Hevajra Tantra (analytical study)
by Seung Ho Nam | 2004 | 83,536 words
This is an English study of the Hevajra Tantra: an ancient Sanskrit text that teaches the process of attaining Buddha-hood for removing the sufferings of all sentient beings. The Hevajratantra amplifies the views and methods found in the Guhyasamaja Tantra which is one of the earliest extant Buddhist Tantras (composed before the 7th century A.D.) d...
3. The Theory of Emptiness in the Madhyamika Doctrine
The Madhyamika system is the systematised form of the Sunyatadoctrine of the "Prajnaparamitan treatises; its metaphysics, spiritual path (sat-paramita-naya) and religious ideal are all present there, though in a loose, prolific garb. The "Prajnaparamitas revolutionised Buddhism, in all aspects of its philosophy and religion, by the basic concept of Sunyata. In them is reached the fruition of criticism that was born with Buddhism. Earlier Buddhism was semi-critical: it denied the reality of the substance-soul-(pudgala nairatmya), but dogmatically affirmed the reality of the dharmas, separate elements. The new phase denies the 1 23-
reality of the elements too (dharma nairatmya). The "Prajnaparamitas are not innovations; they can and do claim to expound the deeper, profounder teachings of Buddha. The fourteen avyakrta (inexpressibles) of Buddha receive their significant interpretation here. The dialectic that is suggested in Buddha is the principal theme here. There is evidence to believe that the Astasahasrika is the oldest and basic "Prajnaparamita text from which there has been expansion and abridgement.25 The Astasahasrika was translated into Chinese as early as A.D. 172 by Lokaraksa. We hold that the Astasahasrika might have been in existence in the Ist century B.C., if not earlier. The formulation of the Madhyamika as a system belongs, therefore, to the beginning of the Christian era. The Nine Dharmas Astasahasrika, Saddharma Pundarika, Lalita Vistara, Lankavatara, Gandavyuha, Tathagataguhyaka, Samadhiraja, Suvarna Prabhasa and Dasabhumika Sutras are held in great veneration by both the Madhyamika and Yogacara. There is evidence that Nagarjuna was acquainted with the Saddharma Pundarika, for he quotes from it. Probably, the Gatha portions of the Samadhi-raja (Candra-Pradipa) Sutra were also utilised by Nagarjuna.26 Four hundred years after Buddha's death, Nagarjuna, the prophesied upholder of Buddha's deepest teaching, was born. He systematically explained the meaning of the Perfection of Wisdom Sutras in his r Treatise on the Middle Way, which is called 'fundamental' (mula) because it is the basic text of the Madhyamika system he founded. Living for six hundred years, his teachings are divided into three proclamations of doctrine which he performed based on former prayer-aspirations made in the presence of the Tathagata Lu-rik-gyel-bo. Nagarjuna's first proclamation of doctrine began with his becoming a monk under the abbot of Nalanda, Rahulabhadra, that is, Saraha, at which time he was called Shriman. While prefect of Nalanda, Nagarjuna protected the monks from famine through alchemy, exhorted 25 T.R.V. Murti, The Central Philosophy of Buddhism, A Study of Madhyamika System, p.43. 26 T.R.V. Murti, Ibid, pp.84-85. - - 24 -
the indolent, and expelled the wayward. His Second proclamation commenced before one hundred years has passed in his lifetime. He went to Naga-land, taught doctrine to the Nagas, and brought back to this continent' the "One Hundred Thousand Stanza Perfection of Wisdom Sutra 1, etc., along with a great quantity of clay from which he made almost ten million reliquaries (stupa) and many images. He composed the Five Collections of Reasonings that establish emptiness as the mode of existence of all phenomena and thus founded the Madhyamika system which avoids all extremes. At that time he was called Nagarjuna. Nagas, or dragons, have their abode in the ocean, have treasures such as wish-granting jewels, and spew forth fire from their mouths, burning fuel and overcoming others.27 He did not newly invent the teachings of the Madhyamika system; Hinayana and Mahayana arose simultaneously during Shakyamuni's lifetime. After his death, the Mahayana Sutras remained in the lands of humans for forty years, but then with tumultuous times they disappeared. This is why the Mahayana had to be brought back, making it necessary for many authors to prove that it was the word of the Buddha-Maitreya in his Ornament for the Mahayana Sutras (Mahayanasutralamkara), Shantideva in his "Engaging in the Bodhisattva Deeds (Bodhisattvacharyavatara), etc. Though one hundred and twenty years after Buddha's death the great religious king Ashoka respected and spread the teaching, it is clear that the Mahayana was then practically non-existent among humans; however, it had spread widely in the lands of gods and dragons and even in other areas. On this 'continent' it was limited to Bodhisattvas abiding on the earth and to tantric yogis who were secretly practicing it themselves and teaching it to the fortunate. 28 Because of the wide dissemination of the Hinayana Hearer orders, the Mahayana scriptures were as if non-existent. Though the great Brahmin Saraha appeared and spread mainly the Mahayana tantric teaching, it was 27 Jeffrey Hopkins, Meditation on Emptiness, p.356. 28 Jeffrey Hopkins, Ibid, p.358. - 25 -
the prophesied Nagarjuna who restored the teaching of the Mahayana to the world and, through the help of his students, spread it widely. The chief of his students was Aryadeva who also attained the eighth Bodhisattva ground during that life. Nagaarjuna and Aryadeva are called the Model Madhyamikas because the founders of the two branches of Madhyamika-Svatantrika and Prasangika-quote them as equally reliable sources.29 Madhyamika and the Cittamatra theories will be discussed in brief to elucidate the basic tenets of the Paramita vehicle. r That the Buddha did not mean the doctrine of elements to be an ultimate standpoint is evident from certain trends and texts of the Pali canons, although they have been subjected, as is accepted now, to a careful and partisan revision and editing by the Theravadins. Buddha declares rupa, vedana, etc, to be illusory, mere bubbles etc. In the Majjhima Nikaya, it is stated:30 "Depending on the oil and the wick does the light of the lamp burn; it is neither in the one nor in the other, nor anything in itself: phenomena are, likewise, nothing in themselves. All things are unreal; they are deceptions; Nibbana is the only truth." Basing himself on this text Nagarjuna says: "In declaring that it is deceptive and illusory, the Lord means Sunyata-dependence of things. "31 Condemning that incapacity of some of the monks to understand the deeper, inner, meaning of his teaching, Buddha speaks of the Bhikkhus of the future period thus:32 The monks will no longer wish to hear and learn the Suttantas proclaimed by the Tathagata, deep, deep in meaning, reaching beyond the world, dealing with the Void (sunnata-patisamyutta) but will only lend their ear to the profane suttantas proclaimed by disciples, made by poets, poetical, adorned with beautiful words and syllables.33 29 Jeffrey Hopkins, Meditation on Emptiness, p.359. 30 Majjh. N. III, p.245 Dialogue, 140. 31 Mulamadhyamakakarika XIII 2. 32 T.R.V. Murti, The Central Philosophy of Buddhism, A Study of Madhyamika System, p.50. 33 Sam. N. II p.267. - 26 -
