SHENTONG MADHYAMAKA AND VIA NEGATIVA 申通中觀和否定之路

SHENTONGMADHYAMAKAANDVIANEGATIVA,

PRIVATE

ABUDDHISTANDACHRISTIANAPPROACHTOTHEABSOLUTE;

WITHSPECIALEMPHASISONTHETEACHINGSOF

THEBLESSEDANGELAOFFOLIGNO(1248/49-1309)

ANDTHEOMNISCIENTDOLPOPASHERABGYALTSEN(1292-1361)

Athesisby

EllenRozett

presentedto

TheFacultyofthe

GraduateTheologicalUnion

inpartialfulfillmentofthe

requirementsforthedegreeof

MasterofArts

Berkeley,California

April,1996

Committeesignatures

____________________

Coordinator

____________________

____________________

page\*roman

vii

toc\fC\e1-5

TABLEOFCONTENTS

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS....................vii

FOREWORD viii

CHAPTERONE

INTRODUCTION 1

A.InSearchofaCommonLanguage...........1

B.PerennialistsandConstructivists 4

C.TheRoleofMysticsandtheirTeachings 16

CHAPTERTWO

THECHARACTERANDHISTORICALROOTSOFVIANEGATIVA

ANDUMASHENTONG 24

A.WhatIsViaNegativa?...............24B.WhatIsShentongMadhyamaka? 31

C.TheDevelopmentofViaNegativa 42

1.BiblicalRoots 42

2.HellenisticRoots 47

3.Negative-MysticalTheologyDuringtheFirst500Years 55

4.ThePseudo-DionysianCorpus 62

5.ViaNegativaintheEuropeanMiddleAges 65

D.TheDevelopmentofUmaShentong 78

1.InSearchofaPositiveNirvana 78

2.TathagatagarbhaandAnatman 86

3.Buddha-gotra,FamilyoftheBuddha,orArya-gotra,NobleFamily 90

4.TathagatagarbhaandMadhyamaka 93

5.MadhyamakaandYogacara 99

CHAPTERTHREE

THEHISTORICALANDRELIGIO-CULTURALSETTINGOF

ANGELAANDDOLPOPA 111

A.Angela 111

1.HerTime....................111

2.HerReligiousInheritance 116

a.GenerallyCatholic 116

i.TheMedievalWomen'sMovement 116

ii.UnionwithGod 121

iii.ChristianSilence 124

b.HerFranciscanInheritance 129

i.Poverty 129

ii.PenanceandMortification 132

3.HerPerson 134

4.HerPositionasaWoman 137

5.TheImpactofHerWork 145

B.Dolpopa 148

1.HisTime 148

2.HisReligiousInheritance 152

a.TantrainTibetanBuddhism 152

b.TheSakyaandJonangSchools 156

c.BuddhistSilence 158

3.HisPerson 161

4.HisPositionasan"Omniscient"MaleLineageHolder 164

5.TheImpactofHisWork 169

CHAPTERFOUR

THEBASICTEACHINGS 177

A.TheTextualSources 177

1.Angela'sWorks 177

2.Dolpopa'sWorks 188

B.WhatAngelaSaysAboutGod 191

1.IdentityofSoulandGod 196

2.NothingnessofSoulandGod 202

3.GodisNothingandEverything 205

4.IsGodInexpressibleandInconceivable? 206

C.WhatDolpopaSaysAboutBuddhaNature 209

1.BuddhaNatureIsAbsoluteandtheUltimateMeaningofBuddha'sTeachings 209

2.BuddhaNatureHasInseparable,Uncompounded,andInconceivableQualities 212

3.TheWisdomofBuddhaNatureor:BuddhaJnana..221

4.TheCompassionofBuddhaNatureor:

