Luminous Buddhism after a bad start

Death of the Historical Buddha, detail (Nehan-zu, 14th century, Met Museum)

From the point of view of later Buddhists the beginnings were a bit of a mess and a bummer, because the Buddha had to stoop down to the lower capacities of his first disciples (hearers, śrāvakas). This led to the Buddha having to behave like a friend (kalyāṇa-mittatā), to teach the “contemplation of the foul” (aśubha-bhāvanā), selflessness (anatta) and emptiness (śūnyatā), and to show the hearers how to perform parinirvāṇa. Obviously, the Buddha’s first disciples were very distraught when they thought they lost their precious teacher forever.

Fortunately, and unbeknownst to many hearers, bodhisattvas and devas had been receiving secret teachings of a much higher level from the Buddha, at the same time and in the same places, but so to speak in another dimension. They knew that not only the dharmakāya, but also the Buddha’s eternal rūpakāyas would always be accessible, and that they themselves would one day become a permament Buddha too, because they carried “the seed of the Buddha”. They were not sad, because this was only the beginning of a great adventure with a happy end for all in perspective.

Sure there is the narrative of the Buddha’s parinirvāṇa seen through the eyes of hearers, but thanks to the above mentioned bodhisattvas we also have the wonderful news of the Mahāparinirvāṇa Sūtra. Don’t we all prefer to see the glass rather half full than half empty?

Before turning to the good news, I want to mention my recent discovery of the two main sects of Pythagoreanism. An inner circle (mathēmatikoi) that received the more esoteric teachings of Pythagoras and lived with their teacher, and a lower class of disciples, the “hearers” (akousmatikoi) that lived as mendicants following a set of rules, and --living from mendacity-- were allowed to eat meat and to have some personal belongings. The hearers “were superseded in the 4th century BC as a significant mendicant school of philosophy by the Cynics", and the “mathēmatikoi” were absorbed into the Platonic school in the 4th century BC.  This happened due to the split (schism), that followed the murder of Pythagoras.

“The akousmatikoi recognised the mathematikoi as real Pythagoreans, but not vice versa.”

 “After the murder of Pythagoras and a number of the mathematikoi by the followers of Cylon of Athens, a resentful disciple, the two groups split from each other entirely, with Pythagoras's wife Theano and their two daughters leading the mathematikoi.” (Knowino)

Let’s turn now to the Mahāyāna Mahāparinirvāṇa-sūtra, that was written after the Lotus sūtra and translated into Chinese in the early 5th century, and that presents “a fully transcendent notion of “Buddha”,  metaphysics, and the rich philosophical language of emptiness”[1].

“After a long, dramatic discussion of all the many beings that bring their last offerings to the Buddha, followed by the appearance of the blacksmith Cunda, there is a series of impassioned pleas for the Buddha not to die.

In response, however, the Buddha launches into a long discussion on the nature of buddhas in general, and himself in particular. He makes it clear that while he will disappear from their sight he is not going to die, because in fact he was never born in the first place. In other words, buddhas are not created phenomena and therefore have no beginning and no end. This leads into the core theme of the sūtra—tathāgatagarbha.” (Blum 2013)

The Buddha is not going to die… Wonderful news. And all of us, except the miserable icchantikas, will not really die, and moreover because we have a Buddha-essence, which is “eternal, blissful, characterized by a personal self, and pure” (some would say Luminous), we will become Buddhas ourselves. Quite a change from the disheartening version of Buddhism of the hearers (śrāvaka). No wonder they were distraught. 

Mourning animals, Death of the Historical Buddha, (Nehan-zu, 14th century, Met Museum), but where are the cats?!

Even the proud cats must have somehow known, because they allegedly didn’t pay tribute to the Buddha and cry at his death[2]…

“The Lotus intimates that all buddhas are eternal but in fact only states that their lives are very, very long. In the Nirvana Sutra the buddha is and always has been eternal and unchanging. He appears on earth as he did, going through the motions of being born as prince and renouncing the household life, only to “correspond to the ways of the world” (Skt. lokānuvartana; Ch. suishun shijian 隨順世間). In other words, if he had not taken these elaborate steps, the people of Jambudvīpa (i.e., India) would not have trusted him as a genuine saint. He took on this human form so that people would pay attention to his message.”

Buddhas and bodhisattvas have to “go through the motions” because of the conditions of the world and of the human beings that need to be saved. Yet they are considered as the “straight ones” (t. drang srong) in the famous verses of Patrul Rinpoche.

"The great Straight one [ṛiṣhi], the Munīndra, god of gods,
Attained the straight level through a straight path,
And in a straight way showed this straight and excellent path to others.
Isn’t that why he’s known as the Great Straight one [mahāṛiṣhi]?”[3]

The next verse goes:

“Alas for people in this age of residues!
The mind’s wholesome core of truth has withered, and people live deceitfully,
So their thoughts are warped, their speech is twisted,
They cunningly mislead others—who can trust them?[4]”

 Since the people of “this age of residues” are “crooked”, the straight bodhisattvas have to use warped yet skillful means and “crazy wisdom”, because crooked + crooked = straight. Since this could lead to great confusion, the bodhisattvas classified the Buddha’s teachings in “straight” (nitartha) and “crooked” or provisional (neyartha). The first teachings of the Buddha (selflessness and emptiness) were provisional, and the ones about Buddha-essence (buddhadhātu) are definite, and can be trusted as being “straight”.

“Self” is what “buddha” means. “Permanence” is what “dharma body” means. “Bliss” is what “nirvāṇa” means. “Purity” is what “dharma” means. Bhikṣus, why do you say, “To have any perception of self reflects arrogance and pride, and leads to transmigration in saṃsāra”? [With that attitude] when any of you declare, “I cultivate my perception of impermanence, suffering, and nonself,” these three types of practice will have no real meaning.” (Blum 2013)

One can sense the Concentration of Heroic Progress is already in motion, the third wheel is in full spin and A Few Good Men take control of the Saṅgha.

The bodhisattva (sic) Kāśyapa asked the dying Buddha “If, as you say, a tathāgata is a permanent dharma, then why is the Tathāgata’s presence [here] impermanent?” The Buddha answers through a parable about sarpirmaṇḍa (the scum of melted butter), potentially present in raw milk when it is properly churned. But the “thieves”/śrāvakas who stole the Buddha’s cows/dharma were incapable of getting the best out of it. The skills they developed in their improper (=impermanent) vessels were as impermanent as themselves. 

“After the World-honored Tathāgata enters nirvāṇa, they will steal the remaining good dharma he leaves behind—be they teachings on morality, meditation, or wisdom [triśikṣa] —just like the thieves who looted the herd of cows [from the farm]. But although ordinary people have obtained [the Buddha’s teachings on] morality, meditation, and wisdom, they lack the skills that would enable them to attain liberation by means of these teachings. With their attitude they simply cannot obtain the permanent morality, the permanent meditation, or the permanent wisdom that is liberation, just like that group of thieves who did not know the means by which to acquire sarpirmaṇḍa and so lost [that opportunity].”

“Therefore I want you to know that after the Tathāgata passes from this world, at that time there will be such people who lecture on the topic of permanence, bliss, self, and purity.”

“When a dharma wheel-turning king appears in the world, ordinary people [=śrāvakas] will no longer be able to preach about morality, meditation, or wisdom; they will retreat from such activities, just as the cattle thieves retreated.”