This is a significant admission that the real heart of Buddha's teaching is the doctrine of Sunyata, as the Madhyamikas claim. Nagarjuna is justified in declaring that the Buddha has nowhere taught the doctrine of Elements as the ultimate tenet.34 i the The Madhyamika standpoint is clearly stated in some celebrated passages. Buddha tells us that there are two principal viewpoints existence and the non-existence views (bhavaditthi and vibhavaditthi). No one holding to either of these can hope to be free of this world. Only those who analyse and understand the origin, nature and contradictions of these two views can be freed from the grip of birth and death samsara. Kaccayana desires to know the nature of the Right View (sammaditthi) and the Lord tells him that the world is accustomed to rely on a duality, on the 'It is' (atthitam) and on the 'It is not' (nattitam); but for one who perceives, in accordance with truth and wisdom, how the things of the world arise and perish, for him there is no ''is not' or 'is'. "That everything exists" is, Kaccayana, one extreme; "that it does not exist" is another. Not accepting the two extremes, the Tathagata proclaims the truth (dhammam) from the middle position. Nagarjuna makes pointed reference to this passage in his Karikas declaring that the Lord has rejected both the 'is' and 'not-is' views views. all The Madhyamika system seems to have been perfected at one stroke by the genius of its founder Nagarjuna. The Madhyamika system has had a continuous history of development from the time of its formulation by Nagarjuna (A.D. 150) to the total disappearance of Buddhism from India (11th Cent.). It is possible to distinguish three or four main schools or rather stages in the course of its development. The first is the stage of systematic formulation by Nagarjuna and his immediate disciple Arya Deva. In the next stage there is the splitting up of the Madhyamika into two schools the Prasangika and the Svatantrika, - 34 Mulamadhyamakakarika XXV, 24. - 27 - -
· represented by Buddhapalita and Bhavaviveka respectively. In the third period Candrakirti (early 7th cent.) re-affirms the Prasangika as the norm of the Madhyamika; the rigour and vitality of the system is in no small measure due to him. Santi Deva(691-743), though coming a generation or two later, may also be taken as falling within this period. These two account for the high level attained by the Madhyamika system. The fourth and last stage is a syncretism of the Yogacara and the Madhyamik the chief representatives of which are Santaraksita and Kamalasila. It is they who culturally conquered Tibet and made it a land of Buddhism. The Madhyamika remains to this day the official philosophy of the Tibetan Church. - "A being is not earth, water, Fire, wind, nor space, Not consciousness and not all of them; what being is there other than these?" Nagarjuna's r Precious Garland, Sutra (stanza 80) speaks of how there is not the slightest something that can be called entity or which is different from its parts or aggregates or the whole or that can be apprehended. The 'I' is merely posited from conceptuality and arises in dependence on its aggregates; it is not established by way of its own entity. The "The Condensed Perfection of Wisdom Sutra (s Wisdom Sutra ( sancayagathapranaparamita), expresses the same thoughts of Selflessness or Emptiness of being and phenomena in these following lines: "Understand all sentient being as like the self, Understand all phenomena as like all sentient beings."35 The focus of all Buddhist schools has been to explain the paths to liberation as being one that is situated in the middle and far removed from the two extremes of nihilism and absolutism. Though the Middle path that each school propagates very on the basis of their degree of negation and also how the term Middle is interpreted by each. Yet they are all in total agreement in their acceptance of the theory of dependent arising. This theory is taken by all to be the true path to liberation as it proves that all phenomena is of the nature of dependent arising. This 35 Anne Carolyn Klein, Path to the Middle (Delhi: Sri Satguru Publications, 1995), p.177. - 28 -
r truth is the direct antidote to the disease of ignorance. Nagarjuna the founder of the Madhyamika thought, established the profoundness of this sublime truth through his various scriptures, primary one being " Mulamadhyamaka Karika. But before bringing Nagarjuna's view on Dependent Arising to focus, it is appropriate to briefly touch upon the central thoughts expressed by six Buddhist schools. • Gradually after the great practitioner and Master Nagarjuna expounded the concept of Emptiness and Dependent Arising it evolved into a truly sublime philosophy with practical applicability The later part of the chapter is devoted to explaining how the great Master evolved the ´ profound theory without deviating in the slightest from the teachings of the Buddha. The history of mahayana buddhism states that, it was Nagarjuna (A.D. 150-250) who established the philosophy of the Middle Way in India. It is based on the perfection of Wisdom Sutras (prajnaparamita sutra) that belonged to the class of earlier mahayana sutras. The purpose of that philosophy was to gain the perfection of the wisdom (prajnaparamita) and the method was to realize that everything is emptiness (sunyata) which Nagarjuna strived to develop in a logical and practicable way. 'Dependent Arising' is the very essence of Lord Buddhas teachings. In Mahavagga part of "Vinaya Texts, it is recorded that after uninterruptedly enjoying the bliss of emancipation for seven days the blessed one first fixed his minds on the twelve Nidanas or practice samutpada i.e theory of dependent origination, in order to analyse the cause of existence and suffering. The four noble truths and the eight foldpath to liberation, both evolved on the basis of the Blessed one's thorough realization of the dependent nature of all arisings. Hence, all Buddhist Schools base their view of existence or phenomena and also self on the theory of dependent arising. However the Buddhist Schools vary in their interpretation of the term 'dependent arising'. The task of analysing the difficult interpretations of 'dependent arising is time consuming hence it is being briefly dealt as follows: CALCUTT * CENTRAL LIBRARY. 29 UNI
