TATHAGATABARBHA: BUDDHA NATURE

Ozmo Hyonjin Piedmont, Ph.D.

1.      Frequently, tathagatagharba, or Buddha-Nature doctrine is held to imply that all beings contain the "potential" to become a Buddha. Zimmerman's translation of "containing a Tathagata" is somewhat different. Briefly discuss the difference, and the implications of each.

The tathagatagharba teaching, understood as Buddha-essence or Buddha-nature, was of great importance in China, where it was considered as the fourth turning of the Dharma wheel (Williams, 5:103).  Michael Zimmerman’s translation of the term as “containing a Tathagata” means that literally each sentient being has a fully-enlightened Buddha seated cross-legged in their center (Williams, 104).  However, the term ‘garbha’ in Sanskrit also means ‘womb/matrix’, ‘seed/embryo’, and ‘innermost part’.  These latter meanings imply that  instead of there being a literal Buddha sitting in our center, we all have the qualities and virtues of a Buddha within us, as undeveloped potential, like a seed, and which is obscured by defilements, yet could be brought to manifest itself fully in our lives. The Tathgatagarbha Sutra describes this as all beings have the virtues of the Buddha, including his wisdom, which is always pure and present in our centers, but which is covered over by defilements.  The question remains, our we all instrinsically already enlightened and are actually Buddhas, or must we become enlightened to realize a potential that lies dormant within us?   The Avatamsaka Sutra seems to be describing the latter, representing this potential as gnosis or awareness of a Buddha, something that is an aspect of our minds, which is pure, and which allows enlightenment to take place (Williams, 105). In light of these latter meanings, we can apprectitate the difference in meaning between Zimmerman, whose translation implies something that is essentially different from the sentient being, but which lies in our center already complete, a Buddha.  Whereas the other above translations are describing what sentient beings essentially are in their minds, with virtues, wisdom and qualities potentially lieing dormant, and which must be awakened to manifest the Buddha that we all essentially are. 

2.      In the Srimala Sutra we find: "This Dharmakaya of the Tathagata when not free from the klesha's is referred to as the Tathagatagharba." The Dharmakaya, or "Dharma/Truth Body" is none other than pure awareness itself - what then, is the implication of the Srimala quote? Defend your position.

The absolute pure essence of our Buddha-Nature is always pure and free from defilements.  It is what is ultimately real.  When one is referring to this real, free, and ever pure essence in itself, that which is unchanging and eternal, term dharmakaya, meaning the Dharma-body of the Buddha, the final truth of what the Buddha really is in and of itself.  But when describing the same thing from the perspective of it being obscured and covered by the defilements, then that is when one uses the term tathagatagarbha.  So they are the same thing essentially, but these are descriptive terms that refer to the reality of the Buddha without obscurations, the dharmakaya, and the other is the reality of Buddha that is obscured by the mind when defilements and passions are present.  The Dharmakaya is really real, has intrinsic existence, and possesses innumerable good qualities.  It is because the tathgatagarbha is one’s pure and radiant essence obscured by the defilements in the apparently unenlightened being that one is able to intuit that there is something more to life, something deeper within one that becons to be revealed.  This provides the original impulse to seek enlightenment and aspire for Buddhahood, to eliminate that which obscures one’s true essence, and thereby transcend suffering and wake-up to one’s true nature (Williams, 106-107).   

  

3.      Why is Buddha-Nature not a "self" or "soul" or atman?

The tathagatagarbha is the name given to the one’s pure and eternal essence when it is obscured by the defilements of an egoic self which cause suffering to the unenlightened person.  This same essence, which is truly real, when free from these obscurations of an ego, is referred to as dharmakaya.  According to the Srimala Sutra, there is something that really exists, therefore it is a purified Self from an enlightened perspective, but not a self based on passions, desires, aversions and ignorance of an ego and unenlightened perspective.  This same sutra goes on to describe this perfect ever present reality as pure, radiant consciousness. One’s Buddha-Nature is what one truly is, so in that sense, it is one’s real Self, and which is one with the Buddha essence of all others.  That which is unenlightened, which clings to an idea of something unique and separate from the Infinite, made up of passions that cause suffering, is only a collection of ideas and not really anything in itself.  Since it is an illusion, based on ignorance and conditioning, one can let go of these negative qualities that lead to suffering and awaken to true and permanent peace and joy based in the purity of one’s Buddha-Nature.  But in the act of coming to this realization and experience of joy and freedom, one does not obliterate consciousness nor one’s awareness of how one lived and evolved to this awareness of one’s truth nature.  In this sense, there is a purified identity that is both different from other Buddha’s due to one’s unique experience and journey, and at the  same time one is the same as other Buddhas in the expression of qualities that are inherently good and help others and express joy and peace (Williams, 108-109).

