“Bodhisattva Gaia” and “Vairocana Sun”

Forum for discussion of East Asian Buddhism. Questions specific to one school are best posted in the appropriate sub-forum.
Heimdall
Posts: 153
Joined: Thu Aug 05, 2021 8:28 am

“Bodhisattva Gaia” and “Vairocana Sun”

Post by Heimdall »

I got a translation of Thich Nhat Han’s book on Buddhist ceremonies, prayers, and various sutras, and during one of the opening prayers, there is an explicit prayer to “Bodhisatva Gaia” and “Vairocana, the Sun”.

While I do not question Thich Nhat Han’s wisdom given his experience as a monk and his Plum Village movement, there’s a part of me that red flagged this questioning of this was really from Buddhism.

While searching for Bodhisattva Gaia, I only found references to his work and Plum Village.

Was this him incorporating Western ecological theological concepts into Buddhism where it didn’t belong? Is there an equivalent to Gaia in Zen Buddhism that I didn’t see before? Why would Earth be a Bodhisattva other than sunyata (but wouldn’t that be like making a prayer to a monkey because the monkey is Sunyata)?
User avatar
Tills ljuset tar oss
Posts: 111
Joined: Sat Sep 18, 2021 8:21 am

Re: “Bodhisattva Gaia” and “Vairocana Sun”

Post by Tills ljuset tar oss »

It is Prithvi.
Malcolm
Posts: 42974
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: “Bodhisattva Gaia” and “Vairocana Sun”

Post by Malcolm »

Heimdall wrote: Sat Oct 16, 2021 9:02 am I got a translation of Thich Nhat Han’s book on Buddhist ceremonies, prayers, and various sutras, and during one of the opening prayers, there is an explicit prayer to “Bodhisatva Gaia” and “Vairocana, the Sun”.

While I do not question Thich Nhat Han’s wisdom given his experience as a monk and his Plum Village movement, there’s a part of me that red flagged this questioning of this was really from Buddhism.

While searching for Bodhisattva Gaia, I only found references to his work and Plum Village.

Was this him incorporating Western ecological theological concepts into Buddhism where it didn’t belong? Is there an equivalent to Gaia in Zen Buddhism that I didn’t see before? Why would Earth be a Bodhisattva other than sunyata (but wouldn’t that be like making a prayer to a monkey because the monkey is Sunyata)?
Prithvi = Gaia Vairocana is a name for the sun.
tingdzin
Posts: 1947
Joined: Fri Feb 15, 2013 7:19 am

Re: “Bodhisattva Gaia” and “Vairocana Sun”

Post by tingdzin »

The literal translation of Vairocana in Chinese logographs is "Great Sun Buddha", so there's no stretch in that case.
User avatar
Zhen Li
Posts: 2748
Joined: Sun Apr 07, 2013 8:15 am
Location: Tokyo
Contact:

Re: “Bodhisattva Gaia” and “Vairocana Sun”

Post by Zhen Li »

I am not so familiar with Thich Nhat Hanh and his tradition, but I understand he doesn't translate all of his own writings. What is translated and how it is translated might not all be his doing.
Knotty Veneer
Posts: 967
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2012 1:50 pm

Re: “Bodhisattva Gaia” and “Vairocana Sun”

Post by Knotty Veneer »

Although Buddhism does not have an earth goddess figure like the Greek Gaia, there are some parallels - most notably the 12th of the 21 Taras TASHI DÖNJÉ MA who is propitiated to bring harmony, timely seasons, good harvests, and fertility generally.

But I agree Bodhisattva Gaia seems a bit of a new-agey invention.
This is not the wrong life.
Heimdall
Posts: 153
Joined: Thu Aug 05, 2021 8:28 am

Re: “Bodhisattva Gaia” and “Vairocana Sun”

Post by Heimdall »

Zhen Li wrote: Mon Oct 18, 2021 3:10 pm I am not so familiar with Thich Nhat Hanh and his tradition, but I understand he doesn't translate all of his own writings. What is translated and how it is translated might not all be his doing.
Technically speaking, I can see why that particular translation is used.

The various Indo-European pantheons (including the Pre-Hindu Vedic pantheons) all have a common source, and as such, they have a lot of substantive crossover in terms of the deities, stories, myths, cosmology, etc.

