由尼柯耶论乔达摩成佛之道

由尼柯耶论乔达摩成佛之道
　　中华佛学研究所特约研究员　穆克纪
　　中华佛学学报
　　第十五期（2002.07）
　　页471-493
　　?2002　中华佛学研究所
　　台湾　台北
　　--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
　　English Version
　　页471 由尼柯耶论乔达摩成佛之道 中华佛学学报第十五期（2002.07）
　　提要
　　此次演讲主要探讨有关乔答摩成佛之道上的几个问题。首先，根据尼柯耶，可以确定乔答摩修四禅。其次，“我”和“现法涅槃”并未出现在乔达摩修四禅的叙述中。接著讨论的是达到初禅后的精神体验。依据《梵网经》巴利原文的语法分析，达到初禅之后并不是住于初禅，因为“初禅”只是一个名相，代表一连串心理状态。综合《梵网经》和《布喻经》的叙述，由于禅修者刻意舍离了渴欲的对象与不善的心理状态，有寻、伺、净信、欢悦、喜、身轻安、乐等心理状态自然地次第升起，最后止于三摩地。禅修者能在三摩地中持续一段时间，也就是安住于三摩地。此时心中对于感受完全没有任何思惟忆念，因此没有自我意识的束缚，这或许是乔达摩把“我”一词从他禅修的叙述中剔除的原因。达二、三、四禅后，一样会住于三摩地。然而，因为有扰动定境的因素，四禅以下只能暂住于三摩地。这些因素在初禅、二禅、三禅分别为寻伺、喜、乐。住于第四禅的三摩地，没有扰乱定境的因素，所以是稳固的，没有自我意识的约束，没有觉受的影响，禅修者达到高度禅定，并且正念具足。此时才有可能获得真正客观的知识，毋需藉助逻辑思考。乔达摩达四禅住于三摩地时，依次如实知自己的过去世、众生的过去世、苦乐生死轮转无尽，最后得“漏尽智（ā?rava-k?aya-j?āna）”，亦即有关除灭三种有漏的智慧。然而证得漏尽智菩提并不等同于证涅槃，因为还有想蕴会干扰定境。为了要住于定境不受干扰，乔达摩另外修无色定，最后达到灭想受定，止息了一切受蕴，并且把想蕴降低至不足以干扰定境的程度，这个境界最接近涅槃的状态，这是禅修者在此世间可以经历到的涅槃。在达灭受想定之后，乔达摩便自称为“如来（Tathāgatā）”。
　　关键词：
　　1.
　　初禅
　　2. 无上现法涅槃
　　3. 三摩地
　　4. 漏尽智
　　5. 如来
　　6. 我
　　页472 由尼柯耶论乔达摩成佛之道 中华佛学学报第十五期（2002.07）
　　今天我将要讨论有关乔答摩成佛之道上的几个问题。首先，乔答摩是否修四禅？有些学者认为他没有修四禅。这种见解根本站不住脚，因为遍寻五部尼柯耶，没有一处提到这种说法；相反地，在这些原始经典中一致记载著：不仅是乔答摩，连他的弟子都修四禅。所以乔答摩当然是修四禅的。
　　五部尼柯耶中对于四禅有两种叙述，其中之一属于无上现法涅槃学派（此派主张，证得无上涅槃时，万法俱存）。这两套说法几乎完全相同，主要的差异只是：“此时，这个‘我’已经达到涅槃。”这句话只出现在无上现法涅槃学派的叙述中，却不见于乔答摩所修四禅的叙述。这或许是后世在结集时省略了这句话，因为没有提到“我”，就表示证得无我实相。然而乔答摩当时还在修行初阶，尚未经历过自我消融，因此，“我”这个字眼，原来应该出现在乔答摩修四禅的叙述中。此外，当时所有的沙门都相信有常我或暂时的我的存在，这也可以佐证乔答摩修四禅的叙述中应该包含“我”这个字眼。
　　“无上现法涅槃”这个名相也应包含在乔答摩修四禅的叙述中。在无上现法涅槃的境界，所有的感受（受蕴）都已泯灭，然而感官认知机能（想蕴）依然完整地运作；换句话说，除了感受以及随之而起的自我意识之外，达到无上现法涅槃的修行者仍有感觉认知忆想的活动。证道之后的乔答摩并不认为这是最高境界的涅槃；他认定世间究极的涅槃是灭受想定，此时不仅无一丝感受的束缚，甚至连所有的认知忆想也几乎荡然无存。但是修四禅阶段的乔答摩还没有经历过灭受想定，当时他既然不知道有任何境界更胜无上现法涅槃，自然不会在他修四禅的叙述中删去这个名相。
　　然而，两种不同的叙述也许不是由于后世结集的增删。乔答摩之所以不认为此“我”达到无上现法涅槃有更深一层的理由，有关他修四禅的叙述和他实际的禅修经验是一致的。这点稍后再讨论。
　　另外，我想讨论一个人达到初禅后精神方面的体验。前面提到的两种叙述都是有关相同的精神体验，为了方便起见，我们主要依据《梵网经》中对无上现法涅槃学派的禅修叙述来讨论这个问题，相关的经文照录如下：
　　舍离了渴欲的对象与障碍圣道的心理状态，而且也已经达到了初禅－－初禅中有寻有伺，由舍离而生，并以喜、乐为特征－－之后，他安住。此时，这个“我”（soul，灵魂，神识）已经达到了无上现法涅槃的境界。
　　这就是巴利原典所要传达的意义，但是至今我所看过的翻译对这段经文多有误译之处，因此也就扭曲了原义。在此，我仅提出一个对我们研究有重大影响的误译，也就是引文最后一部分的翻译：“……现在，他达到且住于初禅。此时，这个‘我’
　　页473 由尼柯耶论乔达摩成佛之道 中华佛学学报第十五期（2002.07）
　　（soul，灵魂，神识） 已经达到了无上现法涅槃的境界。”
　　译者显然改变了原义：原文“舍离”和“达到”这两个动词的型态是表示过去的动作，因此“舍离”和“达到”这两个动作纯粹属于已发生的行为，和现在毫无关系，而译者虽然正确地传达出“舍离”过去式的意味，却毫无根据地把“达到”转变为现在式的动词。这样的翻译显示译者认为修定的人住于初禅，而初禅就是无上现法涅槃。译者这种认知我们不敢茍同，因为那和实际的禅修经验不符。首先，所谓“初禅”，其实是一个约定俗成的名词，用来指涉某些心理状态；初禅，就是由这些心理状态组成的，而不是有别于这些状态的另一个东西。其次，“初禅”既然代表一连串的心理状态，人就不可能在同一时间处于这一切状态之中。再者，属于初禅的这些心理状态含有许多扰乱定境的因素，而现法涅槃是心理极度宁静的状态，这两者决不可能相等。
　　原文亦未明言禅修者住于初禅或任何一种状态，只是表明“住”是一个现在式的动作，“已经达到了初禅”却是过去式，所以，不可能“住于初禅”。另一方面，经中说：“达到后，持续住于涅槃。”可见“证涅槃”的行为虽然已经发生 （patto），其境界却一直持续到现在（hoti）。因此“证涅槃”指的是现存的状态，应该和“住”（viharati）这个现在式动词有关。
　　接著要探讨禅修者的心识住于何种状态，以及这种心理状态何以等同于无上现法涅槃。要解开这两个疑点，首先得审视构成初禅的特征。
