A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
written by Choney Lama, Drakpa Shedrup (1675-1748)
translated by Geshe Michael Roach A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
Copyright ©2018 by Geshe Michael Roach. All rights reserved.
Sections may be reproduced with the author’s permission. Please contact: [email protected]
Volume 111 of the Diamond Cutter Classics Series
Diamond Cutter Press 6490 Arizona Route 179A Sedona, AZ 86351 USA
2 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
Table of Contents
Introduction ...... @
A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness ...... 11
Bowing down, and promising ...... 12
How did Arya Nagarjuna give his commentaries? ...... 15
Why call this book “Wisdom”? ...... 18
The Tibetan translator bows down ...... 20
Chapter 1: An Investigation of Conditions ...... 22
Praising the teacher, for dependence ...... 23
The eight impossibles ...... 26
Two self-natures that were never there ...... 31
What does each chapter teach? ...... 34
Nothing ever grows ...... 40
Choosing the right negation ...... 48
The logic behind the denial ...... 51
Can things grow from something else? ...... 54
Can things grow by themselves? ...... 56
3 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
Can things even be something else? ...... 61
What is a condition for something to grow? ...... 67
If it has results, is it a condition? ...... 73
Conditions for what? ...... 75
Denying that a causal condition has any qualities of its own ...... 77
Denying that an object condition has any qualities of its own ...... 80
Denying that a condition for what comes immediately after has any qualities of its own ...... 83
Denying that a dominant condition has any qualities of its own ...... 86
Concluding remarks on results that never grow ...... 88
Concluding remarks on causes with no nature ...... 92
Connecting the chapter to scripture ...... 96
The name of the chapter ...... 98
Chapter 2: An Investigation of Going & Coming ...... 100
Cancelling three parts to a path ...... 101
Cancelling stepping ...... 106
Can words have a meaning of their own? ...... 108
4 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
Can meanings have a word of their own? ...... 110
Can multiple words have single meanings? ...... 113
Does going make a goer? ...... 117
None of three “possibilities” ...... 119
Does going involve a goer? ...... 121
Do goers involve a going? ...... 124
Neither both goer & going ...... 125
Going is impossible ...... 127
Is there anywhere on a path to go on? ...... 130
Is there any path with parts? ...... 133
Can we stand still? ...... 135
Can we turn back? ...... 138
When staying is going ...... 140
Goer & going: one or separate? ...... 142
Could there not be any going before? ...... 146
Could there be any going before? ...... 149
Summary on three variations ...... 150
Is there anything about going we could ever find? ...... 153
Connections to the scriptures ...... 154
5 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
The title of the chapter ...... 155
Chapter 3: An Investigation of the Powers ...... 157
A structure for discussing how nothing is itself ...... 158
Are senses & their objects themselves? ...... 159
But the eye cannot see itself ...... 161
Why fire doesn’t work ...... 164
A summary on seeing ...... 167
Is the eye connected to seeing? ...... 169
Understanding seers with seeing ...... 171
Seers after seeing ...... 173
No seeing, nothing seen ...... 175
Applying it to the other senses ...... 178
A clarification of terms ...... 180
Scriptural sources ...... 180
The chapter’s name ...... 181
Chapter 4: An Investigation of the Parts to a Person ...... 182
Can causes be separate from results? ...... 183
Causes & results, without ...... 185
6 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
Neither there or not ...... 188
Neither similar nor not ...... 191
And the rest of the parts ...... 192
Using what’s proven, to prove ...... 194
Scriptural sources ...... 197
The chapter’s name ...... 197
Chapter 5: An Investigation of the Elements ...... 199
Which comes first: the definition, or the defined? ...... 200
With or without what defines it ...... 204
Nothing to define ...... 206
No definition, if nothing to define ...... 207
A summary on the impossibility of definition ...... 208
When what’s not there never was ...... 209
Do existing things with no function have a nature? ...... 212
Application to other elements ...... 214
Beyond existing, or not existing ...... 216
Scriptural sources ...... 217
The chapter’s name ...... 218
7 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
