The Sudden and Gradual Sū tric (and Tantric?) Approaches of the Rim gyis ’jug pa’i bsgom don and Cig car ’jug pa rnam par mi rtog pa’i bsgom don

Joel Gruber

According to the dates provided by the Great History of the Rdzogs chen snying thig (Rdzogs pa chen po snying thig gyi lo rgyus chen ; hereafter Great History), the renowned saint named Vimalamitra was born in India around the latter half of the fifth century. We are told that he spent a majority of his early years studying with some of the most esteemed Indian scholars of his generation, until his studies were interrupted by a visit from the Vajrasattva, who encour- aged Vimalamitra to cease practicing exoteric teachings in order to pur- sue a tantric education in China. After two decades of training with the elusive Śrī Siṃha in China, Vimalamitra returned to his homeland to meditate in India’s sacred charnel grounds. Over two hundred years later, word of Vimalamitra’s tantric proficiency reached the Tibetan king, Khri Srong lde brtsan (), who invited the Indian saint to assist with the dissemination of Buddhism throughout the Land of Snows. Though Vimalamitra was purportedly three hundred years of age when he journeyed across the Himalayas, his yogic powers were far from diminished. Shortly after departing India, rumors spread to the Tibetan court that Vimalamitra was a necromantic sorcerer rather than a Buddhist saint. Upon his arrival, Tibetan ministers questioned Vimalamitra’s saintly ­credentials, prompting the tantric master to disintegrate Tibet’s prized statue of Vairocana through the power of a single . When Vimalamitra then transformed the pile of ashes that remained into a new statue more exquisite than the original, Khri Srong lde brtsan’s doubts regarding Vimalamitra’s allegiance to Buddhism were dispelled. The king asked Vimalamitra to remain in Tibet to translate, teach, and compose texts on a vast array of Buddhist topics. After more than a decade in the

Journal of the International Association of Volume 39 • 2016 • 405–427 • doi: 10.2143/JIABS.39.0.3200532 406 joel gruber

Land of Snows, Vimalamitra decided his work in Tibet was complete, but, before departing, he vowed to return every century (as an emanation) to ensure the continued success of the Rdzogs chen Snying thig tantric he transmitted to his Tibetan students. Not long after, the Indian saint returned to China. For the past fifty years, scholars, skeptics, and non-believers alike have been quick to dismiss the veracity of claims regarding Vimalami- tra’s more miraculous achievements, particularly those related to the tāntrika’s ability to live hundreds of years, turn statues into ash, and transform those ashes into objects of worship more beautiful than the originals. But, to an audience living within a medieval tantric universe governed by a widespread belief in the efficacy of Buddhist tantric magic rather than by post-modern, secular-scientific ideals, tantric saints were expected to live beyond the average lifespan of mere mortals, and they were expected to perform incredible feats otherwise unachievable by the ordinary human. In fact, it was these deeds that differentiated them from the average person. It is impossible to know for certain, but the Tibetan audiences who heard stories of Buddhist saints would likely have found a far more mun- dane act, such as Vimalamitra’s journey to China to study advanced Bud- dhist teachings, more difficult to believe than a narrative detailing his tantric achievements. As far as I am aware, there is no other instance in which an Indian Buddhist departs the birthplace of the in order to study more efficacious Buddhist meditative techniques inC hina. Quite simply, Indian tāntrikas did not travel to China to study teachings more advanced than those in India. In addition to the surprising claim that Vimalamitra was trained in China, the Indian saint is said to have composed two texts in support of each of the two opposing sides involved in the Sino-Indian Bsam yas debate allegedly hosted and adjudicated by the Tibetan emperor Khri Srong lde brtsan in the eighth century. At first glance, the The Meaning of Non-Conceptual Meditation According to the System of the Sudden Approach (Cig car ’jug pa rnam par mi rtog pa’i bsgom don, hereafter Sudden Approach) appears to outline the efficacy of the Chinese sudden path to liberation, and the The Meaning of the Gradual Approach to Meditation (Rim gyis ’jug pa’i bsgom don, hereafter Gradual Approach) The Sudden and Gradual Sū tric Approaches 407 sets forth an argument for the supremacy of the Indian gradualist approach to Buddhist training. Despite the purported Indian victory over the Chinese at Bsam yas, these texts seemingly present both approaches as being equally valid. A number of scholars have written about Vimalamitra’s association with China and his links to the Sudden Approach.1 Despite the numerous Tibetan spiritual biographies claiming that Vimalamitra was trained in India, never in China, previous studies have neither adequately accounted for these claims nor considered, in-depth, the numerous additional issues of historicity concerning the saint’s most rudimentary biographical details.2 Furthermore, past studies have far too often been limited to a comparison with other sūtric texts, excluding a comparison with the doz- ens of tantric works also ascribed to Vimalamitra. By widening the scope of analysis to account for the contradictory biographical details among Vimalamitra’s early hagiographies, as well as the numerous authorial issues surrounding the dozens of tantric texts attributed to him, this article sifts through a more robust body of evi- dence to re-examine previous conclusions regarding Vimalamitra’s links with China, as well as his role in composing, compiling, or dictating the Sudden Approach.

1 demiéville 1952: 41-42; Tucci 1958: 45–48; Satoru 1976: 8–10; Gómez 1981; Gómez, 1987: 96–98; Akahane 2004. 2 for example, Nyang ral nyi ma ’od zer’s (1124–1192) Copper Temple (Zangs gling ma) claims that Vimalamitra was trained in India, not China. It also claims Vimalamitra was the grandson of Aśoka and born by virginal conception when a “white man” poured ambrosia over his mother’s head during a dream. These details are repeated in Nyang ral’s Flower Nectar: The Essence of Honey (Chos ’byung me tog snying po sbrang rtsi’i bcud) and, later, in Klong chen pa’s Ray of Sun Clarifying the Teachings: The History of the Precious Treasures Collection (Chos ’byung rin po che’i gter mdzod bstan pa gsal bar byed pa’i nyi’od). In contrast, the Great History claims that Vimalamitra was trained in China and born to two parents. Some sources claim that Vimalamitra arrived during Khri Srong lde brtsan’s reign, while others claim that he arrived during the reign of Khri Gtsug lde brtsan (ca. 806–838). The confusion surrounding Vimalamitra’s basic biographical details reached its zenith when ’Gos lo tsa ba (1392–1481) claimed there were two different Vimalamitras who travelled to Tibet around the same time. See ’Gos lo tsa ba’s Blue Annals 1976: 106-108, 197, 491, 497, 591–592. 408 joel gruber

1. The Monk at Bsam yas

1.1.

