Is Buddhahood Permanent?

Eighth, on buddhahood's own nature and marks: within this there are two topics. First, explaining the meaning of permanence and impermanence; second, explaining the distinctions among its marks. Within the first: according to the Hīnayāna, the fruit of buddhahood is solely impermanent, since it does not speak of an intrinsic-nature virtue. As the Treatise on Buddha-Nature says: "The Hīnayāna, having no doctrine of an intrinsic-nature virtue as buddha-nature, holds only to a cultivated virtue."

According to the Initial Teaching within the three vehicles, the dharma-body is permanent, since it is the buddha's own essential nature; yet it is also impermanent, on account of the difference between being apart from conditioned things and not being apart from them. Cultivated-and-arisen virtue is impermanent, since it arises from causes and conditions, being conditioned though undefiled; yet it too can be called permanent, since it is without interruption, arising in unbroken continuity. The Mahāyānasūtrālaṃkāra says: "The buddha's own-nature body, the body without interruption, and the body of unbroken continuity — the buddha abides permanently in all three," and so on.

According to the Final Teaching there are two aspects: first, explaining them separately; second, a general statement. Within the separate explanation: cultivated-and-arisen virtue is impermanent, since it is cultivated and newly arisen; yet it is also precisely permanent, since, once attained, it is thereafter identical with suchness. Why is this? Because it originally flowed forth from suchness itself, and, ignorance now exhausted, returns again to that very body of suchness. The Liang Mahāyānasaṃgraha says: "There is nothing that does not flow from this dharma-body; there is nothing that does not, in turn, come to realize this same dharma-body," and so on. The Ratnagotravibhāga, the Awakening of Faith, and the like all establish this meaning at length, and it should be understood as they explain it. Further, the Mahāprajñāpāramitā-śāstra says: "Sarvajñā does not conjoin with the three times. Why is this? Because the past and the other times are illusory, subject to arising and ceasing, whereas sarvajñā is a real dharma, not subject to arising and ceasing." Explanation: sarvajñā here means omniscience — one thereby knows that the perfect wisdom of the ground of buddhahood is identical with suchness, and is therefore not subject to arising and ceasing. Further, the Mahāyānasaṃgraha says: "Just as space pervades and fills the entire boundary of form, without arising, abiding, ceasing, or change, so too is the tathāgata's wisdom: it pervades everything knowable, without inversion and without change," and so on. One should therefore understand that it is not merely because it is without interruption that it is called permanent — it is also permanent in being identical with suchness's own unchanging permanence.

The dharma-body is permanent, since, even while according with conditions, it does not change its own essential nature; yet it is also impermanent, since it accords with defiled conditions in order to meet the capacities of beings. Why is this? Because all these virtues alike are, equally, identical with suchness — hence whatever function arises is, in every case, suchness's own doing. Within the Awakening of Faith, the reward-body and the transformation-body are explained as belonging entirely to the great function subsumed under suchness. That treatise also says: "When sentient beings' minds are pure, the dharma-body's own image appears therein," and so on. It also says: "Further, the original enlightenment, according with defilement and discriminating thought, gives rise to two kinds of marks, which are never separate from that original enlightenment itself: the first is the mark of wisdom's own purity; the second is the mark of inconceivable activity," and goes on to explain this at length.

Second, the general statement: because the dharma-body has the meaning of according with conditions, the differentiation of virtues is thereby established; because it has the meaning of being unchanging, there is no virtue whatsoever that is not identical with suchness. It is as though the entire substance accords with conditions while its whole character remains unchanged — the two meanings fusing together without any obstruction. For this reason, the fruit of buddhahood is precisely permanent and precisely impermanent, complete with all four positions of the tetralemma, or else beyond all four — this should be understood according to the particular meaning intended.

Question: If this is so, then why can one say that it is neither one nor different? Answer: Within the Initial Teaching, since suchness pervades everywhere and wisdom directly realizes suchness, they are not different; yet since the conditioned and the unconditioned are not the same, they are not one either. Within the Final Teaching, virtue has two aspects: first, the aspect of dependently arisen manifestation, since the virtue of the three countless kalpas is not in vain; second, the aspect of having no nature of its own, since apart from suchness it has no substance of its own. Here, the first aspect corresponds to the dharma-body's according with conditions, and the latter aspect corresponds to the dharma-body's unchangingness — this is the gate of "not different," since the entire substance is thereby wholly gathered in. And this same first aspect, taken together with unchangingness, and the latter aspect, taken together with according with conditions, form the gate of "not one," since their meanings are distinct. It is precisely in remaining unmoved that they are not different — and this makes clear why they are not one either. Reflect on this, and it becomes evident.

According to the Sudden Teaching, since every mark is exhausted and every thought departed, there is only the single body of real nature, equal and equal alike — one cannot speak of any differentiation of virtue, nor can one speak of permanence and impermanence at all. If one borrows language to indicate it, then, as scripture says: "This very body of mine is precisely the dharma-body," and, as scripture also says: "The bodies of all buddhas are but a single dharma-body," and so on. It should be understood accordingly.

