Back Door Soul Theory

Buddha Nature is today taught as being interchangeable with Tathagatagarbha. They mean different things but this is not taught today. Buddha-nature, Buddha-dhatu or Buddha Principle, is taught differently in various Mahayana Buddhism traditions. Broadly speaking Buddha-nature is concerned with ascertaining what allows sentient beings to become Buddhas. The term is from the Mahayana Parinirvana Sutra where it is defined as the “true sacred nature” of the individual., in other words, a soul. Technically speaking, this universal definition is anti-Buddhist.

No verses have caused so much controversy than the two that reference the “luminous mind.” They are found near the beginning of the Anguttara Sutta. They have been used to justify the idea of a soul theory inherent in the Buddhadhamma as well as the foundation of the teachings found in the Buddha-nature and Tathagatagarbha teachings. These enigmatic versus have no explanation in the Pali suttas and imaginations have run wild with what they might mean. The meaning seems quite clear when we look at the surrounding verses.

The verses immediately before the luminous mind verses peak of the undeveloped mind. This is a mind that is untrained that is ripe with kleshas. This is to say, the mind of the ordinary worldling. The following verses probably then refer to the mind of the accomplished meditator after the defilements have been eliminated. It is not the mind we have. It is the mind to which we aspire.

This mind, O monks, is luminous, but it is defiled by adventitious defilements. The uninstructed worldling does not understand this as it really is; therefore for him there is no mental development.
This mind, O monks, is luminous, and it is freed from adventitious defilements. The instructed noble disciple understands this as it really is; therefore for him there is mental development.

(Anguttara Sutta 1:6.1–2)

The commentaries give the usual explanation of the luminous (pabhassara) mind as “the mind” (citta) refers to the bhavanga-citta, the “life continuum” or underlying stream of consciousness which arises and takes over when active consciousness lapses, such as in deep sleep. The defilements are greed, hatred, and delusion, which appear at a stage of the cognitive process that later Buddhist literature called javana meaning “impulsion.” The defilements do not arise with the bhavanga (ground of becoming), but they are noted later, at the phase of "impulsion". The fact that this expression “luminous mind” does not signify any “eternal and pure mind-essence” is very evident from the preceding text, in which the mind is said to be extremely fleeting and transitory. The “uninstructed worldling” (assutavā puthujjana) is one who lacks adequate knowledge of the Dhamma and training in its practice. What is meant by luminous mind then is the mind after meditation has influenced it. It is not a latent state.  

In the canonical texts bhavanga (bhava-anga) is mentioned only a couple or maybe three times in the Patthāna (meaning "enlargement"), a book within the Abhidhamma. Bhavanga is explained in the Abhidhamma commentaries as the basis or condition (kārana) of "existence", that is, bhava, and is the final result of all life. It is said to have the nature of a process, or literally stated as "the nature of a flux or stream" (sota). From beginningless and infinite time all impressions and experiences have been functioning but concealed to our full consciousness. At times they emerge as subconscious phenomena and come within reach of the threshold of consciousness or even crossing over it into consciousness. This 'subconscious life-stream' or "undercurrent" of life might explain the sense of memory, paranormal or psychic phenomena, mental and physical growth, kamma and rebirth. and so forth. An alternative translation of bhavanga-citta is 'life-continuum'.

It should be noted that bhavanga-citta is a kamma-resultant state of consciousness (vipāka) leading to birth as a human or higher forms of existence. It is always the result of so-called "good", or wholesome kamma (kusala-kamma-vipāka), arising in and from varying degrees of strength. The same is said of rebirth consciousness (patisandhi) and death consciousness (cuti), which are also manifestations of subconsciousness. In the Visuddhimagga chapter XIV it is said: "As soon as rebirth-consciousness (in the embryo at the time of conception) has ceased, there arises a similar subconsciousness with exactly the same object, following immediately upon rebirth-consciousness and being the result of this or that kamma (volitional action done in a former birth and remembered there at the moment before death). And again a further similar state of subconsciousness arises. Now, as long as no other consciousness arises to interrupt the continuity of the life-stream, so long the life-stream, like the flow of a river, rises in the same way again and again, even during dreamless sleep and at other times. In this way one has to understand the continuous arising of those states of consciousness in the life-stream." 