“Were a tathāgata to appear in the world and thoroughly explain to living beings the ordinary, worldly teaching as well as the extraordinary, transcendent teaching, it would enable bodhisattvas to follow him and preach these things on their own. Once those bodhisattva-mahāsattvas obtain that most excellent sarpirmaṇḍa, they would go on to bring an incalculable number of other living beings to where they, too, obtained the unsurpassed, timeless ambrosia of the dharma: that is, the permanence, bliss, self, and purity of a tathāgata.” (Blum 2013)

The Luminous Self with its intrinsic qualities, “the seed of the Buddha”, contained in an ordinary human body allows for developing permanent skills (triśikṣa) and qualities in a permanent Luminous vessel (not an impermanent “leather bag”!), and thus to become a Luminous “permanent and immutable Tathāgata”, undifferentiated from the Divine Light (Nous) and Logos. That is the Luminous project of Luminous Buddhism. Not nirvāṇa, unless nirvāṇa is Bliss, and not a dying Buddha. Pretty good news for an Easter Sunday don't you think? 

*** 

[1] BDK English Tripiṭaka Series, THE NIRVANA SŪTRA (MAHĀPARINIRVĀṆA-SŪTRA) VOLUME I (Taishō Volume 12, Number 374) Translated from the Chinese by Mark L. Blum, BDK America, Inc. 2013.

[2] This seems to be the reason why Trungpa tortured cats.

Leslie Hays, a former official concubine of Trungpa, wrote on her Facebook page:

“We returned to Prajna late one night after a talk and there was this beautiful tabby cat sitting on the porch. I said, “here kitty kitty” and he came right over to me, purring and rubbing against my legs. I picked him up and said: “Here sweetie, here’s the cat you’ve been wanting.” I can’t remember exactly who was on duty but i think it was Marty Janowitz and of course Mitchell. Someone took the cat from me and Rinpche ordered them to tie him to the table on the porch. He instructed them to make a tight noose out of a rope so the cat didn’t get away. He stood over his guards to examine the knots and make sure they were secure. I was curious at this point, wondering what this enlightened master had in mind for the cat-i knew there were serious rodent problems on the land and i assumed he wanted to use the cat for this problem.

Then, he instructed the kasung to bring him some logs from the fire pit that was in front of the porch down a slight slope.

We took our seats-CTR was seated to my right and there was a table between us for his drinks. He ordered a sake. The logs were on his right side, so he could use his good arm. Anyway, the cat was still tied by a noose to the table. Rinpoche picked up a log and hurled it at the cat, who jumped off the table and hung from the noose. He was making a terrible gurgling sound-and he finally got some footing on the edge of the deck and made it back onto the porch. Rinpoche hurled another log-making contact and the cat let out a horrible scream as the air was knocked out of him. I said: “Sweetie-stop! What are you doing? Why are you doing this?” He said something about hating cats because they played with their food and didn’t cry at the buddha’s funeral. He continued to torture the poor animal and I was crying and begging him to stop. I said: “I gave you the cat, please…stop it!” And I’ll never forget his response-he looked at me and said: “You are responsible to for this karma.” and he giggled. I got up to try and stop him and he firmly told me to sit down. One of the guards stepped closer to me and stood in a threatening manner to keep me in my place.

The torture went on for what seemed like hours, until finally the poor cat made a run for his life with the patio table bouncing after him. It was clear he had a broken back leg. I’m sure that cat died. I looked for him or the table for the rest of Seminary and never found either. I imagined him fleeing up the mountain and the table catching on something and strangling him. I was completely traumatized by the event, but it was never spoken of again. Rinpoche told me the “karma” from this event was good. I was dumbfounded. A common feeling i had when around CTR was that there were things going on that i simply could not understand, while it seemed other people, with a knowing nod of their heads, understood things on a deeper level than I. I was in fear of exposing my ignorance, so i learned not to question and to go with the crowd around him. They didn’t appear to have any problems with what he did-such was the depth of their devotion. I just needed to generate more devotion to Rinpoche and one day i might understand.

I kept this secret for 30 years.”

[3] Drang srong chen po thub dbang lha'i yang lhas//
drang po'i lam nas drang po'i go 'phang brnyes//
drang po'i lam bzang 'gro la drang por ston//
de slad drang srong che zhes grags min nam//

From : thog mtha’ bar gsum du dge ba’i gtam lta sgom spyod gsum nyams len dam pa’i snying nor


[4] kye ma snyigs ma'i du 'dir 'gro ba'i rgyud//
drang po'i gzhung bzang nyams nas gyo sgyu spyod//
de slad 'khyog po'i blo dang 'khyog po'i ngag/
gya gyus gzhan sems bslu la su yid gtod//

English translation by Padmakara Translation Group, Dilgo Khyentse Rinpoche, The Heart Treasure of the Enlightened Ones, The Practice of View, Meditation, and Action, Shambhala Publications (2012)

Luminous polytheist Buddhism

Invasion of the Body Snatchers 1978 - The seed is planted... terror grows. 

Whereas in the narrative of the beginnings of the “Great recluse” (mahāsamaṇa) the gods seemed to occupy a minor place as protectors, disciples or admirers, and the death (parinibbana) of the Buddha was initially viewed as a disaster, this very soon changed with the disputes about the nature of nibbana and the deification of the Buddha, who became one of the many Buddhas that preceded and followed Śākyamuni, waiting for their turn in Tuṣita heaven in the company of gods. It became generally assumed that successful followers of the Buddha lived in the highest heavens of the Buddhist cosmos together with the gods, and shared the same, or often far superior, godlike powers. It would probably be difficult for mere mortals to distinguish between bodhisattvas and gods, when ascending into a divine realm after their death.

The universalist (mahāyāna) and esoteric forms of Buddhism have a lot in common with the other religions as they developed around the beginning of our era, specifically during Hellenistic and Roman times in the Mediterranean basin and farther eastward. Whether Christ was the Son of God, an angel etc., he “was sent” from above, or considered from the start as a savior by those following him. The earlier hagiographies of the Buddha don’t present him as someone with a mission except the one that he fixed for himself: mokṣa. Prince Gautama discovered “Buddhadharma” and initially hesitated to share it, before he decided to become a teacher. Whether these hagiographic versions are partly based on the real events of a historic individual or legends we will probably never know. By lack of proof for a historic Buddha we have many versions of the life he is thought to have led and the things he is thought to have said. Everything in the scriptures is known by hearsay (oral transmission) and the transmissions, interpretations, prequels and spin-offs thereof (see e.g. the Mahāvastu).

This is how “Buddhism” developed and instead of speaking of “the Words” of “the Buddha” we ought to speak of “Buddhism”, what Buddhists believed and did, and believe and do. By these standards the large majority of Buddhists in the world were and are “polytheists”, and the “Buddhism” they follow is a religion, that --like many religions-- also incorporates ethics, religious and secular precepts, methods of contemplation, prayer and “wisdom” in the largest sense of the word. As for other religions, the afterlife is one of its main concerns.

Buddhist tradition speaks of a split between the sect of the “Elders” (Sthavira) and the “the Great Sangha" (Mahāsāṃghika) after the Second Buddhist council, which may have occurred during or after the reign of Ashoka (c. 268 to 232 BCE), who according to Buddhist tradition had a Gandharan grandmother. The universalist (“Great”) approach of Buddhism seems very compatible with Ashoka’s and the Mauryan’s “universalism”, as known through Ashoka's rock edicts engraved on pillars in a Greek-influenced style ("Hellenistic baroque”).