Despite the multiple discrepancies regarding Vimalamitra’s birthplace, early training, and visit to China, Tibetan historians frequently claim the Indian saint arrived in Tibet during the reign of Khri Srong lde brtsan. Because traditional Tibetan histories explain that the Bsam yas debate took place toward the end of Khri Srong lde brtsan’s rule, one would expect a prominent Indian saint such as Vimalamitra to be linked to the famous dispute at Bsam yas monastery. But one might not assume he would be linked to China. According to the Testament of Ba (Dba’ bzhed), an indi- vidual referred to as Gnyags Bi ma la – the Tibetan transliteration of the name “Vimalamitra” – sided with Hashang Mahāyāna at the Bsam yas debate.3 Interestingly, PT 4646, a Chinese manuscript from the Dun- huang caves, seemingly corroborates this claim, noting that a monk named ­Pimolo (Ch. P’i mo lo) – the Chinese transliteration for Vimalamitra – sided with the Chinese at the Bsam yas debate. But are both of these sources referring to the same Indian tāntrika who, according to the Great History, travelled to China to study with Śrī Siṃha?

1.2.

In his seminal study of Kamalaśīla’s Bhāvanākrama, Guissepi Tucci argues that the Pimolo referenced in Chinese accounts is the same person as the Bi ma la mentioned in the Testament of Ba.4 The pioneering Tibe- tologist, Paul Demiéville (1952: 41-42) agrees that the Bi ma la of the Testament of Ba and the Pimolo referenced in the Chinese manuscript PT 4646 are likely the same person, but argues that this does not mean this person was the Indian Vimalamitra featured in the Great History. Demiéville believes the Indian scholar who travelled to Tibet at the request of Khri Srong lde brtsan would not have written the Sudden Approach because an Indian scholar would have considered the non-Indic

3 See Wangdu and Diemberger 2000: 76. 4 To read Tucci’s argument within the context of his larger work, see Tucci 1958: 115. The Sudden and Gradual Sū tric Approaches 409

Vajrasamādhisūtra (Rdo rje’i ting nge ’dzin gyi mdo) quoted twice in the Sudden Approach to be an apocryphal work.5 In response, Luis Gómez has accused Demiéville of imposing a twentieth-century scholarly set of criteria for determining which Bud- dhist texts are apocryphal upon an eighth-century Indian scholar, who in all likelihood employed a different set of criteria to make such a judgment. Gómez’s argument is supported by the fact that Sgam po pa Bsod nams rin chen, (1079–1153), a twelfth-century Tibetan scholar, cited the Vajrasamādhisūtra as scriptural support to establish the pedi- gree of a more sudden approach to the path. But the question remains: Did Vimalamitra compose, compile, or dictate the Sudden Approach?

2. The Sudden, the Gradual

2.1.

The oldest compilation of imperial-era texts translated into Tibetan is known as the Denkarma Catalogue (Dkar chag ldan dkar ma), chiefly because it was compiled at the Tibetan fortress of Ldan dkar (Stong thang ldan dkar). Though the precise date this catalogue was compiled has been a matter of scholarly contention, Herrmann-Pfandt (2008: xix– xx) has recently argued that Giuseppe Tucci’s (1958: 47–48) initial estimate, c. 812, is likely accurate. A second imperial catalogue known as the Pangtangma Catalogue (Dkar chag ’phang thang ka ma) was composed not long after. Similar to the Denkarma Catalogue, it is named after the region where it was compiled, an area known as ’Phang thang in south-central Tibet. As Halkias (2004: 49) has noted, these catalogues should be considered important historical records of the assimilation of Buddhism in Tibet during the seventh through ninth centuries. The imperial catalogues each list Vimalamitra as the translator of a single text, the Heart Sūtra (’Phags pa shes rab snying po). More sur- prisingly, he is only listed as the author for two additional texts, the Extensive Commentary on the Perfection of Wisdom in Seven Hundred

5 for more information on the Vajrasamādhisūtra, see Jackson 1994: 22–24. 410 joel gruber

Stanzas (Shes rab kyi pha rol tu phyin pa bdun brgya pa rgya cher bshad pa) and the Extensive Commentary on the Heart Sūtra (Shes rab kyi pha rol tu phyin pa’i snying po’i rgya cher bshad pa). Neither the Sudden Approach nor the Gradual Approach are listed in these cata- logues. Nor is either text quoted in Gnubs chen Sangs rgyas ye shes’s late ninth-early tenth-century Lamp for the Eye of Meditation (Bsam gtan mig sgron). As historical documents, there is a stark contrast between the number of texts attributed to Vimalamitra in these imperial catalogues and the two hundred-plus texts that have since listed Vimalamitra’s name in their colophons. The fact that the Sudden Approach and Gradual Approach have not been listed in the imperial catalogues is surprising because the imperial government’s censorship of texts was largely related to tantric works. As sūtra-based works, imperial strictures would not have pre- vented their inclusion. That neither the Sudden Approach nor the Grad- ual Approach is quoted by Gnubs chen Sang rgyas ye shes is even more surprising, particularly because Gnubs chen’s Lamp for the Eye of ­Meditation contains over one hundred folio sides of content largely structured around quotations from well-known sudden and gradual texts of late ninth/early tenth century. Because Gnubs chen’s work mentions Vimalamitra as one of the principle Rdzogs chen masters,6 one would expect him to include quotations from important works related to Vima- lamitra by this author on topics related to the sudden and gradual paths. In addition, neither work has been included in Bcom ldan rig ral’s (1227–1305) thirteenth-century catalogue. As far as I am aware, there is not a single Indian, Chinese, or Tibetan author who quoted, cited, or otherwise referenced either the Sudden Approach or the Gradual Approach before the fourteenth-century. It was not until Bu ston Rin chen grub (1290–1364) catalogue of Buddhist commentaries (Bstan ’gyur) that the Sudden Approach and Gradual Approach were listed as Vimalamitra-authored texts.

6 for the line of Rdzogs chen teachings Vimalamitra is credited with teaching, as well as a brief summary of Gnubs chen, see Higgins 2013: 35–37 and 40–43. The Sudden and Gradual Sū tric Approaches 411

2.2.

