The Universality of the Buddha-nature

Although the Buddha-nature is signified by various names, all those names can be used interchangeably to denote the same thing that is the ontological source, principle and reality of the whole universe. Universally, the Buddha-nature is the absolute reality or “undifferentiated whole”, i.e. tathatā (zhenru; thusness), dharmadhātu (fajie; realm of Truth), etc.^[1]

Generally speaking, the tathatā is the true, permanent and eternal essence that lies behind the phenomenal world which is constantly in a process of change.^[2] While the phenomenal world that is unreal and runs in an unending process of creation and destruction; tathatā remains uncreated and indestructible, and hence without increase and decrease.^[3]

The universality of the Buddha-nature, therefore, is the universal, immanent, pervasive nature of all sentient beings. Generally, this universality also shows the real nature of things; this nature is also regarded as the Absolute under the names of dharmatā (Nature of things), penetrates and pervades all things including living beings, and thus it is also called dharmadhātu (the realm of truth).

According to the Ratnagotravibhāgasāstra, the tathatā as tainted is called the Tathāgatagarbha. As clean, on the other hand, the same tathāta is called the Dharmakāya.^[4] In itself, the tathatā is said to be “unchangeable by nature, sublime and perfectly pure”^[5] . Thus, the Tathāgatagarbha or Ālayavijñāna is also endowed with universality because it contains the good and evil seeds that are able to arise in all things. In other words, the Buddha-nature is a tainted state of Tathatā covered by defilements. However, the tainted Tathatā (suchness), i.e. Tathāgatagarbha, is intrinsically pure in nature, and at the same time it is covered by defilements, it is still pure.

According to the Mahāparinirvāṇasūtra, the universal dimension of the Buddha-nature is also presented in the famous affirmation of “all sentient beings possess the Buddha-nature and Tathāgata (Buddha), is permanent with no change at all” (一切眾生悉有佛性, 如來常住無有變易)^[6] . This idea was accepted by all the Chinese Buddhist schools after reviving that the icchantika (yichanti) can also attain enlightenment as all other sentient beings. The icchantika refers to someone without a desire for Buddha enlightenment; an unbeliever;shameless, an enemy of the good; full of desires; one who has cut off his roots of goodness. According to the Yogācārā School, therefore, icchantika cannot be saved or cannot attain enlightenment no matter how strenuously he practices. However, the Buddhist schools, such as Tiantai, Huayan, etc., disagreed with this theory and taught that all beings can become the Buddhas.^[7] This view was debated because it implied that some beings (icchantikas) would never become free from the circle of rebirth. The controversy of the universality of the Buddha-nature in Chinese Buddhism concerning with the history of the translation of the Mahāparinirvāṇasūtra is raised by a famous monk named Daosheng (360-434 CE), who asserted that the icchantikas had the Buddha-nature because he had already taught about the absolute universality of the Buddha-nature that all beings will ultimately attain Buddhahood.^[8]

Although the Buddha-nature is described as the essential nature of individual and the world, and sometimes called as “self” or “true self”, it is not a kind of ego or self that the Buddha denied. As mentioned above, the Buddha-nature is the transcendent wisdom which is quite free from fault of impermanence, unconcerned with the doctrine of ego-substance, and thoroughly pure in its essential nature.^[9] In other words, the Buddhanature, in its philosophical aspect, is generally characterized as unique absolute through its essential identification of all phenomena; however, it is not a kind of monism.

Monism is a kind of doctrine which advocates that there only exists one God or Entity that creates all phenomena, and reality consists of a single element or oneness of the universe. The Buddha-nature is not such the monist doctrine; it is a doctrine of Non-dualism.

The Buddha-Nature Treatise, a text of the Tathāgatagarbha literature, although also directly calls the Buddha-nature “Ātman”, it does not adhere to Brahman or Ātman of Hindu philosophy.

