Understanding the Connotation of Dhamma in Relation to Brahma : หน้า 50/141
DIRI Journal : หน้า 50/141 Explore the comparison between the Tathāgata and Brahminical Brahma, focusing on the spiritual significance of dhamma in Buddhism.
In this text, the term 'brahma-' is analyzed in the context of its translation as the masculine 'Brahma.' It discusses how the comparison between the Tathāgata and the Brahma, the creator, illustrates spiritual concepts in Buddhism. The Tathāgata is described as ‘dhamma-bodied’ and ‘the one who has become dhamma,’ establishing a connection with his noble disciples, who are seen as 'born of dhamma' and 'heirs of dhamma.' This reflects a transformation from a worldling to a noble individual, emphasizing the difference between Brahma's role in creation and the Tathāgata's teachings. The essence of dhamma shared among the Tathāgata and his followers signifies a noble heritage.
หัวข้อประเด็น
-Comparison of Tathāgata and Brahma -Spiritual paternity in Buddhism -Significance of dhamma in Buddhist identity -Transformation from worldling to noble disciple -Distinction between mythological and spiritual fatherhood
ข้อความต้นฉบับในหน้า
In the case that ‘brahma-’ refers to the masculine ‘Brahma’
In case of the term ‘brahma-’ in the three compounds50 being
translated as a masculine ‘Brahma,’51 the comparison of the first and
the third parallels suggests that the Buddha compares both himself
and the dhamma with the brahmanical Brahma, the creator. Thus, he is also equating himself with the dhamma. The reason given immediately afterward reinforces this point: ‘Why is that? Because the Tathāgata is designated ‘dhamma-bodied’ (dhammakāya) and he who has ‘become dhamma’ (dhammabhūta), so the noble disciples are entitled ‘born of dhamma,’ created by dhamma,’ and ‘heir (by means) of dhamma,’ as they are named the Tathāgata’s sons. According to this line of thought, the sense of the Tathāgata’s paternity is retained throughout the passage. The Tathāgata’s designations and the noble disciples’ titles are thus connected together, implying that the term dhamma in all these compounds, both the designations of the Tathāgata and the titles for his noble disciples, carries the same connotation; the connotation that is comparable to the brahmanical Brahma, the creator.
In order to determine which connotation of dhamma is meant here, it is necessary to understand the distinction between the Tathāgata’s spiritual paternity and the Brahma’s mythical fatherhood. According to the brahmanical claim, Brahma may simply create Brahmins through his mouth, out of his desire.52 In contrast, the Tathāgata’s ‘creation’ of a Buddhist noble disciple through his verbal teachings involves the entire process of spiritual realisation.
As discussed earlier, the titles of the Tathāgata’s true son as ‘born of dhamma,’ and ‘created by dhamma,’ imply the person’s transformation from a worldling (puthujjana) into a noble one (ariya-puggala). His title as an ‘heir of dhamma’ implies similar qualities he shares with the Buddha which indicates the noble (ariya) heredity. Therefore, the component ‘dhamma’ in all these compounds must
50 This refers to the compounds ‘brahma-ja,’ ‘brahma-nimmitā,’ and ‘brahma-dāyādda.’
51 Gombrich chooses to translate ‘brahma-’ in this instance as ‘Brahma.’ Ibid., pp. 163-165.
52 Paul Deussen, V. M. Bedekar, and Gajanan Balkrishna Palsule, Sixty Upanishads of the Veda, 1st ed. Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass, 1980, pp. 414-415.