'Gos Lo Tsā Ba Gzhon Nu Dpal's (1392–1481) Analytical and Direct Approaches to Ultimate Reality1 Direct Approaches to Ul
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
’Gos Lo tsā ba gZhon nu dpal’s (1392–1481) Analytical and Direct Approaches to Ultimate Reality1 Klaus-Dieter Mathes Direct approaches to ultimate reality are treated with suspicion in Tibet and have very often been associated with the Chinese Chan views of Hwa shang Mo he yan, who is said to have been defeated in the famous debate at bSam yas between 792 and 794 at the hands of the Indian proponent Kamalaśīla. While Mo he yan emphasized an immediate awakening through direct non-conceptual meditation, Kamalaśīla was purportedly able to convince the Tibetan king Khri srong lde btsan (8th century) of the superiority of his gradual path, which emphasizes the importance of conceptual analysis and ethical discipline. 2 Even though the historicity of this story has been questioned, it undoubtedly served to validate new lineages from India as the only authentic source of Buddhist doctrines and practices and confirm the importance of a gradual path.3 Even those in Tibet who were doctrinally closer to the Chinese position of Mo he yan put great effort into legitimizing their tradition by tracing it back to Indian masters and texts. A case in point is the famous bKa’ gdams pa and bKa’ brgyud pa master ’Gos Lo tsā ba gZhon nu dpal (1392–1481) who presents in his commentary on the Ratnagotravibhāgavyākhyā a mahāmudrā interpretation of the Maitreya works that is strikingly similar to what we find in Dunhuang texts of Tibetan Zen (as Van Schaik called them in his recent publication),4 but 1 Improvements to my English by Philip Pierce (Kathmandu) and David Higgins (University of Vienna) are gratefully acknowledged. 2 For a good summary of the debate, see Cabezón & Dargyay 2006: 19–21; Karmay 2007: 87–89. 3 Van Schaik 2015: 15. 4 See Van Schaik’s (2015: 31–41) translation of A Text on the Single Method of Non apprehension from Pelliot Tibétain 116. Journal of the International Association of Buddhist Studies Volume 39 • 2016 • 487–518 • doi: 10.2143/JIABS.39.0.3200534 488 klaus-dieter mathes which he justifies on the basis of Indian masters such as Jñānakīrti and Maitrīpa.5 For gZhon nu dpal ultimate reality must be either determined through logical investigation which culminates in “freedom from mental fabrica- tions” (niṣprapañca) or experienced directly on a mahāmudrā path, which mainly relies on non-conceptual types of insight. This latter approach allows not only a negative characterization of reality such as niṣprapañca or the emptiness of non-affirming negation, but also positive descriptions, such as those found in scriptures of the “third dharmacakra” 5 This strategy is also clearly stated in gZhon nu dpal’s Blue Annals (Deb ther sngon po, 6326–6334): “Moreover, Dwags po Rin po che said to Phag mo gru pa: ‘The basic text of this mahāmudrā of ours is the Mahāyānottaratantraśāstra (Ratnagotravibhāga) by the Venerable Maitreya.’ Phag mo gru pa in turn said the same thing to rJe ’Bri gung pa, and for this reason many explanations of the Mahāyānottaratantraśāstra are found in the works of rJe ’Bri gung pa and his disciples. In this connection, the Dharma master Sa skya pa (i.e., Sa skya Paṇḍita) maintains that there is no conventional expression for mahāmudrā in Pāramitānaya, and that the wisdom of mahāmudrā is only the wisdom arisen from initiation. But in the Tattvāvatāra composed by the Master Jñānakīrti it is said: ‘As for someone with sharp faculties who practices the pāramitās diligently, by performing the meditations of calm abiding and deep insight, he [becomes] truly endowed with the mahāmudrā [already] in the state of an ordinary being; [and this] is the sign of the irre- versible [state attained] through correct realization.’ And the *Tattvadaśakaṭīkā composed by *Sahajavajra clearly explains a wisdom that realizes suchness as possessing the follow- ing three particular [features]: in essence it is Pāramitā[naya], it accords with Mantra[naya] and its name is ‘mahāmudrā.’ Therefore rGod tshang pa, too, explains that rJe sGam po pa’s Pāramitā[naya]-mahāmudrā is [in line with] the assertions of the master Maitrīpa.” (de yang dwags po rin po ches dpal phag mo gru pa la / ’o skol gyi phyag rgya chen po ’di’i gzhung ni bcom ldan ’das byams pas mdzad pa’i theg pa chen po rgyud bla ma’i bstan bcos ’di yin zhes gsungs shing / dpal phag mo gru pas kyang rje ’bri gung (em., text: khung) pa la de skad du gsungs pas / rje ’bri gung (em., text: khung) pa dpon slob kyi gsung rab rnams su theg pa chen po rgyud bla ma’i bshad pa mang du ’byung ba de yin no / ’di la chos rje sa skya pas pha rol tu phyin pa’i lugs la phyag rgya chen po’i tha snyad med cing / phyag rgya chen po’i ye shes gang yin pa de ni dbang las skyes pa’i ye shes kho na yin no zhes bzhed mod kyi / slob dpon ye shes grags pas mdzad pa’i de kho na nyid la ’jug par / pha rol tu phyin pa la mngon par brtson pa’i dbang po rab ni / zhi gnas dang lhag mthong bsgoms pas so so’i skye bo’i gnas skabs nyid na phyag rgya chen po dang nges par ldan pa yang dag par rtogs pas phyir mi ldog pa’i rtags nyid dang / zhes gsungs la / de kho na nyid bcu pa’i ’grel pa (em., text: ’brel ba) lhan cig skyes pa’i rdo rjes mdzad par yang / ngo bo pha rol tu phyin pa / sngags dang rjes su mthun pa / ming phyag rgya chen po zhes bya ba’i khyad par gsum dang ldan pa’i de bzhin nyid rtogs pa’i ye shes gsal bar bshad do / de bas na rje sgam po pa’i pha rol tu (em., text: du) phyin pa’i phyag rgya chen po ni mnga’ bdag mai trī (em., text: tri) pa’i bzhed pa yin par rje rgod tshang pas kyang bshad do /). First translated by Roerich 1949–53: 724–25. ’Gos Lo tsā ba gZhon nu dpal’s Approaches 489 (i.e., Yogācāra texts, the Ratnagotravibhāga and so forth). Such a distinc- tion between an analytic and non-conceptual path can be already found in the works of sGam po pa (1079–1153), who introduces, for example, in his Tshogs chos yon tan phun tshogs a path of direct perceptions, which is well set apart from a Pāramitānaya path of inferences and a Mantranaya path of blessing: As to taking inference as [one’s] path: having examined all phenomena by arguments, [such as] being beyond one and many,6 one says that there is no other [ontological] possibility and posits that everything is empty. [This is the path of] inference. [The practice of] inner channels, energies and drops, the recitation of mantras, and so forth, based on the stage consisting of the generation of the deity’s body, is the path of blessing. As to taking direct perception for [one’s] path, the genuine guru teaches that one’s co-emergent mind-essence is the dharmakāya in terms of its lumi- nosity. Having thus been given an accurate pith instruction of definitive meaning, one takes, with regard to this co-emergent mind, which has been ascertained in oneself, the natural mind as the path, without being separated from any of the three [aspects of teaching]: view, conduct and meditation.7 sGam po pa’s path of direct perception has definitive meaning and out- shines not only the path of inferences, but even ordinary Mantranaya, which he criticizes for remaining dependent upon conceptuali zation. 8 This differs from Maitrīpa’s disciple *Sahajavajra, for whom tantric mahāmudrā, which is based on formal creation and completion stage practice, still outshines the mahāmudrā of Pāramitānaya-based pith 6 This means that phenomena cannot be ascertained to be either single individuals (wholes) or plural composites (parts). 7 sGam po pa, Tshogs chos yon tan phun tshogs, 5564–5573: de la rjes dpag lam du byed pa ni / chos thams cad gcig dang du bral gyi gtan tshigs kyis gzhig (em., text: gzhigs) nas / ’gro sa ’di las med zer nas thams cad stong par byas nas ’jog pa ni rjes dpag go / lha’i sku bskyed pa’i rim pa la brten nas rtsa rlung dang thig le dang / sngags kyi bzlas brjod la sogs pa byin rlabs kyi lam mo // mngon sum lam du byed pa ni bla ma dam pa cig gis sems nyid lhan cig skyes pa chos kyi sku ’od gsal bya ba yin gsung ba de lta bu nges pa’i don gyi gdams ngag phyin ci ma log bstan pas / rang la nges pa’i shes pa lhan cig skyes pa de la lta spyod sgom gsum ya ma bral bar gnyug ma’i shes pa lam du khyer ba … First translated in Mathes 2008: 40–41. 8 Jackson 1994: 34. 490 klaus-dieter mathes instructions, because the former is embedded in a sequence of four seals and benefits from the emergence of vajra pride.9 Also in comparison to later bKa’ brgyud pas, sGam po pa’s classification reveals its uncompro- mising character: we may compare it with that of the great exegete Dwags po bKra shis rnam rgyal (1511–1587), who also presents a path of direct perception within another threefold division of the path, but assigns all three of them to tantra.10 This more cautious approach must be of course seen against the background of the ongoing attempts of classical and post-classical bKa’ brgyud pa masters to respond to Sa skya Paṇḍita’s (1182–1251) broad-based critique of their mahāmudrā tradition.11 ’Gos Lo tsā ba gZhon nu dpal on the Second and Third Dharmacakras Even though the “second and third dharmacakras” are respectively taken to represent analytic and non-conceptual approaches, and even though they do not contradict each other, the third dharmacakra out- shines the second one in the eyes of gZhon nu dpal.