The Lotus Sutra (Saddharma Puṇḍarīka Sūtra, 1st century BCE - 2nd century CE) presents a clearly deified Buddha with transcendent qualities, a savior that can manifest himself in various forms. Unlike the human “Unbound Buddha” that freed himself from Saṃsāra, karma and rebirth at his death, the deified Cosmic Buddha is something completely different, more an eternal principle than a human, manifesting in many various ways, including in humans and Buddhas… No more reason to mourn a dead Buddha. This Buddha never dies. This Buddha is a god, or even God (Ādi-Buddha). And candidate-Buddhas, bodhisattvas (e.g. Avalokiteśvara), sharing the heavens with gods are like gods too. The mere invocation of their names can help protect humans against the main dangers.

The universalist message (“the path of the single vehicle”, “The True Dharma [that] is the hidden essence of all the buddhas”) of the Lotus Sūtra is that all sentient beings can become “deified” Buddhas themselves.

“I tell you, O Śāriputra:
All of you are my children,
And I am thus your father.
Since you were burned by the fire
Of various sufferings for many kalpas,
I saved you all
By leading you out of the triple world.
Although I have previously told you
About your parinirvāṇa,
You have only extinguished birth and death
And have not actually attained nirvana.
You should now seek only
The wisdom of the Buddha.”

“I will give sentient beings who have escaped from the triple world all the toys of the Buddha’s meditations and liberations, which are of one character and one kind, are praised by the Noble Ones, and which produce pure and supreme pleasure.”

“All the buddhas, the Best of Humans,
Know that all dharmas are ever without substance
And that the buddha-seeds germinate
Through dependent origination.”

And those who want to destroy “the seed of the Buddha” will suffer the dire consequences of their heinous act.

“Those people who will not accept
And who disparage this [Lotus] sutra,
Will consequently destroy the seed of the Buddha
In the entire world.”[1]

Buddhas and bodhisattvas (“the sons born from the mouths of the buddhas”[2]) of the highest levels are manifestations from the same “Logos”/Dharmakāya, not individuals. They take whatever form is needed to convert and save “their children” from the triple world below, in order to establish them beyond the triple world, not in parinirvāṇa, while remaining active in the triple world. This idea will be further developed in later sūtras, such as the Mahāparinirvāṇa Sūtra, the Avataṃsaka Sūtra (Flower Garland Sutra), the Śūraṃgamasamādhi (Śgs, T642). The Avataṃsaka Sūtra describes “a cosmos of infinite realms upon realms”, and a vast network of interconnected Buddhas, bodhisattvas, and worlds, that are basically a display of Logos. In the Śūraṃgamasamādhi this Logos is personified by Superbodhisattva Mañjuśrī, the universal One man orchestra all by himself, and the object of Luminous Praise in “Chanting the Names of Mañjuśrī” (Mañjuśrīnāmasamgīti).

As Etienne Lamotte explains[3] in his Introduction to the French translation of the Śūraṃgamasamādhi (La concentration de la marche héroïque), Rājagṛha is not the place we know, but a Pure land, a buddhakṣetra, and Śākyamuni teaching the sūtra is not the “historical” Buddha, but “a pure ray of wisdom and power”, the embodied “Concentration of Heroic Progress”. And so is Mañjuśrī who plays an important part in this Sūtra as another embodiment of Concentration of Heroic Progress, and the one man orchestra of the cosmos, i.e. Mañjuśrī’s stage where he can play all the roles, including that of Māra. He can even stage the nirvāṇa of a Pratyekabuddha at times when there are no Buddhas.

“127. Manjusri, you should know that I [Śākyamuni] exercise this supernormal power everywhere in innumerable (apramāṇa) and infinite (ananta) koṭinayutaśatasahasrāṇis of buddhakṣetras, but the Śrāvakas and Pratyekabuddhas do not know this. Such is, O Mañjuśrī, the supremacy (ārṣabha) of the Śūraṃgamasamādhi bodhisattvas, even while always manifesting such wondrous feats (vikurvaṇa) in innumerable universes, never swerve from this samādhi. 128. Mañjuśrī, just as the sun (śūrya) and moon (candra), without ever leaving their palaces (vimāna), illuminate villages (grāma), towns (nagara) and districts (nigama), so the bodhisattvas, without ever swerving from the Śūraṃgamasamādhi, manifest themselves everywhere in innumerable universes and expound the Dharma according to the aspirations (adhimukti) of beings.”

Mañjuśrī and other bodhisattvas (Maitreya, 156) are capable of doing this, because of this Concentration, and there are many ways of practising it (154). In “reality”, Mañjuśrī has already been a Buddha named Nāgavamsagra (159), but the cosmic show must go on, and so he pretends to be Mañjuśrī in the Concentration of Heroic Progress. Is there anything in the whole cosmos that is not “Concentrationally” accounted for? Including evildoers and Māra, the Lord of evildoers (89-100)? Isn’t this is a sort of pantheism, “ the belief that the divine intersects every part of the universe and also extends beyond space and time”, and that everything is actually alright.

Even Māra pretends to convert, and arouses bodhicitta for the wrong reasons, whereafter the Buddha predicts Māra’s future Buddhahood. The Heroic Progress is unstoppable. Even bad monks "in the future to come" are accounted for.

“96. Then the Buddha said to the bodhisattva Dṛḍhamati: Today Māra Pāpīmat aroused the bodhicitta in order to be unbound, and not with a pure intention (adhyāśaya). Equally, O Dṛḍhamati, after my Nirvāṇa [at the end of time, in the final period], in the last five hundred years (mama parinirvṛtasya, paścime kale, paścime samaye, pascimāyām pañcaśatyām vartamānāyām), numerous bhikṣus will arouse the bodhicitta for material gains (lābha) and not with a pure intention (adhyāśaya).”

No problem. Nothing escapes the project of the Cosmic Buddha where everything seems like it was staged by Buddhas and bodhisattvas in their Concentration. All beings in the cosmos look like empty shells secretly run by the Concentration of Heroic Progress. Only the act of arousing bodhicitta seems “real”, or the Concentration of Heroic Progress for that matter. All other religious acts don’t have real efficiency and don’t really matter. Yet they take place and fill the lives, time and space of those progressing heroically, unbeknownst to themselves and despite themselves.

“[The bodhisattva in Śūraṃgamasamādhi] takes up the religious life in an heretical order (pāsaṇdikeṣu pravrajati) in order to win over beings, but he does not really take it up (pravrajyā), he is not defiled (kliṣṭa) by all the false views (mithyādṛṣṭi) which prevail there and does not give any credence (prasāda) to them. He seems to adopt the bodily attitudes (īryāpatha) of the heretics (pāsaṇḍika), but does not conduct himself in accordance with them. (32)”

The only real offence is to not arouse bodhicitta or to ignore the Concentration of Heroic Progress, or to destroy one's defilements...

