Metaphor and Literalism in Buddhism: The ... - misterdanger.net

THE DOCTRINAL DEVELOPMENT OF NIRVANA
The intended deduction from this image of a fire extinguished was, as
seen in Chapter 3, that just as it goes out through lack of fuel, there will be
no more rebirth due to lack of cause. As far as the early canon (sEtra) was
concerned, this much could be the best possible account of the state of the
TathAgata after death, or nirvana without a remainder of clinging, according
to the Buddha’s method, yoniso manasikAra.
This does not mean there was no influence at all on Indian Buddhism
from the above UpaniLadic view. The Sarvastivadins were unique in insisting
on the existence of all dharmas in the three time periods, while accepting the
momentariness of conditioned dharmas. Two apparently irreconcilable views
were reconciled by saying that what changes momentarily is not the intrinsic
nature (svabhAva) of a dharma but its activities: arising, duration, decay and
ceasing. Although the Sarvastivadins explain things through the horizontal
relationship between dharmas, the relationship between the intrinsic nature
of a dharma and its activities seems to be hierarchical. This became apparent
when Sawgabhadra used this relationship to explain the existence of a separate
dharma behind the lamp’s going out in the last stanza of the Anuruddha’s
verse. 11 In fact there is little difference between the intrinsic nature (svabhAva)
and the imperishable essential character (liWga) in terms of their relation to
phenomenal fires.
Even in this case, the Sarvastivadin interpretation of nirvana without
a remainder of clinging, or the state of the TathAgata after death, was quite
different from the UpaniLadic liberation. It is, as seen in Chapter 5, the disintegration
of the series of aggregates. 12 Thus, the whole picture of nirvana
cannot be revealed, as seen in these two opinions, without considering its
metaphorical and historical contexts together with its early developments in
the abhidharma as well as its later developments among Buddhist schools.
Although the explanations of nirvana in the early canon (sEtra) were
contingent (AbhiprAyika), explanations in the abhidharma were definitive
(lAkLaOika). This abhidharmic trend continued in the exegeses and
treatises that represent specific Buddhist schools, so let us compare each
Buddhist school’s position on the concept of nirvana and the two nirvana
theory.
Although there is no text left to explain systematically what the
Sautrantika’s two nirvana theory is, we can still reconstruct their possible
position from the scattered interpretations seen in the AbhidharmakoUabhALya
in comparison with the Sarvastivada-Vaibhalika position. Comparing three
major Indian Buddhist schools’ opinions can reveal the whole development of
the concept of nirvana. It also allows us to observe whether the Sautrantikas
really revitalized the forgotten value of nirvana’s early metaphorical contexts.
That is to say, are they, the Sautrantikas, worthy of their name, the followers
of the sEtras? As seen in Table 5.4, their positions on the nirvana concept
and the two nirvana theory were different according to school. Although
they seem to have known the basic definition of nirvana, the cessation of
108