[ Pobierz całość w formacie PDF ]
.g., the five aggregates(skandhas) or Abhidharma.On the meanings of AkAra, see Griffiths 1990. 9780203428474_5_end01.qxd 16/6/08 12:00 PM Page 312312 Notes49.Hattori 1988; 2005b repr.: 63 rather suggests that all Yogacara is with form , butaccording to Dreyfus and Lindtner 1989: 32, Vasubandhu s position is without form.Dignaga and Dharmakcrti adopt a with-form perspective.50.Talk here is of the form of the object, but one should remember that in Yogacara thisis largely shorthand for subject and object , since both are in Yogacara on the same level.Subject and object as experienced by unenlightened people are conceptual constructsfabricated out of of the nondual flow of experiences.51.Note also that since how a Buddha perceives is axiomatically correct, the final truth,without any falsehood, so for a without-form perspective finally there exists only ulti-mate radiant pure nonconceptual consciousness.This position is indeed very close tothe view of Paramartha and certain interpretations of the Buddha-nature.Conscious-ness really taking the form of blue, or indeed of anything else, would be seen as astain on its immaculate purity and impugning its absolute nature.On the concept ofpure consciousness in Indian Buddhism, see the chapter by Paul Griffiths in Forman1990.52.Cf.here the position of the Chengweishilun and presumably therefore Dharmapala s con-trasting view, in Schmithausen 2005: 54 5.Here a Buddha sees multiplicity structuredas in unenlightened awareness, but he sees the variety of things correctly, as in itselfillusory and simply the play of nondual consciousness.As Schmithausen points out (ibid.:56) this includes a Buddha s vision of glorious pure Buddha Fields and pure bodies, allseen and known to be nothing more than the play of consciousness.The fact that allof so-called reality is actually nothing more than the play of (his own) consciousnessexplains how it is that it can be transformed through spiritual practice (i.e.meditation)into a sublime pure (Buddha) world.Recall here the possible visionary meditative con-text of the origins of Yogacara and indeed Mahayana generally.It is arguable that Yogacaraphilosophy is itself the philosophy of the visionary experience of meditators, perhapsrelated in some way to the world of the forest hermits who were so influential on therise of Mahayana.For what appears to be the same approach as Dharmapala, see Kambala sFlokamAlA in Lindtner 1985 (210 11; cf.178 ff., esp.180, v.177).The association ofMahayana principles (i.e.here Yogacara cittamAtra), but not other systems, with the abil-ity of advanced Bodhisattvas to do miracles is mentioned specifically in FlokamAlA vv.260 2.We should note in passing an interesting objection (Lindtner 1985: 182) in Kambala swork made by an opponent: If all is empty then exertion in the Dharma (or, with theTibetan, in virtue ) is pointless. To which Kambala s reply is that For one to whom[all is] empty applies, it is true that [exertion] is pointless.But this is because hehas already achieved the point! The commentary to Kambala s text makes it clear thatthis should not be taken quietistically however, but refers to dwelling in emptinessat a very advanced stage of the Bodhisattva path (the eighth stage and beyond), astage that is achieved through the accumulation of vast merit through virtuousdeeds.And in the next verses Kambala notes that because all is empty it also makesno sense for the Bodhisattva to engage in evil deeds.In this he differs from someone 9780203428474_5_end01.qxd 16/6/08 12:00 PM Page 313Notes 313who does not see emptiness, but wallows in conceptual constructs.For that person,the normal (karmic) cause/effect structure of satsara applies and hence serves todiscourage from evil.53.For some interesting if brief critical reflections, but based particularly on earlierclassical Indian Yogacara sources that do not appear to support a literal without-formposition (i.e.earlier classical Yogacara, inasmuch as it articulated such a distinction, thattakes some time to emerge in Yogacara, appears to hold a broadly with form per-spective), see Urban and Griffiths 1994, and also Griffiths 1990.For context and broaderissues, see also Griffiths 1994.Griffiths wants to argue that given the description of whatis involved in these Yogacara sources a Buddha would appear to be severely limitedin his ability to know things.He could not know, e.g., what it is like to be a subjectconfronting an object, what it is to have volitions, and a Buddha cannot have (Griffithswants to argue) anticipations or memories (this has implications in terms of, e.g., a Buddha salleged ability to remember his previous lives).For a discussion of memory in Yogacara,and a brief reflection on its applicability or otherwise to Buddhas, see Griffiths 1992.This picks up earlier critical observations, but not specific to Yogacara, in Griffiths 1989.Hence a Buddha could not be literally omniscient.A Buddha would thus appear to besimilarly limited in his ability to interact with, and hence to act to benefit, others.Thata Buddha could not be literally omniscient would clearly be the case on a without-formposition too, assuming without form means what it says.The possession of omniscienceby definition must involve one s consciousness possessing some sort of phenomenolo-gical content ( form ).For some further philosophical problems and reflections on whatit might be like to be enlightened, or a Buddha, this time within a broader context inBuddhist philosophy and with particular reference to experiencing without a Self, seeTillemans 1996 (cf.also Williams 1998b: Ch.5).Chapter 5 The Tathgatagarbha1.Indeed, I suspect that the idea of the tathAgatagarbha did not develop in India in con-ceptually the same contexts as led to the development of the schools of Madhyamikaand Yogacara.While these schools may have developed in part in circles interested inAbhidharma analysis and its limits, with topics of ontology and psychology to the fore,the tathAgatagarbha seems to be an issue of realizing one s spiritual potential, exhorta-tion and encouragement rather than philosophical analysis (even where the latter incor-porates insight meditation).As I have said elsewhere (Williams, with Tribe 2000: 162),the context for developing the tathAgatagarbha is perhaps the world of advocatingthe supremacy of the Mahayana against rival lower paths, for if the tathAgatagarbha the Buddha-nature is in all sentient beings, all sentient beings should, and pre-sumably in the end will, follow the path to a supreme Buddhahood.This path willleave the arhats and pratyekabuddhas far behind [ Pobierz całość w formacie PDF ]