In Buddhist Cosmological and Soteriological Systems

Home , Acintya, Bhava, Cheng Weishi Lun, Ten Bodhisattas

BSRV 31.1 (2014) 65–90 Buddhist Studies Review ISSN (print) 0256-2897 doi: 10.1558/bsrv.v31i1.65 Buddhist Studies Review ISSN (online) 1747-9681

The Meaning of ‘Mind-made Body’ (S. manomaya-kāya, C. yisheng shen 意生身) in Buddhist Cosmological and Soteriological systems

Sumi Lee

UCLA

[email protected]

Abstract The ‘mind-made body’ (S. manomaya-kāya, C. yisheng shen 意生身) is seen as a subtle body attained by a Buddhist adept during meditative practice. Previ- ous research has elucidated this concept as having important doctrinal significance in the Buddhist cosmological system. The Pāli canonical evidence shows that the manomaya-kāya is not merely a spiritual byproduct of meditative training, but also a specific existential mode of being in the system of the three realms. Studies of the manomaya-kāya to date, however, have focused mostly on early Pāli materials, and thus do not encompass theoretical development and soteriological significance of this notion in later tradition. As a beginning step to fill this gap, this article explores the meanings of the manomaya-kāya represented in the Śrīmālādevī Sūtra and the two treatises of the Ratnagotravibhāga Śāstra and the Foxing lun, which are doctrinally based on the Śrīmālādevī Sūtra in their discussion of the manomaya-kāya. Through the observation of the manomaya-kāya in these Mahāyāna texts, this article seeks to demonstrate how the concept is used in the broader cosmological and soteriological system of Mahāyāna tradition. For this purpose, I first review the meanings of the manomaya-kāya in early Buddhist texts and then observe the cosmological and soteriological meaning of the notion by analyzing the theoretical connection between the three Mahāyāna texts.

Keywords manomaya-kāya, antarā-bhava, Buddhist cosmology, mind, body, Śrīmālādevī Sūtra, Ratnagotravibhāga Śāstra, Foxing lun, Paramārtha

Introduction Canonical texts from early Buddhism through to the Mahāyāna tradition make continuous reference to ‘mind-made body’ (S. manomaya-kāya, C. yisheng shen

意生身), which is commonly known as a subtle body attained by a Buddhist adept during meditative practice. While the notion involves inner experiences not open to empirical checking and thus has been considered as representing the Buddhist mythological sphere, previous studies1 show that the manomaya-kāya has important doctrinal significance in the Buddhist cosmological system. These studies reveal that Buddhist adepts’ attainment of this special body, seen as capable of various supranormal activities, is associated with their existential advancement in Buddhist cosmological system. The studies on the manomaya-kāya to date, however, have focused mostly on Pāli materials. While they have substantially contributed to our understanding of this notion, they do not encompass the theoretical development and soteriological significance of the manomaya-kāya in Mahāyāna tradition. This article seeks to elucidate the later development of the notion to enable our systematic understanding of it as a whole. To this end, it explores various phases of the meaning of the manomaya-kāya by connecting the previous scholarship on the Pāli sources with the doctrines in Mahāyāna scriptures and treatises. The first section will provide an overview of the previous scholarship on the meaning of manomaya-kāya presented in the Pāli sources, focusing on how or in what way the concept is related to the Buddhist cosmological system. Then, I will discuss another, distinct, meaning of the manomaya-kāya, as the mode of existence in the time between lives, as based on non-Pāli texts. The last and main section will examine the meaning of manomaya-kāya in Mahāyāna scriptures, in particular the Śrīmālā Sūtra, and related sixth and seventh century Chinese treatises, considering how the manomaya-kāya concept is used in the Mahāyāna cosmological and soteriological system. Manomaya-kāya and meditation in Buddhist cosmology The term manomaya-kāya appears in various contexts in the Pāli canon, which provide it with different shades of meaning.2 Among these meanings, the

1. The representative studies on the notion of manomaya-kāya in this regard include: Johansson 1979, 34–39; Hamilton 1996, 144–155; Radich 2007, 224–287; Fukuhara 1960. 2. Michael David Radich divides a range of meanings of manomaya-kāya in the Pāli canon into three categories — (I) Buddhist practice and attainment, (II) cosmology, (III) views of other schools — which are again divided into nine subcategories altogether. The first category includes five subcategories of manomaya-kāya: (1) the body as part of a path of practice by practitioners bound for arhatship, (2) the body as the post-mortem destiny of disciples who achieve a certain level of attainment, (3) the body in which the Buddha visits the heaven of Brahmā, (4) the form in which the Buddha comes to a disciple to teach him (once), (5) the kind of body of a generous lay person reborn in a certain heaven. The second category is divided into two subcategories: (6) the form in which certain devas are incarnated in some heavens, (7) the form in which certain beings are reincarnated in the early part of a kalpa in various cosmogonic accounts. The third is divided into two: (8) one of a range of objects of identification that can be mistaken for a permanent self, in a teaching where the Buddha refutes the notion of such a self, (9) part of one of seven nihilist views refuted by the Buddha in the Brahmajāla Sutta (Radich 2007, 224–247). The typical meaning of manomaya-kāya, that is, the special body produced during meditation, corresponds to the first of the nine subcategories in Radich’s division. In Radich’s list, although the category of (I) Buddhist practice and attainment and (II) cosmology are divided, the first category contains many elements that may be reduced into the second category. I provide a discussion in this section on the correlation between Buddhist practice and attainment and the Buddhist cosmology.

© Equinox Publishing Ltd 2014 The Meaning of ‘Mind-made Body’ in Buddhist Cosmological and Soteriological systems 67 manomaya-kāya is best known as a special body attained by a Buddhist practitioner during meditative practice. The Samaññaphala Sutta (DN I 47–85; Rhys Davids 1899, 65–95) provides an archetypal depiction of the manomaya-kāya of the Pāli texts. It lists a series of ‘fruits of the life of a recluse’ in a progressive way, including the manomaya-kāya as one of the ‘fruits’ attained in the later stage of spiritual development. After gaining the ‘fruits’ of the earlier stage, such as various levels of ‘moralities’, ‘self-restraint over the senses’, ‘mindfulness and self-possession’, and ‘contentment’, the practitioner will ‘choose some lonely spot’ and ‘keeps intelligence (sati) alert and intent’. Through this procedure, the practitioner’s mind finally concentrates and enters the four meditative absorptions (P. jhāna, S. dhyāna). It is in the fourth jhāna — the stage characterized by ‘pure self-possession and equanimity, without pain and without ease’ — that the practitioner creates the manomaya-kāya: He calls up from this body another body, having form, made of mind, having all (his own body’s) limbs and parts, not deprived of any organ. Just, O king, as if a man were to pull out a reed from its sheath. He would know: ‘This is the reed, this is the sheath. The reed is one thing, the sheath another. It is from the sheath that the reed has been drawn forth’. And similarly were he to take a snake out of its slough, or draw a sword from its scabbard. (DN I 77; Rhys Davids 1899, 87–88) This special body has the ability to perform many supranormal activities, such as ‘having been one, becoming many’ or ‘having been many, becoming one’, ‘becoming visible or invisible’, ‘going, feeling no obstruction, to the further side of a wall or rampart or hill, as if though air’, ‘penetrating up and down through solid ground, as if through water’, ‘walking on water without breaking through, as if on solid ground’, ‘traveling cross-legged in the sky like the birds on wing’, ‘touching and feeling the sun and moon’, ‘reaching in the body even up to the heaven of Brahmā’ . (DN I 77-78; Rhys Davids 1899, 88-89). Even if the Samaññaphala Sutta appears to describe the manomaya-kāya as simply a product of meditative practice in this context, the creation of the manomaya- kāya during the specific meditative absorption ofjhāna has a strong cosmological connotation, which is consistent with the three levels of Buddhism’s cosmological system, i.e., sensuous realm (kāma-dhātu), pure form realm (rūpa-dhātu) and formless realm (arūpa-dhātu). In the Buddhist worldview, as we will see below, the practitioners’ moral and meditative attainment in previous lives determines their existential mode in one of the realms, and ‘mind-made’ (manomaya) is considered as the existential mode of the pure form realm. In view of this worldview, we may understand the Buddhist practitioners’ attainment of meditative absorption of jhāna and the subsequent creation of the manomaya-kāya not just as a supranormal experience during meditative practice, but as a preliminary sign of their advancement to a higher existential level in the Buddhist cosmological system. The Poṭṭhapāda Sutta has a passage that represents the correlation between the three levels of the cosmological system and three existential modes of the realms. In the text, the Buddha teaches Poṭṭhapāda about three types of ‘personality’ or ‘conventional self’3 of the realms, which should be ultimately abandoned, and in

3. Hamilton says that the term atta-paṭilābha (lit. ‘the taking on of a self’) in this context has the meaning of ‘existence as an individual’, that is, a ‘conventional self’ of each of the three realms, because the terms of oḷārika, manomaya, and arūpa in the passage corresponds respec-

© Equinox Publishing Ltd 2014 68 Sumi Lee this context ‘manomaya’ is addressed as one of the three existential modes of the conventional self: The following three modes of personality [atta-paṭilābhā], Potthāpada, (are commonly acknowledged in the world): material [or ‘gross’], immaterial [or ‘mind- made’], and formless. The first has form, is made up of the four elements, and is nourished by solid food. The second has no form, is made up of mind, has all its greater and lesser limbs complete, and all the organs perfect. The third is without form, and is made up of consciousness only [saññāmayo]. (DN I 195; Rhys Davids 1899, 259–260) This passage depicts the ‘conventional self’ of each of the realms as having the ‘gross’ (oḷārika)’, ‘mind-made’ (manomaya), and ‘formless’ (arūpa) aspect respectively. The commentary on this sutta also associates these three aspects with the sensual, pure form, and formless realm respectively by counting the three types of the ‘conventional self’ as being, respectively, those of the kāma-bhava, rūpa- bhava, and arūpa-bhava levels of existence (DN-a II 380; Hamilton 1996, 152). In this respect, the three types of selves must refer to the respective beings of the sensuous, pure form and formless realms. A passage of the Apaṇṇaka Sutta explicates the existential distinction of heavenly beings (devas) between the pure form and formless realms. In the text, in teaching Brahmin householders the ‘unskillfulness’ of taking one view of a topic as definitely true when one has no direct knowledge to go on, the Buddha describes the devas of the pure form realm as ‘mind-made’ (manomaya) and those of the formless realm as ‘perception-made’ (saññāmaya) as follows: Now as to the recluses and Brahmins who hold the doctrine and view ‘there definitely are no immaterial realms (aruppā)’, if their word is true then it is certainly still possible that I might reappear [after death] among the gods of the fine-material realms (rūpino) who consist of mind (manomayā). But as to the recluses and Brahmins who hold the doctrine and view ‘there definitely are immaterial realms’, if their word is true then it is certainly possible that I might reappear [after death] among the gods of the immaterial realms who consist of perception (saññāmayā). (MN I 410; Ñanamoli 1995, 516). [Emphasis added] In this passage, the Buddha clearly distinguish between the beings of the fine material/pure form and immaterial/formless realm according to their existential modes, and, this again implies that the distinction in the cosmological system is associated with the different existential modes of the beings of the realms. Furthermore, the commentary on this passage states that rebirth as a being of each realm requires a specific level of meditative attainment corresponding to the realm in a previous life; the heavenly beings (devas) of the pure form and formless realm are said to be the results of their rūpa and arūpa jhāna respectively (MN-a III 122; Hamilton 1996, 153).4 Thus it may be said that the practitioners’

tively to the gross and subtle material form, and formlessness of the three realms (Hamilton 1996, 152). 4. Several scholars have discussed the connection between the Buddhist cosmological system of the three realms and meditative attainments. Rupert Gethin, for instance, provides a detailed explanation of the connection between Buddhist cosmology and the fourth ‘meditation’ (jhāna/dhyāna) in his article ‘Cosmology and Meditation: From the Aggañña Sutta to the Mahāyāna’ (Gethin 1997, 186–204); Pongsu Choe investigates the implication of the mind-

