Download - Buddhist Thought in Tibet
Buddhist Thought in Tibet: an Historical Introduction
Page 1 of 14
PRINTED FROM OXFORD HANDBOOKS ONLINE (www.oxfordhandbooks.com). (c) Oxford University Press, 2015. All RightsReserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of a title in OxfordHandbooks Online for personal use (for details see Privacy Policy).Subscriber: OUP-Reference Gratis Access; date: 13 November 2015
PrintPublicationDate: May2011
Subject: Philosophy,Non-WesternPhilosophy
OnlinePublicationDate: Sep2011
DOI: 10.1093/oxfordhb/9780195328998.003.0023
BuddhistThoughtinTibet:anHistoricalIntroduction MatthewT.KapsteinTheOxfordHandbookofWorldPhilosophyEditedbyWilliamEdelglassandJayL.Garfield
OxfordHandbooksOnline
AbstractandKeywords
TheintellectualhistoryofTibetanBuddhismisonlyimperfectlyunderstood.Althoughabundantnewtextualsourceshavebeendiscoveredinrecentdecades,itwilltakesometimebeforescholarshaveassimilatedthisgrowingdocumentation,which,consideringonlywhatispertinenttothehistoryofphilosophicalthought,amountstomanythousandsofindividualworkscomposedoveramillennium.ThisarticletouchesuponselectedtopicsthatarenowgenerallyagreedtobeofimportanceforthehistoryofTibetanBuddhistthoughtoverall.ItdiscussesthebeginningsofTibetanBuddhism,theformationofthemajorBuddhisttraditions,Tibetanscholasticism,Buddha-natureandtheluminosityofmind,andTsongkhapaandhiscritics.
Keywords:TibetanBuddhistphilosophy,TibetanBuddhism,Tibetanscholasticism,Buddha-nature,Tsongkhapa
THEintellectualhistoryofTibetanBuddhismisonlyimperfectlyunderstood.Althoughabundantnewtextualsourceshavebeendiscoveredinrecentdecades,itwilltakesometimebeforescholarshaveassimilatedthisgrowingdocumentation,which,consideringonlywhatispertinenttothehistoryofphilosophicalthought,amountstomanythousandsofindividualworkscomposedoveramillennium.Accordingly,wecandonomoreherethantofurnishaconciseintroduction,touchinguponselectedtopicsthatarenowgenerallyagreedtobeofimportanceforthehistoryofTibetanBuddhistthoughtoverall.
TheBeginningsofTibetanBuddhism:ItsIndian,Chinese,andIndigenousSources
TraditionconsidersBuddhismtohavebeenfirstadoptedinTibetbythemonarchSongtsenGampo(Srong-btsansgam-po,reignedca.617–650),whounifiedhisnationandsetitonthepathofimperialexpansioninCentralAsia.HisChineseandNepalesebridesaresaidtohaveencouragedthekingandhiscourttoadheretotheBuddha'steaching.Nevertheless,thereislittleevidencethatthenewreligionhadmuchsuccessinTibetuntiltheearlyeighthcentury,whenanotherChineseprincess,(p.246) Jincheng(d.739),marriedSongtsen'sdescendantTriDetsuktsen(KhriLde-gtsug-btsan,reigned712–755)andsponsoredamonasticcommunityfromKhotan,aBuddhiststatethenunderTibetanrule.Despitethisroyalsupport,ananti-BuddhistreactiononthepartofnobleswhofavorednativeTibetanreligioustraditions(laterreferredtoingeneralas“Bön”)ledtotheexpulsionoftheKhotanesemonksfollowingtheprincess'sdeath.
ItwasTriDetsuktsen'ssonandheir,TriSongdetsen(KhriSrong-lde-btsan,reigned755–ca.797),whofirmlyadoptedBuddhismasthereligionofhisdynastyandcommittedconsiderablestateresourcestoitspromotion.Severaloftheedictspromulgatedbythisremarkablerulersurvive,andinthemwefindindicationsofhisunderstandingofandinterestinBuddhistdoctrine.Hewrites,forinstance,that
Allthosewhoarebornandrevolveamongthefoursortsofbirth, frombeginninglessoriginstotheinfiniteend,becomeastheyareowingtotheirowndeeds(karman).…Thatwhichisneithergoodnorevilisunspecified.
1
Buddhist Thought in Tibet: an Historical Introduction
Page 2 of 14
PRINTED FROM OXFORD HANDBOOKS ONLINE (www.oxfordhandbooks.com). (c) Oxford University Press, 2015. All RightsReserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of a title in OxfordHandbooks Online for personal use (for details see Privacy Policy).Subscriber: OUP-Reference Gratis Access; date: 13 November 2015
Theresultofwhatonedoestoanotherripensupononeself.Onemaybebornasagodamongtheheavenlystages,orasahumanonearth,orasananti-god,ahungryghost,ananimalorasubterraneancreatureofthehells—allborninthesesixhavedonesoowingtotheirowndeeds.
TranscendingtheworldarethosewhobecomeBuddhas,andthosewhomakeprogressasbodhisattvas,self-awakenedones(pratyekabuddha),andpiousattendants(śrāvaka)—allofthemhavedonesoowingtotheprovisionsofmeritandgnosisthattheythemselveshaveamassed.
BesidestheadherencetoBuddhistnormativedoctrinethatisevidenthere,itisstrikingthatTriSongdetsenwasparticularlyinterestedinthemeanswherebywemayknowthetruthofreligiousclaims.Forhegoesontosay:
IfoneinvestigateswhatisfoundintheDharma[theBuddha'steaching],somepointsareimmediatelyevidentintheirgoodorevilconsequences,whileothersthatarenotimmediatelyevidentmayneverthelessbeinferredonthebasisofthosewhichare,andsoarealsofittobeheldwithcertainty.
Inotherwords,hewasfamiliarwith,andsoughttointroducehissubjectsto,theviewoftheIndianBuddhistepistemologiststhatknowledgemayhavetwovalidsources(pramāṇa):directperception(pratyakṣa)ofwhatisevidenttothesensesandintellectualintuition,andinference(anumāna)ofwhatis“hidden,”thatis,notdirectlyevident.
TriSongdetsenestablishedTibet'sfirstfull-fledgedmonastery,calledSamyé(Bsam-yas),inabout779,whichhousedanimportanttranslationacademy.Itsscholars,includingTibetansandforeignBuddhistmonks,renderedlargenumbers(p.247) ofIndianBuddhistscripturesandtreatisesfromSanskritintoTibetanandachievedanoutstandinglevelofaccuracy,animportantresultofwhichwastheformationofawell-standardizedphilosophicalvocabularyinTibetan.TheprojectofcreatinginthiswayacanonicalliteraturewascontinuedunderTriSongdetsen'ssuccessors,untilthecollapseofthedynastyduringthemid-ninthcentury,bywhichtimemanyhundredsofIndianreligiousandphilosophicaltextswereavailableinTibetanversions.Atthesametime,TibetantranslatorsalsobegintoauthormanualsintroducingthenewvocabularytogetherwithelementsofBuddhistthought.Someoftheseworksarenotablyphilosophical,suchasthetreatiseentitledDistinctionsofViews(Ltaba'ikhyadpar)bytherenownedninth-centurytranslatorYeshé-dé(Ye-shes-sde),inwhich,forexample,hesummarizesakeyargumentoftheMadh-yamakaschool:
InaccordancewiththesystemformulatedbyĀcāryaNāgārjuna,allouterandinnerentitiesareexplainedtobeinterdependentlyoriginated.Relatively,becausetheyhavearisenfromcauseandcondition,theyexistjustapparitionally,whereasultimately,entitiesarewithoutproduction,[asisdemonstrated]bythefourfoldproofthatstatesthattheyarenotbornfromself,other,both,orcauselessly.
“Notbornfromself”meanspreciselynotbornfromitself.Forifentitieswerebornfromthemselves,theywouldhavetobesaidtobebornfromaselfwhoseowncoming-into-beingwascompleted,orelsefromonethathasnotcomeintobeing.Ontheonehand,wereitbornfromwhathadalreadycomeintobeing,itcouldneverbethecasethatitdoesnotcomeintobeing,andthisleadstoanendlessregression.Butontheotherhand,wereitbornfromwhathadnotcomeintobeing,thentherabbit'shornandthebarrenwoman'ssonmightalsocomeintobeing! Therefore,itisnotbornfromself.
Itisalsonotbornfromother,forthatimpliesthefaultofeverything'scomingintobeingfromeverything.Norisitbornfrombothselfandother,forinthatcasebothoftheaforementionedfaultsarecombined.Neitherisitborncauselessly,forinthatcasetherearethesefaults:itwouldalwaysarisewithdependenceonanythingatall,everythingwouldemergefromeverything,andallpurposefulundertakingswouldbefruitless.
Thus,becausethebirthoftheentityisnotestablished,thereforetherecanbenobirth.Birth-talkisnomorethanconventionalutterance.