The word 'dependent-arising' in Sanskrit is pratityasamutpada. It has two parts: pratitya, a continuative meaning 'having depended', and samutpada, an action noun meaning 'arising'. The formation of pratitya is: in n + prati + su - su + + tuk (between i and ya) ktva which changes to lyap - 1 - p k - u + su su = pratitya.36 In other words, the verbal root in, meaning 'going', loses its indicatory letter n, leaving i. To this, prati is affixed, and the nominative case ending su is affixed to prati but immediately erased because prati is an indeclinable. The continuative ending ktva is added to i in the form of lyap, of which the accent letter 1 and the p that indicates the addition of the augment tuk are dropped. This leaves prati i ya. Tuk is added between i and ya, and the indicatory k and pronunciation letter u are dropped. The i of prati and the i of the verbal root are combined, making pratitya. The nominative case ending su is added but is immediately dropped because the continuative pratitya is an indeclinable. The formation of samutpada is: pada + ut (before pada) + sam (before utpada) + su (after ut) + su (after sam) - su - su + ghan (which is a vrddhi- ing of a) + su u (with the s changing to) ru - u (with the r changing to) h = samutpadah.37 In other words, the prefixes ut and sam are added to pada which means 'going. The nominative case ending is added to these two and then is immediately dropped because they are indeclinables, making samutpada. The vowel of pad is strengthened for the sake of denoting an action noun, making samutpada. The nominative case ending su is added; the u is erased; the s changes into ru; the u is erased, and the r changes into visarga, making samutpadah. Pratitya is thus shown to be a continuative meaning 'having depended' and not a secondary derivative noun as many Madhyamikas and 36 Jeffrey Hopkins, Meditation on Emptiness, p.163. 37 Jeffrey Hopkins, Ibid, p.163. i - 30 -
non-Madhyamikas wrongly claim. For then, the t of itya is added because the root i is being used to form an action noun. Ya is then an affix used to form a secondary derivative noun. Thus, for them itya means 'that which goes', and 'prati' means 'multiple', or 'diverse', or 'this and that'. In this mistaken interpretation pratitya means 'that which goes or disintegrates diversely'. Pratitya being viewed not as a continuative but as a noun, it is wrongly asserted that in the compound pratityasamutpada a genitive plural case ending has been erased and should be added when taken out of compound, making pratityanam which means 'of those which go, depart, or disintegrate diversely'. The etymological meaning of pratityasamutpada is thereby wrongly taken to mean 'the composition and arising of effects which disintegrate in each diverse moment and which have definite, diverse causes and conditions'. Chandrakiti does not say that this meaning is wholly wrong, but that it is a bad etymology because though it would apply to a use of pratityasamutpada in a general sense, it would not apply when pratityasamutpada refers to a specific arising of a single effect from a single cause. However, taken as 'having depended, arising' or dependent arising, it applies to both general and specific references. The Prasangikas say that samutpada does not just mean 'arising' (lit., going out'), in the sense of arising from causes and conditions in the way that a sprout arises from a seed. It also menas 'establishment' (siddha) and 'existence' (sat), (two words that are often used interchangeably in Buddhist terminology). The term pratityasamutpada thereby refers not just to products since their existence is relative. All phenomena are dependent-arisings.38 The term 'dependent-arising' not only refers to a process of production and of coming into existence but also to these things which are produced and come into existence. Phenomena themselves are dependent-arisings; a pot is a dependent-arising; a consciousness is a dependent-arising; an emptiness is a dependent-arising, and so forth. 38 Jeffrey Hopkins, Meditation on Emptiness, p.164. - 31 - -
Prapyasamutpada, apekshyasamutpada, and pratityasamutpada are synonyms; however, they are sometimes explained with individual meanings. Prapyasamutpada, 'arising through meeting, is taken as referring to the dependent-arising which is the production of things by their causes. This is the meaning that the Vaibhashikas, Sautrantikas, and Cittamatrins give to 'dependent-arising"; for them, dependent-arising is a sign of things' true existence, not a sign of their non-true existence. Apekshyasamutpada, 'existing in reliance' or 'relative existence", is taken as referring to the dependent-arising which is the attainment by ✓ products and non-products of their own entities in reliance on their parts. This is the Svatantrika Madhyamika's favored means of proving no true existence. Pratityasamutpada, 'dependent-existence', is taken as referring to the dependent-arising which is the designation of all phenomena in dependence on the thought that designates them. 'Existing in dependence on a designating consciousness' is the special meaning of dependent arising in the Prasangika system. The other two meanings are also wholeheartedly accepted by the Prasangikas, as well as their own special interpretation of pratityyasamutpada.39 Understanding the proper meaning of the term pratityyasamutpada is essential for Bodhisattva to embark on his path and to attain the fruit of the path. In the dedicatory verses of "Mulamadhyamaka karika, Nagarjuna is saying "I salute him, the fully enlightened, the best of speakers, who preached the non-ceasing and the non-arising, the non-annihilation and the non-permanence, the non-identity and the non-difference, the non-appearance and the non-disappearance, the dependent arising, the appeasement of differentiated and the auspicious."40 He understood the 39 Jeffrey Hopkins, Ibid, pp.166-167. 40 Anirodham anutpadam anucchedam anucchedam asasvatam/ anekartham ananartham anagamam anirgamam/ yah pratityasamutpadam prapancopasamam sivam/ desayamasa sambuddhah tam vande vandatam varam// Publiee par Louis de la Vallee Poussin, Mulamadhyamakakarikas(Madhyamika-sutras) de Nagarjuna avec la Prasannapada commentaire de Candrakirti, Bibliotheca Buddhica IV (St.Petersburg - - 32 -
