[YAY!] mera R450 final is [what i'll call] complete [for the time being], so i thought to share it here and see whatchall think.
The Tathagata of Here & Now
Many perplexing issues find themselves home in Buddhist thought. Among the most intriguing to me, and the one I hope to address in this paper, is the confusion surrounding Buddha and non-abiding Nirvana. I’ll investigate this through the lens of the three body system, the five wisdoms, the Jataka Tales of Arya Sura and the tenfold Bodhisattva path.
Intro
The title of chapter five from Buddhahood Embodied seems a reasonable place to start, for it presents the perplexation and gives us a launching pad, so to speak, from which this expedition into the vastness of existence can proceed. It goes: “Enlightenment’s Paradox: Non-dual Awareness of Unconditioned (Svabhavikakaya) Embodied in Conditioned Activity for Beings” (Makransky, 85). The problem seems to be that conceptualizations of Buddha as totally liberated from the cyclic nature of samsara conflict with conceptualizations of Buddha as operative in samsara for the sake of beings. The problem may be, though, that a dualistic perspective of existence renders one unable to comprehend true, ultimate liberty period, regardless of whether it occurs on Earth, in some heaven, moksha, or anywhere else for that matter; let alone if all are present here and now. So the problem really is: how can a being with unified awareness express, or be expressed, with or without language, such that those viewing the cosmos through double vision can find understanding, motivation, and inspiration. Given the rather dualistic nature of the medium of language, a complete description of the human state should probably contain both logical analysis and experiential evidence. The tradition supplies both in one of the most popular formulations attempting to reconcile Buddha’s liberation from, and subsequent activity in, the world of conditioned existence with the trikaya or three body system. In it Buddha is seen to manifest as the set of distinguishable, but not necessarily distinct, kayas or ‘bodies’ known as the “body of magical transformation” or Nirmanakaya, the “body of communal enjoyment” or Sambhogakaya, and the “reality body” or Dharmakaya (Griffiths, 81-82). These alone though might not be sufficient to dispel the clouds of confusion. The question remains as to what exactly constitutes and distinguishes those bodies. In order to investigate this more deeply, I’ll invoke the five wisdoms or awarenesses, namely: the awareness of “accomplishing activity,” the “investigative awareness,” the “awareness of sameness,” the “mirror-like awareness,” and the direct awareness of tathata, or “the non-conceptualizing awareness.” I’ll look at connections between the three bodies and the five wisdoms in hopes of more clearly defining them. In addition, I’ll look at the Jataka Tales in relation to the analytical perspectives of Buddha, and the Bodhisattva path in relation to the experiential.
Trikaya- The Three Bodies of Buddha
Nirmanakaya and Sambhogakaya: analytical perspectives
Nirmanakaya: A trip to the pool
Stepping into the waters of the trikaya it seems reasonable to start with the shallow end, which could be said to correlate with the Nirmanakaya, for it is more easily comprehended being “the emanation body or physical embodiment of Buddha” (ORDB). So, the body that roamed India some 2500 years ago that originally (at least) was known as Gautama Sakyamuni is seen by the tradition to represent the primary manifestation (at that time) of Buddha’s Nirmanakaya. That body acted as a means by which those circling even the most basal realms of existence could (and can) encounter Dharma. The Nirmanakaya is the means by which animals, hell dwellers, hungry ghosts, and humans bound tightly by the noose like ropes of aggregated karmic retributions meet Buddha and are directed towards virtuous practice. Neither this conception nor the etymology of the term Nirmanakaya suggest a mode of perception, not limiting it to the physical body in the flesh and blood sense, for the “emanations” of Buddha “can appear as whatever is most salvifically beneficial in a particular case” (Griffiths, 91).