BuddhaActivity...............224

5.BuddhaNatureIsNoOtherthanForm 226

CHAPTERFIVE

COMMONALITIESANDDIFFERENCESBETWEENDOLPOPA'SBUDDHANATUREANDANGELA'SGOD. 232

A.HowAngela'sTeachingsMatchShentongPhilosophy 234

1.TheNothingnessofThings 234

2.TheNo-thing-nessorInconceivabilityoftheAbsolute 235

3.TheQualitiesofBuddhaNatureandGod 241

a.AbsoluteWisdom 242

b.Unborn,UncreatedLove 248

B.HowBuddhismCouldHelpAngela 252

C.HowAngelaCouldResolveBuddhistDebates 256

D.PublicLogicVersusPrivateIntuition 259

E.Angela'sSilenceandBuddhistNon-conceptuality 262

CHAPTERSIX

CONCLUSION 270

ABBREVIATIONS......................276

SELECTEDBIBLIOGRAPHY 277

“QuinescitorarenoncognoscitDeum.”GilofAssisi

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

ThanksbetotheOnewhotranscendsoneandmany,

forinspirationandsustenance.

ThanksalsotoShenpenHookham,myunknownsisterintheDharma,forherfaithfulandthoroughresearchwithoutwhichthisthesiswouldhavebeenimpossible.

Thankstomyadvisorsfortoleratingmystubbornnessandathesistheyagreewithonlypartially.

Thankstomyparentsinlaw,KathrynandWalterRozett.Duringthelastphaseofwriting,theykeptmybodyfromillnessorstarvation,mymindfrominsanity,andmythesisfromthemostgravemistakesandcrudelanguage.

AMoroccanoncetoldmethatMuslimcarpetmanufacturerspurposefullyleaveonemistakeintheirpiecesofartinordertoacknowledgethatonlyGodcandoanythingperfectly.Iamsotakenwiththatideathatthereaderwillmostlikelyfindmanymistakesinthisthesis-thesolepurposebeing,ofcourse,toremindusjusthowlimitedthehumanintellectisandhowunabletoportrayspiritualmattersappropriately.

FOREWORD

TheobjectiveofthisstudyistohelpdispelthewidespreadviewthatBuddhismandChristianityareirreconcilable.TothisendChristian-Buddhistdialoguehasalreadyaccomplishedalot.Henceitmaynolongerbedifficultformanypeopletoconcedethatthereisakinshipbetweenthetworeligionsasfarastheirbasicemphasisonethics,compassion,andspiritualratherthanworldlyvaluesisconcerned.Butwhenitcomestothecore,namelyhowdoeseachreligionthinkoftheabsoluteandconsequentlyofrealityasawhole,mostpeoplestillthinkthatBuddhismandChristianityareincompatible.

ItistruethatmuchofChristianandBuddhisttheologiesandphilosophiesareindeedquitedistinct.OnegenerallyaffirmsarealGodwhocreatedarealworld.Theothernegatesacreator-Godandoftenalsotherealityofthisworld.Buddhistphilosophycallsthisabsenceofanyrealitythatcouldbegraspedastrulyexistent"emptiness".

However,eveninregardtotheabsolutethereareBuddhistandChristianschoolsofthoughtthatareverymuchakin.ThisthesisseekstoshowthatShentongMadhyamakaandMystical-Negativetheologyareoneexample.AlthoughShentongpasdonotnegatethevalidityofemptiness,theynonethelessaffirm(inacertainway)positivecharacteristicsoftheabsolutesuchasexistence,wisdom,compassion,andevenform.AndalthoughMystical-NegativetheologiansdonotnegatetheusefulnessofthinkingofGodastheCreator,theyalsospeakofanabsoluterealitythattranscendsallhumanconceptsofexistenceandnon-existence,Creatorandcreated.

ItisobviouslynotmyintenttoaddargumentstotherhetoricofthosewhowouldproveShentongMadhyamaka"unbuddhist"becauseofitssimilaritytotheism,ornegativetheology"unchristian"bypointingtoitskinshipwithEasternthought.Onthecontrary,myhopeisthatreligiouspeoplearoundtheworldcanlearntorejoiceintheircommonalitieswithoutfearingalossofidentity.HopefullyitwillbecomeclearthatinspiteofallcommonalitiestheBlessedAngelaofFoligno,oneofthegreatestmedievalmystics,isveryChristian;justastheOmniscientDolpopaSherabGyaltsen,whosystematizedtheShentongMadhyamaka,isveryBuddhist.