　　有关初禅的描述中只提到舍离了欲与不善心法的心理状态，同时存在的是初步的和持续的判断性的思惟（有寻有伺），引发这种心理状态的是舍离（由离生），而其特征是喜与乐。其中，“欲”指的是一个人所执著渴欲的对象，而不是指欲望。因为经中说：若人无欲，则感悲伤。没有人会因为失去欲望而感到悲伤。人要是没有了欲望，反倒会感到快乐才对。因此，“舍离了欲”指的是舍离了渴欲的对象。其次，所谓“不善心法”指的是“造成障碍的心理因素”，也就是有碍修证的心理因素。依照无上现法涅槃学派的传统，这些不善心法包括悲伤、哀痛、苦闷、绝望，同属苦受的范畴。至于“由离生”的“离”（viveka）和“舍离了欲与不善心法”的“舍离”（vivicca）同样由字根 √ vic 加上接头词 vi- 衍化而来，可见这两个字同指舍离欲与不善心法。舍离了之后，构成初禅的种种心理状态才次第生起。因此初禅才会被称为“由离生”。最后有关喜和乐，我们只能粗略的说：喜、乐皆与身心有关，但是喜主要影响生理，乐则偏重于心理。
　　此处胪列的初禅的特征并不完备，在《中部 ? 布喻经》也提到其他初禅的特征：
　　当一个人舍离烦恼（内心的染污）时，心中便生起净信 （pasāda），有信则
　　页474 由尼柯耶论乔达摩成佛之道 中华佛学学报第十五期（2002.07）
　　有欢悦（pāmojja），欢悦则喜（pīti）生，而后有身轻安（passaddhi），而后乐（sukha）生。
　　五部尼柯耶中的“乐”和宁静有关，与一般日常所用的“乐”语意大不相同。此经亦未完全列出出现在初禅中的所有心理因素，例如对“不苦不乐”略而不提，在“乐”之后就直接跳到“三摩地 （samādhi，心志专注）”。这一连串心理因素的次第生起以三摩地为终点。
　　这段经文对于我们的研究至为重要，所以有必要了解其中蕴含的讯息。《布喻经》陈述构成初禅的诸多心理因素，却没有提及“初禅”一词，可见这不过是个名相，不是有别于以上所列出的另一种心理因素。此外，对初禅的叙述只是相对的事实，此经所谓的“烦恼”，涵盖了《梵网经》中的“（渴）欲（的对象）”与“不善心法”。这两部经都说：舍离了欲和不善心法（也就是“烦恼”）之后，构成初禅的心理因素便次第生起。所谓“舍离”并不是表示禅修者将欲与不善心法断除尽净，只是将其影响力降低到初禅中的种种心理因素可以生起的程度。所以在阅读尼柯耶时，要注意常有以绝对语词来描述相对事实的情形。
　　“身轻安”在“喜”之后出现。事实上，喜极易扰动定境，只是其力量不及先前大幅翦除的种种苦受，因而在喜之后，有身轻安的生起。
　　另有一点需要注意的是，舍离欲、不善心法（或是烦恼）是禅修者刻意的作为，净信、欢悦等一连串心理变化，是在欲与不善心法大部份消失后自然而然出现的。因此，如果在禅修时将欲与不善心法舍离到某种程度，以上胪列的心理因素自然会次第而起，而这些心理转变的过程止于三摩地。所谓次第而起，其实是指禅修者依次察觉到这些心理因素的存在，也就是感觉到某一种心理状态，便没有察觉到其他心理状态。而当三摩地出现后，就没有其他心理代之而起了，禅修者故而能在三摩地中持续一段时间，这就是经中所谓的“他安住”－－禅修者安住于三摩地。此时只感觉到心境的专注，而不见苦、乐、喜等感受，其心中对于感受完全没有任何思惟忆念。尼柯耶的传统认为，自我意识与对感受的思惟忆念并存。换句话说，没有对感受的思惟忆念，就没有自我意识。所以处于三摩地时，不但察觉不到任何感受，而且不受自我意识的束缚。就因为此时只知心志专注而不觉有我，故说有作业而无作者。
　　若禅修者事后要详细自述住于三摩地的经验，必得裁去“自我”一词，因为在三摩地中没有自我意识，而“我”却是神识中不可或缺的一环，三摩地中自然无“我”，既然如此，也不会有个“我”达到无上现法涅槃。因此之故，乔达摩很可能在证菩提之前，就把“我”一词从有关修四禅的叙述中剔除了。而为何住于三摩地即是达到无上现法涅槃呢？这是因为在三摩地和在无上现法涅槃一样，不受觉受与自我
　　页475 由尼柯耶论乔达摩成佛之道 中华佛学学报第十五期（2002.07）
　　意识的束缚，在思惟忆想能力不失的情况下，经历到极度的宁静。此时乔达摩尚未体验到比三摩地更宁静的境界，当然可能把舍离“我”的三摩地视为无上现法涅槃。
　　“住于初禅”的说法并不确实，正确的说法应该是“住于三摩地”。刚才提过：“住”是 viharati，由接头词 vi- 加上字根 √ h? 形成的动词，早期佛教传统用这个字显示身或心的运动的停驻点。禅修中有一连串心理状态次第生起，止于三摩地且停驻于此。这也是我认为“他安住”指的是“住于三摩地”的另一个依据。禅修者在三摩地中的体验和无上现法涅槃一样，所以有关初禅的叙述中，“安住”和“达到无上现法涅槃”都和现在式有关，指现存的状态。
　　从以上的讨论也可明显看出，佛陀有关无我和有作业而无作者的教说最初是基于他对三摩地的体验。这些论点在后来乔达摩证灭受想定或证菩提时，获得进一步的证实。
　　依《梵网经》所述，不仅在达初禅之后体验无上现法涅槃，达二、三、四禅后，一样会体验到无上现法涅槃。也就是说，不管在哪一禅，禅修者都会有心理不受觉受与自我意识的制约的体验，也就是住于三摩地。
　　在此值得注意的是，阿毗达摩文献中提到三摩地为构成初禅、二禅、三禅、四禅中一连串心理因素的最后一项；乔达摩也说他达初禅后安住，他必然同样地体验到三摩地，虽然他没有说：“此刻，此‘我’已达无上现法涅槃。”
　　然而，他只能暂时住于三摩地，因为这种宁定的境界是自然而然升起，而非禅修者刻意引发的，他既然没有铲除或压抑动摇心定的因素，当一连串心理因素次第而起，止于三摩地时，扰攘不安的心理又开始作用。初禅以寻（vitakka）、伺（vicāra）为主，因此禅修者的注意力由三摩地转向寻、伺，结果自然无法继续安住于无上现法涅槃的极度宁静之中。为了要重回定境，他便试图以批判的方式遣除这两项因素。藉由不断的批判，禅修者对寻、伺产生嫌恶，继而加以遣除。
　　当寻、伺不能扰动乔达摩的心境时，一连串的心理因素再次次第升起，名之为“二禅”。在此不细究构成二禅的种种心理因素，但简而言之，这些心理变化一样止于三摩地，乔达摩安住于此，再度经历了无觉受与自我意识束缚的自在。同样的，他也不能久住于此，因为此时“喜”成为扰动定境的主因，分散了他的注意力，使他又失去了类似涅槃的定境。于是他再次藉著不断地批判而消除“喜”的影响力，继而体验到另一次的种种心理变化，名之为“三禅”。扰动“三禅”定境的是“乐”，这种感受称之为“心的转向（ābhoga）”，ābhoga 是从动词 √ bhuj 衍生而来，其义为“转弯，转变方向”。“乐”使得禅修者的注意力转向乐的感受，而不能住于三摩地，因此他再次从涅槃定境中退堕下来。接著他又藉著批判来遣除“乐”。这自然导致另一次的心理变化，同样的止于三摩地，达到“四禅”，安住于三摩地。
