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


  • 除夕如何迎接“财神、喜神、贵[100]

  • 人类,放过野味吧![260]

  • 送你十大智慧,解烦恼笑开颜[150]

  • 这5种人不用拜佛,却离佛最近,[125]

  • 福到了,那你能接住吗?一个公[174]

  • 身在红尘,何不让心出家?[106]

  • 禅语:世上所有的福气,都是你[114]

  • 民间信仰是迷信吗?佛教对“迷[174]

  • 修持常识[113]

  • 这两件事佛做不到,别去求了[140]

  • 诵持“大悲咒”,有何功德利益[160]

  • 中国古代没有哲学阐释学吗?[124]



  • 本站推荐

    恭迎文殊菩萨成道日

    佛识慧集(二十五):

    佛源老和尚:这就是


       您现在的位置: 佛学研究网 >> E3英文佛教 >> [专题]e3英文佛教 >> 正文


    Aspects of the "bodhisattva" Ideal in the Mahayana
     
    [ 作者: Harry Oldmeadow   来自:期刊原文   已阅:2531   时间:2006-12-22   录入:douyuebo
    49tjf49edf:Article:ArticleID

     

    ·期刊原文


    Delivering the Last Blade of Grass: Aspects of the "bodhisattva" Ideal in the Mahayana

    Harry Oldmeadow

    Asian Philosophy

    Vol.7 No.3 ( Nov 1997)   Pp.181-194

    COPYRIGHT 1997 Journals Oxford Ltd. (UK)

     

    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------


                Doers of what is hard are the bodhisattvas, the great beings who
                have set out to win supreme enlightenment. They do not wish to
                attain their own private nirvana. On the contrary. They have
                surveyed the highly painful world of being, and yet, desirous to win
                supreme enlightenment, they do not tremble at birth and death. They
                have set out for the benefit of the world, for the ease of the
                world, out of pity for the world. They have resolved 'We will become
                a shelter for the world, a refuge for the world, the world's place
                of rest, the final relief of the world, islands of the world, lights
                of the world, leaders of the world, the world's means of salvation'.
                (Prajnaparamita Sutra)

                Introduction

                The unfolding of the Mahayana marked a decisive phase in the history
                of the Buddhist tradition. Against earlier forms of Buddhism the
                Mahayana represented a metaphysical shift from a radical pluralism
                to an absolutism anchored in the doctrine of sunyata;
                epistemologically, through Nagarjuna's Madhyamika, the Mahayana
                moved from a psychologically-oriented empiricism to a mode of
                dialectical criticism; ethically the centre of gravity shifted from
                the arhat ideal of private salvation to that of the bodhisattva, one
                attuned to the universal deliverance of all beings "down to the last
                blade of grass". It has often been remarked that the two pre-eminent
                contributions of the Mahayana to the spiritual treasury of Buddhism
                are the metaphysic of sunyata and the bodhisattva ideal. To these
                might be added the Mahayanist doctrine of the Trikaya, the Three
                Bodies of the Buddha who now appears as a cosmic and metacosmic
                figure.

                After some prefatory remarks about the emergence of the bodhisattva
                ideal this article focuses on its significance within the spiritual
                economy of the Mahayana, and its relationship to the pivotal
                Mahayanist doctrines centering on karuna (compassion), prajna
                (wisdom) and sunyata (voidness). The latter part of the article
                takes up some subsidiary questions relating to the bodhisattva's
                'status', viz. the Buddha, the issue of 'self-power' and
                'other-power', and the popular appeal of the bodhisattva ideal.
                Although our knowledge of early Buddhism is somewhat sketchy, there
                is some evidence to suggest that by about the 2nd century AD the
                pre-Mahayanist tradition was affected by a kind of dogmatic
                constriction and possibly by certain pharisaic currents within the
                sangha. From the (later) Mahayanist perspective there had developed
                an exaggerated reliance on the Abhidharma (the systematic
                explication of the doctrines) and the Vinaya (the disciplinary rules
                of the monastic community), and an undue emphasis on the ideal of
                private salvation. Dr Har Dayal has herein located the source of the
                bodhisattva ideal:
                They [the monks] became too self-centred and contemplative ... . The
                Bodhisattva doctrine was promulgated by some Buddhist leaders as a
                protest against this lack of true spiritual fervour and altruism
                among the monks of that period. [1]

                This suggests rather too narrow a view of the impulses behind the
                ideal. Leaving aside the exigencies of the historical period in
                which it emerged, it can be said that the blossoming of the
                bodhisattva conception, in one form or another, was inevitable.
                Frithjof Schuon has elaborated the 'spiritual logic', so to speak,
                which made it so:
                In considering the bodhisattva ideal, account must be taken of the
                following fundamental situation: Buddhism unfolds itself in a sense
                between the empirical notions of suffering and cessation of
                suffering; the notion of compassion springs from this very fact and
                is an inevitable or necessary link in what might be called the
                spiritual mythology of the Buddhist tradition. The fact of suffering
                and the possibility of putting an end to it must needs imply
                compassion unless a man were living alone upon the earth. [2]

                We are not here concerned with either the early
                Theravadin-Mahayanist disputations on the issues raised by the
                emergence of the bodhisattva ideal except to say that some polemical
                excesses perhaps answered to certain necessities insofar as they
                were 'defensive reflexes' to preserve or affirm the integrity of the
                spiritual outlook in question. Be that as it may, one is still
                exposed in the scholarly literature to certain prejudices and
                over-simplifications which discolour any overview of the Buddhist
                tradition. Edward Conze, for instance, is guilty of the charge when
                he makes a claim as imprudent and as astonishing as the following:
                The rationalist orthodoxy of Ceylon has a vision of Buddhism which
                is as truncated and impoverished as the fideism of Shinran, and it
                is no accident that they are both geographically located at the
                outer periphery of the Buddhist world. [3]

                Such asseverations betoken a failure to grasp the principle that
                under the canopy of any great religious tradition there will
                inevitably emerge a variety of spiritual perspectives answering to
                different needs.