According to the Perfect Teaching, the meaning of buddhahood's permanence and the rest has three accounts. First, with reference to function: since the fruit of buddhahood pervades all dharmas of the three kinds of world and the rest, it is complete with all four positions of the tetralemma concerning permanence. Second, with reference to virtue: the fruit of buddhahood is complete with four aspects — first, cultivated and newly arisen; second, originally possessed; third, originally possessed yet cultivated and newly arisen; fourth, cultivated and newly arisen yet originally possessed — perfectly fused and unobstructed, replete with boundless virtues; hence it too runs through all four positions concerning permanence. The meaning of these first two accounts may be seen upon reflection. Third, with reference to substance, it likewise runs through all four positions: since this sūtra makes itself known by not being explicitly spoken of, it is permanent; since it corresponds to the āgamas, it is impermanent; since the two meanings are unobstructed, it is both; and since it arises according to conditions at their very limit, it is neither. As for these three accounts above: where substance is meant, all are substance; and, going further, where function is meant, all are function — since substance and function are gathered in without any obstruction between them, all of them possess permanence and the rest without obstruction. Reflect on this.

Second, explaining the distinctions among the marks: according to the Hīnayāna, there are the thirty-two marks and eighty minor marks, and these are real dharmas. Within the three vehicles, some likewise speak only of the thirty-two marks and eighty minor marks, holding these to be marks of the transformation-body — yet holding, too, that being empty is itself precisely what being a mark means. So the Diamond Sūtra, the Abhidharmasamuccaya, and the like say. This is spoken according to the Initial Teaching, in order to draw the Hīnayāna onward. Others, speaking with reference to the reward-body, speak of eighty-four thousand marks, all of them real virtues. This is spoken according to those who advance directly and according to the Final Teaching and the like.

Question: Why do the Mahāprajñāpāramitā-śāstra and the like, with respect to this transformation-body, discuss such things as the golden-cymbal wound and the eating of horse-fodder as brought about by past karma, and give an originating cause for each of the thirty-two marks as well? Answer: This is done in order to draw the two vehicles onward, speaking to them at their own lower level, since present karmic fruits are never annulled, and since the noble path's cutting of affliction does not annihilate karmic retribution. Just as an arhat may still choke on sand, the golden-cymbal wound and the rest are exactly the same. The Hīnayāna takes these as real; the Initial Teaching speaks of them as empty, since this is a skillful means — as the Sūtra on Mahāyāna Skillful Means explains. The giving of an originating cause for the marks has two meanings. First, it too is a skillful means for drawing the two vehicles onward, displaying, within this very body, a superior cause and effect, since the real reward-body is not something they are able to see. Second, these are also, in truth, marks of the real reward-body, manifested and displayed within the transformation-body — and it is for this reason that an originating cause can be given for them.

Question: Why does the Mahāyānasaṃgraha say that the thirty-two marks and the rest are subsumed under the virtue of the dharma-body? Answer: This too has two meanings. First, as a skillful means for gradually turning the two vehicles, since they might find the real dharma-body difficult to believe in; by speaking of this visible virtue as the dharma-body, belief becomes easier for them, since it is something they can actually observe and see. Second, that text takes virtue itself as the dharma-body, and so subsumes the marks within it. Both of these are spoken according to the Initial Teaching. Further, the thirty-two marks and the rest, being without arising and without any nature of their own, are for that very reason precisely suchness's own dharma-body. This is spoken according to the Final Teaching.

According to the One Vehicle, there are marks numbering ten times the motes of dust in the Lotus Womb World-Ocean. Both of these kinds of marks pervade the entire dharma-realm, and their karmic function does likewise. The reason ten is spoken of is to make manifest their inexhaustibility. So the "Ocean of Marks" chapter explains. Further, the Sūtra on the Samādhi of Contemplating the Buddha, with reference to these teachings of the three vehicles, divides the buddha's marks into three sections. Hence that sūtra says: "The briefest of the brief: I now, for this present assembly and for King Śuddhodana, briefly speak of the marks. The buddha, born among human beings and displaying deeds shared in common with human beings, on account of these marks shared with human beings, speaks of the thirty-two marks; surpassing all the gods, he speaks of the eighty minor marks. For the bodhisattvas, he speaks of eighty-four thousand wondrous marks. As for the buddha's own real marks — when I first attained the way, at the site of quiescent enlightenment in Magadha, for Samantabhadra, Bhadraśrī, and the other great bodhisattvas, I have already explained them at length within the Miscellaneous Flower Sūtra."

Explanation: Here, the thirty-two marks and the rest correspond to "the briefest of the brief," spoken for gods, humans, and the two vehicles — this is the first tier. The eighty-four thousand marks and the rest correspond, in meaning, to merely "the brief," spoken for the bodhisattvas of the three vehicles — this is the second tier. "The buddha's own real marks, as explained in the Miscellaneous Flower Sūtra" correspond, in meaning, to "the extensive teaching" — this refers precisely to the account given in this very Avataṃsaka Sūtra's "Ocean of Marks" chapter, the marks of the One Vehicle's own Separate Teaching — this is the final tier. For the Miscellaneous Flower Sūtra is precisely the Avataṃsaka Sūtra itself. The remaining points may be known accordingly.