Rameshchandra Mukhopadhyaya
Let us first dwell on what is sutra. The Sanskrit word sutra literally means a thread. The Gita speaks of gems woven with threads in the phrase Sutre manigna iva. The English word “suture” seems to have been derived from Sanskrit sutra.
In the ancient Sanskrit lore, sutra is a distinct type of literary composition or genre where the statements are aphoristic. It uses various technical terms and brevity and precision are its life
The Vayu purana defines sutra as alpaksaram asandigdhan/ saravad viswasto mukham/ astobhyam anavadyam/ ca sutram sutravidoviduh.
The sutra employs minimum syllables. Its meaning should be unambiguous. It should be the essence of what one wants to say. It should be reliable. It should be nonredundant , unique and flawless. One who knows what sutra is knows it to be thus.
But as Monier Williams observes, with the Buddhists and Pasupatas etc the term sutra is applied to original text books as opposed to explanatory works. With the Jainas, they form the part of Dristivada.
Let us probe into the connotation of the word ‘sutra’ with a little more attention. The Tripitaka /Tipitaka or the three baskets of wisdom has in it the Sutrapitaka/Suttapitaka which is a treasure house of wonderful tales told by the lord Buddha himself. They have sutras in the Sanskrit sense in them hiding that could unravel the deeper mysteries of life. But they are not sutras in the sense the Srauta sutra, Kalpa sutra, Brahma sutra or the sutras in Panini grammar are. The sutras in the latter are explanatory. That is their only objective. They are not texts in that sense. They do not have a literary merit on the surface. On the other hand the sutras in the sutrapitaka are texts. They are something like the dialogues of Plato or parables told by Jesus The suttas of Pali are spoken by the Lord Buddha and they are suktas or well said as well.. Buddhist suttas are in the main suktas or oral teachings of the Lord Buddha. When the Lord passed into nibbana, his teaching remained to fill the void by the absence of the lord’s nirmanakaya or the illusory self in the world of ours.
Sutras in the Buddhist context are Buddhavacana a literal record of what lord Buddha said in the form of discourses in the large.
These sutras could be long one like the mahaparinbbanasutta or the Brahmajala sutra The majjhima nikaya has medium length sutras or discourses. Samyutta nikaya has 2800 sutras. They are short ones. But they make a pattern being connected with one another (Samyutta) . And then there are 2300 sutras in Anguttara Nikaya which is ekottara agama. That is the chapter or nipatas in this agama are The Book of ones, The Book of Twos and so on.
The Mahayana sutras are apparently of later date. But the followers of the Mahayana believe that they are authentic –that is they enshrine the direct teachings of Lord Buddha. For example in the Diamond Sutta there is a discourse where Lord Buddha and Subhuti are the protagonists. The followers of the Mahayana, believe that the conversation between the Lord Buddha and Subhuti as enshrined in Diamond sutra did really take place.
Why were the sutras then revealed at the later stage long after the Lord’s demise? The Mahayanas say that the sutras were kept in hiding for five hundred years and were jealously guarded by the nagas. Because till then competent readers were not found. The Mahayanas acknowledge the earlier sutras of the Tripitaka as authentic. But with them the Mahayana Sutras are of deeper import and hence they do not pay much attention to much of the Tripitaka.
Ananta Nirdesha Suttra, Lankavatara sutra, Lotus sutra, Prajnaparamita sutras are some of the Mahayana sutras.
The sandhimocana sutra, a Mahayana one divides the teaching of Lord Buddha in terms of the turnings. of the dharmachakra The Tripitaka is the first turning. The Prajnaparamita and likely other sutras are the second turning of Lord Buddha’s teaching whereas the sandhimocana sutra claims itself as the third and final turning of the Dharmachakra.
But sutras are not always spoken by Buddha himself. Chinese and Japanese Zen Budddhists have great veneration for the Platform Sutra which embodies the teachings of the sixth Patriarch of Zen Buddhism.
Platform Sutra clearly points out that thoughtlessness does not mean suppression of thoughts. Rather one should let one’s thought come and go as they list. The sutra further observes that a lay man, cultivating the thought of Buddha is superior to a monk who does not practice the teachings of the Buddha.
Hui Neng also comments on the Pure Land of the West, The pure land sects are very popular in Eastern Asia. They almost form a sub-set of Mahayanas Buddhism. The Pure Land doctrine points that these days dharma is on the wane. And it is impossible now a days to attain nibbana. The only alternative left for us therefore is to chant the name of Amida or Amitabha Buddha. If anyone chants the name of Amida only ten times he will surely be reborn in the Pure Land of the West. And there from he might be elevated to the state of nibbana.
