Awakening of Faith in the Mahāyāna (AF, , reconstructed Sanskrit title: *Mahāyāna-śraddhotpāda-śāstraHubbard, Jamie (1994, 2008). Original Purity and the Arising of Delusion. Smith College, p.1. Internet Archive) is an influential Mahayana Buddhist treatise for East Asian Buddhism, notable for its doctrine of "one mind and two aspects."
Though traditionally attributed to the 2nd century CE Indian master Aśvaghoṣa, no Sanskrit version is extant and it is widely regarded by many contemporary scholars as having been composed in China.Gardner, Alex. "On the Awakening of Faith in the Mahāyāna." Buddha-Nature: A Tsadra Foundation Initiative, October 9, 2019. The main theories of the authorship of the Awakening of Faith among contemporary scholars now point to either the 6th century Indian monk translators Paramārtha and Bodhiruci, or alternatively to one of their Chinese students.
Origin and authorship While the text is traditionally attributed to Aśvaghoṣa, no Sanskrit version of the text is extant. The two earliest existing versions are written in Chinese, and contemporary scholars widely accept the theory that the text was composed in China.Nattier, Jan. 'The Heart Sūtra: A Chinese Apocryphal Text?'. Journal of the International Association of Buddhist Studies Vol. 15 (2), 180–81, 1992. PDF Chinese Buddhist Apocrypha by Robert E. Buswell. University of Hawaii Press: 1990. . pgs 1–29
As Alex Gardner notes, there is still scholarly debate on whether the work was composed in Sanskrit by an Indian, or whether it was composed in Chinese. Some scholars point to Chinese theories in the text, while others (like Jikidō Takasaki) see it as mainly drawing on classic Indian ideas found in the Indic tathāgatagarbha texts like the Ratnagotravibhāga.
Some scholars note that the AF could have an Indic precedent or at least be based on several Indian ideas. According to Christopher Callahan "the literary quality of the text suggests that its origins are not entirely Chinese". This is because:Callahan, Christopher. "Awakening Faith in the Pure Land Section of the Qixinlun." PACIFIC WORLD: Journal of the Institute of Buddhist Studies. Third Series Number 13 Fall 2011.In comparison with other forged translations, the Qixinlun does not quote from known translations and has no known allusions to Taoist or Confucian texts. Moreover, the text is written in an extremely concise manner without literary embellishment, out of keeping with the ornate pianliti style that was popular in the sixth century. This evidence has led many scholars to conjecture that some form of the text was produced in either India or Central Asia and that the author or authors, perhaps even Paramārtha himself, rewrote the text in light of sixth-century Chinese intellectual concerns. D.T. Suzuki accepted the Indian origin of the Awakening of Faith (though he did not think Aśvaghoṣa was the author). He saw the text as being "inspired by the same spirit" as the Lankavatara, Avatamsaka, and Mahayanamahaparanirvana Sutras, and regarded its identification as a Chinese text as "not well grounded".From p. xxxix of the Introduction to The Lankavatara Sutra, by D. T. Suzuki, Routledge & Kegan Paul, LTD. London 1932, reprinted 1966.
Paramārtha (; 499–569) an Indian monk who became a translator in China, was traditionally thought to have translated the text in 553 CE. However, some modern scholars opine it was composed by Paramārtha or one of his students.Grosnick, William, H. The Categories of T'i, Hsiang, and Yung: Evidence that Paramārtha Composed the Awakening of Faith. Journal of the International Association of Buddhist Studies 12 (1), 65–92, 1989. Internet Archive This thesis was defended by Japanese scholars like Hiroo Kashiwagi Kashiwagi, Hiroo (1981). Daijō kishinron no kenkyū : Daijō kishinron no seiritsu ni kansuru shiryōronteki kenkyū, p. 181 Sally B. King also writes that Paramārtha may have composed the Buddha-nature Treatise () as well as the Awakening of Faith.
Other experts dispute that it has anything to do at all with Paramārtha.Keng Ching, "Yogacara Buddhism Transmitted or Transformed? Paramartha (499–569 C.E.) and His Chinese Interpreters," Ph.D. diss., Harvard University, 2009 Keng Ching argues that the Awakening of Faith does not show any similarities with the other works of Paramārtha, and he notes the doctrinal differences between the works of Paramārtha's the Dilun school and the Awakening of Faith.Ching Keng. "A Re-examination of the Relationship between the Awakening of Faith and Dilun School Thought, Focusing on the Works of Huiyuan", pp. 183–215 in: Chen-kuo Lin / Michael Radich (eds.) A Distant Mirror Articulating Indic Ideas in Sixth and Seventh Century Chinese Buddhism. Hamburg Buddhist Studies, 3 Hamburg: Hamburg University Press 2014. Keng Ching also argues that the attribution of the AF to Paramārtha was mainly due to the efforts of the Shelun scholar Tanqian (曇遷; 542–607).Keng Ching and Michael Radich. "Paramārtha." Brill's Encyclopedia of Buddhism. Volume II: Lives, edited by Jonathan A. Silk (editor-in chief), Richard Bowring, Vincent Eltschinger, and Michael Radich, 752-758. Leiden, Brill, 2019.
The authors of a recent translation of the AF (John Jorgensen, Dan Lusthaus, John Makeham, and Mark Strange) write that "there is now wide consensus that the author of the Treatise was strongly influenced by the terminology and language of Bodhiruci (d. ca. 535)." The Awakening of Faith draws on much of the ideas and specific terms found in Bodhiruci's translations, such as his Laṅkāvatāra-sūtra and his translation of Vasubandhu's Commentary on the Ten Stages Sutra. As such "one theory is that the Treatise was written by someone in Bodhiruci’s circle."Jorgensen, John; Lusthaus, Dan; Makeham, John; Strange, Mark, trans. (2019), Treatise on Awakening Mahāyāna Faith, New York, NY: Oxford University Press, in Introduction (pp. 1–10). According to these authors, one candidate for the authorship of the Awakening of Faith is Tanlin (曇 林), who was "an amanuensis of Bodhiruci and a scholar of Tathāgatagarbha material."
