DOCSLIB.ORG

A Synopsis of the Madhyamaka- Alazkdra of Sntaraksita (1)

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
A Synopsis of the Madhyamaka- Alazkdra of Sntaraksita (1) A Synopsis of the Madhyamaka- alazkdra of Sntaraksita (1) Masamichi Ichigo Santaraksita was born in a time of great scholarly activity for the four Buddhist schools: Vaibhasika, Sautrantika, Yogacarin and Madhyamika. They were already well established and were emulating each other in their philosophies. It is saidl) that he, together with his pupil Kamalasila, established the so-called Madhyamika-Yogacarin synthetic school, on the one hand, inheriting through Jnanagarbha the two-truth theory of Bhavaviveka, a man who was one of the leaders of the Madhyamika school; and, on the other hand, being influenced by the logic and epistemology of Dharmakirti, a founder of the Sautrantika-Yogacarin synthetic school. The Madhyamakalamkara of Santaraksita has been referred to here and there and is historically known to use). It is considered to be the basic source for the Yogacara-Sautrantika-Madhyamika3>, and judging from the way it is described in Tibetan histories, it, rather than Tattvasarhgraha, can be supposed to be Santaraksita's main work. But its contents have been obscured so faro). This may be partly because the text is extant only in Tibetan translation. The Madhyamakalamkara-karika (MAK), listed in the Catalogue of Peking Reprint Editions (CPRE) as no. 5284, is composed of 97 verses. Santaraksita's 1) S. Katsura, Dharmakirti ni okeru Jikoninshiki no Riron (Dharmakirti's Theory of Svasamvedana), Nanto Bukkyo, No. 23, p. 29, 2) F. D. Lessing & A. Wayman, Mkhas grub rje's fundamentals of the Buddhist tantr as, Mouton 1968, p. 91. G. N. Roerich, The blue annals, Part one, Royal Asiatic Society of Bengal, Monograph Series vol. viii, pp. 332-333. A. Schiefner, Taranathae de Doctrinae Buddhicae in India Propagatione, Suzuki Gakujyutsu Zaidan, 1963, p. 157. T. Stcherbatsky, Buddhist Logic, 11,p. 329n. 3) D. S. Ruegg, Arya-Vimuktisena, (WZKSO, xii-xiii, Wien 1968) p. 307, n 18. -995- (37) A Synopsis of the Madhyamakalamkara (M. Ichigo) own commentary, vritti, and Kamalasila's subcommentary, panjika, are listed in the CPRE as no. 5285 and no. 5286 respectively. The subject of the MAK is stated by a syllogism in the first verse as follows: (P) These things set forth by some Buddhists themselves and others do not have in truth their essence. (H) Because they are deprived of singular or plural essence. (D) As a reflected image. The MAK can be divided into two sections. The subject is established in the first section (2-62) by logic (yukti) and in the second (63-97) by testimony (agama). The first section can be sub-divided into two parts: examination of the external objects (rupa-skandha-pariksa) (2-15) and consciousness (vi j- nana-) (16-60). This paper attempts to give a glimpse of the contents of only the first section, as space is limited. In this section, the theories not only of non- Buddhist schools but also of Buddhists are presented as the opponents of Santaraksita. His refutations seem to stress the Buddhists rather than the non-Buddhists. Moreover, as seen5) in the Madhyamakahridaya-karika and the 4) The following are the extant treatises on the MAK at this time. S. Yamaguchi, Hannya Shiso Shi (The History of Prajn"a), Hozokan, 1951; Chukanshogonron no Kaidoku jyosetsu (An Introductory Decipherment of the MAK), Higata Hakase Koki Kinen Ronbun Shu, Y. Ka jiyama, Bukkyo ni okeru Meiso to Tetsugaku (Meditation and Philo- sophy of Buddhism), Tetsugaku Kenkyu, No. 512; Bukkyo no Shiso III, Ku no Ronri (Buddhist Thought III: The Logic of S'unyata), Kadokawashoten, 1969. D. Ueyana, Santaraksita no Kyogakuteki Tokushitsu...MAK ni okeru Kyoji Hoho nitsuite (On the Method of Teaching in Santaraksita's MAK), JIBS, viii, 2; Santaraksita no Nitai Setsu (Theory of the Twofold Truth