Namo Buddhaya,
Sebuah rujukan:
_____
The Blessed One replied: No, Mahamati, my Tathagata-garbha is not the same as the ego (atman) taught by the philosophers; for what the Tathagatas teach is the Tathagata-garbha in the sense, Mahamati, that it is emptiness, reality-limit, Nirvana, being unborn, unqualified, and devoid of will-effort; the reason why the Tathagatas who are Arhats and Fully-Enlightened Ones, teach the doctrine pointing to the Tathagata-garbha is to make the ignorant cast aside their fear when they listen to the teaching of egolessness and to have them realise the state of non-discrimination and imagelessness. I also wish, Mahamati, that the Bodhisattva-Mahasattvas of the present and future would not attach themselves to the idea of an ego [imagining it to be a soul] (atman). Mahamati, it is like a potter who manufactures various vessels out of a mass of clay of one sort by his own manual skill and labour combined with a rod, water, and thread, Mahamati, that the Tathagatas preach the egolessness of things which removes all the traces of discrimination by various skilful means issuing from their transcendental wisdom, that is, sometimes by the doctrine of the Tathagata-garbha, sometimes by that of egolessness, and, like a potter, by means of various terms, expressions, and synonyms. For this reason, Mahamati, the philosophers' doctrine of an ego-substance is not the same as the teaching of the Tathagata-garbha. Thus, Mahamati, the doctrine of the Tathagata-garbha is disclosed in order to awaken the philosophers from their clinging to the idea of the ego, so that those minds that have fallen into the views imagining the non-existent ego as real, and also into the notion that the triple emancipation is final, may rapidly be awakened to the state of supreme enlightenment. Accordingly, Mahamati, the Tathagatas who are Arhats and Fully-Enlightened Ones disclose the doctrine of the Tathagata-garbha which is thus not to be known as identical with the philosopher's notion of an ego-substance. Therefore. Mahamati, in order to abandon the misconception cherished by the philosophers, you must strive after the teaching of egolessness and the Tathagata-garbha.
(Lankavatara Sutra - Bab 6 Transcendental Intelligence)
--------
Sebuah rujukan dalam sutra Mahayana dimana Sang Buddha mengatakan bahwa Beliau tidak mengajarkan adanya Atman Sejati seperti dalam agama lain (Brahmansime). Beliau menggunakan istilah-istilah, Tathagata-garbha, Aku-Sejati, Dharmakaya sebagai upaya kausalya untuk mereka-mereka yang masih melekat pada konsep atman.
Hmm tampaknya anda keliru memahami Arya Lankavatara Sutra silahkan dibaca pembahasan lengkap berikut ini :
Ini adalah pendalaman dan kajian lengkap oleh D.T Suzuki atas Arya Lankavatara Sutra :
http://lirs.ru/do/lanka_eng/Suzuki_Studies_in_the_Lankavatara.pdf
Kajian yang dilakukan oleh Jidiko Takasaki :
http://lirs.ru/do/lanka_eng/jikido-analysis.pdf
Kajian lainnya :
http://lirs.ru/do/lanka_eng/Discourse_in_Lankavatara(Hamlin)ocr_jbig2.pdf
http://lirs.ru/do/lanka_eng/The_Lankavatarasutra_in_Early_Indian_Madhyamaka_Literature,Lindtner,AS,1992.pdf
http://lirs.ru/do/lanka_eng/A_Note_on_Vasubandhu_and_Lankavatarasutra,Schmithausen,AS,1992.pdf
The Laṅkāvatāra Sūtra draws upon the concepts and doctrines of Yogācāra and Tathāgatagarbha.[1] The most important doctrine issuing from the Laṅkāvatāra Sūtra is that of the primacy of consciousness (Skt. vijñāna) and the teaching of consciousness as the only reality. The sūtra asserts that all the objects of the world, and the names and forms of experience, are merely manifestations of the mind. The Laṅkāvatāra Sūtra describes the various tiers of consciousness in the individual, culminating in the "storehouse consciousness" (Skt. Ālayavijñāna), which is the base of the individual's deepest awareness and his tie to the cosmic.[citation needed]
Yogacara and the Absolute
Another scholar sees a Buddhist Absolute in Consciousness. Writing on the Yogacara school of Buddhism, Dr. A. K. Chatterjee remarks: "The Absolute is a non-dual consciousness. The duality of the subject and object does not pertain to it. It is said to be void (sunya), devoid of duality; in itself it is perfectly real, in fact the only reality ...There is no consciousness of the Absolute; Consciousness is the Absolute.
The same Zen adept, Sokei-An, further comments:
The creative power of the universe is not a human being; it is Buddha. The one who sees, and the one who hears, is not this eye or ear, but the one who is this consciousness. This One is Buddha. This One appears in every mind. This One is common to all sentient beings, and is God.