fundamental philosophy of Shakyamuni Buddha as Dependent Arising. He inherited and developed the philosophy of early buddhism that is based on the twelve links of dependent arising, and based on this he understood dependent arising to be the Middle Way of eight Negations. Thus his theory of dependent arising is based on the Philosophy of the Perfection of Wisdom Sutras. In "Mulamadhyamaka karika, Nagarjuna insists that all existence is emptiness or lack of inherent existence does not have a fixed form and a self-nature, because they are dependent arising. The occurrence of self-nature through causes and conditions is not proper. Self-nature that has occurred as a result of causes and conditions would be something that is made. (Mulamadhyamakakarika 15.1)41 Again, how could there be a self-nature that is made? Indeed, an unmade self-nature is also non-contingent upon another. (Mulamadhyamakakarika 15.2.)42 [Commentary] In here the inherently existent is (a characteristic for] the Self Existent. Just like the inherent nature (atmiyam rupam) of something (padartha) is defined as the inherent existence of that. (PP. 15.2)43 Because of the perception of change, the absence of self-nature of existents is [recognized]. Because of the emptiness of existents, there is no existent without self-nature. (nasvabhavas, ca bhavo 'sti). (Mulamadhyamakakarika 13.3)44 : The Imperial Academy Of Sciences, 1903-1913), p.11. [abbreviated [Prasannapada nama madhyamikavritti]] 41 na sambhavah svabhavasya yuktah pratyaya-hetubhih/ hetu-pratyaya-sambhutah svabhavah krtako bhavet// ([Prasannapada nama madhyamikavritti] , p.259) 42 svabhavah krtako nama bhavisyati punah katham/ akrtrimah svabhavo hi nirapeksah paratra ca// ([Prasannapada nama madhyamikavritti] , pp.260-262) 43 iha svo bhavah svabhava iti yasya padarthasya yadatmiyam rupam tattasya svabhava iti vyapadisyate// ([Prasannapada nama madhyamikavritti] , p.262, 1.12 - p.263, 1.1) 44 bhavanam nihsvabhavatvam anyatha-bhava-darsanat nasvabhavas ca bhavo 'sti bhavanam sunyata yatah// J.W.De Jong, Nagarjuna, Mulamadhyamakakarikah, The Adyar Library Series, No.109 (Madras: Adyar Library and Research Centre, 1977), p.17. The underlined portion of this verse is quoted from J.W.De Jong's corrected edition and it is at variance with Poussin's corrected edition of the same. De Jong's rectification was based on the manuscript possessed by Guiseppe Tucci. However Poussin did not use the manuscript in Tucci's possession while he was working on the corrected edition of "Prasannapadal. J.W. De Jong, Textcritical Notes on the Prasannapada, Indo-Iranian Journal, Vol. 20, Nos.1-2 (Holland: D.Raidel Publishing Company, 1978), p.55. In Poussin's corrected edition, the verse is as follows: bhavanam nihsvabhavatvam anyatha-bhava-darsanat/ asvabhavo bhavo nasti bhavanam sunyata yatah// ([Prasannapada nama madhyamikavritti] , p.240) 8 33 -
If you perceive the existence of the existents in terms of self-nature, then you will also perceive these existents as non-causal conditions. (Mulamadhyamakakarika 24.16)45 You will also contradict [the notions of] effect, cause, agent, performance of action, activity, arising, ceasing, as well as fruit. (Mulamadhyamakakarika 24.17)46 We state that whatever is dependent arising, that is emptiness. That is dependent upon convention. That itself is the middle path. (Mulamadhyamakakarika 24.18)47 A thing that is not dependently arisen is not evident. For that reason, a thing that is non-empty is indeed not evident. (Mulamadhyamakakarika 24.19)48 If all this is non-empty, there exists no uprising and ceasing. These imply the non-existence of the four noble truths. (Mulamadhyamakakarika 24.20a)49 As it is difficult to explain the meaning of the term "existence" by the concept of Emptiness, Nagarjuna chose to explain it on the basis of the theory of Dependent Arising. The term 'Dependent Arising' is considered to be comprised of two parts 1) Dependent 2, Arising. The term 'Arising' is supposed to explain existence, while the word 'dependent' is used to explain 'emptiness' or 'lack of inherent existence.' In support of the above statement we can refer to the following Vigraha-Vyavartani, written by Nagarjuna. verse of P That nature of the things which is dependent is voidness. Why? - Because it is devoid of an intrinsic nature. Those things which are dependently originated are not, indeed, endowed with an intrinsic nature; for they have no intrinsic nature - why? Because they are dependent on causes and conditions. If the things were by their own nature, they would be even without the aggregate of causes and conditions. But they are not so. Therefore they are said to be devoid of an intrinsic nature, and hence void. ("Vigraha-Vyavartani, the commentary of the 22nd verse)50 45 svabhavad yadi bhavanam sad-bhavam anupasyasi ahetu-pratyayan bhavams tvam evam sati pasyasi// ([Prasannapada nama madhyamikavritti] , p.502) 46 karyam ca karanam caiva kartaram karanam kriyam/ utpadam ca nirodham ca phalam ca pratibadhase// ([Prasannapada nama madhyamikavritti] , p.503) 47 yah pratityasamutpadah sunyatam tam pracaksmahe sa prajnaptir upadaya pratipat saiva madhyama// ([Prasannapada nama madhyamikavritti] , p.503) 48 apratitiya-samutpanno dharmah kascin na vidyate/ yasmat tasmad asunyo hi dharmah kascin na vidyate// ([Prasannapada nama madhyamikavritti] , p.505) 49 yady asunyam idam sarvam udayo nasti na vyayah// ([Prasannapada nama madhyamikavritti] , p.505) 50 ha hi yah pratityabhavo bhavanam sa sunyata/ kasmat/ nihsvabhavatvat/ ye hi pratityasamutpanna bhavas te na sasvabhava bhavanti svabhavabhavat kasmat/ hetupratyayasapeksatvat/ yadi hi svabhavato bhava bhaveyuh, pratyakhyayapi -- 34- -
This verse clearly states that Emptiness is dependent arising and lack of inherent existence. The contents of the verse is same as what Buddha preached in his sermons on Emptiness, Dependent Arising and the Middle Way these terms have the same meaning as the ones in the dedicatory verse at the end of "Vigraha-vyavartani. And the same thought is mentioned in "Madhyamaka-karika. "We state that whatever is dependent arising, that is emptiness. That is dependent upon convention. That itself is the middle path" can also be mentioned as having the same meaning. (M.K. 24.18) It is necessary to analyse the Madhyamika view of Sunyata to see how it can explain the feasibility of cyclic existence and nirvana even though there is no inherent existence; and also the way in which emptiness and dependent arising are of one meaning. The Madhyamika's assert that the fruits, the two bodies [a Buddha's Form Body and Truth Body], arise from the two collections of merit and wisdom. In order to achieve the fruit, the two bodies, one must at the time of the path, accumulate the two collections. For that, a practitioner must know the view of how to posit the bases, the two truths. And, for that, not only must two factor 1) ascertainment induced from the depths with respect to the relationship of cause and effect arises from such and such a cause, and 2) understanding that all phenomena are without even a particle of inherent establishment be non-contradictory for the mind, but also understanding of the one must serve to assist understanding of the other. Since this is a distinguishing feature of only the wise Madhyamikas, it is difficult for others to realize it. Furthermore, Madhyamikas assert that emptiness is the meaning of dependent-arising: hetupratyayam ca bhaveyuh/ na caivam bhavanti/ tasman nihsvabhava nihsvabhavatvac chunya ity abhidhiyante// Kamaleswar Bhattacharya (tr.), The Dialectical Method of Nagarjuna (Vigrahavyavartani), (Delhi: Motilal Banarasidass, 1998), E. H. Johnston & Arnold Kunst (ed.), The Vigrahavyavartani of Nagarjuna, Part I, Sanskrit Text in Devanagari Script, p.11. - 35- -