of Santaraksita), JIBS, ix, 2; Yugagyo...Chukan Ha ni okeru Yuishiki Setsu nitsuite (On the Citta- Matra Theory of the Yogacara-Madhyamika School), JIBS, x, 2 J. Nagasawa, Kamalasila's Theory of the Yogacara, JIBS, x, 1 M. Ichigo, Chukanshogonronchu no Wayaku Kenkyu (i) (An Annotated Translation of the Madhyamakalamkara-vritti of Santaraksita (i)), Kyoto Sangyo University Essays,. Humanities, vol. 1 5) S. Yamaguchi, Bukkyogaku Bunshu 1 (A Collection of Treatises by S. Yama- guchi on Buddhism, vol. 1), Shunjyusha, 1972, pp. 345-346 -994- A Synopsis of the Madhyamakalamkara (M. Ichigo) (38) Madhyamaka-ratna-pradipa-nama-prakarana, the Buddhist schools are ran- ked and valued as necessary steps to be studied to attain the Madhyamika theory which Santaraksita regards as the ultimate stages). The results of study of the MAK will surely throw light on our under- standing of the Madhyamika-Yogacarin synthetic school, Santaraksita's stand- point as against the controversy between the sakara- and nirakara- views of the Yogacara school, the relation between the thought of Santaraksita and Nagarjuna, and the like. Some Skt. originals of the MAK are to be found here and there and they can be identified chiefly with some verses of the Tattvasamgraha. Enu- merated they are as follows (including incomplete verbative verses). MAK 1: cited in BCP p. 173. 11 MAK 24: TS 1246, PV II 133 8: PV III 211c-d, 212a-b 25: 1250 11: TS 1989 26: 1251, PV II 138 12: 1990 27: 1252 13: 1991 28: 1253, PV II 140 16: 1999, cited in BCP p. 190 29: 1254 17: 2000, cited in BCP p. 190 30: 1255 18: 2001 34a-b: PSV I 4a-b infra. 19a-b: 2002a-b 49: Quoted in the end of TBH, 20: 2004 but its Skt. is lacuna. 21: 2005 50a: PV II 200c 22: 2036 c-d: P V II 201a-b 23: 2037 Contents7) K. no. Opponent Subject 18) I. Proof by logic (yukti) 2-62 (1) Examination of external objects (rupa-skandha-pariksa) 2-15 6) Y. Kajiyama, op, cit., Buddhist Thought III : The Logic of Sunyata, p. 170 7) Sectioning and titling of the sections are made by indications in the Panjika and the translator. -993- (39) A Synopsis of the Madhyamakalamkara (M. Ichigo) A. Refutations of eternal things 2-9 a. The idea of eternity is inadmissible where a causal relation is admissible 2 Kalavadin b. Ref ution of the non-produced which are eternal (asamskrita-dharma) 3-7 Vaibhasika c. Objects to be examined are things with efficient opeation (arthakriyasakti) 8 d. Refutation of the Ego (pudgala) 9 Vatsiputriya B. Refutations of things in the category of space 10-15 a. Refutation of the pervader (vyapaka) Ether (akasa) 10a-b b. Refutation of the non-pervader (avyapaka) The gross (sthula) lOc-d The atom (paramanu) 11-15 Vaisesika Sarvastivadin Sautrantika (2) Examination of conciousness (vi jnana-skandha-pariksa) 169>-60 A. Approval of self-consciousness (svasamvedana) Santaraksita's epistemological standpoint 16-21 a. Refutation of the insentient nature of consciousness 16 Nirakaravada b. Refutation of the relation of the agent and object (karmakartribhava) of consciousness 17 Sakaravada c. The essence of knowledge is self-consciousness 18 d. Refutation of the theory that the essence of knowledge is determination 19 Mimamsaka Subhagupta e. The theory of the Sakaravada 20 f. Refutation of the Sakaravada from the Niraka- 8) On KK. 1-15, see S. Yamaguchi, op. cit., An Introductory Decipherment of the MAK 9) On KK. 16-33, see M. Ichigo, op. cit., -992- A Synopsis of the Madhyamakalamkara (M. Ichigo) (40) ravada 21 Sakaravada B. Refutation of the view that knowledge is of plural essence 22-33 Sautrantika a. Pointing out the contradiction that knowledge of singular essence turns out to be of plural essence by the influence of the image with plural essence 22-23 b. To solve its contradiction, Sautrantika's view that indeterminate knowledge and conceptual knowledge occur gradually 24 c. Against it, Santaraksita's view that they occur