The Jataka Tales of Arya Sura may be seen almost as a repository of Nirmana manifestations. In Once the Buddha was a Monkey we’re presented with stories of Bodhisattva heroes diligently illuminating paths to victory. In many the Bodhisattva is encountered in human form, but stories like ‘The Hare,’ ‘The Lord of the Fish,’ ‘The Young Quail,’ ‘The King of the Geese’ and others weave tapestries depicting non-human manifestations of the wheel turner. For instance, in ‘The Antelope’ we meet the Nirmanakaya manifest in a non-human form, and are introduced to the first of the five wisdoms: “accomplishing activity” which has been identified with the Nirmanakaya (Kalupahana, 99). We find a radiant deer “of surpassing beauty, like a moving mass of jewels” living resplendently in an Edenic jungle free of hunters, or cares or woes of any kind. So dedicated to the welfare of others was he that upon hearing the desperate pleas of a man trapped in the throes of a swift flowing river, he immediately went about rescuing him “without a thought about the danger to his own life.” Even after the man ignores the deer’s only request, betraying him for greed of gold and flesh, the Bodhisattva again offers himself as payment for the man’s ill deeds. He requests that the king pay the man with the money he sought instead of the arrow notched and drawn, ready for the kill, saying “I bow my head and await your command.” And “this mercy towards the man who had wronged him, this genuine desire that he should have some reward, filled the king with amazement and won him over.” In fact the king’s so pleased that he announces “I grant him [the man] the wealth he desired, and I grant you [the deer] free passage throughout this realm.” Yet again the Bodhisattva shows his compassion by giving up his newly regained freedom and offering the king “what I can do for you, so that your coming here may be of some profit to you.” The king requests that the deer Bodhisattva return to the palace and teach the Law, and it is done (Sura, 178-185). “The Antelope” Bodhisattva displays the first wisdom superbly by “spontaneously carr[ying] out all that has to be done for the welfare of beings” (ORDB) four times in two instances in Arya Sura’s story. The first set is his unhesitant action at hearing the man’s cries and his resolute resiliency in keeping the strong waters at bay even under the weight of his passenger. The second set is his repeated rescue of the man’s life (this time from the king’s arrow) and his immediate willingness to join the king and his retinue at the king’s palace, where he fulfilled the dream of the king’s consort and “explained the Law in language whose words were clear, pleasant and well chosen” (Sura, 183-184). So we see, despite his original desire to remain living undisturbed in the jungle, the Bodhisattva successfully ‘accomplishes activity’ that was “most salvifically beneficial in [each] particular case” or instance of need that arose.
Beyond the human body of a flesh and blood Buddha, and the human and non-human Bodhisattvas, there is still space for Nirmana activities, for they can “occur whenever and wherever there are living beings to benefit from them” (Griffiths, 107). So, even in seclusion, with the wilderness as one’s only company, manifestations of the Nirmanakaya can be encountered if it can be of benefit. Here we begin to reach the downward slope into the deeper reaches of the trikaya pool, and in lieu of a doctrinal example, I offer a hypothetical anecdote that may illustrate the point. Let’s say that: if one was to be standing on the bank of a stream or lake, basking reverentially in the setting sun, and a gentle breeze was to rise and caress the viewer. And if one was to embrace the breeze without cognitive dissection, resulting in even a momentary experience of utter peace and clarity of mind, in a sense of unitive cosmic singularity revealing the true nature of the experience (and the one who experiences), then the breeze could be seen as a manifestation of the Nirmanakaya. In fact anything that arouses such an awakening could be seen so according to the above definitions.
Now that we’ve reached the proverbial middle ground in the waters of the trikaya, let’s have some fun, shall we?
Sambhogakaya: The waterslide heights
If Buddha is a public pool, then the Sambhogakaya might be the waterslide that plunges participants into the shallower parts of the deep end being “a more subtle mode of embodiment than the emanation body” that “communicate[s] the Dharma to select audiences of Bodhisattvas and gods,” and “in later tantric Buddhism… is considered to be the speech vector of a Buddha’s activities” (ORDB). Griffiths, in his exposition on Buddha-fields, which are the ‘pure realms’ where the Sambhogakaya is said to be active by doctrinal texts and their digests, paints a slightly different picture, saying “their experience is dependent upon the mental flexibility of those practitioners of the path who are capable of manifesting them at will strongly suggest[ing] that they are mental projections… mental images designed to have desired salvific effects upon the minds of those who experience them.” Now speech may be said to be a “mental image” as much as any experience, but I think what Griffiths is pointing to in this passage is that the Sambhogakaya’s activities, like those of the Nirmanakaya, can “occur whenever and wherever there are living beings to benefit from them.” That is, presumably, “whenever and wherever… those practitioners… who [through meditative quiescence] are capable of manifesting them at will… can benefit from them” (Griffiths, 91; 130-131).