In Greco-Roman myth, the goddess Gaia is the the Earth goddess, whose consort was the sky god Uranus, and the two gave birth to the Titans (who later gave birth to the gods) and various other supernatural entities.
In Pre-Hindu Vedic myth, the goddess Privthi is the Earth goddess, whose consort was the sky god Dyaus, and the two gave birth to the devas.

So in a sense, because Gaia is a more well known term, I can sort of see it.

However, "Gaia" as it is used today does not merely refer to the "Gaia" in Greco-Roman myth. Rather, it's a politically-charged label associated with the "New Age" applied to a derived "Mother Earth Goddess" archetype from various religions, even religions beyond the Indo-European pantheons (for example, Pachamama in the Andean myths or even Francis of Assisi's "Sister Earth"), and whose theology includes her being our direct mother, our servitude to her, a naturally ordered hierarchy with her near the top (implying materialism), and climate change being a manifestation of her divine wrath on us.


I'm still influenced by GK Chesterton who thought that this theology was flawed because nature was something to be enjoyed and appreciated, not something that should be our solemn superior; when it's our solemn superior, it suggests that human beings are not capable of overcoming natural animalistic impulses and being something greater than ourselves.


Considering she is also subject to the Dharma Wheel and Rebirth, I still kind of relate to that. But I know I am prejudiced to my own ideological biases.
User avatar
Zhen Li
Posts: 2748
Joined: Sun Apr 07, 2013 8:15 am
Location: Tokyo
Contact:

Re: “Bodhisattva Gaia” and “Vairocana Sun”

Post by Zhen Li »

Right, it's definitely a misunderstanding for people to conflate Vairocana with the sun. The sun is limited, and Vairocana is unlimited.

As for Gaia Bodhisattva, actually, I don't think it is Pṛthivī. I cannot find Pṛthivī mentioned as a bodhisattva in any text, only as a devā. Probably the appropriate equivalent would Vasudhārā Bodhisattvā (持世菩薩). These are often conflated but I can't find any texts that make the identity explicit.

Personally, I find this practice objectionable. Gene Reeves' Lotus Sutra translation also did this with deities. Gaia has her own history in western religions. As with most western gods, her behaviour is unskilful and not becoming of a bodhisattva. So, we insult the Dharma by doing this. Should we translate Devadatta as Judas and Māra as Satan? Where does it stop? What if we were to call Maitreya "Messiah Bodhisattva"?
User avatar
Tills ljuset tar oss
Posts: 111
Joined: Sat Sep 18, 2021 8:21 am

Re: “Bodhisattva Gaia” and “Vairocana Sun”

Post by Tills ljuset tar oss »

Zhen Li wrote: Tue Oct 19, 2021 4:32 am Personally, I find this practice objectionable. Gene Reeves' Lotus Sutra translation also did this with deities. Gaia has her own history in western religions. As with most western gods, her behaviour is unskilful and not becoming of a bodhisattva. So, we insult the Dharma by doing this. Should we translate Devadatta as Judas and Māra as Satan? Where does it stop? What if we were to call Maitreya "Messiah Bodhisattva"?
You have a point. I would never pray to Prithvi myself. Just passing along what others are saying.

Jizo, on the other hand. He represents the earth. There are people who say Mahdi will be buddhist, but i don't think any muslims would agree on that.
User avatar
Zhen Li
Posts: 2748
Joined: Sun Apr 07, 2013 8:15 am
Location: Tokyo
Contact:

Re: “Bodhisattva Gaia” and “Vairocana Sun”

Post by Zhen Li »

Tills ljuset tar oss wrote: Tue Oct 19, 2021 7:34 am
Zhen Li wrote: Tue Oct 19, 2021 4:32 am Personally, I find this practice objectionable. Gene Reeves' Lotus Sutra translation also did this with deities. Gaia has her own history in western religions. As with most western gods, her behaviour is unskilful and not becoming of a bodhisattva. So, we insult the Dharma by doing this. Should we translate Devadatta as Judas and Māra as Satan? Where does it stop? What if we were to call Maitreya "Messiah Bodhisattva"?
You have a point. I would never pray to Prithvi myself. Just passing along what others are saying.

