Existence and Enlightenment in the Lankavatara-Sutra (Florin G. Sutton)

The Jungianization of Yogacara

[My 2-star Amazon review of “Existence and Enlightenment in the Lankavatara-Sutra: A Study in the Ontology and Epistemology of the Yogacara School of Mahayana Buddhism” by Florin G. Sutton.]

The "Lankavatara Sutra" is the most authorative and influential text of the Yogacara (or "Mind-only") school of Indian Mahayana Buddhism, but it is a deep and abstruse work--and this has led to very different interpretations of its core tenets pertaining to the true nature of Mind (or Consciousness). And in "Existence and Enlightenment," author Florin Sutton (a professor of Asian studies) argues (as his core thesis) that "Universal Consciousness [or Mind]" is best understood as the consciousness which is common to all men, and, in this sense, universal (i.e., the subconscious in its most basic or pure state, the `Alaya'), rather than some universally present `stuff', `entity,' or `substance,' existing independently outside the realm of human mental activity."

From my perspective Dr. Sutton, couldn't be more wrong regarding Universal Consciousness, the Alaya. Universal Consciousness is the universal, transcendental, divine "Mind-Stuff," the unmanifest "All" that has manifested as the "all" (the universe of existents), but yet is utterly and forever independent of it.

Elsewhere, Dr. Sutton writes: "the undefiled Tathagata-garbha [Womb of Buddhahood] (when taken as essence) [can be] understood to designate the Unconscious in its original state." This is reminiscent of Carl Jung's westernized psychological nonsense in his foreword to W.Y. Evans-Wentz's "The Tibetan Book of the Great Liberation."

Dr. Sutton's misunderstanding of Yogacara is hardly limited to the Alaya and the Tathagata-garbha; it extends into other areas of Buddha Dharma as well. For example, a chapter in his book is entitled "Dharmadhatu; the Spacial or Cosmic Dimension of Being." Unbeknownst to Dr. Sutton, the Dharmadhatu is not a cosmic dimension or space; it is the hypercosmic Dharmakaya as the spaceless "context" in which phenomena arise.

Dr. Sutton not only has problems understanding Yogacara, he also seems to lack even a rudimentary understanding of Hinduism. For example, he defines the Atman as the "empirical Self." Anyone with a clue about Hinduism knows that the Atman is the metempirical (or noumenal) Self, not the empirical (or phenomenal) Self.

In short, this is a deeply flawed text by an academic lacking real insight into Buddha Dharma; but because there are such few studies on the "Lankavatara Sutra," scholars might find some useful nuggets in it (such as Dr. Sutton's etymological analysis of Sanskrit terms germane to Yogacara). General readers, however, should look elsewhere for enlightenment on Yogacara and the "Lankavatara Sutra."