because of being dependent-arisings, things depend on causes, conditions, and so forth and thus, since they do not exist as self-powered entities, they are empty of existing from their own sides or of being established inherently.51 Nagarjuna says, those fortunate trainees who progress by way of the supreme vehicle, the vehicle to Buddhahood, and who engage in practice through the force of wanting and aspiring to only that vehicle finally attain, on the occasion of the fruit, the two, the excellent Truth Body and the excellent Form Body. On what does the attainment of these depend? It depends on accumulating, on the occasion of the path, the ´ immeasurable collections of merit and exalted wisdom in a non-partial manner, that is, through the non-separation of the two, method realizing the conventional varieties and wisdom realizing the ultimate mode, as explained earlier. One needs to gain wisdom that is an ascertainment from the depths of the heart seeing that all phenomena, when analyzed well with reasoning, do not have even a particle of inherent existence, that is to say, establishment by way way of their own entities. This attainment of ascertainment with respect to the ultimate mode is wisdom. Therefore, the attainment of the two bodies definitely depends upon those roots method and wisdom. The reason for this is that training involving generation of a wish to train from the depths of the heart in the complete factors containing the entire corpus of the path, a union of both method and wisdom, will utterly not occur if these two, method and wisdom, are incomplete and do not exist in union. Next the Madhyamikas establish how the positing of such cause and effect [i.e., the attainment of the two bodies in dependence on the accumulation of the two collection] depends on the two truths-conventional and ultimate truth. Further, they are the only ones to assert the non-contradiction of 51 Elizabeth Napper, Dependent-Arising and Emptiness (Boston: Wisdom Publications, 1989), p.323. - 36 -
ultimate truths truths absence of inherent existence nominal positing. and conventional Skillful persons possessing subtle, wise, and very vast intelligence, those renowned as Madhyamikas, knowing how to do such, settle through their skill in the techniques for realizing the two truths such a presentation of the two truths without even a scent of contradiction, never mind actually having contradiction. They have found the finality, the root, of the Conqueror's thought, the meaning of the two truths exactly as it is. In dependence on that, they generate wonderful respect viewing the teacher who teaches such and that teaching as very amazing; • with pure speech and words without flattery or falseness, powerlessly induced from having generated [that wonderful respect] they raise up their necks and proclaim again and again with great voice to other fortunate persons, "Listen, O Knowledgeable Ones, the meaning of emptiness, that is to say, of things' emptiness of inherent existence, is a meaning manifesting in the context of dependent-arising, the relationship of cause and effect. It does not mean that things do not exist at all in the sense of things being empty of, devoid of, all capacity to perform the functions of cause and effect."52 . While proving the feasibility of cyclic existence and nirvana even though there is no inherent existence, the Madhyamikas assert that it has seven parts. (1) Although there is no inherent existence, cyclic existence and nirvana suitable. (2) Not only are cyclic existence and nirvana suitable within non-inherent existence, but also, if there were inherent existence, cyclic existence and nirvana would not be suitable. (3) The suitability of the twelve links of dependent-arising and so forth within that emptiness of inherent existence. The forward process is that from ignorance comes actions and so forth; the reverse process is that through stopping ignorance, actions are 52 Elizabeth Napper, Dependent-Arising and Emptiness, p.326. - 37 -
. stopped, and so forth. The twenty-fifth chapter mainly refutes inherent establishment with respect to those dependent- arisings. ↓, (4) The suitability of everything, the four truths, and so forth. The twenty-fourth chapter of Nagarjuna's "Treatise on the Middle Way that analyzing the noble truths, extensively settles how all presentations of cyclic existence and nirvana such as arising, disintegration, and so forth, are not positable within the system of those who assert a non-emptiness of inherent existence and how all those activities are positable within the system of those who assert things that · are empty of inherent existence. (5) In the superior Nagarjuna's system everything is suitable within dependent arising. (6) The superior master Nagarjuna spoke again and again about such suitability. (7) The suitability of all the activities of cyclic existence and nirvana within a system of no inherent existence. Finally they conclude that emptiness and dependent-arising are of one meaning. In Nagarjuna's writing we come across the term sunyavada, but never to sunyadarsana. Originally Sunyata was never a darsana. The words vada and darsana seem to have been used interchangeably by Bhavaviveka. In the excerpts from Nagarjuna's writing cited above, the wise man, convinced that things are impermanent and so neither true nor false, "is not carried away by a drsti." Even more than the other two terms with which it is aligned, drsti functions throughout the corpus of Nagarjuna's work as the paradigmatic emblem of what is to be avoided. Moreover, all of his Indian commentators down through the centuries were careful to follow the Master's lead in this respect. Candrakirti himself was against the holding of any drsti, but this did not stop him from using the word madhyamaka as the formal name of a darsana. In his time it had become commonplace to speak in terms of philosophical schools or systems - 38 -