The Sudden Approach and Gradual Approach are largely composite works, which further compounds the issues of authorship surrounding the texts. In past studies, Harada Satoru (1976: 8–10) and Faber (1989) have argued that Vimalamitra neither wrote nor compiled either text. Akahane (2004) has argued that parts of the Gradual Approach were likely written by Vimalamitra, whereas no portion of the Sudden Approach can be reli- ably traced to the Indian saint. Luis Gómez (1981) has written exactly the opposite, hypothesizing that parts of the Sudden Approach are the work of Vimalamitra, whereas the Gradual Approach was falsely attrib- uted to Vimalamitra at a later date. No scholar has claimed that Vima- lamitra composed both texts:

Scholars Neither Gradual Sudden Both

Faber/Satoru Vimalamitra Akahane Vimalamitra Gómez Vimalamitra No Scholar Vimalamitra

As Akahane (2004) has demonstrated, the first two-thirds of the Gradual Approach is largely an aggregate made up of passages from Kamalaśīla’s first, second, and third Bhāvanākrama, and the final one-third of the text has been taken from Śāntideva’s Śikṣāsamuccaya. As Gómez (1981), Satoru (1976), and Faber (1989) have demonstrated, the bulk of the Sud- den Approach is also an aggregate made of passages from the second and third Bhāvanākramas, but in contradistinction to the Gradual Approach, the Sudden Approach shares similar passages with a Chan text from Dun- huang, Pelliot 116 V–VII. In a comparison of the Sudden Approach and this Chan text, nineteen of the same sūtra passages are quoted in support of sudden enlightenment views. 412 joel gruber

2.3.

Building on the work of Satoru (1976), Gómez (1981) believes the two texts were strategically constructed to soften perceived differences between sudden and gradual approaches that many Tibetans regarded as being mutually incompatible. The extensive passages from the Bhāvanākrama and Śāntideva’s Śikṣāsamuccaya that form the bulk of the Gradual Approach do not necessarily rule out the possibility that a sud- den approach to the path could also be considered valid. The Gradual Approach does not explicitly claim to be either inferior or superior to the sudden views. The opening statements of the Gradual Approach and the Bhāvanākrama also begin with “Those who desire to quickly attain omniscience…” but invoke the importance of cultivating and stress the significance of causal processes such as diligently listening, contemplating, and meditating.7 On the other hand, by inserting select passages from Kamalaśīla’s Bhāvanākrama, the Sudden Approach appears to present a path more consistent with a gradual approach. Following the homage and the author’s statement of purpose, the Sudden Approach begins with lan- guage typically associated with a sudden approach to the path toward enlightenment by stating, “Those who desire to quickly attain omnisci- ence should cultivate non-conceptual samādhi.”8 The Sudden Approach passage does not immediately move into a discussion of the gradual, but instead is immediately followed by more descriptions elucidating the cen- trality of non-conceptual samādhi, supported by quotes from the Laṅkā- vatārasūtra and the Vimalakīrtinirdeśasūtra. The overtly sudden-leaning

7 The Gradual Approach states: Thams cad mkhyen pa nyid myur du thob par ’dod pa des zhe gnas dang lhag mthong bsgom pa dang byang chub tu sems bskyed par bad par bya’o. Vimalamitra, Gradual Approach (Rim gyis ’jug pa’i sgom don) in Bstan ’gyur (Sde dge), vol. 110: 680–681. The Bhāvanākrama states: Thams cad mkhyen pa nyid shin tu myur du thob par ’dod pa rtogs pa dang ldan pas de thob par byed pa’i rgyu rnams dang rkyen rnams la mngon par brtson par bya’o. See the opening lines of Kamalaśīla’s Bhāvanākrama (Bsgom pa’i rim pa) in Bstan ’gyur (Sde dge), vol. 110: 1–2. 8 The Sudden Approach states: Thams cad mkhyen pa nyid myur du thob par ’dod pa des rnam par mi rtog pa’i ting nge ’dzin bsgom par bya’o. Vimalamitra, Sudden Approach (Cig car ’jug pa rnam par mi rtog pa’i bsgom don) in Bstan ’gyur (Sde dge), vol. 110: 12–13. The Sudden and Gradual Sū tric Approaches 413 passages are interrupted by a lengthy insertion from the Bhāvanākrama, which rather abruptly explains the necessity of practicing a gradual path. These passages include exhortations to contemplate negative acts, ­perform good deeds, confess sins, rejoice in , and place the mind on an object of meditation. Despite this unexplained and dissatisfying segue, neither the sudden-leaning nor the gradual-leaning passages in the open- ing section of the Sudden Approach are explicitly contradictory. If one assumes the text is advocating for a more sudden approach for advanced practitioners and a more gradual approach for beginning meditators, as the text implies, the primary fault is one of organization. Moreover, the Sudden Approach does not appear to be arguing for a ‘Chinese’ doc- trine, particularly because the extensive sūtra quotes peppered throughout the remainder of the Sudden Approach provide scriptural support that demonstrate the sudden views typically associated with China have roots in Indic sūtras, which were regarded in Tibet as authentic “words of the Buddha.”

2.4.

Though the available evidence strongly suggests that neither work was composed or compiled by Vimalamitra, in order to be sure it is best to turn to an analysis of the two works listed in the earliest imperial textual catalogues, the only two works we can be near-certain were composed by Vimalamitra, the Extensive Commentary on the Perfection of Wisdom in Seven Hundred Stanzas and the Extensive Commentary on the Heart Sūtra.

3. The Prajñāpāramitā Commentaries

3.1.

