The perfection of Kṣānti in Theravāda and Mahāyāna : a critical study

Abstract

This thesis concerns the concept of kṣānti pāramitā in the Theravāda and Mahāyāna traditions. In early Buddhism, the practice of kṣānti was defined as the ultimate asceticism (parama tapas), which needs to be mastered for the ultimate liberation. The later Buddhist traditions, such as Theravāda and Mahāyāna interpreted the practice as involving the mastery of two kinds of kṣānti, namely, Adhivāsana khanti or Adhivāsana-kṣānti (khanti/kṣānti of acceptance of suffering) and ñāṇa khanti or Dharmāvabodha-kṣānti (khanti/kṣānti regarding knowledge). The former simply refers to the notion of the endurance of physical and verbal afflictions, while the latter essentially refers to the notion of the acceptance of truth or reality. Concepts, such as dhammanijjhānakkhanti, anulomikā khanti, ghoṣānugāmi-kṣānti, anutpattikadharma-kṣānti, and so on come under the latter definition. It is to be noted that scholarly discussion of kṣānti pāramitā have often neglected the aspect of Dharmāvabodha-kṣānti, despite the fact that it is of great philosophical significance. It is also observed that both traditions observe different stages of the “acceptance of truth”, which serve as gradual stages of the pre-supra-mundane attainments. Thus, it is a matter of spiritual practice as well as of spiritual attainment. These attainments are not static, however, but subject to non- retrogressive (avaivartika) progression. In Theravāda, this progression is to enter the fixed state or rightness (sammattaniyāma okkamana), that is to ensure the attainment of the four supra-mundane fruits. In Mahāyāna, it is to enter the bodhisattva certainty (bodhisattvaniyāmavakrānti), that is, to ensure the attainment of Buddhahood. Thus, the second kind of kṣānti involves a complex theory that was even subject to argument among scholar: that in dealing with the concept of kṣānti, there was an incorrect Sanskritization of the Pali word khanti, and that it should, in fact, be read kānti (derived from √kam: to like, to wish, to delight etc.). This study argues against such contentions, and seeks a critical clarification that includes doctrinal and comparative analyses, with sufficient textual support, to show they are two different yet interconnected aspects of the same practice, which are equally important in accomplishing kṣānti pāramitā.