Jizo, on the other hand. He represents the earth. There are people who say Mahdi will be buddhist, but i don't think any muslims would agree on that.
I once had a Muslim try to convince me that Muhammed was Maitreya. They tend to view other religions not so much as false, but as distortions, though since Buddhism isn't Abrahamic that particular instance was a bit beyond the pale.
Malcolm
Posts: 42974
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: “Bodhisattva Gaia” and “Vairocana Sun”

Post by Malcolm »

Zhen Li wrote: Tue Oct 19, 2021 4:32 am
Right, it's definitely a misunderstanding for people to conflate Vairocana with the sun. The sun is limited, and Vairocana is unlimited.
Vairocana is an alternate name for the sun, Surya. This is well known.
As for Gaia Bodhisattva, actually, I don't think it is Pṛthivī. I cannot find Pṛthivī mentioned as a bodhisattva in any text, only as a devā. Probably the appropriate equivalent would Vasudhārā Bodhisattvā (持世菩薩). These are often conflated but I can't find any texts that make the identity explicit.
Definitely Pṛthivī. Vasudhara is Laxmi, not Mother Earth.
User avatar
Zhen Li
Posts: 2748
Joined: Sun Apr 07, 2013 8:15 am
Location: Tokyo
Contact:

Re: “Bodhisattva Gaia” and “Vairocana Sun”

Post by Zhen Li »

Malcolm wrote: Tue Oct 19, 2021 1:06 pm
Zhen Li wrote: Tue Oct 19, 2021 4:32 am
Right, it's definitely a misunderstanding for people to conflate Vairocana with the sun. The sun is limited, and Vairocana is unlimited.
Vairocana is an alternate name for the sun, Surya. This is well known.
As for Gaia Bodhisattva, actually, I don't think it is Pṛthivī. I cannot find Pṛthivī mentioned as a bodhisattva in any text, only as a devā. Probably the appropriate equivalent would Vasudhārā Bodhisattvā (持世菩薩). These are often conflated but I can't find any texts that make the identity explicit.
Definitely Pṛthivī. Vasudhara is Laxmi, not Mother Earth.
Vairocana is the vṛddhi form of virocana (which itself is the sun or an asura (Bali)). This means it is not the sun itself, but something derived/descended from or having the quality of the sun or virocana, such as the son of Bali.

As for Vasudhārā, her name in Chinese is literally earth bearing. I don't know of a text that calls pṛthivī a bodhisattva, so that's where this comes from. We'd have to have a look at the book the OP is talking about to be sure I think.
User avatar
Zhen Li
Posts: 2748
Joined: Sun Apr 07, 2013 8:15 am
Location: Tokyo
Contact:

Re: “Bodhisattva Gaia” and “Vairocana Sun”

Post by Zhen Li »

Okay, I think I found the answer.

It is that these don't correspond to any actual Buddhist figures. They are used figuratively, e.g.:
https://plumvillage.org/library/dharma-talks/non-dualistic-view-of-bodhisattva-gaia/ wrote:Thay shares about truly being present when we touch the Earth while practicing walking meditation, about not getting caught in a dualistic view of nature and the Earth. “The Earth has many good qualities: solidity, endurance, and the capacity to embrace all things. When we feel lost we can go back to our mother, the Earth. [We] can call her Bodhisattva Gaia. The sun is like Vairocana Tathagata. Aware of the Earth and Sun like that, every step is nourishing, every step is healing.”
So, it is probably not meant to specifically be Pṛthivī or the goddess Gaia or Vasudhārā, but the earth as nature.

The sun is "like" Vairocana Tathagata, but not a Buddha itself.
User avatar
FiveSkandhas
Posts: 917
Joined: Sat Jun 29, 2019 6:40 pm

Re: “Bodhisattva Gaia” and “Vairocana Sun”

Post by FiveSkandhas »

There seems to be a bit of confusion between 毘盧遮那仏 and 大日如来...I have heard them both glossed as "Vairocana" but my understanding is that 毘盧遮那仏 as the Buddha of the Avatamsaka Sutra and the Brahmajāla Sūtra (immortalized as the giant Buddha statue in Todaiji) is not precisely the same as 大日如来, who takes on central import in Shingon esoteric Buddhism. Or am I wrong?
"One should cultivate contemplation in one’s foibles. The foibles are like fish, and contemplation is like fishing hooks. If there are no fish, then the fishing hooks have no use. The bigger the fish is, the better the result we will get. As long as the fishing hooks keep at it, all foibles will eventually be contained and controlled at will." -Zhiyi