                In some of the literature on the bodhisattva ideal one finds a good
                many wasted words on the 'selfishness' of the arhat ideal in the
                Theravada - another polemical abuse. On such indiscretions nothing
                need to be added to Schuon's salutary remarks that
                ... if there is the Mahayana an element which calls for some caution
                from a metaphysical point of view it is not, of course, the vocation
                of the bodhisattva as such but, what is quite different, the
                bodhisattvic ideal in so far as this is polemically opposed to the
                "non-altruistic" spirituality of the pure contemplative, as if,
                firstly, all true spirituality do not necessarily include charity,
                and secondly, as if the consideration of some contingency or other
                could enter into competition with pure and total Knowledge. [4]

                Finally, by way of prefatory remarks, it should be noted that the
                bodhisattva conception is not exclusively Mahayanist. For all
                Buddhists the Buddha himself was a bodhisattva before his complete
                enlightenment. The Theravadin perspective generally restricts itself
                to this understanding of the term although the Sarvastivadins had
                elaborated a fairly full-bodied ideal before the time of the
                Mahayana. [5] The decisive contribution of the Mahayana was to
                "unfold to its furthest limits all that was to be found in the
                ideal", [6] to give it its richest and most resonant expression.
                The Bodhisattva Ideal and the Path to its Attainment
                There is no shortage of either traditional accounts or scholarly
                explications of the bodhisattva ideal and of the path to be followed
                by its adherents. Let us state the matter briefly. The bodhisattva
                is one who voluntarily renounces the right to enter nirvana, who,
                under certain inextinguishable vows, undergoes countless rebirths in
                the samsaric realm in order to devote his/her energies, in a spirit
                of boundless compassion, to the deliverance of all beings down to
                "the last blade of grass". The bodhisattva is committed to the
                practice of the six paramitas (perfections), particularly the
                all-encompassing ideal of prajna (wisdom). The bodhisattva advanced
                on the path becomes an exemplar of sacrificial heroism and moral
                idealism as well as an aspirant to complete enlightenment.
                The bodhisattva path can be summarised this way. Firstly there is
                the awakening of the thought of enlightenment which matures into a
                decisive resolve to attain enlightenment for the benefit of all
                beings. After making the Great Resolves, marked by the taking of
                many vows, the bodhisattva (for such he/she now is, although still
                on the early part of the path) perfects the six paramitas and
                progresses through ten bhumis (levels or stages). A crucial
                transformation takes place at the seventh bhumi by which stage the
                bodhisattva has fully penetrated the nature of sunyata and has thus
                perfected the paramita of wisdom. The bodhisattva is now "eligible"
                for entry into nirvana which he/she has perpetually renounced.
                However, the bodhisattva now takes on the nature and functions of a
                celestial or transcendent figure and assumes a dharmic body - the
                manomayakaya, a mind-made body of wonder-working powers whereby
                he/she can manifest anywhere, anytime. The bodhisattva is now beyond
                the terrestrial limitations of time and space, and is free from all
                karmic determinations having now entered a realm of pure, effortless
                compassionate activity, of spiritual action undefiled by any of the
                contaminations of ignorance (dualistic notions, for instance). The
                bodhisattva's compassionate wisdom (or, more strictly,
                wisdom-in-its-compassionate-aspect) is now a super-abundance and
                universal in its applications. On completion of the tenth and final
                bhumi the bodhisattva becomes Tathagata, fully Perfect Being. [7]

                The importance of the initial vows cannot be over-estimated. They
                take many different forms but are always variations on a theme, as
                it were. Here we shall note one such form which sounds the keynote
                of all the vows:
                I take upon myself ... the deeds of all beings, even of those in the
                hells ... I take their suffering upon me ... . I bear it, I do not
                draw back from it, I do not tremble at it, I do not lose heart ... I
                must bear the burden of all beings, for I have vowed to save all
                things living, to bring them safe through the forest of birth, age,
                disease, death and rebirth. I think not of my own salvation, but
                strive to bestow on all beings the royalty of supreme wisdom. So I
                take upon myself all the sorrows of all beings ... . Truly I will
                not abandon them. For I have resolved to gain supreme wisdom for the
                sake of all that lives, to save the world. [8]

                The similarity to the sacrificial ideal incarnated in Christ is
                striking. We can also discern a parallel with Christian doctrine in
                the idea of the transference of suffering and of merit. This was a
                bold doctrinal innovation within Buddhism, and was integral to the
                Mahayanist conception of both the Buddha and the bodhisattva.
                Nevertheless one must be wary of attempts to explain the bodhisattva
                ideal in terms of "borrowings" from Christianity. The differences
                are no less striking. We note, for instance, the emphasis in the
                Buddhist vow on the attainment of wisdom which assumes a secondary
                place in the Christian perspective, addressed as it is primarily to
                man's affective and volitional nature.

                The vows set before the bodhisattva the goal for all time, and
                direct all spiritual development. Furthermore, and this point is
                fundamental in the Mahayana,
                Man becomes what he wills ... . Spiritual realisation is a growth
                from within, self-creative and self-determining. It is not too much
                to say that the nature of the resolve determines the nature of the
                final attainment. [9]

                Lama Anagarika Govinda articulates the same Mahayanist principle
                when he writes
                If ... we take the view that consciousness is not a product of the
                world but that the world is a product of consciousness ... it
                becomes obvious that we live in exactly the type of world we have
                created ... and that the remedy cannot be an "escape" from the world
                but only a change of "mind". Such a change, however, can only take
                place if we know the innermost nature of this mind and its power.
                [10]

                It is, of course, a change of "mind", a transformation of
                consciousness, that the bodhisattva envisages in the original vows.
                The vows are re-affirmed during the ninth bhumi by which time they
                are no longer statements of intent but pure spiritual acts with
                incalculable effects. [11]

                The six paramitas to be actualised in the bodhisattva are charity
                (dana), morality (sila), forbearance (ksanti), vigour (virya),
                concentration (samadhi), and wisdom (prajna). In some schools these
                six paramitas are linked with the first six bhumis, the
                correspondence first being postulated by Candrakirti in the
                Madhyamakavatara. [12] However, the practice of the six paramitas is
                simultaneous, all of them being informed by the all-embracing ideals
                of karuna and prajna. Indeed, the first five paramitas cannot be
                separated from prajna of which they are secondary aspects, each
                destined to contribute in their own way to the attainment of
                liberating knowledge.