© Equinox Publishing Ltd 2014 The Meaning of ‘Mind-made Body’ in Buddhist Cosmological and Soteriological systems 69 attainment of a certain meditative level leads to their existential transformation, which in turn entails the change of their cosmological locus. There is another passage in the Nirodha Sutta that shows the association of the practitioners’ meditative accomplishment with their cosmological level. This passage deals with the doctrinal issue of which realm an adept will be reborn in, if the adept has attained the meditative level of ‘cessation of perception and feeling’ (saññāvedayita-nirodha), but has not attained the final knowledge in this life. When Sāriputta, one of the Buddha’s major disciples, says that the adept will ‘pass beyond the gods that feed on gross food and be reborn among the mind- made gods [viz., in the pure form realm]’, a monk named Udāyin disagrees three times. Later, when the Buddha asks him who he thinks has the manomaya-kāya, Udāyin answers that the devas who are formless and perception-made (arūpī- saññāmayā) have it, and the Buddha criticizes this answer (AN III 193–195; Bodhi 2012, 778–780; Hamilton 1996, 153–154). Although interpretation of this dispute raises some issues,5 the relevant point for the current discussion is the manner in which the meditative attainment is addressed; the meditative level of ‘cessation of perception and feeling’ is considered in this text as a direct factor of the practitioner’s rebirth in a higher cosmological level. This again represents the paralleling relationship between the practitioners’ spiritual progress and their existential level in the cosmological system. The correlation between the spiritual attainment and cosmological level, in turn, places the previously quoted description of the manomaya-kāya in the Samaññaphala Sutta in the broad context of Buddhist cosmology. When the practitioners’ spiritual attainment determines their existential level in the Buddhist cosmological system, the attainment of a certain level of jhāna and subsequent creation of a manomaya-kāya may be understood not just as aspects of a practitioners’ spiritual advancement in this life, but also as their existential transformation to a higher cosmological level in the next life. As practitioners spiritually progress, their existential mode also progresses, and the three levels of the Buddhist cosmological system may be seen as the collective reflection of the spiritual pro- gression of individual practitioners of meditation. The manomaya-kāya, in this sense, may have a broader doctrinal connotation as an existential level of beings within Buddhist cosmology.6

made body by analyzing its connection with the three realms (Choe 1988). Donald Swearer also indicates that manomaya has not only the ‘magical’ aspects of ancient Buddhist mythol- ogy, but ethical and ontic connotations in relation with jhāna practice (Swearer 1973, 447– 452). For an explanation of Buddhist cosmological system along with other Indian ancient cosmology, see Gombrich 1975. 5. Although some scholars take this passage as evidence that the manomaya-kāya is the deva body of the pure form realm, not the formless realm, it seems also possible that the Buddha rebukes Udāyin because he has referred to the devas of the formless realms, not both the pure form and formless devas. Furthermore, the *Mahāvibhāṣā sees both the devas of the pure form realm and those of the formless realm as categories of the manomaya-kāya. Also see n. 25 below. 6. Although the saṃsāric world is divided into the three realms and the Pāli sources refer to the mind-made body as representing the existential mode of the pure form realm, this distinction, as Hamilton consistently argues, does not have the implication of ‘ontological discontinuity’, such as physical and mental, between the levels (Hamilton 1996, 138–168). Hamilton says that the different cosmological levels can be explained in terms of variation in the degree of density (from gross material form, subtle form, through to formlessness),

Manomaya-kāya as the form of a being in the intermediate existence while the typical meaning of the manomaya-kāya in the Theravāda Pāli canon has particular relevance to the Buddhist cosmological system, another strand of canonical source provides a starkly different meaning of the manomaya-kāya. The Saṃyuktāgama (Za Ahanjing 雜阿含經 ), a sūtra collection belonging to another Abhidharma school, the Kāśyapīya,7 depicts the manomaya-kāya as a sort of a medium in the process of transmigration to convey one from this life to another: The Buddha said to Vaccha: ‘When a sentient being exhausts the life-force in the present life, he/she rides on a mind-made body (manomaya-kāya) to be reborn in another place. At this time, he/she takes [another life] because of craving, and stays [in the life] because of craving. Therefore [the manomaya-kāya] is said to have the remainder (S. śeṣa, C. youyu 有餘).’8 The text describes the mind-made body as what one ‘rides on’ (C. sheng 乘)9 at death in order to be reborn in another place for the next life. This description of the manomaya-kāya exactly accords with the Buddhist notion of ‘intermediate existence’ (S. antarā-bhava, C. zhongyou 中有), a transitional mode of being between death and rebirth, which comprises one of sentient beings’ ‘four existential modes’ (S. catur-bhava, C. siyou 四有), along with birth (S. upapatti-bhava, C. shengyou 生有), life (S. pūrvakāla-bhava, C. benyou 本有), and death (S. maraṇa- bhava, C. siyou 死有). In other words, this passage introduces the manomaya-kāya — which in the prior section had been identified as a product of the meditative practice — in the place of the between-lives antarā-bhava. The Pāli canon makes no reference to the term antarā-bhava as an individual topic or concept, even though there are some usages of ‘antarā/antarena’.10

and/or in terms of the behaviour of similarly conditioned phenomena; different modes or states, not different ‘substance’, determine the distinction between cosmological levels (pp. 149–150). Peter Harvey also discusses the issue of ontological distinction between mental and physical substance in Pāli Buddhism (Harvey 1993). For the problem of mind-body dualism in Buddhism from a psychological perspective, see Rune E. A. Johansson’s The Dynamic Psychol- ogy of Early Buddhism, especially the chapters on Perception and Feeling, Motivation, and the Intellectual Superstructure (Johansson 1979). 7. The Kāśyapīya school is doctrinally close to the Sarvāstivāda school. The latter school particularly accepted the notion of ‘intermediate being’ (S. antarā-bhava, C. zhongyou 中有) and understood this notion of ‘intermediate being’ in terms of the manomaya-kāya. 8. 佛告婆蹉：眾生於此處命終，乘意生身生於餘處，當於爾時，因愛故取，因愛而住，故說有餘 (雜阿含經T99:02.244b02–05). Based on this passage, Fukuhara Ryōgon raises a possibility that the mind-made body may be considered as the subject of transmigration, but he also indicates that the Sarvāstivāda school uses the concept of manomaya-kāya in a limited sense, viz., only applying it to the sentient beings within the three realms, not to the body of bodhisattvas beyond the realms as well. In this respect, he concludes, this concept cannot be referred to as the subject of transmigration in a broad sense (Fukuhara 1960, 53). In any case, it is more likely to be simply the form that a being temporarily takes between lives. Also see Radich 2007, 275–277. I will discuss more about the mind-made body as the body of bodhisattvas in the section 3 below. 9. The Pāli equivalent (SN 44.9) of this passage does not contain the exact term corresponding to ‘ride on’. See n. 12 below. 10. Somaratne suggests that the earliest Buddhist community recognized the idea of antarā- bhava, even though the term antarā-bhava as a concrete concept starts to appear only in the Abhidharma period; he points as the evidence to the concept of ‘gandhabba’ in the Pāli nikāyas,

Scholars have also demonstrated that the antarā-bhava was a controversial notion among the Abhidharma schools and not all the Abhidharma schools accepted this notion.11 The term generally appears in Sarvāstivādin texts, such as the *Mahāvibhāṣā, and in later Mahāyāna texts, especially the works of the Yogācāra school, which doctrinally inherited many ideas of the Sarvāstivāda school.12 The Sarvāstivāda school’s subscription to this notion of antarā-bhava also explains the fact that ‘Northern Buddhism’, the same doctrinal line as the Sarvāstivāda school, accepts the notion of antarā-bhava, while ‘Southern Buddhism’, the tradition developed on the basis of the Theravādin school, does not. As is well known, ‘Southern Buddhism’ generally conserved most features of ancient Buddhism in the Pāli nikāyas during the Abhidharma period, while ‘Northern Buddhism’ went through consistent evolution until it finally developed into Mahāyāna Buddhism. This genealogical development of the school lineage explains why the Mahāyāna tradition, especially the Yogācāra school and the Tibetan Vajrayāna tradition, employed the notion of antarā-bhava.13 The Sarvāstivādins present the theory of ‘one who obtains nirvāṇa midway [viz., in the state of antarā-bhava]’ (P. antarā-parinibbāyin, S. antarā-parinirvāyin, C. zhongban 中般) as authoritative evidence of the existence of the antarā- bhava. The antarā-parinibbāyin is one of the five types of ‘non-returners’14 (P. and S. anāgāmin, C. buhuan不還), along with ‘one who obtains nirvāṇa soon [after rebirth]’ (P. upahacca-parinibbāyin)’/ ‘one who obtains nirvāṇa at rebirth’

a being coming into the mother’s womb for a new conception. He also indicates that the term ‘antarā/antarena’ was used in the meaning of ‘in-between’ or ‘intermediate state’ of existence in the earliest period (Somaratne 1999, 149–152). In fact, the Sarvāstivādin *Mahāvibhāṣā gives gardharva (P. gandhabba) as one of the names of antarā-bhava (see n. 22 below). Harvey (1995, 98–108) also discusses a range of evidence indicating acceptance of a between-lives existence in the Pāli nikāyas. 11. For the list of the schools which accepted or rejected the antarā-bhava, see Blezer 1997, 6, n.33. 12. Bryan J. Cuevas says that the Sarvāstivādins and related schools, such as the Sautrāntikas and Mahāyāna Yogācārins, accepted the existence of postmortem intermediate state and this concept was formalized by at least the fifth century (Cuevas 2003, 42). Along this line, Radich also indicates that, even if the above passage of the Saṃyuktāgama of the Kāśyapīya school corresponds to SN 44.9 of the Pāli canon of the Theravāda school, the Pāli version does not contain the term manomaya-kāya. He provides the translation of the Pāli passage as follows: ‘At that time, Vaccha, when a being lays aside this body and rises up again in another body, for that I declare craving to be the fuel. Indeed, Vaccha, craving is on that occasion the fuel’ (Radich 2007, 246). Thanissaro Bhikkhu’s (2014) translation of this passage provides a different recension (of a kind also supported by Harvey (1995, 98–9)), though neither of the translations contains the term manomaya-kāya: ‘Vaccha, when a being sets this body aside and is not yet reborn in another body, I designate it as craving-sustained, for craving is its sustenance at that time’. 13. In both Tibet and East Asia and, Buddhist ceremonies associated with the notion of antarā- bhava have been traditionally well developed. In order to guide the a dead person in the antarā-bhava to a good rebirth, an East Asian Buddhist ceremony called the ‘forty-ninth day ceremony’ (C. sishijiu zhai, J. shijūku sai, K. sasipku chae 四十九齋) has been performed once weekly seven times after death, since it is believed that the period of the antarā-bhava lasts forty-nine days after death. The Bar do thos grol chen po (lit. the ‘Great Liberation by Hearing During the Intermediate State’), which is usually known by its English title, the Tibetan Book of the Dead, systematically explicates the Tibetan ceremony to lead the intermediate being (T. bar do) even to the liberation (grol) (Buswell and Lopez 2013, 827). 14. The concept of the five types of non-returners is explicated in, for instance, the Abhidharmakośa-bhāṣya VI.37–39, 43–44; see Pruden 1988, vol.3, 966–71; 979–981.