　　页476 由尼柯耶论乔达摩成佛之道 中华佛学学报第十五期（2002.07）
　　第四禅中有不苦不乐受，这本质上不是扰动定境的因素，所以一旦住于第四禅的三摩地，就没有扰乱定境的因素升起，此时的三摩地是稳固的，没有自我意识的约束，也就不受主观因素的干扰，加上没有觉受的影响，禅修者达到高度禅定，并且正念具足。再佛陀时代之前的沙门只著重禅定，因为涅槃即是禅定，却不强调去除自我意识与主观因素的束缚。但是，人唯有心中无丝毫主观因素的左右，才有可能获得真正客观的知识，也就是对诸法如实的认识。名之为“菩提”的知识，就是一种客观的知识。此外，禅修者住于这种无主观因素影响的心境时，只要专注于某个对象，就能如实了解它，毋需藉助逻辑思考。这样的知识称为“如实（yathābhūta）”。
　　这种心境不会自行改变，也不需要专注于任何对象，所以乔达摩可以专注于不同的事物，如实地了解这些事物。他首先专注于自己的过去世，不消片刻就看清楚自己无数的过去世。接著专注的对象是众生的过去世，而了解众生在不同的过去世中由于种种不同的业所造成的苦乐。他也发现这样生生世世的轮转无止尽，苦乐也因而无止尽。他想要找出解脱的方法，立刻就认识到有漏的存在、根源、除灭、与除灭的方法。在最早可见的圣典中，这样的认知称为“漏尽智（ā?rava-k?aya-j?āna）”，亦即有关除灭三种有漏的智慧。这种智慧被称为“菩提”是过了相当长的一段时间之后的事。
　　获得“菩提”之后，他所知道的是，他不会再有生死轮回，而且已经完成了所有该做的事。早期经典仅称之为“第三明”，后来在《有学经》中被称为“菩提生（bodhijam）”，意思是由于菩提而产生的。菩提，也就是对诸法客观的如实认知，每次只能针对一个对象，无法同时专注于各种不同的对象。在《念处经》中记载了佛陀如实认识的许多事物，但是只有对于有漏或苦的如实认知才称为“菩提”。
　　关于有漏的如实认识特别重要，因为漏尽智和生死轮回的解脱有直接关系。有漏分为三种：一、欲漏（kāmāsava），因五欲之乐而引起的杂染；二、有漏（bhavāsava），和个体存在有关的杂染；三、无明漏（avijjāsava），和根本无明有关的杂染。显而易见的，只要除灭有漏，禅修者就能跳出生死轮回。
　　然而这种心理状态并非涅槃。证菩提并不等同于证涅槃，证涅槃是心理极度的宁定，这是证菩提时无法体验到的。因为证菩提时思惟忆念的能力（想蕴）和可以感受到的诸法的范畴维持不变，而任何思惟活动对住于三摩地的禅修者而言却犹如在背的芒刺。为了要住于定境不受干扰，乔达摩修另一套禅法－－无色定，以降低思惟作用及其范围。他先藉由批判形体使心不受形体的束缚。空间是因为形体才变为有限，随著形体的消失，他体验到广袤无垠的空间。无色定的修持不是我们今天探讨的要点，所以我只提出乔达摩最后达到非想非非想处，但即使在这个境界，思惟作用也没有完全根除，换句话说，和涅槃相较之下，这个境界仍不稳定。佛陀连那丝毫的思惟作用
　　页477 由尼柯耶论乔达摩成佛之道 中华佛学学报第十五期（2002.07）
　　也除去了，而达到灭想受定，止息了一切思惟与感受（无想蕴与受蕴）。经典所说的“止息”并非全然的止息，因为如果完全没有思惟活动，禅修者无从得知他已经达到这个境界。但是可以确定的是，他完全舍离一切感受，因此不受自我意识（我、我所）的控制，思惟活动也大幅降低至不足以干扰定境的程度。所以这个境界最接近涅槃的状态，这是禅修者在此世间可以经历到的涅槃。不论在证四禅住三摩地时，或在非想非非想处定中思惟感受止息时，主观因素都不复存在。这使得乔达摩相信：在有为法与无为法中，“我”皆不存在。基于以上的讨论内容可知：佛陀主要的教说源于其禅修经验，而在达灭受想定之后，乔达摩便自称为“如来（Tathāgatā）”。
　　接下来我想探讨另一个相当重要的问题：为何乔达摩在证菩提之后选择证入现法涅槃？
　　乔达摩在证菩提之后已经确定他最终将证入涅槃，跳脱生死轮回，他已经完成了应该做的事，也看穿了我、我所虚妄的本质，因此不可能对涅槃有所欲求以满足一己之私。那么为何他要进而努力求取涅槃呢？在这种情况下，唯一可能的解释是他对众生毫无条件的慈悲：由于对众生的慈悲，他证涅槃以圆满利他行。根据《双念经》，乔达摩甚至在达初禅之前就培养出自然流露的平等的慈悲。
　　我们或许可以因此理解他的行为是出于慈悲，但这并未解释为何必须证涅槃以帮助苦难众生。他原本可以藉著持戒、教导大众证菩提之道来利益众生，而要做到这两点不需要证涅槃。那么他为什么要有现法涅槃的经验呢？佛陀那个时代的老师只宣说自己所经历过的，无上现法涅槃学派和无色禅定的老师显然都是如此，即使是断灭论的老师也是基于自身亲证而说法。他们之中没有一个人宣说属于无为法的涅槃，但是当时一般似乎将无为法视为理想，而“如来”就被认定是用来描述亲证涅槃无为法的人。要是没有经历过涅槃，就无法全然掌握真理。根据对色心诸法真正客观的认知，在有为法中并没有“我”的存在，而达到灭受想定时，他也体认到无为法中“我”亦不可得。他是在有了这样的经验之后才能宣说无我的真理，也才能探讨涅槃。而且一个人唯有证涅槃的经验才能确保在身死命终色身坏灭后入涅槃。涅槃是此生必须达到的最高精神目标，是修行人无上尊贵的表征，人们会热切的追求奉行这种人的教导。正是因为如此，乔达摩在证菩提之后进而体验涅槃。
　　2001年6月5日讲于中华佛学研究所
　　（此文系由中华佛学研究所研究生方怡蓉小姐翻译、整理）
　　478 Gotama Becomes the Buddha: A Study in Nikāya Traditions Chung-Hwa Buddhist Journal, No. 15 (2002.07)
　　Gotama Becomes the Buddha: A Study in Nikāya Traditions
　　Biswadeb Mukherjee
　　Contracted Correspondent,
　　Chung-Hwa Institute of Buddhist Studies
　　Chung-Hwa Buddhist Journal
　　No. 15 (2002.07)
　　pp. 471-493
　　The Chung-Hwa Institute of Buddhist Studies
　　Taipei, Taiwan
　　--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
　　中文版
　　Summary