Vimalamitra’s Extensive Commentary on the Heart Sūtra and Extensive Commentary on the Perfection of Wisdom in Seven Hundred Stanzas are both meticulously detailed word-by-word explanations (tshig ’grel) of two of the more concise Perfection of Wisdom texts in Mahāyāna litera- ture. The root texts Vimalamitra composed commentaries on, the Heart 414 joel gruber

Sūtra (Shes rab kyi pha rol tu phyin pa’i snying po) and the Perfection of Wisdom in Seven Hundred Stanzas (Shes rab kyi pha rol tu phyin pa bdun brgya pa; hereafter Seven Hundred Stanzas) were both influential in the development of Chinese Chan literature.9 Each sūtra focuses on the inexpressible nature of reality from the vantage point of the most advanced bodhisattva practitioners, negating reified, dualistic conceptions of reality, including those outlining Buddhist views such as the . For example, the Heart Sūtra states that there is (1) no truth of suffering, (2) no cause of suffering, (3) no cessation of suffering, and (4) no cause of the cessation of suffering. Similarly, the Seven Hun- dred Stanzas claims that the object to be observed in meditation, the embodiment of enlightenment in the form of the Tathāgata, transcends simplistic notions based on rudimentary dualistic concepts, even those employed in Buddhist teachings. Because the Heart Sūtra and Seven Hundred Stanzas focus on advanced-level bodhisattva practices, which tend to emphasize the more immediate, sudden nature of non-conceptual realization, both were com- monly cited and/or referenced by early Chan scholars arguing for the supremacy of their approach to the path. For example, Dayi Daoxin (580–651), the fourth Chan patriarch, purportedly wrote a commentary on the Heart Sūtra and taught meditative practices described in Seven

9 Jan Nattier has argued that the Heart Sūtra was composed/compiled in China and disseminated throughout India by the famous Chinese pilgrim, . Nattier writes: “During his stay at Nālandā University Xuanzang discovered that this important text was unknown to his Indian correligionists. There is a clear precedent for viewing Xuanzang not merely as the passive recipient of Indian Buddhist learning, but also as an active transmitter of Chinese Buddhist culture in foreign lands. We are not told, of course, that Xuanzang translated the Heart Sūtra into Sanskrit, and indeed we should not expect this fact to be recorded even if Xuanzang and his biographers knew it to be the case. For in China the fundamental criterion for the authenticity of a Buddhist sūtra is its Indian ped- igree, and to state outright that Xuanzang had translated the Heart Sūtra from Chinese into Sanskrit would cast doubt upon its legitimacy, arousing suspicions that it might be a non-Indian text and hence (by Chinese Buddhist standards) apocryphal. One can well imagine that Xuanzang, convinced of the authenticity of the Heart Sūtra as a religious text and with first-hand experience of its supernatural protective power, would simply have concluded that the Indian original had been lost. Under the circumstances he may have done just what we would expect him to do: quietly re-translate the text back into Sanskrit.” (Nattier 1992: 161). The Sudden and Gradual Sū tric Approaches 415

Hundred Stanzas.10 In fact, Daoxin’s famed “one-practice” approach to viewing an image of the Buddha almost assuredly influenced the sud- den-leaning practices of Hashang Mahāyāna, the defeated contestant of the Bsam yas Debate, and, quite frankly, the most infamous Chinese Buddhist in Tibetan history. For these reasons (and others), the language employed in Chan texts is often similar to the rhetoric employed within these two seminal Perfection of Wisdom texts.

3.2.

According to Edward Conze (1974), the pioneering twentieth-century scholar of Prajñāpāramitā literature, “[Vimalamitra’s Extensive Commen- tary on the Heart Sūtra] is replete with unorthodox views that do not represent mainstream Buddhist thinking.” Conze (1974) also wrote that Vimalamitra’s commentary is “not too helpful for understanding the Heart Sūtra’s layered meanings …” because “Vimalamitra was a lay Tantric with often strange views … aligned with the losing party of the Samyé Debate, an individual who could not maintain himself in Tibet against the orthodoxy of Kamalaśīla.” As is evident from his comments, Conze did not hold the academic quality of Vimalamitra’s work in high esteem, also writing that the work is “labored, overelaborate, and unsystematic.” Perhaps Conze’s comments should be taken with a grain of salt, par- ticularly because he calls Vimalamitra’s work a “pamphlet supporting its author’s point of view in the struggles which took place in Tibet at the time” (1974). At nearly forty folio sides in length, Vimalamitra’s com- mentary is the opposite of a pamphlet. It is the lengthiest of the eight extant Indian commentaries on the Heart Sūtra.11 Though an argument

10 daoxin is said to have been Hongren, the fifthC han Patriarch’s predecessor. Accord- ing to John McRae (2003: 37–38), the oldest known records of his teachings did not appear until the second decade of the eighth century, when proponents of Chan published the writings of Hongren and Daoxin. 11 The Heart Sūtra has been the subject of more commentaries (eight) than any other sūtra. Among the In­dian works preserved in the various Tibetan canons, there are an additional two tantric sādhanās written for the text. The work seems to have been popular among Indians belonging to the Pāla Dynasty (8th–12th centuries). The eight Indians who wrote commentaries are Vimalamitra, Jñānamitra, Vajrapāṇi, Praśāstrasena, Kamalaśīla, Śrī Siṃha, Atiśa, Śrī Mahājana. 416 joel gruber could be made that parts of the text are “labored,” a cursory reading reveals that it is neither “unorthodox” nor “unsystematic.” Instead, Vima- lamitra’s commentary is carefully structured to progressively introduce the basics of Mahāyāna Buddhism, including reasoning, Yogācāra meditation, and mantric recitation in a manner that is easy to understand.12 Furthermore, the commentary is largely indicative of the type of ‘gradualism’ one might expect from an erudite Indian scholar, which makes Conze’s assessment particularly confusing, and, frankly, inaccurate. In fact, Donald Lopez has described Vimalamitra’s Extensive Commentary on the Heart Sūtra as “the work of a scholastic virtuoso” with “an extensive knowledge of Buddhist literature, as well as consid- erable acquaintance with a wide range of philosophical positions and categories” (1996: 9).

3.3.

When analyzing the Vimalamitra-authored texts listed in the imperial catalogues, the Extensive Commentary on the Heart Sūtra and Extensive Commentary on the Perfection of Wisdom in Seven Hundred Stanzas, it is evident that both are the work of an erudite Indian paṇḍita well-versed in a wide range of orthodox doctrine, including Madhyamaka, Yogācāra, Pramāṇa, and proto-tantric traditions. Each commentary has been trans- lated into Tibetan from a Sanskrit original, the doctrinal views and med- itative practices espoused in each are consistent with one another, and the choice of terms used to describe them are strikingly similar. Each quotes from the same sūtras and , and the method utilized for construct- ing the commentaries around sūtra verses is comparable:

12 The colophon to Vimalamitra’s Extensive Commentary to the Heart Sūtra claims that “Vimalamitra provided this extensive explanation of the Heart of the Perfection of Wisdom [at the request of] an assembly of monks at Tsangpé Chungné temple (Tshang pa’i ’byung gnas).” It continues: “The commentary was translated and revised by the Indian abbot Vimalamitra, and then redacted by prominent Tibetan redactors and translators, including the monks named Nam mkha’ and Ye shes snying po. If either one of the Tibetan monk-translators specifically mentioned by name, Nam mkha’ and Ye shes snying po, are Tsig tsa Nam mkha’i snying po, then one of the trans- lators of Vimalamitra’s commentary was a disciple of Hashang Mahāyāna and was sym- pathetic to the sudden approach to enlightenment. See Karmay 2007: 98. The Sudden and Gradual Sū tric Approaches 417

Shared Texts, Authors Quoted 700 Stanzas Heart Sūtra

Maitreya 3 X 2 X Nāgārjuna 2 X 2 X Abhisamayālaṃkāra 4 X 2 X Candrapradīpa 3 X 1 X Bhūmyavatāra 3 X 1 X Saṃdhinirmocanasūtra 3 X 2 X Lalitavistarasūtra 1 X 1 X Pramāṇavārttika 1 X 1 X Aṣṭasāhasrikāprajñāpāramitā 2 X 1 X Pañcaviṃśatisāhasrikāprajñāpāramitā 12 X 3 X Daśabhūmika 2 X 2 X Ratnakaraṇḍakasūtra 1 X 3 X Vairocanābhisaṃbodhisūtra 3 X 4 X Tathāgatācintyaguhya 1 X 1 X Ratnolkadhāraṇī 6 X 1 X Bodhisattvapiṭaka 4 X 3 X

For these reasons, we can state with some confidence that the same scholar composed each. Vimalamitra regards the gradual approach as important to beginning students, while maintaining that advanced practices should, as explained in the Heart Sūtra, be rooted in a view that transcends dualistic concepts. In addition, his commentaries reiterate the primary message of the Seven Hundred Stanzas, namely that advanced practitioners should engage in meditation practices focused on “non-observation” that is effortless, non-exertive, non-conceptual, and better resembles “non-viewing” than “viewing,” but ultimately transcends dualistic notions of subject and object. Though Vimalamitra favors a more ‘sudden’ approach for advanced students on the latter stages of the path, even when compared to Kamalaśīla, who is regarded by many Tibetans as a paragon of the gradualist approach, there is little within Vimalamita’s commentary demonstrating an alle- giance to a Chinese approach to the path. Instead, both commentaries merely demonstrate that, unlike Kamalaśīla, Vimalamitra focused on the actual content within the Heart Sūtra and the Seven Hundred Stanzas. 418 joel gruber

3.4.

If we return to the Sudden Approach and Gradual Approach, we can say that in terms of structure, content, and style, they have little in common with Vimalamitra’s Prajñāpāramitā commentaries. I suppose an argument could be made that the commentaries emphasize the validity of both a gradual and a sudden approach to the path, but these approaches are well thought out, consistent, and lack the organizational problems and appar- ent contradictions evident when the Sudden Approach is compared to the Gradual Approach. Once all the evidence is considered, it is likely that the Vimalamitra of the Prajñāpāramitā commentaries had nothing, or as close to nothing as possible, to do with the Sudden Approach and Grad- ual Approach texts. The question that remains is: why were these rather sloppily-constructed composites attributed to Vimalamitra, the patron saint of disputed tantric texts, a figure most frequently called upon to defend Rdzogs chen tantras from the harmful accusations made by their ‘evil’ Gsar ma oppressors?

4. The Spiritual Biographies

4.1.

During the twelfth century, Rnying ma authors composed spiritual biog- raphies of revered Indian saints purported to have founded their tantric lineages as a defense against accusations made by their rivals, the New Schools, or Gsar ma,13 who claimed that the Rnying ma sect’s most revered Rdzogs chen tantric texts lacked Indic pedigree. The most imme- diate problem for Rdzogs chen practitioners was simple: Tibetans had in fact composed the texts in question. The solution to this ‘simple’ problem was far more complicated. As part of a concerted effort to respond to these accusations, tantric texts that proponents of Gsar ma lineages previously claimed were apoc- ryphal were persistently linked with Indian tāntrikas known to have

13 The New Schools, known as the Gsar ma, included the Bka’ brgyud, Sa skya, and Bka’ gdams pa. These traditions are based on texts from the later translation period (phyi ’gyur), which began with the work of the great translator Rin chen bzang po, 958–1055. The Sudden and Gradual Sū tric Approaches 419 traveled to Tibet during the early dissemination of Buddhism, including Vimalamitra.14 Rnying ma authors also created spiritual biographies wherein the ‘biographers’ could utilize saintly life stories to address rival claims that the Rdzogs chen tantric texts in question lacked Sanskrit orig- inals, were unknown in India, and were composed centuries after the bio- graphical subjects departed Tibet and returned to India. In this way, the spiritual biographies of Vimalamitra functioned as narrative-based argu- ments constructed to address disputed points of contention regarding the authenticity of Rdzogs chen tantric lineages, which the Rnying ma held to be the pinnacle of Buddhist thought and practice. As a result, the oldest biographical accounts of Vimalamitra, the Indian tāntrika retrospectively deemed most responsible for composing, translating, and transmitting a plethora of Rdzogs chen texts, had little to do with the life and teachings of a historical figure. Instead, these spiritual biographies, located within twelfth-century texts such as the Great ­History15 and the Copper Temple should be read as narratives utilizing Vimalamitra’s name and status to establish the Indic pedigree of Rdzogs chen texts that neither the authors nor their ancestors had, in actuality, composed themselves.

4.2.

A majority of Vimalamitra’s earliest biographies, dating from the twelfth to fourteenth centuries, including both Deü Dharma Histories (Lde’u chos ’byung), Nyang ral’s Copper Temple, and Klong chen pa’s Dharma History (Klong chen chos ’byung), make no mention of Vimalamitra’s trip to China, as featured within the Great History. Whether it was the author(s)’ intent or not, the Great History offers proponents of the Snying thig tantras a potential way of explaining why there was no trace of the Rdzogs chen tantras in India: The only copies of the tantras, which orig- inated in India, were taken from India to China by Śrī Siṃha.