TibetanthinkersthusbegantobecomefamiliarwiththemajortraditionsofIndianBuddhistphilosophy:Vaibhāṣika,Sautrāntika,Yogācāra,andMadhyamaka.Yeshé-dérecognizedtwomaindivisionsofthelatter:one,followingBhāvaviveka,adheredtoSauntrāntikaconventionsintheirtreatmentofrelativereality,whiletheother,followingŚāntarakṣita,adoptedtheidealistapproachoftheYogācāra.BothwouldbelaterclassifiedasdivisionsoftheSvātantrika-Mādhyamika,theschool(p.248) thatsoughttodemonstratethethesisofuniversalemptinessbymeansofdirect,or“autonomous,”proof.ThePrāsaṅgika-Mādhyamika,whichfavoredindirectproofandwouldlaterbecomethedominanttrendinTibetanMadhyamakathought,wasasyetunknown.
2
3
4
Buddhist Thought in Tibet: an Historical Introduction
Page 3 of 14
PRINTED FROM OXFORD HANDBOOKS ONLINE (www.oxfordhandbooks.com). (c) Oxford University Press, 2015. All RightsReserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of a title in OxfordHandbooks Online for personal use (for details see Privacy Policy).Subscriber: OUP-Reference Gratis Access; date: 13 November 2015
Duringthesameperiod,ChineseBuddhismmadeinroadsinpartsoftheTibetanworld.TeachersaffiliatedwiththeteachingofChan(“meditation,”orZeninJapanese)introducedTibetanstotheideathatenlightenment,orawakening,wasimmediately,intuitivelypresent,withoutstrivingfornumberlesslifetimesasthemainstreamofIndianBuddhismaffirmed.ThisledtoaprotracteddisputeinTibetbetweenpartisansof“sudden”versus“gradual”enlightenment,theformersometimesassociatedwithateachingofmysticalintuition,andthelatterwiththemethodicalapplicationofreasonedanalysis.Thecontroversyresurfacedrepeatedlyinlatertimesowingtoitsimplicationsforconceptsofourprospectsforspiritualprogressand,indeed,ourverynature:areweessentiallyflawedcreatures,forwhomself-perfectionisafardistantgoal,orarewe,andallcreatures,alreadyinfactBuddhas?Doesthelatterpositionentailakindofgnosticism,accordingtowhichignoranceandknowledgeareallthatreallymatter,andmoraleffortmerelyanillusion?
TraditionalsourcesrecountthatthefirstactualdebateovertheseissuestookplaceatSamyéduringthelateeighthcentury,andthatthedisputantsweretheChineseChanmasterMoheyanandtheIndianphilosopherKamalaśīla.Theaccountsthathavecomedowntousaremostlylate,andtendtocaricaturetheChanperspective:
WhenmasterKamalaśīlaaskedforhisopponent'sposition,saying,“WhatistheChinesereligioustraditionlike?”theChineseresponded,“Yourreligioustradition,beginningwithgoingforrefugeandthecultivationofanenlightenedattitude,isanascentfrombelow,likeamonkeyclimbingatree.BecauseonewillnotbeawakenedasaBuddhabysuchcontriveddoctrines,itisinthistraditionofours,havingmeditativelycultivatedthenonconceptual,thatonebecomesawakenedbyrealizingthenatureofminditself.Sothisisliketheeagle'salightingfromtheskyuponthetopofatree;itisa‘purepanacea’becauseitisadoctrinethatthusdescendsfromonhigh.”
Tothisthemastersaid,“Yourexampleanditssignificancearebothinvalid.Fortheeaglealightsuponthetree,eitherspontaneouslygeneratedintheskywithitswingsfullygrown,orborninitseyrie,whereitswingshavegraduallymatured.Onlythendoesitalight.Thefirstisanimpossibilityandthesecondshouldbeagradualistexample,butisinappropriateasanexampleofsuddenenlightenment.”
Thoughthisexchangemaybeapiousfiction,itdoesreflecttheimportantrole,inheritedfromIndiansystemsofargument,ofexemplificationandcounterexampleintheacceptedproceduresofreasoning.Atthesametime,itunderscoresthegreatgulfthatseparatedrationalistfromintuitionistapproachestoBuddhistinsight.
(p.249) ThecurrentsenteringTibetfromIndiaandChinaprovokeddynamicresponses,bothharmoniousandhostile,onthepartofindigenousTibetantraditionsaswell.ItwasthisprocessthatgavebirthtothenativereligionofBön(Bon),which,fromaboutthetenthcenturyon,establisheditsownmonasticcommunitiesandscripturalcanons,inmanyrespectsresemblingthoseofBuddhism.Nevertheless,theelaborationofBönliterarytraditionsalsoencouragedeffortstogivewrittenformtoautochthonoustechniquesandbeliefs.ThoughBonthinkersoftenusedtheBuddhistphilosophicalapparatus,theyalsodevelopedanalmostanthropologicalinterestindocumentingthepracticalmeanswherebyTibetanshavetraditionallyinteractedwiththenaturalworld,seenasanabodeofbenignandmalignantspirits.Here,atwelfth-centuryauthorsummarizesthe“priestlywayoftherealmofappearance”(snang-gshen):
Thefourgatesofincantationarethegateofworshipofthedivinespirits,thegateofexpulsionandcleansing,thegateofliberationandransom,andthegateofcreation,fortuneandpower.[…]Oneenters[thispriestlyway]unerringly,inaccordwiththechantsofthanksgivingandthemethodsofplayingthedrum.
Asforpracticalaction:becauseallthatappearsandcomesintobeingispresentasgodsanddemons,inordertodealwithobstaclesandspirits[…]oneamassesthestipulatedrequisitesandritualitems.Havingdistinguishedbetweenbeneficialdeitiesandharmfulspirits,onebeseechesthedeitiestofulfillone'sfinalpurposes,andoffersarefugeasbefitsthelordsandpatronsofthepriesthood.
Intime,theancienttraditionsreflectedhere,whichsoughtnottranscendence,butinsteadamasteryoftheforcesinheringinthephenomenalworld,wouldbecomepartandparcelofTibetanBuddhistthoughtandpracticeaswell.Inclinationstowardholismandaviewoftheworldastheplayofdivineandquasi-divineenergieswouldberegularlyreassertedthroughoutthehistoryofTibetanreligiousthought.Thus,esoteric(or“tantric”)Buddhism,withitsemphasisonritualagencyanditsphilosophicalgroundingintheMahāyānaconceptionoftheultimateidentityofworldlyexistence(saṃsāra)andtranscendentpeace(nirvāṇa),introducednotjustanIndianpantheon,butembracedalsothenativegodsanddemonsofTibet.
5
6
Buddhist Thought in Tibet: an Historical Introduction
Page 4 of 14
PRINTED FROM OXFORD HANDBOOKS ONLINE (www.oxfordhandbooks.com). (c) Oxford University Press, 2015. All RightsReserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of a title in OxfordHandbooks Online for personal use (for details see Privacy Policy).Subscriber: OUP-Reference Gratis Access; date: 13 November 2015
TheFormationoftheMajorBuddhistTraditions
ThecenturyorsofollowingthecollapseoftheTibetanempireistraditionallyrememberedasadarkage,whenBuddhismwassuppressedandlearningandletterswerenomore.Althoughrecentscholarshipshowsthistobemuchexaggerated,translationactivityandthescholarshipassociatedwithitwereseverely(p.250) reduceduntiltheendofthetenthcentury,whentheWestTibetankingdomofGugébegantopatronizeBuddhistartandlearningonalargescaleonceagain.Henceforth,conditionsfavoringdoctrinalandphilosophicalinvestigationsgraduallyreemerged.
Centraltothisrevivalwasthelong,influentialsojournoftheBengalischolarandsaintDīpaṃkaraśrījñāna,betterknownasAtiśa,firstinGugé(1042–1045)andthenincentralTibetuntilhisdeathin1054.AtiśasoughttoemphasizeabovealltheethicalgroundingofMahāyānaBuddhism,andhisteachingsbecamethebasisforsubsequentTibetaneducationwithrespecttotheMahāyānapath,includingthesubstantialliteratureon“trainingthemind,”or“spiritualexercise”(blo-sbyong).Theessentialframeworkforinstructioninthisareawasamoralanthropologythatrecognizedthreegradesofaspirant,asdefinedbyAtiśainhiswidelyreadLamponthePathofEnlightenment(Bodhipathapradīpa):
WhoeverbywhatevermeansstrivesforhisownsakeOnlyforsaṃsāra'spleasures—thatoneisthelesserperson.Turninghisbacktoworldlypleasure,andshunningsinfuldeeds,Thesoulwhostrivesforhisownpeaceiscalledthemiddlingperson.Onewho,owingtothepainofhisownexistence,wholeheartedlyseekstoendAllthepainofothers—thatisthesuperiorperson.
Atiśa'soverridingconcerntoencouragethepracticeofsuch“superiorpersons”isevident,too,inhisreservewithrespecttoaspectsofphilosophicalactivity.WhilehepromotedthestudyofMadhyamaka,andinparticulartheworkofCandrakīrti,hewishedtoemphasizemeditationonemptinessasanecessarycomponentofthepathofpractice,andnotdialecticalreasoningperse.Thus,hefamouslywrote:
[Investigationsof]perceptionandinferenceareunnecessary.Theyhavebeenformulatedbythelearnedtorefutethedisputationsofextremists.
