Buddha-nature: Encyclopedia II - Buddha-nature - Buddha-nature vs. atman

Buddha-nature - Buddha-nature vs. atman

Unlike the Western concept of "soul" or some interpretations of the Indian "atman", Buddha-nature is not considered an isolated essence of a particular individual, but rather a single unified essence shared by all beings with Buddha-nature. (Though such an essence would still be in violation of some interpretations of anatta, as for example that of Nagarjuna, which attacks all essences; similarly, a trans-personal self shared by multiple beings exists already within the Hindu context in some monistic and/or pantheistic interpretations of the atman, and such concepts are generally regarded as being rejected under anatta.)

However, in the Mahayana version of the Mahaparinirvana Sutra, which is one of the most substantialist interpretations of Buddha-nature, (Gethin, p. 252) Tathagatagarbha is equated with Atman in, for some, direct contradiction of the Buddhist doctrine of anatman and is actually spoken of as an inner Reality which "nurtures/sustains" the being. The Sutra contains many Hindu elements and is thought to have been composed during the Gupta Period which coincided with a Hindu revival in India.

The "Mahayana Mahaparinirvana Sutra" is, however, generally accepted by Mahayana Buddhists as genuine "Buddha-word" and is not alone amongst Mahayana sutras in asserting the reality of an essential Self within each sentient being (including animals) and linking it to the Tathagatagarbha/Buddha-dhatu. Other sutras which mention the Self in a very affirmative manner include the Srimala Sutra, the Lankavatara Sutra (in the "Sagathakam" chapter - e.g."The Self characterised with purity is the state of Self-realisation; this is the Tathagata-garbha, which does not belong to the realm of the theorisers"), the Shurangama Sutra and the Mahavairocana Sutra (this list is by no means exhaustive).

The teaching on the Self which is attributed to the Buddha in the "Mahayana Mahaparinirvana Sutra" insists upon the True Self's ultimacy, sovereignty and immortality. The Buddha states (in the Tibetan version of the Sutra): "all phenomena ["dharmas"] are not non-Self: the Self is Reality("tattva"), the Self is eternal ("nitya"), the Self is virtue ("guna"), the Self is everlasting ("shasvata"), the Self is stable ("dhruva"), and the Self is peace ("siva")". In the Chinese versions of the Sutra, the Self is also characterised as "autonomous/sovereign" ("aishvarya"). The main concern in the "Mahaparinirvana Sutra" in contrasting this doctrine of the Self with that of the Astikas seems to have been to remove the reifying notion that the Self was a little person, the size of a grain of rice or of one's thumb, sitting in the heart of the being. This, the Buddha says, is a misconception of the nature of Self. The Self of which the Buddha speaks is said by him to be the "essential/intrinsic being" ("svabhava") or even "life-essence" ("jivaka") of each person, and this essential being is none other than the Buddha himself - "radiantly luminous" and "as indestructible as a diamond".

Thus, while there certainly are distinctions between the Brahmanist/Hindu notion of Self and that of even the most essentialist version of Buddha-nature, there are similarities too. What is certain is that to assert categorically that the Buddha (of the Mahayana) utterly and absolutely denied the Self is to fly in the face of very weighty Mahayana doctrinal statements by the Buddha across a number of highly respected sutras. As for the Buddhist Tantras, they also on occasion speak affirmatively of the Great Self, which is the Primordial Buddha ("Adibuddha") himself.

Adapted from the Wikipedia article "Buddha-nature vs. atman", under the G.N U Free Docmentation License. Please also see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki