The Doctrine of Kaya in Hinayana and Mahayana
By Nalinaksha Dutt
The Indian Historical Quarterly
vol 5:3, Setptember, 1929, pp. 518-546
p. 518
One of the points of difference between the
Hinayana and Mahayana schools noticed by the
Saddharma-Pundarika, viz., that Buddha makes a show
of his existence in the three dhatus leads us to an
examination of the question of the Kayas of Buddha as
conceived by the Hinayanists and the Mahayanists. Of
the Hinayana schools, the Sthaviravadins had very
little to do with the Kaya conceptions, as Buddha was
to them an actual man living in this world like any
other human being and subject to all the frailties of
a mortal body. Metaphorically they sometimes spoke of
Buddha as identical with Dhamma without any
metaphysical implication but these remarks gave
opportunity to the Sarvastivadins and the Mahayanists
to put forth their theories of Dharmakaya.
The Sarvastivadins commenced speculating on the
kaya of Buddha. but it was the school of the
Mahasanghikas that took up the question of kaya in
right earnest and paved the way for the speculations
of the Mahayanists.
The early Mahayanists, whose doctrines are mostly
to be found in the Astasahasrika Prajnaparamita,
along with the school of Nagarjuna conceived of two
kayas: (i) Rupa- (or Nirmana-) kaya, which included
bodies, gross and subtle, meant for beings in
general, and (ii) Dharmakaya, which was used in two
senses, one being the body of Dharma (i.e. collection
of practices) which makes a being a Buddha, and the
other the metaphysical principle underlying the
universe-- the Reality.
The Yogacara school distinguished the gross
rupakaya from the subtle rupakaya, calling the former
Rupa or Nirmana-kaya and the latter Sambhogakaya. The
Lankavatara, representing the earliest stage of the
Yogacara conception, calls the Sambhoga-kaya Nisyanda
Buddha or Dharmata-nisyanda Buddha (the Buddha
produced by the Dharmas). The Sutralankara uses the
term Sambhogakaya for Nisyanda Buddha and
Svabhavikakaya for Dharmakaya.(1) In the
Abhisamayalankarakarika and the recast version of the
Pancavimsati-sahasrika Prainaparamita, Sambhogakaya
denotes the subtle body, which the Buddhas adopted
for preaching their doctrines to Bodhisattvas,
_____________
1 Sutra., pp. 45, 188.
p. 519
and Dharmakaya the body purified by the practice of
the bodhipaksika and other dharmas, which make a
Buddha. For the metaphysical Dharmakaya they use the
term Svabhava or Svabhavikakaya. The
Vijnaptimatrata-siddhi retains the conception of the
Karika but adopts a new term, Svasambhagakaya, to
denote the Dharmakaya of the Karika and distinguishes
the Sambhogakaya by calling it Parasambhogakaya.
Realistic Conception of Buddha in the Nikayas
In a land where the tendency to deify saints is
so strong, it is greatly to the credit of the early
Hinayanists that they were able to retain the human
conception of Buddha even a century or two after his
actual existence, when the scriptures may be regarded
as having been put into a definite shape. They gave
expression to their conception of Buddha in the
following words, occurring in the Nikayas: Bhagava
araham sammasambuddho vijjacaranasampanno sugato
lokavidu anuttaro purisadammasarathi sattha
devamanussanam buddho bhagava. So imam lokam
sadevakam samarakam sabrahmakam sassamanabrahmanim
pajam sadevamanussam sayam abhinna sacchikatva
pavedeti. So dhammam deseti adikalyanam, etc. (`The
Blessed one is an arahat, a fully awakened one,
endowed with knowledge and good conduct, happy, a
knower of the world, unsurpassed, a leader able to
control men, a teacher of men and gods, the awakened,
the blessed. He knows thoroughly the worlds of gods,
maras, recluses, brahmins and men, and having known
them he makes his knowledge known to others. He
preaches the dhamma (doctrines), which is excellent
in the beginning, middle and end," etc).(1)
A description like this does not suggest that
Buddha was originally more than a man, a mortal, In
the cosmology of the Buddhists, the gods of the
various heavens, the highest of which is
Brahmaloka,(2) are only beings of superior merit and
power, but they are inferior, in the matter of
spiritual attainments, to the saints or arahats. So
in this description the Hinayanists do not attribute
any transcendental or theistic element to Buddha. All
they say is that Sakyamuni by pure
______________
1 This passage occurs in many places of the Nikayas,
see, e.g, Digha, I, pp. 87-88; cf. Lal. Vis., p. 3;
Sad, P., pp. 144, 376.
2 In the Mahayanic works also, as for instance in the
Dasa., it is stated that a Bodhisattva can become a
Mahabrahman in the ninth bhumi if he so wishes.
p. 520
and simple spiritual culture in this life and as a
result of the accumulated merits of his previous
lives, reached the highest stage of perfection and
attained not only knowledge and power superior to any
man or god but also the highest knowledge and power
attainable. In the Majjhima Nikaya, Ananda explains
why Buddha should be considered superior to the
Arhats as well, although both arrived at the same
goal. He says that there is not a single bhikkhu, who
can be regarded as endowed with all the qualities in
all their forms as possessed by Buddha. Moreover, a
Buddha is the originator of the path not existing
before, a knower and promulgator of the marga, which
is only followed by the savakas.(1)
Nikaya Passages admitting a non-realistic Conception
In the face of such descriptions of Buddha, it
would have been difficult for the later Hinayana
schools to sublimate the human elements in him, had
it not been for certain expressions in some of the
earlier works of the Pitaka, which lent themselves to
other interpretations. Some of these expressions
are:-
1. `Yo vo Ananda maya dhammo ca vinayo ca desito
pannatto so vo mam' accayena sattha. (Buddha said to
Ananda just before his parinibbana `the dhamma and
vinaya that have been preached by me will be your
teacher after my death.').(2)
The dhamma and vinaya clearly refer to the
collection of doctrines and disciplinary rules
delivered by Buddha' This is also evident from the
conversation of Ananda with Gopaka-Moggallana, where
the former explains why the monks after Buddha's
death should not be considered as without refuge
(appatisarana). He says that they have now a refuge
in Dhamma (dhammapatisarana), which, he points out,
are the doctrines and disciplinary rules.(3)
2. Bhagavato' mhi putto oraso mukhato jato
dhammajo dhammanimmito dhammadayado iti.(4) Tam kissa
hetu? Tathagatassa h' etam
_________________
1 Majjhima, III, p. 8.
2 Digha, II, p.154; Milinda, p. 99.
3 Majjhima, Gopaka-Moggallana Sutta (No, 108). Cf.
Saddhamma Sangaha (JPTS., 1890), ch.x, p.65: Buddha
says "84,000 dham makkhandhas have been preached by
me in 45 years. I alone only pass away while there
are 84,000 dhammakkhandhas which like 84,000 Buddhas
(buddha-sadisa) will admonish you."
4 Samyutta, II, p, 221; Majjhima, III, p. 29 has the
identical
p. 521
adhivacanam. Dhammakayo iti pi Brahmakayo iti pi.
Dhammabhuto iti piti. "Just as a brahmana would say
that he is born of Brahma, through his
mouth--Brahmuno putta orasa mukhato jata brahmaja
brahmanimmita brahmadayada--so a Sakyaputtiya-samana
may say that he is born of Bhagava, through his
mouth, born of his doctrine, made of his doctrine,
etc.(1) Though in this passage Dhamma is equated with
Brahma, the context shows that there is no
metaphysical sense in it; it is only to draw a
parallel between a brahmana and a Sakyaputtiya-samana
that Dhammakaya is equated with Brahmakaya.
3. Vakkali on his death-bed became very eager to
see Buddha in person; so Bhagava came to him and said
"Alam Vakkali kim te putikayena ditthena. Yo kho
Vakkali dhammam passati so mam passati. Yo mam
passati so dhammam passati." Just after saying this,
Buddha referred to his dhamma of impermanence
(anicca). There are in the Nikayas many passages of
this import, which may well be taken as precursors of
the later Mahayanic conceptions and probably formed
the basis of their speculations. But the passages
when read as they stand do not appear to bear any
metaphysical sense. In this passage Buddha refers to
his body as putikaya (body of impure matter), and to
lay stress on his doctrines he says that his dhamma
should be looked upon with the same awe and reverence
by his disciples as they regard his person.(2)
________________________
passage with the addition "no amisadayado" after
dhammadayado." For the interpretation of
"dhammadayado" see Majjhima, I, pp. 12f.
1 Majjhima, II, p. 84; Digha, III, p. 84; Majjhima,
III, pp. 195, 224 has ''Bhagava janam janati passam
passati cakkhubhuto nanabhuto dhammabhuto".