Chapter 6: An Investigation of Desire & Who Feels It ...... 219
Does the one who feels it come before desire? ...... 220
Does desire come before one who feels it? ...... 224
Are desire and the one who desires simultaneous? ...... 226
Alone together ...... 227
The impossible together of separate things ...... 231
Should distinct things be together? ...... 233
Not as an elephant who washes themselves ...... 234
The denial, in summary ...... 238
And the same with every other thing ...... 239
Scriptural sources ...... 240
The chapter’s name ...... 240
Chapter 7: An Investigation of Beginning, Staying, & Ending ...... @
Chapter 8: An Investigation of Agents & Actions ...... @
Chapter 9: An Investigation of Who Might Have Been There, Before ...... @
Chapter 10: An Investigation of Fire & Firewood ...... @
Chapter 11: An Investigation of a First Beginning, or a Final Ending, to Things ...... @
8 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
Chapter 12: An Investigation of Whether Pain was Created by Itself, or by Something Else ...... @
Chapter 13: An Investigation of Factors ...... @
Chapter 14: An Investigation of Contact between Things ...... @
Chapter 15: An Investigation of a Nature to Things ...... @
Chapter 16: An Investigation of Bondage, and Freedom from Bondage ...... @
Chapter 17: An Investigation of Karma & Consequences ...... @
Chapter 18: An Investigation of the Person & Things ...... @
Chapter 19: An Investigation of Time ...... @
Chapter 20: An Investigation of the Convergence of Causes & Conditions ...... @
Chapter 21: An Investigation of How Things Occur, and Then Pass Away ...... @
Chapter 22: An Investigation of Those Gone Thus ...... @
Chapter 23: An Investigation of Error ...... @
Chapter 24: An Investigation of the Higher Truths ...... @
Chapter 25: An Investigation of Nirvana ...... @
9 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
Chapter 26: An Investigation of the 12 Links of Suffering Existence ...... @
Chapter 27: An Investigation of Viewpoints ...... @
Appendices ...... 242
Wisdom: Arya Nagarjuna’s root text ...... 243
An Excerpt from The Sutra on the Source of the Jewels ...... 291
Bibliography of works originally written in Sanskrit ...... 300
Bibliography of works originally written in Chinese ...... 304
Bibliography of works originally written in Tibetan ...... 305
Bibliography of works originally written in English ...... 307
10 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness
[1] ,DBU MA RTZA BA SHES RAB KYI RNAM BSHAD RIGS PA'I RGYA MTSOR 'JUG PA‘I GRU GZINGS ZHES BYA BA BZHUGS SO,,
Herein lies A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness: An Explanation of “The Middle Way, The Root Text on Wisdom.”1
[2] [f. 1b] DBU MA RTZA BA SHES RAB KYI RNAM BSHAD RIG {%RIGS} PA'I RGYA MTSOR 'JUG PA'I GRU GZINGS ZHES BYA BA,
What you find here is a ship for entering that sea of reasoning which is an explanation of the “Middle Way, the Root Text on Wisdom.”2
1 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness: We will be including details of editions used in this translation within the bibliography found at the end. For this title, see bibliography entry %B1, ACIP digital text S00028. 2 A ship for entering the sea: A couple of things are going on here, in the title that Choney Lama has chosen for his work. He is first indicating that his own commentary upon Arya Nagarjuna’s most famous work is meant to help us cross the great sea of the more extensive commentary by the illustrious Je Tsongkapa (1357-1419); the latter treatise is about three times longer and much more difficult—and is itself entitled A Sea of Reasoning in Explanation of “Wisdom,” Root Verses upon the Middle Way (see bibliography entry %B2, ACIP digital text S05401). The fact that Choney Lama has chosen the word “entering” in his full title (Tib: ‘jug-pa) is an allusion to the famed explanation of Nagarjuna’s classic by Master Chandrakirti (c. 650AD), which is named Entering the Middle Way. “Middle Way” is itself a common nickname of Nagarjuna’s work, since it is the crowning jewel of the philosophical view of a middle way between accepting the world as it seems to be, or rejecting its reality altogether.
11 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
Bowing down, and promising
[3] BCOM LDAN 'DAS 'JAM DPAL GZHON NUR GYUR PA DANG RJE BTZUN BTZONG KHA PA CHEN PO DBYER MI PHYED PA'I ZHABS LA GUS PHYAG 'TSAL ZHING SKYABS SU MCHI'O,,
In deep respect, I bow down at the holy feet of both the Conqueror, Gentle Voice, in his youthful form; and to the Lord, the Revered One, Tsongkapa—indivisible one from the other. In you do I seek my protection.