Hui neng observes in the Platform Sutra in the context of the notion of the Pure land of the West that physical location of one’s self does not matter; what matters is his mental state.
Hui Neng recounts the story of Bodhidharma.
The Platform Sutra however opens with an autobiographical narration. He dwells on how he was drawn to the teachings of Buddha.
Hui Neng was but a lad when his father died. He used to gather firewood and sell them in the market. He provided for his mother and himself this way. One day while at the market, he heard a line “let your mind flow freely without dwelling on anything.” His mind was at once alight with the quest of Truth. He arranged some money for his widow mother to survive. He gave up his business activity and set out in search of his teacher in the North China. It was a long trek, which compassed 500 miles.
The line that suddenly struck Hui Neng and effected a great change in his career was a quote from Diamond Cutter sutra or Vajra- chhedika Prajnaparomita Sutra.
The Diamond Sutra opens with Lord Buddha sitting in his retreat surrounded by the Bhikkhus and Bodhisattvas. There the Shubhuti a venerable follower of the Lord asks how one could seek incomparable enlightenment.
Well the Buddha observes that a Bodhisattva must take a vow of liberating every speck of life and yet when everyone is liberated no one will be liberated
That is a paradox. But Buddha posits---who will liberate another.? That needs an a priori notion of self. Is there any self at all? The answer is simply -No. What we call self is a flow and fire ignited by tanha or desire which is illusory. If there are no self and the other ,who liberates whom?
The Bodhisattvas must have compassion and charity. But he must practice charity without attachments. The merits of charity without attachment.-- The merits of charity and compassion are incalculable. And yet no such merit is accrued.
Convention says that the Tathagata is always accompanied with 32 marks of greatness. True and not true. The Tathagatas can not be recognized by any material characteristic. Because the knower and the object of knowledge are illusory. One who knows that Tathagatas can not be recognized knows Tathagatas.
Who is a Tathagata? One who has gone to suchness or reality as it is or arrived at suchness is a Tathagata.
Subhuti asks the Lord whether there will be always men who will truly believe after coming to hear these teachings. The Lord replies that there will be such men always and they will be nourished by countless Buddhas. Still the belief is never absolute. The teaching of Buddhas are merely a raft that reaches one across the ever changing and illusory samsara or the world. Once one crosses the vast ocean of illusion, the raft will become of no use. Every faith is relative. To have faith means to have ego. It is the ego that has faith. So to lift up one self one must not believe in the teachings of the Buddhas even.
Being asked by the Buddha whether there is any enlightenment at all and whether Tathagata has a teaching to enunciate, Subhuti answers that there could be no perfect enlightenment and Tathagata has nothing to teach. Because Truth is not limited and truth baffles expression. Truth is neither is nor is not.
Hence we could infer, despite the fact that there are countless sutras told by Tathagatas . a Tathagata did not utter a single word.
Buddha points out that meritorious deeds in the contingent world are very good. And still merits are no merits.
Subhuti observes that merit always partakes of the character of no merits.
This puts in ours mind the notions put by the Post Moderns. Any word in the language has its antonym. For example, light implies darkness. Truth implies falsehood.
Derrida the French philosopher observes-- the western thought since Plato has been logo centric. It has emphasized certain notions as light, truth etc as the centre. But since light could not be there with-out darkness, the centre of light must be darkness. Again Darkness could not be there without light. If there were no periphery there could be no centre. So the periphery is the centre of the centre. Again the periphery has a centre. Hence the Truth is neither light nor darkness. Neither not light nor not darkness. Neither not not light nor not not darkness.
This is why Hui neng exhorts to his disciples “ whenever a question is put to you, answer it in the negative. if it is an affirmative one and vice versa. If you are asked about an ordinary man tell the question of a sage and vice versa. From the correlation and the interdependence of the two opposites, the doctrine of the Middle way may be grasped.”
Indeed the doctrine of the Middle Way of the Buddhism does not ask one to walk along the middle of a street so that one is over run by the vehicles. The middle way implies an understanding of the fact that there is neither truth nor untruth, neither not truth, nor not untruth, neither not not truth, nor not not untruth. Truth is beyond grasp. One who knows it knows.
Thus in the context of the Lord Buddha’s teachings as embodied in the Diamond sutra one might argue that the notion of Post modernism though emergent in the West are as old as Lord Buddha and Buddhism has played a large role in changing the gamut of thought of the world today. It dissipates fundamentalism and dissolves essentialism. If any four lines of the Diamond Sutra were realized by the world our world would be different from what it is today. Why do people fight amongst themselves? Why do nations war among themselves. Because of their fundamentalist approach. But the most fundamental truth about the existence is that there is nothing fundamental.
