Laá¹…kÄvatÄra-sÅ«tra: Mind Only
-
Laṅk�vat�ra-sūtra: Mind Only
Bodhi Journal: 8th Issue (Jun, 2008) - Early Mahayana Sutrasby Satiman 2012-06-03
Introduction
The central tenet of Laá¹…kÄ�vatÄ�ra-sÅ«tra is the Doctrine of Mind- Only (Citta-mÄ�tra). The following are the assertions or statements which define the notion of Mind-only according to the central theme of the SÅ«tra which is the precursor to the development of Chan Buddhism in China and Zen Buddhism in Japan and in the West. Chan or Zen tradition advocates the direct perception and discernment of the distinction between the false mind and True mind. The false mind is the ordinary consciousness. The True mind is the Buddha-mind – the pure and infinite consciousness.
Mind-only
The Sūtra illustrates the Doctrine of Mind-only utilizing the metaphor of deer to drive home the doctrinal point of cosmic illusion expounded in the Doctrine of Mind-only (cittam�trav�da): A herb of deer was wandering in a desert on a very hot day.On seeing the mirage of water at the distant desert, they joyfully rushed towards spot. On reaching the spot of the appearance of the mirage, they disappointingly discovered that it was not extant there.
Any physics student comprehends that a mirage is an apparent or relative existence. It is like an illusion (m�yopama). It does not exist in reality. It only appears to exist or exist apparently. The mirage is merely wrongly conceived by the mind relative to the conditions of the natural environment. Similarly, Ś�kyamuni Buddha repeatedly promulgates that the external objects are just like the magically created shows. They, like dreams or echoes, do not exist in reality but exist apparently.
Illusory Multiplicity
According to the Three-nature theory (Trisvabh�vav�da). It is called the false imagination of the unreal (Pari-kalpita svabh�va). The ordinary worldings or sentient beings do not perceive that the external objects are illusionary and unreal. This fact is highlighted by all major esoteric religions, such as Hinduism, Christianity and Islamic Sufism. They grasp upon them conceiving that they are real. They react with either attachment or aversion resulting in the outbreak of the harmful emotions of greed and hatred rooted in delusion.
Ontological Commitment
The enlightened ones or the wise intuitively discern the ultimate truth (paramÄ�rtha satya) of Mind-only. Thus, they relinquish all ontological commitment of concepts and language (See A History of Buddhist Philosophy” Continuities and Discontinuities by Kalaupahana,pp. 156-157). Ontological commitment is object reification which defiles the mind. Consequently, they are emancipated from the tangle of saṃ̣sÄ�ra because they cease clinging on the five aggregates of form, feelings, perceptions, volitions and consciousness. Non-clinging is the annihilation of superimposed illusive self or ego through wisdom of insight into things as they really.
Non-clinging
Advocating non-clinging, Ś�kyamuni Buddha never advises us to abandon or renounce everything useful, beneficial and valuable in the mundane world. Abandonment of clinging is the obliteration of illusive self or ego which does not exist in the first place. Non-clinging has generally been misinterpreted by both Buddhists themselves as well as by non-Buddhists. The mispresentation of the true meaning of non-clinging has resulted in much vexation and heretical criticism of the general Buddhists and the resultant unjust torture or persecution of the Buddhist masters or gurus. What is to be abandoned is the ontological commitment of concept, language, things, events or phenomena collectively known as the conventional realities. Only ontological commitment to conventional realities or object reification is abandoned but not the conventional realities. The valuable and helpful conventional knowledge of realities are not discarded but are wisely utilized to manage our daily, business and social life. What are useful, beneficial and valuable are to be utilized without any ontological commitment or object reification.
The Diamond Sūtra (Vajraccedik�-sūtra) advises us to abandon the ontological commitment or object reification thus:
Do not dwell in (cling on) anything and produce your
your mind (that is, pure mind).If one apprehends intuitively the Doctrine of Mind-only, one purifies his store-house of consciousness (Ä€layavijñÄ�na) and activates a revulsion (parÄ�vá¹›tti) bringing forth his womb of TathÄ�gata (TathÄ�gatagarbha). His innate Buddha-nature (DharmadhÄ�tu) is redeemed or recovered. Chan or Zen Buddhism is developed on the basis of the Doctrine of Mind-onlywhich advocates formlessness or appearancelessness (nirÄ�bhÄ�sa) as the things as they really are (yathÄ�bhÅ«ta).
Conclusion
All the external objects perceived by us are the reflections, images or manifestations of the mind. These external objects are illusions (mÄ�yÄ�) and unreal. Every object, perceived by the worldings, is just like the reflected moon in the water. It is visible but it is unreal. The Laá¹…kÄ�vatÄ�ra-sÅ«tra, like any MahÄ�yÄ�na SÅ«tra, asserts that all external objects perceived by the worldlings are like magics, dreams, mirages, echoes, tortoise’s hairs, children of a barren woman and so forth. These metaphors of illusion are highlighted in the MahÄ�yÄ�na PrajñÄ�pÄ�ramitÄ�-sÅ«tras.