“O Bhagavat, a man guilty of the five offences of immediate fruition (pañcānantarya) who hears the Śūraṃgamasamādhi expounded is superior to the [holy one who has] entered into the certainty (avakrāntaniyāma) and to the arhat who has destroyed all the defilements (kṣiṇāsrava. Why? The man who is guilty of the pañcānantaryas, on hearing the Śūraṃgamasamādhi expounded, arouses the anuttarasamyaksaṃbodhicitta and even if, because of his previous misdeeds (pūrvapāpakarman), he falls into the hells (naraka), the merit (kuśalamūla) of having heard the Śūraṃgamasamādhi enables him to become a Buddha. Conversely, the arhat who has destroyed the defilements (kṣiṇāsrava) is like a broken receptacle (chinnabādjana): never could he make use of the Śūraṃgamasamādhi.” (150)

Why? Because he could not behave in worldly or evil (Māra) ways. He could not, like the bodhisattva Māragocarānupalipta, convert two hundred daughters of Māra (devakanyās) deeply attached to the pleasures of the senses (kāmarāgatisakta) by making love to them simultaneously through "creating through transformation" two hundred devaputras, sons of gods, of perfect beauty, identical to his own (94). He could not act like a “banker, householder, minor king, great king, warrior, brahmin or śūdra” (122-123, for this topic also see the Gaṇḍavyūha sūtra, in particular the passage about king Anala).

The world of Māra and the world of Buddha share the same essence. There is no duality and no difference (114)[4]. The world, as it is, is filled with suffering everywhere, like a house on fire (Lotus sūtra). Yet everything ought to be left as it is, because everything is in the good hands of bodhisattvas and under the control of the Concentration of Heroic Progress.

And so in Buddhist monist polytheism everything is left as it is. The only way out is through arousing bodhicitta and abiding in the Concentration of Heroic Progress, while opportunely remaining on the side of the ones in power in heaven as on earth, because why try and fix anything that cannot be fixed and is and will always remain imperfect anyway? With one’s head in dharmakāya and one’s feet in the mud the world will gradually be taken over by the Concentration of Heroic Progress, without any noticeable difference. Perhaps it already is the case.

***

[1] English translations from THE LOTUS SŪTRA, (Taishō Volume 9, Number 262) Translated from the Chinese of Kumārajīva by Tsugunari Kubo and Akira Yuyama

[2] Just like brahmins are born from the mouth of Brāhma.

[3] “The Buddha Śākyamuni who appears in the Sūtra is not the Buddha of the sixth century B.C.E. whom we call 'historical' and whom the Mahāyānists term 'transformational', that Buddha who was born in the Lumbinī Park, attained enlightenment at Bodh-Gaya, expounded the Dharma for forty-five years, and passed into Nirvāṇa in Pāvā. This is Śākyamuni in Heroic Progress, a pure ray of wisdom and power, who manifests himself simultaneously in our little universe of four continents, in the Great Cosmos from which the latter derives, and in all the great cosmic systems as numerous as the sands of the Ganges; here, he repeats the feat of the historical Buddha; there, he is some divinity; there again, he is a banker, householder, minor king, great king, warrior, brahmin or śūdra (§§ 122-3). “ English translation by Sara Boin-Webb, MOTILAL BANARSIDASS PUBLISHERS, Delhi

[4] “The true nature of the world of Māra (māradhātudharmatā)23* is the true nature of the world of the Buddha (buddhadhātudharmata). Between the māradhātudharmatā and the buddhadhātudharmatā there is neither duality (dvaya) nor difference (viśeṣa). And we do not leave, do not exceed that true nature.”

Luminous Praise

The Ascension of Isaiah in Ethiopian translation

First some quick reminders of Ethiopia in antiquity and late antiquity. There have been contacts between this area of the region of Alexandria and India from at least the 1st century AD.

“In the second century BC, Ptolemy III Euergetes annexed several northern Ethiopian cities such as Tigray and the port of Adulis, which became major trading hubs for Ethiopian Greeks.” “The name Ethiopia itself is Greek and means "of burned face".

“After the Romans annexed the Ptolemaic Empire, the Axumite king Zoskales (Ancient Greek: Ζωσκάλης) established the Axumite Empire (Ancient Greek: Ἀξωμίτης) (c. 100 AD–c. 960 AD), which maintained Ethiopian Greek culture and used Greek as its lingua franca.”

“Trade between the [Ethiopia and India] flourished during the ancient Axumite Empire (1st century AD), which is seen to be origin of modern Ethiopia. Indian traders flocked to the ancient port of Adulis in the 6th Century AD trading silk and spices for gold and ivory.” https://www.mea.gov.in/Portal/ForeignRelation/Ethiopia_Sept_2017.pdf

Ethiopian priest with a fly whisk (Rod Waddington, Flickr)

According to Philostrates (3rd century CE) the 1st-century CE sage Apollonius of Tyana (VA) traveled to India, where he conversed with a group of wonder-working gymnosophists presided over by one Iarchas.

"Later, after advising Vespasian in Alexandria, Apollonius travels south to visit “the naked ones” (οἱ Γυμνοί‎), whom Philostratus locates imprecisely near Egypt’s border with Ethiopia, south of Thebes (6.4) and apparently in Ethiopian territory (6.22.1). Like the Indians, they live on a hill, albeit smaller, but meet in a grove (ἄλσος‎) and have no single place of worship (6.6.1–2). In reply to their leader Thespesion’s exposition (6.10.2–6) of their way of life as closer to nature than that of the Indian gymnosophists (they have no need of clothes, tables, chairs, or magic), Apollonius explains his own choice of a Pythagorean lifestyle and his grounds for believing Indian wisdom superior to theirs (6.11)—a covert Philostratean attack on Cynicism." (Gymnosophists, Ewen Bowie)

Were they different from the “Gymnosophists” or Garmanes (i.e., Buddhist Sramans) that Alexander the Great was said to have met? “Later Apollonius goes to see Ethiopian gymnosophists (6.6–23), whose inferiority to those in India (of whom they are represented as colonists) is stressed.” (Ewen Bowie)

Also see Les Gymnosophistes éthiopiens chez Philostrate et chez Héliodore 

“An Ethiopian delegation arrives at the Satavahana court c180. The magnificence of the Amaravati stupa was due to its proximity to the important port of Dharanikota, where excavations of its wharves have revealed quantities of glass & amphorae of wine, imported by Axum traders”. (Tweet and picture above by William Dalrymple, with a glimpse of himself in the glass)

Ethiopian priest reading old Bible (Wall Art)

Ethiopians also took part in the “Gnostic” activity of which Alexandria was the main center. One of the Gnostic texts is “The Ascension of Isaiah”, “a pseudepigraphical Judeo-Christian text” from approximately 70 AD to 175 AD. It is an assembled work consisting of three parts[1] “brought together in the third or fourth century A.D”. The extant complete manuscripts are from a later date, and an Ethiopic translation[2] was made during the 4th-6th cent. I am interested in the last part of the work, the Vision of Isaiah, because it describes the ascension and descent of Isaiah in some detail. It gives quite a precise idea about how such an ascension was thought to take place “technically”, from an early Christian perspective (proto-Trinitarian or subordinationist), at that time. It is possible that the last Cathar burnt at the stake in 1321, Guillaume Bélibaste, knew this text from a translation in langue d’Oc[3].