                During the early bhumis the bodhisattva's energies must be dedicated
                in the first place to the realisation of sunyata without which the
                perfection of prajna is not possible. Recall the incident in the
                Life of Milarepa when the great Tibetan sage is asked by his
                disciples whether they should engage in an active life of good
                deeds. His reply:
                If there is not attachment to selfish aims, you can. But that is
                difficult. Those who are full of worldly desires can do nothing to
                help others. They do not even profit themselves. It is as if a man,
                carried away by a torrent, pretended to save others. Nobody can do
                anything for sentient beings without first attaining transcendent
                insight into Reality. Like the blind leading the blind, one would
                risk being carried away by desires. Because space is limitless and
                sentient beings innumerable, you will always have a chance to help
                others when you become capable of doing so. Until then, cultivate
                the aspiration toward Complete Enlightenment by loving others more
                than yourselves while practising the Dharma. [13]

                In considering the later stages of the bodhisattva's spiritual
                trajectory we enter realms where any verbal articulation of the
                realities in question becomes problematical. Any formulation must be
                in the nature of a suggestive metaphor, a signpost fashioned out of
                the limited resources of human language. Much of the Mahayanist
                literature concerning this subject, especially in the Himalayan
                regions, resorts to a densely symbolic mythology and its
                accompanying iconography. [14]

                The attainment of insight into sunyata makes possible the
                compassionate mission of the bodhisattva, unhindered by dualistic
                misconceptions. Once in the seventh bhumi, with the assumption of
                the manomayakaya, the bodhisattva can appear in manifold guises,
                each one appropriate to the spiritual necessities of the case. Thus
                the bodhisattva can appear in forms fierce and gruesome as well as
                benign and attractive - as we see in the resplendent and sometimes
                startling iconography of the Vajrayana. Before reaching the seventh
                level the bodhisattva remains in the phenomenal realm and his
                compassionate acts partake of "strain and strenuosity", but now the
                bodhisattva leaves behind all terrestrial and karmic constraints and
                enters the realm of spontaneous, effortless, and pure spiritual
                action. The Dasa-bhumika explains the transition to effortlessness
                thus:
                It is like a man in a dream who finds himself drowning in a river;
                he musters all his courage and is determined at all costs to get out
                of it. And because of these efforts and desperate contrivances he is
                awakened from the dream and when thus awakened he at once perceives
                that no further doings are needed now. So with the bodhisattva ... .
                [15]

                This does not mean that the bodhisattva settles into quietistic
                inertia but rather that his/her being has been transformed into
                compassionate wisdom radiating through the universe. It might be
                compared to the Christian conception of God's love which is
                universal, non-discriminating, indifferent, making the sun to rise
                on the evil as well as the good, and sending rain on both the just
                and the unjust. [16] Murti speaks of the bodhisattva being "actuated
                by motiveless altruism ... his freedom is full and complete by
                itself; but he condescends to raise others to his level. This is a
                free phenomenalizing act of grace and compassion". [17]
                If we return to Schuon's claim that the bodhisattva ideal is
                implicit in the Buddhist vision which turns on the two poles of
                suffering and deliverance, we can now, perhaps, see more clearly
                what is meant by this claim. Schuon elaborates the claim in writing
                that the bodhisattva
                incarnates the element of compassion - the ontological link as it
                were between Pain and Felicity - just as the Buddha incarnates
                Felicity and just as ordinary beings incarnate suffering: he must be
                present in the cosmos as long as there is both a Samsara and a
                Nirvana, this presence of his being expressed by the statement that
                the bodhisattva wishes to deliver "all beings". [18]

                The Bodhisattva Ideal and the Metaphysic of Sunyata
                The bodhisattva enterprise is oriented towards enlightenment, as the
                etymology of the term itself makes clear:
                Prajna informs and inspires the entire spiritual discipline; every
                virtue and each act of concentration is dedicated to the gaining of
                insight into the real. The stress has shifted [viz. earlier Buddhist
                practices] from the moral to the metaphysical axis ... all the other
                paramitas are meant to purify the mind and make it fit to receive
                the intuition of the absolute. It is Prajna that can make of each of
                them a paramita - a perfection. [19]

                We have already noted, in the cautionary advice of Milarepa, the
                emphasis on prajna. Without the guidance of insight, would-be
                compassion is often no more than sentiment, all too easily
                conscripted by what Chogyam Trungpa has called "the bureaucracy of
                the ego" and turned, unwittingly, to destructive and futile ends.
                In the Mahayanist perspective karuna (compassion) is inseparable
                from prajna - insight into sunyata which, for the moment, we can
                translate in conventional fashion as "emptiness" or "voidness". The
                relationship is stated by Milarepa in this characteristic
                formulation:
                If ye realize Voidness, Compassion will arise within your hearts; If
                ye lose all differentiation between yourself and others, fit to
                serve others ye will be ... [20]

                Karuna arises out of insight into prajna. Compassion, at least in
                its full amplitude, cannot precede prajna; it is a function of
                prajna. On this point the Mahayanists are unyielding. As Herbert
                Guenther has pointed out, karuna means not only compassion but also
                action. [21] This anticipates the point at issue here: karuna is the
                action attending an awareness of sunyata. However, even this
                formulation implies a dualism not to be found in the reality itself.
                Compassion, it might be said, is the dynamic aspect of knowledge or
                awareness and as such, is a criterion of its authenticity. To recast
                this in moral terms more characteristic of the Occidental religious
                traditions we can say that virtue is integral to wisdom. As Schuon
                has remarked, "a wisdom without virtue is in fact imposture and
                hypocrisy ...". [22] At this juncture an interesting comparison with
                Christianity arises. Buddhism insists that karuna without Prajna is
                a contradiction in terms, a chimera, the blind leading the blind.
                Christianity, with its more "bhaktic" orientation, alerts us, in the
                first place, to the illusoriness of a wisdom bereft of caritas - a
                'sounding brass' or a 'tinkling cymbal'. [23] Ultimately, of course,
                the principle at stake is the same, but the different accents are
                illuminating.