(S. upapadya-parinirvāyin, C. shengban 生般), ‘one who obtains nirvāṇa without effort’ (P. asaṅkhāra-parinibbāyin, S. anabhisaṃkāra-parinirvāyin, C. wuxing ban 無行般), ‘one who obtains nirvāṇa with effort’ (P. sasaṅkhāra-parinibbāyin, S. sābhisaṃkāra-parinirvāyin, C. youxing ban 有行般), and ‘one who goes upstream to the highest abode’ (P. uddhaṃsota akaniṭṭha-gāmin, S. ūrdvasrotas akaniṣṭa-gāmin, C. shangliu ban 上流般). The concept of the antarā-parinibbāyin appears in Pāli texts, along with a listing of the five types of the anāgāmin. The Pāli texts state the term anāgāmin as the third of the four levels of ‘noble person’ (ārya-pudgala), i.e., ‘stream-enterer’ (sotāpanna), ‘once-returner’ (sakadāgāmin), ‘non-returner’ (anāgāmin), and ‘worthy-one’ (arhat),15 and also refers to the antarā-parinibbāyin quite a few times.16 Based on such textual testimonies, the Sarvāstivādins inter- pret the antarā-parinibbāyins as those who obtain nirvāṇa in the state of the antarā- bhava as follows: You should know that there are beings of the intermediate existence (antarā-bhava). … Why? Because it is what the Buddha said. As the Buddha said, the seven advan- tages of the great man (sapta satpuruṣa-gataya)17 include the ‘nirvāṇa [obtained in the state of the] intermediate [existence]’. If there were no intermediate existence, there would be no nirvāṇa [obtained in the state of the] intermediate [existence]. If they [viz., those who do not agree] say that there are ‘intermediate devas’, and, accordingly, [it is called] the [intermediate] nirvāṇa, it is not right because [the intermediate devas] are not stated as one of the deva-destinies. … The rest [of kinds of the non-returners] also would not make sense. When they say ‘nirvāṇa [obtained] during birth’, would there be further what is named as ‘birth devas’?18 The above passage confirms that the Abhidharma schools were not in agree- ment regarding the problem of exactly what the term antarā-parinibbāyin refers to,19 which accords with the extent that there were different viewpoints among the schools on the existence of the antarā-bhava. The schools that accepted the existence of the antarā-bhava interpreted antarā-parinibbāyin as those who attain nirvāṇa during the antarā-bhava, but some other schools viewed the antarā- parinibbāyin in terms of ‘intermediate devas’. However, as Somaratne says, in spite of the Theravādins’ refusal, some Pāli texts appear to assume the existence of an intermediate state, at least for the antarā-parinibbāyin. Since the antarā-

15. For instance, these four levels of noble persons are stated at SN V 200 (Bodhi 2000, 1674). 16. E.g. DN III 237, SN V 69–70, AN IV 70–74. For the list of references of the antarā-parinibbāyin in the Pāli texts, see Blezer 1997, 7. n. 40. 9 17. The ‘seven results’ (sapta satpuruṣagataya) are described at SN V 69–67, 237, 285 (Bodhi 2000, 1572–1573, 1702–1703, 1743). They are: (1) Adepts attain perfect knowledge (aññā) earlier in this very life. (2) If they do not, then they attain perfect knowledge at the time of death. (3) If they attain perfect knowledge neither earlier in this very life nor at the time of death, then they, having ended the five lower fetters, become antarā-parinibbāyin. (4) … upahacca- parinibbāyin. (5) … asaṅkhāra-parinibbāyin. (6) … sasaṅkhāra-parinibbāyin. (7) … uddhaṃsota akaniṭṭhagāmin. For more explanation, see Harvey 1995, 100–102 and Hwang 2006, 30. 18. 當知有中陰 … 何以故。世尊所説故。如世尊説。七士夫趣有中般涅槃。若無中陰者則無中般涅槃。若言有中天從彼般涅槃者不然。天趣中不説故。… 餘亦有過。若説生般涅槃。復有名生天耶 (雜阿毘曇心論(*Saṃyuktābhidharma-hṛdaya Śāstra) T 1152 962c18–25). 19. For more explanation of the interpretative differences on the antarā-parinibbāyin among the schools, see Blezer 1997, 6–13.

© Equinox Publishing Ltd 2014 The Meaning of ‘Mind-made Body’ in Buddhist Cosmological and Soteriological systems 73 parinibbāyin, who will not be born again after their physical death,20 should be still in saṃsāra, they must exist in some state — such as the state of ‘intermediate being’ — when they attain nirvāṇa (Somaratne 1999, 148–149). In any case, the Sarvāstivādin interpretation of the antarā-parinibbāyin became dominant in the Northern Buddhist tradition,21 and the idea of the intermediate state also appears to have enjoyed consistent development in this tradition. The *Mahāvibhāṣā, the encyclopedic treatise of the Sarvāstivāda school, in fact provides a list of four terms with the same referent as antarā-bhava, i.e., antarā-bhava (C. zhongyou 中有), gandharva (C. qiandafu 揵達縛), ‘birth-seeker’ (S. saṃbhavaiṣin, C. qiusheng 求生), and manomaya (C. yicheng 意成).22 This list, by including the gandharva (P. gandhabba), a concept that appears in the Pāli nikāyas as the beings coming into the mothers’ womb for a new conception (MN I 265– 266; Harvey 1995, 105–106), reveals the Sarvāstivādins’ identification of thegand - harva as the antarā-bhava.23 This concept, although also known to the Theravādins, was not accepted as a being in the antarā-bhava by them. Furthermore, the inclu- sion of the concept of ‘birth-seeker’ (saṃbhavaiṣin) in the list confirms that the Sarvāstivādins considered the notion of antarā-bhava as applying to all unenlightened sentient beings, not just to such special beings as antarā-parinibbāyins, because unenlightened sentient beings are obviously all destined to ‘seek birth’ for the next life in saṃsāra. In another place, the *Mahāvibhāṣā divides the mind-made beings into several types, including the two types of the manomaya-kāya discussed above, that is, the manomaya-kāya as one of the existential modes and the kind of body in the intermediate existence. The text categorizes sentient beings into four groups in terms of their birth type, and explains ‘mind-made’ as one of the four birth types, viz., ‘birth complying with mind’. There are four groups in this ‘mind-made’ birth type, i.e., pertaining to the beings at the beginning of kalpas, in the intermediate

20. The division between re-arising/rebirth (uppatti) and becoming (bhava) presented in AN II 134 demonstrates that the antarā-parnibbāyins are not born again. The text says that the antarā- parnibbāyins still have the fetters for taking up becoming (bhava-paṭilābhika-saṃyojana), but, unlike the other kinds of non-returners, they no longer have the fetters for taking up re-arising/rebirth (uppatti-paṭilābhika-saṃyojana), implying that the antarā-parnibbāyins still exist in some sort of existential state, although they are not born again (see Harvey 1995, 101–102; Somaratne 1999, 148). 21. It is interesting to note that, according to the contemporary Buddhist rituals in Sri Lanka, which belongs to ‘Southern Buddhism’, the concept of preta — commonly known as ‘hungry ghost’, one of the six destinies of the sensuous realm in the Buddhist cosmological system — appears to have a connotation similar to that of the antarā-bhava, although the antarā-bhava seems to have a broader meaning than the preta (Langer 2009, 80–84). Research on the notion of the preta in Southern Buddhism and its relationship with the antarā-bhava would constitute a meaningful contribution to this subject. 22. 如是中有有多種名。或名中有。或名揵達縛。或名求有。或名意成 (阿毘達磨大毘婆沙論 T 1545 363a01–02). These four names are also mentioned by Vasubandhu in the Abhidharmakośa (III 40c–41a; Pruden 1988, vol 2, 441-42) where he list five names, adding another name of ‘arising’ (S. nirvṛtti, C. qi 起); see Radich 2007, 278. The Chinese translation of the equivalent passage reads: 由佛世尊以五種名說中有故。何等為五。一者意成。從意生故。非精血等所有外緣合所成故。二者求生。常喜尋察當生處故。三者食香。身資香食往生處故。四者中有。二趣中間所有蘊故。五者名起。對向當生暫時起故 (阿毘達磨俱舍論 T 1558 55b03–08). 23. Also see n. 10 above.

© Equinox Publishing Ltd 2014 74 Sumi Lee existence (antarā-bhava), the devas of the pure form and the formless realms, and the ‘transformative bodies’, as seen below: Question: Why is intermediate existence (antarā-bhava) also named mind-made (manomaya) [body]? Answer: It is because [beings in the antarā-bhava] are born complying with mind. As for all sentient beings, [1] some are born complying with the mind; [2] some with their karmas (C. ye 業); [3] some with the matured results [of their karma] (S. vipāka, C. yishou 異熟); [4] some with their sexual desire. [1] Those who are born complying with the mind refer to the beings at the beginning of kalpas, all the beings of the intermediate existence (antarā-bhava), [the devas of] the pure form realm (rūpa-dhātu) and the formless realm (ārūpa-dhātu), and the transformative bodies (S. *pariṇāma-kāya,24 C. bianhua shen 變化身); [2] those who are born complying with the karmas refer to [the beings] of hell, as the scriptures say that the sentient beings of hell are bound by their karma and cannot be freed from it, and [they are] born according to their karma, not to what the mind is pleased with; [3] those who are born complying with the matured results [of their karma] refer to all flying birds, ghosts and sprits, and so on. Since the strength of the matured results [of their karma] (vipāka) are light and strong, they can fly in the air, and in some cases walls or obstacles cannot obstruct them; [4] those who are born complying with sexual desire refer to the six levels of devas of the sensuous realm (kāma-dhātu) and human beings. Since the body of all the intermediate beings is born complying with the mind and acts while riding on the mind, they are called mind-made [body].25 [Emphasis and numbers added] Besides the two types of the manomaya-kāya previously observed, the above passage presents two more categories of the manomaya-kāya, i.e., ‘beings at the beginning of the kalpas’ and ‘transformative bodies’. The Pāli texts make several references to the ‘beings at the beginning of kalpas’. The Kosala Sutta, for instance, says that when the cosmos devolves between kalpas, beings are generally reborn as beings of ‘Streaming Radiance (ābhassara-)’, and they remain ‘mind-made (manomaya), feeding on rapture, self-luminous, moving through the skies, living in glory’ (AN V 59–60; Bodhi 2012, 1380). From their description, these beings of Streaming Radiance do not seem to have much difference in their existential mode from the devas of the heaven of Streaming Radiance (P. ābhassara, C. guang- yin tian 光音天), the uppermost of the second group of heavens among the four

24. There is a passage from which we may conjecture the Sanskrit equivalent of this term. Xuanzang, the translator of the *Mahāvibhāṣā, explains in the Cheng weishi lun 成唯識論 (*Vijñaptimātratāsiddhi Śāstra), another of his translations, that the ‘transformative bodies’ (變化身), along with the mind-made body (C. yicheng sheng 意成身), is another designation for those who are subject to the ‘inconceivable transformative birth and death’ (C. busiyi bianyi shengsi 不思議變易生死) (二不思議變易生死。謂諸無漏有分別業由所知障緣助勢力所感殊勝細異熟果。… 或名意成身隨意願成故。… 亦名變化身。無漏定力轉令異本如變化故 [成唯識論 T1585 45a17–25]). The Śrīmālādevī Sūtra addresses ‘inconceivable transformative death’ (S. acintya- pāriṇāmikī-cyuti, C. busiyi bianyi si 不思議變易死), as I will discuss this below in the next section (Xuanzang also mentions the Śrīmālādevī Sūtra in this passage), and thus we see that ‘transformative’ (變化) is related to ‘pāriṇāmikī’ (變易). 25. 問何故中有復名意成。答從意生故。謂諸有情或從意生。或從業生。或從異熟生。或從婬欲生。從意生者。謂劫初人及諸中有。色無色界并變化身。從業生者。謂諸地獄。如契經說。地獄有情業所繫縛不能免離。由業而生不由意樂。從異熟生者。謂諸飛鳥及鬼神等。由彼異熟勢輕健故能飛行空。或壁障無礙。從婬欲生者。謂六欲天及諸人等。諸中有身從意生故。乘意行故名為意成 (阿毘達磨大毘婆沙論 T 1545 363a17–27).