"Just be kind." -Atisha
User avatar
Queequeg
Former staff member
Posts: 14462
Joined: Tue Jul 03, 2012 3:24 pm

Re: “Bodhisattva Gaia” and “Vairocana Sun”

Post by Queequeg »

I don't think any of the gods started out "Buddhist"... many heard the teaching and were "converted", vowing to protect those who practice Dharma. Brahma and Shakra seem to have had memories of other buddhas and so came to Gautama's aid and support when they saw him arise in the world. Alternatively, the way gods and goddesses have appeared to humanity throughout history have also been revealed to be expedients to prepare the way for the Dharma to spread and were revealed to actually be known dharma protectors.

Drawing back the curtain... These are strategies by which Dharma is insinuated into the cultures it is introduced to.

In Japan, the land of Kami, the kami were coopted into the Buddhist pantheon directly or through Honjisuijaku theory by which their real identities were revealed to be protectors, bodhisattvas and buddhas. Padmasambhava subdued and converted the native gods of Tibet to Dharma. Kong Fuzi appeared to teach the Chinese ethics and propriety, and Lao Tzu instructed on the workings of Heaven and energy, to prepare the way for Dharma. Jesus taught Metta, Karuna, Mudita and Upechka. Elohim, an avatar of Brahma, will one day explain that he was just the first to appear in this cycle, not the Creator.

Point is, sure there's something to keeping things straight so as not to create confusion and distort Dharma, but I wouldn't rule out the ability of a great being to cause the gods of the West to hear the Dharma and enter the Path, or be revealed by great seers to be beings that Buddhists have known all along.

Myths... they're stories to guide and instruct. They're not factual accounts in any event.

How many angels on this pin? Oh... forget it.
Last edited by Queequeg on Tue Oct 19, 2021 2:23 pm, edited 1 time in total.
There is no suffering to be severed. Ignorance and klesas are indivisible from bodhi. There is no cause of suffering to be abandoned. Since extremes and the false are the Middle and genuine, there is no path to be practiced. Samsara is nirvana. No severance achieved. No suffering nor its cause. No path, no end. There is no transcendent realm; there is only the one true aspect. There is nothing separate from the true aspect.
-Guanding, Perfect and Sudden Contemplation,
Malcolm
Posts: 42974
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: “Bodhisattva Gaia” and “Vairocana Sun”

Post by Malcolm »

Zhen Li wrote: Tue Oct 19, 2021 1:26 pm So, it is probably not meant to specifically be Pṛthivī
Pṛthivī was called to witness the Buddha's awakening when he made the bhumisparśa mudra. This passage, "when we touch the Earth" is a reference to bhumisparśa mudra.
Heimdall
Posts: 153
Joined: Thu Aug 05, 2021 8:28 am

Re: “Bodhisattva Gaia” and “Vairocana Sun”

Post by Heimdall »

Queequeg wrote: Tue Oct 19, 2021 1:44 pm I don't think any of the gods started out "Buddhist"... many heard the teaching and were "converted", vowing to protect those who practice Dharma. Brahma and Shakra seem to have had memories of other buddhas and so came to Gautama's aid and support when they saw him arise in the world. Alternatively, the way gods and goddesses have appeared to humanity throughout history have also been revealed to be expedients to prepare the way for the Dharma to spread and were revealed to actually be known dharma protectors.

Drawing back the curtain... These are strategies by which Dharma insinuates itself into the cultures it is introduced to.

In Japan, the land of Kami, the kami were coopted into the Buddhist pantheon directly or through Honjisuijaku theory by which their real identities were revealed to be protectors, bodhisattvas and buddhas. Padmasambhava subdued and converted the native gods of Tibet to Dharma. Kong Fuzi appeared to teach the Chinese ethics and propriety, and Lao Tzu instructed on the workings of Heaven and energy, to prepare the way for Dharma. Jesus taught Metta, Karuna, Mudita and Upechka. Elohim, an avatar of Brahma, will one day explain that he was just the first to appear in this cycle, not the Creator.