Hence,otherpreconceptionsIwouldliketohelpdispelarethoseconcerningwhatthe"mainstream"or"majority"ofChristiansandBuddhistsbelieveordonotbelieve.NarrowviewsofwhatitmeanstobeChristianorBuddhistareoftenheldnotonlybyoutsidersofdifferentfaithsbutequallybymassesofinsiderswhothinkoftheirparticularspeciesoftradition(ordenomination)andschoolofthoughtasthestandardfortheirwholefamilyofreligion.Yetitwouldseemthattwothousandormoreyearsaftertheirfounderslefttheirbodies,itistimetoconcedethateachandeveryChristianorBuddhistsectisbutavariationonatheme.Unlesswewanttocontinueatraditionofreligiousintolerance,warsandpersecutions,wehavelittlechoicebuttoacceptthatneitherreligionhasproducedonlyone"mainstream"or"true"formofitstradition.Bothreligionsincludesuchapluralityofdistinctteachings,practices,approachesanddenominationsthatonemayevendisputetheproprietyofreferringtoBuddhismorChristianityinthesingular.

IfwecanembraceallChristianandBuddhisttraditions(aswellasotherreligions)astrueandauthentic,itthenbecomesmeaningfulfordialoguetofindparallelsbetweencertaintraditions,evenifinevitablyothersdonotconsiderthem"mainstream".Forifallschoolscanberespectedbyotherschoolswithinthatreligionthen,inorder,forexample,foroneparticularBuddhistconcepttoberespectedbyChristians,itnolongerhastomatchallofChristiandoctrineandpractice;itsufficesifitisakintooneparticularChristianschoolofthought.

NaturallyIhaveotherpresuppositionsthatareboundtocolormywork.Whileobjectivityremainsaworthwhileguideline,theacademiccommunityhasbeguntoacknowledgethatitisimpossibletoachieve.SteveBishopconfirmsthatevenscienceisnowviewedas"subjectiveandvalue-laden.Itisnotneutral....factsareoftendeterminedbyculture...Ourworldviewaffectsallthatwedo...itisthereforeimpossibletobeaneutralobserver.""ScienceandFaith:BoaConstrictorsandWarthogs?"Themelios(February1994):5.

Thereforeitisamatterofacademichonestyandaccuracyformetodisclosethereligiousinstitutionsthathaveframedmythinking.

IwasbroughtupProtestantinGermany.Since1983IconsidermyselfaChristianBuddhist.IpracticeTibetanBuddhism.Myguru,thelateKaluRinpoche(1905-1989),wasnotonlytheheadoftheShangpaKagyulineageAsub-schooloftheKarmaKagyupa,describedbyMatthewKapsteinin:"TheShangs-pabKa'-brgyud:anUnknownTraditionofTibetanBuddhism",TibetanStudies(1979):138-144.

butalsooneofDolpopa'sJonanglineageholders.UndernormalcircumstancesthiswouldmeanthatDolpopa'spracticesandteachingshavebeentransmittedtohimviaanuninterruptedlineofmastersanddisciples(Sanskrit,hereafterSkt.,parampara)goingbackallthewaytoSherabGyaltsenhimself.ButsincetheTibetangovernmentbannedtheJonangpasinthesecondhalfoftheseventeenthcentury,thetransmissionthatreachedKaluRinpoche,whileauthentic,wasapparentlynotascompleteasitshouldhavebeen.Formoreonthebanseebelow,sectionIII.B.5."TheImpactofHisWork",161-3.

S[henpen]K.HookhammaintainsthatsincethebantheJonanglineagehasbeentransmittedthroughmastersoftheNyingma,Kagyu,andSakyaschools.Shesays:"ThelateKaluRinpocheisagreatrepresentativeofthistradition(aswellasofmanyothers)andincludestheJonangpasasabranchoftheKagyupas."TheBuddhaWithin:TathagatagarbhaDoctrineAccordingtotheShentongInterpretationoftheRatnagotravibhaga,SUNYSeriesinBuddhistStudies(Albany:StateUniversityofNewYorkPress,1991),135.