[4] BRTZE BAS RJES SU BZUNG NAS ZAB DON RDZOGS PAR RTOGS PA'I BLO'I MCHOG SBYIN MDZAD DU GSOL LO,,
And I beg you, in your love, to take me after you; and grant me that highest of all states of mind: the one where I realize, in its entirety, the deepest of all things in the universe.
[5] ,TSOGS GNYIS STOBS BCU'I LUS RTZAL RAB RDZOGS SHING, ,GZUNGS SPOBS TING 'DZIN MI 'JIGS MCHE SDER 'BAR, ,SO SO YANG DAG RIG BZHI'I G-YU RAL CAN, ,SMRA BA'I SENG+GE THUB DBANG DE LA 'DUD,
I bow myself to those lions among all teachers; To the Lords of the Able Ones. The dance of your holy bodies Is complete in every way: The two collections, and all ten powers.
You show the fiery fangs and claws Of the courage of holy words, And fearless meditation; You shake your mane of midnight blue:
12 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
The four knowledges of purity.3
[6] ,RAB 'BYAMS RGYAL BA KUN GYI MDUN SA CHER, ,ZAB DON SGROGS LA 'GRAN ZLA MA MCHIS PAS, ,MKHYEN PA'I GTER CHEN SMRA BA'I DBANG PHYUG ZHES, ,YONGS SU GRAGS PA'I ZHABS LA PHYAG 'TSAL LO,
You stand mighty at the forefront Of a galaxy of all the Victors— Incomparable in the way You proclaim that deepest idea of all.
I bow at your holy feet, To the one that all proclaim The very god among all Teachers, Vast goldmine of knowledge.4
[7] ,RGYAL BA NYID GYIS {%KYIS} ZAB MO'I DON 'GREL BAR, ,LUNG BSTAN JI BZHIN SHING RTA'I SROL PHYE NAS, ,THUB BSTAN GSAL MDZAD KLU SGRUB LHA ZLA BA, ,RGYAL BA GNYIS PA YAB SRAS BCAS LA 'DUD,
I bow down to the second victorious Buddha To walk in this world; and to his spiritual son:
3 Lord of the Able Ones: The original Sanskrit for “Able Ones”—a reference to the Buddhas of the universe—is Muni, which can also refer to a saint who favors the practice of mauna, or spiritual silence. Here they are being compared to the lion; an ancient Indian poeticism for which is “the one with a mane of midnight blue,” or simply “the one with locks.” The “two collections” are the accumulations of wisdom and merit, which produce the mental and physical parts of an enlightened being, respectively. The ten powers and “four knowledges of purity” are elements of the 21 components of enlightened wisdom. 4 Very god among all Teachers: A reference to our own Buddha, Shakyamuni; but note that Choney Lama has snuck in here, twice, a piece of Je Tsongkapa’s ordination name—and a piece which he happens to share with the great commentator, Chandrakirti.
13 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
To the divine angel, to Nagarjuna—
Whom the Victor himself foretold Would invent the spiritual wheel, Commenting upon that deepest thought, Clarifying the teachings of the Able;
And I bow as well to the Moon.5
[8] ,RJE BTZUN BLA [f. 2a] MA'I GSUNG RAB RGYA MTSO NAS, ,LHUN PO MCHOG LTAR MNGON PAR 'PHAGS GYUR PA, ,t'IG {%t’IK} CHEN RIGS PA'I RGYA MTSO'I DGONGS ZAB GNAD, ,RNAM DPYOD DAD BAS {%PAS} MDOR BSDUS BRI BAR BYA,
In deepest faith, and with critical analysis, I will now make a summary presentation Of the most profound points of the true intent Of the “Great Commentary,” the “Sea of Reasoning”—
A work which towers high, like the ultimate Peak, Rising from that veritable sea of all holy words
5 I bow to the Moon: A reference to Master Chandrakirti, whose name literally means “well- known as the moon.” Arya Nagarjuna is counted, along with Arya Asanga (350AD) and sometimes Je Tsongkapa as well, as one of the very rare masters in the history of this planet who was able to present the traditional teachings of Lord Buddha in a completely new and yet still completely authentic way—thus earning the name of “The One Who Invented the (Spiritual) Wheel,” or more literally, “Who Invented the Wooden Horse,” or “Carriage.” The image is of one who helps the whole world forever find a better way to carry heavy loads, than to do so on our own backs. Such masters must have seen emptiness directly; must be bodhisattvas (beings who work for total enlightenment in order to be of benefit for all beings); and must be predicted by the Buddha himself; see for example the definition of such a master by Kedrup Tenpa Dargye (1493-1568) at f. 6a, Volume 1, of his Dialectic Analysis of the “Jewel of Realizations” (%B3, S00001).