Point is, sure there's something to keeping things straight so as not to create confusion and distort Dharma, but I wouldn't rule out the ability of a great being to cause the gods of the West to hear the Dharma and enter the Path, or be revealed by great seers to be beings that Buddhists have known all along.

Myths... they're stories to guide and instruct. They're not factual accounts in any event.

How many angels on this pin? Oh... forget it.
It's a valid argument, but there is still a few issues:

First, you not only have to convince the non-Buddhists of that argument, but convince the Buddhists too.

There are many Theravadins, for example, who think that Mahayana and Tibetan Buddhism aren't even valid forms of Buddhism, with their integrity compromised by this syncretism (remaining willfully ignorant that their form of Buddhism is guilty of that too). The same could be said of many Mahayana Buddhists across different schools. I know there's plenty of Chan Buddhists who find "Pure" Pure Land Buddhism (it's influences not withstanding) and Tibetan Buddhism to be off the mark, and I even came across a Tibetan Buddhist website that claimed that the Theravada and Mahayana rejection of Adi-Buddha caused by the "delusions of Mara distorting the Dharma".

Second, you have to divorce the beings from their theology, which is easier said than done. I find that Brahma really doesn't appear that much in the Sutras (at least compared to other beings like Mara), and I wonder if it's simply because his identity is a personification of "Brahman", just like Vairocana is a personification of "Sunyata".

Elohim basically takes the Deva realm, the Brahma realm, and Sunyata, and smushes it together while never denying dualism. You can easily risk corrupting the Dharma by incorporating non-Buddhist philosophical concepts like that.


Third, you have to be very careful about the historical sources of these myths and where they come from, especially with the information we have today.

We are lucky with the information that's available today. If you are familiar with some basic Near Eastern and even Indo-European myths, it redefines the way you view the Bible.

There's a story that pops up in every Indo-European pantheon religion where this giant primordial evil snake god has a fight with the chief lightning god. In the Vedas, Indra (who is Sakkha / Sakhra in Buddhism) fights the snake god of drought Vritra with his lightning bolts and kills him. In Greek mythology, Zeus fights the snake titan Typhon and sends him to the underworld. In Norse Mythology, Thor goes fishing and catches the snake god Jormungandr, who is so big he circles around the whole Earth and is able to grab his own tail, where a fight ensues.

In Canaanite mythology, this takes the form of the lightning god Marduk fighting Tiamat, who is the snake god of chaos. Marduk stands upon the corpse of Tiamat and uses the remains to create the world.

This story is referenced in the Old Testament a number of times with Yahweh fighting the Sea Dragon "Leviathan" (Psalm 74 [where it's used in a poem about God's Creation of the World], Isaiah 27). It's indirectly referenced in Genesis 1 where Yahweh stands upon the "deep" and creates the world. The Hebrew word for deep is "Tehom" which comes from the word "Tiamat". It might also be indirectly referenced in Genesis 2 where Yahweh curses the serpent and sends Adam and Eve out into the world.

So it might very well be the case that Yahweh, especially the Old Testament Yahweh, is just Indra in disguise. Not to mention other parallels too, like Indra / Sakhra commanding the devas in the Four Great Kings Realm, just like Yahweh commands the angels [who are governed by the Four Winds of the Four Directions; the Four Archangels Michael, Uriel, Gabriel, and Raphael]; or how Yahweh's Mount of Assembly is on Mount Zaphon in Isaiah 13, just like how Indra resides with the Devas on top of Mount Sineru.
User avatar
Queequeg
Former staff member
Posts: 14462
Joined: Tue Jul 03, 2012 3:24 pm

Re: “Bodhisattva Gaia” and “Vairocana Sun”

Post by Queequeg »

Heimdall wrote: Tue Oct 19, 2021 2:23 pm Theravadins
Our autistic cousins. No humor. Excessively literal. *Fun* at parties.

Just kidding.
think that Mahayana and Tibetan Buddhism aren't even valid forms of Buddhism, with their integrity compromised by this syncretism (remaining willfully ignorant that their form of Buddhism is guilty of that too). The same could be said of many Mahayana Buddhists across different schools. I know there's plenty of Chan Buddhists who find "Pure" Pure Land Buddhism (it's influences not withstanding) and Tibetan Buddhism to be off the mark, and I even came across a Tibetan Buddhist website that claimed that the Theravada and Mahayana rejection of Adi-Buddha caused by the "delusions of Mara distorting the Dharma".
Believe me... I know well the mindset of carrying mythological totems into sectarian battle. It gets at a certain itch that my ego has.

