatgarbha` when referring to the existence
            of the `sunyata` nature of living being's mind which
            is essentially free of defilement. Again no notion
            of immutable substance should be asserted.
     
                 3) `Gotra-svabhava: from the perspective of
            the cause of the `Tathagata`. This `gotra-svabhava`
            means that the gotra (seed nature) of the
            `Tathagata` exists in all sentient beings. The gotra
            in this context is explained accroding to the
            two-fold structure: (1) the `prakrtistha-gotra`
            (innate gotra), and (2) the `samudanilagora`
            (acquired gotra). According to Dhar-ma rin-chen,
     
              Based on the innate gotra, the first body, which
              is `Dharmakaya`, is obtained. Based on the
              acquired, perfected gotra, the later two form
              bodies (`sambohogakaya` and `nirmanakaya`) are
              obtained.(21)
            The `prakrtistha` gotra which obtains the
            `dharmakaya`, does so on the basis of the wisdom
            (`prajna`) through which insight into the reality of
            all dharmas is attained. According to Dharma
            rin-chen, the `prakrtistha` gotra is the primary
            meaning of the `tathagatagarbha`, because it is
            identified with `sunyata` and as such the primary
            "cause" of Buddhahood.
                 The `samudanita` gotra which obtains
            `sambhogakaya` and `nirmanakaya`, does so on the
            basis of vigorous practices and the accumulation of
            innumberable merits and thus is the productive
            "cause" of Buddhahood. The `samudanita` is called
            the uttara, or ultimate, because it signifies the
            central theme of general `Mahayana` practice, that
            is, "wisdom (`Dharmakaya`) becomes compassion
            (`rupakaya`)(22). In other words, within
            ────────────
           21. Ogawa, p. 85.
           22. Ibid.
     
                                 238页
     
            the very meaning of gotra is experssed the movement
            from `prajna` to `karuna`. This might be called
            hsia-huei-hsiang (下回向), a down-ward
            transformation or `tatha-agata`, i.e., returning
            from the realm of enlightenment to that of this
            world of sentient beings─a process of enlightening
            others, after the socalled shan-huei-hsiang (上回向)
            , an up-ward transformation or `tatha-gata`, i.e.,
            striving for the realm of enlightenment from the
            realm of this world of sentient beings, a process of
            enlightening oneself. However, this "two-way
            traffic" process should not be seen as two
            distinctive and separated processes; rather, they
            are non-dual, interrelated and inter-dependent.
     
                 Based on the commentary of Dhar-ma rin-chen, we
            can conclude that the real purpose of the passage
            "the gotra of the `Tathagata` exists in all sentient
            beings" is to articulate bodhisattva practices based
            on wisdom. This is supported by the structure of the
            Ratnagotravibhaga, which is arranged by the
            following order: 1. Buddha, 2. Dharma, 3. Sangha,
            4. `Dhatu`, 5. Bodhi, 6. `Guna` (merits) and Karma
            (act). The seven `vajrapadas` are expalined in terms
            of cause, condition and result. "`Dhatu`" is the
            "cause"; bodhi, `guna`, and karma are the
            "conditions" through which the three jewels (of the
            Buddha, Dharma and Sangha) as "result" are
            manifested. As kiyota says that the wisdom, merits
            and practice of a Bodhisattva constitute the
            condition through which the "Buddha-is-caused". The
            expression "Buddha-is-caused", or "Buddha-caused" is
            derived from `Buddha-dhatu`. It is employed
            synonymously with the `tathagatagarbha`. As Kiyota
            rightly points out, the term "cause" here does not
            refer to a first cause (i.e., a substance or a
            physical entity), but symbolically as a potential (a
            principle) which is empirically
     
                                 239页
     
            revealed through a set of conditions─wisdom, merits
            ,and practices.(23) In other words, the
            `tathagatagarbha` as a potential inherent in the
            human consciousness can only be realized through
            Bodhisattva practices.
     
                 The above arguments are mainly based on the
            Rathagotravibhaga. At least two other
            `Tatnagatagarbha` related `sutras` also support this
            viewpoint. One is the Buddha Nature Treatise(24) and
            the other the `Mahaparinirvana sutra`(25).
     
