[Buddha-l] MPNS & Buddha-nature (Lusthaus)

[Stephen Hodge]

Dear Dan,

>> Could you please direct to even one text which is demonstrably a 
>> "partial"
>> translation of the MPNS ?
> volume 12 of the Taisho has a bunch, [snip] There are others, but
> my notes are 1300 miles away in another state, so this will have to do
>  for now.
*****
No, as far as I know none of these are even partial translations of the 
Mahayana-Mahaparinirvana-sutra -- certainly none have any connection with 
the Faxian / Tibetan portion of the MPNS.  They are possibly affiliated, in 
various degrees, to the Mahaparinirvana-sutra (T 07) -- which is, as you 
know, a entirely different text.  Shimoda discusses this in his "Nehangyo no 
Kenkyuu" pp60ff [for those who do not know, Prof Masahiro Shimoda is the 
leading Japanese authority on the MPNS].
--------
> are you aware
> that the text itself says it was first circulated in South India and then
> transmitted to Northwesterrn India ?
While Chinese colophons and catalogs can be very reliable (and sometimes 
not), such explicit self-explanation in a text, ironically, especially if it 
IS Indian, I would view with suspicion unless other factors tend to confirm 
it.
******
Ok, if you find Chinese catalogues very reliable, have a look at T55.2059 
335c16ff and T55.2145a10-20 for the Dharmaksema version and T55.2415.60b2-7 
for Faxian, which give accounts of where the MPNS texts were obtained.  The 
first concerning Dharmaksema says that he got the first 17 chapters (= 
Faxian / Tib) in Central India but had to go Khotan for the later portions. 
Faxian is said to have got his in Pataliputra (not Varanasi as I stated 
previously) at the house of an upasaka called Kalasena.  Also, if the text 
says it originated in the south, why should one necessarily discount that ? 
One perhaps needs to consider thase claims case by case, but there are 
various other things in the MPNS that suggest that the compilers were 
referring to actual places and events.  Be paitient and wait for my eventual 
book :)
------
On the other hand, the close proximity in time between which the D and F 
translations were made suggests that both versions were circulating, at 
least somewhere, at around the same time.
****
Evidently.  I never disputed this.  However, I think the Dharmaksema 
prototype of Ch1-17 split off from the textual stemma quite early.  The 
reason I suggest this is because there is an obvious lacuna in one passage 
both Faxian and Tibetan that is present in Dharmaksema.  This is interesting 
because, if the Gaoseng account is correct, there were two different 
versions of the core MPNS already available in India around the 400s CE. 
One can place Faxian and Tibetan (+ Skt frags) in one group despite the time 
separating them and Dharmaksema in another group of its own. Even the core 
portion of Dharmaksema has been extensively modified -- definitely not the 
other way round.
-------
Which groups had affinities with which versions, and who was interested and 
circulating all the other Nirvana Sutras? I don't have a clear picture of 
that either.
****
As you will see from my comments above, the picture is very complex. 
However, there is internal evidence that the core MPNS has some connection 
with the Mahasanghikas.  It is possible that the "spurious" parts of 
Dharmaksema derive from a non-Mahasanghika milieau.
-------
Actually attention to the term in China begins with the Nirvana Sutra. I 
don't know offhand of any significant earlier uses. From what I remember, 
most of the fo-xing references in MPNS seem to derive from buddha-dhaatu (as 
you stated), but also sa.mbuddha-gotra.
*****
In the core portion of the MPNS I have worked on, fo-xing only translates 
Buddha-dhaatu.  Sa.mbuddha-gotra does not occur -- in fact, no "gotra" 
terminology or doctrines occur there, which is not too surprising.
------

Fo-xing [snip]  buddha-taa, buddha-tva, buddha-gotra, etc. are typical
****
Yes.  But only Buddha-dhaatu = fo-xing occurs in the core MPNS. 
Nevertheless, gotra does seem functionally similar to buddha-dhaatu and is 
understood as such in the Uttaratantra.
----
> You are, of course, referring to the reaction in the minds of people not
> predisposed to the TG doctrine :)
Au contraire. If a Buddhist ever mounted a logical defense of 
tathagatagarbha theory, I have yet to read it.
*****
Why should they ?  Just to please sceptics ?   I am agnostic about the true 
value of the TG theory but am prepared to accept that there may be some 
spiritual truths that cannot be demonstrated logically.  In fact, I wonder 
just how much would be left of any Buddhist doctrines if they all had to be 
logically proven and defended.
-------
If it seems bizarre, then you must think the concept of Buddha-nature 
existed, and possibly originated in India. I don't. What evidence would 
there be for that?
******
While I accept that connotations of the Chinese term fo-xing *may* have been 
somewhat extended beyond Indian sources, you have not mentioned anything 
that does not have an Indian ancestor or direct parallel.  There may be some 
details of nuance between the Indian doctrine and the Chinese version that 
it is "an ontological ground, a pre-existing condition, the only reality, 
the true essence, the dharma-dhatu, tathata, the Dharmakaya", but all of 
these definitions can be found in Indian sources.  To start with, try 
reading the Ratnagotra-vibhaga attentively (or is this a Chinese text ?) --  
e.g.  what do you think prak.rtistha-gotra means ?  Then have a look at the 
Anuunatva-Apuur.natva-Nirde`sa (another Chinese text ?).  Then go on and 
read some of the main Tantras and their commentaries (more Chinese texts, I 
suppose ?).   At some stage, also read the references I gave in my msg to 
Robert Morrison last week re Ray, Schayer (esp. his paper on the term 
"tathagata") and Falk, and also add the many works by Jikido Takasaki to 
your reading list.  You might begin to see something that is evidently very 
unpalatable to you: that the TG cluster of doctrines, often with exactly the 
connotations you list above, has a long history in India.  Whether they are 
true or not, is another matter, of course.
-------
donuts and coffee, the luminous, pure, ubiquitous hoohah.  Tiantai will 
insist it also has a nasty streak.
****
I think this kind of comment gives some idea of where you are coming from. 
If TG doctrines do not appeal to you, then so be it.  But if you are going 
to come out with various unsubstantiated assertions as above, please do your 
homework first.  You are a first-rate Yogacara scholar whose work I admire 
and sympathize with, so I would really expect better from you.

Best wishes,
Stephen Hodge