                In the Mahayana karuna and prajna come to be seen not only as
                inseparable but as identical: reference to one or the other
                signifies the same reality when viewed from a particular angle. The
                fully-fledged bodhisattva is simultaneously fully enlightened and
                boundlessly compassionate. The compassionate aspect of the
                bodhisattvas is stressed not because they are in any sense deficient
                in wisdom but because their cosmic function is to highlight and to
                radiate this dimension of wisdom-awareness. Ultimately Karuna is
                identified not only with prajna but with sunyata itself. This is so
                because the duality of knower and known must be transcended.
                Further, because the universe itself is of the nature of sunyata,
                karuna also comes to be identified with the universe itself.
                Heinrich Zimmer put it this way:
                Within the hearts of all creatures compassion is present as the sign
                of their potential bodhisattvahood; for all things are sunyata, the
                void - and the pure reflex of the void ... is compassion.
                Compassion, indeed, is the force that holds things in manifestation
                - just as it with-holds the bodhisattva from nirvana. The whole
                universe, therefore, is karuna, compassion, which is also known as
                sunyata, the void. [24]

                The same principle is approached from a different angle in this
                formulation:
                ... the Mahayana under its sapiential aspect aims at maintaining its
                solidarity with the heroic ideal of the bodhisattva, while
                nonetheless referring back that ideal to a strictly metaphysical
                perspective. It first declares that compassion is a dimension of
                Knowledge, then it adds that one's neighbour (and one's self) is
                non-real ... there is no one whom our charity could concern, nor is
                there a charity which could be "ours". [25]

                Now this, to say the least, is somewhat perplexing to the
                ratiocinative mind. There is no gainsaying the fact that, at least
                on the level of mundane experience and 'common sense', we are here
                faced with several conundrums. What is the meaning of the
                bodhisattva's mission in the face of sunyata? If all is 'emptiness'
                is this much ado about nothing? Is the bodhisattva's enterprise
                somewhat akin to the monkey trying to take hold of the moon in the
                water? [26] What are we to make of such characteristic claims as
                "Where an attitude in which sunyata and karuna are indivisible is
                developed, there is the message of the Buddha, the Dharma, and the
                Sangha"? [27] And then too, we must ask, in what sense should we
                understand the bodhisattva's refusal to enter Nirvana until all
                beings are saved? How be it that an enlightened being is not thereby
                'in' nirvana? And what of the well-known formulation that "Samsara
                is nirvana", and vice versa, or, similarly, that "Form is void, Void
                is form"?

                Such questions can only adequately be answered through an
                understanding of the term upaya, usually translated as "skilful
                means" but perhaps more adequately rendered as "provisional means
                which have a spiritually therapeutic effect" or, to use Schuon's
                more poetic term, "saving mirages". Buddhism is directed in the
                first place to our most urgent spiritual needs, the soteriological
                purpose everywhere informing and shaping the means of which the
                tradition avails itself. In other words, Buddhism, like all
                religious traditions, resorts to certain mythological and doctrinal
                'accommodations' which
                ... are objectively inadequate [i.e. in the light of a pure
                metaphysic] but which are none the less logically appropriate to the
                religious axiom they serve and justified by their effectiveness pro
                domo as well as by their symbolic and indirect truth. [28]
                Of course, Buddhism is not peculiar in dealing with 'partial truths'
                in respect of its formal elements but the Madhyamika-based
                traditions have been conspicuously alert to the dangers of
                identifying Truth or Reality with any dogmatic or conceptual forms
                which can never be more than markers guiding the aspirant.
                Nagarjuna's whole dialectic (nearly two millenia before our own much
                vaunted post-modernists!) is directed towards demonstrating the
                inadequacy and self-contradiction of all mental and conceptual
                formulations. Indeed, the Mahayanists speak of Reality itself only
                in apparently negative terms reminiscent of the Upanisadic neti
                neti. Nevertheless, certain truths can be brought within the purview
                of the average mentality through 'therapeutic errors'. It is
                therefore important to make the necessary discriminations in
                considering myths and doctrines which might be situated on different
                levels and which may answer to varying spiritual needs and
                temperaments.

                With these considerations in mind let us return to the questions
                before us. Clearly any adequate understanding of the bodhisattva
                ideal rests on an understanding of sunyata. Unhappily the
                conventional English translations - "emptiness", "voidness" - often
                carry negative implications and associations which can only blur our
                understanding of sunyata. We cannot here recapitulate the
                Nagarjunian dialectic nor explore the ramifications of the doctrine
                of sunyata. However, it is useful to note Guenther's remark that
                "openness" is at least as helpful a pointer as "emptiness". In
                similar vein, Lama Govinda stresses that an understanding of sunyata
                heightens our awareness of the "transparency" of phenomena. Sunyata,
                he writes.

                is not a negative property but a state of freedom from impediments
                and limitations, a state of spontaneous receptivity ... sunyata is
                the emptiness of all conceptual designations and at the same time
                the recognition of a higher, incommensurable and indefinable reality
                which can only be experienced in the state of perfect enlightenment.
                [29]