　　The main concern of this speech is certain problems about the path which Gotama followed to become Tathāgata. First, according to the Nikāyas, Gotama surely practiced the 4 jhānas. In Gotama's version of the 4 jhānas in the Nikāyas there is no mention of “attā” and “Parama-di??ha-dhamma-nibbāna”. The next problem is about the spiritual experience after the attainment of the first jhāna. With the analysis of the Brahmajāla-sutta in Pali, after the attainment of the first jhāna, one does not abide in the first jhāna, for “the first jhāna” is a mere name for a series of mental elements. According to Brahmajāla-sutta and Vatthupama-sutta, due to the meditator's intentional separation from the object of desire and inexpedient mental elements, such mental elements as initial and sustained judgemental deliberations (vitakka and vicāra), pasāda (confidence), pāmojja (glad), pīti (joy), passaddhi (physical tranquility), and sukha (happiness) naturally arise one after another and end with the arising of samādhi (mental concentration). The meditator is able to remain conscious of samādhi for some time, which situation is indicated by the statement “he abides (viharati)” (in “samādhi”). The thoughts of all feelings are absent from the mind of the meditator, and therefore there is no awareness of “I”. So it is quite possible that Gotama dropped the term “attā” from his description of the 4 jhānas. After the attainment of the other three jhānas, the meditator was abiding in samādhi. But because of some
　　479 Gotama Becomes the Buddha: A Study in Nikāya Traditions Chung-Hwa Buddhist Journal, No. 15 (2002.07)
　　agitative elements Gotama could not abide in samādhi for long until the attainment of the fourth jhāna. The most agitative elements in the first three jhānas are vitakka and vicāra, pīti, and sukha respectively. Without any disturbing element, samādhi after the fourth jhāna is stable and the meditator’s mind is free from any feeling and “I-consciousness”. It is then that it is possible for him to gain truly objective knowledge with no aid of any logical thinking. Gotama gained in order the truly objective knowledge of his own past lives, the past lives of others and the endless cycle of birth and death, and the ā?rava-k?aya-j?āna (the wisdom regarding the destruction of the ā?ravas). The realisation of ā?rava-k?aya-j?āna is, however, different from the realisation of nibbāna, for in former case the faculty of perception remains intact and disturbs the calmness in samādhi. To experience the undisturbed calmness Gotama next followed the ārupya-samāpattis (the attainment of formlessness) and finally attained the state of the sa??ā-vedayita-nirodha (the cessation of perception and feeling), which is the closest possible approximation to the actual nibbāna. After the attainment of the sa??ā-vedayita-nirodha, Gotama declared himself to be the Tathāgatā.
