{"collection":"Buddhism","html_url":"https://unchartedknowledge.5gfusion.net/browse/bud/taf/taf25.htm","path":"bud/taf/taf25.htm","source_url":"https://sacred-texts.com/bud/taf/taf25.htm","text":"There are five different views springing from it [belief in the ego], which are held by common people (prthagjana).\nFirst, hearing that it is said in the S\u00fbtra 2 that the\n[paragraph continues] Dharmak\u00e2ya of the Tath\u00e2gata is perfectly tranquil and may be likened unto space (\u00e2k\u00e2sa), yet not understanding its purport, ignorant people cling to the view that the nature of the Tath\u00e2gata is eternal and omnipresent in the same sense as space is.\nIn order that this clinging to the false doctrine may be eliminated, be it clearly understood that space is nothing but a mode of particularisation and that it has no real existence of its own. Where there is a perception of space, there is side by side a perception of a variety of things, in contradistinction to which space is spoken of as if existing independently. Space therefore exists only in relation to our particularising consciousness.\nFurther since matter (r\u00fbpa) as stated before, is merely a particularisation of the confused mind, it is clear enough that space cannot have any independent existence. In a word all modes of relative existence, our phenomenal world as a whole, are created simply by the particularisation of the confused mind. If we become dissociated from the latter, then all modes of relative existence vanish away by themselves; while the soul alone, in its truth and suchness, pervades the whole universe. The soul, therefore, that constitutes the essential nature of the Tath\u00e2gata, cannot be compared with space, though the latter may be said to be in a certain limited sense eternal and real.\nSecondly, hearing that it is said in the S\u00fbtras that all things in the world without exception are perfect\nemptiness (atyanta\u00e7\u00fbnyat\u00e2), that even Nirv\u00e2na 1 or suchness is also perfect emptiness, is devoid in its true nature of all characteristics (lakshan\u00e2), yet not understanding its purport, ignorant people cling to the view that Nirv\u00e2na or suchness is a nothing, devoid of contents.\nIn order that this clinging may be eliminated, be it clearly understood that suchness or Dharmak\u00e2ya in its self-nature (svabh\u00e2va) is not a nothing (\u00e7\u00fbnyat\u00e2) but envelopes in full immeasurable merits (guna) which make up its true nature.\nThirdly, hearing that it is said in the S\u00fbtras 2 that the Tath\u00e2gata's womb (tath\u00e2gatagarbha) envelopes in full all kinds of merits which constituting its true nature do neither suffer augmentation nor diminution, yet not understanding its purport, ignorant people cling to the view that there is in the Tath\u00e2gata's womb itself an inherent and fundamental distinction between the two objects, matter (r\u00fbpa) and mind (citta).\nIn order that this clinging may be eliminated, be\nit clearly understood that suchness (bh\u00fbtatathat\u00e2) has nothing to do with any form of distinction produced by defilement, and that even in case we speak of its possessing innumerable meritorious characteristics, they are free from the traces of defilement.\nFourthly, hearing that it is said in the S\u00fbtras 1 that even all impure and defiled things in the world are produced through the Tath\u00e2gata's womb (tath\u00e2gatagarbha), and that all things in the world are not at variance with suchness, yet not understanding its purport, ignorant people imagine that the Tath\u00e2gata's womb all-containingly envelopes all objects of defilement in the world.\nIn order that this clinging may be eliminated, be it clearly understood that the Tath\u00e2gata's womb all-containingly envelopes pure and spotless merits (guna) which, outnumbering the sands of the Ganges, are not at variance with suchness; that the prejudices (\u00e2\u00e7rava or kle\u00e7a) and defiled objects, which also outnumber the sands of the Ganges are nothing but non-entity, have from the first no self-existence (svabh\u00e2va), have never been in correspondence with the Tath\u00e2gata's womb; that there is no reason to suppose that the Tath\u00e2gata's womb had been corresponding with defiled objects, but has now by virtue of intellectual intuition been freed from falsity and defilement.