. (darsanas), and it was equally commonplace to understand Nagarjuna's thought as defining one such system albeit the "highest" among others. In the Tibetan dGe lug ba tradition, set forward by Tsong kha pa it is commonly assumed that there are two kinds of Madhyamika, called Svatantrika and Prasangika. These two schools will be analysed in keeping with the guidelines set forth by Tsong kha pa. It also is assumed that the distinction between them involves a disagreement about logical procedure: Svatantrikas are said to hold what Edward Conze once called the "well-nigh incredible thesis" that Madhyamikas should maintain valid, independent (svatantra) inferences, while Prasangikas focus their logical labors on showing that opponents' assertions lead to untenable conclusions (prasanga). Tsong kha pa respected this logical distinction, but for him the key difference between the Svatantrikas and the Prasangikas did not lie in the form of their arguments but in their approach to the elusive and problematic category of conventional truth. According to Tsong kha pa, all Madhyamikas agreed that nothing could be established ultimately, or from the point of view of ultimate truth (paramarthathah), but Madhyamikas did not agree about what it meant to say that things are "established" or "accepted" (siddha) or "presupposed" (abhyupagata) in a conventional sense.53 Buddhapalita and Bhavaviveka initiate a new phase in the development of the Madhyamika system. Buddhapalita takes the essence of the Madhyamika method to consist in the use of reductio ad absurdum arguments alone (prasanga-vakya). The true Madhyamika cannot uphold a position of his own; he has therefore no need to construct syllogism and adduce arguments and examples. His sole endeavour is to reduce to absurdity the arguments of the opponent on principles acceptable to him. We have the evidence of Candrakirti to say that Buddhapalita held - 53 Georges B.J. Dreyfus and Sara L. McClintock (ed.), The Svatantrika Prasangika Distinction; Malcolm David Eckel, The Satisfaction of No Analysis: On Tsong kha pa's Approach to Svatantrika-Madhyamaka. (Boston: Wisdom Publications, 2003), pp.175-176. 39 -
prasanga (reductio ad absurdum) to be the real method of Nagarjuna and ⠀ School of the of Arya Deva. He therefore initiates the Prasangika School Madhyamika. Bhavaviveka (Bhavya), a younger contemporary Buddhapalita, criticises the latter for merely indulging in refutation without advancing a counter-position. He seems to have held that the Madhyamika could consistently advance an opposite view. When the satkaryavada is criticised, the opposite view of cause and effect being different should be set forth. It is not quite clear what exactly Bhavaviveka, who was himself a Madhyamika, meant by this. Probably, he would have liked to take a particular stand with regard to empirical reality, or his aim was to vindicate the empirical validity of both the alternatives in turn. turn. Bhavaviveka is the founder of the Svatantra (Svatantrika) Madhyamika School which had some following and which later on gave rise to combination with the Sautrantika and Yogacara. Candrakirti criticises him severely for being inconsistent, although a Madhyamika, in advancing independent arguments and for his fondness for exhibiting his skill as a logician. He is even castigated for his inaccuracy in stating the opponent's position.54 Tsong kha pa's argument is read as a distortion of the Indian sources or as a careful elaboration of their implications, it is clear that Tsong kha pa's text is more than a slavish reproduction of the Indian tradition. It is a strong act of philosophical interpretation. Tsong kha pa argues that Bhavaviveka thinks things like coiled snakes are established with their own identity (svalaksanasiddha) conventionally.He is prepared to accept that coiled snakes that are not falsely superimposed on coiled ropes have some conventional reality, but his method does not require him to accept the Yogacara definition of that reality. Nor does he seem eager to accept this aspect of the Yogacara as a stepping stone to something else. 55 This concept of analysis lets Tsong kha pa draw a sharp distinction 54 T.R.V. Murti. The Central Philosophy of Buddhism, A Study of Madhyamika System, pp.95-96. 55 Georges B.J. Dreyfus and Sara L. McClintock (ed.), Ibid, pp.183-184. 40 -
between the Svatantrikas and the Prasangikas: one group analyzes things conventionally and the other does not. The distinction conveys a satisfying sense of clarity, but it poses a problem. If we look closely at Tsong kha pa's Indian sources, we find that the distinction is not as sharp as it appears in Tsong kha pa's text. By the eighth century, the concept of no analysis seems to have become a standard feature of Madhyamaka, regardless of a thinker's traditional affiliation. Jnanagarbha, an eighth-century Madhyamika who is considered part of the Svatantrika lineage, says that relative truth exists "as it is seen" or "as it is presented to cognition" (yathadarsana), and he insists that it cannot be analyzed. His teacher, Srigupta, defines conventional things by saying, "They satisfy only when they are not analyzed, from such things other things seem to arise, and such things produce specific effective action." Santaraksta uses the same formula in the the "Madhyamakalamkaraj: "Whatever satisfies only when it is not analyzed, has the property of arising and ceasing, and is capable of effective action is considered relative." The same formula appears in sources that would normally be ascribed to the Prasangika branch of the school, such as Atisa's Satyadvayavataraj: "A phenomenon (dharma) which arises and is destroyed, which only satisfies when it is not analyzed (avicararamaniya), and is capable of efficiency (arthakriyasamarthyavat) - is maintained to be the genuine relative truth."56 r The point of distinction between the two Madhyamika schools, lies in their presentation of the conventional truth. Both accept Sunyata as the Ultimate truth, but what is their position regarding the conventional truth that a non-analytical mind perceives? From the perspective of the Prasangika Madhyamika, the definition of something's being a conventional truth [or, more literally, a truth for a concealing consciousness] is: an object that is found by a valid cognition distinguishing a conventionality and with respect to which a valid cognition distinguishing a conventionality becomes a valid cognition 56 Georges B.J. Dreyfus and Sara L. McClintock (ed.), Ibid, pp.190-191. wwwwwww 41 -
distinguishing a conventionality. An illustration is a pot. A definition of a conventional truth sufficient to apply to anyone but a Buddha is: an object found by a valid cognition that distinguishes a conventionality (that is, any existent except an emptiness). However, a single consciousness of a Buddha distinguishes both conventionalities (everything except emptinesses) as well as the final nature of those phenomena (emptinesses). Thus, a Buddha is said to have a valid cognition that distinguishes conventional phenomena only from the point of view of the object, such as a pot. Similarly, a Buddha is said to have a valid cognition that distinguishes the final nature only from the point of view of the object, such as the emptiness of a pot. Thus, relative to different objects, a Buddha is said to have valid cognitions that distinguish conventional phenomena and that distinguish the final nature. However, a Buddha's valid cognition that distinguishes. conventional phenomena. Therefore, with respect to a Buddha, an object found by a valid cognition that distinguishes conventional phenomena is not necessarily a conventional phenomenon. Similarly, with respect to a Buddha, an object found by a valid cognition that distinguishes the final nature is