© Equinox Publishing Ltd 2014 The Meaning of ‘Mind-made Body’ in Buddhist Cosmological and Soteriological systems 75 of the pure form realm. The very next sentences, moreover, describe them as devas of Streaming Radiance.26 This identifies these beings as a particular group of devas, who existed even at the beginning of kalpas (DN III 84–85). This passage, however, gives little information about the meaning of the fourth type of the manomaya-kāya, ‘transformative bodies’. Mahāyāna scriptures, such as the Śrīmālā Sūtra and the Laṅkāvatāra Sūtra, though, give their own ideas on the concept of ‘transformative bodies’ in association with the notion of the body of Buddhist saints, as I shall discuss in the following section. Manomaya-kāya as the body of Buddhist saints Manomaya-kāya in the Mahāyāna cosmological system Mahāyāna literature presents a new rubric of the manomaya-kāya that is distinct from those examined above through the Pāli sources and other Abhidharma materials. The Śrīmālādevī (Siṃhanāda) Sūtra describes the manomaya-kāya as the body of three types of Buddhist saints, i.e., arhats, pratyekabuddhas, and ‘bodhisattvas-of-great-power’ (S. vaśitā-prāpta bodhisattva, C. dali pusa 大力菩薩),27 and other Mahāyāna canonical texts, such as the Ratnagotravibhāga Śāstra, the Foxing lun 佛性論, the *Anuttarāśraya Sūtra (Foshuo wushangyi jing 佛說無上依經), and the *Vijñaptimātratāsiddhi Śāstra (Cheng weishi lun 成唯識論), also discuss the manomaya-kāya on the basis of the Śrīmālādevī Sūtra’s scheme.28 Besides these texts, the Laṅkāvatāra sūtra explains the manomaya-kāya in association with three types of bodhisattva body on different levels of the bodhisattva path,29 and the

26. Right after the phrases quoted above, it is said: ‘When the world is dissolving, the devas of streaming radiance rank as the foremost. But even for these devas there is alteration; there is change.’ (AN V 60; Bodhi 2012, 1380). From the way in which this passage addresses the beings as those who have those supreme features of the Streaming Radiance devas and yet still go through change and reverse, it seems apparent that this passage considers the beings as the devas of the heaven of Streaming Radiance. 27. I will discuss it soon below. 28. All of these four texts discuss the manomaya-kāya claiming the Śrīmālādevī Sūtra as the canonical basis. The Foxing lun, a treatise dubiously attributed to Vasubandhu, and the *Anuttarāśraya Sūtra are both presumed to have been composed on the basis of the Ratnagotravibhāga Śāstra, since they are partially very similar to it. In particular, the passages about the manomaya-kāya overlap among these three texts with some variations. There are studies by Kubota Chikara on the theories of the four impediments (paripantha) and the three impurities (saṃkleśa) of these three texts from a comparative perspective (Kubota 1999; Kubota 1998). Since the Foxing lun and the *Anuttarāśraya Sūtra are extant only in Chinese ‘translation’ by Paramārtha (499–569), the authorship of these texts has been suspected. Scholars generally agree that these two texts reflect Paramārtha’s own interpretation if not being composed by Paramārtha himself. The authorship of the Foxing lun has been especially controversial. For this issue and the chrono- logical relationship between the texts, see: Tsukinowa 1935; Takasaki 1974, 7, 769; Takasaki 2005, 15–64; and King 1991, 23–26. In citing the Śrīmālādevī Sūtra, the *Vijñaptimātratāsiddhi Śāstra (Cheng weishi lun 成唯識論) explains the mind-made body (C. yicheng shen/yisheng shen 意成身/意生身) in relation with ‘inconceivable transformative birth-and-death (C. busiyi bianyi shengsi 不思議變易生死), one of the two types of birth-and-death cycle, along with ‘discontinuous birth-and-death’ (C. fenduan shengsi 分段生死) (T 1585 45a14–24). 29. There are two passages mentioning the manomaya-kāya in the Laṅkāvatāra Sūtra. In one passage, the manomaya-kāya is said to be attained by bodhisattvas on the eighth bodhisattva stage (Nanjio 1923, 80–81), and the other passage lists three types of manomaya-kāya, each of which belongs to certain stages of bodhisattva path (see Nanjio 1923, 136–137). For more

Ghanavyūha Sūtra (C. Dasheng miyuan jing 大乘密嚴經) mentions ten types of manomaya-kāya.30 Rather than reviewing all these texts addressing the concept of manomaya-kāya, I will focus on the Śrīmālādevī Sūtra and also the Ratnagotravibhāga Śāstra and the Foxing lun 佛性論, treatises which are based on the Śrīmālādevī Sūtra’s explanation of the manomaya-kāya with close similarity in their contents.31 In describing the manomaya-kāya as the special body of the three types of beings, i.e., arhats, pratyekabuddhas, and bodhisattvas-of-great-power, the Śrīmālādevī Sūtra32 says that these beings are subject to a special type of death, ‘inconceivable transformative death’ (S. acintya-pāriṇāmikī-cyuti, C. busiyi bianyi si 不思議變易死), whereas ‘the sentient beings who have reconnection (S. pratisaṃdhi) [of their lives]’ (viz., the sentient beings who are subject to rebirth) 33 are subject to ‘discontinuous death’ (S. pariccheda-cyuti, C. fenduan si 分段死), the death that happens repetitively in the revolution of lifetimes of restricted length. There are two types of ‘death’. What are the two? They are [the ordinary] ‘discontinuous death’ (S. pariccheda-cyuti, C. fenduan si 分段死) and ‘inconceivable transformative death’ (S. acintya-pāriṇāmikī-cyuti, C. busiyi bianyi si 不思議變易死). The discontinuous death belongs to the sentient beings who have reconnection (S. pratisaṃdhi); the inconceivable transformative death belongs to the mind-made

explanation of the passages in the context of the texts, see Tokiwa 1995. Also see Radich 2007, 281–283. 30. 捨於世間中所取能取見轉依離麁重智慧不思議十種意生身眾妙為嚴好作三界之主而來密嚴國 (大乘密嚴經 T681 728a10–13). The Sanskrit original of this text is not extant. 31. Since the passage on the manomaya-kāya in the *Anuttarāśraya Sūtra’s (佛說無上依經 T 669 472a24–b05) is relatively short and mostly included in the equivalent part of the Foxing lun, I will confine my research to theRatnagotravibhāga Śāstra and the Foxing lun among these three related texts. 32. Although the Sanskrit original of the Śrīmālādevī Sūtra is not extant, a significant part of the text is quoted in the Ratnagotravibhāga Śāstra. I have referred to Alex Wayman and Hideko Wayman’s translation (Wayman and Wayman 1973), which has consulted various versions of the sūtra including Sanskrit fragments, Tibetan translation, and Chinese translations. For Chinese renditions of the sūtra, there are two extant versions: the Shengman shizi hu yisheng da fangbian fangguang jing 勝鬘師子吼一乘大方便方廣經 (T 353) translated by Guṇabhadra (394–468) in 436 and the Shengman furen hui 勝鬘夫人會 (T 310), the forty-eighth section of the Ratnakūṭa Sūtra (C. Do baoji jing 大寶積經) translated by Bodhiruci (572?–727) in 713. It is also known that the Tibetan translation is similar to the Shengman furen hui, and the passages of the sūtra cited in the Ratnagotravibhāga Śāstra is similar to the translation by Guṇabhadra (Ogawa 2001, 16–17). I have used Guṇabhadra’s translation in this article. 33. While Alex Wayman indicates that the primary sense of ‘pratisaṃdhi’ is ‘rebirth’, that is, connection (saṃdhi) again (prati) (with a new body), he also claims that this typical sense of ‘pratisaṃdhi’ does not fit the Śrīmālādevī Sūtra because this denies that arhats have avoided rebirth (Wayman and Wayman 1973, 82 , n. 53). It does not seem, however, that the rebirth to which the Śrīmālādevī Sūtra says the arhats are subject has to be seen as the same sort of rebirth as that of the sentient beings in saṃsāra, because the sūtra clearly says that ‘the Arhats … have gained control over … the reconnections in saṃsāra’ (Wayman and Wayman 1973, 83). Further, the death to which the arhats, pratyekabuddhas, and bodhisattvas-of-great-power are subject is described as ‘inconceivable transformative’ (acintya-pāriṇāmikī) in distinction from the regular type of death that the sentient beings in saṃsāra experience. The ‘inconceivable transformative death’ refers to a sort of existential transformation that happens to the bodhisattvas when completing the tenth stage, as I will discuss below. In this light, it appears that the rebirth and death addressed in the Śrīmālādevī Sūtra should be divided into two types according to the sentient beings’ existential mode or level, confining the rendition ‘rebirth’ for the ‘pratisaṃdhi’ just to the rebirth of the beings in saṃsāra.

body (manomaya-kāya) of arhats, pratyekabuddhas, and bodhisattvas-of-great- power, up to their reaching ‘the ultimate supreme enlightenment’ (C. jiujing wushang puti 究竟無上菩提).34 The sūtra continues to say that the reason why the manomaya-kāya of the arhats, pratyekabuddhas, and bodhisattvas-of-great-power are subject to the ‘inconceivable transformative death’ is because they still have uneliminated defilements.35 In other words, the Śrīmālādevī Sūtra describes the manomaya-kāya of these special beings as a sort of remaining undesirable existence resulting from the non-completion of their spiritual development. Indeed, the sūtra con- nects the manomaya-kāya with a specific type of defilement, that is, ‘entrenched ignorance’ (S. avidyāvāsa-bhūmi, C. wuming zhudi 無明住地), the most fundamental type of defilement, whereas it associates the beings of the three realms with the defilement of ‘grasping’ (S. upādāna, C. qu 取):36 With grasping as condition and contaminated activities (S. sāsrava-karma, C. youlou ye 有漏業) as cause, there arise [existence in] the three realms. In the same way, with entrenched ignorance as condition and uncontaminated activities (S. anāsrava-karma, C. wulou ye 無漏業) as cause, there arise the three types of the manomaya-kāya belonging to the arhats, pratyekabuddhas, and bodhisattvas-of- great-power.37 Here the mode of being of the three types of beings — arhats, pratyekabuddhas, and bodhisattvas-of-great-power — is described in contrast with existence in the three realms, and thus we may say that they are the beings who are freed from the three realms. These beings, however, are depicted as still imperfect, due to being still affected by ignorance. Such a view in the Śrīmālādevī Sūtra of the manomaya-kāya as the ‘body’ of a spiritually developed but still imperfect being is also explicated in the Ratnagotravibhāga Śāstra. Associating the manomaya-kāya with the four kinds of ‘impediments’ (S. paripantha), the Ratnagotravibhāga Śāstra describes the manomaya-kāya of the three types of beings as a defective mode of existence, 34. Wayman and Wayman 1973, 82. Translation modified. The Sanskrit original for this passage, however, is missing. The Chinese translation of this passage reads: 有二種死。何等爲二。謂分段死。不思議變易死。分段死者。謂虚僞衆生。不思議變易死者。謂阿羅漢辟支佛大力菩薩意生身乃至究竟無上菩提 (T 353 219c20–23). 35. Wayman and Wayman 1973, 83–84. The Chinese rendition reads: 阿羅漢辟支佛…非盡一切煩惱。亦非盡一切受生故說不受後有。何以故有煩惱 (T 353 219c27–a01). 36. Right before this following passage, the Śrīmālādevī Sūtra explains the defilements that cannot be eliminated by those still at the stage of arhat or pratyekabuddha: a) four types of ‘entrenched defilements’ (C. zhudi fannao 住地煩惱), i.e.: ‘entrenched defilements of particular viewpoint’ (C. jian yichu zhudi 見一處住地); ‘attraction to desire’ (C. yuai zhudi 欲愛住地); ‘attraction to form’ (C. seai zhudi 色愛住地); ‘attraction to pure existence’ (C. youai zhudi 有愛住地); and also b) ‘arisen defilement’ (C.qi fannao 起煩惱). ‘Entrenched ignorance’ is said to be the unconscious deep-rooted defilement as the substratum of all other defilements, which has existed from beginningless time. Wayman associates the four types of the ‘entrenched defilements’ with the four kinds of upādāna that form the ninth link in Dependent Origina- tion: dṛṣṭi-upādāna (C. jianqu 見取), kāma-upādāna (C. yuqu 欲取), śīla-vrata-upādāna (C. jie jinqu 戒禁取), ātma-vādopādāna (C. woyu qu 我語取) respectively; see Wayman and Wayman 1973, 84. n. 56. 37. For alternative translation, see Wayman and Wayman 1973, 85. 又如取縁有漏業因而生三有。如是無明住地縁無漏業因。生阿羅漢辟支佛大力菩薩三種意生身 (T 353 220a16–18).