　　Key words:
　　1.
　　the first jhāna
　　2.
　　Parama-di??ha-dhamma-nibbānavādins/PDN
　　3.
　　samādhi
　　4.
　　ā?rava-k?aya-j?āna
　　5.
　　Tathāgatā
　　6.
　　attā
　　480 Gotama Becomes the Buddha: A Study in Nikāya Traditions Chung-Hwa Buddhist Journal, No. 15 (2002.07)
　　Today I would like to discuss certain problems relating to the path which Gotama followed to become Tathāgata.[1]
　　The first problem is whether Gotama practised the system of 4 jhānas or not. Some scholars think that Gotama did not practise this system of meditation. Such a view is really untenable. The Nikāyas do not know of any tradition that states that Gotama did not follow this system of meditation. On the contrary, the Nikāyas consistently and unanimously hold that not only Gotama but also his disciples followed the system of 4 jhānas. So we may take it for granted that Gotama practised the 4 jhānas.
　　There are 2 different versions of the 4 jhānas in the Nikāyas. One version is attributed to the Parama-di??ha-dhamma-nibbānavādins (Parama-di??ha-dhamma-nibbāna is called PDN hereafter), or the advocates of the Supreme Nibbāna amidst the perceptibles. These 2 versions are almost identical. The only notable difference is that the PDN-vādin version includes the following sentence which is missing from the version attributed to Gotama: “Now the attā has attained the PDN”. One may think that this difference is due to the later-day editing due to the following reasons: the non-mention of the term “attā” presupposes the realisation of the truth of “anattā”. But Gotama was then in the initial stages of his spiritual journey. He had yet no experience about the non-existence of “attā”. So the version attributed to Gotama should have included the term “attā”.
　　Moreover, all the contemporary ?rama?as believed in the permanent or temporary existence of “attā”. This state of things also supports the idea that Gotama had included the term “attā” in his account of the 4 jhānas.
　　Again it is reasonable to think that the term PDN was also included in his version. In PDN the feelings are absent, but the
　　--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
　　1. A copy of the speech I gave extempore for the students on May 6, 2001 at the Chung-Hwa Institute of Buddhist Studies.
　　481 Gotama Becomes the Buddha: A Study in Nikāya Traditions Chung-Hwa Buddhist Journal, No. 15 (2002.07)
　　faculty of perception remains intact. Except the feelings and the resultant “I-awareness”, all the other perceptibles can be experienced. This state was not accepted by the Buddha as the Supreme Nibbāna. The state of sa??ā-vedayita-nirodha, which is free not only from all feelings but also from almost all perceptions was accepted by the Buddha as the Nibbāna in this world. But Gotama had not yet experienced this state. As Gotama had not yet any knowledge of nibbāna which was truer and higher than the PDN, there is no reason why Gotama would drop this term from his account of the 4 jhānas.
　　Yet this difference between the 2 versions may not be due to editing at a later period. There are deeper reasons to think Gotama did not accept the view that the attā attains the PDN. Consequently the version attributed to Gotama conforms to the actual experience that he had in meditation. This point will be discussed later.
　　The next problem I want to discuss is about the spiritual experience one attains after the attainment of the first jhāna. In course of our discussion it would become clear that both the versions speak of the same spiritual experience. For the sake of convenience we would discuss this problem mainly with reference to the PDN-vāda as given in the Brahmajāla-sutta.
　　The relevant passage in the Brahmajāla-sutta runs as follows:
　　Having separated himself (vivicca) from kāma (desirable objects), having separated himself (vivicca) from akusala-dhammas (inexpedient mental elements) and having attained the first jhāna -- which is accompanied by vitakka and vicara, born of separation (vivekaja) and characterised by pīti and sukha (joy and happiness) -- he abides (viharati). Now the attā (soul) has attained the PDN.
　　This is what the Pāli passage actually means. But so far as I have seen, this passage has always been wrongly translated in more
　　482 Gotama Becomes the Buddha: A Study in Nikāya Traditions Chung-Hwa Buddhist Journal, No. 15 (2002.07)
　　than one places and the message was distorted. Here I will discuss only one of the mistakes committed by the previous translators which is of utmost importance for our study. They have translated the last part of the account as follows: “He attains and abides in the first jhāna. Now the attā has attained the PDN”.
　　One can immediately see how the translators have changed the meaning of the passage. The forms of “vivicca” and “upasampajja” are gerund and in Pāli these forms are called “pubba-kiriyā”, which means “past action”. So these actions of separation (vivicca) and attainment (upasampajja) belong exclusively to the past and are no way connected with the present. But the scholars arbitrarily interprets “upasampajja” in the present tense (attains) while retaining the correct meaning of “vivicca” (having separated). Moreover, the implications of such an arbitrary translation, as it will be shown, are absolutely unacceptable. This translation implies that the meditator is abiding in the first jhāna, and that the first jhāna is the same as the PDN. Both these implications are contradicted by meditative experiences and should be rejected. First, there is no first jhāna over and above the mental elements characterising this mental state. The first jhāna is a mere name to indicate all these elements. Secondly, the term first jhāna stands for a series of mental elements and one cannot abide in all these elements at the same time. Thirdly, this series contains many agitative elements and so it cannot be identical with the nibbāna in this world, which indicates ideal mental calmness.
　　The text also does not state that the meditator abides in the first jhāna. It simply states that he abides (viharati). We have also to note that the attainment of the first jhāna has been described as a completed past action (upasampajja = having attained), a pubba-kiriyā. On the other hand, the expression “viharati” (abides) indicates a present action. The act of “abiding” cannot mean abiding in the first jhāna.
　　The attainment of nibbāna, on the other hand, has been
　　483 Gotama Becomes the Buddha: A Study in Nikāya Traditions Chung-Hwa Buddhist Journal, No. 15 (2002.07)
　　described through the verbal expression “patto hoti”. The experience of nibbāna, though already attained (patto), is still continuing in the present (hoti). So the attainment of nibbāna refers to a present situation and as such it should be connected with the present action of abiding (viharati).