CyrusStearnsontheotherhand,insistedinaconversationthat,withintheKagyuschool,onlythetantricJonangteachingsweretransmitteduninterruptedly.Accordingtohim,wecannottellwhethertheyincludeDolpopa'sShentongteachingsornot,butweknowthattheKagyumastershavenot,inrecenthistory,hadhisnon-tantricworksdirectlyavailableandtransmittedtothem.

MyownimpressionisthatDolpopa'sShentongteachingsweretransmittedtoKagyumastersas"secretoralinstructions"alongwiththetantrictransmissions.

SinceIammysticallyinclined,andsinceTibetanBuddhismhasmuchmoreincommonwithCatholicismthanwithanyotherChristiandenominationIampersonallyfamiliarwith,myChristianpartsfeelmostathomeintheCatholicchurch.

Accordingtoconstructivistthinking,whichwillbeelucidatedintheintroduction,IcouldneverbesurewhetherIunderstandwhatDolpopa(or,forthatmatter,anyotherancientBuddhistmaster)triedtosay.AndImustadmitthatmyknowledgeofSherabGyaltsen'sphilosophyisquitelimited.IamnotTibetan;myTibetanlanguageskillsareextremelylimited;and,aswillbeexplainedinsectionIV.A.2."Dolpopa'sWorks",Westernknowledgeofhisteachingsingeneralisquitescarce.OntheotherhandIamapracticingBuddhistwhohasbeensteepedinShentongthoughtbyamasterwhowasjustaboutascloselylinkedtoDolpopaasanyonecouldbeinourera.FurthermoreIamrelying,toagreatextent,ontheaccountsandtranslationsofexcerptsgivenbyShenpenK.Hookham.SheisaveryseriousBuddhistpractitionerandalsoreceivedteachingsonthesubjectfromJonanglineageholders.MoreoverCyrusStearns,aWesternauthorityonDolpopa,hasconfirmedduringaconversationthatmyunderstandingofthemaster'sthoughtwasgood.HenceIbelievethatwhilemygraspofShentongdoctrineislimited,itisreasonablyaccurate.

Anoteonmethodology:Withintheframeworkofthisthesisitisessentialtoinvestigatethephilosophical,historical,andsocialbackgroundofDolpopa'sandAngela'steachings.Withoutsuchworktheywouldbedifficulttoevaluate,especiallybecauseverylittleofDolpopa'steachingsaredirectlyavailabletomeandbecauseAngela'swordswereeditedtoagreatextentassoonastheywerespoken.OnAngela'ssidethisrequiressomefeministanalysisofhertradition,time,andsayings.Bytakingsuchfactorsintoaccount,onecanbegintosiftoutwhichstatementsbestreflectthecoreoftheirexperiences.

Myapproachisbasedontheperennialistviewwhichallowsmetobe"interreligiouslyengaged".Idonotbelieveinthemythofneutralscientificresearch.Theeerieregularitywithwhich"neutral"academicstudieshavebeenusedfordestructiveendscompelsmetobequitefrankaboutmysocio-politicalgoals:IwantBuddhistsandChristianstoknow,respect,andhelpeachother.

Asmuchaspossible,IwilltrytorefrainfrominterpretingAngela'srevelationsfromaBuddhistperspective.ItmayattimesseemtoChristianreadersasifIweresuperimposingBuddhiststructuresontoChristianthinking.Indeterminingwhetherthisisreallythecase,onemustrememberthatMysticalTheologybydefinitiontranscendsordinarytheologyasChristiansknowit.ThusitisconceivablethatChristians,evenmoresothanBuddhists,maybepronetoreadtheirownpresuppositionsintoNegativeTheology.

Asappropriateforinter-religiousdialogue,Iwilldepicteventsinanemic(insider)ratherthanetic(outsider)fashion,analyzingwhatoccurrencesmeantothoseexperiencingthem,nothowoutsidersmightinterpretthem.

SanskritwordsthatarenotprintedinitalicsandbearnodiacriticalmarkscanbefoundinWebster'sThirdNewInternationalDictionaryandcanthereforebeconsideredEnglishwords.Regrettablythedictionarywearefollowing,leavesthediacriticalmarksoutwithoutchangingthespellingsoastoreflectproperpronunciation.Maythereaderbeadvisedthatcisalwayspronouncedchandsisoftenpronouncedsh,forexamplesunyataisreadasshunyata.