If this ultimate truth is self-realized, the ontological commitment to concept and language created by the false imagination and discrimination of the ignorant mind of a worldling will be relinquished. With the relinquishing of the ontological commitment to all external objects which do not exist ultimately, there arises the view of great emptiness (mahÄ�’sÅ«nyatÄ�) in the mind of the wise. Supreme enlightenment ensues from this self-realization of Mind-only and nothing else exists substantially. The multiplicity fabricated by the false mind is illusory. Only the original essence of the mind - the Buddha-nature is real. The phenomena are illusive, impermanent and mutable. Only the Buddha-essence (DharmadhÄ�tu) which is eternal Principle of Truth is real, eternal and immutable. All esoteric religions concur on this eternal Truth of ultimate reality. One is reminded of Ramakrishna who practised Islam, Christianity, Shaktism, Vaiṣṇavism and so on. According to him too, there is one God towards whom all are traveling (Shankara bhÄ�á¹£ya of Gita.Intro.Chap.3 &4)
-
Thanks for sharing, but this person's understanding is prone to the Advaita Vedanta's substantialist understanding, treating buddha-nature as something real and substantial. Such substantialist understanding of buddha-nature is refuted by the Lankavatara Sutra.
Instead to understand the true Dharma one should understand: "
Here practice is clearly understood as neither going after the mirror nor escaping from the maya reflection; it is to thoroughly 'see' the 'nature' of reflection. To see that there is really no mirror other than the on-going reflection due to our emptiness nature. Neither is there a mirror to cling to as the background reality nor a maya to escape from. Beyond these two extreme lies the middle path -- the prajna wisdom of seeing that the maya is our Buddha nature." - Thusness, http://awakeningtoreality.blogspot.com.au/2007/03/thusnesss-six-stages-of-experience.html -
His conclusion about one God towards whom all are travelling certainly leans towards the substantialist point of view.
As I understand it, the Lankavatara Sutra try to show the positive and intuitive side of the Mind itself since it participate in both our transcendental intelligence and our normal 5 senses and the discriminating intellect the sixth consciousness.
Once this Mind of ours has re-orientate from the empirical world of the senses to the inner world of oneness, there will be an inner conversion, or as it is stated in the Sutra, the ‘turning about in the deepest seat of consciousness’. This will lead to a change in our attitude, and one would have then entered into the stream of liberation.
-
" A herd of deer was wandering in a desert on a very hot day.On seeing the mirage of water at the distant desert, they joyfully rushed towards spot. On reaching the spot of the appearance of the mirage, they disappointingly discovered that it was not extant there."
A dog or a small child looks into a mirror and thinks there is another being inside. A grownup sees the image and sees himself in the mirror. An enlightened person doesn't see himself in the mirror. He knows that which stares back is not who he really is.
Form and emptiness, emptiness and form.
"To see that there is really no mirror other than the on-going reflection due to our emptiness nature. Neither is there a mirror to cling to as the background reality nor a maya to escape from. Beyond these two extreme lies the middle path -- the prajna wisdom of seeing that the maya is our Buddha nature." - Thusness"
-
Good Pegembara, also, an enlightened person sees the image on the mirror not staring back at anyone. There is no looker. Just that appearance alone is! In seeing just the seen, no seer.
-
"Lord, who makes contact?"
"Not a valid question," the Blessed One said. "I don't say 'makes contact.' If I were to say 'makes contact,' then 'Who makes contact?' would be a valid question. But I don't say that. When I don't say that, the valid question is 'From what as a requisite condition comes contact?' And the valid answer is, 'From the six sense media as a requisite condition comes contact. From contact as a requisite condition comes feeling.'" Phagguna Sutta
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka ... .than.html
The bell is a series of processes as is the "one" who makes contact with the "bell". There is only the "eye" that sees, "ear" that hears, "hand" that touch the bell. -
There is only the process of hearing. No hearer and no heard. What actually hears? Where is the hearer located? Is it the eardrum, ear ossicles, cochlea, auditory nerve or brain? Sound is nothing but vibrations. The "hearer" is an activity, not an entity.What is the ear|(anatta) without its parts (the eardrum, ear ossicles, cochlea, auditory nerve or brain)
Why now do you assume 'a being'?
Mara, have you grasped a view?
This is a heap of sheer constructions:
Here no being is found.
Just as, with an assemblage of parts,
The word 'chariot' is used,
So, when the aggregates are present,
There's the convention 'a being.'
It's only suffering that comes to be,
Suffering that stands and falls away.
Nothing but suffering comes to be,
Nothing but suffering ceases.http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn05/sn05.010.bodh.html