Fewer of the stories in Once the Buddha Was a Monkey might be said to depict the Sambhogakaya. This may be due to the fact that most show the Bodhisattva discoursing with beings yet unable to experience Dharma through the perspective implied by the term Sambhoga which Griffiths translates as “communal enjoyment.” One story that I feel does depict the Sambhogakaya and displays well the next two wisdoms, namely: the “investigative awareness” and the “awareness of sameness,” is ‘Sutasoma.’ Sutasoma’s story incorporates themes not present in many of the other Jatakatales about renunciant ascetics shunning social misconduct. One that is ingrained in others, but not necessarily made explicit, is the Bodhisattva’s “love of wisdom.” One that is quite foreign to all the rest as far as I can tell (and one that points as a glow in the dark arrow to the Sambhogakaya) is the Bodhisattva “pass[ing] his time in pleasure” as he and “his ladies, just like… in paradise” were enjoying a walk through a local park. Just as they were preparing to listen to “a certain Brahmin who had some wise words to recite,” their joviality was abated by the approach of “the cannibal Kalmasapada.” Now, Kalmasapada was “a king in his own right but… unfortunate[ly]… had tasted human flesh and decided… he liked its flavor.” After terrorizing his home lands, being imprisoned, and bartering with “goblins, who delight in offerings of human flesh and blood” for his freedom, Kalmasapada proceeded to expand his pillage radius, and went about collecting his payment for the goblins; “a hundred royal princes.” The nearing of such a character would no doubt widen the eyes of, and set scurrying even the toughest superficial peacefulness, but the Bodhisattva, determined to “completely eradicate [Kalmasapada’s] evil habit without any effort, agitation, or violence,” went out to meet him unarmed and without back-up, saying “Hey there!... Come back here. Why are you so intent on slaughtering those people?” Though likely not accustomed to that response, but consumed by “a frenzy of pride” Kalmasapada not so cordially invited the Bodhisattva to dinner, and steals his body away to “the place… littered with the corpses of men… [with] the ground… horribly spattered with blood.” Again, one might expect one trapped in such a place, on display like the thanksgiving turkey awaiting the oven, to shed tears of desperation, but only after “thinking of how unhappy [the Brahmin] must be” for he “came a long way to offer those wise verses and was filled with expectation,” do the prince’s eyes show “tears welled up.” Upon this, a conversation begins between Kalmasapada and the Bodhisattva that alludes to the tantric definition of the Sambhogakaya. That is, they discussed the value of not “deviat[ing] from [one’s] word,” which the Bodhisattva takes to be “the source of contentment, renown, and happiness.” It worked out that, since Kalmasapada “already [had] a full complement of… princes… with [which to] sacrifice to the demons as promised” (possibly ‘content’ having kept his word) he decided, rather arrogantly, to test the Bodhisattva’s honesty by allowing him to return to hear the brahmin’s ‘wise verses’ and seeing if he then would come back to the sacrifice, as per the prince’s promise.