　　It follows from the conclusions reached above that we have now to find out what is the mental state where one can abide and why was this mental state identified with the PDN. To solve these two problems we have to pay close attention to the characteristics that constitute the so-called first jhāna.
　　The first jhāna formula merely tells us that the mental state is separated from kāma and akusala-dhammas, accompanied by initial and sustained judgemental deliberations (vitakka and vicāra), born of separation (vivekajam) and characterised by pīti and sukha (joy and happiness). Here kāma means desirable objects to which one is attached. It does not mean desire. For in the text we read that when a person loses kāma, he becomes sad. Nobody becomes sad by losing desire. One becomes happy instead. And what is the meaning of “akusala-dhammas”? This term can be translated as “inexpedient mental elements”, i.e. the mental elements which are unsuitable for attaining the spiritual goal. According to the PDN-vādin tradition these dhammas stand for soka (grief), parideva (lamentation), dukha (pain), domanassa (melancholy) and upāyāsā (despair). It is obvious that these akusala-dhammas belong to the category of the feeling of dukkha.
　　Next the term “viveka” (separation) may be explained. Vivicca and viveka come from the same root √ vic together with the same prefix “vi”. It is reasonable to conclude that these two terms refer to the separation from the same elements viz kāma and akusala-dhammas. As a result of this separation the mental elements constituting the first jhāna gradually come into existence. The jhāna is, therefore, called “vivekajam”.
　　As to pīti and sukha we can say without going into a detailed
　　484 Gotama Becomes the Buddha: A Study in Nikāya Traditions Chung-Hwa Buddhist Journal, No. 15 (2002.07)
　　discussion that pīti is joy which is more connected with the body than with the mind. This joy affects the body strongly. Sukha is more mental than physical. But it is also connected with the body, for one experiences sukha through the body.
　　This list of the mental characteristics of the first jhāna as given here is not complete. There are other characteristics of this state which have been given in the Vatthupama-sutta of Majjhima Nikāya as follows:
　　When one gives up the upakilesas (mental defilements) the element of pasāda (confidence) arises in his mind. When there is pasāda, he feels pāmojja (glad). When he feels glad, pīti (joy) arises in his mind. After pīti he experiences physical tranquility (passaddhi). After passaddhi, sukha (happiness) arises.
　　Sukha in the Nikāyas is connected with calmness, and is different from what is understood as sukha in ordinary life. The sutta omits a number of elements, one of which is adukkham-asukham. Immediately after sukha, the sutta mentions the arising of the element of mental concentration (samādhi). And this progression from one element to another came to an end with the arising of the element of samādhi.
　　This passage is of utmost importance for our study and we should try to understand the message it conveys. The Vatthupama-sutta gives a description of the mental element constituting the first jhāna without using the blanket term “first jhāna”. This shows that the “first jhāna” is a mere name; there is no first jhāna as distinct from the mental traits enumerated.
　　Moreover, the account of the first jhāna is only relatively true. “Upakilesa” of the Vatthupama-sutta covers the desire for the desirable objects (kāma) and the akusala-dhammas of the Brahmajāla-sutta account of the first jhāna. The suttas state that after the meditator has become separated from kāma and akusala-
　　485 Gotama Becomes the Buddha: A Study in Nikāya Traditions Chung-Hwa Buddhist Journal, No. 15 (2002.07)
　　dhammas (i.e. from upakilesa) the mental elements constituting the first jhāna come into existence. When the suttas speak of the separation from kāma and akusala-dhammas, it does not mean that the meditator has completely given up kāma etc. He has become free from these elements to the extent it is necessary for the arising of the mental elements constituting the first jhāna. One has to be very careful while reading Nikāyas which are often using non-relative expressions to express relative facts.
　　Physical calmness (passaddhi) arises after pīti. Actually pīti is a very agitative element. But it is not as agitative as the feelings belonging to the category of dukkha which the meditator has just given up to a great extent. So compared to dukkha, pīti does not agitate the body so much. Consequently after the arising of pīti he feels physical calmness (passaddhi).
　　Another point we have to note is that the giving up of kāma and akusala-dhammas or that of the upakilesas is an intentional act on the part of the meditator. The arising of pasāda, pāmojja, etc. is not intended by the meditator; it is happening automatically. The process starts due to the relative absence of kāma and akusala-dhammas. Thus if one is able to give up kāma and akusala-dhammas to some extent in meditation, the mental elements enumerated above will naturally rise one after another. This natural progression of elements comes to an end with the arising of the element of “samādhi” (mental concentration). The statement that the mental elements are arising one after another actually means that the meditator is becoming conscious of them one after another. When he is conscious of one element, he is not conscious of the other elements. So when the element of samādhi comes into existence, there is no mental element that naturally rises after samādhi and replaces it. So the meditator is able to remain conscious of it for some time. This situation is indicated by the statement “he abides” (viharati). The meditator abides in “samādhi”. Now the meditator is only aware of the concentrated
　　486 Gotama Becomes the Buddha: A Study in Nikāya Traditions Chung-Hwa Buddhist Journal, No. 15 (2002.07)
　　state of mind. He is no longer aware of such feelings as dukkha, sukha, pīti, etc. So the thoughts of all feelings are absent from the mind of the meditator. According to the Nikāya tradition the thoughts of “I-awareness” must co-exist with the thoughts of feelings. If there is no thoughts of feelings, there cannot be an awareness of “I” So while in samādhi one is not only free from the consciousness of any feeling but also free from the ego-consciousness, or “I”.
　　When one abides in samādhi, the awareness of the mental concentration is there, but there is no awareness of “I”. So such thoughts as “I am aware of that” does not arise. Thus there is knowledge of an action but not of an actor.