Edifying myths abound, and the freedom and ease with which Buddhist adepts have wielded them over the centuries is remarkable.
Second, you have to divorce the beings from their theology, which is easier said than done.
Ah. Its like shuffling tarot cards. There are holdouts who are increasingly belligerent when they hear god is dead... they'll kill you to prove their point about their loving god... but god is pretty much dead, for better and worse, replaced by the scientific method. While in the past Buddhist masters conducted shamanistic rituals to subdue the hostile gods, these days the masters do things like this.

There's a story that pops up in every Indo-European religion where this giant primordial evil snake god has a fight with the chief lightning god...
Oh, yeah. That guy, or one of his cousins, spread his hood and protected Gautama while he meditated. Then later, he gave Nagarjuna a bunch of books.

BTW, to explain that I'm not against this stuff... I pray to the rivers near my house for protection and prosperity few times a week, and call on various beings to guide and teach me. These practices are efficacious and I recommend them for others.
There is no suffering to be severed. Ignorance and klesas are indivisible from bodhi. There is no cause of suffering to be abandoned. Since extremes and the false are the Middle and genuine, there is no path to be practiced. Samsara is nirvana. No severance achieved. No suffering nor its cause. No path, no end. There is no transcendent realm; there is only the one true aspect. There is nothing separate from the true aspect.
-Guanding, Perfect and Sudden Contemplation,
User avatar
Astus
Former staff member
Posts: 8883
Joined: Tue Feb 23, 2010 11:22 pm
Location: Budapest

Re: “Bodhisattva Gaia” and “Vairocana Sun”

Post by Astus »

Apparently "Bodhisattva Gaia" in Chinese is Qīngliángdì púsà 清涼地菩薩 (see here and here). Qīngliángdì púsà 清涼地菩薩 (means something like "Cool Earth Bodhisattva") occurs in some common ceremonial texts (e.g. "Pure and Cool Land Bodhisattva-Mahasattva" on p 67 here, "Bodhisattvas Mahasattvas of the cool and refreshing land" on p 2 here), but that's all I could find.
It matches its Vietnamese format Bồ Tát Thanh Lương Địa, as found here and on page 5 here.
1 Myriad dharmas are only mind.
Mind is unobtainable.
What is there to seek?

2 If the Buddha-Nature is seen,
there will be no seeing of a nature in any thing.

3 Neither cultivation nor seated meditation —
this is the pure Chan of Tathagata.

4 With sudden enlightenment to Tathagata Chan,
the six paramitas and myriad means
are complete within that essence.


1 Huangbo, T2012Ap381c1 2 Nirvana Sutra, T374p521b3; tr. Yamamoto 3 Mazu, X1321p3b23; tr. J. Jia 4 Yongjia, T2014p395c14; tr. from "The Sword of Wisdom"
Heimdall
Posts: 153
Joined: Thu Aug 05, 2021 8:28 am

Re: “Bodhisattva Gaia” and “Vairocana Sun”

Post by Heimdall »

they'll kill you to prove their point about their loving god
I'm glad there's no Buddhists in history who did the same thing.
but god is pretty much dead
In the contemporary West, yes.
replaced by the Scientific method
Hah, I wish.

One thing you have to understand is that people today don't value knowledge and wisdom. They only value the social appearance of knowledge and wisdom.

My giant rant about the historical connections of Yahweh to Indo-European myth, thereby connecting most of the major religions of the world to each other, I think is very meaningful and pretty objective.

Thing is, if I share these ideas to others even in academia, nobody cares.

It's much easier to just write an article in 10 minutes saying "The Old Testament is a patriarchal invention meant to oppress women" and give off the impression you are a sophisticated Liberal elite drinking champagne in New York.

Rather than reading the works of Heisenberg or even modern physicists like Brian Cox, it's much easier to just latch onto Bill Nye the Science guy and pretend to be scientific and give the false appearance of intelligence.

Finally, let me know how scientifically sound Astrology is, despite how popular it is today.
Post Reply

Return to “East Asian Buddhism”