Nevertheless,ananalysisofthephenomenaofeverydayexperienceisessential,soastoarriveattheinsightthat:
Thereisneitherseeingnorseer,butpeacewithoutbeginningorend,Abandoningsubstantialityandinsubstantiality,freefromconceptions,freefromobjectives,Neitheranabode,northatwhichabides,nocomingorgoing,unexemplified,Ineffable,nottobeviewed,unchanging,uncompounded—(p.251) Iftheadeptrealizesthat,theaffectiveandcognitiveobscurationsareabandoned.
Inbrief,Atiśa,followingCandrakīrtiinwhatbecameknownasthePrāsaṅgika-Mādhyamika(theMadhyamakaschoolthatadmitsonlyindirectproof,prasaṅgainSanskrit),heldthatrelative,orostensiblereality(saṃvṛtisatya),isbestdescribedinaccordwiththeconventionsofeverydaylanguage.Thespecialroleofphilosophicaldiscourseisnotsystembuilding,butthecriticismofourassumptionsaboutreality,dismantlingthemuntilwearriveattheprofoundrealizationofemptiness.
Atiśa'sdisciplesestablishedadistinctivemonasticorder,calledKadampa(Bka'-gdams-pa),meaningthe“adherentsofthecanonandpracticalinstructions”oftheMahāyāna.Duringthesameperiod,anumberofotherneworderswerefoundedthatwouldsimilarlyshapethelaterhistoryofTibetanBuddhism.ForemostamongthemweretheKagyüpa(Bka'-brgyud-pa)“adherentsoftheorallineage,”stemmingfromthefollowersofthetranslatorandtantricadeptMarpaChökiLodrö(Mar-paChos-kyiblo-gros,1012–1096),andtheSakyapa(Sa-skya-pa)“adherentsofSakya,”referringtothemonasticcenterfoundedbythearistocraticKhönfamilyin1071.Thedifferencesamongtheseandothercontemporaneousordersreflectedprimarilydifferinglineagesandtraditionsofesotericritualandyogaratherthanphilosophyanddoctrine,thoughastheydevelopedthroughthegenerationstheyalsobegantoelaboratedistinctivedoctrinalpositions,aswillbeseenbelow.Atthesametime,linesofteachingthattracedtheirantecedentsbacktotheearlierimperialperiodsoughttoretaintheirdistinctidentityoverandagainstthenewerorders,andsocametobeknownasNyingmapa(Rnying-ma-pa),the“Ancients.”Thelatter,togetherwiththeBön,consideredthehighestrealizationstobeembodiedbytheGreatPerfection(rdzogschen),asystemofabstractcontemplationthatwassometimesattackedasaresurgenceoftheChanteachingofsuddenenlightenment.TheKagyüpa,fortheirpart,promulgatedtheMahāmudrā—the“greatseal”delimiting
7
8
Buddhist Thought in Tibet: an Historical Introduction
Page 5 of 14
PRINTED FROM OXFORD HANDBOOKS ONLINE (www.oxfordhandbooks.com). (c) Oxford University Press, 2015. All RightsReserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of a title in OxfordHandbooks Online for personal use (for details see Privacy Policy).Subscriber: OUP-Reference Gratis Access; date: 13 November 2015
theparametersofallpossibleexperience—anesotericapproachtomeditationthat,insomeofitsformsatleast,becametheobjectofsimilarcriticism.Bothofthesesystems,however,servedasimportantstimuliforlaterdoctrinalinvestigations.
TibetanScholasticism
Fromthelateeleventhcenturyonward,TibetanmonasticcollegesemphasizedahighlyrationalizedapproachtoBuddhistdoctrine,overandagainstonedominatedprimarilybyfaith.AttheforefrontofthisdevelopmentwasthecollegeofSangpu(p.252) (Gsang-phu),establishedin1073byoneofAtiśa'sforemostdisciples,NgokLekpéSherab(RngogLegs-pa'ishes-rab),whosenephewNgokLodenSherab(RngogBlo-ldanshes-rab,1059–1109)wasresponsibleforitspreeminenceinphilosophicaleducation.TheyoungerNgokwasanexcellentscholarofSanskrit,whostudiedBuddhistphilosophyinKashmirandwho,despiteAtiśa'sreservations,wasmuchinspiredbytherigorofIndianepistemologicaltheories.Thecurriculumheformulatedrequiredthecarefulstudyofphilosophicalwritings,withtheepistemologicalandlogicalworksofDharmakīrti(c.600)supplyingthemajormethodologicalorgan.OtherrequiredtopicsincludedthemonasticcodeorVinaya(‘dul-ba),the“meta-doctrine”orAbhidharma(chos-mngon-pa),thePerfectionofWisdomorPrajñāpāramitā(phar-phyin),andtheteachingoftheMiddleWay(dbu-ma),thatis,theMadhyamakadialecticoftheIndianphilosopherNāgārjuna.Henceforth,thiswouldbecomethecorecurriculumofTibetanmonasticcolleges,regardlessoftheordertowhichonebelonged.
InstructionatSangpuemphasizedthepracticeofdebate.PrecisedefinitionofkeytermsandtheunderstandingoftheirrelationswithregardtoanumberofbasiclogicaloperationsformedthefoundationsoftheTibetandebatelogic.Relationsamongtermsweredefinedintermsof“invariableconcomitance,”or“pervasion”(Skt.vyāpti),atechnicalconceptderivedfromIndianlogicthatreferstotheextensionofterms(i.e.,whattheterm“covers”).Whentwotermsaremutuallypervasive—theycoverthesameground,aswewouldsaycolloquially—theyaretreatedhereassynonyms.Understandingsuchrelations—whethertermsaresynonyms,contradictories,orcontraries—allowsonetodrawouttheirimplications.Whatthissystemofreasoninginfactseekstodoistoexploretheimplicationsofthetermsproposeduntilonearrivesattherecognitionthatone'sinitialpremiseswereinconsistentorotherwisedefective,orelseonereachesthosefundamentalassumptionsthatmustbeacceptedasintuitivelyvalid,withoutfurtherpossibilityofdispute.Thedebateisthusatonceaninquirythatseekstoarriveatsoundandvalidconclusionsandatthesametimeagame,inwhichonedeploysallthedialecticalskillonecanmusterwiththesoleobjectiveofdefeatingone'sopponent.Inthisrespect,thedebatebecomesalsoadramaticperformance,inwhichexaggeratedmovements,verbaltricks,andsometimeshumorousasidesaredeployedtodrivehomethepoint.
Eachargumentispartofalargerdiscussionandintroducesfurtherpossiblelinesofinquiry,inaccordwiththeoverallarchitectureoftheBuddhistphilosophicaledifice.Ontheanalogyofagame,theindividualargumentmaybeseenasasingleroundorinnings.Thedialecticalmethodthatisemployedhereisoftendescribedasathreefoldprocedure,consistingof,first,arefutationoferroneouspositions(dgag),followedbythedefinitionofthepositiononewishestodefend(bzhag),and,finally,therefutationofchallengestothatposition(spong).Asthedebatersdeveloptheirskillthroughpractice,likechessplayerswhothriveonconstantcompetition,theypursuetheanalysisoftheentirerangeoftopicstreatedinthemonasticcurriculum,examininginfulldetailtheconceptsoffundamentalreality,thepathtospiritualawakening,andthenatureoftheBuddha'senlightenmentitselfasthesewere(p.253) elaboratedinthefourprincipalschoolsofIndianBuddhistphilosophymentionedabove.Thepracticeaimstosharpenanddeepenone'ssenseoftheconceptualrelationsamongBuddhistideas,andsoreinforcesareadyfamiliaritywiththeconceptualschemeasawhole,fixingitasone'swayofspontaneouslyengagingwiththeworld.
TheSangpucurriculumwasrefinedbyasuccessionofbrilliantteachers,includingChapaChökiSenggé(Phya-paChos-kyiseng-ge,1109–1169),whoisoftencreditedwithgivingdefinitiveformtothesystemofdebatelogicoverall.OneofthescionsofSakya,famedasSakyaPaṇḍita(1182–1251),alsoreceivedhisearlyphilosophicaleducationatSangpu,andthen,after1204,continuedhisstudieswiththeKashmirimasterŚākyaśrībhadra,whoarrivedinTibetaccompaniedbyanentourageofIndianscholars.SakyaPaṇḍitawasoneofanumberofTibetanclericswhowereinspiredbythisopportunitytolearndirectlyfromknowledgeableIndianteachersandheappliedhimselftomasteringSanskritgrammarandotheraspectsofIndiclearning,atrainingthatwouldlendanotably“Indological”perspectivetohisscholarshipinlateryears.Inhistreatise,theScholar'sGate(Mkhas-pa‘jug-pa'isgo),hesetsforthageneralprogramrepresentinghisscholarlyideals,detailingatriviumbasedonthemasteryofcomposition,rhetoric,anddebate.