                The penetration of sunyata allows the bodhisattva to experience the
                phenomenal realm as it actually is and not under the illusory
                aspects it assumes when experienced in a state of ignorance.
                Understanding sunyata, the bodhisattva does not repudiate the world
                of suffering beings as an utter non-reality; to do so would be to
                succumb to what the Mahayanists call uccheddadarsanam, i.e. a kind
                of nihilism. As Suzuki has pointed out,
                That the world is like a mirage, that it is thus empty, does not
                mean that it is unreal in the sense that it has no reality
                whatsoever. But it means that its real nature cannot be understood
                by a mind that cannot rise above the dualism of "to be" (sat) and
                "not to be" (asat). [30]

                The bodhisattva's karuna issues from the overcoming of this dualism.
                As one translation of the Lankavatara Sutra has it,
                The world transcends (the dualism of) birth and death, it is like
                the flower in the air; the wise are free from (the ideas of being
                and non-being); yet a great compassionate heart is awakened in them.
                [31]

                The mission of the bodhisattva, far from being 'invalidated' by
                sunyata, actually derives from it. Murti has explicated this in
                commanding fashion, especially in the light of the
                sunyata-prajna-karuna-universe equation already discussed:
                Sunyata is prajna, intellectual intuition, and is identical with the
                Absolute. karuna is the active principle of compassion that gives
                concrete expression to sunyata in phenomena. If the first is
                Transcendent and looks to the Absolute, the second is fully immanent
                and looks down towards phenomena. The first is the ... universal
                reality of which no determinations can be predicated; it is beyond
                the duality of good and evil, love and hatred, virtue and vice; the
                second is goodness, love and pure act ... the bodhisatta ... is thus
                an amphibious being with one foot in the Absolute and the other in
                phenomena. [32]

                Prajna perceives the emptiness, openness and indivisibility of the
                Absolute while karuna sees the diversity of the phenomenal realm.
                But these aspects of awareness are inseparable: the bodhisattva is
                the living embodiment, the 'personification' of this truth.
                The bodhisattva appreciates the lack of any self-existent reality in
                the phenomenal world and understands the impermanent and fugitive
                nature of all things within the world of time and space.

                Simultaneously the bodhisattva takes account of the relative reality
                of manifested beings and thus sets out to eradicate evil on the
                samsaric plane and to help deliver all beings from the Round of
                Existence. In other words, the bodhisattva experiences whatever
                measure of reality belongs to the phenomenal world while being
                immune to dualistic misconceptions and their karmic effects. "The
                bodhisattva weeps with suffering beings and at the same time
                realizes that there is one who never weeps, being above sufferings,
                tribulations and contaminations." [33] Because of his identification
                with all beings the bodhisattva suffers; because of his wisdom he
                experiences the blissful awareness of the full plenitude of the
                Void. [34]

                What of the bodhisattva's 'location' in samsara/nirvana? In the
                Mahayanist literature we can find different formulations of the
                bodhisattva's 'whereabouts'; he remains in samsara; he is 'on the
                brink' of nirvana; he is in nirvana because nirvana is samsara. Here
                we are in a realm not amenable to factual exactitude and will only
                succeed in tightening the 'mental knots' if we approach these
                expressions in the either/or mode of rationalist, analytical and
                empiricist philosophy; rather, we need to understand the truths
                enshrined in these different formulations.

                The first expression, as well as signalling various truths which we
                have already discussed, suggests that enlightenment is possible
                within the samsaric realm:
                The condition of the gnostic bodhisattva would be neither
                conceivable nor tolerable if it were not a matter of contemplating
                the Absolute in the heart and in the world at one and the same time.
                [35]

                The second symbolises the truth that time and eternity, phenomena
                and the Void, do not exist as independent opposites but are aspects
                of the one reality, all of the nature of sunyata. The bodhisattva is
                a link or axis that joins the apparently separate realms of the
                phenomenal, the celestial and the metacosmic. (In this context the
                bodhisattva conception is closely related to the doctrine of the
                Trikaya). Thirdly, from the enlightened "point of view" the
                opposition between samsara and nirvana is seen to be illusory, all
                dualities having been transcended in the light of the supreme
                unitive knowledge. Thus there can be no question of the bodhisattva
                being either "here" or "there".

                When the prajnaparamita Sutra and other scriptures tell us that
                "Form is void and Void is form" this must be understood in the sense
                of what is before we project our conceptualisations and designations
                onto it. The formulation cannot be fully understood prior to the
                intuition of sunyata. Once the liberative knowledge has been
                attained then, and then only, will the duality of samsara and
                nirvana disappear. Thus the Lankavatara Sutra speaks in one and the
                same breath of the bodhisattva both being and not being "in"
                nirvana.

                The bodhisattvas, O MahatmA, who rejoice in the bliss of the samadhi
                of cessation are well furnished with the original vows and the
                pitying heart, and realizing the import of the inextinguishable
                vows, do not enter nirvana. They are already in nirvana because
                their views are not at all beclouded by discrimination. [36]
                Many of these considerations are synthesised in a magisterial
                passage by Frithjof Schuon, one which can stand as a conclusion to
                this part of our inquiry:
                If the bodhisattva is supposed to "refuse entry into Nirvana so long
                as a single blade of grass remains undelivered" this means two
                things: firstly (this is the cosmic viewpoint) it means that the
                function of the bodhisattva coincides with what in Western language
                may be termed the permanent "angelic presence" in the world, a
                presence which only disappears with the world itself at the final
                reintegration, called "apokatastasis" in the language of Western
                gnosticism; secondly (this is the metaphysical viewpoint) it means
                that the bodhisattva, realizing the "emptiness" of things, thereby
                realizes on the same showing the nirvanic quality of Samsara as such
                ... expressed in the sentence "Form is void and Void is form." The
                Samsara which seems at first to be inexhaustible, so that the
                bodhisattva's vow appears to have something excessive or even crazy
                about it, becomes "instantly" reduced - in the non-temporal
                instaneity of Prajna - to universal Enlightenment (Sambodhi); on
                this plane, every antinomy is transcended and as it were consumed.
                "Delivering the last blade of grass" amounts, in this sense, to
                beholding it in its nirvanic essence or to apprehending the
                unreality of its non-deliverance. [37]