14 The Rnying ma claim their Rdzogs chen teachings first emerged when Vajrasattva dictated them to Dga’ rab rdo rje (d.u.). The transmission was then passed to Mañjuśrīmi- tra (d.u.), Śrī Siṃha (d.u.), and Jñānasūtra (ca. 8th c.), prior to being continued in Tibet by , Vimalamitra, and Vairocana during the eighth century. 15 The Great History is the oldest extant Rdzogs chen history. It documents the life and teachers of prominent figures in Rdzogs chen Snying thig. 420 joel gruber

4.3

Neither the fictive nature of Vimalamitra’s early biographies nor the authorial issues surrounding the Sudden Approach and Gradual Approach preclude the possibility that Vimalamitra also had some familiarity with, and perhaps even an affinity toward, Chinese Buddhist approaches to the path. Perhaps Vimalamitra’s affinity for an approach comparable to Chi- nese provided Tibetan authors with a reason to justify claims that he journeyed to China and wrote the Sudden Approach. To address this possibility, let us examine some of the more specific reasons that Rdzogs chen texts were attributed to imperial-era Indic saints such as Vimalamitra. As Samten Karmay explains: The infancy of rDzogs chen and the disappearance of the Cig car ba as a living tradition… seem to have misled certain segments of the Tibetan Bud- dhist orthodoxy, from the king of mNga’-ris, lHa Bla-ma Ye-shes-’od, to the Sa skya pa… to assume that rDzogs chen is a disguised form of Chinese Cig car ba doctrine…16 rDzogs chen has therefore been the focus of doctri- nal and philosophical dispute right from the beginning of the eleventh cen- tury A.D. The criticism of it seems to be centered around two points: authenticity of its source and validity of its doctrine as a genuine Buddhist teaching. The adepts of rDzogs chen therefore must have felt the need to defend their doctrine.17

Among contemporary scholars such as Karmay, it is well known that Rdzogs chen texts were attributed en masse to Vimalamitra to establish an Indic pedigree and disguise the fact that Tibetans composed them. Most scholars, however, have assumed that Vimalamitra translated or composed a majority of the non-Rdzogs chen related texts ascribed to him. In fact, many believe that it was Vimalamitra’s strong ties to eighth-/ ninth-century Mahāyoga tantric texts that led Tibetans to attribute Rdzogs chen tantras to the Indian saint. But how strong were these ties? Based on an extensive analysis of Vimalamitra-related texts, there are numerous reasons to question this assumption.

16 Karmay 2007: 89. 17 Karmay 2007: 124. The Sudden and Gradual Sū tric Approaches 421

To begin, over two-thirds of the sixty-nine Mahāyoga texts linked to Vimalamitra either contain authorial discrepancies or were clearly com- posed or translated after the ninth century. In addition, within the Den- karma and Pangtangma imperial catalogues, there are several Mahāyoga texts ascribed to Buddhaguhya, a lesser-known contemporary Indian tantric exegete, but not a single text has been attributed to Vimalamitra.18 Gnubs chen’s late ninth/early tenth-century text, Lamp for the Eye of Meditation, cites only one Vimalamitra-composed text, the rather gener- ically titled Vimala’s Expansive Commentary (Byi ma la’i klong ’grel).19 Of the remaining texts that can be dated to the late ninth/early-tenth century, there is only one work ascribed to Vimalamitra, a Mahāyoga text found in the Dunhuang caves. Dalton and van Schaik have found a near identical Khotanese text ascribed to a different tāntrika by the name of Baśhrāmajus, marking the oldest of the many authorial discrepancies sur- rounding the Mahāyoga texts of Vimalamitra.20 Even when coupled with the overwhelming number of authorial dis- crepancies surrounding the sūtric and tantric texts ascribed to Vimalam- itra, this does not prohibit the possibility that Vimalamitra composed or translated texts other than those listed in the imperial catalogues. But it does mean that non-Rdzogs chen-related texts were also falsely attributed to Vimalamitra long after he departed Tibet, and it does mean that a vast majority of the oldest extant references to the one hundred-plus Mahāyoga and Rdzogs chen texts ascribed to Vimalamitra postdate the twelfth cen- tury, the same century when scrutiny surrounding the Indic pedigree of Rdzogs chen intensified. It was this same scrutiny that likely prompted Rnying ma authors of the twelfth century to compose the first biograph- ical accounts of Vimalamitra, nearly four hundred years after he departed

18 The commentaries ascribed to Buddhaguhya in the Ldan dkar ma imperial cata- logue’s section on “Tantras: Secret ” (gsang sngags kyi rgyud) include the Con- densed Commentary to the Complete Enlightenment of Vairocana (’Phags pa rnam par snang mdzad de’i bsdus ’grel), Commentary to an Inquiry to the Radiant King to Purify Everything (’Phags pa nang song thams cad yongs su sbyong ba gzi brjid kyi rgyal po’i brtag pa de’i ’grel pa), and Commentary to the Progressive Divisions of the Meditative Concentration (Bsam gtan phyi ma’i rim par phye ba de’i ’grel pa). See Herrmann-Pfandt 2008: 176–180. 19 See Lamp for the Eye of Meditation, p. 4. 20 See Dalton and van Schaik 2006: 294–296. 422 joel gruber

Tibet. Upon closer examination, rather than providing strong evidence of Vimalamitra’s ties to China, the narrative regarding Vimalamitra’s jour- ney establishes, or attempts to establish, a stronger connection between the Snying thig tantras and India.