Mahayana Buddhism is not only intellectual, but it is also devotional ... in Mahayana, Buddha was taken as God, as Supreme Reality itself that descended on the earth in human form for the good of mankind. The concept of Buddha (as equal to God in theistic systems) was never as a creator but as Divine Love that out of compassion (karuna) embodied itself in human form to uplift suffering humanity. He was worshipped with fervent devotion... He represents the Absolute (paramartha satya), devoid of all plurality (sarva-prapancanta-vinirmukta) and has no beginning, middle and end ... Buddha ... is eternal, immutable ... As such He represents Dharmakaya.
The Zen Buddhist master, Sekkei Harada, likewise speaks of a true Self in his explications of Zen Buddhism. This true Self is found when one "forgets the ego-self".Harada states that the doctrine of "no-self" really means awakening to a self that is without any limits and thus invisible: "No-self means to awaken to a Self that is so vast and limitless that it cannot be seen.Harada concludes his reflections on Zen Buddhism by speaking of the need for an almost passionate encounter with the "person" of the essential True Self:
… in our lifetime there is only one person we must encounter, one person we must meet as though we were passionately in love. That person is the essential Self, the true Self. As long as you don’t meet this Self, it will be impossible to find true satisfaction in your heart …
Saya rasa anda yang salah Sdr. Triyana2009. Dalam Sutra jelas dinyatakan.:
Tathagata-garbha is not the same as the ego (atman) taught by the philosophers; for what the Tathagatas teach is the Tathagata-garbha in the sense, Mahamati, that it is emptiness, reality-limit, Nirvana, being unborn, unqualified, and devoid of will-effort; the reason why the Tathagatas who are Arhats and Fully-Enlightened Ones,
teach the doctrine pointing to the Tathagata-garbha is to make the ignorant cast aside their fear when they listen to the teaching of egolessness and to have them realise the state of non-discrimination and imagelessness.
Dan sumber yang saya ambil adalah sumber yang anda ajukan, dan telah saya teliti sebelumnya sebelum topik ini ada.
Saya kutip berikut penjelasan dalam sumber yang sama yang anda ajukan
----------
The more ordinary expressions given to the highest reality known as Citta are Tathata, "suchness" or "thusness", Satyata, "the state of being true", Bhutata, "the state of being real", Dharmadhatu, "realm of truth", Nirvana, the Permanent (nitya), Sameness (samata), the One (advaya), Cessation (nirodha), the Formless (animitta), Emptiness (sunyata), etc.
From these descriptions it is found natural for Mahayanists psychologically to deny the existence of an ego-soul or ego-substance in the Alaya, and ontologically to insist that the tragedy of life comes from believing in the substantiality or finality of an individual object. The former is technically called the doctrine of Pudgalanairatmya, egolessness of persons,1 and the latter that of Dharmanairatmya, egolessness of things; the one denies the reality of an ego-soul and the other the ultimacy of an individual object.
Superficially, this denial of an Atman in persons and individual objects sounds negative and productive of no moral signification. But when one understands what is ultimately meant by Cittamatra (Mind-only) or by Vivikta-dharma (the Solitary), the negations are on the plane of relativity and intellection.
---------------
Jadi baik dalam sutra maupun penjelasan sudah jelas, terang benderang dan tidak perlu ditafsirkan macam-macam bahwa Mahayana juga tidak mengajarkan adanya atman sejati, tetapi menggunakannya untuk suatu pendekatan agar orang yang masih melekat pada atta/atman mau belajar dan memahami. Begitu juga Master Zen, Sekkei Harada menggunakan istilah "
true Self is found when one "forgets the ego-self" adalah usaha pendekatan agar pemikiran orang yang masih melekat pada Atman dapat memahaminya. Penjelasan saya ini sama seperti penjelasan Sang Buddha dalam Lankavatara Sutra yang memang mengatakan demikian. Jadi tinggal anda pilih lebih percaya pada pendapat pribadi anda atau dengan ucapan Sang Buddha yang sudah jelas terdapat dalam sutra.
Lagi, dalam World Buddhist Sangha Council (WBSC) terbentuk di Colombo, tahun 1966 menyatakan dengan bulat bahwa semua tradisi Buddhisme mengajarkan mengenai anatman bukan atman. Jika saya salah berarti anda menepis kebenaran yang terkandung dalam Lankavatara Sutra yang disabdakan Sang Buddha sendiri dan World Buddhist Sangha Council yang jelas-jelas mengatakan bahwa tidak ada atman.
Saya tidak tahu tujuan anda membahas ini dan berusaha keras menyama-samakan ajaran Buddha dengan Hinduisme. Saya katakan anda akan sia-sia, karena dari pengamatan saya, memang tidak sama.