© Equinox Publishing Ltd 2014 78 Sumi Lee which has not obtained the four kinds of ‘supreme virtue’ (S. guṇa-pāramitā) of the Dharma-body of the Tathāgata: [F]or the acquisition of these four kinds of supreme virtue (S. guṇa-pāramitā, C. gongde boluomi 功德波羅蜜) of the Dharma-body of the Tathāgata, there are four ‘impediments’ (S. paripantha, C. zhang 障) even in case of the arhats, pratyekabuddhas and bodhisattvas-of-great-power, though they are abiding in the ‘uncontaminated sphere’ (S. anāsrava-dhātu, C. wulou jie無漏界). … [1] ‘Phenomenon of condition’ (S. pratyaya-lakṣaṇa, C. yuanxiang緣相) means ‘entrenched ignorance’. [The ‘entrenched ignorance’ is the condition for ‘karmic activities’ (S. saṃskāra, C. xing 行) 38 for the three types of beings,] just as ‘ignorance’ (S. avidyā, C. wuming 無明) is [the condition] for ‘karmic activities’ (S. saṃskāra, C. xing 行) [for ordinary people]. [2] ‘Phenomenon of cause’ (S. hetu-lakṣaṇa, C. yinxiang 因相) means the ‘uncontaminated activities’ (S. anāsrava-karma, C. wulou ye 無漏業) conditioned by the ‘entrenched ignorance’ [as the cause of the manomaya-kaya], [and it is to be] compared with the ‘karmic activities’ [conditioned by the ‘ignorance’ of the ordinary beings]. [3] ‘Phenomenon of origination’ (S. saṃbhava-lakṣaṇa, C. shengxiang 生相) means the origination of the three types of mind-made body (S. manomayātmabhāva), conditioned by the ‘entrenched ignorance’ and caused by the ‘uncontaminated activities’, just as the origination of the three realms (S. tribhava) is conditioned by four kinds of ‘grasping’ (S. upādāna, C. qu 取)39 and caused by the ‘contaminated activities’ (S. sāsrava-karma, C. youlou ye 有漏業).40 [4] ‘Phenomenon of destruction’ (S. vibhava-lakṣaṇa, C. huaixiang壞相) means ‘inconceivable transformative death’ (S. acintya-pāriṇāmikī-cyuti, C. bukesiyi bianyi si 不可思議變易死) conditioned by the origination of the three types of manomaya-kāya. It corresponds to ‘aging and death’ (S. jarā-maraṇa, C. laosi 老死) [of the existence of the three realms, which is] conditioned by the birth (S. jāti, C. sheng 生).41 In this passage, ‘entrenched ignorance’ and ‘uncontaminated activities’, which are described as the condition and cause of the manomaya-kāya in the Śrīmālādevī Sūtra, are referred to as the first and second of the four types of ‘impediments’, i.e., the ‘phenomenon of condition’ and the ‘phenomenon of cause’, and the origination and the death of the manomaya-kāya as the third and fourth type of the impediments respectively, i.e., the ‘phenomenon of origination’ and the ‘phenomenon of destruction’. Further, these four types of impediments are also compared with four types of phenomena in the ‘contaminated sphere’ (S. sāsrava-

38. In the Chinese translation, it is clearly stated that ‘the entrenched ignorance is the condition for the activities’ (無明住地與行作緣). For the Chinese translation of the entire passage, see n. 41 below. 39. See n. 36 above. 40. Viewed from the context, the ‘grasping’ and the ‘contaminated activities’ seems to correspond respectively to the ‘ignorance’ and ‘karmic activities’, and a little later the same ‘activities’ (行) is used in the place of anāsrava-karma of the Sanskrit original 41. Johnston 1950, 32–34; Takasaki 1966, 214–216, translation modified. The Chinese translation reads as follows: 又此四種波羅蜜等住無漏界中。聲聞辟支佛得大力自在。菩薩為證如來功德法身第一彼岸有四種障。… 緣相者。謂無明住地。即此無明住地與行作緣。如無明緣行。無明住地緣亦如是故。因相者。謂無明住地緣行。即此無明住地緣行為因。如行緣識。無漏業緣亦如是故。生相者。謂無明住地緣依無漏業因生三種意生身。如四種取。緣依有漏業因而生三界。三種意生身生亦如是故。壞相者謂三種意生身緣不可思議變易死如依生緣故有老死 (T 1611 830a28–b11).

© Equinox Publishing Ltd 2014 The Meaning of ‘Mind-made Body’ in Buddhist Cosmological and Soteriological systems 79 dhātu, C. youlou jie 有漏界), i.e., ‘ignorance’, ‘karmic activities’, origination of the three realms, and ‘aging and death’ [of the existence in the three realms]. Judging from such a parallel explanation of the ordinary beings and the three types of beings with manomaya-kāyas as belonging to two distinct spheres, i.e., the contaminated and uncontaminated sphere, it seems likely that these beings constitute two different abodes within the Mahāyāna cosmological system. The ordinary beings and the beings with manomana-kāyas are both described as spiritually imperfect beings bound by the four types of impediments respectively inside and outside the three realms, and each of them is said to be subject to a specific type of life cycle with a specific type of existential mode. In this respect, it seems that the manomaya-kāya described in the Śrīmālādevī Sūtra and the Ratnagotravibhāga Śāstra should be understood as one of the two types of existence in the Mahāyāna cosmological system, along with the ordinary beings of the three realms. Manomaya-kāya in the Mahāyāna soteriological system The Foxing lun, a treatise that is partially based on the Ratnagotravibhāga Śāstra,42 contains a passage that discusses the manomaya-kāya in an exactly parallel way to that of the Ratnagotravibhāga Śāstra, which we just have observed above. The two equivalent passages have overall the same structure and similar contents. Just like the Ratnagotravibhāga Śāstra, the Foxing lun states that it is because of the four types of ‘inimical impediments’ (C. yuanzhang 怨障) that the three types of saints (S. ārya, C. shengren 聖人)43 — arhats, pratyekabuddhas, and bodhisattvas- of-great-power — who are abiding in the uncontaminated sphere outside of the three realms, cannot (prior to becoming perfect Buddhas) attain the four types of supreme virtues of the Dharma-body of the Tathāgata.44 The Foxing lun, however, replaces the four types of phenomena of the Ratnagotravibhāga Śāstra, i.e., the phenomena of condition, cause, origination, and destruction, with ‘four types of birth-and-death’ (C. sizhong shengsi 四種生死): ‘birth-and-death of skilful means’ (C. fangbian shengsi 方便生死); ‘cause and conditions’ (C. yinyuan shengsi 因緣生死); ‘with a [remaining] lifetime’ (C. youyou shengsi 有有生死); and ‘with no [remaining] lifetime’ (C. wuyou shengsi 無有生死).45 Then the Foxing lun continues to explain each of these birth-and-death cycles as follows: [1] The ‘birth-and-death of skilful means’ refers to [the phenomenon that] ‘entrenched ignorance’ (C. wuming zhudi 無明住地) creates new ‘uncontaminated activities’ (C. wulou ye 無漏業).46 It is compared to [the ordinary beings’ phenom- 42. See n. 28 above. 43. In this passage, the Foxing lun clearly refers to the arhats, pratyekabuddhas, and bodhisattvas- of-great-power as the ‘saints’. In the equivalent passage of the Ratnagotravibhāga Śāstra, we do not see this term (see the passage of the Ratnagotravibhāga Śāstra quoted above). 44. 以出三界外有三種聖人。謂聲聞。獨覺。大力菩薩。住無流界。有四種怨障。由此四怨障故。不得如來法身四種功德波羅蜜 (佛性論 T 1610 799a06–08). 45. 四怨障者。一方便生死。二因緣生死。三有有生死。四無有生死 (佛性論 T 1610 799a08–10). 46. The Foxing lun distinguishes the concept of ‘skilful means’ from ‘cause and conditions’. It says that the ‘birth-and-death of skilful means’ is called this since the entrenched ignorance may have as result (C. guo 果, S. phala) the uncontaminated activities that are of a different kind from that of the entrenched ignorance; the entrenched ignorance, the Foxing lun says, not only causes meritorious activities (C. fuxing 福行), which belongs to the conventional abode (C. su 俗, S. saṃvṛti) as the entrenched ignorance does, but also cause the activities of wis-

enon that] ‘ignorance’ (C. wuming 無明) creates ‘karmic activities’ (C. xing 行). … [2] The ‘birth-and-death of cause and conditions’ refers to [the phenomenon of] the ‘uncontaminated activities’, which have been created by ‘entrenched ignorance’, and these activities [as a whole] are named the ‘birth-and-death of cause and conditions’. It is compared to the [ordinary beings’ phenomenon of] ‘karmic activities,’ which have been created by ‘ignorance’. … [3] The ‘birth-and-death with a [remaining] lifetime’ refers to [the phenomenon of the origination of] the manomaya-kāya of the three types of saints, which have ‘entrenched ignorance’ as skilful means (S. upāya, C. fangbian 方便)47 and the ‘uncontaminated activities’ as cause. It is compared to [the ordinary beings’ phenomenon of] the origination of the bodies in the three realms conditioned by the four ‘graspings’ (C. qu 取) and caused by ‘contaminated activities’ (C. youlou ye 有漏業). … [4] The ‘birth-and- death with no [remaining] lifetime’ refers to [the phenomenon of] the ‘inconceivable regression and fall’ (C. buke siwei tuiduo 不可思惟退墮) conditioned by the last manomaya-kāya of the three types of saints.48 It is compared to [the ordinary beings’ phenomenon of] ‘aging and death’ conditioned by ‘origination’ (C. sheng 生).49 [Numbers added] The Foxing lun’s explanation of the four types of impediments as the four types of birth-and-death cycle appears to imply that each type of impediment consti- tutes a particular type of birth-and-death cycle of a particular group of beings,