5. Conclusion

As previously mentioned, proponents of Rdzogs chen made numerous attempts to establish the Indic roots of their tantras and distance their practices from a sudden approach that had been labeled Chinese. Attempts at the latter were necessary because any approach to the path using the word cig car was liable to be accused by rival schools of being akin to, or based on, heretical Chinese interpretations of Hashang Mahāyāna’s position. As explained by Ronald Davidson, “the thirteenth-century neo- conservative attempt to align Gampopa’s position with that of Hashang Mahāyāna was based in part on collapsing the distinctions between Mahāmudrā and Chan while ignoring the [Indic] orthodox roots [of the sudden approach]” (2005: 289). In other words, one of the ways that rivals attempted to discredit Bka’ brgyud Mahāmudrā practices included pointing to Sgam po pa’s use of the phrase, cig car ’jug pa, to outline a sudden approach, which they then used as ‘evidence’ that the founding figure’s Mahāmudrā was akin to the teachings outlined in inauthentic Chinese . If we view Davidson’s quote alongside the quote from Samten Karmay, we are reminded that rival schools, including the Sa skya, had also accused Rdzogs chen of being a disguised form of Chinese cig car ba. With this in mind, it seems unlikely that Tibetan proponents of Rdzogs chen lineages would risk tainting the sterling pedigree of their Indian founding figure by attributing to him a text titled Sudden Approach. Yet, there are at least eight reasons to suspect that this is precisely what happened. First, we have evidence that a large number of Rdzogs chen and non- Rdzogs chen texts on a wide array of sūtric and tantric topics, ranging from Dhāraṇī, Mahāyoga, Anuyoga, Sems sde, Klong sde, Man ngag sde, and even a short text, Six Branches for Taking Refuge, were attrib- uted to Vimalamitra, but not composed by Vimalamitra. Second, there is The Sudden and Gradual Sū tric Approaches 423 no evidence that either the Sudden Approach or the Gradual Approach were attributed to Vimalamitra prior to an era of intense sectarian rivalry that led to dozens of texts being attributed to Vimalamitra centuries after he departed Tibet. Third, Vimalamitra’s journey to China presents a nar- rative-based argument that, regardless of authorial intent, establishes, or attempts to establish, the Indic pedigree of Rdzogs chen tantras, while also an explanation regarding why Indians have not heard of Rdzogs chen and there are no Rdzogs chen texts with Sanskrit originals. Fourth, the sūtra passages quoted in Sudden Approach, Pelliot 116, Lamp for the Eye of Meditation, and O rgyan gling pa’s fourteenth century Proclamation regarding the Ministers (Blon po bka’i thang yig) have been slightly altered in the Sudden Approach to ensure it is the only text that does not also quote from Chan masters/texts. Though the Sudden Approach cites the names of multiple Buddhist masters, including Nāgār- juna, Āryadeva, and Haribhadra (in addition to borrowing from Kamalaśīla), it is unique from the others in that those named are solely Indians. The key difference is that the quotations fromC han masters have been removed so that the Sudden Approach only provides quotations from sūtras and Indian scholars such as Nāgārjuna, Āryadeva, and Har- ibhadra.21 Fifth, when the Sudden Approach is read in tandem with the Gradual Approach, it becomes evident that the texts were designed to function as a duo that attempts to soften the perceived hard distinctions between the sudden and gradual approaches. Numerous Rnying ma authors of the eleventh through fourteenth centuries attempted to do the same.22 Sixth, Rnying ma tantric exegetes frequently quote several of the sūtras quoted in the Sudden Approach,23 and at least one quotation has

21 for a detailed explanation of which names and texts were included/not included in the Sudden Approach, see Faber 1985. 22 for a detailed explanation of the prominent Rnying ma authors who argued for the efficacy of the sudden approach, its compatibility with the gradual approach, and, at times, even claimed Hashang Mahāyāna’s interpretation was superior to the Indic gradual approach, see van Schaik 2004. 23 These texts include the Laṅkāvatārasūtra, Avataṃsakasūtra, Vimalakīrtinirdeśasūtra, Dhāraṇī of Entering Into Non-Conceptuality (Rnam par mi rtog par ’jug pa’i gzungs), Diamondsūtra, Adornment of the Light of Wisdom Sūtra (Ye shes snang ba’i rgyan gyi mdo), Sūtra of the Dense Array (Stug po bkod pa’i mdo), etc. 424 joel gruber appeared in a Rnying ma .24 Seventh, there is at least one additional tantric text, the Sudden Approach to Empowerment (Dbang cig car du ’jug pa), with the word cig car in the title also ascribed to Vimalamitra. Eighth, numerous Rdzogs chen scholars went to great lengths to demon- strate the compatibility of Rdzogs chen tantric teachings with Indian sūtric traditions. It may be that one way for proponents of the Rnying ma tradition to defend the Indic roots of their tantric texts included claiming that a renowned Indian scholar such as Vimalamitra composed two texts that offered Indic sūtra-based scriptural support for the validity of, as well as the compatibility of, sūtric and tantric, and sudden and gradual, approaches to the path.

Bibliography

Primary Sources

Bhāvanākrama Kamalaśīla, Bhāvanākrama (Bsgom pa’i rim pa). In Bstan ’gyur (Sde dge). Delhi: Delhi Karmapae Choedhey, Gyalwae Sungrab Partun Khang, 1982– 1985, vol. 110: 1–68. Blue Annals ’Gos Lo tsa ba, Deb ther sngon po. Trans. George N. Roerich. 1976. Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass. Extensive Commentary on the Heart Sūtra Vimalamitra, Shes rab kyi pha rol tu phyin pa’i snying po’i rgya cher bshad pa. In Bstan ’gyur (Sde dge). Delhi: Delhi Karmapae Choedhey, 1982– 1985, vol. 95: 536–562. Extensive Commentary on the Perfection of Wisdom in Seven Hundred Stanzas Vimalamitra, Shes rab kyi pha rol tu phyin pa bdun brgya pa’i rgya cher ’grel pa. In Bstan ’gyur (Sde dge). Delhi: Delhi Karmapae Choedhey, 1982– 1985, vol. 95: 14–179.

24 There is a quote within Vimalamitra’s Sudden Approach from the Prajñāpāramitā in One Hundred and Fifty Methods (’Phags pa tshul brgya lnga bcu pa): Thams cad nam mkha’i mtshan nyid de nam mkha’ la yang mtshan nyid sbyor bas na / kun mchog mnyam nyid rdzogs. The same quote is also within the Primal Supreme Glorious One’s Tantra (Dpal mchog dang po’i rgyud), and a variant is also found in the Guhyagarbhatantra. The Sudden and Gradual Sū tric Approaches 425

Gradual Approach Vimalamitra, Rim gyis ’jug pa’i sgom don. In Bstan ’gyur (Sde dge). Delhi: Delhi: Delhi Karmapae Choedhey, 1982–1985l, vol. 110: 680–715. Great History Rdzogs pa chen po snying thig gyi lo rgyus chen mo. Bka’ ma shin tu rgyas pa (Kaḥ thog). Chengdu: Kaḥ thog mkhan po ’Jam dbyangs, 1999, vol. 34: 505–660. Lamp for the Eye of Meditation Gnubs chen Sangs rgyas ye shes, Sgom gyi gnang gsal bar phye ba bsam gtan mig sgron. Reproduced from a manuscript made presumably from an Eastern Tibetan print by ’Khor gdon gter sprul ’Chi med rig ’dzin. Leh: Sman rtsis shes rig mdzod, vol. 74, 1974. Sudden Approach Vimalamitra, Cig car ’jug pa rnam par mi rtog pa’i bsgom don. In Bstan ’gyur (Sde dge). Delhi: Delhi Karmapae Choedhey, 1982–1985, vol. 110: 12–26.