As the Bodhisattva reaches the “palace… [and] send[s] for the Brahmin” the Dharma party begins. So pleased with “the Brahmin[‘s]… kind words” is the prince that he “reckon[s] each verse as worth a thousand gold pieces… [and] reward[s] him with the riches he longed for.” Rather taken a-back by the seemingly lavish expenditure, the king somewhat rebukes his son, saying “wealth is the chief means to success, and an effective one since it is quite impossible to live as one likes without it.” The prince swiftly replies with “when something you hear calms your mind, reaffirms your yearning for salvation, enlarges your wisdom so that the gloom of ignorance vanishes, surely you would pay for it with your own flesh and blood if need be? Sacred knowledge is a lamp that scatters the darkness of delusion. It is the best kind of wealth, beyond the reach of theft or anything else,” again taking us back to the Sambhogakaya as he continues, saying “the riches contained in sacred knowledge are also the principle ingredient of that eloquence which in good company has the charm of a gift and in learned assemblies gives pleasure.” Then, provoking an image of the Bodhisattva path where one “put[s] to use the riches… and… take[s] heed of them pursu[ing]… a path free from begetting sins,” and placating the king, he embarks on his return trip to Kalmasapada’s lair. Reaching there he learns that the fire is not quite ready for cooking when Kalmasapada says “this pyre is too smoky, and flesh tastes good only when cooked on a smokeless fire” (I guess he hadn’t ever experienced the smoky deliciousness of a mesquite pit:). Apparently not wanting to waist the mean time though, he says “so let us hear these wise sayings of yours.” After a bit of reverse psychology, ramping up Kalmasapada’s anticipation, he gladly does so. And in the process, “although Kalmasapada had had some very harsh things said to him, his savage nature was overcome by the Bodhisattva’s friendliness.” As they bantered, “tears of gladness filled Kalmasapada’s eyes” and he said “now that I have seen my loathsome conduct reflected in the mirror of the Law, perhaps I may have felt a stirring of the conscience and be eager for the Law… Speak, my master!” “And the Bodhisattva spoke.” Transformed by the experience, Kalmasapada says “those princes I seized for my sacrifice are languishing in captivity… Come, let us free them together!”
So we see, inter-assured of the mind by a firmly established awareness of “accomplishing activity” the Bodhisattva ‘investigates’ the possibility of assisting many by assisting Kalmasapada, recognizing “the uniqueness of” the paths each were treading. The major ‘uniqueness’ between the two seems to be the Bodhisattva’s ability to proceed with peaceful compassion via the “awareness of sameness,” looking beyond the differences between himself and the mislead cannibal king; for they both resonated with the same energy, and both were treading paths. He does so in spitting image too, for it seems that the Bodhisattva’s description of the path he walks was as if to say ‘I must now go test Kalmasapada, for his mind is confused. “This sacred wisdom has come to me as a gift. How can I not treat it with honor when it is in my power to do so?”’ And it seems that Kalmasapada was too truly a Bodhisattva, for upon hearing the Law he was filled with ‘tears of gladness’ (Sura, 221-236)(ORDB).
We need remember Griffiths’ masterfully scholastic description of the Sambhogakaya’s non-bodily activities, for not to do so would be to neglect the mystery in favor of the easily understood. It seems best to now bring in the ten stage Bodhisattva path starting with the first stage or ‘ground,’ being that of ‘Great Joy,’ where “the Bodhisattvas practice all virtues, but especially generosity” (Avatamasaka Sutra, ?). In The Jewel Ornament of Liberation, Gampopa refers to this stage as “the path of insight.” This seems to imply that walking the first ground involves a kind of spiritual introspection, where personal weaknesses are identified and begin their transformation, strengths are strengthened, and a meditative quiescence is sought. With practice comes understanding and further abilities, and as one leads to two, ‘Great Joy’ leads to ‘Stainless[ness]’ as one moves along the path. By Gampopa’s analysis, walking the second stage, where the “emphasized virtue is moral discipline,” is to walk “the path of meditation.” It’s likely here that one begins to be “capable of manifesting [meditative visions] at will,” and thereby encountering the Sambhogakaya independent of sensory input. So, taking it back to the pool analogy, the “mental projections” of the Sambhogakaya might be likened to the water pumped beyond the body of the pool, up the waterslide’s frame, flowing back to the pool as a waterfall of jocularity. The “mental images” of “those practitioners of the path” then could be seen as Bodhisattvas, unafraid of the height, pausing in their pleasure to picture the pools waters (which might as well be the sea), infusing themselves (and others) with courage for the plunge.