Buddhist Thought in Tibet: an Historical Introduction
Page 6 of 14
PRINTED FROM OXFORD HANDBOOKS ONLINE (www.oxfordhandbooks.com). (c) Oxford University Press, 2015. All RightsReserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of a title in OxfordHandbooks Online for personal use (for details see Privacy Policy).Subscriber: OUP-Reference Gratis Access; date: 13 November 2015
IndiantraditionsoflogicandepistemologyfiguredprominentlyamongSakyaPaṇḍita'smajorconcerns.HiskeycontributionsincludedthefinalredactionoftheTibetantranslationofDharmakīrti'smasterwork,thePramāṇavārttika,andhisownsynthesisofIndianBuddhistepistemology,theTreasuryofEpistemology(Tshad-marigs-gter),whichenjoysasingularlyextensivecommentarialtradition.Inotherwritingshecommentedatlengthoncurrentdoctrinaldebates,voicingtrenchantcriticismsofvariousdevelopmentsinTibet.Amonghisforemosttargetswasthenotionofsuddenenlightenment,whichheoftencharacterizedasthe“ChineseGreatPerfection”(rgya-nagrdzogs-chen).Buthefoundmanyotherissuestobeproblematicaswell,includingtheclaimsofeverydaylanguagephilosophy:
Somesophists,conformingwithmasterCandrakīrti,establishtherelativeasaccordingwithordinaryworldlyconventions,andtheysaythat,thoughtheindividualmaynotbeaworldling,heneverthelessengages[inactivity]conformingtotheunanalyzed,unexaminedengagementofaworldlymind.Butifthisbeexamined[intermsof]thelogicandepistemologyofconventionalsigns,itis[showntobe]unsound.For,toamindthathasnotinvestigatedthem,therearenoengagementsinvolving[well-formednotionsof]perception,inference,proof,eliminationoftheexclusion, andsoon,andthereforetheentireorderofepistemiccriteriaandtheiropposites,thatareexplainedintheseventreatises[ofDharmakīrti],arebroughttodecline.Ifyouwishtofollowthosewhothusaffirmaworldlyphilosophy,then[youarealreadyrefuted],becauseamong(p.254) theobjectsofknowledge[youmayadmit]thereareonlyentitiesandnonentities,andamongtheentitiesonlyinanimatematterandawareness,andeverywayofaffirminginanimatematterhasalreadybeenrefuted,while,asforawareness,exceptforMindOnlynothingelseissound.
Inshort,everydayconventionsareinevitablyunsustainable.Toelaborateasoundapproachtorelativerealitysomesystembuildingmustbecountenanced,eventhough,likeeverydaydiscourse,thiswillultimatelygivewayundertheassaultoftheMadhyamakadialectic.
ThetraditionsofSangpuandSakyawerelargelyresponsibleforthecontent,style,andmethodofsubsequentTibetanBuddhistscholasticism,whichcametobecharacterizedbyclosestudyofthemajorIndianBuddhistphilosophers—Nāgārjuna,Asaṅga,andDignāga,andtheircommentatorsCandrakīrti,Vasubandhu,andDharmakīrti,aboveall—rigorousadherencetothecanonsofargument,andpreciseandelegantuseoflanguage.Nevertheless,despitetheresultingedificationofexegeticalsystemsinwhichtheBuddha'steachingwassubjecttothoroughgoingrationalization,skepticalundercurrentsstillsometimesrosetothesurface.Thus,thesecondKarmapahierarch,KarmaPakshi(1206–1283),authoredacatalogueofdisputedopinions,inwhichhewrites:
Itisheldthatsaṃsārahasabeginningandend,anditisheldthatsaṃsāraiswithoutbeginningorend.Itisheldthatmindsareofidenticalnaturethroughoutallsaṃsāraandnirvāṇa,anditisheldthatallmindsareofdifferingnatures.Itisheldthatsentientbeingsarenewlyproduced,anditisheldthatsentientbeingsarenotnewlyproduced.…Butwhateversuchtenets—whethergood,bad,ormediocre—onemightharborarethecausesofgood,bad,ormediocre[conditionsof]saṃsāra.Theyaredevoidofthelife-forceofnirvāṇa.Therefore,whatevertenets,hankeringsorparticularphilosophicalpositionsyouhold,theycauseyoutobebuddhaless,andmakeyoumeetwithsaṃsāra.Youshouldknowinthiswaythewholemassoftenets,[eachone]inparticular.
Buddha-NatureandtheLuminosityofMind
Thefourteenthcenturysawdeepeninginterestintopicsassociatedwiththeso-called“thirdturnofthedoctrinalwheel”:Buddha-natureorthe“matrixofthetathāgata”(tathāgatagarbha),the“consciousnessoftheground-of-all”(ālayavijñāna),andthe“luminosityofmind”(cittaprabhāsa)foremostamongthem.Therecanbelittledoubtthattheefforttoelaboratesatisfactoryintellectualframeworksfortheinvestigationoftheseandrelatedtopicsreceiveditsimpetusinpartfromthespreadof(p.255) contemplativeandyogictechniques,whichmadeuseofthesesameconceptsinthepracticalcontextofspiritualdisciplines.ThepresenceofsimilarterminologyinsomebranchesoftheIndianscholasticliteratureandincertainofthesūtrasledagrowingnumberofscholarstoarguethatthehighestteachingsoftheBuddhaweretobefoundinsuchtextsandtoelaborateanexegeticalprograminsupportofthatposition.ThedebatestowhichthisgaverisebecamesomeofmosthotlycontestedareasofTibetanBuddhistthought,andamongtherichestintermsoftherangeofperspectivesthatemerged.Astrongcurrentofidealistinfluencemaybedetectedinmanyauthors,thoughmost,whowerewellawareofthecritiquesofidealismonthepartoftheIndianMadhyamakaphilosophers,steeredclearofanycommitmenttotheultimateviabilityofmetaphysicalidealism.
TheeffortsexpendedbyIndianBuddhistwritersinordertodistinguishtheteachingsofālayavijñānaand
9
10
11
Buddhist Thought in Tibet: an Historical Introduction
Page 7 of 14
PRINTED FROM OXFORD HANDBOOKS ONLINE (www.oxfordhandbooks.com). (c) Oxford University Press, 2015. All RightsReserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of a title in OxfordHandbooks Online for personal use (for details see Privacy Policy).Subscriber: OUP-Reference Gratis Access; date: 13 November 2015
tathāgatagarbhafromvarious“doctrinesofself”(ātmavāda)demonstratethattheywerefelttobeproblematicalmostfromthetimethattheywerefirstintroduced.D.S.Ruegghasarguedthatinterpretiveapproachestothemexhibitedtwobroadtendencies:ontheonehandtherewerethosewhosoughttoshowthatthedoctrinesinquestionwerenotliterallyintended,butregardedasderivingfromasoteriologicalstrategytailoredfortheneedsofthosenotyetreadytoapprehendthegenuinepurportoftheBuddha'steaching;andontheothertherewerethosewhomaintainedthattheyhadbeensointended,addingonlythattheirproperrelationshipwithotherdiscoursesontheabsolute,especiallytheconceptofemptiness,hadtobeunderstoodcorrectly. Itwasthislatterapproachthatwasmostobviouslyproblematic,asitseemedtosuggestthat,onceemptinesswascomprehended,therewasneverthelesssomethingmoretobeknown.
TheThirdKarmapaRangjungDorjé(Karma-paRang-byung-rdo-rje,1284–1339)wasoneofthemostinfluentialfiguresinconnectionwiththedevelopmentswithwhichweareconcerned.Hisviewsaresetforthinhiscelebratedtreatise,ProfoundInnerMeaning(Zabmonangdon),summarizedhereintheremarksofJamgönKongtrül(‘Jam-mgonKong-sprul,1813–1899):
Thatreality,orsuchness,thatisthegroundofallsaṃsāraandnirvāṇa,isreferredtobymanynames,suchasthe“primordial,indestructible,greatseminalpoint,”“Prajñāpāramitā,”“inborngnosis,”and“ordinarycognition.”Whenitisstirredbytheagitatingvitalenergyofintellect,extraneousthoughtsgrowactive.Owingtotheappearanceofdichotomizedphenomena,oneadoptstheconvention[ofdistinguishingbetween]the“gnosisoftheground-of-all”(ālayajñāna)andthe“consciousnessoftheground-of-all”(ālayavijñāna).
Regardingthegnosisoftheground-of-all:itisbuddha-nature,andinthePrajñāpāramitāandtheUttaratantraśāstraitiscalledthe“natureofmind.”…That,moreover,isthehomogeneouscausalbasisofnirvāṇa,andthedominantorappropriatingcausalbasisofsaṃsāra.Andbecauseitabideslatentlyintheconsciousnessoftheground-of-all,inthemannerofwaterandmilkmixed(p.256) together,thosewhoarebewilderedaboutthedefinitivesignificancedonotrecognizethegnosisoftheground-of-all,andmaintainthatthereareonlythesixaggregatesofconsciousness;andeveniftheymaintaintheretobeeightaggregates,theyapprehendtheground-of-allasconsciousnessalone.