                 In the Buddha Nature Treatise, the author gives
            five reasons to the question why the Buddha spoke of
            Buddha nature. They are (1) to cause sentient beings
            to depart from inferior mind, (2) to leave behind
            arrogance, (3) to get rid of delusion, (4) to keep
            away from slandering the truth and (5) to sever the
            attachment to self(26). By overcoming these five
            shortcomings, one gives rise to five virtues, namely
            , diligent mind, reverence, widom (`prajna`)
            knowledge (`jnana`) and compassion (`karuna`).
            Clearly, right from the beginning, the author does
            not try to establish that the Buddha nature stands
            for something substantial. Rather, he points out the
            ────────────
           23. Minoru Kiyota, "`Thatagatagarbha` Thought─Basis
               of Buddhist Devotionalism in East Asia," Japanese
               Journal of Religious Studies, Vol. 12, no. 2-3,
               p.214.
           24. Traditionally, Fo Hsing Lun (The Buddha Nature
               Treatise) is attributed to Vasubandha and
               translated into Chinese by `Paramartha`. Some
               Buddhologists, for example, Takasaki, suspect
               that it was actually written by `Paramartha`.
               However, this is still an unresolved issue. At
               any rate, this text represents the Yogacarin view
               concerning the Buddha nature.
           25. This is the `Mahayana` version of the Buddha's
               `Parinirvana`. Its content concentrates mainly on
               the `Mahayana` doctrines such as the eternal
               nature of Buddhahood rather than on the
               description of the last days of the Buddha.
           26. T. 31, p. 787a.
     
                                 240页
     
            soteriological function of the teaching of the Buddha
            nature.
     
                 Delusion refers to the two erronous views of
            the substential existence of both person (`atman`)
            and things (dharma). Ignorant actions arise from
            these two attachments to the self and external
            things which prevent human beings from perceiving
            the truth. To the author of the Buddha Nature
            Treatise, the truth is nothing but the Buddha nature,
            for "Buddha nature is the Thusness revealed by the
            twin emptiness of person and things."(27) Thus it
            is said that "if one does not speak of Buddha
            nature, then one does not understand emptiness and
            consequently will cling to reality and slander
            Thusness."(28) Since the Buddha nature is the
            implementation of emptiness, it can be any thing but
            an entity.
     
                 Furthermore, in the chapter of expounding the
            nature of Buddha nature, the author identified
            Buddha nature with the `Dharmakaya`, which is
            characterized with four virtues (`guna`). One of
            them is "self" (`atman`). This "self" is immediately
            identified with the perfection of non-self
            (`anatman-paramita`无我波罗蜜). How can the self be
            at the same time the perfection of non-self? The
            author explains,
     
              All the heterodox, in their various ways, conceive
              and grasp a self in those things which lack self,
              namely, the five skandhas─form, etc. Yet these
              things such as form, etc. differ from what one
              grasps as the mark of self; therefore, they are
              eternally lacking in self [However] with the
              wisdom of Thusness (chen ju chih真如智). all
              Buddhas and bodhisattvas realize the perfection of
              non-self (`anatman-paramita`) of all things
              ───────────
             27. T. 31, p. 787b.
             28. Ibid.
     
                                 241页
     
              Since this perfection of non-self and that
              which is seen as the mark of not-self are not
              different, the `Tathagata` says that this mark of
              the eternal not-self is the true, essential nature
              (chen t'i hsing 真体性) of all things, therefore.
              it is said that the perfection of not-self is
              self. As the `sutra` verse says,
                  Already the twin emptiness [of person and
                  thing] is pure!
                  [In this] is realized the not-self, the
                  supreme self, Since the Buddha realizes the
                  pure nature (hsing性). Not-self turns on
                  itself (chuan转) and becomes self.(29)
     
                 It is evident from this explanation that the
            teaching of Buddha nature is the instrument employed
            along with `prajna` to realize the true, essential
            nature of all dharmas, namely, the non-self.
            Soteriologically speaking, `tathagatagarbha/Buddha`
            nature also functions as an active skillful means,
            for it is reiterated in several `tathagatagarbha`
            texts that `tathagatagarbha` is the basis of
            `samsara` and `nirvana`. That is to say without
            `tathagatagarbha/Buddha` nature, sentient beings
            would neither arouse aversion to `samsara` nor
            desire for `nirvana`. Therefore, `tathagatagarbha`
            is active, not static. In other words, it represents
            actions of practice, rather than an monastic
            substance.
     