ComparingtheteachingsofAngela,aChristianwoman,andDolpopa,aBuddhistmanhastheaddedadvantageofrevealinghowgenderhasinfluencedphilosophicalexpression.Thedisadvantage,inthiscase,isthatalltheinescapablefeministcritiqueisdirectedagainstChristianity,whileBuddhismissparedthatembarrassment.ToavoidawrongimpressionitshouldbenotedthatthesituationofBuddhistwomenwascomparabletothatoftheirChristiansisters.Theironlyadvantagewasthattheywereneverphysicallypersecutedandslaughteredaswitchesorheretics,aswereChristians.ButintheirspiritualdevelopmentBuddhistwomenprobablyreceivedlesssupportthanChristianwomendid.WhenallissaidanddoneitisprobablysafetoremarkthatBuddhistwomenhavebeenjustasoppressedastheirChristiansisters.ForanexcellentanalysisofBuddhistandrocentrismsee:RitaGross,BuddhismAfterPatriarchy:AFeministHistory,Analysis,andReconstructionofBuddhism,(Albany:StateUniversityofNewYorkPress,1993).

Ittook,however,muchmoreeffortontheChristiansidetosecurewomen'ssubordination.Letmebrieflyexplain,fortheseissuesplayanimportantroleinthisstudy.

JesusthreatenedpatriarchyfarmorethanBuddhaShakyamunidid.Judgingbythesutras,Gautamawasasexistwhohadtobepersuadedbyhisfavoritediscipletoallowtheordinationofwomenasnuns.Heonlyagreedtothiswishafterfixingwomen'ssubordinationintherulesoftheorderandpredictingthatbecauseofwomen'spresenceitwouldlastonlyfivehundredinsteadofonethousandyears.Hemadeitquiteclearthatspiritualtruthswerenottointerferewiththesocialhierarchy.Nomatterhowenlightenedawomanwas,shewassociallyinferiortotheyoungestmonk.AndnomatterofwhatcosmicsignificanceitmayhavebeentojointheBuddha'sorder,onewasnotallowedtodosowithoutthepermissionofparentsandkings.Inshort,patriarchshadnothingtofearfromtheBuddha.Afterthediscoveryofthehistorical-criticalmethodforanalyzingancienttexts,onecannolongerbecertainthatallthesayingsattributedtotheBuddhaortoJesuswereactuallypronouncedbythem.IrespecttheworkofBuddhistwomensuchasInYangChungwhostrivetoshowthatcertainsexiststatementsdonotreflecttheBuddha'smindframebutwereprobablylateradditions.("ABuddhistViewofWomen:AComparativeStudyoftheRulesforBhiksunisandBhiksusBasedontheChinesePratimoksa",IBS/GTUM.A.thesis,Berkeley:1995)

SuchresearchisveryhelpfulwhenwetrytodecideforourtimewhattotakeasthetrueandauthoritativeteachingsofBuddhaorJesus.Butwhenstudyingthehistoricalcharacterofareligion,theseconsiderationsareofnoconcern.ChristianandBuddhisttraditionswerebuiltonwhatwastransmittedasJesus'andGautama'steachings,notonwhattheyactuallysaid.Thus,whenitisnotedwithintheframeworkofthisthesis:"TheBuddhaorJesussaidsuchandsuch."itdoesnotrefertothehistoricalfoundersbuttothepersonasastheyaredepictedinscriptures.

Jesusontheotherhandwasmuchmoresubversive.Tofollowhimexplicitlymeanttobreakwithallhierarchyofgender,classes,andpersonalinteraction.Heconstantlywentagainstsocialcustomsthatwerediscriminatoryagainstwomen,thepoor,oranydetestedgroup.Andhedemandedfromhisdisciplesthattheynotabidebycustomsthatstoodinthewayoffollowinghimimmediatelyandone-pointedly.Nowonderwomenweredrawntohimandhisteachingsingreatmasses,probablyoutnumberingthemen.TheBibleonlymentionsthat"manywomen"followedJesusaround.(Mat27:55andMk15:41)Womenwerenevercountedinthosedays,butMargaretSmithmaintainsthatthey:"seem,indeed,tohavebeeninthemajority,atleastamongtheupperclasses,intheearlyChristianChurch,andinthepersecutionofLicinius,aboutA.D.322,specialprohibitionsweredirectedagainstwomen,asiftheemperorrealizedthatthestrengthofChristianitylayinitswomenmembers."TheWayoftheMystics:TheEarlyChristianMysticsandtheRiseoftheSufis,2nded.(NewYork:OxfordUniversityPress,1978),35.