2 Samyutta, III, p.120; Majjhima, I, pp. 190, 191: Yo
paticcasamuppadam passati so dhammam passati yo
dhammam passati so paticcasamuppadam passati. For
other references, see Prof. Vallee Poussin's
article "Notes sur les Corps du Bouddha" in Le
Museon, 1913, pp. 259-290. Compare the remarks in
the later Pali works,--
Saddhamma Sangaha (JPTS., 1890), p. 61:
Yo me passati saddhammam so mam passati Vakkali
Apassamano saddhammam mam passe pi na passati.
Milinda, p. 71: yo dhammam passati so bhagavantam
passati, dhammo hi maharaja bhagavata desito ti.
Ibid,, p. 73: Dhammakayena pana kho maharaja
sakka bhagava nidassetum, dhammo hi maharaja
bhagavata desito ti.
p. 522
4. The passage in the Anguttara Nikaya,(1) where
Buddha says that he is neither a god, nor a
gandhabba, nor a man, has been taken by Prof.
Masson-Oursel(2) as showing trace of the Mahayanic
kaya conceptions. It is not impossible to read some
metaphysical ideas into the passage, though probably
the compiler of the Suttas did not mean to convey
them. Dona brahmana, noticing the sign of the wheel
in the feet of Buddha, enquired of him whether he was
a deva, a gandhabba, a yakkha or a mortal. Buddha
replied that he was none of these beings as he had
got rid of the asavas (impurities) by the continuance
of which one remains a deva, gandhabba, yakkha or
mortal. Just as a lotus is born in water, grows in it
but remains above and is apart from it, so also
Buddha was born in the world, grew up in it but
overcame it (abhibhuyya) and lived unaffected by the
same. Therefore, he asked the brahmana not to regard
him as anything but Buddha.
There are other passages referring to the
miraculous powers of Buddha, viz., his ability to
live a kalpa or to assume different forms and perform
such other miracles; but it will be noticed that
these powers were attributed not to Buddha alone but
also to his disciples in general, who bad been able
to attain the higher stages of sanctification.(3)
Kaya-conceptions of the Theravadins remained
unchanged
Even if it be assumed that the Mahayanic ideas
are latent in the above-mentioned expressions though
not adequately expressed, the discussion in the
Kathavatthu to establish the historical existence of
Buddha as against those who denied it, and the manner
in which references were made to the events of
Buddha's life as depicted in the Nikayas leaves no
vestige of doubt about the opinion of the Theravadins
regarding the kaya of Buddha.(4)
________________________
1 Anguttara, II, p. 38.
2 Prof. Masson-Oursel in his article "Les trois
Corps du Bouddha" J. A., 1913, pp. 581ff.
3 See Kosa, II, 10 (also for references in the
Nikayas),
4 K.V. xvii, I: The Vetulyakas held on the basis
of the passage cited above (no. 4) that 'it is not
right to say that `the exalted Buddha lived in
the world of mankind.' The Theravadins did not
agree with them. Buddhaghosa also pointed out how
the passage should be interpreted.
p. 523
Though the terms rupakaya and dharmakaya found
their way into the later Pali works(1) from Mahayana
or semi-Mahayana works, they did not bring with them
any non-realistic sense. Buddhaghosa even as late as
the fifth century A.C. refers thus to the kayas: "yo
pi so Bhagava asiti anuvyanjanapatimandita-
dvattimsamahapurisalakkhana-vicitra-rupakayo
sabbakaraparisuddha-silakkhandhadi-gunaratana-
samiddha-dhammakayo yasamahatta-punnamahatta.....
appatipuggalo araham sammasambuddho (`that Bhagava,
who is possessed of a beautiful rupakaya, adorned
with eighty minor signs and thirty-two major signs of
a great man, and possessed of a dharmakaya purified
in every way and glorified by sila, samadhi, etc.(2),
full of splendour and virtue, incomparable and fully
awakened').(3)
In short, the early Hinayanists conceived the
Buddha's rupakaya as that of a human being,(4) and
his dhammakaya as the collection of his dhammas, i.e,
doctrines and disciplinary rules collectively.
Conception of the Sarvastivadins
The other school, the Sarvastivadins, who
retained the realistic conception of Buddha, differed
a little from the Theravadins. Unfortunately their
original Pitakas in Sanskrit are lost beyond recovery
and we have to depend for our information about them
on the few fragmentary pieces of their literature
discovered in Central Asia, or on the Chinese
translations of their Agamas, in which again very
little spade-work has yet been done.(5) Our main
source of information at present is the
Abhidharmakosa, made accessible to us from Chinese by
the monumental translation in French by Prof. Vallee
_________________________________
1 See e.g, Sad. San. (JPTS.) 1890, p. 69:
Sambuddhanam dve kaya rupakayo siridharo/
Yo tehi desito dhammo dhammakayo ti vuccati//
2 The five khandhas referred to here are, sila,
samadhi, panna, vimutti and vimuttinanadassana. See
Mil., p. 98,
3 Vism., P. 234; Atthasalini, p.13: 'Nimittabuddha';
Jataka, I, p. 84: 'Rupakayasiri'.
4 See Prof, Vallee Poussin's Bouddisme, pp, 232f.
5 Dr. Chizen Akanuma (Eastern Buddhist, II, p. 7)
quotes some passages from the Chinese Anguttara and
Samyukta Agamas and shows that the dharmakaya of
Buddha denoted the collection of dharmas
(teachings).
p. 524
Poussin. The Kosa, again, it should be noted, is the
work of a systematiser and the production of a time
much later than that of the Agamas, to which it bears
the same relation as the Visuddhimagga does to the
Pail Pitakas. As the present state of our knowledge
indicates that the Divyavadana and the
Lalitavistara(1) originally belonged to this school,
though they were recast by the Mahayanists, we must
examine with caution some of the statements found in
them: regarding the kaya conception.
(i) Divyavadana
There are a few passages in the Divyavadana
throwing light on the rupakaya and dharmakaya of
Buddha and bearing the identical sense of the Pali
works. On one occasion Srona Kotikarna said that,
through the grace of his teacher, he had seen the
dharmakaya of Buddha, but as he was anxious to see
the rupakaya, he wanted to go to the place where
Buddha was living at the time.(2) Upagupta once said
to Mara that he had seen the dharmakaya only and
requested him to show him the rupakaya. Mara
thereupon made an image (vigraha) of Buddha replete
with all the major and minor signs of great men.(3)
In the answer that king Rudrayana gave to Bimbisara
that "na rajan krpano loke dharmakayena samsprset"
(let not, O King, an irreligious person(4) attain
(lit. touch) the dharmakaya), the word "dharmakaya"
may bear a metaphysical interpretation but the
context does not warrant it.(5) The remark made by
Asoka, after Upagupta had pointed out to him the
stupa of Ananda' makes the sense of dharmakaya quite
explicit. It runs thus: 'That body which you all call
pure, excellent and made of dharma (dharmatmano
dharmamayo) was borne (dharitam) by him called Visoka
(=Ananda) and therefore his stupa deserves great
honour. The lamp of dharma, the dispeller of the
darkness of afflictions that burnt still among men
was due to the power of him, the son of Sugatendra,
and therefore, should be worshipped with special
reverence.(6)
_________________________
1 Winternitz, Geschichte etc., II, p. 194.
2 Divya., p. 19. 3 Divya., p. 360.
4 Ibid., p, 560.: krpana is defined thus:
yas tu dharmaviragartham adharme nirato nrpah/
sa rajan krpano jneyas tamastamahparayanah//
5 Ibid. p. 560.
6 Divya,, pp, 396-7. Cf. Przyluski, Asoka, p.408: In
connection
p. 525
There are, however, Avadanas in the Divyavadana,
which were not without same Mahayanic tint, for, we
read in the Rudrayanavadana,(1) as we usually find in
the Mahayanic works, that rays of light issued forth
from Buddha'(5) mouth when he smiled, irradiating the
beings of heaven and hell. It is noteworthy that the
Attasalini(2) also speaks of rasmis (rays of light)
of six colours issuing out of Buddha's body. It seems
that the Mahayanic ideas were percolating gradually
into the rocky soil of the conservative Theravadins.