simultaneously 25-27 d. Refutation of the example of a fire-brand circle (alata-cakra) 28-30 e. The opponent's objection that their simultaneous occurrence results in knowledge of plural essence 31-32 f. The atom can not be the object of perception 33 Dharmakirti C. Refutation of the views that knowledge is of singular essence 34-60 a. The views of schools with the exception of Yogacarin 34-42 34 Sautrantika 35 Sarnkhya Vaisesika 36 Jaina Mlmamsaka 37 Carvaka 38-39 Sathkhya 40 Vedanta 41-42 Sautrantika b. A conclusion to refute the theory that --991 -- (41) A Synopsis of, the Madhyamakalamkara (M. Ichigo) knowledge is of singular essence in conformity with the image 43 c. Views of Yogacara school 44-60 i. The theory of 'the Yogacara school that our cognition,which is transformed by the ripening of vasana of one particular personality since the past which has no beginning, contains images with the essence of illusion 44 ii. The necessity of examination to determine whether images are real or false 45 iii. Refutation of the view of the sakaravada of the Yogacarin 46-49 Sakaravada of the Yogacarin Pointing out the errors in case the images are real 46-47 The same error can be pointed out in the theory of the sakaravada 48 Refutation of the atom is applied here 49 iv. Refutation of the view of the nirakaravada of the Yogacarin 50-60 Nrrakaravada of the Yogacarin The theory of the nirakaravada that singular knowledge, just like agate, has the essence of plurality, is the same as that of the Jaina 50-51 Imageless knowledge appears because of falsity 52 It is incorrect that the untrue image is cognized 53 Knowledge is necessarily endowed with the image of its object 54 -990- A Synopsis of the Madhyamakalamkara (M. Ichigo) (42) Knowledge of which essence is not insentient is real 55 Even the secondary knowledge of self -conciousness does not percieve non-existence 56 There is no relation between knowledge and the untrue image 57 Knowledge without the image as cause does not produce the effect occasionally.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Studies in Buddhist Hetuvidyā (Epistemology and Logic ) in Europe and Russia
    Nataliya Kanaeva STUDIES IN BUDDHIST HETUVIDYĀ (EPISTEMOLOGY AND LOGIC ) IN EUROPE AND RUSSIA Working Paper WP20/2015/01 Series WP20 Philosophy of Culture and Cultural Studies Moscow 2015 УДК 24 ББК 86.36 K19 Editor of the series WP20 «Philosophy of Culture and Cultural Studies» Vitaly Kurennoy Kanaeva, Nataliya. K19 Studies in Buddhist Hetuvidyā (Epistemology and Logic ) in Europe and Russia [Text] : Working paper WP20/2015/01 / N. Kanaeva ; National Research University Higher School of Economics. – Moscow : Higher School of Economics Publ. House, 2015. – (Series WP20 “Philosophy of Culture and Cultural Studiesˮ) – 52 p. – 20 copies. This publication presents an overview of the situation in studies of Buddhist epistemology and logic in Western Europe and in Russia. Those studies are the young direction of Buddhology, and they started only at the beginning of the XX century. There are considered the main schools, their representatives, the directions of their researches and achievements in the review. The activity of Russian scientists in this field was not looked through ever before. УДК 24 ББК 86.36 This study (research grant № 14-01-0006) was supported by The National Research University Higher School of Economics (Moscow). Academic Fund Program in 2014–2015. Kanaeva Nataliya – National Research University Higher School of Economics (Moscow). Department of Humanities. School of Philosophy. Assistant professor; [email protected]. Канаева, Н. А. Исследования буддийской хетувидьи (эпистемологии и логики) в Европе и России (обзор) [Текст] : препринт WP20/2015/01 / Н. А. Канаева ; Нац. исслед. ун-т «Высшая школа экономи- ки». – М.: Изд. дом Высшей школы экономики, 2015. – (Серия WP20 «Философия и исследо- вания культуры»).