The Nasadiya sukta—the 129th hymn of the 10th mandala of the Rig Veda opens in the self same note when it says
Na asat asit na u sat asit tadanim
That which exists is sat. That which does not exist is asat.
The sukta says
In the beginning neither there was existence
Nor there was non-existence.
The first six sections of the Diamond cutter sutta, thus unravel the suchness of the existence. They seem to strike the keynote of the Post-modern thought that rocks the world today and shows the path to serenity.
The eighth section of the Diamond Sutra vouchsafes that the recitation of the only four lines of the sutra has great merits . It outdoes the merit of the highest merit of compassion and charity. Because the understanding the Lord, points out is the fountain head where from the Buddhas emerged. May we hence take the liberty to call the philosophy enshrined in the Diamond Sutra as Tathagata garbha or the womb wherefrom Tathagatas turn up?The Tathagata Garbha doctrine of the Mahayana Philosophy points that everyone has Buddha nature in him. I do not use the Tathagata garbha in that sense. Still, however much narrow minded we are, do we not all of us sometimes realise that there is no absolute truth in the existence and every assertion is as good as every other kind of assertion?
Lord Buddha asks whether there is anything called stream entrant or srot apanna once-to- be - reborn or sakridagami or never to be born or anagami. Besides is there anything called perfect Enlightenment. The answer is always No.The stream entrant is only a name. The stream entrant never enters any stream be it that of touch or smell or sound etc. Since there is no going away and no coming to existence, there can be no one to be born once or to be never born. Perfect Enlightenment is a myth. Because if anyone says he is perfectly enlightened he assumes the existence of his self and the other and hence he is not enlightened. And there can be no Buddhaland set up by any Bodhisattva. Indeed there can not be the categories of the sacred and profane. Because the sacred partakes of the profane and vice versa. If there is anything called the Buddha land, be it the pure land of the West or of the pure land of the East tjere must be profane land or the world. And Buddha land must partake of it.But Buddha land would not be Buddha land then. Because by definition Buddha land should have nothing profane in it. Buddha observes that if any four lines of this discourse is repeated or taught anywhere it become the holiest of the holy places /even venerated by gods.
Shubhuti asks what should be the name of the present discourse?
Buddha replies that the name should be Vajra Chheddika Prajna Paramita sutra.
The word Vajra implies the diamond with which gems are bored. Compare Kalidasa
Kritte Vajra-samutkirne
Sutrasyevasti me gati
Or else Vajra could be lightning or thunderbolt. With the diamond cutter or the lightning what could be pierced or probed into? Well the inscrutable existence that baffles all interpretation should be pierced or decoded with this sutra.
The Vajra-chheddika is prajna paramita or the metaphor of perfection in transcendental wisdom.
But the Lord at once adds that there could be no perfection of wisdom. Thus prajna paramita is a name only. It has no meaning. Buddha further adds that the molecules are not molecules. They are only called molecules. The world is not world. it is called only world.
Thus the Lord knows that the names are not things. There is no organic relation between the signifier and the signified. And the world we perceive is a vast ocean of signifiers. And signifiers are there as signifiers and they signify nothing.
Subhuti understands the import of the Lord’s saying. He is in tears. He exclaims that he did not ever hear such a discourse and one who hears the discourse will learn the fundamental reality even though fundamental reality is not any distinctive idea. And fundamental reality is only a name.
Since any signifier is a signifier only without a signified, the distinctions with the aid of which we separate one person from another, one individual from another, are hollow sham. Shubhuti acknowledges this and further asserts that those who have left phenomenal distinction behind are Buddhas all.
Buddha adds that the perfection or paramitas are mere names only. The first perfection is the perfection in charity or Dana Paramita. But that is only a name. The perfection in patience is also only a name.
Buddha falls back upon his earlier birth. He remembers how he patiently stood the mutilation of his body by the king of Kalinga. This seems to be referred to in Khantibadi Jataka. But he points out that it is not an exercise in patience. Because the Bodhisattva knew that he had no self. Buddha notes that if he were bound by the notion of the self and the other, he would be ignited with such emotions as hatred and anger. Buddha says that he went through numerous lives and deaths exercising in patience. But a Bodhisattva does not distinguish the self from the other and no questions of tolerating others arise.
Bodhisattvas practise charity in this way. They take the vow of liberating every living being. But with them living beings are not living beings.