(ii) Lalita vistara
The Lalitavistara gives us a picture of Buddha
more superhuman than human and yet far from the
Mahayanic conceptions of the Sambhogakaya and
Dharmakaya, though in the last two chapters it dwells
on the doctrine of Tathata. In the Lalitavistara
Buddha is deified but there are no tracess of the
Trikaya conception, It says in many places that
Buddha appears in the world of men for lokanuvartana
(i.e. to follow the ways of the world), which, if he
so desired, he could avoid by remaining in one of the
heavens and attaining emancipation there. The running
account of Buddha's life is interrupted at
times, --probably they are afterthoughts of the
complier--by dialogues between Buddha and Ananda, in
order to make the treatise appear Mahayanic and not
Hinayanic. At one place Buddha explains to Ananda
that, unlike human beings, he did not stay in the
filth of mother's womb but in a jewel-casket
(ratnavyuha)(4) placed in the womb, which was as hard
as adamant but soft to the touch like the down of a
Kacilindika bird, and that his birth and other events
connected with it were all superhuman. At the same
time he prophesies that there will be, in the future,
men unrestrained in act, thought and speech,
ignorant, faithless, proud, believing without
deliberation what is heard by them, who will not
believe in the superhuman nature of his birth.(5) One
can perceive through the poetical exaggerations of
______________________
with the destruction of the law, Mahamaya exclaiming
"Ceux qui sont nes du Corps de la Loi (dharmakaya),
ou sont-ils alles?
1 Divya., xxxvii, p, 568.
2 Attha., p. 16.
3 E.g. Mtu., I, pp. 168, 170.
4 Lal. Vis., pp. 88, 105, 106. This formed one of the
points of contention of the Mahasanghikas. See
Masuda, Early Origin &c. in the Asia Major, vol.
II.
5 Ibid., pp. 87ff, This goes against the Sarvastivada
and Theravada conceptions.
p. 526
the Lalitavistara that it has in view the historical
Buddha endowed with the major and minor signs--a
human being after all, who requires to be reminded by
the heavenly musicians of the acts of his past lives
and his resolution to become a Buddha and rescue
beings from misery, and who needs a stimulus to
renounce the world in order to fulfil his
resolution.(l) In connection with the offer of houses
which was made by the gods to the Bodhisattva when he
was in the womb, it is said that in order to please
ail the gods who offered houses he caused the the
appearance of his pregnant mother Mayadevi in each of
those houses by means of the Mahavyuha samadhi. This
does not clearly reflect any idea of Nirmanakaya-it
appears more like some of the miracles mentioned in
the Nikayas. In the last chapter of the Lalitavistara
where Buddha's attributes are mentioned, he is called
the great tree (mahadruma), because he possesses a
body of Dharmakayajnana (the knowledge of
Dharmakaya).(2) As this chapter is very likely a
Mahayanic addition, we may reasonably say that the
Lalitavistara in its original form as a treatise of
the Sarvastivadins viewed Buddha as a human being
with superhuman attributes.
(iii) Abhidharmakosa
We may now consider the writings of Vasubandhu,
the great exponent of the Sarvastivada school. In
his Abhidharmakosa he imported a new meaning into the
words Dharmakaya and Rupakaya. In examining the three
Saranas, he tried to bring out the real sense of the
Buddha, Dharma, and Sangha in which a Buddhist takes
refuge. He said that those who take refuge in Buddha
do, in fact, take refuge in the dharmas (qualities)
which constitute a Buddha (buddhakaraka), i.e. the
dharmas by the acquisition of which a certain person
is called a Buddha, or in other words, the dharmas by
the acquisition of which a person understands all
things. These dharmas are ksayajnana (knowledge of
the destruction of misery), anutpadajnana(3)
knowledge
_______________________
1 The descriptions gave opportunity to the
Mahayanists to invent Upayakausalya Paramita, the
duties of Adhyesana, Yacana, etc.
2 La1,. Vis., p. 428
3 Kosa, VI, 67 explains that Ksayajnana with
Anutpadajnana makes Bodhi. On account of difference
among saints in the acquisition of these jnanas,
Bodhi is said to be of three kinds: Sra-
p. 527
of the further non-origination of misery), and
samyagdrsti (right view) of the Asaiksas together
with the dharmas attendant on the jnana, viz. the
five pure skandhas. A dharmakaya is formed of these
dharmas, In another place, while showing the sameness
of the Dharmakayas of all Buddhas, he explained the
Dharmakaya as a series of pure dharmas, or rather a
renewal of the psyche-physical organism of the
substratum (anasravadharmasamtana,
asrayaparavrtti).(1) The Dharmakaya then signifies a
new purified personality or substratum (asraya), but
it is pointed out that such a dharmakaya is possessed
also by an arhat.(2) In the Sutralamkara(3) such a
dharmakaya is also attributed to the mother of
Sakyamuni or to an advanced upasaka. Thus we see that
the Kosa has two interpretations of the Dharmakaya,
one being th qualities adhering to a Buddha and the
other the purified personality (asraya) possessed by
him. The Kosa, in fact, replaces the concrete
conceptions of the Dharmakaya found in the Nikayas
and the Divyavadana by an abstract one. In the last
two works the Dharmakaya signified only the
doctrines, viz., the Bodhipakkhiya dharmas or Anicca,
Dukkha and Anatma, together with the Vinaya rules
contained in the Patimokkha, while to Vasubandhu it
meant the qualities adhering to a Buddha as well as
the purified personality (asraya).
Referring to the formulae of the Saranas,
Vasubandhu says that as the physical body (rupakaya)
of Buddha does not udergo any
_________________________
vakabodhi, Pratyekabuddhabodhi and
Anuttarasamyaksambodhi. By the above two jnanas one
completely abandons ignorance (asesavidyaprahanat);
by the first, one realises the truth that his task
is accomplished (i.e. the duhkha has been realised
by him); by the second, one realises that his task
is no more to be accomplished, (i.e, the duhkha has
been realised by him and he will not have to labour
any more).
The samyagdrsti of the Asaiksas is to see things
as they are really, to know truly the general
character (samanyalaksana) of dharmas, See Keg, VI,
50 fn. For a note on the Ksayajnana, see Masuda,
'Origin of Schools etc.', in Asia Major, vol.II,
Fasc. I.
1 Kosa,VII. 34 for the sense of asraya see Ibid.,
VIII, 34 fn. Cf. asraya parsuddhi, Sutra, p. 186 l.
I.
2 Kosa, IV, 56.
3 Huber, Sutralamkara, pp, 217, 390 quoted in the Fr.
Transl. of the Kosa, VII, 32 p 81.
p. 528
modification by the acquisition of the quality of
Buddha, one should not take refuge in the rupakaya of
Buddha, which is, in fact, the rupakaya of the
Bodhisattva and hence sasrava (impure). Just as a man
would respect a monk for the qualities adhering to
him and not for his person, so a Buddhist should take
refuge in Buddhatva and not in Buddha the person. In
the same way Vasubandhu explains the two other
saranas, viz., Dharma and Sangha, the former being
explained as Nirvana, or the three Truths-Duhkha,
Samudaya and Marga, or Sukha, Duhkha and
Aukha-adukha--and the latter as the qualities that a
sangha of monks is expected to possess.(1)
The Vibhasa informs us that there are some who
believe that to take refuge in Buddha is to take
refuge in the body constituted by the head, nape of
the neck, belly, back, hands and feet of the
Tathagata. Some say that as the body is born of
parents, it is impure (sasrava) and therefore it
should not be a place of refuge, The refuge should be
the Asaiksa dharmas, which make a Buddha, i,e., the
Dharmakaya.(2) Apparently the Vibhasa refers in the
first case to the earlier Hinayana schools and in the
second to the Sarvastivadins and their followers.
Similar Dharmakaya Conception among the Satyasiddhis
and the Mahayanists
The Satyasiddhi school takes almost the same view
of the Dharmakaya as the Sarvastivadins. According to
it the Dharmaksya is made of sila, samadhi, prajna,
vimukti and vimuktijnanadarsanadharmakayas.
Buddhaghosa, Nagarjuna and the writer of the
Milinddapanha also refer to such a dharmakaya.(3) It
means that the body of Buddha was purified by the
practices of these five skandhas, and hence it can be
called Dharmakaya. But as these purifications are
obtained by Arhats also, Harivarman, the founder of
the Satyasiddhi school, distinguished the Dharmakaya
of Buddha by saying that his dharmakaya consisted not
only of the above five purificatory practices but
also of ten powers (dasa bala), four proficiencies
(vaisa-
_________________________
1. Compare the formulae of Sarana in the Nikayas, e.g.
Digha, III, p. 227.