Foratleastthreehundredyearstheirlotwassignificantlyimprovedandtheyprobablyneverexpectedthisdevelopmenttoreverse.

To"re-establishorder"inthepatriarchalsensetookgreateffortonthepartofchurchmenmorethanonceinthehistoryofChristianity.Itrequirednotonlytheintimidation,persecution,andmurderofwomenbutalsothesuppressionofmanyChristianteachingsandpractices,includingtheViaNegativa.

Thatiswhythesubordinationofwomenistobedealtwithinthisthesis.Itisheartbreakingandrepresentativeofthesuppressionofhumanityallovertheworld.Isay'humanity'becauseinorderformentosuppresswomentheyalsohavetosuppressotherthings,includinggreatpartsofthemselves.TheCatholicchurchisanexample,notanexceptioninthis.

page\*arabic

2

CHAPTERONE

INTRODUCTION

A.InSearchofaCommonLanguage

Eachreligionhascreateditsownjargonsomeofwhichiseasilytranslatedintothelanguageofothertraditionswhileotherportionsarenoteasilytransferable.Partofthetaskofinterreligiousdialogueistofindalanguagethatallconversationparticipantscanaccept.Inthisthesis,andperhapsinallinterreligiousdialogue,oneofthemostimportanttasksisfordialoguepartnersnottobedisturbedbyeachother'stermsfortheabsolute.ManyBuddhists,forexample,areveryuncomfortablewiththethoughtofaddressingtheultimateas"Lord"or"divine".YettheBuddhisttraditionknowsmanyLords.ForexampletheLordAvalokiteshvara(Tibetan:jobospyanrasgzigs),whoembodiestheloveandcompassionofallbuddhas.BuddhaShakyamuniaswellisoftenreferredtoasBhagavanBuddha,whichliterallymeans"theSublime"or"Holly"andisaHinduappellationforGod.Heisalsosaidtopossesses"thedivineeye"and"thedivineear".NotaltogetherunliketheChristianGod,theBuddhacametoembodyabsolutetruthorreality,andmanyseekersofenlightenmentinterpreteverythingtheymeetwithas"theblessingoftheBuddha".OfcourseIdonotmeantosaythatthereisnodifferencebetweentheChristianandBuddhistLords.Butoneneednotbeoverlysensitive;andforeignwordsshouldnotdetractfrompossiblecommonalities.

page\*arabic

12

ParticularlyWesternBuddhistsoftenoverreacttolanguagetheyconsiderloadedwithChristianthinking.AgoodexampleisAlexandHidekoWayman'suseoftheterm"uncreate(reality)"ratherthan"uncreated".ApparentlytheypreferusingagrammaticallyincorrectwordtoaBuddhisttermthatmightbesharedwithChristians.FortheWaymans'translationseebelowp.15n.29.ForotherBuddhistandAngela'susesoftheword"uncreated"seesectionV.A.2."TheNo-thing-nessorInconceivabilityoftheAbsolute",225-6.

OthersmayinsistthatthereisatremendousdifferencebetweenAbsoluteandabsolute,onedesignatingamorereifiedorpersonalizedreality/being,theotheranabstractvariable.EvenamongdifferingBuddhisttraditionsthisisanissue.S[henpen]K.Hookham,forexample,distinguishesbetweenself-emptyabsoluterealityandother-emptyAbsoluteReality.See:TheBuddhaWithin,364.