    [Show full text]
  • Finnigan Madhyamaka Ethics 2018
    View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by PhilPapers This is a draft of a chapter that appears in The Oxford Handbook of Buddhist Ethics ed- ited by Dr Daniel Cozort and Dr James Mark Shields (2018) Madhyamaka Ethics Bronwyn Finnigan 12 Abstract There are two main loci of contemporary debate about the nature of Madhyamaka ethics. The first investigates the general issue of wheth- er the Madhyamaka philosophy of emptiness (śūnyavāda) is consistent with a commitment to systematic ethical distinctions. The second queries whether the metaphysical analysis of no-self presented by Śāntideva in his Bodhicaryāvatāra entails the impartial benevolence of a bodhisattva. This article will critically examine these debates and demonstrate the ways in which they are shaped by competing under- standings of Madhyamaka conventional truth or reality (saṃvṛtisatya) and the forms of reasoning admissible for differentiating conventional truth from falsity and good from bad. 1 School of Philosophy, Research School of Social Sciences, Australian National Univer- sity. Email: [email protected]. 2 Many thanks to Sara McClintock, Tom Tillemans and the editors of this collection for helpful comments on a previous draft of this paper. I am also grateful for feedback from participants of the Australasian Workshop in Moral Philosophy (2016). 2 Finnigan, Madhyamaka Ethics Introduction Madhyamaka is one of two major philosophical schools of Mahāyāna Buddhism, alongside Yogācāra. It is best known for its philosophy of emptiness (śūnyavāda) as articulated by Nāgārjuna in his Mūlamadh- yamakakārikā and has an illustrious lineage of eminent exponents in In- dia, Tibet and China.
    [Show full text]
  • From Mādhyamika to Yogācāra, an Analysis of MMK, XXIV. 18 and MV
    THE JOURNAL OF THE INTERNATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF BUDDHIST STUDIES EDITOR-IN-CHIEF A. K. Narain University of Wisconsin, Madison, USA EDITORS Heinz Bechert Leon Hurvitz Universitat Gottingen FRG University of British Columbia Vancouver, Canada Lewis Lancaster A. W. MacDonald University of California, Berkeley, USA Universiti de Paris X, Nanterre, France B. J. Stavisky Alex Wayman WCNILKR, Moscow, USSR Columbia University, New York, USA ASSOCIATE EDITOR Stephen Beyer University of Wisconsin, Madison, USA Volume 2 1979 Number 1 TABLE OF CONTENTS I. ARTICLES 1. The Mongol Khans and Chinese Buddhism and Taoism, by Sechin Jagchid 2. From Madhyamika to Yogacara, an Analysis of MMK, XXIV. 18 and MV, 1.1-2, by Gadjin m. Nagao 3. Dynamic Liberation in Yogacara Buddhism, by Alan Sponberg 4. Yogacara and the Buddhist Logicians, by Alex Wayman II. SHORT PAPERS 1. Sambodhi in ASoka's 8th Rock Edict, by A. L. Basham 81 2. Can Meditational Practice be Measured? A Report on a Quantitative Survey, by Jacques Maquet 84 3. Nirvana and Metaphysical Experience, by Ismael Quiles 91 III. BOOK REVIEWS AND NOTICES Reviews: 1. World Conqueror and World Renouncer, by S.J. Tambiah 99 2. Comparative Ethics in Hindu and Buddhist Traditions, by Roderick Hindery. 103 3. Mahayana Buddhist Meditation: Theory and Practice, by Minoru Kiyota, assisted by Elvin W. Jones 106 4. Chandi Borobudur: A Monument of Mankind, by Dr. Soekmono 108 Obituary: 1. Paul Demieville, by Alexander W. Macdonald 110 FROM MADHYAMIKA TO YOGACARA An Analysis of MMK, XXIV. 18 and MV, 1.1-2 by Gadjin M. Nagao In the Sino-Japanese Buddhist tradition, the Madhyamika and Yogacara-Vijnanavada tenets have been understood to be both parallel and opposite to each other.
