Svabhava and Sunyata

(26)Journal of Indian and Buddhist Studies voL 43, No.2, March 1995

Musashi TACHIKAWA

The following passage from the PraJnapayamitahrdayasutya(PHS)clealy shows one of the basic meanings of the term "sunya" (emptyor devoidof) in Buddhist texts: Holy Avalokitasvara...insighted that there are fiveaggregates and he realized that they are svabhava-sunya, (arydvalokitesvaro...vyavalokayati sma panca skandhas.tams ca svabhavasunyan pasyatisma.)1) M. Muller has translatedthe above passage as follows: ...thegreat Bodhisattva Aryavalokitesvara, ...,thought thus: "There are thefive Skandhas,and thatthose he consideredas somethingby theirnature empty".2) Here Muller has taken the term "svabhava" in the so-calledgood or positivesense. At least,he has not taken it to refer to sorne entity to be negated in order to obtain ultimate reality.It is, however, doubtful whether the term"smbhava"apPearing in PHS has been used in the positivesense. It is also doubtful whether one could translatethe compound "svabhava-sunya"as "by their nature empty." H.Nakamura and K. Kino have taken the term"`svabhava"in PHS in the positivesense. Their Japanese translationof the passage above could be rendered into English as follows: Avalokitesvararealized that those aggregates are devoidof intrinsicnature from the viewpointof reality.3) Here in their translationthe term "sunya," has been taken to mean: devoid of intrinsicnature, and the term"smbhava"to mean reality. Obviously, in the above translationthe term "svahhava" has been used in the pcsitivesense. Other Japanese scholars,such as S. Watanabe and S. Kanaoka, also have given a positivemeaning to the term "svabhava" in their translationsof the above-mentioned passage from PHS.4)

-1027- Svabhava and Sunyata (M. TACHIKAWA) (27)

In this way the term "svabhava" in PHS has been often interpreted as something positive, such as reality cr ultimate truth. When interpreted in such ａ way, there might be room fcr the following implication:

Then, the five aggregates would not be empty cn a level other than that of ultimate truth. As a matter of fact, K. Morimoto in his work entitled Dogen and Sartre has interpreted the passage from PHS translated by H. Nakamura and K. Kino as having such an implication. K. Morimoto has stated as follows:

Thtis, to say that all [entities]are cievoid of intrinsic nature is to say that the

entire world exists as phenomena.5>

K.Morimoto holds that there are two levels of existence:(1) the level of permanent intrinsic nature, and (2) the level of momentary phenomena. Here in Morimoto's interpretation, the negation of the first level of existence implies the affirmation af the secand. ln other words, one

alterna,tive is established or affirmed through the exclusion of the other

alternative, provided that the two alternatives are complementary to

each other. This kind of interpretation is not peculiar to Mcrimoto, but

it ha.s been ra.ther common in the later development of Buddhist thought

in China and Japan.

It would be inaccurate to translate "svabhava" in PHS as "empty from

the point of ultimate truth."The compound"svabhava-sunya"seems to

mean simply that intrinsic nature(or own-being)is absent, and there

ls no further implication. The term "sunya" as the second element of a

compound often means:to be devoid of. The compound seems to be one

of such instances.

It is true that, in Buddhist literature, the term "svabhava" is sametimes

used in a positive sense. FOr example, Candrakirti (7th century), who

was one of the representative figures of the middle Madhyamika school,

uses the term in b0th the negative and the positive sense. We do not

know exactly from which age the term began to be used with a posi-

tive value in Buddhist literature. ln early Prajnaparamita literature and

-1026- (28) Svabhava and Sunyata (M. TACHIKAｗA) early Madhyamika treatises, however, the term "svabhava" is usually used in the negative sense. The Astasahasyika Pyajnaparamia (ASP), which represents early Prajnaparamita literature, states as follows:

Matter lacks its own-being(svabhava)that is nothing but matter.

(rupam eva... virahitam rupasvabhavena.)6)

Here "svabhava" used in the instrumental case h.as been construed with "virahita ."This kind of usage of"virahita"is similar to that of"sunya", which is to be construed with the instrumental case in order to convey the meaning of being devoid of scme entity. In the sense of the meaning of "from the point of true nature," the word "prakrtya"is often used in

.ASP.7) On the other hand, the term"svabhava"seems to have been used only in the negative sense in ASP.