The ascension takes place in a cosmological structure of that time. As an example, Syrianus, the teacher of Proclus (412-485), explains it as consisting of three triads of intelligible gods (theoi noetoi, being), three triads of intelligible-intellective gods (theoi noetoi noetikoi, life), two triads of intellective gods (theoi noetikoi, intellect), and the seventh divinity (hebdomē theos, the separation of the higher gods from the world gods). The celestial beings are divided in hypercosmic gods (= the rulers), hypercosmic-encosmic gods (= the gods detached from the world), encosmic gods (= the celestial and sublunary gods), the universal souls, and finally the superior beings (angels, daimons and heroes). The lowest celestial heaven and the highest earthly level is “the firmament”, the limit between the sensitive and the sensual realm, where continuous fighting occurs.

For comparison, the Buddhist cosmological structure is divided in three realms: the Formless, the Form (form and subtle materiality), with Akaniṣṭha as the highest Form abode, and the Desire realms (six worlds), where Brāhma loka is the highest Desire abode. Also part of the Desire realm and respectively lower are Tuṣita, The Realm of Blissful Contentment, where future Buddhas abide waiting for their mission, and Tāvatimsa, The Heaven of the Thirty-three Gods of Śakra/Indra. The Form realms are accessible through contemplation (dhyāna), and the Formless realms through formless contemplation (arūpadhyāna). At every Great dissolution (mahāpralaya) -- the end of a universe -- the three realms disappear. This structure and its conditions may differ in Mahāyāna and Vajrayāna schools, where Brāhma’s role is not limited to the Desire realm, and  where nirvāṇa (and the ancient path to nirvāṇa) is no longer the top priority… There is a change of strategy, and mythology makes a huge come-back.

Back to the Ascension of Isaiah. Isaiah is the 8th-century BC prophet from the Book of Isaiah. The Ascension of Isaiah is a Judeo-Christian “prequel”, probably meant to show how the coming of the messiah Jesus was part of the Divine plan and known by an important prophet like Isaiah. In chapter 7 of the online English translation by M. A. Knibb[4], Isaiah recounts how he saw a glorious angel (the angel of the Holy Spirit) and how he was taken to heaven by him, like e.g. Paul (in 1Co1). Isaiah’s ascension takes place in ten stages.

1. Firmament

2. 1st heaven
3. 2nd heaven
4. 3rd heaven
5. 4th heaven
6. 5th heaven

7. The air of the 6th heaven
8. 6th heaven
9. The air of the 7th heaven
10. 7th heaven

“Who are you? And what is your name? And where are you taking me up?"

"When I have taken you up through (all) the stages and have shown you the vision on account of which I was sent, then you will understand who I am; but my name you will not know, for you have to return into this body. But where I take you up, you will see, because for this purpose I was sent.”

"You will see one greater than me, how he will speak kindly and gently with you; and the Father of the one who is greater you will also see, because for this purpose I was sent from the seventh heaven, that I might make all this clear to you."

From the 1st heaven until the 5th heaven, Isaiah sees in each heaven “a throne in the middle, and on the right and on the left of it there were angels”. The one sitting on the throne, having more glory than the rest. The angels on the right sing, in one voice, the glory of the one on the throne. They are followed by the angels on the left, who don’t sing in one voice. In the 2nd heaven the glory is greater and Isaiah feels like worshiping.

“And I fell on my face to worship him, and the angel who led me would not let me, but said to me, "Worship neither throne, nor angel from the six heavens, from where I was sent to lead you, before I tell you in the seventh heaven. For above all the heavens and their angels is placed your throne, and also your robes and your crown [skt. makuṭa] which you are to see."

A celestial throne, robes and crown are waiting for Isaiah “above all heavens”, and due to his hierarchical celestial rank, it would not be right to worship a lower celestial being. Isaiah hasn’t reached his final destination, i.e. after his descent back on earth, and his final ascension. As Isaiah ascends, “the glory of my face was being transformed”, and he will notice that “nothing is hidden from the thrones and those who dwell in the heavens, nor from the angels."

From “the air of the sixth heaven” onward, there was a change. The glory and the splendor were greater, there was no throne, and no right and left row of angels. The angels present had greater glory and Praise. The guiding angel tells Isaiah he is not his lord, but his companion, and that from here on, everything is under the direct influence of the 7th heaven and in direct communication with it. Praise of the highest One is possible from here.

"From the sixth heaven and upwards there are no longer those on the left, nor is there a throne placed in the middle, but [they are directed] by the power of the seventh heaven, where the One who is not named dwells, and his Chosen One, whose name is unknown, and no heaven can learn his name; for he is alone, (he) whose voice all the heavens and thrones answer. I, therefore, have been empowered and sent to bring you up here that you may see this glory, and (that) you may see the Lord of all these heavens and of these thrones being transformed until he resembles your appearance and your likeness. But I say to you, Isaiah, that no man who has to return into a body of that world [has come up, or seen], or understood what you have seen and what you are to see, for you are destined in the lot of the LORD, the lot of the tree, to come here, and from there is the power of the sixth heaven and of the air."

Isaiah will have to return to his old body and to earth before his final ascension.

“[When from the body by the will of God you have come up here], then you will receive the robe which you will see, and also other numbered robes placed (there) you will see, and then you will be equal to the angels who (are) in the seventh heaven."

From the sixth heaven (the 8th stage), all denizens have the same appearance and their Praise is equal. The light of the sixth heaven is beyond the light of the lower stages, that seems like darkness now. From here onward the trinity is named and praised "with one voice".

“And (strength) was given to me, and I also sang praises with them, and that angel also, and our praise was like theirs. And there they all named the primal Father and his Beloved, Christ, and the Holy Spirit, all with one voice, but it was not like the voice of the angels who (were) in the five heavens, nor (was it) like their speech, but there was a different voice there, and there was much light there.”

In the the air of the seventh heaven, the voice of a celestial being (guardian) asked what a mortal being was doing at this level, another voice, Lord Christ, says “the holy Isaiah is permitted to come up here, for his robe is here”. Isaiah cannot hear his name until he has left his mortal body. The seventh heaven is filled with light, angels and with all the righteous ones from Adam’s time onward, but “ stripped of their robes of the flesh”. They were not sitting yet on thrones and not wearing their crowns of glory, but they were dressed “in their robes of above”. Everybody has to wait until the Beloved one, Christ, descends incognito, “concealed even from the heavens so that it will not be known who he is”, and for his glorious return.

“When he has plundered the angel of death, he will rise on the third day and will remain in that world for five hundred and forty-five days. And then many of the righteous will ascend with him, whose spirits do not receive (their) robes until the Lord Christ ascends and they ascend with him. Then indeed they will receive their robes and their thrones and their crowns, when he has ascended into the seventh heaven."

Isaiah spots all the numerous thrones, robes and crowns waiting for those who are destined for the seventh heaven. He also sees the books kept by the angels in which all the deeds are written down, “nothing which is done in this world is hidden in the seventh heaven”. Then Isaiah sees Christ, “one standing (there) whose glory surpassed that of all”, worshiped by all, who then “transformed and became like an angel”, ready for the descent into the world. When Isaiah sees him, the Glory (Light) is such, that everything else pales in comparison. Then the angel of the Holy Spirit and Lord Christ and all the righteous from the other six heavens together worship and praise “that Glorious One whose glory I could not see”[5], in a praise that is not only heard but also seen… Then that Glorious one addresses Christ.