                 This interpretation can be further attested by
            the three causes of the Buddha nature explained in
            the Buddha Nature Treatise. The Buddha nature
            consists of three causes: (1) "deserved" cause (应
            得因), (2) the cause of intensified effort (加行因),
            and (3) the casue of fulfillment (圆满因).(30) The
            ────────────
           29. T. 31, p. 798c. Adapted from the translation in
               Sallie King's "The Buddha Nature: True Self As
               Action," Religious Studies, 1982, pp. 259.
           30. T. 31, p. 794a.
     
                                 242页
     
            three-cause schema signifies that depending on the
            "Thusness manifested by the twin emptiness (i.e.,
            Buddha nature)", and through the intensified effort
            of Buddhist practices, one "should obtain" or
            "deserves" the fulfillment of Buddhahood. Apparently
            , the pivot of the triple cause is the cause of
            intensified practice, for it plays the role of
            activating the potentiality to realize the Buddha
            nature.
     
                 As we know, the `Mahaparnirvana-sutra` is one
            of the most important `sutras` which articulate the
            concept of Buddha nature. Just as the
            Ratnagotravibhaga claims that all sentient beings
            possess the `tathagatagarbha`, so the
            `Mahaparinirvana Sutra` teaches that sentient beings
            have the Buddha nature. In explaining what it means
            by sentient beings' having the Buddha nature, the
            `Mahaparinirvana Sutra` distinguishes three
            different ways of understanding the term "to have",
     
              Good son, there are three ways of having: first,
              to have in the future, Secondly, to have at
              present, and thirdly, to have in the past. All
              sentient beings will have in future ages the most
              perfect enlightenment, i.e., the Buddha nature.
              All sentient beings have at present bonds of
              defilements, and do not now possess the thirty-two
              marks and eighty noble characteristics of the
              Buddha. All sentient beings had in past ages deeds
              leading to the elimination of defilements and so
              can now perceive the Buddha nature as their future
              goal. For such reasons, I always proclaim that all
              sentient beings have the Buddha nature.(31)
     
            Since the above passage identifies sentient beings'
            ways of
            ────────────
           31. T. 12, p. 524b. Adapted from the translation in
               Miug-wood Liu's "The Doctrine of the Buddha
               Nature in the `Mahayana Mahaparinirvana Sutra,`"
               Journal of the International Association of
               Buddhist Studies, vol. 5, no. 2, 1983, p. 70.
     
                                 243页
     
            having Buddha nature with the third way of having,
            i.e., having in the future, it is again a proof that
            the teaching of the universal Buddha nature does not
            intend to assert the existence of substantial,
            entity-like self endowed with excellent features of
            a Buddha. Rather, Buddha nature simply represents
            the potentiality to be realized in the future.
     
                 Elsewhere in the `Mahaparinirana Sutra`, Buddha
            nature is defined as the ultimate emptiness and the
            Middle Way. It says,
     
              Good son, Buddha nature is the ultimate emptiness
              ,which is `prajna` itself. [False] emptiness means
              not to perceive emptiness or non-emptiness. The
              wise perceive emptiness and non-emptiness,
              permanence and impermanence, suffering and
              happiness, self and non-self. What is empty is
              `samsara` and what is not empty is great
              `nirvana`.... Perceiving the non-self but not the
              self is not the Middle Way. The Middle Way is
              Buddha nature.(32)
     
            The essential point of this passage is that true
            emptiness, or in this case Buddha nature, trancends
            any dictomony─being and non-being, self and
            non-self, suffering and happiness, etc. Ordinary
            people and the heterodox see only the existence of
            self, while `Sravakas` and Pratyekabuddhas perceive
            only the non-self, but not the existence of a self.
            Clinging to one extreme or the other, they cannot
            realize the ultimate, and true emptiness and
            consequently cannot realize the Middle Way. Without
            the Middle Way, they are not able to comprehend
            Buddha nature. Trying to lessen the monistic flavour
            of the Buddha nature, the `Mahaparinirvana Sutra`
            interprets Buddha nature as both emcompassing and
            transcending the notions of self
            ────────────
           32. T. 12, p. 523b.
     