                The Bodhisattva and the Buddha(s)

                In keeping with its cosmic perspective, the Mahayana, unlike the
                Theravadin tradition, sees the Buddha as the embodiment of a
                spiritual principle, one who "acted out" his life for the benefit of
                all sentient beings still lost in the "forest of birth, disease, old
                age, death and rebirth", his own enlightenment, in the words of the
                Sadharmapundarika Satra, having been attained "inconceivable
                thousands of millions of world ages" ago. [38]

                The Theravadins had recognized three ultimate spiritual
                possibilities: Self-Buddhas (Paccekebuddha), the perfected saint
                (arhat) and the Complete Perfect Buddha (Sammasambuddha). The arhat
                ideal occupied the pivotal position, it being the possibility open
                to the ordinary human being who was prepared to tread the path
                mapped by Sakyamuni. This ideal rested on an austere monastic
                asceticism. The Mahayana, on the other hand, established the Perfect
                Buddha as an ideal whose realisation was open to all and equated it
                with the aspirations of the bodhisattva. It also elaborated a
                conception of a host of transcendent Buddhas and celestial Buddha -
                Lands-Pure Lands or Paradises, of which Amitabha's Western Paradise
                has been, historically, the most important. The celestial Buddhas
                and Paradises, as well as the bodhisattvic figures such as
                Avalokitesvara, Manjusri, Vajrapani and Tara, have played a
                particularly important part in the iconography of the
                Tibeto-Himalayan branches of the Mahayana.

                The most significant Mahayanist distinction between the Buddha and
                the Bodhisattva is not determined by 'degrees' of enlightenment but
                by function. That of the bodhisattva is a dynamic and salvatory one
                implying a perpetual 'descent' into Samsara (thus recalling the
                Hindu conception of the avatar). From one point of view it might be
                said that "the Buddha represents the contemplative aspect and the
                bodhisattva the dynamic aspect of nirvana", or that "the former is
                turned towards the Absolute and the latter towards contingency".
                [39] As the bodhisattva and the Buddha are of the same nature there
                is no rigid distinction between them but a subtle relationship which
                appears in different guises under different lights. It is said in
                the Lankavatara Sutra, for instance, that the bodhisattvas are
                incapable of reaching their final goal without the "other-power"
                (adhisthana) of the Buddha, without his all-pervading power. [40]
                However, it is also sometimes said in the Mahayanist texts that it
                is by virtue of the compassion of the bodhisattva that the Buddhas
                come into the world. In the Sadharmapundarika Sutra, for instance,
                we find this: "From the Buddhas arise only the disciples and the
                Pratyekabuddhas but from the bodhisattva the perfect Buddha himself
                is born". [41]

                Self-Power, Other-Power and the Bodhisattva

                The question of self-power and other-power has generated a good deal
                of reckless and polarising polemic within nearly all of the major
                religious traditions. Buddhism is no exception. Edward Conze has
                remarked that the ineffable reality of salvation can be viewed from
                three distinct vantage points; (a) as the product of self-striving
                under the guidance of an infallible teacher, (b) as the work of an
                external and personified agent accepted in faith, and (c) as the
                doing of the Absolute itself. From a metaphysical point of view
                doubtless the third represents the least restricted outlook.

                However, the relative merits of these perspectives are not at issue
                here; rather we must consider this question in the context of our
                primary concern, the Mahayanist understanding of the bodhisattva.
                The Theravadins, by and large hold to the first of these views. Take
                this from an eminent contemporary Theravadin:
                ... man has the power to liberate himself from all bondage through
                his own personal effort and intelligence ... . If the Buddha is to
                be called a "saviour" at all, it is only in the sense that he
                discovered and showed the path to Liberation, Nirvana. But we must
                tread the path ourselves ... according to the Buddha, man's
                emancipation depends on his own realization of the Truth, and not on
                the benevolent grace of a god or any external power ... . [42]

                In the Mahayana we find a less monolithic attitude. The Zen schools,
                in the main, also emphasise self-power (jiriki) rather than
                other-power (tariki) while the Jodo and Shin branches of Buddhism
                place overwhelming importance on both faith and grace. [43] Taken
                overall the Mahayana encompasses all the points of view posited
                above. The precise way in which the saving power of the Buddha(s)
                and bodhisattvas is envisaged varies according to the prevailing
                spiritual climate and the proclivities of the peoples in question.
                However, the bodhisattva conception can provide a meeting-place for
                the truths which underlie the different attitudes under discussion.
                Lama Govinda, by way of example, pays due respect to both the
                other-power of the bodhisattva and the self-power of the aspirant
                which, so to speak, 'collaborate':
                The help of a bodhisattva is not something that comes from outside
                or is pressed upon those who are helped, but is the awakening of a
                force which dwells in the innermost nature of every being, a force
                which, awakened by the spiritual influence or example of a
                bodhisattva, enables us to meet fearlessly every situation ... .
                [44]

                Before leaving this question we might profitably remind ourselves of
                a general point, one highly pertinent to the discussion at hand and
                best laid bare by further recourse to the writings of Schuon, the
                most profound of contemporary exponents of the sophia perennis:
                All great spiritual experiences agree in this: there is no common
                measure between the means put into operation and the result. "With
                men this is impossible, but with God all things are possible", says
                the Gospel. In fact, what separates man from divine Reality is the
                slightest of barriers: God is infinitely close to man, but man is
                infinitely far from God. This barrier, for man, is a mountain: man
                stands in front of a mountain which he must remove with his own
                hands. He digs away the earth, but in vain, the mountain remains;
                man however goes on digging, in the name of God. And the mountain
                vanishes. It was never there. [45]

                Despite its theistic vocabulary this has a certain Buddhist
                resonance and recalls the man drowning in the river. The multivalent
                spirituality of the Mahayana certainly takes full account of the
                spiritual possibilities latent in the principle.