“And I heard the voice of the Most High, the Father of my Lord, as he said to my Lord Christ, who will be called Jesus,"Go out and descend through all the heavens. You shall descend through the firmament and through that world as far as the angel who (is) in Sheol, but you shall not go as far as Perdition. And you shall make your likeness like that of all who (are) in the five heavens, and you shall take care to make your form like that of the angels of the firmament and also (like that) of the angels who (are) in Sheol. And none of the angels of that world shall know that you (are) Lord with me of the seven heavens and of their angels. And they shall not know that you (are) with me when with the voice of the heavens I summon you, and their angels and their lights, and when I lift up (my voice) to the sixth heaven, that you may judge and destroy the princes and the angels and the gods of that world, and the world which is ruled by them, for they have denied me and said, 'We alone are, and there is no one besides us[6].' And afterwards you shall ascend from the gods of death to your place, and you shall not be transformed in each of the heavens, but in glory you shall ascend and sit at my right hand, and then the princes and the powers of that world will worship you." This command I heard the Great Glory giving to my Lord.”

Isaiah witnesses in his vision the concealed descent and transformation of Christ through the various stages. In the 6th heaven (the 8th stage) Christ keeps his own appearance and doesn’t transform into an angel, and was recognised and praised as such by the angels there. In the 5th heaven “he made his form like that of the angels there, and they did not praise him, for his form was like theirs.” While descending, Christ adopts the form of the angels of every respective heaven, and is not praised, having the appearance of one of them. From the third heaven onward Christ even gives the required password, in order to pass incognito, including when passing the Firmament, “where the prince of this world [skt. jagannātha] dwells” and there are ongoing battles. The descent continues.

“I saw when he descended and made himself like the angels of the air, that he was like one of them. And he did not give the password, for they were plundering and doing violence to one another.”

The next stage in the text describes the miraculous conception of Mary and the birth of Jesus[7], his being suspended from a tree (crucifixion), resurrection (“et surget tertia die”) and return through ascension, this time without transforming himself.

“And I saw him, and he was in the firmament, but was not transformed into their form. And all the angels of the firmament, and Satan, saw him and worshiped. And there was much sorrow there as they said, "How did our Lord descend upon us, and we did not notice the glory which was upon him, which we (now) see was upon him from the sixth heaven?"

“And I saw how he ascended into the seventh heaven, and all the righteous and all the angels praised him. And then I saw that he sat down at the right hand of that Great Glory, whose glory I told you I could not behold. And also I saw that the angel of the Holy Spirit sat on the left.”

After his vision, Isaiah returned into his “robe” until his days were counted. “Then you shall come here." The Ascension of Isaiah is the account of the spheres Isaiah saw, the vision of the future descent and ascension of Christ, and his “incognito” transformations during the descent and the ascension in full glory. Other more theurgic traditions speculated about the transformations or metamorphoses of the ascension of the luminous body of saviors, saints etc. and how this hidden knowledge could be used for one’s own or others' ascension(s).

What is characteristic of The Ascension of Isaiah and other Gnostic works is the “praising” of the triune Godhead and of the ones sitting on the thrones of the last heavens, where their hidden names are essential. This is no ordinary “praise”: “the expression of approval or admiration for someone or something”. When an esoteric Buddhist text such as Chanting the Names of Mañjuśrī[8] (Mañjuśrīnāmasamgīti[9]) makes Praise a central theme, it’s worth looking into.

Buddha preaching in Tuṣita, Amaravati, Satavahana period, 2d century AD.Indian Museum, Calcutta

Chanting the Names of Mañjuśrī is a revelation given to the Master of Mysteries (Guhyendra) Vajrapāṇi, the vajradhara, directly into his “stream of consciousness” by the Lord (nātha)[10], no different from Mañjuśrī[11], the knowledge being (jñānasattva), the “gnosis embodiment”. Seven maṇḍalas (spheres, heavens, on the throne in the middle of which is seated the main deity) are revealed.

“The Lord in the center of the maṇḍala can also be understood as the central element-the Maṇḍa-while the surrounding gods and goddesses are the containing element the La; and these are nontwo.”

The seven maṇḍalas and their central deities are respectively:

1. The Net of Illusion, Mañjugoṣa
2. The Great Maṇḍala of Vajradhātu, MahāVairocana
3. The Pure Dharmadhātu Wisdom (Womb), Arapacana
4. Mirrorlike Wisdom: Trailokyavijaya (Victorious over the Three Worlds), Vajra hūṃkāra, Vajrabhairava
5. Discriminative Wisdom: Vādisiṃha
6. Sameness wisdom: Vādirāj, Vāgīśvara (Lord of Speech)
7. Procedure-of-duty Wisdom: Mañjuvajra, Vajrasattva, Jñānakāya

Six Buddha Families, six Buddhas, six Mañjuśrī aspects, the Lord of Speech (Vāgīśvara) being the seventh. And also six cycles of Praise (anuśaṃsā).

1. Cycle of eleven Praises of Mañjuśrī, the 'knowledge being' (jñāna-sattva) , “who is the knowledge body of the Bhagavat, the knowledge body of all the Tathāgatas”.

2. Cycle of fifty-two Praises of the “pure and immaculate omniscient knowledge (sarvajñājñāna) and the secret Body, Speech, and Mind. “It is the speedy success of the Bodhisattvas who engage in the practice by way of Mantra.”

3. Cycle of fifty-two Praises of the undoing of all negativity and the appearing of good qualities. “It is the utmost cleansing of all who are utmost cleansed; and the utmost purity of those who are utmost pure.” “preserving the names and clarifying the meaning of the underlying nature of non two, is the inexpressibility of all dharmas.”

4. Cycle of nineteen Praises of practicing Mantras and chanting the non two and absolute names of the jñānakāya of Bhagavat Mañjuśrī the 'knowledge being, which is the jñānakāya of all the Tathāgatas”. And Mañjuśrī the 'knowledge being' will be revealed to those who Praise.

5. Cycle of fifty-one Praises to generate the best materialization of the formal body (rūpakāya), and “never will he descend to the certainty of the Śrāvakas, Arhats, and Pratyekabuddhas."

6. Cycle of immeasurable Praises leading to quickly accomplishing the Buddha merits, and becoming manifestly awakened to the incomparable rightly perfected enlightenment, as a King of the Dharma.

In this Revelation, the Buddha pronounces a first gātha consisting of the twelve vowels (in Sanskrit),

A Ā I Ī U Ū E AI O AU AṂ AḤ

followed by:

“Stationed in the heart of the Buddhas abiding in the three times, am I (aham) the Buddha, gnosis embodiment." 

Wayman adds as a note:

“The twelve vowels: Smrti (37-2 and -3), defends the theory of the ācārya Līlavajra that the twelve stand for the twelve bhūmis, ten of the Bodhisattva and two more that are Buddha and Complete Buddha stages.”

“Smrti (37-2-8 to 37-3-1), gives a number of synonyms of the twelfth stage, all having a word "light" (prabha) as last member of compound.”

Light, prabha, Nous. At the matrix level (Dharmadhātu Womb, dharmayonir[12]), special codes and names are needed, ordinary language won’t work.

In the Gnostic tradition, the Great Invisible Spirit is the primordial Light (Father)[13]. It is from his womb, his silence, his "matrix", that a triad of powers emerges: the Father, the Mother and the Son. The Son is a triple person in himself. The primordial triad is presented as a monad or pentad, called the "five seals". The manifestation of the (primordial) Father takes place in a glorious place (Ennead), the throne room, where the secret name (the (five) vowels) of the Father is inscribed. The entities above the Ogdoade (eight level) address hymns to him.

