The Idea of Dhātu-vāda in Yogācāra and Tathāgata-garbha Texts
< Articles
Line 2: | Line 2: | ||
|ArticleLayout=Academic Layout | |ArticleLayout=Academic Layout | ||
|ArticleTitle=The Idea of Dhātu-vāda in Yogācāra and Tathāgata-garbha Texts | |ArticleTitle=The Idea of Dhātu-vāda in Yogācāra and Tathāgata-garbha Texts | ||
− | |AuthorPage=Yamabe, N. | + | |AuthorPage=People/Yamabe, N. |
|PubDate=1997 | |PubDate=1997 | ||
− | |ArticleSummary=Hakamaya Noriaki and Matsumoto Shirõ are convinced that ''tathāgatagarbha'' theory and the Yogācāra school share a common framework that they call ''dhātu-vāda'' or "locus theory." The word ''dhātu-vāda'' itself is a neologism introduced by Matsumoto<ref>Matsumoto, "The ''Śrīmālādevī Sūtra'' and Ekayana Theory," 313</ref> and adopted by Hakamaya.<ref>Hakamaya, "Critical Notes on the ''Awakening of Mahayana Faith''," 66.</ref> They argue that the ''dhātu-vāda'' idea stands in direct contradiction to the authentic Buddhist theory of ''pratītyasamutpāda'' or "dependent origination," which in turn leads them to consider ''tathāgata-garbha'' and Yogācāra theories to be non-Buddhist. In their opinion, not only these Indian theories but also the whole of "original enlightenment thought" (''hongaku shisõ'') in East Asia fell under the shadow of the ''dhātu-vāda'' idea,<ref> Matsumoto, "Deep Faith in Causality: Thoughts on Dõgen’s Ideas," 201–2 (581–2).</ref> with the result that most of its Buddhism is dismissed as not Buddhist at all.<ref>Hakamaya, "The Significance of the Critique of Original Enlightenment," 8 ''et passim''.</ref><br> The idea of ''dhātu-vāda'' is thus an integral part of the Critical Buddhism critique and as such merits careful examination in any evaluation of the overall standpoint. Since Matsumoto first found the ''dhātu-vāda'' structure in Indian ''tathāgata-garbha'' and Yogācāra literature, we need to begin with a look at the texts in question. My approach here will be purely philological and will limit itself to the theoretical treatises (śāstras).<br><br> | + | |ArticleSummary=Hakamaya Noriaki and Matsumoto Shirõ are convinced that ''tathāgatagarbha'' theory and the Yogācāra school share a common framework that they call ''dhātu-vāda'' or "locus theory." The word ''dhātu-vāda'' itself is a neologism introduced by Matsumoto<ref>Matsumoto, "The ''Śrīmālādevī Sūtra'' and Ekayana Theory," 313</ref> and adopted by Hakamaya.<ref>Hakamaya, "Critical Notes on the ''Awakening of Mahayana Faith''," 66.</ref> They argue that the ''dhātu-vāda'' idea stands in direct contradiction to the authentic Buddhist theory of ''pratītyasamutpāda'' or "dependent origination," which in turn leads them to consider ''tathāgata-garbha'' and Yogācāra theories to be non-Buddhist. In their opinion, not only these Indian theories but also the whole of "original enlightenment thought" (''hongaku shisõ'') in East Asia fell under the shadow of the ''dhātu-vāda'' idea,<ref> Matsumoto, "Deep Faith in Causality: Thoughts on Dõgen’s Ideas," 201–2 (581–2).</ref> with the result that most of its Buddhism is dismissed as not Buddhist at all.<ref>Hakamaya, "The Significance of the Critique of Original Enlightenment," 8 ''et passim''.</ref><br> The idea of ''dhātu-vāda'' is thus an integral part of the Critical Buddhism critique and as such merits careful examination in any evaluation of the overall standpoint. Since Matsumoto first found the ''dhātu-vāda'' structure in Indian ''tathāgata-garbha'' and Yogācāra literature, we need to begin with a look at the texts in question. My approach here will be purely philological and will limit itself to the theoretical treatises (śāstras). (Yamabe, introductory remarks, 193)<br><br> |
[https://www.academia.edu/33371726/The_Idea_of_Dh%C4%81tu-v%C4%81da_in_Yogacara_and_Tath%C4%81gata-garbha_Texts Read more here:] | [https://www.academia.edu/33371726/The_Idea_of_Dh%C4%81tu-v%C4%81da_in_Yogacara_and_Tath%C4%81gata-garbha_Texts Read more here:] | ||
|DisableDropcap=No | |DisableDropcap=No | ||
}} | }} |
Latest revision as of 15:20, 4 August 2020
Citation: | Yamabe, Nobuyoshi. "The Idea of Dhātu-vāda in Yogācāra and Tathāgata-garbha Texts." In Pruning the Bodhi Tree: The Storm over Critical Buddhism, edited by Jamie Hubbard and Paul L. Swanson, 193–204. Honolulu: University of Hawai’i Press, 1997. |
---|
Abstract
Hakamaya Noriaki and Matsumoto Shirō are convinced that tathāgatagarbha theory and the Yogacara school share a common framework that they call dhātu-vāda or "locus theory." The word dhātu-vāda itself is a neologism introduced by Matsumoto[1] and adopted by Hakamaya.[2] They argue that the dhātu-vāda idea stands in direct contradiction to the authentic Buddhist theory of pratītyasamutpāda or "dependent origination," which in turn leads them to consider tathāgata-garbha and Yogacara theories to be non-Buddhist. In their opinion, not only these Indian theories but also the whole of "original enlightenment thought" (hongaku shisō) in East Asia fell under the shadow of the dhātu-vāda idea,[3] with the result that most of its Buddhism is dismissed as not Buddhist at all.[4]
The idea of dhātu-vāda is thus an integral part of the Critical Buddhism critique and as such merits careful examination in any evaluation of the overall standpoint. Since Matsumoto first found the dhātu-vāda structure in Indian tathāgata-garbha and Yogacara literature, we need to begin with a look at the texts in question. My approach here will be purely philological and will limit itself to the theoretical treatises (sastras).
Notes
- I do not know exactly when Hakamaya Noriaki and Matsumoto Shirō began their critique of tathāgata-garbha thought and hongaku shisō, but the first time I myself ran across it was in Hakamaya's "Thoughts on the Ideological Background of Social Discrimination."
- A text quoted as the basis for the Mahāyāna-saṅgraha, but not extant.
- Sutra of Neither Increase Nor Decrease, T No. 668, 16.466–8.
- I have published an expanded discussion of this topic under the title "'Mushi jirai no kai' no saikō" [A reexamination of anādhikāliko-dhātuḥ] in Suguro Shinjō Hakase Koki Kinen Ronbunshū [Festschrift for Dr. Suguro Shinjō] (Tokyo: Sankibō Busshorin, 1996), 41–59.