\nFifthly, hearing that it is said in the S\u00fbtras 1 that depending on the Tath\u00e2gata's womb, there is birth-and-death (sams\u00e2ra) as well as the attainment of Nirv\u00e2na, yet not understanding its purport, ignorant people imagine that depending on the Tath\u00e2gata's womb there is a beginning for birth-and-death, and that since there is the beginning, Nirv\u00e2na is in turn subject to extinction.\nIn order that this clinging may be eliminated, be it clearly understood that as the Tath\u00e2gata's womb has no beginning, ignorance and birth-and-death depending on it have also no beginning; that it is a view held by the t\u00eerthaka 2 [i.e., the followers of the Vai\u00e7esika]\nand not taught by the Buddha, to say that there are outside of the three worlds 1 (triloka) some other beings coming into existence; that the Tath\u00e2gata's womb has no future [i.e., time of extinction]; and that those who have an insight into it, will eternally destroy the seeds of birth-and-death and attain to Nirv\u00e2na which has also no future [i.e., time of extinction].\nThese four 2 erroneous views have thus arisen from the conception of a personal \u00e2tman, and so we have laid down the four refutations as above mentioned. 3\n106:2 It is not exactly known to what S\u00fbtra or S\u00fbtras this refers, but the analogy of this kind is frequently met with in most of the Mah\u00e2y\u00e2na texts.\n108:1 Fa-tsang, a commentator of the present Discourse, quotes the Mah\u00e2praj\u00f1\u00e2-p\u00e2ramit\u00e2-S\u00fbtra as here referred to. The S\u00fbtra says: \"Even Nirv\u00e2na is like a mirage, like a dream. Nay, if there be something superior to Nirv\u00e2na, I declare it is also like a mirage, like a dream.\"\n108:2 For instance, we read in the second volume of the Lank\u00e2vatara S\u00fbtra (translated into Chinese by \u00c7iks\u00e2nanda): \"The Tath\u00e2gatagarbha is in its intrinsic nature pure, clean, eternal, permanent, unintermittent, and immutable; it embraces the thirty-two excellent qualities, and abides within the body of all sentient beings,\" etc.\n109:1 Though not exactly known to what S\u00fbtra or S\u00fbtras the reference is made here, we can easily find similar passages in the Mah\u00e2y\u00e2na texts, such as the Lank\u00e2vatara, the \u00c7r\u00eem\u00e2l\u00e2, etc.\n110:1 These are not also exactly known.\n110:2 It is not precisely known bow many philosophical schools, called t\u00eerthakas by Buddhists, were flourishing just at the time of A\u00e7vaghosha. The Nirv\u00e2na S\u00fbtra and the Vimalak\u00eertinirde\u00e7a S\u00fbtra mention six of them which were existing at the time of Buddha: (1) P\u00fbrana K\u00e2\u00e7yapa; (2) Maskarin Go\u00e7\u00e2liputra; (3) Sa\u00f1jayin Vaira\u1e6d\u1e6d\u00eeputra; (4) Ajita Ke\u00e7akambala; (5) Kakuda K\u00e2ty\u00e2yana; (6) Nirgrantha J\u00f1\u00e2tiputra. In a commentary on the Vim\u00e2nam\u00e2tr\u00e2-\u00e7\u00e2stra, however, which is a later production than this Discourse, twelve different t\u00eerthaka schools are enumerated. They are: (1) the Samkhya school; (2) the Vai\u00e7esika school; (3) the school which believes in Mahe\u00e7vara as the creator; (4) the school which believes in Mah\u00e2brahma as the creator; (5) the school which maintains that Time is the creator; (6) the school which maintains that Space is the creator; (7) the school which maintains that Water is the creator; (8) the school which says that the world exists by itself; (9) the school which says that the creation comes from Quarters; (10) the school which maintains that the Ego is the principle of existence; (11) the school which maintains the immortality of articulate sounds, i.e., the M\u00eemams\u00e2 school; (12) the Lok\u00e2yatika school, an Indian materialism. For further references p. 111 see Dr. Enry\u00f4 Inouye's Ged\u00f4 Tetsugaku (Philosophical Systems of the T\u00eerthakas), 1897, Tokyo, Japan.\n111:1 They are the world of desire (k\u00e2maloka), the world of form (r\u00fbpaloka), the world of formlessness (ar\u00fbpaloka). (See also p. 77). The k\u00e2maloka is divided into hells (naraka), region of ghosts (preta), animal life (tiryagyoni), human life (manushyaloka), and region of gods (deva); the r\u00fbpaloka into 17 heavenly abodes corresponding to the three stages of Dhy\u00e2na; the ar\u00fbpaloka into four heavenly abodes. For details see the second chapter of the Abhidharmako\u00e7a-\u00c7\u00e2stra, by Vasubandhu.\n111:2 The number \"four\" in this paragraph should be \"five,\" for the author enumerates five misunderstandings and their refutations, as we have seen.\n111:3 The whole passage is missing in the older translation.","title":"The Awakening of Faith: The Awakening of Faith: A. Five F...","type":"page"}