not necessarily a final nature. The second part of the definition, therefore, is given for the sake of including the objects of a Buddha's cognitions within the framework of the definition.57 Conventional truths are not divided into real conventionalities and unreal conventionalities. This is because there are no real conventionalities, for conventionalities are necessarily not real since conventionalities are necessarily unreal [in the sense that they appear to be inherently existent but are not inherently existent]. However, However, relative to an ordinary worldly consciousness, conventional truths are divided into the real and the unreal. According to Yogacara Svatantrika view, when objects of knowledge are divided, they are twofold-ultimate truths and conventional truths. The definition of an ultimate truth is: an object that is realized in a non-dualistic manner by a direct prime cognition that directly realizes it. When an ultimate truth, an emptiness, is directly realized in meditative equipoise, it is realized in an utterly non-dualistic manner without any appearance of subject and object, conventionalities, conceptual image, difference, or true existence. It is only an ultimate truth that can be non-dualistically cognized in this way.58 57 Geshe Lhundup Sopa & Jeffrey Hopkins, Cutting Through Appearances (New York: Snow Lion Publications, 1989), pp.305-306. -- - 42
The definition of a conventional truth is: an object that is realized in a dualistic manner by a direct prime cognition that directly realizes it. "Duality here refers to an appearance of subject and object, which in this system are conventionally one entity."59 A pot's emptiness of true existence is an illustration of an ultimate truth. A pot is an illustration of a conventional truth. If an extensive division of ultimate truths is made, there are sixteen emptinesses. Or, in brief, there are four emptinesses. The four emptinesses are of compounded phenomena, uncompounded phenomena, self, and other. In "Hevajra Tantra sixteen emptinesses are mentioned. The sixteen arms of the deity Hevajra symbolises the purification of the sixteen emptinesses or voidnesses. [Hevajra Tantra] The arms symbolise the purification of Voidness; the feet the purification of the Maras; the faces the purification of the Eight Releases (astavimoksah) and the eyes the purification of the three Vajris. (1.9.16)60 [commentary] the arms: The essential principle of the sixteen arms are the sixteen Voids. These sixteen Voids are: Inner Voidness, External Voidness, Internal and External Voidness, Great Voidness, Voidness of Voidness, Supreme Voidness, Refined Voidness, Unrefined Voidness, Extreme Voidness, Supreme Voidness without precedent, Undispersed Voidness, Self-characterised Voidness, Primordial Voidness, Voidness of all natures, Voidness of non-existence, Voidness of essential non-existence). The arms signify these Voids is the intent. (Yogaratnamala)61 The two truths are not different entities but one entity within nominal difference. Similarly, a Buddha would not have forsaken the apprehension of inherent existence because he would have only a powerless apprehension of an emptiness which was entirely separate from objects. If the two truths were utterly the same, everything true of the one would be true of the other. In that case, for every 58 Geshe Lhundup Sopa & Jeffrey Hopkins, Ibid, p.286. 59 Geshe Lhundup Sopa & Jeffrey Hopkins, Ibid, p.286. 60 bhujanam sunyatai suddhis carana maravisuddhitah/ mukhany astavimoksena netrasuddhis trivajrinam//16// (Hevajra Tantra (Commentary) , p.116) 61 (Hevajra Tantra (Study) ,part 2, pp.130-131) -- - 43 ·
truth-for-a-concealer such as desire and hatred which was overcome on the path, an ultimate truth also would be overcome. Therefore, the two truths are not different entities; they are the same entity. This is what the "Heart of Wisdom (the Heart Sutra) means when it says that emptiness is form and form is emptiness. The two truths are not one, but are nominally different, for they appear differently to thought. The relationship is called a oneness of entity but a difference of isolates or opposites of the negatives.62 The relation between Madhyamaka and Yogacara has been one of the most contentious and important issues in the Tibetan philosophical ✓ tradition for several centuries. Tsong-kha-pa stresses the primacy of the second turning of the wheel and emphasizes the distance and incompatibility between Madhyamaka and Yogacara. For him, one of the most important Madhyamaka ideas is that of the conventional validity of the external world, which he holds to be a central theme of Candrakirti's works, particularly of his Madhyamakavatara. Mi pham minimizes the distance between Madhyamaka and Yogacara, and offers a Madhyamaka view in which the centrality of the mind and the fact that the external world exists as its mere display are stressed. In that, he is quite close to the Mind-Only tradition, as he recognizes in his commentary on Santaraksita's "Madhyamakalamkaras. He does make, however, an important distinction between Madhyamaka and Mind-Only as he understands it, namely that, while emphasizing the centrality of the mind, as a Madhyamika Mi pham also seeks to ward off its reification. In the Great Perfection, the ultimate is not just the emptiness described by the Madhyamaka treatises but also the clear and knowing quality of the mind. . The first, that of the ultimate's pristine nature, refers to the empty quality of the ground, which is variously glossed as reality (dharmata), the ultimate, and so on. Proponents of the Great Perfection, especially 62 Jeffrey Hopkins, Meditation on Emptiness, p.413. - 44 - -
Klong clen pa, explain this empty quality in accordance with the Madhyamaka view. The second quality refers to the clarity of awareness, which is described as self-arisen wisdom, self-cognition, clear light, and so on.63 Together these two qualities provide a view of the ultimate as being not just empty but also luminous, that is, as having the nature of pristine awareness the realisation of the ultimate is the removal of all obstructions to omniscience and attainment of Buddhahood. A mahayana practitioner aims to attain Buddhahood for the sake of all sentient beings, for the purpose of helping sentient beings he or she needs to actualize the Truth Body as well as the Form Body of a Buddha. A Bodhisattva spends at least three countless on the paths of accumulation, preparation, seeing, and meditation and reaches the last part of the tenth ground. Tantra is limited to persons whose compassion is so great that they cannot bear to spend unnecessary time in attaining Buddhahood, as they want to be a supreme source of help and happiness for others quickly. The most qualified of tantric practitioners complete the path in one lifetime, and it is said that those who are less qualified but maintain their vows will attain the supreme achievement in either seven or sixteen lifetimes. In order to enter the tantric path it is necessary to have good understanding of the three principal aspects of the path to to full enlightenment: the thought to leave cyclic existence, the aspiration to highest enlightenment for the sake of all sentient beings, and the correctview of emptiness. Tantra in general is divided into four types which in ascending order are: Action (kriya), Performance (charya), Yoga (yoga), and Highest Yoga (anuttarayoga). The mode of developing a union of calm abiding and special insight 63 Georges B.J. Dreyfus and Sara L. McClintock (ed.), The Svatantrika Prasangika Distinction, Georges B.J. Dreyfus, Would the True Prasangika Please Stand? The Case and View of 'Ju Mi pham. (Boston: Wisdom Publications, 2003), pp.328-330. - 45 -
