 |
| 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/.