It does not accept the kind of monistic metaphysics as the following quotation from the sūtra shows:

“All non-Buddhists, in their various ways, conceive of and grasp a self (wo 我) in those things that lack self; namely the five skandhas, e.g., form, etc. Yet these things, such as form, differ from what one grasps as the mark of self;therefore, they are eternally lacking in self. [However,] with the wisdom of thusness, all Buddhas and bodhisattvas realize the perfection of not-self (anātmanpāramitā) of all things. Because this perfection of not-self and that which is seen as the mark of not-self are not different, the Tathāgata says that this mark of the eternal not-self is the true, essential nature of all things. It is because of this that the perfection of not-self is called “self”. All non-Buddhists perceive and grasp a self within the five skandhas. By overturning that attachment to self as vacuous and cultivating prajñāpāramitā they may realize the supreme not-self that is identical to the perfection of self (ātmapāramitā). This is the fruit [of the practice of prajñāpāramitā]. This is the appropriate knowledge [for them]”^[10]

Thus, according to this treatise, the essential nature of all things, i.e. the Buddha-nature, is the perfection of no-self (anātmapāramitā), and is realized through the practice of prajñāpāramitā. The treatise also accepts the lack of self of all things as in early Buddhism. Furthermore, the text ontologically advocates the universal anātman (no-self in all things). Hence it suggests another word, anātmanpāramitā (the perfection of no-self), which is more positive than both self and no-self. The anātmanpāramitā, therefore, is identical with the concept of śūnya of the Mādhyamakas.

The Buddha-nature, in its religious approach, is a positive language of Buddhism because it affirms that all living beings possess the Buddhanature -the wisdom, compassion and ability of becoming the Buddha. Individually, in an unawaken person, the Buddha-nature called Tathāgatagarbha or Ālayavijñāna because it is tainted by defilements; and in the Buddha, the enlightened one, the Buddha-nature is called Dharmakāya because it is free from all defilements. Universally, the Buddha-nature is identical with suchness (tathatā), the immanent and pervasive essence of all things which is so-called anātmanpāramitā (the perfection of no-self of all things), transcendent of both ātman and anātman as usually understood.

In other words, all individual phenomena are unreal because of its no-self nature which is the Buddha-nature. The Buddha-nature is essentially real and does not concern with the unreal and no-self phenomena at all. Therefore, in practice of Chan -a Chinese Buddhist school which closely relates to the Buddha-nature, Chan practitioners do not attempt to avoid defilements or wrong mental thought because they realize that all defilements are unreal in their nature; they just only directly see into the inherent Buddha-nature to attain the Buddhahood as the guide of Bodhidharma, the founder of this school: “Direct pointing at the human mind, seeing into one’s nature and attainment of Buddhahood” (直指人心, 見性成佛)^[11] .

Thus, one of the Buddhist ways to overcome suffering and achieve happiness is the realization of the Buddha-nature—the real essence of all living beings without greed, hatred and ignorance. The Buddha-nature is also referred to the latent ability for becoming the Buddha, and the transcendent wisdom and compassion within all living beings. Whether or not such ideas of the Buddha-nature are available in Early Buddhism, is a question for anyone who studies the Buddha-nature doctrine.

Footnotes and references:

[1]:

B.E. Brown, The Buddha Nature: Aṅguttaranikāya Study of the Tathāgatagarbha and Ālayavijñāna, p. 56.

[2]:

Damien Keown, Dictionary of Buddhism, p. 260.

[3]:

Ibid.

[4]:

Jikido Takasaki, Aṅguttaranikāya Study on the Ratnagotravibhāga–Being a Treatise on the Tathāgatagarbha Theory of Mahāyāna Buddhism, pp. 186-87.

[5]:

Ibid., 287.

[6]:

Taisho Tripiṭaka (CBETA 2011) [T12n375], p. 0767b.

[7]:

W.E. Soothill and L. Hodous, Aṅguttaranikāya Dictionary of Chinese Buddhist Terms, p. 9.

[8]:

Kenneth K.Saṃyuttanikāya. Ch”en, Buddhism in China: Aṅguttaranikāya Historical Survey, p. 115.

[9]:

Dīghanikāya.Taisho Tripiṭaka (CBETA 2011). Suzuki (tr.), The Laṅkāvatāra Sūtra: Aṅguttaranikāya Mahāyāna Text, (hereafter abbreviated to Laṅkāvatāra-Sūtra), p. 190.

[10]:

Taisho Tripiṭaka (CBETA 2011) [T31n1610], p. 793a14-16, 20-21; Jamie Hubbard & P.L. Swanson (ed.), Pruning the Bodhi Tree: The Storm over Critical Buddhism, p. 178.

[11]:

教外別傳 Jiao-wai-bie-chuan (Xuzangjing 84n1580, p. 157b); Dīghanikāya.Taisho Tripiṭaka (CBETA 2011). Suzuki, Essays in Zen Buddhism, Vol. I, p. 176.