Miscellany--Nirvana

·期刊原文
Miscellany--Nirvana

By Louis De La Valle Poussin

The Indian Historical Quarterly

vol 4:2, June, 1928. pp. 347-348

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

p. 347

Nirvana

I find that some of my views have been
misconceived in some quarters. An instance of this
will be met with in connection with the references to
my views in the review of Stcherbatsky's Nirvana by
Kaccayana (IHQ., III, no. 4,p.871). To remove such
misconception of my views already clearly expressed
in my works I want to make my position clearer by
this opportunity.

Nirvana, from the beginning, is perfect
happiness, the summum bonum, much better than any
paradise, not a paradise (of course) without any
conceivable relations with any form of existence. The
canonic literature sates clearly that the happiness
of Nirvana, end of suffering, is blissful because it
is not vedita. Later, in the Buddhabhumisastra, the
philosopher understands that Buddhahood (id est the
possession of apratisthitanirrvana) is better than
the properly so called Nirvana: for Nirvana is sukha,
but is not sukhasamvedana.

I have said that "Le yoga est essentiellement un
ensemble de pratiques en honneur des les plus vieux
ages de l'Inde aryenne ou autochtone, pratiques des
sorciers et des thaumaturges, et dent il semble que
la recherche des etats hypnotiques soit le motif
dominant: immobilite prolongee du corps............
c'est une technique etrangere en soi a toute morale
comme a toute vue religieuse ou philosophique. Mais
de cette technique peuvent se degager, a cette
technique peuvent s'ajouter morale, theologie,
devotion et, comme on dit, theosophie" (Nirvana,
p.13). In Stcherbatsky's Nirvana (quoted in IHQ., p.
872) this definition is summarized as follows: "Yoga
is nothing but vulgar magic and thaumaturgy coupled
with hypnotic practices."--But "essentiellement"
cannot be translated by "nothing but."--"Fakirism" or
"yogism" (there is, I believe, a line in the Rg-veda
on half-mad saints) is originally and
"essentiellement" supernatural devices to which
magical forces are attributed. But, from a very
remote past--men are reasonable and religious
beings--from these practices have emerged, or to
these practices have been added, mystical, religious,
metaphysical theories: It is by means of trance or
ecstasy, dhyana, samadhi, etc. that a man obtains
supernatural faculties, divine eye etc. It is by the
same methods that man enters into relations with the
gods,

p. 348

identifies himself for a time with Brahman,
contemplates the amata dhatu or Nirvana. In the same
way, prayer, sacrifices, rites of every sort,
brahmacarya, and so on, take a magical or a religious
garb. I do not believe that prayer or sacrifice is
"essentially" and from the very first, magical; but
is it not "vraisemblable" that brrahmacarya was first
practised without any speculation on the religious or
moral merit of chastity, that the Yoga practices of
fixing the eyes on the nose, etc., are, in
themselves, hypnotic contrivances and that tapas,
diksa etc., are the rude materials on which have been
built intricate and beautiful ideologies?

But my point is that, to the end, Buddhism
remains faithful to its Yoga-orgins. Buddhists
believe that the true and exact jnana is the
avikalpakajnana, a certain knowledge, to be obtained
in dhyana, which is beyond words and concepts, which
is free from any duality, subject and object. In this
jnana, there is neither a grahaka nor a grahya. In
the canon, it is said that an ascetic sees Nirvana,
or rather "touches Nirvana with its body," when he
has entered into the samjnavedita-nirodhasamapatti.
-- Here we have what may be called a "metaphysic of
ecstasy." I thought that I could make such remarks
without any risk of being accused of considering
Sakyamuni as a sorcerer. But because I have denied
that Nirvana is annihilation, Stcherbatsky concludes
that I identify Nirvana and Svarga!

European scholars can read French books, and I
did not think it useful to answer my critic, for I
hate controversies, as long as his inexact renderings
were unknown abroad. But it is of importance for me
that the learned Kaccayana and the readers of the
IHQ. should be better acquainted with my opinions.
These opinions may be inexact, are certainly inexact,
but they are not thoroughly absurd.