Passagessuchasthis,takenoutofcontext,mayleadonetosupposethatKarmapaRangjungDorjéfavoredasubstanceontologysimilartothatsometimesassociatedwithidealisttraditions.OtherpassagesfromtheKarmapa'swork,however,suggestthatthefundamentalground,asheunderstoodit,wassomethingfarmorediaphanousthansomesortof“mind-stuff.”Indeed,intheversesinwhichhecomesclosesttocharacterizingitdirectly,hedeliberatelyundercutsthetendencytosubstantialism:
Thecausalbasisismind-as-suchthatisbeginningless.Thoughitiswithoutinterruptionandimbalance,Throughitsunimpededplay—Emptyinessence,radiantinnature,unimpededinfeatures—Itarisesasanythingwhatsoever.
AndelsewherehedescribesthesignificanceofthegroundinthealtogethernormalMadhyamakatermsof“uncompoundedreality,surpassingthought,neitherindicatedbyaffirmations,norrefutedbynegations.”
Thefiguremostoftenassociatedwithcontroversialontologicalspeculations,however,wasajuniorcontemporaryoftheKarmapa,DölpopaSherabGyeltsen(Dol-po-paShes-rab-rgyal-mtshan,1292–1361),whoseradicalteachingassertedthatemptinesswasnottheintrinsicnatureoftheabsolute,whichwasinfacttoberealizedasaplenitude.Itisthusonlyextrinsicallyempty,thatis,emptyofallthatconstitutesrelativereality:
Theintentionistodistinguishintrinsicemptiness(rang-stong)fromextrinsicemptiness(gzhan-stong).Asforthosewhodonotdosoandwhosaythatallisonlyintrinsicemptiness,andthatemptinessisnotdeterminedintermsofextrinsicemptiness,butthatonlyintrinsicemptinessdeterminesemptiness,andwhomaintainthatall[theBuddha's]statementsthatultimatelythereisexistence,permanence,self,purityandtruthareofprovisionalmeaning,whileallstatementsofnonexistence,impermanence,non-self,impurityandrottennessareofdefinitivemeaning,andthatthe[…]absolute,theultimatebodyofreality,theessentialbody,naturalluminosity,naturalcoemergence,naturalgreatbliss,the(p.257) naturallyinnate,naturalnirvāṇa,thenaturalandspontaneouslyachievedmaṇḍala,etc.,aswellasthenaturalabidingbuddha-familywithitsmanyclassifications,theultimatebuddha-natureendowedwithmanyattributes,etc.,areheldwithrespecttorealitybutthatrealityisitself
12
13
14
15
16
Buddhist Thought in Tibet: an Historical Introduction
Page 8 of 14
PRINTED FROM OXFORD HANDBOOKS ONLINE (www.oxfordhandbooks.com). (c) Oxford University Press, 2015. All RightsReserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of a title in OxfordHandbooks Online for personal use (for details see Privacy Policy).Subscriber: OUP-Reference Gratis Access; date: 13 November 2015
intrinsicallyempty—theseandmorearesomanyperverseviews,coarseandbadviews,withoutnumber.
Dölpopa'sthinkingsparkedaprolongeddisputeandhewascondemnedinsomecirclesasatacitadherentoftheHinduteachingoftheātman.Aftertheordertowhichheadhered,theJonangpa,wassuppressedbytheFifthDalaiLamaforpoliticalreasons,hiswritingswereevenbanned,andmanybelievedthesuppressionitselftobeduetoperceivedheresy.Nevertheless,Dölpopa'sinsistencethattheabsolutecouldnotbeconceivedasamerenothingnesshadtouchedasorenerveinTibetanBuddhistthought,sothathisteachinghasbeenrepeatedlyrevived,albeitwithvariousmodifications,downtothepresenttime.Hisworkhadmadeclearthegreatdifficultiesinvolvedinreconcilingtheteachingsofthe“thirdturn,”asdescribedabove,withthoseofthe“secondturn,”thatis,thePerfectionofWisdomsūtraswiththeiremphasisonemptiness.Thenotededitorofthecanon,ButönRinchendrup(Bu-stonRin-chen-grub,1292–1364),forinstance,insistedagainstDölpopathattheBuddha'sdefinitiveteachingsweretobefoundjustthere,andnotinthethirdturn.Theirdisagreementinmattersofhermeneuticswasnotwithoutsignificantphilosophicalramifications.
ThegreatinterestarousedbydiscussionsofluminosityandBuddha-naturemaybeseen,too,intheworkofLongchenRabjampa(Klong-chenRab-’byams-pa,1308–1364),thegreatesttheoreticianoftheNyingmapateachingoftheGreatPerfection.Nowhereisthismoreevidentthaninhistreatmentofthe“ground”(gzhi),thebasisfortheactualizationofthe“fruit”(‘bras-bu)thatisbuddhahood.Inhisconceptionoftheemptinessoftheabsolute,heavoidsDölpopa'sposition,butisneverthelesssimilarlyconcernednottoembracewhatheregardsasthenihilistictendenciesofsomeTibetanscholars:
Theprimordiallyluminousrealitythatisunconditionedandspontaneouslypresent,fromtheperspectiveofemptinessisinnowayestablishedasentityorcharacteristic,andsoisinnowaydividedintosaṃsāra,nirvāṇa,etc.,forwhichreasonitisfreefromallelaboratedextremes,likespace.Fromtheperspectiveoflucency,beingprimordiallyendowedwiththenatureofbodyandgnosis,thereisspontaneouspresenceandluminosity,likethemaṇḍalasofsunandmoon….
Nowadays,mostoftheteachersandallofthehermitsalikemakeoutthegroundtobeabarevacuity,nothingatall,andthisdoesnotaccordwiththeintentionofthesignificanceofthematrix.Byexperientiallycultivatingagroundthatisnothingatall,thefruitofawakeningasbuddha,withallenlightenedattributes,willnotemerge,becausethetrioofground,path,andresulthasbeenconfounded.Thisisbecausetheawakenedbuddha,unconditionedandpossessingthespontaneouslypresentenlightenedattributes,isadisclosureofthe(p.258)resultofaseparation[ofadventitioustaintsfromtheprimordiallypureground].…Here,ontheotherhand,itistheunconditionedandspontaneouslypresentluminositythatisheldtobetheground.Fromtheinherentstructureofsuchaground,whennotrecognizedasitis,therecomestobeunawareness.Duetothat,havingerrantlyconstructedtheapprehendingsubjectandapprehendedobject,oneturnsthroughthethreerealms.
TsongkhapaandHisCritics
ThefourteenthcenturywasinmanyrespectsthegoldenageofTibetanBuddhistphilosophy.Besidesthefiguresjustsurveyed,ahostofscholars,manyofwhomwereeducatedintheKadampaandSakyapatraditions,contributedtotheelaborationofeveryaspectofBuddhistthought,engenderinglivelycontroversiesinmostareas.Itbecamecustomaryforaspirantstomovefromonecentertoanother,studyingwithdifferentmastersandhoningtheirdebatingskillsontheway.OneofthosewhoenteredthisworldofitinerantscholarswasJéTsongkhapaLozangDrakpa(RjeTsong-kha-paBlo-bzang-grags-pa,1357–1419).OriginallyfromthefarnortheasternTibetanprovinceofAmdo(modernQinghai),hecametocentralTibetasateenagerandpursuedrigorousstudieswithalltheforemostluminariesofthevariousorders.HisdedicationtotheKadampateachingoftheprogressivepathofthebodhisattvawassuchthatheandhissuccessorsoftencametobethoughtofas“newKadampa”(bka’-gdamsgsar-ma)andhistreatisetheGreatExpositionoftheStagesofthePath(lam-rimchen-mo)isrenownedasadefinitiveexpressionofthisapproach.FromhisSakyapateacher,RemdawaZhönuLodrö(Red-mda'-baGzhon-nu-blo-gros,1349–1412),heacquiredaspecialconcernfortheinterpretationofthePrāsaṅgika-MādhyamikaphilosophyoftheIndianmasterCandrakīrti,anditwasincollaborationwithRemdawathatheundertookhiscelebratedreformofthepracticeofthemonasticcode,orVinaya.Hethoroughlyrejectedthe“extrinsicemptiness”doctrineofDölpopa,regardingitasanextremerepresentativeofpersistentTibetanmisunderstandingsoftheYogācāraphilosophyofIndia,and,thoughacceptingtheauthorityofthePrāsaṅgika-Mādhyamika,hedevelopedhisowndistinctiveinterpretationthereof,thatinmanyrespectswasnotanticipatedintheworkofRemdawaorearlierthinkers.IncontradistinctiontoAtiśa'sreservationswithregardtotheutilityofBuddhist
16
17
Buddhist Thought in Tibet: an Historical Introduction
Page 9 of 14
PRINTED FROM OXFORD HANDBOOKS ONLINE (www.oxfordhandbooks.com). (c) Oxford University Press, 2015. All RightsReserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of a title in OxfordHandbooks Online for personal use (for details see Privacy Policy).Subscriber: OUP-Reference Gratis Access; date: 13 November 2015
epistemology,forinstance,TsongkhapasoughttoforgeaviablesynthesisbetweenDharmakīrti'sapproachtologicalanalysisandCandrakīrti'sconceptionofthetwotruths.InTsongkhapa'sformulationofthelatter,(p.259) theabsolutedidnotoverrideconventionalreality,butinthehighestinsightonearrivedataseamlessintegrationofthetwo.Ashehimselfexpressedit:
TheBuddha'srealizationisnotcomprehendedsolongastheinfallibleconditionalityofappearanceandemptiness-without-assertion arebothunderstoodasseparate.When[theyarise]simultaneously,withoutalternation,sothatinjustperceivingtheinfallibilityofconditionedoriginationallpositionsapprehendingtheascertainedobjectdissolve,atthattimetheanalysisofviewpointsisconcluded.