2. Kosa., VI, p. 32 ; IV, p. 76n.; VIII, p. 34.
3. Vism. p.234; M. Vr.(as opinion of non-Madhyamikas),
p.433; Mil, p. 98.
p. 529
radya) and the three recollections (smrtyupasthana),
which the Arhats cannot obtain.(1)
The Abhisamayalankarakarika(2) and the
Pancavimsati -sahasrika- prajnaparamita,(3) important
text-books of the Yogacara school, define the
Dharmakaya with a similar sense. They say that the
various dharmas, viz., Bodhipaksikas, Apramanas,
Vimoksas, Samapattis and so forth, constitute
Sarvajnata (omniscience) and Sarvajnata is the
Dharmakaya. It should be noted that the Karika and
the Prajnaparamita use this expression in a sense
different from that current in the Mahayana texts. It
is really the Svasambhogakaya of the later
Vijnanavadins.
The Prajnaparamitas also maintain the conception
that Dharmakaya is produced by dharmas, the highest
of which is, according to them, the prajnaparamita,
i.e. the knowledge which helps a person to realise
the dharma-sunyata. The Astasahasrika takes up the
question whether the honour shown to the relics of
the Tathagatakaya is more meritorious than the honour
shown to the Prajnaparamita, e.g., by making a copy
of it. The answer given is that the relies depend on
the body purified by the prajnaparamita, and
therefore it is the source of Buddhas. The source
deserves more honour than the remnants of the fruit
(i.e. relics of Buddha) produced therefrom, and
therefore it is more meritorious to honour the
Prajnaparamita than the relics.(4) It adds that all
teachings of Buddha issue from the Prajnaparamita and
the Dharmabhanakas preserve and propagate them; so
the Dharmabhanakas should also be respected. They are
protected by the Dharmakaya, the Prajnaparamita.
Sarvajnata (omniscience) is predominated
(paribhavita) by the prajnaparamita; from sarvajnata
issues the body of Tathagata, the relics of whom are
worshipped; hence prajnaparamita deserves greater
honour.(5)
Hinayanic speculations: (a) Whether rupakaya is
vipakaja?
The Kosa maintains that the rupakaya of Buddha
endowed with the major and minor signs is the result
of the excellent karmas of his
________________________________
1. Y. Sogen, Systems, etc, pp. 181, 182,
2. Karika, Ch. viii.
3. Pancavimsati, (ASB, ms.) 1, 224a.
4. Asta,, ch. iv.
5. Ibid., p.99. It is from this conception that the
Prajnaparamita is addressed as the mother of
Buddhas.
p. 530
previous lives. According to it, even the Buddhas
cannot escape the effects of their karma. The schism
created by Devadatta in the sangha is attributed to a
deed in one of the previous lives of Sakyamuni. The
Vyakhya and the Vibhasa explain that it happened to
Sakyamuni only, and not to any other Buddha's,
because in one of his former lives he divided by
dissension the disciples of an ascetic, possessed of
five abhijnas.(1) That the Buddhas enjoy or suffer
the effects of karma is also maintained by the
Divyavadana(2) and the Majjhima Nikaya.(3) The
Divyavadana refers to a saying of Sakyamuni that even
the Jinas themselves are not free from their karmas,
while the Majjhima Nikaya says that a Tathagata
performs good deeds in his previous lives, and as a
result of those he enjoys in the present pure, and
pleasant sensations (vedana) only. Tradition says
that when Buddha was hurt by the splinter of stone
thrown by Devadatta, he said that ninety-one kalpas
ago he had hurt a person by a spear, as the result of
which evil deed, he now received a wound.
The Milindapanha, however, takes a different view
of this matter. Admitting that Devadatta created a
schism in the sangha, it says that as the schism was
not created by any act of Buddha's own and as it was
caused by an external influence, it should be said
that Buddha as the result of his karma had an
undivided assembly (abhejjapariso). In a similar way
it explains away the wound or the illnesses from
which Buddha suffered. First it asserts that Buddha
attained omniscience after uprooting all roots of
evil (akusalamulas); so he could not have any more
sufferings through karma. It then says that apart
from karma there are other causes like the three
humours, seasons, etc. which produce 'vedana'
(feelings). According to it, the wound that Buddha
received was due to an 'opakammika' (accidental)
cause and his illnesses to causes other than karma.
(b) Was Buddha a jarayuja or upapaduka?
In order to remove doubt from the minds of the
people as to the nature of the birth of so great and
meritorious a being as the Bodhisattva in his last
existence--a doubt expressed also in the
Lalitavistara, where a ratnavyuha has been devised
for the Bodhisattva's abode in his mother's womb--the
Kosa(4) proceeds to show that the
_______________________________
1. Kosa, VII. 34, p.8 fn., 84; IV. 102, p.212 fn. 2.
2. Divya., p.416
3. Majjhima, III, p.227.
4. Kosa, III, 9.
p. 531
Bodhisattvas possess the power of choosing the manner
of their birth (upapattivasitva), and that Sakyamuni
chose birth in a uterus (jarayu) with two objects.
One was to benefit the Sakya clan and at the same
time not to give opportunity to the people to
consider him a magician or a god or a demon, and the
other was to leave some relics of his body, by
worshipping which men and other beings would go to
heaven by thousands, or attain deliverance.
The Mahasanghikas and their followers(1) assert
that Sakyamuni was an upapaduka (self-born), and that
even his son Rahula was also an upapaduka, for
Bodhisattvas cannot have kama. They assert that
Bodhisattvas are possessed of 'adhisthaniki rddhi'
(i.e. the power of appearing anywhere and in any
form), and that by that power Sakyamuni made a
seeming show of his existence in the womb of Maya.
They conceived Buddha as lokottara (transcendental),
and Sakyamuni as only a phantom (Nirmanakaya). The
transcendental Buddha has a rupakaya which is
limitless, everlasting, free from all sasrava
dharmas. He is always in samadhi,(2) never sleeps or
dreams, can know everything in an instant of thought.
He knows neither fatigue nor rest, and is ever busy
in enlightening sentient beings. His power and his
life are limitless. For the benefit of sentient
beings he appears at will in any one of the six
gatis. Whatever he utters relates to the truth,
though people may understand him differently. In
short, the Mahasanghikas conceived Buddha as a
totally supermundane being with illimitable powers
and knowledge, who never desired to attain
Nirvana.(3)
Kaya conception at the beginning of Mahayana
The Mahayanists incorporated the Nirmanakaya
conception of the Mahasanghikas into their Trikaya
theory, adding the two other, Samhhogakaya and
Dharmakapa, the former approaching the Mahasanighilka
conception of the transcendental Buddha, while the
latter was a new philosophic conception of the
Mahayanists.
______________________
1. Eg. the Vetulyakas (Kathavatthu).
2. Cf. Lanka., p, 240: sada samahitas ca tathagatah.
3. For details see Masuda's Origin and Doctrines of
Early Indian Buddhist Schools, Asia Major, vol. II,
fasc. I; Anesaki's article in the E.R.E., sv.
Docetism (Buddhist); Suzuki's Outlines of Mahayana
Buddihism, pp. 249-251. See also Kosa, III, 9
referring to Mahavastu, I, pp. 145, 154
p. 532
These new Kaya conceptions, it seems, did not
make much of an appeal at the beginning of Mahayana.
The Saddharma-pundarika and the Suvarnaprabhasa tried
to erase any lingering impression about the
historical existence of Sakyamuni. In the
Saddharma-pundarika(1) we find Maitreya Bodhisattva,
assuming the role of a sceptic and enquiring how
Buddha could, within a short space of forty years
after the attainment of Bodhi at Gaya, perform the
innumerable duties of a Tathagata and lead
incalculable bodhisattvas to Buddhahood. It appears
like the paradox of a man of twenty-five years
claiming centenarians as his sons and the latter
calling him their father. Similarly Buddha's pointing
to Bodhisattvas who had been performing the various
duties conducive to Buddhahood for many millions of
years as his disciples appears paradoxical. Maitreya
says further that in the minds of those Bodhisattvas
who recently became Mahayanists
(navayanasamprasthitah) there may be doubts of this
nature; so the Tathagata should explain the paradox
for the welfare of the religion. Buddha then asks his
audience thrice to believe his words (avakalpayadhvam
abhisraddaddhvam), and says, "It is not to be
considered (naiva drastavyam) that Bhagavan Sakyamuni
lately leaving his family attained Bodhi at Gaya. I
attained sambodhi incalculable ages ago(2), and since
then I have been preaching the dharma. All that I
have said about the previous Tathagatas, Dipankara
etc., and their parinirvana were all my own
creations. They were only my expedients for imparting
the dharma (upayakausalyadharmadesan-
abhinirharanirmitani). All that I have said to the
effect that I was young, recently born, left home,
and attained Bodhi, was to appeal to a class of
people who otherwise would not have been convinced of
the excellence of the religion and derive benefits
therefrom. But all that I said was not untrue, as the
Tathagatas know what the three dhatus really are;
they know that the dhatus neither are born nor die,
neither produce nor nonproduce, neither exist nor
non-exist; neither are they the same nor different,
and they are neither true nor false. All that the
Tathagatas say is true, but people devoid of right
knowledge construe different meanings out of it.