                No doubt Buddhism as a whole is founded upon self-power but since
                other-power is a spiritually efficacious possibility it was bound to
                appear somewhere within the orbit of the tradition. In the
                Tibeto-Himalayan area, where the bodhisattva ideal is preeminent, we
                find a happy and judicious blend of the two elements. In the
                everyday life of the common people there was unquestionably a great
                deal of emphasis on the miraculous effects flowing from a faithful
                devotion to the Buddha and the bodhisattvas. As Conze has observed,
                the Madhyamika dialectic and the doctrine of sunyata has exercised a
                potent appeal for Buddhists of a 'jnanic' disposition. However, the
                popular appeal of the Mahayana is, in good measure, to be explained
                by the "spiritual magnetism" of the bodhisattva ideal which could
                "stir the hearts of all" and provide "the basis for immediate
                action". [46] Furthermore, the bodhisattva ideal helped introduce
                into Buddhism a more explicitly religious element, particularly
                through 'bhaktic' practices, as well as a cosmic perspective without
                which Buddhism might easily have degenerated into what Murti calls
                "an exalted moral naturalism". [47] In the popular teachings much is
                made of the unlimited merits and "boundless treasury of virtues"
                (gunasambhava) of the bodhisattvas. It is worth noting that the
                three principal virtues - Merit, Compassion, Wisdom - correspond
                analogically with the paths of karma-yoga, bhakti-yoga and jnana
                yoga in the Hindu tradition. [48] The bodhisattva ideal also
                provided fertile ground for the flowering of Buddhist mythology and
                iconography, particularly in the Vajyarana and in the Far East where
                the cult of Kuan-Yin remains pervasive to this day. [49]

                Conclusion

                The bodhisattva ideal has been of incalculable importance in the
                Mahayana, although it has not everywhere received the same emphasis.
                It gathered together in a vivid, living ideal the principles of
                prajna and karuna and tied them firmly to the metaphysic of sunyata.
                The conception found its most luxuriant expression in the Vajrayana
                where it played an integrative role for many different aspects of
                Buddhist teaching and practice. On the popular level the bodhisattva
                provided an exemplar of the spiritual life and a devotional focus.
                Cosmologically, the bodhisattva was an axial figure running through
                terrestrial, celestial and transcendental realms. Metaphysically
                considered the bodhisattva conception, rooted in the doctrine of
                sunyata, provided a resolution of dualistic conception of Samsara
                and nirvana and provided a bridge between the Absolute and the
                relative. In its reconciliation of all these elements in the
                bodhisattva Mahayana Buddhism finds one of its most characteristic
                and elevated expressions. Let us leave the final word with Saraha,
                reputedly the teacher of the Mahayana's greatest metaphysician,
                Nagarjuna:
                He who clings to the Void And neglects Compassion Does not reach the
                highest stage. But he who practises only Compassion Does not gain
                release from the toils of existence. He, however, who is strong in
                the practice of both, Remains neither in Samsara nor in nirvana.
                [50]

                Harry Oldmeadow, School of Arts and Education, La Trobe University
                Bendigo, PO Box 199, Bendigo, 3552, Australia.