　　If the meditator himself should later give an accurate description of this experience in samādhi, he could do it only by dropping the term attā from his description. It is so because there is no awareness of “I” in samādhi, whereas “I” is the essential characteristic of an attā. So it is quite possible that even before the attainment of bodhi Gotama dropped the term “attā” from his description of the 4 jhānas. As the existence of “attā” in the state of samādhi is denied, the question of an attā attaining the PDN does not arise at all. Why was the abiding in samādhi accepted as the attainment of the PDN? The experience of samādhi is free from all thoughts of feelings, and of ego-consciousness also. In this state the meditator experiences a great degree of calmness, even though the faculty of perception remains intact. This state was identified with the PDN. Gotama had not yet experienced any state which was calmer than samādhi; so he might have accepted this identification of samādhi with the PDN, provided the attā was not brought into association with this experience.
　　The abiding in the “first jhāna” is unreal, but the abiding in samādhi is real. This abiding, as pointed out before, is indicated by the expression “viharati” (he abides). The verbal root √ h? with the prefix “vi-” in early Buddhist tradition shows the point at which a
　　487 Gotama Becomes the Buddha: A Study in Nikāya Traditions Chung-Hwa Buddhist Journal, No. 15 (2002.07)
　　movement, whether physical or mental, comes to an end, and the person abides there. In meditation also the meditator experiences one mental element after another. This series of experiences comes to an end when he experiences samādhi and he abides there (viharati). This is also another reason for which I concluded that “abiding” means abiding in samādhi. The mental state in samādhi is the same as the mental state of one who experiences PDN. Therefore, in the description of the first jhāna the acts of abiding and attaining the PDN have been referred to as current situations.
　　It is also apparent from what I have discussed so far that the Buddha”s teachings about anattā or about actions without an actor are initially based on his experience of the mental state in samādhi. Later these conclusions were further confirmed when Gotama attained the ā?rave-k?aya-j?āna or bodhi.
　　Moreover, the Brahamajāla-sutta speaks of experiencing the PDN not only after the attainment of the first jhāna but also after the attainment of the other three jhānas. This shows that in all these cases the meditator was experiencing the same mental state which is free from the thoughts of all feelings and the awareness of “I”. This means that in every case he was abiding in samādhi.
　　It may be noted in this connection that the Abhidharma texts mention samādhi as the last element in the series of mental elements constituting all the four jhānas. There is no doubt that Gotama also experienced the same mental state, for he also says that he abides (viharati) after attaining the first jhāna, though he most probably did not use the expression: “Now the attā has attained the PDN”.
　　But Gotama could abide in this peaceful mental state only for a very short time. Why? He has experienced the state of samādhi due to the force of natural progression of mental elements that ends in samādhi. This progression has not been willed by the meditator. The agitative elements have neither been destroyed nor suppressed by him. When the progression of elements comes to an end with the
　　488 Gotama Becomes the Buddha: A Study in Nikāya Traditions Chung-Hwa Buddhist Journal, No. 15 (2002.07)
　　arising of samādhi, the agitative elements again start becoming active. The most agitative elements in the first jhāna are the vitakka and vicāra. So his continuous awareness of the mental concentration (samādhi) is disturbed, and his attention is drawn towards these two elements. Consequently he loses his awareness of the peacefulness of PDN. He wants to get back the state of nibbānic calmness. He therefore tries to get rid of these two elements by adversely criticising them again and again. The meditator loses his liking for the elements adversely criticised and generates aversion for them, and in consequence gets rid of them.
　　When the vitakka and vicāra lost their influence on the mind of Gotama, a progression of a new series of mental elements followed, which was given the name of “second jhāna”. We need not discuss all the mental elements constituting the second jhāna. We can simply say that this progression of elements also ends in samādhi, in which Gotama abided. So again he experienced the same mental state which was free from all feelings, and consequently from the awareness of “I”. Again Gotama could not abide in samādhi, for pīti, the most agitative element in this mental state, creates distraction and he could no longer be aware of the mental concentration. He lost nibbāna-like calmness. So he got rid of pīti through adverse criticism of pīti, and became aware of another series of mental elements the conventional name for which was the “third jhāna”.
　　The samādhi in which Gotama was abiding after the attainment of the third jhāna was disturbed by the element of sukha (happiness). Sukha is the strongest agitative element in this mental state. This feeling (sukha) is called the “ābhoga” of mind. The word “ābhoga” comes from the verbal root √ bhuj, which means in this case “to bend”. The feeling “sukha” bends the attention of the meditator towards itself, so that the meditator cannot abide in samādhi any more.
　　Thus he lost the nibbānic calmness again. So he next got rid of sukha by adversely criticising it, and naturally another progression
　　489 Gotama Becomes the Buddha: A Study in Nikāya Traditions Chung-Hwa Buddhist Journal, No. 15 (2002.07)
　　of elements followed which likewise ended in samādhi, and he attained the fourth jhāna. He abided in samādhi.
　　The feeling in the fourth jhāna is called adukkham-asukham. It is non-agitative in itself. So once the meditator is in samādhi, there is no element in this mental state that can disturb the concentrated state of mind. So samādhi after the fourth jhāna is called stable and immovable. The mind in samādhi is free from “I-consciousness”, so it is free from subjective elements. Moreover, as the mind in this state is not influenced by any feeling and “I-consciousness”, it is characterised by a deep calmness and perfect mindfulness. The pre-Buddhist ?rama?as paid attention to the calmness only, for nibbāna was calmness itself. But they did not pay attention to the freedom from the ego-consciousness and subjective elements. And only when a person's mind is free from subjective elements is it possible for him to gain truly objective knowledge, i.e. the knowledge of an object as it truly is. The knowledge which is given the name of “bodhi” is also an objective knowledge.
　　Another interesting feature of this mental state is that the meditator in this state -- which is free from all subjective elements -- gains the true knowledge of it by simply paying attention to it; it is not necessary for him to go through any logical thinking. Such a knowledge is indicated by the term “yathābhūta” (如实).