dom (C. zhihui xing 智慧行), which belongs to the absolute abode (C. zhen 真, S. paramārtha); 一方便生死者 … 或因煩惱方便。生同類果。名為因緣。如無明生不善行。若生不同類果。但名方便。如無明生善行。不動行故。今無明住地生新無漏業亦爾。或生同類。或不同類生福行。名為同類。以同緣俗故。生智慧行。名不同類以智是真慧故。是名方便生死 (佛性論 T 1610 799a10–17). Conversely, the ‘birth-and-death of cause and conditions’, the second type of the birth-and- death, is called this since the uncontaminated activities only create the results that are of the same kind as that of the uncontaminated activities; wholesome deeds only produce delightful results, whereas unwholesome deeds only cause painful results; 二因緣生死者 … 但感同類不生不同類果。善行但生樂果。不善但招苦報。故名因緣生死 (佛性論 T 1610 799a17–20). 47. Since the Ratnagotravibhāga Śāstra mentions the ‘condition’ instead of the ‘skilful means’, it seems that the ‘skilful means’ may be seen as the condition, which may produce the results that are of a different kind from that of the cause. The first birth-and-death, ‘birth-and-death of skilful means’, then may be the birth-and-death of the ‘condition’, and this in turn res- onates with the ‘phenomenon of condition’, the first impediment of the Ratnagotravibhāga Śāstra. 48. It is not certain whether ‘the last manomaya-kāya of the three types of saints’ (三聖意生最後身) merely refers to the three types of saints’ manomaya-kāya at their last moment as bodhisattvas, or has also the implication that the perfect Buddhas no longer have the manomaya-kāya as their existential mode. This is associated with the issue of whether or not, or how, a Bud- dha’s existential mode is related with the manomaya-kāya. This issue is particularly important because, as Radich points out, the manoamaya-kāya has been very often regarded as a possible precursor of a Buddha’s ‘transformative body’ (S. nairmāṇika-kāya, C. huashen 化身) (Radich 2007, 224). Some scholars, such as Frank E. Reynolds, connect it with ‘dharma body’ (S. dharma-kāya) as well (Reynolds 1977, 383–387). Radich also problematises this tendency by indicating that the Mahāyāna texts frame the manomaya-kāya primarily as the body of spiritual beings other than the Buddha, such as the three types of saints, who are soteriologically inferior to the Buddha (Radich 2007, 283-84). In the context of the given passage, however, it appears that we should keep an open mind regarding this issue. 49. 一方便生死者。是無明住地。能生新無漏業。譬如無明生行 … 二因緣生死者。是無明住地所生無漏業。是業名為因緣生死。譬如無明所生行是業 … 三有有生死者。是無明住地為方便。無漏業為因。三種聖人是意所生身。譬如四取為緣。有漏業為因三界內生身 … 四無有生死者。是三聖意生最後身為緣。是不可思惟退墮。譬如生為緣。老死等為過失 (佛性論 T 1610 799a10–29).

© Equinox Publishing Ltd 2014 The Meaning of ‘Mind-made Body’ in Buddhist Cosmological and Soteriological systems 81 not just referring to a hindering factor or reason to prevent the Buddhist saints from attaining the supreme virtues of the Buddha. Indeed, the Foxing lun starts the discussion on the four types of impediment of the three types of saints, which we have just observed above, by saying that ‘[the bodhisattvas on] the ten stages of the bodhisattva path have not yet attained the four supreme virtues because of the four types of impediments. It is not until they attain the adamantine mind (C. jingangxing 金剛心)[viz., ‘adamantine absorption’ (S. vajra-upama-samādhi), the final stage at the end of the tenth stage] that they attain them. Therefore it should be known that …’.50 In other words, the Foxing lun draws in the discussion of the four types of impediments of the three types of saints in order to explain the case of the bodhisattvas on the ten stages: they have these impediments until Buddhahood is attained. Further, in the She dashenglun shi 攝大乘論釋, Paramārtha’s translation of Vasubandhu’s Mahāyānasaṃgraha- bhāṣya,51 the four types of birth-and-death are attributed respectively to four soteriological divisions of the bodhisattvas on particular ranges of the bodhisattva stages, i.e., [1] bodhisattvas on the first through fourth stages; [2] the fifth through seventh stages; [3] the eighth through tenth stages; and [4] the stage of tathāgatagarbha (C. rulai di 如來地, S. tāthāgata-bhūmi) respectively.52 Moreover, the Foxing lun compares the first three types of birth-and-death of the bodhisattvas to respective groups of those practicing the two vehicles on particular soteriological stages in terms of the similarity of their soteriological implication of each scheme of path to liberation. This also implies that the four types of birth-and-death are associated with particular soteriological groups of beings with particular types of lifecycle. The three groups of those practicing the two vehicles compared to the first three types of birth-and-death are as follows: [1] The ‘birth-and-death of skilful means’ [of the bodhisattva path] is compared to the stage of ordinary beings (C. fanfu 凡夫) [of the path of the two vehicles],

50. 復次十地由四障故。未得極果四德。金剛後心。方乃得之應知 … (佛性論 T 1610 799a04–05). There is no equivalent of this line in the Ratnagotravibhāga Śāstra. 51. Just as Paramārtha’s significant role in the Foxing lun is presumed, either as the pseudoepi- graphical author of the whole text or a translator who heavily edited the text, Paramārtha’s translation of the She dashenglun shi is also probably edited by him. The She dashenglun shi is known for its containing many of Paramārtha’s own comments, which are not found in the equivalent Tibetan version or the translation by Xuanzang. These concepts of the four types of birth-and-death also do not appear in Xuanzang’s translation, and, moreover, the fact that the Fo shuo wushangyi jing 佛說無上依經 (*Anuttarāśraya Sūtra), another Paramārtha translation, also discusses these concepts (佛說無上依經 T669 472b14–23) strongly suggests that these concepts were added by Paramārtha. Thus it seems likely that these concepts in all three texts are associated with each other through Paramārtha. 52. 有二十二無明。麁重報障十一地。諸地各能滅三障。各得勝功德。初地能滅三障者。一法我分別無明。二惡道業無明。此二無明感方便生死名麁重報。為滅三障故修正勤。因修正勤滅三障。已得入初地得十分圓滿 … 已入第二地得八種清淨功德入 …已入第三地得八種轉勝清淨及四定等。…已入第四地得八種轉勝清淨。…所以未得者由三障故。一生死涅槃一向背取思惟無明。二方便所攝修習道品無明。此二無明所感因緣生死名麁重報。為滅此三障故。修正勤。因修正勤滅三障。已入第五地得八種轉勝清淨 …已入第六地得八種轉勝清淨 … 已入第七地得八種轉勝清淨 … 所以未能者由三障故。一於無相觀作功用無明。二於相行自在無明。此二無明所感有有生死名麁重報。為滅三障故修正勤。因修正勤滅三障。已入第八地得八種轉勝清淨 …已入第九地得八種轉勝清淨 …已入第十地得八種轉勝清淨。及能得正說圓滿法身等 … 所以未得者由三障故一於一切應知境微細著無明。二於一切應知境微細礙無明。此二無明所感無有生死名麁重報。為滅此三障故修正勤。因修正勤滅三障。已入如來地得七種最勝清淨。(攝大乘論釋 T 1595 225c21–227a02).

and [2] the ‘birth-and-death of cause and conditions’ [of the bodhisattva path] is compared to [the stage of] ‘stream-enterer’ (S. sotāpanna, C. xutuohuan 須陀洹) and above [of the path of the two vehicles].53 [3] ‘With a [remaining] lifetime’ [of the ‘birth-and-death with a [remaining] lifetime’ of the bodhisattva path] means that one has only one remaining lifetime for the future, and this is called ‘with a [remaining] lifetime’. It is compared to the ‘non-returners going upstream’ (S. ūrdvasrotas akaniṣṭha-gāmin, C. shangliu anahan- ren 上流阿那含人; viz. shangliu ban 上流般)] who attains nirvāṇa during the second [viz., next] lifetime,54 because [for both groups] there is one remaining lifetime. Therefore it is called ‘with a [remaining] lifetime’.55 [Numbers added] In this passage, the first level of birth-and-death of the bodhisattvas is compared to the stage of the ordinary beings56 of the two vehicle path in that both groups are in the stages of initial cultivation for their own paths; the second to stream-enterers in that both are in the established stage of cultivation in their own process of enlightenment; the third to the non-returners going upstream who attain nirvāṇa, i.e., become arhats, during the next lifetime in that they both in the final stage of their own practice. Among these, theFoxing lun mentions the reason why the third level of the bodhisattvas is compared to the third level of those practicing the two vehicles: it is because both groups have only one remaining lifetime since they reach their respective final goals, i.e., Buddhahood and arhatship, during their next lifetime. In other words, the bodhisattvas in the birth- and-death with a [remaining] lifetime and the non-returners going upstream who attain nirvāṇa during their next lifetime are both said to live their last lifetime as bodhisattvas proper and those training for arhatship respectively. The comparison between those practicing the two vehicles and the bodhisattvas on the ten stages in terms of the similarity of their lifecycles and soteriological implications may be summarized in the chart below: Table 1. Although we may compare the soteriological implications of the cultivation process between those aiming at the two vehicles and the bodhisattvas in a parallel way, we should note that the former may be explained within the scheme of the latter from the Mahāyāna perspective, which is also the perspective of the Foxing lun. Since the manomaya-kāya of the three types of saints corresponds to the third type of birth-and-death according to the scheme seen in the above passage of the Foxing lun, and the third level of birth-and-death is explained as the birth-and-death with only one single remaining lifetime as shown in Table 1 (opposite), we may say that from the perspective of the Mahāyāna texts discussed here, the three types of saints are the beings who live their last lifetime prior to

53. 方便生死。譬凡夫位。因緣生死。譬須陀洹以上 (佛性論 T 1610 799a20–21). 54. This kind of non-returner is first born in one of the ‘pure abode’ heavens within the form realm and then in the highest of these, Akaniṣṭha (C. se jiujing tian 色究竟天), where he then becomes an arhat. See Pruden 1988, vol. 3, 967–69. 55. 有有者。未來生有。更有一生。名為有有。如上流阿那含人於第二生中般涅槃者餘有一生故。故名有有 (佛性論 T 1610 799a25–27). 56. As I will discuss below, the Foxing lun says that the ordinary beings in the path of the two vehicles refer to those in the stages of ‘four roots of the wholesome’ (S. catuṣ-kuśala-mūla, C. si shangen 四善根) or ‘aids to penetration’ (nirvedha-bhāgīya), i.e., the stage of ‘heat’ (S. uṣma-gata, C. nuan 煖), ‘summit’ (S. mūrdhan, C. ding 頂), ‘acquiescence’ or ‘receptivity’ (S. kṣānti, C. ren 忍), and ‘highest worldly dharmas’ (S. laukika-agra-dharma, C. shi fa/shi diyi fa 世法/世第一法).