Dharmakaya: The Pool, The Water, The Wetness
On the subtle scale, the Dharmakaya would either (or both?) max out the scale/nearly not register, being that “which functions as the ground for the other two aspects” (ORDB). Makransky describes it by saying “thus while ontologically one, Buddhahood is both functionally and epistemologically divided into three: dharmakaya as only Buddhas know it (=svabhavikaya), and dharmakaya in its twofold manifestations to others (as Sambhogakaya and Nirmanakaya)” (pg.87). Some may say to that ‘I’ve been to the pool, I’ve been to the water flowing from the tap, how can the water else be experienced?’ To answer this, let us now turn to the final two awarenesses that Kalupahana associates with the Dharmakaya. They are the “mirror-like awareness” and the direct awareness of tathata as the “ultimate nature of all things,” or the “non-conceptualizing awareness” (ORDB). Being the ‘ultimate nature of all things,’ it would be false to say that thusness isn’t a key aspect of each stage of the Bodhisattva path, but by the definitions in the Avatamsaka Sutra, stage three could be where one begins perceiving tathata. These observations might not be direct, but seen through the world, for walking the third ground “the light of Dharma is said to radiate from the Bodhisattva for others.” Observing the beauty of Dharmadhatu in this manner would likely strengthen Bodhisattvas’ love of, and compassion for, beings, as the “mirror-like awareness” reflects not only the world, but the world in light of the Dharma. From the third stage on, the path becomes more or less the means by which ‘the light of Dharma’ can be made more and more luminous through the various virtues, but primarily (and ultimately) by “the practice of primordial wisdom” which is “the emphasized virtue” for the tenth Bodhisattva ground. The question remains though as to what distinguishes Buddha’s awareness from others. One line in particular clears it up for me: “Buddha’s gnosis is inseparably fixed upon ultimate reality (tathata, dharmadhatu, etc).” This implies that the one pointed mind of a stream-winner striving for enlightenment (an inherently dual concept, as it entails a not-enlightenment) is transformed through the dawning of prajñaparamita into a one pointed awareness of suchness as the undifferentiated ground of existence. Buddha’s perception may be like that of the one who experiences the pool and the tap, but made different by the awareness that the ‘water’ ‘outside’ is too the ‘water’ ‘inside.’
As to the dilemma of Buddha’s activity and the assumption that spontaneity implies non-conception, this might be said: is insight conception? It might be slightly beyond the realm of ‘proper scholasticism’ to reference it, but the relevant Wikipedia page has this to say: “Tathata as a central concept of Mahayana Buddhism, expresses the appreciation of reality within a unique moment.” This doesn’t intrinsically necessitate a conceptionless Buddha even if, glorious as it is in its power, mind oft falls short in attempts to conceptualize each fleeting moment, for each moment contains All in All’s totality, and a moment of direct, unconditioned understanding lends itself to be or not to be later transcribed into concepts for conventional or non-conventional means of transmission. For instance, the systematic formulations of Guatama’s teachings (especially the four noble truths and eightfold path, being amongst the earliest), even if they came as insights, could be called ‘concepts,’ for they are constructed of, and expressed via, words and ideas. This may reduce their surface purity but, at their core, they retain the direct transmittable potential of Mahakasyapa’s realization.
Outro
I hope that, if not directly illuminating on Buddha and non-abiding Nirvana, this interpretation at least sheds some light on that which may or may not reside, not either here or there, but here and there here (so to speak:). True expression of non-duality may only be capable in the form described in The Flower Sermon where Buddha is said to have directly transmitted the awareness of tathata to Mahakasyapa; even though to say that there was one who ‘transmitted’ and one who ‘received’ may be a misnomer. As far as i’m concerned, the simplest purpose of any teacher is to show that there is a path; whether it be to knowledge of the primary colors, the function of cytochrome c in the apoptosis pathways, or awareness beyond epistemologically provable knowledge. One need not be labeled ‘teacher’ to be so though. i’ve learned many a infinitely profound lesson from teachers that didn’t even know they were teaching, which made the lessons all the more profound. Some nano-increment of a quark away from the non-teaching teachers are those who, by virtue of practice (and practice of virtue) cultivate verdant gardens where sprinklers rain a nutritive solution of knowledge dissolved in the universal solvent: primordial water. Gardens are awesome, and connections between the quest to regain ‘The Garden’ (which may be slipping through our fingers) and tathagata-garbha could probably be drawn. As for the Gardeners, i suppose that whether they teach or not is the distinction between Bodhisattvas and pratakyabuddhas, but that’s for another. To close, an attempt to sum up Buddha’s teaching via haiku:
Please practice Dear One
Remembering one and All.
We are Pure Beauty.
Help
Sign In
work
July 2009 
Fa- La- La- La- La- La- La-
Access: Public