"(Son:) How do they sing?
(Hermes:) You have reached the point where we will no longer be able to speak to you.[14]"

The Ogdoad and the Ennead, from Ecrits gnostiques Pléiade, p. 964

"(Son:) I am silent, O my Father. I wish to sing you a hymn in silence.
(Hermes:) Sing it to me then, for I am the Intellect.
(Son:) The Intellect is intelligible to me. Hermes, he who cannot be interpreted, For he withdraws into himself.
.../... I invoke from the bottom of my heart your mysterious Name:
a ō eeō ēēē ōōō iii ōōōō ooooo ōōō ōō uuuuuu ōō ōōōō ōōōō ōōōōō ōōōō"

A note explains that scribes often make intentional errors in transcribing the name of God, which must be transmitted by the initiator.
Note from Ecrits gnostiques Pléiade, p. 962 The name of God is often written a ee ēēē iii ooooo uuuuuu ōōōōō. This means that in the seven spheres or planets there reign twenty-eight particular gods, one more in the next than in the previous, all together constituting the one God."

There are lots of apparent similar structures and materials here, that ought to be further examined by specialists in both fields.

 

***

[1] Martyrdom of Isaiah, Testament of Hezekiah, and Vision of Isaiah.

[2] Ascension d’Isaie, Translated into French by Eugène Tisserant in 1909, Letouzé et Ané, éditeurs, Paris.

[3] L' « Ascension d'Isaïe » à travers la prédication d'un évêque cathare en Catalogne au quatorzième siècle, Mathias Delcor, 1974

[4] Ascension of Isaiah, M. A. Knibb, edited by James H. Charlesworth. Garden City, NY: Doubleday, 1985. (pp. 164-176) [This digital edition omits all of the notes in the original and reproduction.]

[5] This reflects the proto-Trinitarian or subordinationist perspective of the text.

[6] Compare with Brahma , the first god, who thinks he is the creator god.

[7] “And when she was betrothed, she was found to be pregnant, and Joseph the carpenter wished to divorce her. But the angel of the Spirit appeared in this world, and after this Joseph did not divorce Mary; but he did not reveal this matter to anyone. And he did not approach Mary, but kept her as a holy virgin, although she was pregnant. And he did not live with her for two months. And after two months of days, while Joseph was in his house, and Mary his wife, but both alone, it came about, when they were alone, that Mary then looked with her eyes and saw a small infant, and she was astounded. And after her astonishment had worn off, her womb was found as (it was) at first, before she had conceived. And when her husband, Joseph, said to her, "What has made you astounded?" his eyes were opened, and he saw the infant and praised the Lord, because the Lord had come in his lot. And a voice came to them, "Do not tell this vision to anyone." But the story about the infant was spread abroad in Bethlehem. Some said, "The virgin Mary has given birth before she has been married two months." But many said, "She did not give birth; the midwife did not go up (to her), and we did not hear (any) cries of pain." And they were all blinded concerning him; they all knew about him, but they did not know from where he was. And they took him and went to Nazareth in Galilee.”

[8] Chanting the Names of Manjushri, The Manjusri-Nama-Samgiti, Sanskrit and Tibetan Texts, Alex Wayman, Motilal 1985

[9] 'Phags pa 'jam dpal gyi mtshan yang dag par brjod pa.

[10] Śākyamuni, Bhagavat, Sambuddha.

[11] “O Bhagavat, you have self-originated the gnosis-body, the great uṣṇīṣa, the master of speech, the gnosis-embodiment of Mañjuśrī, the knowledge being.”

[12] “Smrti (46-3-3), by knowing the nature of all the dharmas. "Dharma-womb": Smrti (46-3-3), because devoid of personal-self or dharma-self, makes an end to phenomenal life. [Notice the three kinds of Tathāgatagarbha set forth above under VI, no. I, so "progenitor" is the Dharmadhātu womb; "son" is the Dharmakāya embryo; and "womb-source" as well as "dharma-womb" amount to the third kind, with two qualifications of dharma.]”

[13] "Livre sacré", Ecrits gnostiques, Pleiade, p. 514

[14] Blog Le Corps de Gnose, source du Corps mystique, 22/12/2021

Luminous theology

Descent of Buddha from Trayastrimsa Heaven, 2nd-3rd Century (Victoria and Albert)
"It shows the descent of the Buddha from the Heaven of the Thirty-three gods (Trayastrimsa),
where he had gone to preach the law to his mother, Mayadevi.
Three staircases are seen in the central section with the Buddha depicted
at three stages of his descent flanked by the Hindu gods Brahma and Indra." See Lalitavistara Sūtra

Buddhism as a philosophy, a way of life, a science of mind, etc. doesn’t correspond to how Buddhism, and in particular Tibetan Buddhism, is used and practiced as what we would call a religion. Perhaps most clearly so in the Dzogchen Great Perfection of the Nyingma school, which is in fact a compendium of all types of beliefs and practices with different origins and frames, that have been more or less successfully grouped together and systematised into a Great Perfection patchwork. But certainly not exclusively so.

Buddhism's most “philosophical” part is that which the Dalaï-Lama now seems to call the “Nālandā tradition”, enhanced with Indo-Tibetan philosophical tenets, where contemplation plays an essential part. In Mahāyāna Buddhism, Yogācāra was more positively and “practically” (Yoga) inclined and included eternalist religious elements in skillful ways… It also made the Budhist path a lot more tangible. Asceticism, Buddhist phenomenology, and theological “philosophy” were joined by theurgy (mantranaya), that would henceforth play the main role and determine the success (siddhi) of (esoteric) Buddhist endeavors.

A similar evolution (although more in conformity with its initial views) can be seen in Platonism, Middle platonism, Neoplatonism, Late Neoplatonism and their “divide” into “contemplatists” and “theurgists” (see Olympiodorus the Younger[1]). According to the theurgist Proclus (c. 480) theurgy is "a power higher than all human wisdom embracing the blessings of divination, the purifying powers of initiation and in a word all the operations of divine possession.[2]"

The Yogācārin theurgist Ratnākaraśānti (T. rin chen 'byung gnas zhi ba), also called Śāntipa, made a similar declaration about the superiority of the use of theurgy in esoteric Buddhism. He wrote about five different Buddhist contemplative scenarios[3], where the inclusion of theurgy would guarantee the quickest and most complete results.

“(1) If one meditates on the mind alone, then one would only obtain mundane mental concentration (ting nge ’dzin, *samādhi) like the stage of the infinity of consciousness (rnam shes mtha’ yas skye mched, *vijñānānantyāyatana).
(2) Yet if one meditates on emptiness above all, that [result] too becomes only complete cessation, because of not perfecting the actions of purifying the Buddha qualities.
(3) Or, if one meditates on [the mind] only as having the nature of the deities, in this case, one does not even become awakened at all through that alone because the perfection of actions is incomplete.
(4) Or, if one meditates only on the true nature of what the deities stand for and not the deities, then in this case too, one would attain Buddhahood in many countless aeons but not quickly.
(5) Therefore, the meditation of both [the mind as deities and the true nature of the deities at the same time], because it is extremely pleasant to the mind and because it is a special kind of empowerment, causes one to obtain the highest perfect awakening very quickly[4].” (Madhyamakanising)

Method (1) is followed by “non-tantric and non-Buddhist practitioners of mind-focused meditation”. Method (2) by “śrāvaka Buddhists who meditate on a specific aspect of emptiness (without the aid of Mahāyāna skillful methods)”. Method (3) by “Tantric, non-Buddhist practitioners of meditation”, i.e. non-Buddhist theurgists. Method (4) by “Mahāyāna Buddhists following the perfection method” and method (5) by “Mahāyāna Buddhists following both the perfection method and the mantra method”.