Inshort,thoughdrawingonearliertradition,TsongkhapaformulatedanovelsynthesisoftheIndianBuddhistlegacy,stronglyemphasizingcarefultextualstudyandthedemandsoflogic.AfterfoundinghisownmonasticcenterofGandenin1409,hisfollowersgraduallycametobeestablishedasadistinctiveneworder,whicheventuallyadoptedthenameGelukpa(Dge-lugs-pa)andtowhichtheDalaiLamasadhere.
TsongkhapaclearlyperceivedthatthemanycontestedtopicsintheBuddhismofhisdaycouldnotberesolvedbyappealingtoscripturalauthorityaloneandwrote:
Ascripturalpassagewhichmerelysays“this[text]isofthis[levelofmeaning]”cannotestablishthattobeso,for,asthereisingeneralnosuchinvariableconcomitance[relatingstatementsoftheformgiventothelevelsofmeaningtowhichtheyrefer],themerestatement,“this[scripture]isofthis[levelofmeaning]”cannotproveaparticularinstanceofinterpretableordefinitivemeaning.
Thewould-beinterpreteristhereforethrownbackontheoperationsofnaturalreasonifheistocutthroughtheconundrumsposedbydoctrinaltexts.
InconnectionwiththePrāsaṅgika-Mādhyamikaphilosophy,inparticular,therewereprincipallyeightsuchconundrumsaboutwhichTsongkhapaproposednewsolutions.Oneofhischiefdisciples,Gyeltsab-jé(Rgyal-tshab-rje,1364–1432),liststhemasfollows:
(p.260) Inrelationtotheground:(1–2)thedenialsoftheground-of-allandtheself-markingparticular, and(3)theaffirmationofouterobjects.Inrelationtothepath:(4–5)thedenialsoftheautonomoussyllogism[i.e.directproof]andreflexiveawareness asthemeansforrealizingjustwhatisasitis,and(6–7)theaffirmationof[auniqueapproachtotheexplanationof]howthetwoobscurationsareestablishedandoftherealization,amongpiousattendantsandself-centeredbuddhas,oftheabsenceofthesubstantialnatureofprinciples. Andinrelationtotheresult:(8)[auniqueapproachtotheexplanationof]howtheBuddhacognizestheextensionofthings.
Eachofthesetopicsiscomplex,andeachoccasionedextensivediscussion.Aswehaveseenaspectsoftheearliertreatmentoftheconsciousnessoftheground-of-all,someextractsofGyeltsab-jé'scommentsonthismaybetakenasillustrative:
Someholdthat,ifvirtuousorunvirtuousdeedsweretoabideuntilthematurationoftheresult,thentheywouldbepermanent,sothat[onewhoaffirmedthis]wouldfallintotheextremeofeternalism,whileif,ontheotherhand,thedeedthatwasperformedweretobeannihilatedinthesecondinstant,then,becausetheannihilatedcannotbeanentity,itcouldnotgeneratethematureresult,whereforecompleteddeedswouldvanishwithouttrace.
Somerespondtothisargument,sayingthat,eventhoughthedeedbeannihilated,thereisagroundforthesuccessiveemergenceofthepotencyofthedeed,whichisconsideredtobetheground-of-all,whileothersaffirmthistobethecontinuousstreamofintellectualconsciousness.Andsomerespondbyholdingthat,eventhoughthedeedbeannihilated,thedeed'sacquisitionremainsinexistence,whileothersholdtheretobesomeotherprinciple,called“inexhaustion,”thatislikethesealwitnessingadebt.Ourownresponseisthat,evenwithoutaffirminganyofthosefourpropositions,beginningwiththeground-of-all,itisimpliedthatthecompleteddeedwillnotvanishwithouttrace.Forevenifthose[fourtheories]arenotaffirmed,thereisnocontradictioninvolvedifweassumethatitistheannihilateddeedthatgeneratesaresult.If[ouropponentcounters,]saying,“Unproven!Forwhatisannihilatedcannotbeanentity,”then[werespondthat]thatisunproven,for,thoughtheannihilatedcannotbeanentityifyouaffirmtheself-markingparticular[tobethedefiningentity],wedonotaffirm
18
19
20
21
22
23
Buddhist Thought in Tibet: an Historical Introduction
Page 10 of 14
PRINTED FROM OXFORD HANDBOOKS ONLINE (www.oxfordhandbooks.com). (c) Oxford University Press, 2015. All RightsReserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of a title in OxfordHandbooks Online for personal use (for details see Privacy Policy).Subscriber: OUP-Reference Gratis Access; date: 13 November 2015
theself-markingparticularevenasamatterofconvention,whereforebothannihilatedandunannihilateddeedsareequivalentwithrespecttowhetherornottheyareentities.
Tsongkhapa'ssolutiontotheproblemofkarmaandcausation,thattheannihilationordestruction(zhig-pa)ofathingcouldactinacausalstreamjustasdoesanentity,mayappeartobearabbitpulledfromthehatjustinordertopreservehissystem.This,indeed,ishowhiscriticsperceiveditand,togetherwithmanyotherof(p.261) thedistinctiveaspectsofhisthought,itwasuniversallyrejectedbythoseoutsideoftheGelukpaorderhehadfounded.Oneofhissharpestopponents,theSakyapaGorampaSonamSenggé(Go-rams-paBsod-namsseng-ge,1429–1489),forinstance,arguedthatithadtheabsurdentailmentthat“karmaanditseffectsaredifferentsinceatthelevelofconventions,theyaresetofffromoneanotherbyanintermediary,namely‘destructionquarealentity,’justliketwomountainsthatfaceeachotheraresetofffromoneanotherbytheriver[thatrunsbetweenthem].” MuchofthelaterhistoryofBuddhistthoughtinTibet,infact,maybeinterpretedintermsofthecontinuingdebatebetweenTsongkhapa'scriticsanddefenders.Amongtheformer,besidesGorampa,particularlynotablephilosophersincludetheSakyapamasterSerdokPaṇchen(Gser-mdogPaṇ-chen,1428–1507)andtheEighthKarmapahierarchMikyöDorjé(Mi-bskyodrdo-rje,1507–1554),while,amongthelatter,SeraJetsünChökiGyeltsen(Se-rarje-btsunChos-kyirgyal-mtshan,1469–1546)isfamedforhisdetaileddefensesofTsongkhapa'sthinkingagainstallthreeofthecriticsmentionedhere.
LaterDevelopments
PoliticalturmoilinCentralTibetthroughoutmuchoftheseventeenthandeighteenthcenturies,intandemwithchangingrelationswithTibet'sMongolandManchuneighbors,contributedtoaremarkableshiftinTibet'sculturalgeography.WhereasCentralTibethadbeen,throughouttheprecedingcenturies,theunrivaledheartofTibetanreligiouslife,newcentersofintellectualandartisticactivitynowemergedinTibet'sfareasternregionsofAmdoandKham.Inthelatter,withthepatronageoftherulersofDergé(Sde-dge),KarmapaandSakyapamasterscontributedtothefoundationofTibet'sgreatestpublishinghouse,theDergéPrintery,whichmadecanonicalandotherworkswidelyavailable.Atthesametime,theGelukpamonasteriesinAmdoforthefirsttimealsobecameimportantcentersoflearningintheirownright,forinstanceatKumbum(Sku-'bum),nearTsongkhapa'sbirthplacenotfarfromthecityofXining(QinghaiProvince),andLabrang(Bla-brang),foundedbyJamyangZhepa(‘Jam-dbyangs-bzhad-pa,1648–1721)insouthernGansu.ScholarsassociatedwiththeselattercenterswereoftennotethnicTibetans,andtheyfrequentlyenjoyedthepatronageoftheManchucourt,whichregardedTibetanBuddhismassupplyingaculturallinguafrancaforthepeoplesofInnerAsia.