4.      If the Dharmakaya is originally pure and untainted, what is "purified" with regards to the Tathagatagharba? What is the ultimate difference between Tathagatagharba and Dharmakaya?

                           There ultimately is no difference between Tathagatagharba and Dharmakaya, since they are both referring to the same thing, but from differing perspectives of unenlightened and enlighted beings.  What is purified in the Tathagatabharba are the obscurations of ego based on the klesas of desire, aversion, and delusion.   As long a one clings to these obscurations, one suffers, experiencing the world as samsara.  But when one understands the nature of these kleshas as the root to dukka, one lets go of identifying with them as an ego identity.  Freed from the karmic tendencies that perpetuate these egoic tendencies, one wake’s up to that which was always present, one’s Buddha-Nature, which now is able to shine without the obscurations of the kleshas, which is now the experience of enlightenment and the direct experience of Dharmakaya, or one’s real essence as a Buddha (Williams, 106-107).

5.      Explain the Rangtong (Rang sTong) and Shentong (gZhan sTong) points of view as thouroughly as you can. To which view do you, yourself, ascribe? Why? Defend your position.

The Rangton point of view is know as the ‘self-empty’ as contained in the dGe lug tradition of Tibet.  The opposing point of view is the Shentong or ‘other-empty’ teaching associated with the Jo nang pa school (Williams, 114).  The Rangtong school emphasizes that both dharmakaya and tathagatagarbha are both empty of intrinsic existence, there is absolutely no Absolute or Ultimate Reality to be found.  For this reason it is referred to as self-empty, since there is nothing of which this Buddha-nature itself is actually composed. The Buddha, in teaching the tathagatagarbha was really referring to emptiness, or sunyata, which should be understood in the Madyamika sense as a negation of intrinsic existence.  Emptiness of all qualities is what is implied by dependent origination, that all is impermanent and changing continually.  This also implies that the mind of the sentient being is a changing mind stream that is empty of intrinsic existence, it is in a constant mental flow.  Thus all minds lacking intrinsic nature are minds that can change and become Buddha minds. This mental flow is continuous and eternal. When this continuous flow of mind is misidentified with egoic tendencies it is tathagatagarbha, and when it is purely understood as being without any intrinsic existence, it is the Buddha’s mind called dharmakaya.  This also implies two important points: 1. The tathagatagarbha is the fundamental cause of Buddhahood, and therefore not all beings are already enlightened.  2. When one practices the Buddhist religion, one obtains the result of dharmakaya, free from defiling obscurations.  But in all cases, from the Rangton point of  view, there is no ultimate existing entity (Williams, 113-114)

The opposing view of Shentong, meaning ‘other-empty’, teaches that there is literally an Ultimate or Absolute, something that is really, inherently existing.  It is eternal, exists in all sentient beings, and is exactly the same whether obscured or enlightened.  When it is obscured it is tathagatagarbha, when it is unobscured it is dharmakaya.  It is referred to as ‘other-empty’ because the Buddha-nature as the Ultimate is always empty of any defilements which are intrinsically other, or truly different, from this essence.  But the essence itself, as the Absolute, actually has its own really existing intrinsic essence of Buddha qualities that are a part of its own nature.  This school insists that it is through direct, nonconceptual meditative experience that one is able to go beyond reasoning and discover this really intrinsically existing Absolute (Williams, 114). 

I ascribe to this second school, having an orientation influenced by the teachings of Dogen, who stressed that the whole phenomenal world and all sentient beings are literally Buddha-nature, the Tathagata itself. This Tathagata includes everything, that which is permanent, that which is non-being, as well as being and change.  Dogen’s teaching is to see things the way they really are in this very moment, not striving for something else.  Sitting and practice itself are enlightenment.  We come to identify with this perfection of the Absolute which is already present as everything just as it is (Williams, 119-122). In the teachings of serene reflection meditation of Rev. Master Roshi Jiyu-Kennett, it is understood that the Buddha taught that there is an unborn, uncreated, undying, eternal.  This Absolute which is beyond any conceptualization, is a reality, and it is our true identity when we free ourselves from our attachments to that which is impermanent.  In so doing, we attain the goal of goal-lessness, that all is the Absolute that is only obscured by our ignorance and our clinging due to egoic tendencies based on our conditioning and ignorance. 

Bibliography

Williams, Paul. 2009. Mahayana Buddhism: The Doctrinal Foundations. 2^nd Edition.

Routledge: New York.

 If you enjoyed this article, please consider making a contribution to the MBZ Sangha.

DONATE