Those practicing the two vehicles Bodhisattva stages and their type of birth-and-death Ordinary beings Bodhisattvas on 1st through 4th stages (Birth-and-death of skilful means) Stream-enterers (sotāpanna) and above Bodhisattvas on 5th through 7th stages stages (Birth-and-death of cause and conditions) Non-returners going upstream Bodhisattvas on 8th through 10th stages (ūrdvasrotas akaniṣṭha-gāmin) in the last (Birth-and-death with a [remaining] life- lifetime prior to the one in which they time) become arhats [Arhats] Stage of Tathāgata (Birth-and-death with no [remaining] lifetime)

Table 1 Comparison between those practicing the two vehicles and bodhisattvas in terms of their soteriological implications and lifecycles on the basis of the Foxing lun and the She dashenglun shi by Paramārtha the Mahāyāna spiritual culminations, that is, Buddhahood. In addition, the chart show us that the bodhisattvas-of-great-power among the three types of the saints of the third level of birth-and-death refer to the eighth through tenth stages. What should be noted here is that although those practising the two vehicles and the bodhisattvas have similar features as regards to their soteriological implications and lifecycles, this does not mean that their existential modes are also identical to each other. For instance, although the third groups of the two vehicles and the advanced bodhisattvas commonly have one remaining lifetime, as discussed above, the bodhisattvas on this level have the manomaya-kāya, as one of the three types of the saints, while those practising the two vehicles on this level, the non-returners going upstream, do not have the manomaya-kāya in the way that it is said arhats do. The Foxing lun (and the Ratnagotravibhāga Śāstra) clearly says, as observed above, that the manomaya-kāya, associated with the third type of impediment, belongs to the three types of saints, i.e., the arhats, pratyekabuddhas, and bodhisattvas-of-great-power, and thus the bodhisattvas on this level have the same existential mode as that of the arhats, not that of the non-returners.57 57. In fact, the status of arhatship is typically regarded as corresponding to the eighth (or seventh) stage of the ten stages of the bodhisattva path in Mahāyāna tradition. The five stages of the mainstream tradition, i.e., the stage of (1) preparation (S. saṃbhāra-avasthā, C. ziliang wei 資糧位); (2) application (S. prayoga-avasthā, C. jiaxing wei 加行位); (3) the path of seeing (S. darśana-mārga, C. jiandao 見道); (4) the path of cultivation (S. bhāvanā-mārga, C. xiudao 修道); and (5) no-more-learning (S. aśaikṣatva, C. wuxue 無學) [i.e., arhats], have close similarity in the structure to the five-stage scheme of the Mahāyāna tradition, which is represented in, for instance, such a Yogācāra text as the Chengweishi lun (*Vijñaptimātratāsiddhi-śāstra), i.e., (1) preparation (S. saṃbhāra-avasthā, C. ziliang wei 資糧位); (2) application (S. prayoga-avasthā, C. jiaxing wei 加行位); (3) proficiency (S. *prativedha-avasthā, C. tongda wei 通達位); (4) the state of cultivation (S. *bhāvana-avasthā, C. xiuxi wei 修習位); and (5) completion (S. *niṣṭha-avasthā, C. jiujing wei 究竟位). But the stages of the Yogācāra scheme do not correspond to those of the old scheme one to one. While the bodhisattva path of the Mahāyāna ultimately culminates in the attainment of Buddhahood, adherence to the five stages of mainstream Buddhism ends up in attainment of arhatship. Also, in the Mahāyāna path, the new scheme of ten stages of

It seems then that the commonality of the soteriological implication between those practicing the two vehicles and the bodhisattvas and their existential modes are two distinct matters. Now we may say that there are two aspects to the comparison between the soteriological levels of those practicing the two vehicles and bodhisattvas: [1] one based on the common features in their soteriological implications and lifecyles, and [2] the other based on their existential modes in the cosmological system. From the perspective of the first way of explanation, we may say that the first and second levels of those practicing the two vehicles and bodhisattvas are still subject to at least two rebirths, given that the third level of those practicing the two vehicles and bodhisattvas have only one remaining lifetime. From the perspective of the second way of explanation, we may say that the beings on the stages below the three types of saints, viz., those practicing the two vehicles below the stage of the arhats or the pratyakabuddhas, and the bodhisattvas below the stage of the bodhisattvas-of-great-power, still have a mortal body that is subject to the type of birth and death experienced in saṃsāra of the three realms (viz., in the contaminated sphere), since the Ratnagotravibhāga Śāstra and Foxing lun state that the manomaya-kāya is the body of the three types of saints, who are at least free from the saṃsāric birth and death outside of the realms (viz., in the uncontaminated sphere). The Foxing lun, however, describes the ‘saints’ (S. ārya, C. shengren 聖人)58 as beings ‘out of the realms’ (C. chushi 出世) on the one hand59 and also defines the bodhisattvas on the first and above stages as the ‘saints’ on the other hand,60 hence implying that the bodhisattvas on the first and above stages are subject to the manomaya-kāya out of the realms. This statement seems contradictory to what we have just discussed above from the perspective of the second way of explanation. The seeming contradiction between the two positions, both of which are derived from the Foxing lun (and the Ratnagotravibhāga Śāstra), may be resolved by considering the group at issue as beings who are subject to both the mortal body of the three realms and the manomaya-kāya out of the realm. In other words, the

the bodhisattva path is superimposed on the third and fourth of the old scheme — with the first stage of the bodhisattva path being analogous to the third stage, the path of seeing (S. darśana-mārga, C. jiandao 見道), which is re-termed as the stage of proficiency (*prativedha- avasthā) in the Mahāyāna; and the second up to the tenth stage of the bodhisattva path is analogous to the fourth stage, the path of cultivation (S. bhāvanā-mārga, C. xiudao 修道), which is similarly renamed as the state of cultivation (S.*bhāvana-avasthā, C. xiuxi wei 修習位) (Gethin 1998 194–98; 229–31). However, the path of cultivation, the fourth stage of the old scheme, is not exactly comparable to the fourth one of the Mahāyāna, that is, the state of cultivation: while the fourth stage of the Mahāyāna refers to the second up to the tenth level of bodhisattva path, as mentioned before, the fourth stage of the old scheme corresponds to the second up to the seventh (or sixth) level of the bodhisattva path. In other words, the bodhisattva stages from the eighth (or seventh) and above do not have any analogue in the old scheme. The implication is that the arhatship, the final state of the old scheme, corresponds to the eighth (or seventh) level of bodhisattva path. It seems likely that the Mahāyāna scheme of the five stages, although having a similar structure as the old one, represents a more comprehen- sive soteriological structure. Also see Table 2 below. 58. See n. 43 above. 59. 有二種學人。一凡夫。二聖人。此惑在學道凡夫相續中。無始已來未曾見理。因初出世聖道所破名為見諦。(佛性論 T 1610 807a28–b01). 60. 聖人者。初地以上 (佛性論 T 1610 807b12).

© Equinox Publishing Ltd 2014 The Meaning of ‘Mind-made Body’ in Buddhist Cosmological and Soteriological systems 85 bodhisattvas on the first through the seventh stages, viz., the bodhisattva group between the ordinary beings and the bodhisattvas-of-great-power, should range both within and beyond the realms in the middle section of the path from the contaminated to the uncontaminated sphere. The same issue and resolution apply to the case of those practicing the two vehicles. Given that the first group of those practicing the two vehicles is described as the ordinary beings in the Foxing lun, as seen in Table 1, the second and third groups may theoretically seem to be the beings out of the realm, but stream-enterers, once-returners and non-returners are known to be on the way to leaving the three realms, but they have not yet done so. Further, according to what has been discussed from the perspective of the second way of explanation above, the second and third groups are subject to the mortal body in the saṃsāra of the three realms since they are on the stages below that of arhatship. In the same vein, the seeming contradiction between the theoretical presumption and the actual evidences is again resolved by considering those on the second and third level as those who still have a saṃsāric body in the three realms at some times and the manomaya-kāya during other times on the process of the spiritual advancement from the contaminated to the uncontaminated sphere. Beside the saints outside the three realms and the ‘semi’-saints who range both within and beyond the realms, the Foxing lun also explains about ordinary beings. In the Ratnagotravibhāga Śāstra, ‘those who undergo training [on the Buddhist path]’, or ‘learners’, (S. śaikṣa, C. xueren 學人) are categorized into two groups, i.e., the ordinary beings and the saints.61 In explaining62 this passage, the Foxing lun subdivides each of the groups into the small vehicle (S. hīnayāna, C. xiaosheng 小乘) (viz., the two vehicles) and the great vehicle (S. Mahāyāna, C. dasheng 大乘). In the case of the small vehicle, the Foxing lun says that the ordinary beings on the stage of ‘learners’ consist of the four stages, which is generally known as the stages of ‘four roots of the wholesome’ (S. catuṣ-kuśala-mūla, C. si shangen 四善根) or ‘aids to penetration’ (nirvedha-bhāgīya) — the stage of ‘heat’ (S. uṣma-gata, C. nuan 煖), ‘summit’ (S. mūrdhan, C. ding 頂), ‘acquiescence’ or ‘receptivity’ (S. kṣānti, C. ren 忍), and ‘highest worldly dharmas’ (S. laukika-agra-dharma, C. shi fa/shi diyi fa 世法/世第一法) — whereas in the great vehicle, the ordinary beings on the stage of ‘learners’ refer to those on the ‘stage of ten faiths (C. shixin 十信), and the like’.63

61. Johnston 1950, 67–68; Takasaki 1966, 279–280. 62. The Foxing lun contains passages that starts with ‘to explain’ (C. shiyue 釋曰), which is presum- ably Paramārtha’s own comments. The Foxing lun’s explanation on the ‘learners’ is also part of the comments. 63. 釋曰。學道凡夫相續中者。若小乘則從煖頂忍世法。此四是學道凡夫位 … 若大乘則十信等諸位 (佛性論 T 1610 807b01–b12). The concept of the ‘stage of ten faiths’ occurs as the stage of the ordinary beings, along with the stages of ‘ten abodes’ (C. shizhu十住); ‘ten practices’ (C. shix- ing 十行); ‘ten dedications of merits’ (C. shi huixiang 十迴向), in the scheme of the fifty-two or fifty-seven stages of the bodhisattva path. These schemes of the bodhisattva path appear in the putative Chinese apocryphal scriptures, such as the Pusa yingluo benye jing 菩薩瓔珞本業經 (T1485 1012a23–29; 1017a06–08) and the Shou lengyan jing 首楞嚴經 (Śūraṃgama-samādhi Sūtra; T945 141c01–142c28). In the case of the fifty-two stage scheme, these four groups of ten stages of ordinary beings are followed by the ten bodhisattva stages (S. daśa-bhūmi, C. shidi 十地), the stage of perfect enlightenment (S. samyak-saṃbodhi, C. dengjue 等覺), and the stage of marvel- ous enlightenment (S. *subuddhi, C. miaojie 妙覺), hence making fifty-two stages in total; in the fifty-seven stage scheme, there comes the stages of ‘four roots of the wholesome’ (S. catuṣ- kuśala-mūla, C. si shangen 四善根) between the four groups of the ten stages of ordinary beings

Cosmological sphere Those practicing the two Bodhisattvas vehicles Within the three realms Ordinary beings on the Ordinary beings on the (contaminated sphere) stages of four roots of the stage of ten faiths (C. shixin wholesome (catuṣ-kuśala- 十信) and the like mūla) Within & beyond the three Stream-enterers (sotāpanna) Bodhisattvas on the 1st realms (contaminated & up to non-returners going through 7th stages uncontaminated sphere) upstream (ūrdvasrotas akaniṣṭha-gāmin) towards their the last lifetime

Arhats Bodhisattvas on the 8th Beyond the three realms through 10th stage (uncontaminated sphere) Stage of Tathāgata

Table 2 Comparison of between those practicing the two vehicles and bodhisattvas in terms of their soteriological stages and cosmological system on the basis of the Ratnagotravibhāga Śāstra, the Foxing lun, and the She dashenglun shi by Paramārtha. The soteriological levels of those practicing the two vehicles and the bodhisattvas on the basis of their existential modes in the cosmological sphere may be summarized as in Table 2. This table shows that the Buddhist cosmological system is divided into three spheres according to the existential mode of the beings belonging to the respective spheres in association with their soteriological levels. The contaminated sphere is the abode of the ordinary beings who are subject to incessant transmigration (saṃsāra) in the three realms with a mortal body, whereas the wholly uncontaminated sphere is the locus of the Buddhist saints who are completely freed from the saṃsāra of the realms and have a manomaya-kāya instead of a saṃsāric mortal body. In between the two spheres, there is another sphere of the beings who belong both within and beyond the realms and thus are subject to both a saṃsāric mortal body and the manomaya-kāya. The beings in this sphere may be viewed as those who abide in the three realms but can temporarily experience transcendence of the saṃsāra of the realms until they are completely freed from the saṃsāra by advancing to the stage of the saints beyond the realms. Conclusion This article has sketched out a range of meanings of the manomaya-kāya presented in the early tradition focusing on the Pāli materials and the Mahāyāna sources of

and the ten bodhisattva stages, and there is another stage of ‘dry insight’ (S. *śukla-vipaśyanā- bhūmi, C. ganhui di 乾慧地) before the four groups of ten stages of ordinary beings. See also Kawamura 2004, and Chŏn and Mujinjang 1988. While the ‘saints’ on the stage of ‘learners’ of the small vehicle are not clearly identified in the Foxing lun, those of the great vehicle are indicated as the bodhisattvas on the first and above stages of the bodhisattva path, as already discussed above (see n. 60 above).