Theprominenceoftheeastinthisperiodisverywellillustratedinthelifeandworkofthegreateighteenth-centurymasterChangkyaRolpeiDorjé(1717–1786).BornamongtheMonguorofQinghai,hewasidentifiedattheageoffourasthe(p.262) incarnationofafamouslamaandsenttoBeijingtobeeducatedatthecourt.TherehebecamethefastfriendofaManchuprince,wholatersucceededtothethroneastheemperorQianlong(reigned1736–1799),thegreatestoftheQingmonarchs.Changkyarosewithhisboyhoodfriendtobecometheempire'spreeminentBuddhistclergyman,aswellastheconfidanteandbiographeroftheSeventhDalaiLamaKelzangGyatso(Bskal-bzangrgya-mtsho,1708–1757).AsChangkya'swritingsmakeclear,headheredcloselytoTsongkhapa'sidealofreasoninseekingtoresolveforhimselftheconflictedpointsofBuddhistteaching.
OneofChangkya'smostesteemedandpuzzlingworks,calledthe“EpistemologicalPath”(Tshadmalamrim),recordsadream-visioninwhichtherelationshipbetweenthesystematicstudyofDharmakīrti'sepistemologyandprogressontheBuddhistpathissetoutingeneralterms.Changkya,byplacinghissketchofBuddhistrationalisminthecontextofadream-vision,effectivelyannulsthegulfseparatingreligiousexperiencefromreason.Inhisdream,avoiceinstructshim:
YoumustreflectonyourunderstandingofDharmakīrti,interminglingyourintellectualinsightwithyourpresentexperience:thesevariedpleasuresandpainsthatoccurtoyounowinthecourseofthingsareephemeraloccurrences.Thesepleasuresandpainsareexperientiallyproventooccuronthebasisofcausesandconditions.…ThusyouarriveatthethoughtthattheBuddha'steachingsofimpermanence,suffering,andcausalityareestablishedbyreasonandverifiedexperientially….”
Hence,forChangkya,thereasonedinvestigationoftheteachingistobeintermingledwithone'sexperiences;itmustflowfrom,andinturninform,one'sengagementintheself-cultivationthatcharacterizestheBuddhistpath.
Thepositionofthenon-GelukpaorderswasrelativelystrongerinKham,where,duringthenineteenthcentury,adynamic
24
25
26
Buddhist Thought in Tibet: an Historical Introduction
Page 11 of 14
PRINTED FROM OXFORD HANDBOOKS ONLINE (www.oxfordhandbooks.com). (c) Oxford University Press, 2015. All RightsReserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of a title in OxfordHandbooks Online for personal use (for details see Privacy Policy).Subscriber: OUP-Reference Gratis Access; date: 13 November 2015
movementoftencharacterizedas“eclectic”or“universalist”(ris-med)soughttodefusetheintensesectarianismthathadoftenplaguedTibetanBuddhism.TheencyclopedicwritingsofJamyangKhyen-tse(‘Jam-dbyangsMkhyen-brtse,1820–1892)andJamgönKongtrül(1813–1899)becameinsomerespectsanewcanonfortheadherentsofthismovement.Oneoftheirdisciples,MipamNamgyel(Mi-phamrnam-rgyal,1846–1912),alsoelaboratedanewscholasticcurriculumemphasizingthedoctrinalstandpointoftheNyingmapaorder,andengagedinwide-rangingdebateswithsomeofhisGelukpacontemporaries.Likehisteachers,however,MipamwasconvincedthattheTibetanBuddhistordershadmoreincommonthansectarianpolemicistswerereadilywillingtoadmit.Inasatiricalessay,afternotingsomeofthestrengthsandvulnerabilitiesofthefourmajororders,heconcludes:
ThephilosophicalsystemsoftheteachinginTibetbeganatthetimeofthe[…]thereligiousking[TriSongdetsen].Fromthatancientandexcellentlegacy,all[theTibetanorders]arealikeinaffirmingthefoursealsthatmarkthetransmittedpreceptsoftheteaching. Aboveandbeyondthat,theyallaffirmthe(p.263) greatunelaborateemptinessand,what'smore,alsoaffirmthevehicleofthetantras,[whichteaches]thecoalescenceofblissandemptiness.Because,then,inpointoffact,theirviewsandsystemsaresimilar,theyareexceedinglyclose.
Inthinkingaboutotherfactions,[considerthat]amongnon-Buddhistsandbarbarians,withwhomwesharenoteventokensanddress,andwhoare[asnumerous]asnighttimestars,we,whoarejustafew,likedaytimestars,areapproachingthecompletionoftheteaching.Whilesomethingofitremains,thosewhohaveenteredintothedomainsoftheteachingwithcommonpurposeoughttocultivatetheperceptionthattheyaremostcloselyrelated.Becausemutualenmitywillbringruination,regardoneanotherasdoesamotherherchild,orasdoesabeggaratreasure,andsocultivateaperceptionofjoy.
ThoughsectarianantagonismshaveremainedundiminishedamongsomeTibetans,theidealoftoleranceespousedherehasbecomewidespread,andinourtimesisembracedbyH.H.theFourteenthDalaiLama.
BibliographyandSuggestedReadingsARGUILLÈRE,S.(2007)Vastesphèredeprofusion,Klong-chenrab-’byams(Tibet,1308–1364),savie,sonœuvre,sadoctrine.OrientaliaAnalectaLovaniensa167.Leiden:Peeters.
CABEZÓN,JOSEIGNACIO,andGESHELOBSANGDARGYAY.(2007)FreedomfromExtremes:Gorampa's“DistinguishingtheViews”andthePolemicsofEmptiness.Boston,MA:Wisdom.
DEMIÉVILLE,P.(1952)LeconciledeLhasa:unecontroversesurlequiétismeentrebouddhistesdel'IndeetdelaChineauVIII siècledel'èrechrétienne.Bibliothèquedel'InstitutdesHautesÉtudesChinoises,VolumeVII.Paris:ImprimerieNationaledeFrance.
DREYFUS,GEORGESB.J.(2003)TheSoundofTwoHandsClapping:TheEducationofaTibetanBuddhistMonk.Berkeley/LosAngeles/London:UniversityofCaliforniaPress.
DUDJOMRINPOCHE,JIKDRELYESHEDORJE.(1991)TheNyingmaSchoolofTibetanBuddhism:ItsFundamentalsandHistory,translatedbyGyurmeDorjeandMatthewKapstein.Boston,MA:WisdomPublications(2nded.2002).
GOLD,J.C.(2007)TheDharma'sGatekeepers:SakyaPaṇḍitaonBuddhistScholarshipinTibet.Albany,NY:StateUniversityofNewYorkPress.
GOLDFIELD,A.,J.Levinson,etal.(trans.).(2006)TheMoonofWisdom:ChapterSixofChandrakīrti'sEnteringtheMiddleWaywithCommentaryfromtheEighthKarmapa.Ithaca,NY:SnowLion.
GUENTHER,HERBERTV.(1989)FromReductionismtoCreativity:Rdzogs-chenandtheNewSciencesofMind.Boston,MA:Shambhala.
HOPKINS,J.(2004)MapsoftheProfound:Jam-yang-shay-ba'sGreatExpositionofBuddhistandNon-BuddhistViewsontheNatureofReality.Ithaca,NY:SnowLion.
JACKSON,DAVID.(1987)TheEntranceGatefortheWise(SectionIII):Sa-skyaPaṇḍitaonIndianandTibetanTraditionof
27
28
e
Buddhist Thought in Tibet: an Historical Introduction
Page 12 of 14
PRINTED FROM OXFORD HANDBOOKS ONLINE (www.oxfordhandbooks.com). (c) Oxford University Press, 2015. All RightsReserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of a title in OxfordHandbooks Online for personal use (for details see Privacy Policy).Subscriber: OUP-Reference Gratis Access; date: 13 November 2015
PramāṇaandPhilosophicalDebate.2vols.WienerStudienzurTibetologieundBuddhismuskunde17,1–2.Vienna:ArbeitskreisfürTibetischeundBuddhistischeStudienUniversitätWien.
KAPSTEIN,M.T.(2001)Reason'sTraces:IdentityandInterpretationinIndianandTibetanBuddhistThought.Boston,MA:WisdomPublications.
KARMAPHUNTSHO.(2005)Mipham'sDialecticsandtheDebatesonEmptiness.London:Routledge.
KLEIN,A.C.,andGESHETENZINWANGYALRINPOCHE.(2006)UnboundedWholeness:Dzogchen,Bon,andtheLogicoftheNonconceptual.NewYork:OxfordUniversityPress.
KUIJP,LEONARDW.J.VANDER.(1983)ContributionstotheDevelopmentofTibetanBuddhistEpistemology.Wiesbaden:FranzSteinerVerlag.
LOPEZ,D.S.,JR.(2006)TheMadman'sMiddleWay:ReflectionsonRealityoftheTibetanMonkGendunChopel.Chicago,IL:UniversityofChicagoPress.
MAKRANSKY,JOHNJ.(1997)BuddhahoodEmbodied:SourcesofControversyinIndiaandTibet.Albany,NY:StateUniversityofNewYorkPress.
MATHES,KLAUS-DIETER.(2007)ADirectPathtotheBuddhaWithin:GöLotsāwa'sMahāmudrāInterpretationoftheRatnagotravibhāga.Boston,MA:Wisdom.