Buddha observes that the truth in which Tathagatas are plunged is neither real nor unreal.
The Buddha further points out that this is the supreme Way or the tao for the benefit of the initiate. Those who hold on to limited doctrines that involve a notion of an ego entity. And a personality and like can not comprehend the present sutra.
Thus the Lord clearly discards reductionism where one expression is replaced by finitely stable definitions whereby the indefinitely possible realizations of the previously mentioned expression are shut out. The Lord clearly discards essentialism. Essentialism is a metaphysical theory that objects have essences and there is a distinction between its essence and accidental attribute. But lord But the Lord Buddha will not admit of any distinction between this or that and the fundamentalists, reductionists and essentialists can not comprehend the present sutra which has indefinite possibilities of meaning. No limit could be set to its meaning. As we have already posited that since signifiers and signified are not organically connected signifiers have no real meaning. But when the signifier has infinite possible meanings or none, the case is different. That is what the Lord is about. Buddha however reminds Subhuti that those who receive the present discourse might be hounded by misfortunes. But they are but the fruitions of action performed in the past and they will be worked out paving the way to consummation of peerless Enlightenment.
And Buddha asserts that there is no perfect enlightenment. No one attains perfect transcendental wisdom. And there is no formula for the attainment of enlightenment.
When Dipankar Buddha foresaw the Buddha of the present discourse the Sakyasinha would attain enlightenment, he foresaw it only because there is no formula that can reach one to enlightenment. True that Bodhisattvas must take the vow to liberate all the living creatures and yet Bodhisattva can not take such vows because Bodhisattvas are sans egos.
And Buddha asserts that the Tathagata can see into every mind though there are different kinds of mind.
This is because all modes of mind are in fact Only Mind.
Nothing is like charity. The greatest possible charity is however merit less. Or else Tathagata does not have merit. In other words achievements do not count. Or else Tathgata does not have merit. Tathgata’s merit does not have any foundation. Because the phenomenal distinctions are unreal.
Thus the Lord’s utterances out-rightly denies foundationalism .
Foundationalism views that knowledge and epistemic justification have a two tier structure. Some instances of knowledge and justification are based on experience and foundational. Others are derived from inference and non- foundational. The Lord denies their distinction .
The Lord affirms that language can not express truth and Tathagatas have not therefore thought anything. Consummation of Knowledge does not attain any knowledge and hence it is consummation of knowledge. The Buddha says that through his attainment he has not acquired anything.
There can not be knowledge and ignorance perfection and imperfection . So the Lord says that if Consummation of enlightenment is at all there then it is everywhere. Thus, the theory of Tathgatagarbha that posits that the Tathagata is in every being and thing is upheld. The Buddha says that true that one should cultivate goodness to attain this state and yet there is nothing called good.
No one should say that Tathagata liberates living beings. Tathagata does not. Because he has no individual self or ego. There is no difference between ego and non-ego. There is no difference between a Tathagata and the common man. The common man is not common.
Thus, the Lord affirms love and regards for all things both great and small. Ours is the society where hierarchies rule and differences dominate. Tathagata gives us a vision of a world where functional hierarchies and differences could exist; but they will be always known as functional and not real.
The Tathagata they say have marks that distinguishes him from the common run of men. Yet these distinguishing marks does not refer to Tathagata and hence whoever sees Tathagata in form, whoever hears his words does not see him or hear him. A seeker of this kind is far away from the road or tao.
Tathagata further observes that though it is said that everything is impermanent, the reality is neither permanence nor impermanence; neither not permanence nor not impermanence. Consequently nibbana does not mean extinction of the awareness of things. It is neither awareness nor non- awareness; neither not awareness nor not non- awareness.---naivasanjna naasanjna.
And when they say that Tathagata is thus gone or thus come, they are in the wrong, because Tathagata has nowhere to go whence he comes.
Neither the cosmos nor the minutest particle is what it seems. That is the suchness of the things. People with ego view the reality in different ways. Because everybody reads his or her own mind in the text of the reality. And the reality is in the hiding, its different aspects are only manifest. To know the suchness of things one must be sans ego.
The Diamond Sutra thus does make the in road into delusions of appearance and unravels the suchness.
The appearance will then look like
a star at dawn
a dew—a bubble
a lightening or dream
Or else a cloud.
Subhuti , the Bodhisattva and the gods who surrounded the Lord were full of delight when the conversation came to its omega; they dispersed and went their way. Did they go their way to liberation although the way is not the way and liberation is not liberation?
No comments:
Post a Comment