Though I have not attained parinirvana, I say that I
have attained it. In order to rouse curiosity in the
minds of the people and a desire to see Buddha, I say
that the appearance of a Buddha is an exceedingly
rare event, I made a show of the Nirvana, but did not
enter into it, but people with distorted views could
not
______________________________
1. Sad' P., pp.311ff.
p. 533
see my real self, and busied themselves with the
worship of my relics. But this also produced a good
effect, for they thereby became righteous and gave up
their passions. From among them I formed my
Sravakasangha, and showed myself at Grdhrakuta, and
explained to them how to attain the agrabodhi."
In the Suvarnaprabhasa(1) Ruciraketu and
Kaundilya the brahmana play the role of the sceptics.
The former enquires why Sakyamuni, who performed so
many meritorious deeds, should have such a short
span of life as eighty years. The latter seeks a
mustard-like relic of Buddha's body to worship and
thus go to heaven. Ruciraketu is told by the Buddhas
of all lokadhatus that they did not know any man or
god who could calculate the length of Sakyamuni's
life. They said that it might be possible to count
the drops of water in a sea but it would be
impossible to accertain the length of his life.
Kaundilya brahmana, who only feigned ignorance, was
told by Litsavikumara that, just as it is absurd to
expect cocoanuts from a rose-apple tree, so it is
absurd to expect a relic from the Buddhakaya. The
Tathagatas have no origin, they are ever existing and
inconceivable. It is only the Nirmitakaya that is
shown by them. How can a body, in which there is no
bone or blood, have a dhatu (relic)? Buddhas have
only Dharmakaya and there is only the Dharmadhatu.
Nirmanakaya
The Mahayanic texts tried to show, on the one
hand, that the Hinayanists were wrong in their belief
that Sakyamuni was really a man of flesh and blood
and that relics of his body existed, while on the
other hand, they introduced the two conceptions of
Nirmanakaya and Buddhakaya. Whatever is said to have
been done by Sakyamuni is accounted for by these
tests as the apparent doings of a phantom of the
Buddhakaya, a shadowy image created to follow the
ways of the world (lokanuvartana),(2) in order to
bring conviction to the hearts of the people that the
attainment of Buddhahood was not an impossibility. As
the Buddhas possess the knowledge of all that is to
be done (krtyanusthanajnana),(3) they can take any
form they desire for the illumination of the various
classes of beings. The Mahayanic conception of the
Nirmanakaya is essentially the same as that of the
Mahasanghikas.
______________________________
1. Suvarnaprabhasa (B.T.S. ed.), pp.4-8.
2. Cf. Mtu., I, pp.168, 170.
3. One of the four jnanas peculiar to Buddha, see
Mvyut., p.2,
p. 534
The Prajnaparamitas in their quaint way refer to
the Nirmanakaya or Rupakaya. The Pancavimsati says
that a bodhisattva after acquiring all the necessary
dharmas and practising prajnaparamita, becomes
Sambuddha. He then renders service to beings of all
lokadhatus (worlds) of the ten corners at all times
by Nirmanamegha (Nirmanaclouds). This is called the
Nairmanika-kaya.(1)
From the Chinese sources(2) we are informed that
Nagarjuna in his commentary on the Prajnaparamita,
called the Mahaprajnaparamita sastra, speaks of two
kayas, rupakaya and dharmakaya. The former is the
body born of parents, possessing the qualities of
sentient beings, and is subject to human frailties.
It was born in Kosala while his dharmakaya was born
at Rajagrha. The material body was necessary for
"earthly truth." It was for the deliverance of beings
that Buddha assumed different bodies, different
names, birth-places and ways of emancipation. This
interpretation of rupa- and dharma-kayas is also
followed in the Chinese Parinirvanasutra and
Sandhinirmocanasutra.(3)
Some of the Yogacara texts furnish us with the
following information regarding the conception of
Nirmanakaya as prevailing among the Yogacarins:
(i) The Sutralankara(4) explains the Nirmanakaya
to be those forms which are assumed by Buddhas to
render service to beings of the various worlds. It
generally refers to the human form that Buddha takes
in order to make a show of his acquiring the ordinary
arts and crafts required by an average man, living a
family life and then retiring from it, and ultimately
attaining Nirvana by recourse to ascetic practices.
(ii) The Vijnaptimatratasiddhi tells us that the
Nirmanakaya is meant for Sravakas, Pratyekabuddhas,
Prthagjanas (common men) and Bodhisattvas, who are
not yet in one of the ten bhumis. It may appear in
all lands whether pure or impure.(5) The Chinese
commentaries on the Siddhi mention the various ways,
in which Buddha can transform his body or another's
body or voice, and his or others' mind, to suit his
purpose. Not only could he transform himself into
Sakya-
______________________________
1. Pancavimsati (Cambr. ms.) 343b.
2. C.Akanuma, E.B., II, pp.17ff.; Masuda, Die Indivi-
dualistische Idealismus, etc., p.60.
3. E.B., II, pp. 21f.
4. Sutra., p. 45.
5. Masuda, Die Individualistische, etc., p.60.
p. 535
muni, or Sariputra into a young girl, but he could
also create an altogether new apparitional body, not,
of course, a living, thinking being.(1) Often he
assumed the voice of Brahma or expressed himself
through the mouth of Sariputra or Subhuti, and it was
for this reason that we find Sariputra or Subhuti
explaining some of the abstruse Mahayana teachings,
which they themselves were not expected to
understand.(2) The third way in which he could
transform his voice was to produce sounds from the
sky. His thoughts were supramundane (lokottara) and
pure (anasrava). He could produce in his mind any
thought he liked; in fact, he appeared in his
Nirmitakaya as Sakyamuni with a mind (citta) suited
to the ways of the world. He could also impose his
thoughts on the minds of others.
(iii) The Abhisamayalankarakarika thinks that
there are four kayas, of which the Svabhavikakaya is
real, and the three others, viz., Dharmakaya (=
Svasambhogakaya), Sambhogakaya (= Parasambhogakaya)
and Nirmanakaya are samvrta (i.e. unreal) which are
meant for Buddhas, Bodhisattvas and Sravakas
respectively. According to it. the Nirmanakaya was
intended for Sravakas and Bodhisattvas, who are not
yet in one of the ten bhumis. It describes the
Nirmanakaya as a body unsevered from the real kaya;
and as the actions performed by it are similarly
unsevered from the kaya, they should be regarded as
asamsara (transcendental, i.e. not worldly). Then it
proceeds to show that the thirty-seven kinds of
purificatory actions performed by the Nirmanakaya are
really the actions of the Dharmakaya. The
thirty-seven actions, as explained by it, are the
thirty-seven steps through which a Nirmanakaya passes
after its inception. They are as follows:(3) A
Nirmanakaya (i) is unmindful of good or bad forms of
existence; in other words, takes birth as an animal,
human being or god as necessities require-this is
called gatiprasamam; (ii) practises the four
samgrahavastus (elements of popularity); (iii)
enlightens himself about matters opposite and
similar, good and evil, by the srutamayi and such
other means of knowledge, and then applies himself to
the service of others, keeping himself unconcerned
(i.e. having no anunaya, like a magician (for the
things made by him magically); (iv) prac-
_____________________________
1. I have derived this information from Prof. de la
Va Ilee Poussin.
2. See Asta., pp. 14, 33, 414. 3. Journal Asiatique,
1913, p. 604.
p. 536
tises the six paramitas purified in three ways
trimandalavisuddhi); (v) performs and persuades
others to perform, the ten kusalakarmapathas (moral
duties) and thus establish all in the path leading to
Buddhahood; (vi) exerts for realising the
non-existence in reality of all things; (vii)
comprehends the non-duality of things and the
all-pervasiveness of the dharma-dhatu, and so on,
until he reaches the Tathagatabhumi after realising
the absence of difference between things constituted
and unconstituted.(1) In short, the Karika wants to
say that the whole course of life of a Bodhisattva,
extending through incalculable births, is nothing but
the Nirmanakaya, a thing not separate from the
Dharmakaya, as, in fact, according to the Mahayana
philosophy, all creations are neither the same as,
nor different from, the dharmadhatu.