Does any of this apply to the existence of a Buddha-nature or Tathagatagarbha (the words seem to be interchangeable)? Well, not in the Buddha’s sense of the term bhavanga, which seems to be closer to the idea of “the womb of the Tathagatagarbha” than the concept of a Buddha Nature.  Bhavanga is more closely related to Tathagatagarbha simply because it is in the mind stream that all minds, including an enlightened one must necessarily have in order for states of mind to arise. It is in reality closer to the Yogacara idea of Alaya Consciousness than anything else. (Yes, the Pali Canon has all the teaching of the Yogacara School already built into it.) So, in spite of the Mahayana Mahaparinirvana Sutra, the association of Tathagatagarbha with the bhavanga citta makes more sense than the idea of it being some kind of restated soul theory. It does not; however make sense to associate the Tathagatagarbha with the luminous mind – the mind that emerges as a result of meditation.

At the same time, I am not so sure that both the ideas of Tathagatagarbha and Buddha Nature can be said to be identically the same as bhavanga citta. The whole presentation of that notion falls apart as religious superstition. Buddha Nature has to be closer in meaning to emptiness, perhaps. In one of the Nagarjuna letters, he writes, “It is the nature of the Buddha to dwell in emptiness.” Bingo! Buddha Nature is emptiness itself and this makes sense if we say the Buddha Nature is a synonym for "emptiness" (shunyata).

Oddly, it is where Dogen said when a person sits in zazen he is already enlightened that Jodo becomes more efficient than Zen. This statement comes from the Shobogenzo I am told though I have never found the exact wording. Dogen seems to saying several things: that we are already enlightened and it comes through during zazen and that the practice of zazen itself manifests enlightenment. Except in Dogen’s world neither can be said to be true. If we were already enlightened then the Buddha would have said so and wouldn't we sort of know it? The fact is, the Buddha said there are those that will never reach enlightenment. Is enlightenment made manifest while sitting in zazen? I really do not think so. Zen’s history shows that it is a direct outgrowth of the dhyana/jhana teaching and method but jhana/dhyana isn't the Zen practice. The fourth jhana is the direct perception of emptiness and nibbana/nirvana has been said to take place at that point. A person reaching that point, it is claimed in contemporary Buddhism, becomes an arahant. An arahant is a fully enlightened human being. The Japanese call the experience kensho. In Japan kensho is said to be “an enlightenment” but rarely “the enlightenment.” The Buddha said wondrous things about the fourth jhana but he didn't seem to equate it with enlightenment.

Further, zazen is not entry into the fourth jhana. Zazen is simply the practice of “choiceless awareness”, which all too often degenerates in “choiceless distraction.” It is not the moment-to-moment slideshow experience of paramatha sacca – ultimate truth. It is for these very reasons that Pure Land Buddhism, which we call Jodo, becomes more effective in contemporary society than is Zen, at least as a practice for the average person, especially in America where religion experience plays such an important role in society.

First, Pure Land recognizes the fact that lay people will have an extremely difficult time attaining nirvana/nibbana and enlightenment. Rebirth in the Pure Land is a more reasonable expectation and even a desirable practice given the teaching of the Buddha because it leads us to the proper result as stated by the Buddha. Second, Pure Land is firmly based on Yogacara but recognizes the value of Madhyamaka. Zen is based almost exclusively on Madhyamaka but does not recognize the reality of the Buddha's teaching. The Abhidhammic teaching of the “holographic” universe and mental projection seems to be there but it is not presented through the Canon. Zen speaks largely about moment-to-moment experience but Jodo is a here–and–now practice. If a Jodo practitioner can maintain the idea that Pure Mind=Pure Land in line with the purification teachings, maintain the moral code of the precepts, and maintain integrity through the Eightfold Path, then Jodo practice, while a bit more complex than Zen is also a superior method. There is a very good reason that Pali teachings are the first thing presented in Jodo training for both serious lay practitioners and clergy alike whereas Zen presents the "universe as scripture." It sounds noble but the problems with that approach are obvious in light of the Abhidhamma and Yogacara. The universe is just another projection, an illusion, and illusion cannot be the Dhamma.

Without this precise understanding of the terms Tathagatagarbha and Buddha Nature then we are talking about a soul theory, which is both superstitious and anti-Buddhist. Unfortunately, it is the soul theory that came into Mahayana and turned it into Marayana–the Mara vehicle (yana literally = "ox cart", by the way). 

In both the Mahayana and the Marayana teachings there is absolutely nothing new. The Mahayana teachings are mainly rewording and reworking of what is already in the Pali. The Marayana teachings all go back to the Vedic religion, Taoism and Shintoism (in Japan's case). It's not new and it's not Buddhadhamma. The Avamtamsaka Sutra is the most incredible piece of literature I have ever read, but it is still all there in the Pali. The word bodhisattva replaces the terms “disciple” and “monk”. Even the word bodhisattva–enlightening being–is incorrect if applied to earthly humans. That term should be bodhiskta, meaning a person working towards enlightenment.