In Nagarjuna's Mularnadhyamakakayika(MMK)the term"svabhava"appe- ars flfty times. Among those instances, howev er, there is no case in which the term "svabhava" is used in the positive sense. Une should also note that the compound"svabhava-sunya"does not appear in MMK.

Now it would be saf e to conclude that the compound "svabhava-sunya" in PHS means to be devoid of intrinsic nature or own-being. One could also say that the term "svabhava"has been used in the negative sense insof ar as it ref ers to the object of negation. Things are devoid of intrinsic nature or ow n-being. That is the most basic meaning of empti- neas not only xn Nagarjuna's philosophy but also in the history of the

Madhyamika schoo1.

E. Conze in his translation of PHS has rendered the word "svabhava" as "own-being," to which he has given no positive sense. His translation runs as f ollows :

He looked down from on high. He beheld but five heaps, and he saw that in

their own-being they were empty.8)

Commenting on his translation of the passage, E. Conze has clearly stated

that"to be empty in their own-being"means"the absence of the own- being"in the five aggragetea.9> Hence; one could hold that Conze has interpreted the passage frorn PHS in almost the same way as we have

-1025- Svabhava and Sunyata (M. TACHlKAWA) (29 ) interpreted it. In the Tibetan version of PHS the compound "svabhava-sunya"has been translated as"rang bzhin gyis stong pa"(devoid of intrinsicnature or own- being).The Sanskrit compound"svabhava-sunya"should be analyzed into "svabhavena (i nstrumental) sunya." The term "sunya." when used in the sense of being devoid of some entity, should be construed with the in- strurnental case. ln a similar way, the Tibetan term "stong pa"construed with "X gyis"mean that which is devoid of X. Through the history of Tibetan Buddhism the expression "rang bzhin gyis stong pa" has been always understocd to mean "to be devoid of intrinsicnature," not "to be empty from the point of intrinsic reality." We have thus seen that the passage from PHS means: Avalokitesvara realized that the five aggregates are devoid of intrinsicnature. The passage points out one of the most fundamental aspects of emptiness mentioned not only in PHS but also in other Buddhist wcrks.

Before we go into a clcse examination of the passage from PHS,let us point out another important passage from PHS, which runs as follows: Matter is emptiness(or empty), and emptinessis matter. (rupam sunyata [or sunyam], sunyata eva yupam.) 1o) Here in the passage above,matter, which is the firstmembe of trie five aggregates, is identifiedwith emptiness, which is ultimate truth. Or it is given the predicate "empty." That passage is so well-known that one may call it a slogan of the Prajnaparamita Sutras. According to the ordinary way of thinking,matter is neither emptiness nor empty. Matter belongs to the transmigratory world, and emptiness, which is ultimate reality, is beyond the transmigratory world. Between matter and emptiness there is a long distance,which should be traversed by a series of religiouspractices.Nonetheless,PHS and other Prajnaparamia Sutyas indentify the two poles which are usually considered to be far apart from each other. ln other words, Prajnaparamita literature began to insist that the sacred, which is one of the two religious poles, is

-1024- (30) Svabhava and Sunyata (M. TACHIKAWA) nothing but the profance, which represents the other religious pole. One could guess that the paradoxical s1Ogan of Prajnaparamita literaturewas welcomed and accepted as a fresh idea by early Mahayana Buddhists. In the later development of Buddhist thought ,however,there arose reactions against the direct identification of the two religious poles as advocated by early Prajnaparamita literature. Buddhist philosophers began to feel the necessity of explaining the relation between the poles, i.e.,matter and emptiness, in terms of operating concepts. One may consider the history of the Madhyamika philosophy as a history of the efforts to bridge the gap between matter and emptiness. ln the history of such efforts,the concept of svabhava Cintrinsicnature , own-being) played the role of an operating concept. The role of the concept of "svabhava" differs according to its meaning, of course. As mentioned before, Nagarjuna in his MMK has never used the term"svabhava"in the positive sense.Nagarjuna in his Vigrahavya- vartani has repeated that all things are empty(sunya) because they have no own-being(nihsvabhavatvat). Candrakiirti, however, has sometimes used the term "svabhava" in the positive sense. ln other words, he has given the name "true nature" (svabhava)to the truth that things are devoid of their own-being(svabhava). Here the first "svabhava" is employed in the positive, and the second, in the negative sense. In the history of interpretations of emptiness, the position of the gZhan stong ("Other-Emptiness")school in Tibet is unique. Following the autho- ritative tradition, the gZhan stong school accepts that the five aggregates are devoid of their own-being.ll) On the other hand,those who belong to the Tibetan Buddhist school do not hold that ultimate reality, i.e., emptiness,is devoid of its own-being.That is to say,thay insist that emptiness,which is beyond the flve aggregates,does exist.The doctrine of the gZhan stong school had a great deal of influence upon the doctrines of other Tibetan Buddhist schools. Hence, one of our tasks is to locate the position of the doctrine of the gZhan stong school in the intellectualhistory of emptiness.