InthesearchforthemostcorrectandacceptablewordsonewoulddowelltorememberthatthereisprobablynotoneimportantChristianorBuddhisttermthatisusedandinterpretedconsistentlywithinitsreligionorevenwithinanyonedenomination;nottheabsolute,orGod,ordivinization,enlightenment,oremptiness,orbuddhanature.Anyoneofsuchtermshasbeenfilledwithawidevarietyofmeaninginitsowntradition,whyshouldonecastoneoftheminconcretewhenenteringdialogue?Interreligiousencounterwouldcertainlybeeasierifallparticipantscouldadmitthattheirownreligionhasnotcometoanunanimousagreementconcerningdefinitionswithintheirownlanguage.

SowhenIuselowercaseforwordslike'theultimate',thisdoesnotmeanthatitwouldbeinappropriatetoregardthedesignatedrealitywithgreatrespect,awe,orlove.Forexample,whenmanypeopleagreethatBelgiumisacountryinEurope,thisdoesnotmeanthattheyallhavetofeelthesamewayaboutitorhaveexactlythesameinformationaboutit.

Inanefforttousethemostneutraltermsavailable,Iwillcall'theabsolute'unconditioned,ultimate,oruncreatedwhendescribingitinawayrelevanttobothChristianandBuddhisttraditions. Whentheword"reality"isusedinconjunctionwiththeseterms,itreferstotheabsoluteasviewedfromanordinary,relativeviewpoint.Whenitstandsalone,itreflectstheviewthat"relativereality"isnotseparatefrom,butanaspectoftheultimate.

Furthermore,Ihavenotputtermsthatareonlyusedwithinonereligionandperhapsnotcondonedbytheother(likeGod,Spirit,orbuddhanature)inquotationmarkssoastoaccommodatethosewhowoulddoubttheadequacyofthesewordsfordescribingtherelevantreference.Forexample,IwillnotquestionwhetherineachoneofAngela'svisionsitistrulyGodwhospeakstoher.AslongasitisconsistentwithherowntraditiontosaythatthethingssheseesorhearsstemfromtheHolySpirit,thatshouldbeanacceptableway,withininterreligiousdialogue,ofexpressingtheoccurrence.

B.PerennialistsandConstructivists

Elucidating,asIdointhesecondhalfofchapterV,howBuddhistandChristianteachingscouldhelpeachotherovercomesomeoftheirownlimitations,presupposesthatrepresentativesofbothreligionscanandfrequentlydoexperiencethesamerealityandareabletorealizehighestenlightenment.Buddhismacknowledgestheexistenceof"pratyeka-buddhas"(lonesomeawakenedones)whogainrealizationwithouthelpfromouterteachersorinstructions.Buttheyarenotrespectedveryhighly;rathertheyaredenouncedasselfishintheirliberation.

Theword'enlightenment'itselfisrepresentativeoftheconfusionastowhocanreachit.Towhomdoesitbelong?IntheWestitisgenerallyidentifiedwiththefinalgoalofEasternreligions,evenbyChristians.NonethelessnoneoftheSanskritwordswhicharetranslatedasenlightenment,actuallyhastodowithlight.'Bodhi'forexamplemeans'awakening'.Theword'enlightenment'isrootedinGreekthoughtandintheBible,whereitdescribestheinfusionoftheHolySpiritintothesoul.(e.g.Hebr6:4)Atfirstthiswasdescribedashappeningduringbaptism,laterduringcontemplation.Christian'contemplation'iswhatBuddhistscall'meditation'andChristian'meditation'iswhatBuddhistswouldcall'contemplation'or'thinkingabouttheDharma.SimilarlyinthemysticalChristiantradition'enlightenment'denotesnotthefinalgoaloftheChristianpathbutthepowerfuldirectteachingofGodinone'ssoul.Duringthefollowingstageitissupersededby'divineunion'.(JosefWeismayer,"Erleuchtung"inLexikonfürTheologieundKirche,1995ed.)ManyChristianshaveforgottenthatenlightenmentcouldbeacentralelementoftheirreligion.Theyarenowremindedofitbyinter-faithdialogue.Iwillusetheterm'highestenlightenment'todenotethefinalgoalofeachreligion,i.e.perfectbuddhahoodorunionwithGod.Thisseemsfairenoughatatimewhenitisnotcleartowhichreligionth