Secondary Sources

Akahane, Ritsu. 2004. “Rim gyis ’jug pa’i bsgom don of Vimalamitra.” Japanese Association for Tibetan Studies 50: 49–65. Buswell, Robert E. 1989. The Formation of Ch’an Ideology in China and Korea: The ‘Vajrasamadhi-Sūtra,’a Buddhist Apocryphon. Princeton: Princeton University Press. —. 2007. Cultivating Original Enlightenment: Wonhyo's Exposition of the 'Vajrasamadhi-Sūtra. Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press, 2007. Conze, Edward. 1974. “Praśāstrasena’s Ārya-Prajñāpāramitā-Hṛdaya-Ṭīkā.” In L. Cousins, A. Kunst, and K. R. Norman, eds., Buddhist Studies in Honour of I. B. Horner. Dordrecht: D. Reidel Publishing: 51–52. Dalton, Jacob and Sam van Schaik. 2006. Tibetan Tantric Manuscripts from Dunhuang: A Descrptive Catalogue of the Stein Collection at the British Library. Leiden: Brill. Davidson, Ronald. 2005. Tibetan Renaissance: Tantric Buddhism in the of Tibetan Culture. Columbia: Columbia University Press. Demiéville, Paul. 1952. Le Concile de Lhasa. Paris: Presses Universitaires de France. Faber, Flemming. 1985. “Tibetan Dunhuang Treatise on Simultaneous Enlight- enment.” Acta Orientalia 46: 47–77. —. 1989. “Vimalamitra – One or Two?” Studies Central and East Asian Reli- gions: Journal of the Seminar for Buddhist Studies 2: 19–26. Gómez, Luis. 1981. “Vimalamitra y la Doctrina Subitista.” Estudios de Asia y África 16(2): 254–272. 426 joel gruber

—. 1987. “Purifying Gold: The Metaphor of Effort andI ntuition in Buddhist Thought and Practice.” In Peter Gregory, ed., Sudden and Gradual: Approaches to Enlightenment in Chinese Thought. Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press: 96–165. Halkias, Georgios. 2004. “ Registered: Imperial Archives from the Palace-Temple of ‘Phang-thang.” The Eastern Buddhist Vol. XXXVI, no. 1–2: 46–105 Herrmann-Pfandt, Adelheid. 2008. Die Lhan Kar ma: Ein früher Katalog der ins Tibetische übersetzten buddhistischen Texte. Wien: Österreichische Akade- mie Der Wissenschaften. Higgins, David. 2013. The Philosophical Foundations of Classical rDzogs chen in Tibet: Investigating the Distinction between Dualistic Mind (sems) and Primordial Knowing (ye shes). Wiener Studien zur Tibetologie und Bud- dhismuskunde, Heft 78. Wien: Arbeitskreis für Tibetische und Buddhis- tische Studien der Universität Wien. Jackson, David. 1994. Enlightenment by a Single Means. Tibetan Controversies on the “Self-Sufficient White Remedy” (dkar po chig thub). Österreichische Akademie der Wissenschaften,­ Philosophisch-historische Klasse, Sitzungs- berichte, Bd. 615. Beiträge zur Kultur- und Geistesgeschichte Asiens Nr. 12. Wien: Verlag der Österreichischen Akademie der Wissenschaften Karmay, Samten Gyaltsen. 2007. The Great Perfection (rDzogs chen): A philo- sophical and meditative teaching of Tibetan Buddhism. Leiden: E. J. Brill. Lopez, Donald. 1996. Elaborations on Emptiness: Uses of the Heart Sūtra. Princeton: Princeton University Press. McRae, John. 2003. Seeing Through . Berkeley: University of California Press. Nattier, Jan. 1992. “The Heart Sūtra: A Chinese Apocryphal Text?” Journal of the International Association of Buddhist Studies 15(2): 153–223. Satoru, Harada. 1976. “bSam-yas no shūron igo ni okeru ton-mon-pa no ronsho.” Nihon Chibetto Gakkai Gadkuhō 22: 8–10. Schaik, Sam van. 2004. Approaching the Great Perfection: Simultaneous and Gradual Methods of Practice in the Longchen Nyingtig. Boston: Wisdom Publications, 2004. Tucci, Giuseppe. 1958. Minor Buddhist Texts, Part II, Bhāvanākrāma. Serie Ori- entale Roma, 9.2. Rome: Istituto Italiano per il Medio ed Estremo Oriente. (Reprint Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass, 1986). Wangdu, Pasang and Hildergard Diemberger. 2000. dBa' bzhed: The Royal ­Narrative concerning the bringing of the Buddha's Doctrine to Tibet. Vienna: Verlag der Österreichi­ schen­ Akademie der Wissenschaften. The Sudden and Gradual Sū tric Approaches 427

Abstract

The Indian tāntrika Vimalamitra is said to have composed two texts that support the central arguments presented in the alleged eighth-century Bsam yas (Samyé) debate. The Cig car ’jug pa rnam par mi rtog pa’i bsgom don (Cig car ’jug pa) is believed to outline the efficacy of the Chinese sudden approach, and the Rim gyis ’jug pa’i bsgom don (Rim gyis ’jug pa) sets forth the Indian gradualist path to liberation. Despite the purported Indian victory over the Chinese at Samyé, some maintain that Vimalamitra’s texts present both approaches as being equally valid. Multiple scholars have worked with the Rim gyis ’jug pa and the Cig car ’jug pa, but previous studies have not considered the genealogy of early narra- tives describing Vimalamitra’s stay in Tibet. As a result, scholars have examined the authorial issues central to understanding these works without accounting for the gradual standardization of competing Vimalamitra biographies. The scope of past studies has also been limited to sūtric works, excluding the dozens of tantric texts ascribed to Vimalamitra that were previously unattributed or attributed to another author/translator. This article utilizes a more extensive body of data to determine whether the Rim gyis ’jug pa and the Cig car ’jug pa should be included among a list of numerous works that were attributed to Vimalamitra in order to establish the authenticity of ‘Indic’ views and practices that became central to the tradition.