    [Show full text]
  • Unearthing the Foundations of Tibetan Buddhist Philosophy
    Introduction Unearthing the foundations of Tibetan Buddhist philosophy Pascale Hugon and Kevin Vose The contributions to this volume are the result of a panel on the theme “Tibetan Scholasticism in the 11th and 12th centuries” or- ganized at the 15th Conference of the International Association of Buddhist Studies held at Emory University, Atlanta, in June 2008.1 Our motivation for this panel came in great part from the recent surfacing of new material pertaining to this period, which opens the way to novel research on the development of Tibetan Buddhism in the early part of the Second Diff usion (phyi dar). In particular, the 2006 publication of the fi rst 30-volume set of the bKaʼ gdams gsuṅ ʼbum by the dPal brtsegs Institute for Ancient Tibetan Manuscripts (dpal brtsegs bod yig dpe rñiṅ źib ʼjug khaṅ)2 1 Three further papers were presented in the IABS panel at Emory: “Roṅ zom Chos kyi bzaṅ po’s Subclassifi cation of the Madhyamaka School” by Orna Almogi, “Roṅ zom Chos kyi bzaṅ po on ‘Dialectics’ (mtshan ñid), ‘Secret Mantra’ (gsaṅ sṅags), and the ‘View’ (lta ba)” by Nathaniel Rich, and “Challenging Candrakīrti: Phywa pa Chos kyi seṅ ge’s Criticism of Prāsaṅgika-Madhyamaka” by Dorji Wangchuk. Owing to other commitments, these could not be included in the present vol- ume. Thomas Doctor’s paper was originally presented in the panel “Madhyamaka and Yogācāra Models of Truth or Reality in Indo-Tibetan Buddhism.” 2 The fi rst 30 volumes appeared in 2006 and a second set of 30 vol- umes in 2007.
    [Show full text]
  • Madhyamaka and Yogācāra: Allies Or Rivals? Eds
    Madhyamaka and Yogācāra: Allies or Rivals? eds. by Jay L. Garfield and Jan Westerhoff (review) Oren Hanner Philosophy East and West, Volume 68, Number 2, April 2018, pp. 629-633 (Review) Published by University of Hawai'i Press For additional information about this article https://muse.jhu.edu/article/690307 Access provided by University of California @ Berkeley (14 Apr 2018 01:33 GMT) and thought. I highly recommend this book to anyone interested in the life and thought of a seminal Korean Confucian philosopher. Note 1 – Edward Y. J. Chung, The Korean Neo-Confucianism of Yi T’oegye and Yi Yulgok: A Re- appraisal of the “Four-Seven Thesis” and Its Practical Implications for Self-Cultivation (Albany: State University of New York Press, 1995). Madhyamaka and Yogācāra: Allies or Rivals? Edited by Jay L. Garfield and Jan Wester- hoff. New York: Oxford University Press, 2015. Pp. xi + 280. Hardcover $105.00, ISBN 978-0-1902-3128-6. Paper $36.95, ISBN 978-0-1902-3129-3. Reviewed by Oren Hanner University of California, Berkeley [email protected] Recent decades have witnessed a number of scholarly attempts to illuminate the philosophical affinity between the Madhyamaka and Yogācāra, the two main systems of thought in the Mahāyāna stream of Buddhism. Both schools originated in India in the first centuries of the common era, and had a significant impact on the doc- trines of Asian Buddhism in such countries as China, Korea, Tibet, and Japan. Conse- quently, their views concerning reality have been documented in various textual sources, ranging from early philosophical treatises by their chief founders, Nāgārjuna (Madhyamaka) and Vasubandhu and Asaṅga (Yogācāra), to sūtras and later commen- taries.