• with emptiness as the object is similar in the first three Tantra sets to that in the Sutra teachings in the sense that, after attaining calm abiding, analytical meditation and stabilizing meditation are alternated in order to prevent respectively laxity and excitement, or lack of penetrating ascertainment and lack of stability. However, unlike the Sutra system, all four Tantras emphasize a union of manifestation and emptiness the vivid appearance of oneself as a deity in conjunction with conceptual cognition of emptiness.64 i It is found in other non dGe lug Buddhist traditions in Tibet such Mahamudra or the view of inseparability of samsara and nirvana is extensively described in the Indian and Tibetan tantric literature. It is also present in certain texts of the exoteric tradition, particularly interpretation of the doctrine of emptiness is combined with the idea that the mind is luminous. This empty aspect is identified as the emptiness taught in the Madhyamaka texts and is combined with the understanding of the luminosity of the mind. Santaraksita's view as Yogacara-Svatantrika-Madhyamaka emphasizes the centrality of the mind, presenting phenomena as its display, but only on the conventional level. The mind itself is presented as empty, thereby avoiding its reification. In this way, reality is described by focusing on the mind and its emptiness. Such a description is well suited as view of reality as both empty and luminous. In Hevajra Tantra, one comes across similar concepts which deal with _ the question of purification and non-duality. Here the practitioner's path is projected as being truly non-dualistic, as it avoids the two extremes of rejecting the phenomenal world as mere illusion and reifying the world as ideation. In stead the path adopts the material world as the base [once the aggregates are purified] on which the edifice of Buddhahood is to be attained. 64 Jeffrey Hopkins, Meditation on Emptiness, pp.111-113. - - 46 -
65 [Hevajra Tantra] Vajragarbha asked: O Bhagavan, what are these unpurified things? Bhagavan replied: Form and the others. Vajragarbha asked: How so? Bhagavan answered: Because of the existence of the subject and object. Vajragarbha asked: What are the subjects and objects? Bhagavan replied: Form is perceived by the eye; sound is heard by the ear: smell is experienced by the nose; taste is experienced by the tongue; objects are felt by the body and the mind experiences pleasure etc. These which are worthy of adoration, should be served, rendering them non-substantial through purification. (1.9.5-7)65 [commentary of 1.5.1] 'There is no mind etc.': Here, 'mind' refers to the totality of conscious experience, and 'thought' to contingent and imagined thoughts. These three are also non-existent from the standpoint of absolute truth. How is it that they are non-existent when Bhagavan has said: "The whole three-fold realm, O sons of the Victorious, is nothing but of mind." How can this be true? Understand that this is said only in order to turn those disciplined aspirants away from their attachment to form and so on. In this respect Nagarjunapada has said: "The teaching of the Sage which says 'all this is of mind' was spoken to remove the fears of the simple-minded, but in truth it is not so." Thus from the standpoint of the absolute truth the mind does not exist. So far the True Principle of all things has been discussed. (Yogaratnamala)66 he bhagavan ke te 'visuddhahh bhagavan aha rupadayah//asmat// grahyagrahakabhavat// vajragarbha aha/ ke te grahyagrahakas ceti// bhagavan aha/ caksusa grhyate rupam sabdah karnena sruyate/ gandham nasikaya vetti jihvaya svadanam viduh// kayena sprsyate vastu manah sukhadim apnute/ sevitavya ime sevya nirvisikrtya suddhitah// (Hevajra Tantra (Commentary) , p.113) • • 66 rupam nilapitadi tan nasti kathan nasti yavata drsyata eva svarupena nasti • yad asyakrtrimam param anirapeksyam nijarupam svabhavas tenakarena nasti pratityasamutpatteh/ yas ca pratityasamutpadah sa eva bhavanam anutpadah yadi hy utpadat purvam bhavanam svabhavo bhavet tadatmasattalabhartham hetvantaram anapeksyam bhavet/ apeksate ca hetvantaram atah siddham bhavanam nihsvabhavatvam// tatha coktam Nagarjunapadaih/ akrtrimah svabhaivo hi nirapeksah paratra ca// yadi nihsvabhava bhavah svabhavato na vidyante// katham tarhi vicitrakarah pratibhasante pratibhasanta eva balanam na hi pratibhasamatrena svarupasiddhih/ kesadvicandrasikhicandramaksikadayah kin na pratibhasante/ tesam timirasabhava pratitih cet/ anyo 'pi avidyaitimiropahatamatinayanah sarvabhaivan svarupenavidyamanan taimirikopalabdhakesan iva purato vivartamanain pasyantei na punar arya apetavidyamaladhicaksavo 'pi tatha ca Sarvavivarananiskambhi bodhisattvah samstauti Bhagavantam/ adisantadyanutpannah prakrtyaiva tu nirvrtah// dharmas te vivrta Natha dharmacakrapravartane// tasmat svarupena rupadayo na santy eveti sthitam/ na drstety adi yo hi rupasya drasta caksurvijnanadiko dharmah/ so 'pi nasti sarvadharmanam anutpatteh/ evam sabdadayo vacyah na cittam ityadi cittam parinispannam vijnanam caittikam . • - 47 -
[commentary of 1.1.4] 'Being (sattva)': Means the existent being. Existence is characterised by actions that produce effects (arthakriyakaritva) which are the basis for belief in the manifested external world (idampratyayaksanam). The 'existent being' is characterized by the Aggregate of the Five Components of Phenomenal Awareness (pancaskandha). (Yogaratnamala)67 Thus in Hevajra Tantra, and "Yogaratnamala, the Madhyamika Prasangika as well as the Yogacara Svatantrika view has been expounded. However, Nagarjunapada's statement in "Yogaratnamala, upholds the supremacy and accuracy of the Prasangika view of the ultimate truth. It is not sufficient to discuss the Yogacara Svatantrika and the Madhyamika Prasangika view of Emptiness and selflessness, the Cittamatra view on the same topic needs mentioning As with the Madhyamika, we shall primarily rely on the works of the great dGe lug ba scholars like Tsong kha pa, Jamyang Shey Ba, Jang gya and so forth for a brief study of the Cittamatra doctrine and the influence it exerted on "Hevajra Tantra.