Newsgroup: it.cultura.religioni
Titolo: VIMALAKIRTI NIRDESA SUTRA.:BODHISATTVA

Dal sito di New type Universe il testo  della prefazione  al
Vimalakirti Nirdesa Sutra da parte di HISAMATSU Shin'ichi, gia'
presentato nel precedente post  al link 
http://www.hi-ho.ne.jp/universe/yuima/yuimahp.html
 
=======================================================
TALKS ON THE VIMALAKIRTI SUTRA
HISAMATSU Shin'ichi
                                           PREFACE
I would like to take up seven points which I think are important in
The Vimalakirti Sutra and lecture on them one by one. 
This sutra is comprised mainly of the teaching of Vimalakirti, an
exemplary Awakened lay person. It also includes Shakyamuni's
teaching, as well as that of other disciples and Boddhisattvas. Yet
the heart of this sutra is Vimalakirti's teaching, thus it is also
called The Sutra of Vimalakirti's Teaching.
Though he is usually simply called Yuima, Yuimakitsu is a
transcription into Chinese characters of his Indian name. Vimala
means something like defilement-free or pure, although it is also
translated as eliminating impurities. The word kirti has the
sense of praised, ringing or renowned. Thus the name Vimalakirti is
usually translated as "Renowned for Purity, but it also can
mean "Praised for Freedom from Defilement" or even "Defilement-free
Ringing.
In fact, this sutra is also called The Renowned-for-Purity Sutra, and
Vimalakirti has come to mean the one who has eliminated
all impurity, or the one renowned for accomplishing this. The point
is, the fundamental character of Vimalakirti is purity, a purity
concerning emancipation, and this emancipation is given great
importance in this sutra. The most profound meaning of having
eliminated all impurity is, after all, being one who is emancipated
from all things.
Recently, historical studies of Buddhism have become more and more
scientific and text critiques are scrutinizing the history of
the sutras. Although the sutras were believed to have had their
beginnings in Shakyamuni's day, scholars are now claiming that
most of them were composed much later. The Vimalakirti Sutra also
seems to have been composed six years after
Shakyamuni's death, at the beginning of the second century AD. 
As a matter of historical fact, we cannot be certain whether
Shakyamuni or Vimalakirti really said what is recorded in the sutra.
But rather than focus on this problem of historical facts, let us
focus on the content itself.
I consider myself a Buddhist, but I neither approve of Shakyamuni's
words nor think they are true simply because he is
supposed to have said them. And, to be frank, I don't want to assume
such things at all. My attitude is one of agreeing with
what he said if it really convinces me, and if it doesn't, I will
continue to doubt.
Even if I am doubtful, however, I will never insist that only my view
is correct. I think I am flexible enough to learn from the
sutras where I am wrong or my understanding is insufficient.
Thus, whether The Vimalakirti Sutra is considered a sermon directly
from Shakyamuni's "golden lips" or from a later date, I
want to find a way to live in truth by learning from it and
understanding it for myself. This is my present attitude.
I have decided to lecture on The Vimalakirti Sutra because its superb
Buddhism for lay people, like us, appeals to me. There
has been an undeniable tendency to think that only monks can
thoroughly understand Buddhism, or be thoroughly Buddhist. But
this idea that lay Buddhist must acquiesce and let monks take the lead
is utterly destroyed by The Vimalakirti Sutra. The
possibility of lay people far exceeding monks is clearly presented
here!
For example, the sutra describes how Shakyamuni requested Mahakasyapa,
his leading disciple, as well as Sariputra and
Ananda, visit Vimalakirti when he was ill in bed, but they all refused
out of fear. These leading disciples were afraid that, even
though they were going to visit him in his illness, they wouldn't be
able to respond to Vimalakirti if he criticized them from his
thorough and superb Buddhist Awakening. Thus, each of them submitted
apologies to Shakyamuni saying why he was
unqualified to visit Vimalakirti. This is one place where the sutra
indicates the possibility of a lay man with a wife and children
being a better Buddhist than monks. This has a great significance for
lay people like us, and allows us to really identify closely
with the sutra.
It is well known that Shotoku Taishi [Japanese Prince, statesman, and
devout Buddhist; 574-622] wrote a commentary on The
Vimalakirti Sutra; I suppose he was deeply interested in this sutra
not just because he was a fine Buddhist, but because he was
a lay person.
We must now think about the meaning of lay Buddhism has at present,
and for the future. I have been working on this problem
for years, and it comes down to this: which is more fundamental,
monastic or lay Buddhism? I am afraid my view will not be
understood well without going into some detail, but my conclusion is
that for true Buddhism, it is lay Buddhism that is
fundamental, monastic Buddhism being only one of its particular forms.
Speaking in terms of universality, monastic Buddhism
can only exist based on the universality of lay Buddhism. Thus I think
that lay people now are necessary, not conventional
Buddhist monks.
Is it even possible, given the present situation, to maintain
conventional monastic Buddhism? Looking to the future, monastic
Buddhism should be disbanded; in fact it already is in the process of
falling apart.
Saying this, monastic organizations and monks may criticize and
denounce me. But the actual fact is that monastic Buddhism
has already virtually disappeared. Even if it can be said to still
exist, what is truly worthy of the name monastic Buddhism has
been relegated to one special corner of society. there may be hundreds
of thousands of people called monks here in japan. but
it must be said that very few of them maintain the traditional ways of
monastic life. Of course, they are not entirely responsible