    [Show full text]
  • 85The Madhyamaka Speaks to the West.Pdf
    Kent Academic Repository Full text document (pdf) Citation for published version McGuire, Robert (2015) The Madhyamaka Speaks to the West: A philosophical analysis of nyat as a universal truth. Doctor of Philosophy (PhD) thesis, University of Kent,. DOI Link to record in KAR https://kar.kent.ac.uk/54341/ Document Version UNSPECIFIED Copyright & reuse Content in the Kent Academic Repository is made available for research purposes. Unless otherwise stated all content is protected by copyright and in the absence of an open licence (eg Creative Commons), permissions for further reuse of content should be sought from the publisher, author or other copyright holder. Versions of research The version in the Kent Academic Repository may differ from the final published version. Users are advised to check http://kar.kent.ac.uk for the status of the paper. Users should always cite the published version of record. Enquiries For any further enquiries regarding the licence status of this document, please contact: [email protected] If you believe this document infringes copyright then please contact the KAR admin team with the take-down information provided at http://kar.kent.ac.uk/contact.html The Madhyamaka Speaks to the West A philosophical analysis of śūnyatā as a universal truth by Robert McGuire A thesis submitted in fulfilment of the requirements of a Doctor of Philosophy in Theology and Religious Studies Department of Religious Studies School of European Culture and Languages October 2015 (word count: 99,617) This work was supported by the Arts and Humanities Research Council under Grant number AH/K503046/1.
    [Show full text]
  • Santaraksita and Modern Philosophy
    SANTARAKSITA AND MODERN PHILOSOPHY Marie-Louise Friquegnon William Paterson University The philosopher Santaraksita was born in Bengal, the son of the king, in the same family as Atisa.. Renouncing worldly honors, he became a monk. Eagerly pursuing knowledge, he became one of the greatest Buddhist philosopher of all time. Professor of philosophy and abbot at the famous university-monastery of Nalanda in north India, he analyzed and refuted many tenets of Buddhist and non-Buddhist schools. Summary: Santaraksita asserted nothing to be true on the absolute level. But on the relative level he claimed that all of reality was nothing other than mind. He arrived at his philosophical position in the following way. There are two possible candidates for the nature of reality, -material and mental. If reality is material, it must be made of parts. The smallest of these are said to be atoms. But if they are the smallest, they must be indivisible. However, if they are indivisible, they can have no extension. (For the only number which is indivisible is zero.) Nor can they have sides to attach to one another, for if they had sides, they would be divisible into those sides. So they cannot combine to make up larger objects. So it would seem that the only alternative is that reality is mental. It is, after all, impossible to deny awareness without utilizing awareness. But there are problems with the concept of mind and its relation to an object. Mind is either one or many, a unity or a plurality, one with its object or different.
    [Show full text]
  • Introduction
    Introduction The Philosophical Grounds and Literary History of Zhentong Klaus-Dieter Mathes and Michael R. Sheehy Though the subject of emptiness śūnyatā( , stong pa nyid) is relatively well estab- lished in English-language texts on Buddhism, it is usually presented only as the emptiness of lacking independent existence or, more literally, the emptiness of an own nature (svabhāva, rang bzhin). However, the general reader of English literature on Buddhism may not be aware that such an understanding of emptiness reflects a particular interpretation of it, advanced predominantly by the Sakya, Kadam, and Geluk orders, which has exercised a particularly strong influence on the dis- semination of Buddhist studies and philosophy in the West. In Tibetan discourse, this position is referred to as rangtong (rang stong), which means that everything, including the omniscience of a Buddha, is taken to be empty of an own nature. It is this lack of independent, locally determined building blocks of the world that allows in Madhyamaka the Buddhist axiom of dependent origination. In other words, rangtong emptiness is the a priori condition for a universe full of open, dynamic systems. The union of dependent origination and emptiness—the insepa- rability of appearance and emptiness—sets the ground for philosophical models of interrelatedness that are increasingly used in attempts to accommodate astonishing observations being made in the natural sciences, such as wave-particle duality or quantum entanglement. Throughout the long intellectual history of Indian and Tibetan Buddhism, one of the major questions that remains unresolved is whether a systematic pre- sentation of the Buddha’s doctrine requires challenging rangtong as the exclusive mode of emptiness, which has led some to distinguish between two modes of emptiness: (1) Rangtong (rang stong), that is, being empty of an own nature on the one hand, and (2) Zhentong (gzhan stong), that is, being empty of everything other 1 © 2019 State University of New York Press, Albany 2 Klaus-Dieter Mathes and Michael R.