A later translation or reedited version was attributed to the Khotanese monk (; active 695–700). This version was edited and modified to make it more compatible with classic Yogacara doctrine of the school of Xuanzang which had been critical of the Awakening of Faith. But this new edition was never as popular as the earlier version of the Awakening of Faith, which was defended by the Huayan scholar and Sanskritist Fazang (643–712).Lai, Whalen W. "A Clue to the Authorship of the. Awakening of Faith: "Siksananda's". Redaction of the Word "Nien"*". Journal of the International Association of Buddhist Studies. Volume 3 1980 Number 1. Fazang himself had worked with Śikṣānanda's translation team on other sutras, like the Lankavatara.
When it was discovered by Westerners at the beginning of the 20th century in 1907, Welsh missionnary Timothy Richard interpreted The Awakening of Faith in the Mahayana Doctrine as a crypto-Christian text and new form of Buddhism.
Title The term Mahayana points not to the Mahayana school, but to tathatā "suchness" or "the Absolute":
Charles Muller argues that the terminology "faith in" is misleading:
In other words, the treatise is not discussing "Faith in the Mahayana," rather it is presenting the Mahayana style of faith, which is faith in the true suchness of mind or the "One Mind". If this is accurate then a more apt title would be The Awakening of Mahāyāna Faith.
Sung Bae Park observes, following Wŏnhyo, that "Mahāyāna" in the title does not refer to the object of faith, but to essence, i.e. the One Mind, while faith is its function. Accordingly, Park explains that the title "in the final analysis, comes to mean simply 'the naturally functioning mind' or 'the properly operating mind,' which, in effect, is the 'mind of faith.'"Sung Bae Park. Buddhist Faith and Sudden Enlightenment, pages 38-39. State University of New York Press, 1983.
Content Written from the perspective of Essence-Function () philosophy, this text sought to harmonize the two soteriological philosophies of the Buddha-nature (tathagatagarbha) and the Eight Consciousnesses of Yogacara into a synthetic visionLusthaus, Dan (1998). Buddhist philosophy, Chinese . In E. Craig (Ed.), Routledge Encyclopedia of Philosophy. London: Routledge. based on the "One Mind in Two Aspects" doctrine. According to Whalen Lai, this doctrine holds that "self and world, mind and suchness, are integrally one. Everything is a carrier of that a priori enlightenment; all incipient enlightenment is predicated on it." Paul Williams explains the main teaching of the Awakening of Faith thus:The Awakening of Faith itself takes the tathagatagarbha as the substratum of samsara and nirvana. This Mind has two aspects – the Mind as Suchness or Thusness, that is, the Absolute Reality itself, and the Mind as phenomena. Between them these two aspects embrace all there is.Williams, Paul (2008). Mahayana Buddhism: The Doctrinal Foundations, p. 116. Routledge. The text is divided into five sections, and often summarized as “One Mind, Two Aspects, Three Greatnesses, Four Faiths, and Five Practices". Following two introductory chapters dealing with the oneness of mind and motivations for the text's composition, part three focuses on two aspects of mind to clarify the relationship between enlightenment and ignorance, nirvana and samsara, or the absolute and the phenomenal. Part four describes five practices that aid in the growth of faith, emphasizing calmness and insight meditation. Part five describes the benefits that result from cultivating the five practices.
One Mind and two aspects According to the Awakening of Faith, the principle of the Mahāyāna is "the Mind of the sentient being" which includes within it all phenomenal and transcendental states.The Awakening of Faith, Attributed to Aśvaghoṣa, Translated from the Chinese of Paramārtha (Taishō Volume 32, Number 1666) by Yoshito S. Hakeda, page 7, Bukkyō Dendō Kyōkai and Numata Center for Buddhist Translation and Research, 2005Treatise on Awakening Mahāyāna Faith, edited and translated by John Jorgensen, Dan Lusthaus, John Makeham, and Mark Strange, page 66, Oxford University Press, 2019. This is explained in terms of the One Mind which has two aspects: the aspect of suchness, and the aspect of birth-and-death. These two aspects mutually include each other and embace all dharmas, or states of existence.The Awakening of Faith, Attributed to Aśvaghoṣa, Translated from the Chinese of Paramārtha (Taishō Volume 32, Number 1666) by Yoshito S. Hakeda, page 11, Bukkyō Dendō Kyōkai and Numata Center for Buddhist Translation and Research, 2005Treatise on Awakening Mahāyāna Faith, edited and translated by John Jorgensen, Dan Lusthaus, John Makeham, and Mark Strange, page 68, Oxford University Press, 2019.
The aspect of suchness Suchness refers to the essential nature of mind which is unborn and imperishable. This nature is beyond language and characteristics, as all verbal explanations are merely provisional and used in connection with illusions. Accordingly, the word "suchness" is explained as "the limit of verbalization wherein a word is used to put an end to words." Regarding this, Wŏnhyo comments that, "It is just as though one stops the voices with a voice," while Fazang states, "It is just like saying 'Be quiet!' If this voice were not there, other voices would not be made to cease."The Awakening of Faith, Attributed to Aśvaghoṣa, Translated from the Chinese of Paramārtha (Taishō Volume 32, Number 1666) by Yoshito S. Hakeda, pages 12-13, Bukkyō Dendō Kyōkai and Numata Center for Buddhist Translation and Research, 2005