© Equinox Publishing Ltd 2014 The Meaning of ‘Mind-made Body’ in Buddhist Cosmological and Soteriological systems 87 the Śrīmālādevī Sūtra and two other treatises, the Ratnagotravibhāga Śāstra and the Foxing lun, which are in part based on the Śrīmālādevī Sutra. The previous research on this notion within Pāli materials has clarified that the manomaya-kāya has the meanings of a subtle body produced on the basis of jhāna and the existential mode of beings in the pure form level of the Buddhist cosmological system, and another direction of study on the manomaya-kāya outside the Pāli materials has disclosed a new meaning of the manomaya-kāya, that is, the existential mode during the intermediate existence (antarā-bhava) between one’s death and rebirth. Such Mahāyāna texts as the Śrīmālādevī Sūtra, the Ratnagotravibhāga Śāstra and the Foxing lun (which may represent particularly Paramārthā’s view: see note 51) present another distinct scope of meaning of the manomaya-kāya: the body of three types of Buddhist saints, namely arhats, pratyekabuddha, and bodhisattvas- of-great-power. The nature of this body and how it is seen to be used is a matter for further research. The different meanings of the manomaya-kāya, which have distinct doctrinal significances in their own contexts, suggest that the manomaya-kāya is a sort of functional concept that is applicable to various levels of ‘mind-made’ phenomena in different categories. There seems to be a connection, however, between these several types of ‘body’ termed manomaya-kāya, although they have no direct relationship that shows apparent connection between them. We may describe the four types of the manomaya-kāya from a collective perspective on three ascending planes, i.e., (1) the existential mode during the intermediate existence (antarā- bhava), (2) the existential mode of the beings of the pure form or formless realm and related jhānic states, and (3) the body of the three types of Buddhist saint. The existential mode during the antarā-bhava represents the basic and spiritually lowest level of the manomaya-kāya, since, even if the mind directs it, the antarā-bhava refers to merely a transitional existence between death and the next rebirth, that all unenlightened beings go through. For the antarā-bhava, no special effort or training is necessary in terms of the Buddhist path of cultivation. The second type of manomaya-kāya, however, is that of spiritually advanced beings, because practitioners attain this kind of body when they are born in the pure form or formless realm as the result of their attainment of advanced level of spirituality in their previous life, and may also experience it as a subtle body based on jhāna during that life. Nonetheless, this type of manomaya-kāya is still a temporal body, because although it is released from a coarse physical body, it is still bound to the saṃsāra of the three realms. In the body of the three types of Buddhist saints, they attain the freedom from the restriction of the mortal body of the three realms. When the practitioners are liberated from the saṃsāra of the three realms and advance to attain a manomaya-kāya, they become Buddhist saints. The manomaya-kāya of the saints obviously belongs to the highest spiritual level among the three types of manomaya-kāya, since this body is directed by the saints’ mind, which is entirely freed from all karmic fetters.

Abbreviations

AN Aṅguttara Nikaya DN Digha Nikaya DN-a Digha Nikayaṭṭhakathā (Sumaṅgalavilasini) MN Majjhima Nikāya MN-a Majjhima Nikāyaṭṭhakathā (Papañcasudani) SN Saṃyutta Nikaya T Taishō shinshū daizō kyō 大正新脩大藏經

Bibliography T 99 Za ahan jing 雜阿含經 T 353 Shengman jing 勝鬘經 T 1152 Za apitan xinlun 雜阿毘曇心論 T 1545 Apidamo da piposha lun 阿毘達磨大毘婆沙論 T 1558 Apidamo jushe lun 阿毘達磨俱舍論 T 1585 Cheng weishi lun 成唯識論 T 1595 She dashenglun shi 攝大乘論釋 T 1610 Foxing lun 佛性論 T 1611 Jiujing yisheng baoxing lun 究竟一乘寶性論

Blezer, Henk. 1997. Kar glin Źi khro : A Tantric Buddhist Concept. Leiden, the Netherlands: Research School CNWS, School of Asian, African, and Amerindian Studies. Bodhi, Bhikkhu. 2000. The Connected Discourses of the Buddha: A New Translation of the Saṃyutta Nikāya. Boston, MA: Wisdom. ———. 2012. The Numerical Discourses of the Buddha: A Translation of the Aṅguttara Nikāya. Boston, MA: Wisdom. Buswell, Robert E. and Donald S. Lopez. 2013. ‘sishijiu [ri] zhai’. In The Princeton Dictionary of Buddhism. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. Choe, Pongsu 최봉수. 1988. ‘Pali Nikaya ŭi ŭisŏngsin sŏl kwa samkye, samsinsŏp e taehayŏ’ Pali Nikaya 의 의성신설(意成身說)과 삼계 · 삼신섭 (三神燮) 에 대하여. Han’guk pul- kyohak 한국불교학 13: 213–238. Chŏn, Kwan-ung 전관응 and Mujinjang 무진장. 1988. Posal Kyewi 보살계위. In Pulgyohak Taesajŏn 불교학대사전, edited by Hongbŏbwŏn p’yŏnjippu 홍법원편집부. Seoul: Hongbŏbwŏn홍법원 . Cuevas, Bryan J. 2003. The Hidden History of The Tibetan Book of The Dead. New York: Oxford University Press. Fukuhara, Ryōgon 福原亮厳. 1960. ‘Tenshō no riron: ubu shisō ti chūshin to shite’ 転生の理論: 有部思想を中心として. Indogaku bukkyōgaku kenkyū 印度学仏教学研究 8(2): 51–58. Gethin, Rupert. 1997. ‘Cosmology and Meditation: From the Aggañña-Sutta to the Mahāyāna’. History of Religions 36(3): 183–217. http://dx.doi.org/10.1086/463464 ———. 1998. The Foundations of Buddhism. New York: Oxford University Press. Gombrich, Richard. 1975. ‘Ancient Indian Cosmology’. In Ancient Cosmologies, edited by Carmen Blacker and Michael Loewe, 110–142. London: George Allen & Unwin.

Hamilton, Sue. 1996. Identity and experience : the constitution of the human being according to early Buddhism. London: Luzac Oriental. Harvey, Peter. 1993. ‘The Mind-body Relationship in Pāli Buddhism: A Philosophical Investigation’. Asian Philosophy 3(1): 29–41. http://dx.doi. org/10.1080/09552369308575369 ———. 1995. The Selfless Mind: Personality, Consciousness and Nirvana in Eary Buddhism. Richmond: Curzon Press. Hwang, Soon-il 황순일. 2006. Metaphor and Literalism in Buddhism: The Doctrinal History of Nirvana. New York: Routledge. Johansson, Rune E. A. 1979. The Dynamic Psychology of Early Buddhism. Scandinavian Institute of Asian Studies. London: Curzon Press. Johnston, E. H. ed. 1950. The Ratnagotravibhāga Mahāyānottaratantraśāstra. Patna: Bihar Research Society. Kawamura, Leslie S. 2004. Bodhisattva(s). In Encyclopedia of Buddhism, edited by Robert E. Buswell. New York: Macmillan. King, Sallie B. 1991. Buddha Nature. Albany: State University of New York Press. Kubota, Chikara 久保田力. 1998. ‘Shō to iu yogore: Ishōshin to fukashigi-hen’eki-shōji’ ‘ 生という汚れ’ : 意生身と不可思議変易生死. Indogaku bukkyōgaku kenkyū 印度学仏教学研究 47(1): 122–127. ———. 1999. ‘Nyorai zō shisō no muro engi setsu (I): Hōshō ron no shi shō, san zōzen setsu o megutte’ 来蔵思想の無漏縁起説（上）:『宝性論』の四障・三雜染説をめぐって. Tohoku geijutsu koka daigaku kiyo 東北芸術工科大学紀要 6: 4–26. Langer, Rita. 2009. Buddhist Rituals of Death and Rebirth Contemporary Sri Lankan Practice and Its Origins: Routledge. Ñanamoli Bhikkhu and Bodhi Bhikkhu, trans. 1995. The Middle Length Discourses of the Buddha : a New Translation of the Majjhima Nikāya. Boston, MA: Wisdom Publications in association with the Barre Center for Buddhist Studies. Nanjio, Bunyiu, ed. 1923. The Lankavatara sutra. Kyoto: Otani University Press. Ogawa, Ichijō 小川一乗 , trans. and ed. 2001. Ōkutsumara kyō, Shōman gyō, Nyoraizō kyō, Fu sō fu gen gyō 央堀摩羅経･勝鬘経･如来蔵経･不増不減経 . Shin kokuyaku daizōkyō 新国訳大蔵経 . Nyoraizō, Yuishiki bu 如来蔵・唯識部 1. Tokyo: Daizō shuppan 大蔵出版. Pruden, Leo M., trans. 1988. Abhidharmakośabhāṣyam. 4 vols. Berkeley, CA: Asian Humanities Press. Radich, Michael David. 2007. The Somatics of Liberation: Ideas about embodiment in Buddhism from its origins to the fifth century C.E. Ph.D., Harvard University, Ann Arbor. Reynolds, Frank E. 1977. ‘The Several Bodies of Buddha: Reflections on a Neglected Aspect of Theravada Tradition’. History of Religions 16(4): 374–389. http://dx.doi. org/10.1086/462774 Rhys Davids., T. W., trans. 1899. Dialogues of the Buddha (Digha-nikaya), vol. 1. London: Luzac. Somaratne, G. A. 1999. ‘Intermediate existence and the higher fetters in the Pāli Nikāyas’. Journal of the Pali Text Society 25: 121–154. Swearer, Donald K. 1973. ‘Control and Freedom: The Structure of Buddhist Meditation in the Pāli Suttas’. Philosophy East and West 23(4): 435–455. http://dx.doi. org/10.2307/1397716 Takasaki, Jikido 高崎直道. 1966. A Study on the Ratnagotravibhaga: being a Treatise on the Tathagatagarbha Theory of Mahayana Buddhism. Roma: Istituto Italiano per il Medio ed Estremo Oriente.

———. 1974. Nyoraizo shiso no keisei : Indo Daijo Bukkyo shiso kenkyu 如来蔵思想の形成 : インド大乗仏敎思想硏究. Tokyo: Shunjusha 春秋社. ———. , and Hiroo Kashiwagi 柏木弘雄, trans. and ed. 2005. Busshō ron, Daijō kishin ron 仏性論, 大乗起信論. Shin kokuyaku daizokyo 新国訳大蔵経. Ronshubu 論集部2. Tōkyō: Daizō shuppan 大蔵出版. Thanissaro Bhikkhu. 2014. ‘Kutuhalasala Sutta: With Vacchagotta’, Access to Insight, www. accesstoinsight.org (20 February 2014): www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/ sn44/sn44.009.than.html. Tokiwa, Gishin 常盤義伸. 1995. ‘The manomayakaya of the Lankavatara-sutra’. Journal of Indian and Buddhist studies 44(1): 475–471. Tsukinowa, Kenryū 月輪賢隆. 1935. ‘Kyūkyōichijō hōshō ron ni tsuite 究竟一乗宝性論に就て’. Nihon Bukkyōgaku Kyōkai nenpō 日本仏教学協会年報 7: 121–139. Wayman, Alex and Hideko Wayman, trans. 1973. The Lion’s Roar of Queen Śrīmālā; a Buddhist Scripture on the Tathāgatagarbha Theory. New York: Columbia University Press.