(iv) The Lankavatara explains the relation of the
Nirmanakaya to the Dharmakaya in the same way, It
states that the Nirmitabuddhas are not produced by
actions; the Tathagata is neither in them nor outside
them (sarve hi nirmitabuddha na karmaprabhava na tesu
tathagato na canyatra tebhyas tathgatah).(2) It is
only when the sons of the Jina realise the visible
world to have no existence apart from the citta that
they obtain the Nirmanakaya free from kriya and
samskara, and endowed with bala, abhijna and
vasita.(3) Like the Siddhi, it says that the
Tathagatas by creating Nirmanakaya perform the
various duties of a Tathagata (Tathagatakrtya).(4) It
gives also the interesting information that Vajrapani
serves as an attendant on the Nirmitanirmanabuddhas,
and not on the real Buddhas(5): and that the function
of such a Buddha is to preach and explain the
characteristics of dana, sila, dhyana, samadhi,
citta, prajna, jnana, skandha, dhatu, ayatana,
vimoksa, and vijnana.(6)
Sambhogakaya
We have seen that the Rupakaya or Nirmanakaya was
meant for the Sravakas, Pratyekabuddhas, Prthagjanas
and Bodhisattvas who were not in one of the ten
bhumis, so another kaya had to be devised, a very
subtle kaya, for the benefit of the Bodhisattvas.
This is called
_____________________________
1. Abhisamayalankarakarika, (A.S.B. ms.) 1. 5b; also
J.A., 1913, pp. 599, 600.
2. Lanka., p. 242.
3. Lanka., p. 73.
4. Ibid., p. 240.
5. Ibid., p. 242.
6. Ibid., p. 57.
p. 537
Parasambhogakaya, as distinguished from
Svasambhogakaya, a similar subtle body perceived by
the Buddhas alone. It is this Parasambhogakaya which
plays the role of a preacher of the various Mahayana
sutras, the scenes being mostly laid either at
Grdhrakuta, the only place in the three dhatus
considered pure and suitable for the appearance of a
Sambhogakaya, or in the Sukhavati-vyuha, or in one of
the heavens.
It will be observed from the description of the
appearance of Buddha and his manner of preaching the
Sutras that the Mahayanists were not yet able to
forget or rise above the human conception of the
Hinayanists. They still give Sakyamuni the role of
the presiding Buddha of the universe, to whom flock
reverently with flowers, incense etc. all the
Bodhisattvas, Sravakas and Grhapatis of the various
lokadhatus of the ten directions, to hear from him
the Prajnaparamita, the Saddharmapundarika, or the
Gandavyuha. These Bodhisattvas again have their own
tutelary Buddhas, who, according to the Mahayana
metaphysics, possess the same Dharmakaya as Sakya-
muni. They also come or are sometimes sent by their
Buddhas, with messages of greetings and flowers as
tokens of their regard, to Sakyamuni Buddha, whose
Buddhaksetra is at present the Saha-lokadhatu.
Sometimes the descriptions go so far as to say that
the Buddhas themselves came to hear discourses from
Sakyamuni Buddha, and the concourse of Buddhas and
Bodhisattvas became so great that the Saha-loka-
dhatu had to be cleared of all oceans, mountains,
seas, rivers, and cities, as well as gods, men and
other beings. As we read in the Hinayana texts that
monks used to come to meet Buddha, bringing with them
one or two samaneras, so also we read in the
Saddharmapundarika that on account of insufficiency
of space the countless Buddhas could not bring with
them more than one or two Bodhisattvas as attendants
(upasthapakas).(1)
Now let us see what was their conception of the
Kaya of this Buddha. According to the Satasahasrika
and the Pancavimsatisahasrika, (2) it is an
exceedingly refulgent body, from every pore of
which streamed forth countless brilliant rays of
light, illuminating the lokadhatus as innumerable as
the sands of the Ganges. When this body stretched out
its tongue, innumerable rays of light
______________________________
1. Sad. P., pp. 244-245.
2. Sata., pp. 8-29; Pancavimsati, pp. 6ff.; For
Asecanaka' see Samadhirajasutra, (B.T.S. ed.) p.10
p. 538
issued forth from it, and on each ray of light was
found a lotus of thousand petals on which was seated
a Tathagatavigraha (an image of the Tathagata, a sort
of Nirmanakaya), preaching to Bodhisattvas, Grhasthas
(householders), Pravrajitas (recluses) and others the
dharma consisting of the six paramitas. After a
Simhavikridita samadhi his body illuminated the
trisahasramahasahasra lokadhatu just as the bright
clear sun or the full-moon illuminates the world.
Buddha then shows his Prakrtyatmabhava (real form) to
all the worlds. The several classes of gods as well
as the men of the four continent, Jambudvipa,
Aparagodana etc., see this Prakrtyatmabhava and think
that the Tathagata is sitting before them and
preaching the doctrine. From this body again some
rays of light issue forth by which all beings of all
lokadhatus see Sakyamuni Buddha preaching the
Prajnaparamitas to his sangha of monks and
congregation of Bodhisattvas.
Though this concept of the refulgent body of
Buddha found currency in the Prajnaparamitas, the
expression Sambhogakaya was still unknown to them. It
was usually called by them Prakytyatmabhava (natural
body) or Asecenaka-atmabhava (All-diffusing body). As
a matter of fact, the Astasahasrika is not even aware
of the Prakrtyatmbhava or Asecanaka-atmabhava,
showing clearly its priority to the other
Prajnaparamitas. It speaks only of Rupakaya and
Dharmakaya(1) and the long glorious description of
Buddhakaya, which appears in the Sata and
Pancavimsati as 'nidana' (introduction) to the text,
is totally absent from it. It is only in the recast
version of the Pancavimsati that the expression
Sambhogika-kaya was introduced by way of giving a
gist of the topic.(2) In it the Sambhoga-kaya is
described thus: Bodhisattvas, after attaining bodhi
by means of the prajnaparamita, take a body endowed
with thirty-two major and eighty minor signs with a
view to preach the doctrines of Mahayana to the
bodhisattvas and at the same time to arouse in their
minds joy, delight and love for the excellent
dharma(3). The Prajnaparamitas regarded this
refulgent kaya as nirmita (created), and as such they
included it in Rupakaya and did not feel the
necessity of introducing the conception of a third
kaya, the Sambhogika.
In keeping with this dvikaya theory of the
Prajnaparamitas, Nagarjuna also did not refer to, or
probably was not aware of, the third kaya, the
Sambhogika. Both Drs. Akanuma and Masuda could not
_____________________________
1. Asta., pp. 338, 497, 513
2 & 3. Pancavimsati (A.S.B. ms.) 1, 359a Iti Sambho-
gika-kayah.
p. 539
trace the conception of Sambhogakaya in Nagarjuna's
Mahaprajnaparamitasastra. Dr. Akanuma also mentions
his disinclination to accept the "Hymns of the Triple
Body (Trikaya)" ascribed by the Tibetans to Nagarjuna
as a work of the famous Nagarjuna.(1) If the Karikas
of Nagarjuna on the Tathagatakaya(2) be examined, it
also becomes apparent that Nagarjuna was interested
in giving an exposition of the real kaya (i.e.
Dharmakaya or Svabhavakaya) only. To him the
distinction of Sambhogakaya and Rupakaya was
unimportant, as both of them were unreal.
Thus, we see that up to the time of Nagarjuna,
the conception of Sambhogakaya was not distinguished
from that of Rupa-or Nirmanakaya. The Lankavatara
presents us first with this conception, calling it
Nisyanda- or Dharmata-nisyanda-Buddha, and it seems
that the term Sambhogakaya was not yet current. We
have seen that in Hinayana works also it is pointed
out that the super-excellent body of Buddha, endowed
with the major and minor signs of great men, was due
to the countless meritorious deeds performed by him
in his previous lives(3). The Chinese rendering of
Sambhogakaya by hsing fo, in which hsing means fruit
or reward, also indicates that Sambhoga had no other
sense than 'vipaka or nisyanda'. The later Yogacarins
called it Parasambhogakaya in order to distinguish it
from the other kaya called by them Svasambhoga.
Though the Astasahasrika does not distinguish
Sambhogakaya from the Nirmanakaya, it refers to the
super-excellent body of Buddha as the result of his
meritorious acts in previous lives.(4) The
Lankavatara by using the expression Vipakaja or
Vipakastha, shows a stage of transition from the
Hinayanic conception of Vipakaja-kaya to that of
Mahayanic Parasambhogakaya.
The Lankavatara says that the function of the
Nisyanda Buddha is to teach the parikalpita
(imaginary) and pardtantra (relatively existent)
nature of things to those persons, who weave a net of
thought-constructions around themselves being unaware
of the dreamlike nature of things.(5) This is also
the function of Sakyamuni of
______________________________
1. Eastern Buddhist, II, pp. 17ff.
2. M. Vr. ch. XXII.
3. Lanka., pp. 28, 34; see ante, pp. 529-530.
4. Asta., p. 515. Buddhanam kayah karanasamutpannah
purvakarmavipakad utpannah, etc.
