| Previous scholarship on Buddha-bodies has given excessive, teleological pride-of-place to the doctrine of trikaya ("three bodies"), and as a result, has paid insufficient attention to a broad range of other relevant ideas, especially ideas about bodies of beings other than Buddhas, or bodies not named kaya. As a result, our received history of ideas about the body in Buddhism is fundamentally inaccurate. This dissertation therefore proposes a through revision of this history.;Most notably, there is not sufficient evidence to believe that any significant concept of positive, adequate, ideal embodiment of Buddhist liberation is entertained in the period down to the close of the Pali canon. Inscriptional evidence strongly suggests that the earliest identifiable such positive embodiment of Buddhahood is to be found in the relics of the Buddha. The very notion of positive, adequate embodiment of Buddhahood therefore seems to originate in relic-centred cultic practice around the turn of the Common Era. Subsequently, in Mahayana and the Mainstream "Schools", a whole range of new ideas about ideal embodiments emerges, including, centrally, the ideas that Buddhahood is most veritably embodied in gnosis (bodhi, jnana ); or in the "Absolute" (dharmadhatu etc.); or (eventually, immortally) in adamant (vajrakaya). Early Mahayana texts are more central than has been recognised to the rise of new, positive ideas embodiments, which are connected with a broader Mahayana shift towards greater emphasis on immanence. Mainstream "Schools" most likely follow rather than pioneer these developments. Subsequently, still further development gives rise to a range of further ideas among which is trikaya doctrine itself, and the significance of trikaya doctrine is very different when regarded in the context of this revised narrative.;The arguments of this dissertation should thus bring about a fundamental revision of our understanding of ideas about Buddha-bodies and the history of their development, while also bearing broader implications for our understanding of the relationship between the Mahayana and Mainstream materials, especially those of the "Schools" (esp. Mahasam&dotbelow;ghika and Sarvastivada). The Buddhist ideas studied here also have implications for broader comparative questions, including the nature and significance of the problematic of embodiment in cross-cultural perspective. |
