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

THE DOCTRINAL DEVELOPMENT OF NIRVANA
of the unconditioned element given in the VibhaWga was so solid and widely
accepted in their tradition that the Theravadins seem to have had no choice,
unlike the AbhidharmakoUabhALya seen above, 112 but to find an explanation
of how it could be classified as an Ayatana and dhAtu. We can find a small
clue in the fifth book of this abhidhamma, the KathAvatthu.
In Chapter 3 we saw that it is the ‘singularity’ of the unconditioned
(asaNskKta) that Pali abhidhamma seeks to establish for nirvana. The
KathAvatthu was the book that established this aim and rejected plurality of
the unconditioned. The decisive argument put forward from the Theravadins
was as follows: ‘Of the two nibbAnas, is one high one low, one excellent one
deficient, one superior one inferior, and is there a boundary or difference, a
line or interval between them?’ 113 This argument is unique in the Theravada.
The question is: where does this unique argument come from? André Bareau
pointed out that the Theravada’s basic concept of nirvana came from the
structure of space. 114 He did not mean that this space was ‘smaller space’, or
physical space, through which we arrive at the concept of nothingness. None
the less, he insisted that the concept of space can be found at the bottom of
the Buddhist concept of nirvana. 115
L. S. Cousins has suggested that the argument put forward in the
KathAvatthu is more subtle and is a reductio ad absurdum. Here is his reconstruction
of the above passage with modern terminology:
The unconditioned is by definition not in any temporal or spatial
relation to anything. Qualitatively it is superior to everything. If
then two unconditioneds are posited, two refutations are possible.
Firstly, either only one of them is superior to everything and the
other inferior to that one or both are identical in quality. Obviously
if one is superior then only that one is unconditioned. Secondly, for
there to be two unconditioneds, there must be some dividing line or
distinguishing feature. If there is, then neither would be unconditioned
since such a division or dividing line would automatically
bring both into the relative realm of the conditioned. Of course if
there is no distinguishing feature and they are identical in quality, it
is ridiculous to talk of two unconditioneds. 116
He is probably right to separate the concept of space from this argument.
He, unlike André Bareau, may want to avoid one obvious outcome of this
KathAvatthu passage: that the Theravada’s concept of nirvana was derived
from the concept of space. This must be an unwanted result not only for
him but also for the masters of the Pali abhidhamma. They clearly rejected
the view that space (AkAsa), among other things such as dependent origination
(paMiccasamuppAda), can be the unconditioned. 117
The space (AkAsa) rejected here is the space element (AkAsadhAtu) seen in
the DhammasaWgaOi and the VibhaWga. 118 According to the DhammasaWgaOi,
68