　　This mental state does not change of itself. Moreover, this is a state of mental concentration without any object to concentrate upon. So Gotama was able to direct his attention to different subjects of enquiry to gain objective knowledge of them. He first directed his attention to his own past lives. And immediately he could see innumerable past lives with various details. Next he paid attention to the past lives of others and could know about their sorrows and happiness in different past lives due to various types of kammas (skt. karma). He found there is no end to this progression of one life to another, no end to the experiences of sadness and
　　490 Gotama Becomes the Buddha: A Study in Nikāya Traditions Chung-Hwa Buddhist Journal, No. 15 (2002.07)
　　appiness. So he wanted to find a way out of this situation. Thereafter he had the direct knowledges of the existence of the āsavas (skt. ā?rava), the origin of the āsavas, the destruction of the āsavas, and the path to their destruction. In the earliest available tradition these knowledges came to be collectively called as the ā?rava-k?aya-j?āna, the wisdom regarding the destruction of the ā?ravas. This wisdom came to be known as “bodhi” at a comparatively later time.
　　After “bodhi” he got the knowledge that he would have no more any future birth, he had already done what had to be done. In the earlier suttas this knowledge is merely called the “third knowledge”. But later in the Sekha-sutta this knowledge is called “bodhijam”, born of bodhi. The objective knowledge of different things has to be gained separately. One cannot get the objective knowledge of all things at the same time. In the Satipa??hāna-sutta we read about many items about which the Buddha had objective knowledge. But only the objective knowledge about āsavas or duhkha came to be known as “bodhi”.
　　The objective knowledge of the ā?rava was held to be specially important, for the ā?rava-k?aya-j?āna is directly connected with the end of the cycle of births and deaths. There are three types of āsavas: 1) kāmāsava, or the defilements connected with desire for the five types of sensual objects, 2) bhavāsava, or the defilements connected with individual existence, and 3) avijjāsava, or the defilements connected with the basic ignorance. So once the ā?ravas are destroyed, the meditator becomes free from all future existences.
　　This state is, however, not the experience of nibbāna. The realisation of “bodhi” is not the same as the realisation of nibbāna, for the nibbāna stands for the utmost calmness which in the state of bodhi cannot be experienced. This is so because in the state of bodhi both the faculty of perception and the entire range of perceptibles remain intact. And any act of perception is painful and
　　491 Gotama Becomes the Buddha: A Study in Nikāya Traditions Chung-Hwa Buddhist Journal, No. 15 (2002.07)
　　has been compared to a boil and other painful things. It disturbs the abiding in samādhi. So to experience the undisturbed calmness he next followed another system of meditation, the ārupya-samāpattis (the attainment of formlessness) in order to reduce the faculty and field of perception. First he freed his mind from the forms through the adverse criticism of forms. The space becomes limited due to forms. With the disappearance of forms he experiences the unlimited space. We would not discuss the different states of formless meditation. Anyway, he gradually reached the state of neither-perception-nor-not-perception. Even in this state the Buddha had the awareness of some perception. This state was agitative compared to the nibbāna. So Buddha got rid of even that perception and attained the state of the sa??ā-vedayita-nirodha, the cessation of perception and feeling. The cessation the tradition speaks of is not complete cessation. For if there is a total cessation of perception, the meditator would not be able to know that he was in that mental state. It is, however, true that he got rid of all feelings, and consequently he was free from the awareness of “I” and “mine.” The perception in this state is so weak that it does not disturb meditator's sense of calmness. The state is the closest possible approximation to the actual nibbāna, the unconditioned. This is the nibbāna which the meditator can experience while in this world.
　　The absence of the element of “I” either in the state of samādhi after the attainment of the rūpajhāna, or in the state of the cessation of perception and feeling after the samāpatti of the neither-perception-nor-not-perception, convinced the Buddha of the non-existence of the attā in both the realms of the conditioned and the unconditioned. On the basis of what we have discussed so far it is clear that the main tenets which the Buddha taught flows from his meditative experiences. After the attainment of the sa??ā-vedayita-nirodha, Gotama declared himself to be the Tathāgatā.
　　I would now like to discuss a problem which might be of some
　　492 Gotama Becomes the Buddha: A Study in Nikāya Traditions Chung-Hwa Buddhist Journal, No. 15 (2002.07)
　　importance. Why did Gotama choose to realise the nibbāna in this world after the attainment of the “bodhi”?
　　After the realisation of “bodhi” Gotama was certain that he would ultimately merge into nibbāna and go out of the vortex of sa?sāra. All he had to do had already been done. Moreover, as Gotama had seen through the illusory nature of “I” and “mine”, he could not have any personal desire for nibbāna. So why did he further strive for nibbāna? Under such circumstances the only answer that suggests itself is his unconditional compassion for others. Out of compassion for others he realised the nibbāna, so that he could help others better. According to the Dvedhāvitakka-sutta Gotama developed non-judgemental, spontaneous compassion even before the attainment of the first jhāna.
　　We may thus accept that he acted out of compassion. But this does not explain why he had to realise nibbāna in order to help the suffering people. He could have helped by preaching ?īla and teaching others the path to the realisation of bodhi. And to do this it was not necessary to attain nibbāna. So why did he experience nibbāna in this world? In those days the teachers preached only what they experienced. This is evident from the teachers of the Parama-di??ha-dhamma-nibbāna-vāda, the different formless attainments (ārūpya-samā-patti). Even the teachers of the Ucchedavāda spoke from their own experiences. None of them preached the nibbāna, the Unconditioned. But it appears that the Unconditioned as an ideal was well known and the Tathāgatā was the accepted epithet of the knower of the Unconditioned, the nibbāna. Without experiencing the nibbāna the truth was not completely mastered. The true objective knowledge of the different elements -- physical or mental -- proved that the conditioned was devoid of attā. On the other hand, the attainment of the cessation of perception and feeling showed him that there was no attā even in the Unconditioned. It was only after this experience that he was in a position to preach the truth of anattā and talk about the nibbāna.
　　493 Gotama Becomes the Buddha: A Study in Nikāya Traditions Chung-Hwa Buddhist Journal, No. 15 (2002.07)
　　It is only after the realisation of the nibbāna that one is able to merge directly into the nibbāna after the dissolution of the body. The nibbāna was the highest spiritual goal to be attained in this life and marked the unrivalled excellence of a ?rama?a. The teachings of such a person would be eagerly sought after and followed by the people. It is for this reason the Gotama experienced the nibbāna even after the realisation of the bodhi.
　　(A speech at Chung-Hwa Institute of Buddhist Studies, on June 5, 2001.
　　Translated and collated by Miss FANG Yirong)