For the convoluted reasoning[5] of Indo-Tibetan teachers behind the necessity of theurgy for the best performance and highest efficiency to achieve Buddhahood, I refer to Daisy S. Y. Cheung’s article. The reasoning can be compared to justifications regarding a transcendent God that is both involved and not involved in creation, has nothing to do with evil (off-camera), is not one, not many, not the same, not different, etc. In short, wanting to have its non-dual cake and eat it too with a huge layer of divine cream and an invisible cherry on top.

The success of Yogācāra theurgy (and thaumaturgy) was such that it became the main ingredient of Mahāyāna Buddhism and that even mādhyamikas had to integrate it, if you don’t mind my Western bias. Daisy S. Y. Cheung’s article gives some examples, including Tsongkhapa’s way of dealing with it. Temple practice was widespread and popular, and simply the ideology of the day. Would it have been possible for Buddhist vihāras to survive without it? And they didn't survive in India in the end. Theurgists were as common as ministers in royal and imperial courts, whose favors were needed to finance temples. For any endeavor to succeed, the help of the gods was necessary. Including for Buddhahood. Yogācārins were no doubt more enthusiastic about it than Mādhyamikas, but both wanted full and complete Buddhahood, and as fast as possible. For the yogācārin Ratnākaraśānti “The mind itself is not empty, and what is ultimately real is sheer luminosity (prakāśamātra)” (Madhyamakanising).

For mādhyamikas like e.g. Abhayākaragupta “the mind itself [is] empty i.e. without intrinsic nature (svabhāva), and what is ultimately real is the absence of intrinsic nature (niḥsvabhāvatā)[6]”. As an interesting aside, Daisy S. Y. Cheung explains:

“In other words, Ratnākaraśānti adopts the Yogācāra understanding of emptiness as an implicative negation (paryudāsapratiṣedha), while Abhayākaragupta adopts the Mādhyamika understanding of emptiness as a nonimplicative negation or absolute negation (prasajyapratiṣedha).” (Madhyamakanising).

The neoplatonist theurgist Syranios, who was Proclos’ teacher, follows a similar line of thinking, and uses an indefinite negation, implying a super-essence.

“Syrianos reflects on the status of negation (ἀποφασίς) and privation (στέρεσις) by commenting on Aristotle. This is what allows him to say that the first hypothesis of the Parmenides affirmed the position of the One through negation. The negation is indefinite and the privation has a cataphatic aspect. This allows for determining a super-essence: the One-that-is-not is not because it is beyond being.[7]”

The super-essence implied by Ratnākaraśānti’s (and other hardcore theurgists’) “implicative negation” is “sheer luminosity”, Divine Light (Nous), the source of the gods that clearly were so indispensable for esoteric Buddhism, and the “ultimately real” substance of the mind (prakāśamātra). “Badass” Longchenpa said it even more explicitly:

“The sphere [dhātu] is the ultimate truth. It is said that by seeing its nature [rang bzhin] you see ultimate truth. But again, it is not the case that an emptiness in which nothing exists at all is the ultimate truth. To fools, ordinary beings, and beginners, the teachings on selflessness [anatta] and so forth [sic!] were given as a remedy for being attached to a self. But [this selflessness or emptiness], it should be known, [is] in reality the sphere [or] luminosity, [which is] unconditioned and exists as something spontaneously present.[8]”

In the first centuries of Indo-Tibetan Buddhism, obviously theurgy and thaumaturgy were central, whether one was a Yogācārin or a Mādhyamika or one of their garden varieties, but there were still debates about the nature of mind, the nature of the gods, etc. -- not really about the reality and the necessity of the gods though -- but later on and especially nowadays, “sheer luminosity” (prakāśamātra, Nous) has taken the place of selflessness, emptiness and “and so forth” (la sogs pa), and theurgy is its main practice. (Tibetan) Buddhism is not a philosophy, a way of life, a science of mind, it’s a religion, best approached through Luminous theology.

***

[1] Olympiodore d'Alexandrie, dit le Jeune, In Platonis Phaedonem (vers 550), éd. W. Norvin, 123.3.

[2] Proclus, On the theology of Plato, 1.26.63. E. R. Dodds, The Greeks and the Irrational, University of California Press, 1959).

[3] “Madhyamakanising” Tantric Yogācāra: The Reuse of Ratnākaraśānti’s Explanation of maṇḍala Visualisation in the Works of Śūnyasamādhivajra, Abhayākaragupta and Tsong Kha Pa Daisy S. Y. Cheung

[4] Seton, G. M. (2023). Ratnākaraśānti: The illumination of false forms. In W. Edelglass, P.-J. Harter, & S.McClintock (Eds.), The Routledge handbook of Indian Buddhist philosophy, p. 590.

[5] "[Ratnākaraśānti] explains in the Prajñāpāramitopadeśa (Tōh. 4079) and the *Madhyamakālaṃkāropadeśa (Tōh. 4085) that although the representational forms (ākāra) are ultimately unreal, they possess a special identity (I) relation with the real reflexively aware luminosity (prakāśa). The identity between the representational forms and reflexively aware luminosity is a superimposed identity (*āropitaṃ tādātmyam) which, while imposing an identity, still maintains a difference between the two.” (Madhyamakanising).

[6] Abhayākaragupta’s Munimatālaṃkāra chapter one.

[7] “Syrianos réfléchit sur le statut de la négation (ἀποφασίς) et de la privation (στέρεσις) en commentant Aristote. C'est ce qui lui permet de dire que la première hypothèse du Parménide en niant affirmait la position de l'Un. La négation est indéfinie et la privation possède un aspect cataphatique. Cela permet de déterminer une sur-essence : l'Un qui n'est pas, n'est pas car il est au-delà de l'être.”
Eric Robertson Dodds, Les Grecs et l'irrationnel (1959), trad., Flammarion, coll. « Champs », 1977, p. 301, en grec.

[8] Mathes, Klaus-Dieter. A Direct Path to the Buddha Within: Gö Lotsāwa's Mahāmudrā Interpretation of the Ratnagotravibhāga. Studies in Indian and Tibetan Buddhism. Boston: Wisdom Publications, 2008.
Ibid., 185.6-186.2: de'ang don dam pa'i bden pa dbyings yin la/ 'di'i rang bzhin mthong bas don dam bden pa mthong zhes bya'i/ cir yang med pa'i stong nyid kyang don dam bden pa ma yin no/ de'ang byis pa so so skye bo dang/ las dang po dag bdag tu zhen pa'i gnyen por bdag med pa la sogs pa bstan pa yin gyi (text: gyis)/ don la dbyings 'od gsal ba 'dus ma byas shing lhun grub tu yod pa shes par bya ste/.