                NOTES

                [1] DAYAL, HAR (1970) The Bodhisattva Doctrine in Buddhist Sanskrit
                Literature (New Delhi, Motilal Barnisidass), (reprint; first
                published 1932), pp. 2-3.
                [2] SCHUON, FRITHJOF (1968) In the Tracks of Buddhism (London, Allen
                & Unwin), p. 132. See also SUZUKI, D. T. (1973) Essays in Zen
                Buddhism. Third Series (London, Rider), p. 78.
                [3] CONZE, EDWARD (1967) Thirty Years of Buddhist Studies (Oxford,
                Bruno Cassirer), p. 40.
                [4] SCHUON, op. cit., note 2, p. 139.
                [5] See CONZE, EDWARD (1959) Buddhism: Its Essence and Development
                (New York, Harper & Row), pp. 125-126.
                [6] SUZUKI, op. cit., note 2, p. 79.
                [7] This adumbrated version of the ideal and the path is derived
                from several sources; it is an unexceptional account which follows
                the traditional sources. For a detailed discussion of the
                significance of the tathagata, not canvassed in this article, see
                MURTI, T. R. V. (1980) The Central Philosophy of Buddhism (London,
                Allen & Unwin). For a detailed account of the ten bhumis see DUTT,
                N. (1976) Mahayana Buddhism (Calcutta, Firma KLM), Chs 4 & 5.
                [8] Taken from BASHAM, A. L. (1967) The Wonder that was India
                (London, Collins Fontana), pp. 277-278. For an extended version of
                the bodhisattva's vows see SANTIDEVA (1979) A Guide to the
                Bodhisattva Way of Life (Bodhisattvacharya-vatara), (Trans.) STEPHEN
                BATCHELOR (Dharamsala, Library of Tibetan Works & Archives), pp.
                29-34.
                [9] MURTI, op. cit., note 7, pp. 266-267.
                [10] GOVINDA, ANAGARIKA (1969) Foundations of Tibetan Mysticism
                (London, Rider), p. 274. This passage might suggest the Yogacarin
                view of "mind-only" but as Lama Govinda makes clear in the same
                work, this is not the intention of the passage above. For a similar
                statement but one protected by the appropriate qualifications, see
                GOVINDA, ANAGARIKA (1974) The Way of the White Clouds (London,
                Rider), p. 123.
                [11] See CONZE (1967), op. cit., note 3, pp. 42-43.
                [12] See MURTI, op. cit., note 7, p. 269.
                [13] LHALUNGPA, LOBSANG (Trans.) (1977) The Life of Milarepa (New
                York, E.P. Dutton), p. 171.
                [14] For an illuminating discussion of the often-misunderstood
                nature, in a traditional context, of both 'symbol' and 'myth', see
                essays on these subjects in RAINE, KATHLEEN (1985) Defending Ancient
                Springs (Cambridge, Golgonooza) (first published 1967).
                [15] Quoted in SUZUKI, op. cit., note 2, p. 225. See also SHURMANN,
                HANS W. (1973) Buddhism: An Outline of Its Teaching and Schools
                (London, Rider), pp. 112-113.
                [16] See ST. MATTHEW 5:45.
                [17] MURTI, op. cit., note 7, p. 263.
                [18] SCHUON, op. cit., note 2, p. 132.
                [19] MURTI, op. cit., note 7, p. 267.
                [20] This translation from EVANS-WENTZ, W. (Ed.) (1951) Tibet's
                Great Yogi Milarepa (trans.) KAZI DAWA-SAMDUP (London, Oxford
                University Press), p. 273.
                [21] GUENTHER, H. V. & TRUNGPA, CHOGYAM (1975) The Dawn of Tantra
                (Berkeley, Shambala), p. 31.
                [22] SCHUON, FRITHJOF (1991) Roots of the Human Condition
                (Bloomington, World Wisdom Books), p. 86.
                [23] 1 CORINTHIANS 12:1.
                [24] ZIMMER, HEINRICH (1951) in: JOSEPH CAMPBELL (Ed.) The
                Philosophies of India (London, Routledge & Kegan Paul), p. 553.
                [25] SCHUON (1968), op. cit., note 2, p. 130.
                [26] A traditional metaphor referred to, in this context, in SUZUKI,
                op. cit., note 2, p. 215.
                [27] Quoted in GUENTHER & TRUNGPA, op. cit., note 21, p. 32.
                [28] SCHUON, FRITHJOF (1969) Spiritual Perspectives and Human Facts
                (London, Perennial Books), p. 70. See also SCHUON, FRITHJOF (1976)
                Understanding Islam (London, Allen & Unwin), pp. 144 ff.
                [29] GOVINDA, ANAGARIKA (1976) Creative Meditation and Multi-Level
                Consciousness (Wheaton, Quest), p. 11. On the 'transparency' of
                sunyata, see also p. 51.
                [30] SUZUKI, op. cit., note 2, p. 215.
                [31] Sung translation, quoted by SUZUKI, ibid., p. 215.
                [32] MURTI, op. cit., note 7, p. 264.
                [33] SUZUKI, op. cit., note 2, pp. 229 & 216.
                [34] See PALLIS, MARCO (1960) The Way and the Mountain (London,
                Peter Owen), p. 182. See also Pallis's remarks in a footnote on the
                parallels with the doctrine of the Two Natures of Christ.
                [35] SCHUON (1968), op. cit., note 2, p. 136.
                [36] SUZUKI, D. T. (Ed.) (1973) Lankavatara Sutra (Routledge & Kegan
                Paul), p. 184.
                [37] SCHUON (1968), op cit., note 2, p. 156.
                [38] Sadharmapundarika Sutra (Lotus of the Good Law Sutra), cited in
                SHURMANN, op. cit., note 15, p. 99.
                [39] SCHUON (1968), op. cit., note 2, p. 144.
                [40] See SUZUKI, op. cit., note 2, pp. 202-205.
                [41] See Tattvasangraha per ZIMMER, op. cit., p. 552. For discussion
                of some recent scholarly debate about the relationship of the
                boddhisattvas and Buddhas see WILLIAMS, PAUL (1989) Mahayana
                Buddhism: The Doctrinal Foundations (London, Routledge), pp.
                204-214.
                [42] RAPOLA, WAHULA (1978) What the Buddha Taught (London, Gordon
                Fraser), pp. 1-2.
                [43] A great deal of ink has been spilt on the question of Buddhist
                attitudes to faith and grace. For a salutary corrective to
                overheated polemics on this subject see PALLIS, MARCO (1980) A
                Buddhist Spectrum (London, Allen & Unwin), pp. 52-71.
                [44] GOVINDA (1969), op. cit., note 10, p. 233.
                [45] SCHUON, FRITHJOF (1961) Stations of Wisdom (London, John
                Murray), p. 157.
                [46] CONZE (1967), op. cit., note 3, p. 54.
                [47] MURTI, op. cit., note 7, p. 263. On the place of the
                bodhisattvas in devotional practices, see WILLIAMS, op. cit., note
                41, pp. 215-276.
                [48] SCHUON (1968), op. cit., note 2, p. 135. See also ZIMMER, op.
                cit., note 24, p. 535.
                [49] See BLOFELD, JOHN (1977) bodhisattva of Compassion: The
                Mystical Tradition of Kuan-Yin (Boston, Shambala).
                [50] From SARAHA Treasury of Songs, quoted in PERRY, WHITALL (1971)
                A Treasury of Traditional Wisdom (London, Allen & Unwin), p. 607.
                

     

     【关闭窗口
    相关文章:
  • 想要什么样的世界,先要变成什么样的人[147]

  • 佛菩萨是如何暗中护持修行人的?[220]

  • 自律者出众,不自律者出局[318]

  • 鸠摩罗什圆寂纪念日 | 这位伟大的译经家有着怎样的光辉一生[382]

  • 想广结善缘?菩萨大德有妙招[475]

  • 菩萨们也有分工吗?观音菩萨到底管什么?[495]

  • 佛教称谓之“居士”的由来[465]

  • 菩萨行证:八宗共祖龙树菩萨[449]

  • 有一位无尽意菩萨,那什么叫无尽意?[488]

  • 佛教的三级教育目标[571]

  • 大乘佛法的真实性与实践性[558]

  • 菩萨道的精神所在!如何成为一个菩萨?[663]

  • 梦参老和尚:我们在念菩萨,菩萨在念谁?[593]

  • 菩萨在哪里?菩萨就在每个人的心里[559]

  • 为何菩萨不现身救度我们?[502]

  • 你对菩萨不相信,又如何能求感应呢?[549]

  • 其实,要当菩萨很容易[660]

  • 活在现在,佛在现在[640]

  • 佛教故事|马鸣菩萨:大众闻法悟道,群马感动嘶鸣[648]

  • 我们的爱人也许是菩萨假扮的哦[589]

  •  
    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)