for this. There are other causes, so we can't blame the monks alone.
But anyhow that's the situation right now.
If we think a little more seriously about this, we realize that monks
today have to live their whole lives feeling somewhat inferior
and constantly- in anguish over being false. It's a real tragedy. In
Zen, at least the people called shike or roshi (masters) are
supposed to be authentic. But again, we must ask ourselves who really
is authentic. And even if most of the masters are, what
about the others? They, at any rate, are actually considered as second
or third rate.
I suppose such monks feel somewhat hopeless and are never satisfied.
they can practice earnestly to become masters, but very
few really accomplish this. And I'm afraid there will be fewer and
fewer in the future. To make matters worse, a person who
traveled in India and Sri Lanka a few years ago told me that people
called masters here in Japan would certainly be considered
totally depraved in Sri Lanka. They would not even qualify as monks if
judged by the precepts of Theravada Buddhism.
Thinking in the conventional way, there can be no salvation for lay
people if there is no recovery of monastic Buddhism from the
present situation. Needless to say, there would be no salvation for
monks either. This is the problem for today's monks. Where
in the world is the solution to be found? Monks can't go on as they
are; all they will do is sink to the same level as lay people.
It's not clear where they are supposed to be, so they don't even know
how far they've fallen. Is this how Buddhism should be?
I have already presented in theory my idea that lay Buddhism must be
established as fundamental Buddhism, and I have just
stated why lay Buddhism must actually be realized as such. Without
establishing such a lay Buddhism, the essential meaning of
Buddhism itself will deteriorate. I think we must have a Buddhism
which can save monks as well, and which will also remain as
true Buddhism for the future. A lay Buddhism like this must be
established. This is the way to save present-day Buddhism, and
is also what Buddhism in the future must be like.
In this context The Vimalakirti Sutra has profound significance. I
always keep in mind this sutra's most condensed and simplified
expression:
Realizing the affairs of an ordinary person without abandoning the
Dharma-Way.
I think this is the fundamental principle which runs through the
entire sutra, clearly expressing the true way of being in Buddhism.
The active life of Buddhism is found in this "realizing the affairs of
an ordinary person," and without it Buddhism cannot truly
function in this world. Not only realizing the affairs of an ordinary
person but also realizing them without abandoning the
Dharma-Way, indicates the profound Buddhist ground which transcends
actuality. In the intimate union of these two lies the
fundamental principle of a life free and unhindered, creating the
actual world even as one transcends it. The real Dharma-Way is
a garba (womb), the self-as-subject which can actively realize the
affairs of an ordinary person. And when we have, through
our own practice, established this Dharma-self-as-subject, we can
actualize the active life of an ordinary person.
Conventional Buddhism has had a strong tendency to emphasize only
going to paradise and being born in the Pure Land. The
ultimate goal of Buddhism does not lie there; it is found where the
Dharma-Way and the affairs of an ordinary person are
completely at-one and non-dual, what in The Vimalakirti Sutra is
called,
"Entering the Dharma Gate of Non-duality."
This expresses the true way of being in Buddhism, the goal of which is
not to live in one world part from this actual one, but to
live where the actual and what transcends it are completely one.
I would like to discuss this Dharma gate of Non-duality as Buddhism's
new true way of being. And I think this should be
advocated not just as a true way of being for Buddhism, but for all
human beings. In one sense this can be called a new
humanism. Our F.A.S. Society's Vow of Humankind expresses such a way
of being. If we look for such a vow of humankind
in the ancient sutras, we can find it in The Vimalakirti Sutra: and
the simplest, most modern working of The Vimalakirti Sutra
is crystallized in the "Vow of Humankind."
                                        Calm and composed
                                    Let us Awaken to our True Self
                                  Become fully compassionate humans
                                      Make full use of our abilities
                                  According to our respective
vocations
                                          Discern suffering
                                       Both individual and social
                                          And its sources
                                      Recognize the right direction
                                    In which history should proceed
                                         Joining hands as kin
                                       Beyond the differences of
                                        Race, nation or class
                                       Let us, with compassion
                                      Vow to bring to realization
                                          Our deep desire
                                          For emancipation
                                    And construct a world in which
                                       All can live truly and fully
Translated by TAKAHASHI Nobumichi in collaboration with TOKIWA Gishin
and Jeff SHORE 
--
to iu koto de 
e' tutto 
' S A T O R I '
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"It is not existence, it is not non-existence, it is not both
existence and non-existence (they are not different), it is not
not existence nor non-existence (they are not the same, it is not
something else)." 
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Free & Easy!  Love, Peace, Email   
http://JMAIL.CO.JP

Dal sito di New Type Universe il testo  della prefazione  al