NGAWANGSAMTENandJAYGARFIELD.(2006)OceanofReasoning:AGreatCommentaryonNāgārjuna'sMūlamadhyamakakārikā.NewYork:OxfordUniversityPress.
PETTIT,JOHN.(1999)Mipham'sBeaconofCertainty.Boston,MA:WisdomPublications.
RUEGG,DAVIDSEYFORT.(1989)Buddha-nature,MindandtheProblemofGradualisminaComparativePerspective:OntheTransmissionandReceptionofBuddhisminIndiaandTibet.London:SchoolofOrientalandAfricanStudies.
STEARNS,CYRUS.(1999)BuddhafromDolpo.Albany,NY:StateUniversityofNewYorkPress.
THUPTEN,JINPA.(2002)Self,RealityandReasoninTibetanPhilosophy:Tsongkhapa'sQuestfortheMiddleWay.London:RoutledgeCurzon.
THURMAN,R.A.F.(1984)TsongKhapa'sSpeechofGoldintheEssenceofTrueEloquence.Princeton,NJ:PrincetonUniversityPress.
TSONG-KHA-PA.(2001–2004)TheGreatTreatiseontheStagesofthePathtoEnlightenment,translatedbyJoshuaCutleretal.3vols.Ithaca,NY:SnowLion.
WILLIAMS,PAUL.(1998)TheReflexiveNatureofAwareness:ATibetanMadhyamakaDefence.Surrey,England:Curzon.
Notes:(1.)Birthfromanegg,fromthewomb,duetoheatandmoisture,ormiraculousbirth.
(2.)FollowingthetextasestablishedinHughRichardson,“TheFirstTibetanChos-'byung,”inhisHighPeaks,PureEarth:CollectedWritingsonTibetanHistoryandCulture,ed.MichaelAris(London:Serindia),pp.89–99.Unlessotherwisestated,thisandalltranslationsinthepresentchapteraremyown.
(3.)The“rabbit'shorn”isastandardexample,inIndianphilosophy,ofanempiricalimpossibility,the“barrenwoman'sson”ofalogicalcontradiction.
(4.)Ye-shes-sde,Ltaba'ikhyadpar.Archaicversion,ms.PelliotTibetain814,reproducedinMacdonaldandImaeda,Choixdedocumentstibetains(Paris:BibliothequeNationale,1978),vol.1,plates210–225.
(5.)Sba-bzhedces-bya-ba-lasSbaGsal-snang-gibzhed-pabzhugs(Beijing:NationalitiesPress,1980),pp.64–76.
Buddhist Thought in Tibet: an Historical Introduction
Page 13 of 14
PRINTED FROM OXFORD HANDBOOKS ONLINE (www.oxfordhandbooks.com). (c) Oxford University Press, 2015. All RightsReserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of a title in OxfordHandbooks Online for personal use (for details see Privacy Policy).Subscriber: OUP-Reference Gratis Access; date: 13 November 2015
(6.)Galmdo(Dolanji:TibetanBonpoMonasticCentre,1972),p.167.2ff.
(7.)Atiśa,Bodhipathapradīpa,verses3–5.
(8.)BoththisandtheprecedingquotationarefromAtiśa,Satyadvayāvatāra.Theaffectiveobscuration(Skt.kleśāvaraṇa)includesalldispositionsunderlyingtheemotionsthatbindustoworldlypatterns;thecognitiveobscuration(jñeyāvaraṇa)theinabilitytopenetratetoafullrealizationofthetruenatureofthings.
(9.)Theeliminationoftheexclusion(Skt.anyāpoha)wasthecenterpieceoftheBuddhisttheoryofmeaning,developedbyDignāga.Accordingtothistheory,whichaccordswithaspectsofmodernsemantics,thecontentofatermorconceptisafunctionofitsrangeofexclusion.Thatis,“cow,”whichexcludesallthingsthatarenotcows,isconceptuallyricherthan“livingbeing.”
(10.)Sa-skyaPaṇḍitaKun-dga'-rgyal-mtshan,Tshadmarigsgter(Beijing:NationalitiesPress,1989),pp.43–60.
(11.)‘Dodpargyamtshomtha’yas,inKarmaRang-byung-rdo-rje,Rgyamtshomtha'yasskor(Gangtok,1978),vol.1,pp.625–626.
(12.)RefertoRuegg1989.
(13.)Kong-sprulYon-tanrgya-mtsho,Rnal‘byorblanamedpa'irgyudsdergyamtsho'isnyingpobsduspazabmonanggidonnyungngu'itshiggisrnampar‘grolbazabdonsnangbyed,inBka’brgyudpa'igsungrabpodnyishupa:thabsgrol(Xining:Mtshosngonmirigsdpeskrunkhang,2001),pp.69–70.
(14.)KarmaRang-byungrdo-rje,Zabmonanggidonzhesbyaba'igzhung,inBka'brgyudpa'igsungrabpodnyishupa:thabsgrol,pp.3–4.
(15.)Ngesdonphyagrgyachenpo'ismonlam,op.cit.,p.892.
(16.)The‘Dzam-thangEditionoftheCollectedWorksofKun-mkhyenDol-po-paShes-rab-rgyal-mtshan(NewDelhi:ShedrupBooksandKonchhogLhadrepa,1992/1993),vol.5,pp.335–343.
(17.)Kloṅ-chenRab-’byams-paDri-med-'od-zer,Semsdangyesheskyidrilan,inMiscellaneouswritings(Gsuṅthorbu)ofKun-mkhyenKlon-chen-paDri-med-'od-zer(Delhi:SanjeDorje,1973),vol.1,pp.377–392.
(18.)Inadoptingthisexpression,Tsong-kha-paemphasizeshiscommitmenttothePrāsaṅgikatraditionofCandrakīrti,overandagainsttheSvātantrika-Mādhyamika,associatedwithsuchfiguresasBhāvavivekaandŚāntarakṣita,forwhomemptinessisassertedinthepositiveconclusionofaformaldemonstration.
(19.)RjeTsong-kha-paBlo-bzang-grags-pa,Lamgyigtsobornamgsum,inRjetsongkhapachenpo'ibka'‘bumthorbu(Xining:Mtshosngonmirigsdpeskrunkhang,1987),pp.344–346.
(20.)RjeTsong-kha-paBlo-bzang-grags-pa,Drangngeslegsbshadsnyingpo,Sarnathed.,p.3.
(21.)InthesystemofDignāgaandDharmakīrti,the“self-markingparticular”(svalakṣaṇa)isthediscretephenomenonthatbearsthosequalitiesthatestablishitsuniqueidentityforaperceiverwhoisnotsubjecttoerror.This,theelementarybuildingblockoftheirontology,wasacceptedbymanyTibetanthinkersasconventionallytrue,eveninMadhyamakacontexts,butbyTsongkhapatobenotevenconventionallyacceptableforthePrāsaṅgika.
(22.)ForDignāgaandDharmakīrti,reflexivityorapperception(svasaṃvittiḥ)wastheelementaryunitofconsciousness,paralleling,intheirsystem,theself-markingparticularastheminimalobject.Tsongkhapa,truetohisownprinciples,inrejectingone,rejectedequallytheother.
(23.)Themoreprevalentviewwasthatśrāvaka-sandpratyekabuddha-s,whoexemplifiedthehighestgoalsofthe“lesservehicle”(hīnayāna),realizedtheinsubstantiality(“selflessness”)ofpersons,butnotoftheprinciples(dharma)uponwhichpersonssupervene.
(24.)ThisandtheprecedingquotationfromRgyal-tshab-rjeDar-marin-chen,Dbumartsaba'idka’gnadchenpobrgyadkyibrjedbyang,inDbuma'iltakhridphyogsbsdebs(Sarnath:CentralInstituteofHigherTibetanStudies,1985),pp.154–187.
Buddhist Thought in Tibet: an Historical Introduction
Page 14 of 14
PRINTED FROM OXFORD HANDBOOKS ONLINE (www.oxfordhandbooks.com). (c) Oxford University Press, 2015. All RightsReserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of a title in OxfordHandbooks Online for personal use (for details see Privacy Policy).Subscriber: OUP-Reference Gratis Access; date: 13 November 2015
(25.)CabezónandDargyay2007,137.
(26.)Tshadmalamrim,inLcangskyarolpa'irdorje'irnamthar,pp.635–638.
(27.)Thefoursealsoftheteachingarethatconditionedentitiesareimpermanent;thatcorruptiblethingsinvolvesuffering;thatnoentityisorpossessesasubstantialself;andthatnirvāṇaispeace.
(28.)Mi-pham,Gzhanstongkhaslensengge'ingaro,Ser-lodgon-pa(Nepal)xylographiced.
MatthewT.KapsteinMatthewT.KapsteinisDirectorofTibetanStudiesattheEcolePratiquedesHautesEtudes(Paris)andNumataVisitingProfessorofBuddhistStudiesattheUniversityofChicago.HisrecentbooksincludeTheTibetans(Oxford,2006),aneditedvolumeentitledBuddhismBetweenTibetandChina(Boston,2009),andatranslationofaSanskritphilosophicalallegory,TheRiseofWisdomMoon(NewYork,2009).