DOI Page / Citation link:
https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.45392#0327
Mahayana Mysticism
the non-distinction of the unshown and the shown—
“this our worldly life is an activity of Nirvana itself, not
the slightest distinction exists between them ”—(Nagar-
juna, Madhyamika Sastra). This view is expressed with
dramatic force in the aphorism, ‘ Yas klesas so bodhi, yas
samsaras tat niivanam' That which is sin is also Wisdom,
the realm of Becoming is also Nirvana.1 One and the
same is the heart of Suchness and the Heart of Birth-and-
Death—‘what is immortal and what is mortal are
harmoniously blended, for they are not one, nor are they
separate ’—(Asvaghosha). If the truth is not to be
found in our everyday experience, it will not be found by
searching elsewhere.
Mahayana mysticism
It scarcely needs to be pointed out, though it is important
to realize, that this is the ultimate position to which the
mystics of every age and inheritance have ultimately
returned. It is that of Blake when he says that the notion
that a man has a body distinct from his soul must be
expunged, and that it is only because the doors of per-
ception are closed—by ignorance—that we do not see all
things as they are, infinite. It is that of Kabir when he
says—“ in the home is reality ; the home helps to attain
Him who is real—I behold His beauty everywhere ” ; and
when he asks, “What is the difference between the river
and its waves; because it has been named as wave, shall
1 Mahayana monism is thus fatalistic: it affirms the unreality of
phenomena as such, but equally affirms their significance. This life is
a dream, but not without meaning. There is no sanction for this
doctrine in early Buddhism, and in one place it is also condemned by
Asvaghosha as born of the devil (The Awakening of Faith, trans.
T. Suzuki, page 137); perhaps it was sometimes misunderstood in the
sense of ‘ Let us eat, drink and be merry, for to-morrow we die.’
245
the non-distinction of the unshown and the shown—
“this our worldly life is an activity of Nirvana itself, not
the slightest distinction exists between them ”—(Nagar-
juna, Madhyamika Sastra). This view is expressed with
dramatic force in the aphorism, ‘ Yas klesas so bodhi, yas
samsaras tat niivanam' That which is sin is also Wisdom,
the realm of Becoming is also Nirvana.1 One and the
same is the heart of Suchness and the Heart of Birth-and-
Death—‘what is immortal and what is mortal are
harmoniously blended, for they are not one, nor are they
separate ’—(Asvaghosha). If the truth is not to be
found in our everyday experience, it will not be found by
searching elsewhere.
Mahayana mysticism
It scarcely needs to be pointed out, though it is important
to realize, that this is the ultimate position to which the
mystics of every age and inheritance have ultimately
returned. It is that of Blake when he says that the notion
that a man has a body distinct from his soul must be
expunged, and that it is only because the doors of per-
ception are closed—by ignorance—that we do not see all
things as they are, infinite. It is that of Kabir when he
says—“ in the home is reality ; the home helps to attain
Him who is real—I behold His beauty everywhere ” ; and
when he asks, “What is the difference between the river
and its waves; because it has been named as wave, shall
1 Mahayana monism is thus fatalistic: it affirms the unreality of
phenomena as such, but equally affirms their significance. This life is
a dream, but not without meaning. There is no sanction for this
doctrine in early Buddhism, and in one place it is also condemned by
Asvaghosha as born of the devil (The Awakening of Faith, trans.
T. Suzuki, page 137); perhaps it was sometimes misunderstood in the
sense of ‘ Let us eat, drink and be merry, for to-morrow we die.’
245