    [Show full text]
  • Madhyamaka in India and Tibet." in Oxford Handbook of World Philosophy.” Edited by J
    CHAPTER 16 Dunne, John D. (2011). "Madhyamaka in India and Tibet." In Oxford Handbook of World Philosophy.” Edited by J. Garfield and W. Edelglass. Oxford: Oxford University Press: 206-221. MADHYAMAKA IN INDIA AND TIBET JOHN DUNNE THE Mahayana Buddhist philosophy of India and Tibet contains several major strands, and while some strands were eventually construed to be flawed, one became dominant in Indian Mahayana. Its hegemony continued in Tibet, where it became the largely unquestioned pinnacle of Buddhist thought. It is the Madhyamika or "Middle Way" philosophy, initially developed by Nagarjuna (fl. third century). In the context of Mahayana Buddhism, sweeping claims rarely survive a careful review of the historical evidence, but in saying that the Madhyamika eventually became the pinnacle of Indo-Tibetan Mahayana thought, one is unlikely to run afoul of historical contradictions. The superiority of the Madhyamika is nevertheless not a simple matter, for the term applies to a wide range of stances. In Tibet especially, the great variety of systems called "Madhyamika" (Tib. dbu ma) might lead one to conclude that the term simply became an obligatory epithet for a tradition's most cherished philosophy, what­ ever it might be. This conclusion, however, would belie the commonalities that Madhyamika thinkers share-commonalities that become evident when they trace themselves back to Nagarjuna, the revered originator of Madhyamika thought. This essay will thus focus on Nagarjuna's initial articulation of Madhyamika, and it will then examine
    [Show full text]
  • Kamalasila's Theory of the Yogacara
    Kamalasila's Theory of the Yogacara Jitsudo Nagasawa Santaraksita (710-792-) united the Madhyamaka doctrine and the Yogacara in his Madhyamakalamkara-karika & vrtti, 91.92. Kamalasila (730 -794-) explained Santaraksita's Yogacara-theory and commented on the three gathas of the Lankavatara quoted in the Vrtti in his Panjika. If we collate these commentaries with the explanations of the same three gathas in his Bhavanakrama, we can understand Kamalasila's theology more clearly. Then, what a situation holds Kamalasila, being heir to Santaraksita, in Indian Buddhism of the 8th century? ABBREVIATIONS: BhK Kamalasila, "Bhavanakrama", Minor Buddhist Texts, II. ed. G. Tucci, Roma, 1958. Lank The Lankavatara Sutra, ed. B. Nanjio, 1923. MAK Santaraksita, Madhyamakalamkara-karika, The Tibetan Tripitaka, Peking Edition Reprinted (=PER) Tokyo-Kyoto, Vol. 101, No. 5284. MAV Santaraksita, Madhyamakalamkara-vrtti, PER, Vol. 101, No. 5285. MAP Kamalasila, Madhyamakalamkara-panjika, PER, Vol. 101, No. 5286. MVT Sthiramati, Madhyantavibhaga-tika, ed. S. Yamaguchi, 1934. SDV Jnanagarbha, Satyadvayavibhaga-vrtti, Tohoku., No. 3882. SN Samdhinirmocana-sutra I. from MAV, 91 Cittamatra as the law of cause-effect (mutual im- manent attribute of cause-effect) in the world. Although the law of cause- eff ect as the origination of the world is mere citta-caitta substantially, but there are two theories: (1) one attaching weight to caitta, and (2) one giving priority to citta (called "the two Madhyamaka doctrines" in MAP). (1) is one who contend "that which is preached cittamatra is for the sake of setting apart a kartr and a bhoktr" in, the sastra (MAP appoints Mad- (1) hyamakahrdaya of Acarya Bhavya).