5. Lanka., p. 57.
p. 540
the Sahalokadhatu when he imparts the teaching of the
Prajnaparamitas or the Saddharma-Pundarika.(1)
(ii) The Sutralankara also does not distinguish
Sambhogakaya into Svasambhoga and Parasambhoga. It
says that with this body Buddhas enjoy the dharmas
and it is different according to the different
lokadhatus, implying thereby that a Buddha of each
lokadhatu has his own Sambhogakaya which is different
from those of other Buddhas of other
Buddhaksetras.(2)
(iii & iv) The Suvarnaprabhasa and the
Abhisamayalankarakarika tell us that the Sambhogakaya
is a very subtle body of Buddha. It is endowed with
all the mahapurusa signs and is generally assumed by
Buddhas for imparting the higher and metaphysical
truths to the advanced bodhisattvas. The
Suvarnaprabhasa(3) also does not speak of the two
forms of Sambhogakaya, to be found in the Siddhi.
(v) The Siddhi says that there are two
Sambhogakayas called Parasambhogakaya and
Svasambhogakaya. The former is seen by bodhisattvas,
while the latter is seen by the Buddhas of the
various lokadhatus, and not by bodhisattvas. As
regards refulgence, illirnitability and
immeasurability there is no difference between these
two kayas. Both of them have colour and form
(varna-rupa- samsthana) as well as sound (sabda). On
account of the knowledge of sameness (samata)
obtained by Buddhas, the body is anasrava (pure). It
can appear only in a pure land like the
Sukhavativyuha or Grdhrakuta. The differences between
the Para-sambhogakaya and the Sva-sam- bhogakaya are
that the former has the mahapurusalaksanas while the
latter has not, and that the citta of the former is
as unreal as that of the Nirmanakaya, while the citta
of the latter is real, and besides, this citta
possesses the four jnanas, viz., adarsajnana
(mirror-like knowledge),(4) samata-jnana (knowledge
of the sameness of all things), pratyaveksana-jnana
(knowledge of distinguishing subject, object and the
varieties of things) and krtyanusthana-jnana
(knowledge of doing all that is to be done).(5) The
rupa of both the Sambhogakayas is exceedingly subtle
and expansive without limit, yet it is sapratigha
______________________________
1. The function of Nirmitabuddha is to teach dana,
sila etc. see ante, p. 536.
2. Sutra., pp. 45-6.
3. Suzuki, Outlines etc., p. 257 ; in the published
portion of the Sanskrit text (B.T.S.) this passage
does not occur,
4. Cf. Digha., II, p. 93 : Dhammadasa.
5. Explained in detail in the Sutra., pp. 46ff;
Mvyert., 5.
p. 541
(possessed of the quality of obstruction).
Nevertheless the subtle bodies of countless Buddhas
are interpenetrable.
The recast version of the Pancavimsati(1) refers
to the Sambhogakaya, and does not, like the Karika,
distinguish between Dharmakaya (= Svasambhoga) and
Parasambhogikakaya the reason being that in the
original version of the Pancavimsati, there must have
been, as in the other Prajnaparamitas, the
conceptions of only two kayas, and not of three or
four. The Karika, in fact, supports the Siddhi in
regard to the conception of kayas, using only
somewhat different names. The conception of the
Svasambhogakaya shows a tendency of the Yogacara
school to posit something like the Isvara of the
Upanisads behind the phenomenal universe. The
Dharmakaya corresponds to the impersonal absolute of
the Vedanta, the Brahman, and the Sambhogakaya to the
Isvara when Brahman assumes name and form. Every
Buddha, it should however be noted, has his own
Sambhogakaya but all Buddhas have one Dharmakaya. The
Lankavatara also gives hints to this effect. It says
that abhava (absence of anything) is not Tathagata,
and again, as Tathagata is described as
'Anutpadaanirodha', it has some meaning. It then
denotes the Manomayadharmakaya(2). It cannot be seen
by non-Buddhists, Sravakas, Pratyekabuddhas and even
Bodhisattvas in one of the first seven bhumis. Just
as different names of one thing or one person like
hasta, kara, pani, or, Indra, Sakra, Puraudara
indicate different aspects of the same thing so also
the different names of Sakyamuni Buddha in the
Sahalokadhatu, e.g. Svayambhuva, Nayaka, Vrsabha,
Visnu, Isvara, Pradhana, Kapila, Soma, Bhaskara,
Rama, Vyasa; or, Sunyata, Tathata Bhutakoti, Nirvana,
Sarvajna etc. indicate the different aspects of
Sakyamuni Buddha(3). People being subject to the
conceptions of two extremes 'is' or 'is not'
(dvayantapatitaya) do not know that Buddha is like a
reflection of the moon on water neither appearing nor
disappearing. In this passage there is a clear hint
that this Manomayadharmakaya, existing in the
Sahalokadhatu, is the same as the Svasambhogakaya of
the Siddhi and the Asecanaka-atmabhava or
_____________________________
1. Pancavimsati (A.S.B. ms) 1. 359a. Cf. Siksa. p.159
Bodhic., pp. I, 4; Mtu., III, pp. 344, 452.
2. For definition of Manomayakaiya and its three sub-
divisions, see Lanka., p. 81; Suzuki, E.B., iv,
pp. 284-5.
3. Lanka., pp. 192-3 ; Cf. Dasa., P, 55,
p. 542
Prakrtyatmabhava of the Prajnaparamitas, and it
corresponds to the Upanisadic conception of Isvara.
Dharmakaya
The three Kayas, of which we have so far spoken,
belong strictly to the realm of Samvrti, worldly and
transcendental, and as such they were treated as Rupa
or Nirmanakaya by the early Mahayanists, including
Nagarjuna. The only real kaya of Buddha is the
Reality as conceived by the Mahayanists, and is not
different from the things or beings of the
universe(1). Though an attempt to define it by the
current words and expressions is bound to be not only
incorrect but misleading, the Mahayanic texts tried
to give an idea of it as far as the language
permitted. The Karika and the Siddhi call it
Svabhavika or Svabhava kaya. It is, according to
them, immeasurable and illimitable. It fills all
space. It is the basis of the Sambhoga and
Nirmana-kayas. It is devoid of all marks (i.e.
mahapurusalaksanas) and is inexpressible
(nisprapanca). It is possessed of eternal, real and
unlimited gunas. It has neither citta nor rupa, and
again it is not different from them. There is one and
only one Dharmakaya. Buddhas may have their
individual Sambhogakayas but they have all one
Dharmakaya(2). It call only be realised within
oneself and not described, for that would be like the
attempt of the blind man to describe the sun, which
he has never seen(3).
It is often questioned whether the conception of
Dharmakaya can be traced in the Prajnaparamitas and
the works of Nagarjuna, and whether the
Prajnaparamitas and works of Nagarjuna admit of such
a reality, or rather preach pure and simple
negativism? To put in another way, was it the object
of the Prajnaparamitas and Nagarjuna's works to point
out only the incongruities of the world and worldly
knowledge and avoid making any statement about the
Reality or the truth?
The Astasahasrika and other Prajnaparamitas,
though unrelenting in their negation of every
possible statement about the reality, never assert
that Tathata or Sunyata or Dharmakaya in its real
sense is also non-existing. The statements like
'tathatavikara
______________________________
1. In a Buddhist inscription of Battambang, a stanza
in salutation of Buddha brings out this idea. See
Le Museon, vol. VII.
2. Cf, Vis. M., p. 508 : Nirvana is one for all
Buddhas.dhass.
3. Masuda, op. cit., p. 59; Suzuki, Avakening of Faith,
p. 62.
p. 543
nirvikaravikalpa nirvikalpa' (Suchness is immutable,
unchangeable, beyond percept and distinctions)(1)
show rather a positive conception of the Reality than
a purely negative one. In regard to the Dharmakaya
also the Astasahasrika makes similar statements, It
says that he who knows that the dharmas, existing in
the world or preached by the Tathagata, have no more
existence than things in a dream and, does not
enquire whence the Tathagata comes and where does he
go, realises the Tathagata through Dharmata.(2). The
Buddhakaya, that people speak of, arises through
cause and condition like the sound of a flute; it has
really no appearance or disappearance, Those who run
after the form and voice of the Tathagata and
conceive of his appearance and disappearance is far
from the Truth(3). No further statemeuts than this
can be mad e about the Reality, for that would be
again prapanca. When the Astasahasrika asserts that
Tathagata does not exist, it refers to that
Tathagata as conceived by one on reading the Mahayana
texts. Even the Bodhisattvas, unless and until they
reach the tenth bhumi, cannot extricate themselves
from a conception of the Tathagatakaya, however
subtle it may be (e.g. the Svasambhogakaya). They are
still under a delusion and it is this delusion that
the Prajnaparamitas endeavour to remove by asserting
that there is no Tathagata.
