[ Pobierz całość w formacie PDF ]
or the intrusion of foreign ideas into the doctrinal foundation. On one level,
Eliade s thought does not seem so problematic, in that both are arguing for, in
general language, a transcendence that is a transformation or destruction of
what would be considered the mundane state of affairs. But the question
that arises is whether the experiences themselves share similar, concrete char-
acteristics. It can be argued that this is close, if not identical, to postulating a
universal theory of mysticism or religious experience, one that decontextual-
izes the practices that fall under its observations. Needless to say, Eliade s
position raises serious issues regarding how to deal with these variations in
practice, whether we see them as being questions of ritual, doctrine, or medi-
tative practice.
A more pragmatic and less controversial examination of yoga in the Ther-
ava\ da Meditation: The
da tradition can be found in Winston King s Therava\
Buddhist Transformation of Yoga. Unlike Eliade, whose work is a thoroughly
comparative text that attempts to get at the nature of yoga in the pan-Indian,
and even pan-Asian context, King s work is primarily an attempt to understand
the role of meditation uniquely in the context of Therava\
da s relationship with
the yoga techniques characteristic of the early Buddhist context. The image
The Debate over Dialogue 89
that King develops is of a Buddhism that sees itself as an autonomous, non-
Brahmanical tradition, one that grew out of an Indian yogic context but is nev-
ertheless identified more by how it diverges from earlier tradition than how it
converges. As an extension of the Therava\ presentation of meditation,
da s
King s study appeals strongly to the Pali sources as a means of understanding
early Buddhism. The Buddha is understood to have integrated the methods of
his teachers, A| ra and Udraka, with those that he discovered as a youth into a
la\
soteriological schema epitomized by his enlightenment experience.67
King s presentation mirrors Eliade s analysis in at least two important
ways. The doctrinal foundations can be seen as orienting the meditative
experience toward certain characteristics, in that the insight meditation
process provides the context for the development of óamatha, and there is a
sense of progression from external and ethical aspects of practice toward
internal and meditative aspects. Acknowledging the viability of scholarship
that discusses a common substratum of both Buddhist and Hindu systems of
yoga based on a practical discipline as opposed to a superstructure of theory,
King believes that finding the root of the dhya\na structure is a problem that
may well be impossible to solve.68 However, he is not afraid to note the simi-
larities between Pa\tajala-yoga and the Buddhist yogic system, stating in
essence that both traditions develop a set of progressively subtle meditations,
although yielding different experiential and theoretical results. 69 He does,
however, see a tension in the development of meditation theory in the Pali
texts, particularly with regard to the formula of enlightenment as containing
elements of dhya\na, the a\ru\pya dhya\nas, and the attainment of cessation
nirodha-sama\patti.70 This is further complicated for King by questions regard-
ing the nature and role of vipassana\ in the liberation process and its character
as distinguishing Buddhist and non-Buddhist meditation and soteriology. In
the nirodhasama\patti as well as the a\ru\pyadhya\na states, he demonstrates the
uncertainty regarding the role of each with the attainment of liberation, or the
lack thereof.71 King, noting the lack of clarity on the issue in the Pali sources,
nevertheless wants to follow Buddhaghosa s interpretation of the advanced
meditative states as being secondary to the liberative process of developing
insight, or even being unnecessary.72
Following the lead of Heiler, King wonders if the formless states were
added to the Therava\da meditation system through a process of reyoganiza-
tion that took place long after the development of the early Buddhist com-
munities, or perhaps even the possibility of two variant Buddhist communi-
ties coming together.73 Although he feels quite comfortable asserting the
Therava\da s emphasis on vipassana\ as being the Buddhist qua Buddhist prac-
tice, he nevertheless notes the marginal position of the more complex óamatha
types of meditation that receive a significant amount of attention and empha-
sis in both canonical and noncanonical accounts.74 King demonstrates an acute
90 Sama\dhi
awareness of the importance of non-Buddhist yoga methodologies both in the
early and later phases of the development of the Pali su\ttas, as well as the
importance of noncanonical sources such as Buddhaghosa s Visuddhimagga.
Though briefly referring to Patajali s system, including a reference to the
statements of Stephan Beyer on the parallelism of Buddhist sama\dhi and
Classical Yoga, King does not spend a significant amount of time discussing
the possibilities of influence and development as extending from the Buddhist
tradition into the Hindu and Jaina systems.75 However, one of the stronger
points he does make is that there are some ambiguities in the canonical
sources about the role of yoga in soteriology, particularly the more complex
yogic presentations of the formless realms and cessation. The role of nirod-
hasama\patti, particularly in the modern Buddhist context, is problematic, in
that vipassana\ methods and the development of liberating insight are consid-
ered the essential teaching, and dhya\na types of accomplishments are either
unimportant or forgotten methods. This has been a subject of considerable
controversy in the realm of Buddhist studies, where there has been difficulty
understanding why such an important part of Buddhist meditation theory
(samatha) has become not only a marginal practice but one that might even
receive ridicule by some practitioners.76
A point of particular controversy here is the problem of the sequence of
[ Pobierz całość w formacie PDF ]