    [Show full text]
  • Madhyamaka and Yogācāra — Allies Or Rivals?, Edited by Jay L
    BSRV 33.1-2 (2016) 303–307 Buddhist Studies Review ISSN (print) 0256-2897 doi: 10.1558/bsrv.31650 Buddhist Studies Review ISSN (online) 1747-9681 BOOK REVIEWS Madhyamaka and Yogācāra — Allies or Rivals?, edited by Jay L. Garfield and Jan Westerhoff. Oxford University Press, 2015. 300pp. Pb. £23.49. ISBN-13: 9780190231293. Reviewed by Warren Lee Todd, University of South Wales, warren.todd@south- wales.ac.uk Keywords Buddhism, philosophy, ontology, phenomenology, mind One of the optional essay questions on the M.A. module I happen to teach reads ‘Are the philosophies of the Madhyamaka and Yogācāra schools compatible/complemen- tary or incompatible?’. In one form or another, it is a question that has concerned the minds of many great Buddhist philosophers, as well as having been addressed by outsiders, like Śaṅkara (eighth century) in his Brahma Sūtra Bhāṣya (II.ii.32), and more recently by modern scholars such as Paul Williams, Ian Harris, Peter Harvey, Janice Willis and Gadjin Nagao. So, apart from the immediate delight felt at seeing the release of this book, the first question that leapt to mind was whether‘Allies or Rivals?’ was equivalent to ‘compatible/complementary or incompatible?’. Unravelling this question seemed a fruitful way forward. Turning first to the book chapters, after the Introduction by Jay L. Garfield and Jan Westerhoff: ch.1 is by Chaisit Suwanvarangkul on, ‘Pratītyasamutpāda and Dharmadhātu in Early Mahāyāna Buddhism’; ch.2 by Mattia Salvini on, ‘Language and Existence in Madhyamaka and Yogācāra: Preliminary Reflections’;
    [Show full text]
  • Madhyamaka in Tibet: Thinking Through the Ultimate Truth
    Madhyamaka in Tibet: Thinking Through the Ultimate Truth Douglas Duckworth (Temple University) 국문요약 본고는 티벳 중관 사상의 지배적인 해석적 줄기를 철학적으로 재구축한다. 논자는 마크 시더리츠(Mark Siderits)가 용수의 중관에 대한 관점으로 특징 지 은 것, 특히 시더리츠가 용수에 대해 주장한 것처럼 궁극적인 진리는 논리를 여읜 것이라는 관점과 중관에 대한 티벳 중관학의 해석의 특징들을 구별한다. 그러한 과정에서 논자는 중관학파가 유가행파와 양립한다는 해석에 대하여 미 팜(1846-1912)이 제시한 해석에 주목하여 입증한다. 미팜의 이론은 진제와 속 제의 언설불가능한 통합에 대해 설명함으로써 중관학파와 유가행파의 교각역 할을 한다. 불교학리뷰 (Critical Review for Buddhist Studies) 20권 (2016. 12) 171p~197p 172 불교학리뷰 vol.20 논자는 모든 진리를 틀에 의지하는 것(framework-dependent)으로서 이해 하는 해석 체계로서의 중관학파에 주목함으로써 불가해한 진리가 유가행파 및 중관학파와 양립가능하다는 것을 주장한다. 즉, 모든 진리가 중관학파의 특수 한 틀과 관계되며, 틀에 의지하는 진리는 항상 관습적인 것 또는 상대적인 진 리들일 뿐이며 틀에 의지하지 않는 진리는 존재하지 않는 것이다. 그러나 그러 한 틀의 구조 자체는 생각과 표현의 범위를 넘어서는, 즉 “틀에 규정될 수 없는 것(unframeable)” 것인데, 왜냐하면 개별적 진리는 필수적으로 어떤 특수한 틀 안에 가둬지기 때문이다. 틀의 경계를 초월하고 완전히 틀 안에 가둬질 수 없는 것이 바로 궁극적 진리이다. 한편 공(空)은 중관학파에서 궁극적 진리에 관한 핵심적 은유이며, 언설 불 가능한 (틀을 벗어난) 궁극성은 유가행파에서 “의타기”(paratantra)와 “알라 야식”(ālayavijñāna)과 같이 다른 방식들로 나타난다. 불가해한 궁극성은 물 론 유가행파에서도 유지되지만 중관학파의 해석과 갈등을 일으킬 필요는 없었 다. 이는 일체가 공이기 때문이며, 또한 연기에 의한 것이기 때문(이고, 공이 공한 것과 마찬가지로 연기 역시 의존적이기 때문)이다. 주제어: 중관학파, 유가행파, 미팜(Mipam), 공(空), 언설불가능(inconceivable) Madhyamaka in Tibet: Thinking Through the Ultimate Truth 173 1.
    [Show full text]