PACIFIC WORLD - The Institute of Buddhist Studies

62Pacific Worldstill does not explain why Dharmåkara himself chose to rely on themechanism of the vow to establish the pleasurable land. Why not saysimply that Dharmåkara aspired to function as a buddha, and when thetime came to fulfill his aspiration, he created a land and acted as a buddhato save anyone who called on his name? In other words, why does thetradition attribute active agency to the Vow rather than to the Buddhahimself? If we look beyond the two Sukhåvat∆vy¥ha S¥tras, to thecommentarial and philosophical literature of the Indian Mahåyåna, it ispossible to give clear answers to these questions. Buddhas like Amitåbhahave passed completely beyond conceptual distinctions and cannot initiateparticular forms of action. They only appear to act, based on the needsof the believers who come to them for help and on the lingering effect of theaspirations that conveyed them to buddhahood in the first place. In theIndian tradition, these aspirations are referred to as a Buddha’s previousvows (p¥rva-pra√idhåna). 15The philosophical significance of the Vow is evident in a short passagefrom Ûåntideva’s Introduction to the Practice of Awakening(Bodhicaryåvatåra), a work that has become one of the literary classics ofthe Mahåyåna. This passage occupies a distinctive place in traditionalaccounts of the composition of the text. According to the legend ofÛåntideva’s life, Ûåntideva was perceived as a lazy monk and seemed tohave little interest in his studies. 16 Challenged to show how much heactually understood, he sat down and began to recite the Introduction.When he came to a crucial verse about emptiness, “When neither being nornonbeing are present to the mind, and there is no other option, [the mind]has no object and is at peace,” he rose into the sky and disappeared. 17 Themonks who were listening to Ûåntideva’s recitation went to his cell andfound that Ûåntideva was gone, for reasons that seem quite clear. The versethat ended his recitation represents a particularly definitive and negativeformulation of the doctrine of emptiness: there is no entity (bhåva), thereis no absence (abhåva), and there is no other possibility. Not only does thisleave the mind at peace, but it leaves very little more to say. We mightimagine that Ûåntideva’s listeners went looking for him not just to find outwhere he had gone but to see whether this verse actually constituted theend of the text. After this statement of emptiness, what more couldsomeone like Ûåntideva say? The legend tells us that the monks found theiranswer in Ûåntideva’s cell in a continuation of the text. The next threeverses say simply that the form of the Buddha appears, based on the needsof his disciples and on the strength of his previous vow:The form of the Buddha is seen, like a wishing jewel or wishing treethat fulfills desires, because of a previous vow and because of thosewho need to be disciplined. When a snake charmer consecrates apillar and then dies, the pillar cures snakebite, even when [the