Nagarjuna by denying the existence of a so-called
Tathagata does nothing more than what the
Prajnaparamitas endeavour to establish. His point is
that, if bhavasantati (series of existence) be
admitted then the existence of a Tathagata should
also be admitted,(4) for the Tathagata represents the
ultimate state of this bhavasantati; it is a
______________________________
1. Asta., p. 507 ; cf. another passage : ya ca tatha-
gatatathata ya va ca dharma-tathata ekaivaisa
tathatadvayadvaidhikaradvayatathata na kvacit
tathata na kutascit tathata na kasyacit tathata
tatah sa tatha-tadvayadvaidhikaradvayatathata.
(That which is Tathagata-tathata and that which is
all-things-tathata are non-dual, one and the same,
Tathata is neither anywhere nor arises from
anywhere, nor belongs to anything, hence as
Tathata does not belong to anybody; it is non-
dual and one). For other passages of similar
import, see M. Vr., ch. xxii.
2. Asta., p. 514: te dharmataya tathagatam prajanati.
Cf, M.Vr. p. 448 : dharmato buddha drastavyah.
3. Asta,, p, 513.
4. M Vr., p. 431 :vidyata eva bhavasantatis tathaga-
tasadbhavat.
p. 544
state attained by a being after a long series of
existence. As in reality (paramarthatah) there is no
bhavasantati, there is also no Tathagata--that being
who is supposed to have become Tathagata after
practising mahakaruna and other virtues, and thereby
attaining omniscience. If the Tathgata had really
existed, he would either be the same as five skandhas
or different from them, or the skandhas would be in
him or he in the skandhas, but as he is none of these
nor any one of these is he, he cannot have any real
existence. By these and other similar arguments
Nagarjuna asserts that there is no Tathagata. By such
denial he only establishes that the Tathagata as the
ultimate state of bhavasantati does not exist.
Candrakirti, in support of Nagarjuna's arguments,
quotes a passage from the Astasahasrika (p.479), in
which Buddha and his dharma are compared to maya or
svapna, but at the same time he says "we do not
assert the non-existence (nastitva) of the Tathagata
in every way, for then we would be guilty of apavada
(denial), and yet being desirous of describing the
Tathagata by means of vyavahara-satya
(conventionally) and by taking recourse to
super-impositions (samaropa) we say that he is sunya
or asunya, or sunyasunya or naiva sunyam nasunyam.
But he who endeavours to realise the true Tathagata
by having recourse to statements and denials will
never know him. Candrakirti in support of this quotes
the verses from the Vajracchedika, to which the
Astasahasrika also refers, viz., "he who endeavoured
to see me through my form and voice could not see me
because
dharmato buddha drastavya dharmakaya hi nayakah/
dharmata capy avijneya na sa sakya vijanitum//
(A buddha is to be seen) in the sense of dharmata
(nature of dharmas), for the leaders (of men) have
only Dharmakaya. That dharmata-is unktnowable (so
also is the Tathagata)(2)
Nagarjuna concludes his examination of the
Tathagatakaya by identifying Tathagata with the world
(jagat)(5) or nature itself, and asserting that the
Tathgata, whom people or even Bodhisattvas have
______________________________
1. Ibid., p.432. Na hy ekena janmana Sakyam tathaga-
tatvam anupraptum.
2. M. Vr., p.448 ; cf, Asta., pp. 513, 514; Vajra.,
p. 43.
3. Tathagato yatsvabhavas tat svabhavam idam jagat/
Tathagato nihsvabhavo nihsvabhavam idam jagat//
M. Vr., pp. 448-9
p. 545
in view, is only a bimba (image) of kusaladharmas and
is not the real Tathata or Tathagata(1). A
dialectician like Nagarjuna cannot go further than
this to establish the Reality. it is by denial of the
existence of unreal things, including the so-called
Tathagata, that he points towards the Reality--the
real Tathagatakaya, the Dharmakaya(2).
The conception of Dharmakaya was of special
interest to the Yogacarins. The Lankavatara(3) in
describing it says that Dharmata- Buddha is without
any substratum (niralamba) and lies beyond the range
of functioning organs of sense, proofs or signs and
hence beyond the vision of Sravakas, Pratyeka-buddhas
or the non-Mahayanists. It is to be realised within
one's own self. The Sutralankara(4) calls it
Svabhavika-dharmakaya. It is one and the same kaya in
all Buddhas, very subtle, unknowable and eternal. The
Trimsika(5) explains the Dharmakaya as the
transformed asraya (substratum)--the alaya-
vijnana--the transformation being effected by
knowledge (jnana) and the suppression of the two
evils (dausthulyas), viz., klesavarana and
jneyavarana. The Aloka(6) on the
Abhisamayalankarakarika also explains the Dharmakaya
in a similar way. According to it, there are two
kinds of Dharmakaya, one being the Bodhipaksika and
other dharmas, which are themselves pure and
productive of clear knowledge (nisprapancajnanatmaka)
and the other the transformed asraya of the same,
which is then called Svabhavakaya. Prof.
Stcherbatsky(7) supplies us with nearly the same
information that we find in the Aloka from some
source, which he does not mention. He says that
"according to the early Yogacaras the Dharmakaya is
divided into Svabhavakaya (no-bo-nid-sku) and
Jnanakaya (ye-ses-kyi-sku), the first is the
motionless (nitya) substance of the universe, the
second is anitya, i.e. changing, living." Evidently
what the Professor means by Jnanakaya is the
Dharmakaya, consisting of the Bodhipaksika and other
dharmas, of the Aloka. That the Svabhavakaya is the
nityakaya, as pointed
______________________________
1. M.Vr., p. 449.
2. Prapancayanti ye buddham prapancatitam avyayam /
Te prapancahatah sarve na pasyanti Tathagatam //
See also M. Vr, p. 534.
3. Lanka., pp. 57, 70.
4. Sutra., p. 45.
5. Trimsika, p. 44.
6. J.A., 1913.
7. Con. of N., p. 185n.
p. 546
out by him, is also supported by the Suvarnaprabhasa
and other texts(1).
The Chinese commentators on the Siddhi say that
Dharmakaya is the metaphysical principle of real
citta and rupa of the Tathagata. 'It is the real
nature of things, and it can be equated with Tathata,
Dharmadhatu or Tathagatagarbha.(2)
The goal of Bodhisattvas is to realise the
Dharmakaya. Every being has the Dharmakaya, or the
Dharmakaya comprises all beings of the world, but
beings being blinded by avidya do not realise this
fact. What the Bodhisattva aims at is the removal of
this avidya and the realisation of the fact that he
is the same as the Dharmakaya. The Aloka on the
Karika(3) enumerates gradual steps through which a
Bodhisattva passes, and points out that the last step
of a Bodhisattva is to realise the Dharmakaya
(dharmakayahisambodhena bhavisyati), after which it
becomes easy for him to assume any one of the four
kayas. In the Lankavatara we notice that Mahamati is
anxious to know how a Bodhisattva after completion of
the ten bhumis can attain the Tathagatakaya or
Dharmakaya and go to any one of the Buddhaksetras or
heavens. The Lankavatara also describes in rosy
colours the prospect of attaining Dharmakaya. It says
that a Bodhisattva after attaining the
Mahadharmamegha in the ninth bhumi is adorned with
many jewels, and sits on a lotus in a jewelled palace
surrounded by other Bodhisattvas of his status. He
there comprehends the illusory nature of all things.
He is anointed (abhiseka) by Vajrapani as a son of
Buddha. He then goes beyond the bhumi of Buddhasutas
by realising within himself the dharmanairatmya and
confronts the Dharmakaya.(4) The Trimsika says that
just as Vimuktikaya is the goal of the arhats so
Dharmakaya is the goal of Bodhisattvas. It shows that
as the arhats by getting rid of klesavarana obtain a
purified kaya so also a Buddha by getting rid of both
klesa- and jneyavaranas obtains the Dharmakaya.(5)
______________________________
1. Suvarnaprabhasa (B. T. S.), p. 8; Lanka., p. 78;
Sutra., p. 46.
2. I have derived this information from Prof. de la
Vallee Poussin. In Lanka. (pp. 77, 78) the Tatha-
gatagarbha is described as nitya, dhruva, sasvata,
siva etc. just as the non-Buddhists speak of their
great soul as nitya, karta, nirguna, vibhu, avyaya.
3. J. A., 1913.
4. Lanka., pp. 51, 70.
5. Trimsika, p. 44.