-1023- Svabhava and Sunyata (M. TACHIKAWA) (31 )

As the preceding discussion indicates, there have been various interpretations of emptiness. Now let us exarnine four typical kinds of interpretations of emptiness.In the following examination,the two passages:"The five aggregates are devoid of their own-being"(Passage 1) and "Matter is emptiness, and emptiness is matter" (Passage 2) furnish two windows through which we can examine the structure of the thought of emptiness.

Interpretation 1 may be given in terms of Passage 1 as follows: The five aggregates are empty or devoid of their own-being, and there is no strong implication such that, then, the five aggregates possess that which not their own-being. (Here the mode of negation is prasajyapratisedha.) Interpretation 2 may be expressed in terms of Passage l as follows: The five aggregates are devoid of their intrinsicnature, but they are not devoid of those which are other than their intrinsic nature. (Here paryuddsa has been applied to the concept of svabhava.) Interpretation 3 may be expressed in terms of Passage 1 as follows. The five aggregates are devoid of their own-being, but emptiness, i.e.,that which is other than the five aggregates,possesses its own-being. (Here payyuddsa has been applied to the concept of the five aggregates.) Interpretation 4 may be expressed in terms of Passage 2 as follows: The five aggregates are emptiness, and empteness is nothing but the five aggregates. (Here there is no room for negation of the relation between emptiness and the five aggregates.) The fact that PHS refers to emptiness mainly in terms of the two types of passages, i.e., Passeges 1 and 2, seerns to have a theoretical necessity.

1) M. Muller and B. Nanjio, ed., The Ancient Palm-Leaves, Annecdota Oxoniensia, Aryan Series, Vo1,1, part 3, Oxfor, 1884, p. 51. 2) lbid., p, 55. 3) H. Nakamura and K. Kino, Hannyashigyo, Kongohannyakyo (Annotated Japa- nese Translations of the Pyajnapayamitahrdayasutra and the Vajyacchedika),

-1022- (32) Svabhava and Sunyata (M. TACHlKAWA)

Iwanami Shoten, 1960, p.9.

4) S. Watanabe, Watanabe Shoko Chosakushu (Collected Works of Shoko Wata-

nabe), Vo1, 6, p, 7; S. Kanaoka, Hannyashingyo (Annotated Japanese Translation

of the Pra jvcaparamitdhrdayasutra),Kodansha,1973,P.16.

5) K. Morimoto, Dogen to Saytye (Dogen and Sanrtre), Kodansha, 1974, p.87.

6) P.L. Vaidya, ed., Astasdhasyika Pyajndpayamita, Buddhist Sanskrit Texts

No, 4, Darbhanga, 1960, p. 6.

7) For example, see ibid., p.148.

8) E. Conze, Biddhist Wisdom Books, Harper Torch-book5, New York, 1958,

p. 78.

9) lbid., p.81.

10) M. Miiller and B. Nanjio, op. cit., p.51.

11) Cf., Mi bskyod rdo rje, dBu ma gzhan stong smra ba'i syol legs pay phye ba'i

sgyon me, Rumtek, 1972, 19b, 2-3.

svabhava,sunyata,Nagarjuna

(Professor, National Museum of Ethnology)

新刊紹介

『長阿含経』の原語の研究

― 音写語分析を中心として ―

辛島静志著

B5判・307頁・定価 8,240円

平河出版社 1994年8月

-1021-