                                 244页
     
            and non-self. It makes the doctrine of the Buddha
            nature adhere closely to the Buddhist teaching of
            non-duality and the Middle Way. Thus Buddha nature
            should not be treated as equivalent to the monistic
            absolute. If it does seemly indicate the presence of
            a substantive self, it is actually a positive
            expression of emptiness.
     
                 In conclusion, when we try to interpret the
            thought of the `tathagatagarbha`, we should keep
            several points in mind: (1) The `tathagatagarbha`
            symbolizes the potential for enligh-tenment (a
            principle) rather than a material "essence" of
            ultimate truth, because (2) the `tathagatagarbha` is
            based on the framework of the `Mahayana` doctrine of
            `sunyata-pratitys-amutpada`. (3) The development of
            the `tathagatagarbha` doctrine signifies the ability
            of a religious tradition to meet the spiritual needs
            of the masses aiming at a given time. That is to
            say the `tathagatagarbha` thought was formed as an
            positive soterio-logical approach to counteract the
            "`sunyam sarvam`" (all is empty) view. The
            `tathagatagarbha` which strongly articulates a
            devotional and experiential approach to salvation
            provides much to the hope and aspiration of the
            people at large.
     
                 It is this positive aspect that was taken up
            and strongly emphasized in Chinese Buddhism. (4) The
            `tathagatagarbha` doctrine is employed as a
            skill-in-means (`upaya`). This does not necessarily
            mean that the theory of the `tathagatagarbha` is
            neyartha, a teaching requiring further
            qualifications; rather, it is a skill-in-means in
            that it is taught to suit the needs of a certain
            kind of people and circumstances. This is why it is
            said in the `sutra` that in order to teach the
            emptiness of all dharmas, the Buddhas preach
            sometimes by the doctrine of the `tathagatagarbha`,
            and sometimes by that of emptiness. Thus
     
                                 245页
     
            it is better to take the `tathagatagarbha/Buddha`
            nature as representing "profound existence" (妙有)
            derived from "true emptiness" (真空) rather than as
            a monistic self.
     
                                 246页
     
                     论  如  来  藏  之  空  性  义
     
                               释  恒  清
     
            真常系思想为大乘佛教三大思想之一,影响中国佛教至巨。
        此系统主要是建立在如来藏(或佛性)的教义上,高扬人心中蕴含
        的清净本性。
     
            然而,带有神我色彩的如来藏却自古引起不少诤议。例如,
        如来藏是否代表某种有「我」论?清净的如来藏如果是本然的存
        在,则染污的「无明」又因何而起?
     
            本文根据「宝性论」、「大般涅盘经」、「佛性论」等真常
        系统经论,探讨如来藏的空性义,以驳斥现代某些学者主张如来
        藏思想为实体一元论的论调。
     
     

     【关闭窗口
    相关文章:
  • 佛教中的十大真理,一条比一条经典[178]

  • 俗话说不要享痴福,为什么福会跟痴合在一起?[157]

  • 恭迎“八宗共祖”龙树菩萨圣诞,愿菩萨之光永照世人![300]

  • 有人一生受苦,是不是前世修行不好?[435]

  • 学佛的重点在有没有“悟”[526]

  • 什么是佛教真理?铭记这十条你会一生受益[716]

  • 为什么佛菩萨都不穿鞋?[500]

  • 怎样才能增长空性智慧 [嘎玛仁波切][737]

  • 科学与佛教的相遇处:空性、一体性和现实的本性 [杰拉德][1558]

  • 墨子号卫星上天!“量子纠缠”证明佛法空性[1678]

  • 空性:消除执着的金钥匙 [慈诚罗珠堪布][2018]

  • 如来藏本有义与空性之关系略述[5507]

  • 空性的智慧[4957]

  • 中观学派“空性与绝对”之意义[4586]

  • 证悟空性的结果之一:平息世间八法[6241]

  • 唯识的空性与二谛思想研究[6122]

  • 老子之道与佛教空性的比较研究[4042]

  • 空性的魔术[4348]

  • 禅与杜威--教育思想和方法之比较[6152]

  • 禅净融合主义的思惟方法[5910]

  •  
    设为首页 | 加入收藏 | 联系站长 | 友情链接 | 版权申明 | 管理登录 | 
    版权所有 Copyright© 2005 佛学研究        站长:wuys
    Powered by:Great Tang Hua Wei & XaWebs.com 2.0(2006)