14 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
Written by the Holy One, our Lord and Lama.6
How did Arya Nagarjuna give his commentaries?
[9] ` ,DE LA 'DIR BDAG CAG GI STON PA DE NYID KYIS YUM RGYAS 'BRING BSDUS PA GSUM SOGS GSUNG RAB DU MA NAS STONG NYID ZAB MO JI SKAD GSUNGS PA'I DON 'PHAGS PA KLU SGRUB KYIS LAGS {%LEGS} PAR GTAN LA PHAB PA BZHIN RJE NYID KYIS GSAL BAR MDZAD PA LTAR 'CHAD BAR BYA STE
Now our Teacher himself described this deepest thing of all—emptiness—in a great many of his high teachings, such as the more extensive, medium-length, and briefer presentations of the Mother. The meaning of these teachings was then organized, perfectly, by the realized one, Nagarjuna; and then our Lord himself offered us further clarifications of all of them. This then is what I shall undertake to explain here.7
[10] 'DI LA GNYIS, 'PHAGS PAS JI LTAR BGRAL BA DANG, SKABS KYI DON BSHAD PA'O,,
6 That ultimate Peak: A reference to Mt Meru, a mythical mountain said to be the center of our world, and rising some 80,000 yojana (about 120,000 miles) above the water line of the great oceans that cover the planet. See lines 190-203 of the geographical presentation in Chapter 3 of the Treasure House of Higher Knowledge by Master Vasubandhu (c. 350AD) (f. 8b, %S2, TD04089). The “Great Commentary” is a common nickname for Je Tsongkapa’s extensive explanation of Wisdom; he is of course the “Lord & Lama” mentioned here. The poetical sections up to here constitute the traditional obeisance to the lamas of the lineage, and pledge to compose the work, found at the beginning of almost any classical Buddhist commentary. 7 I shall undertake to explain: The “Mother” mentioned here refers to a body of teachings on the perfection of wisdom by Lord Buddha, of greatly differing lengths. The “Lord” here is, again, Je Tsongkapa.
15 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
We will proceed in two steps: an explanation of how the Arya8 gave his commentaries; and then an explication of each section of the text of Wisdom.
[11] DANG PO NI, SPYIR 'PHAGS PAS MDO SNGAGS KYI BSTAN BCOS DU MA MDZAD CING, KHYAD PAR DU ZAB DON 'GREL BA LA DBU MA RIGS PA'I TSOGS DRUG MDZAD DO,,
Here is the first of these. The Arya, in general, composed a great many classical commentaries upon both the open and the secret teachings. More particularly, he wrote a collection of six different “treatises on the reasoning of the middle way,” in explanation of that most profound of all truths.
[12] DES? {%DES} ZAB DON LUNG RIGS GNYIS KYI SGO NAS GTAN LA 'BEB PAR MDZAD DE, DE YANG LUNG GI SGO NAS GTZO BOR SGRUB PA LA MDO KUN LAS BTUS PA DANG, RIGS PA'I SGO NAS GTZO BOR SGRUB PA LA [f. 2b] DBU MA RTZO {%RTZA} BO {%BA} SHES RAB SOGS GSUNGS PA'I PHYIR,
In these works, he set forth the meaning of this truth utilizing both scriptural authority and logical reasoning. The text in which he primarily used scripture to establish emptiness was A Compendium of All the Sutras; whereas it was in “Wisdom, The Root Text on the Middle Way” and other such titles that he primarily used clear reasoning to establish this truth.
[13] PHYI MA GRUB STE, RTZA BA SHES RAB KYIS YUL RANG BZHIN MED PA'I STONG NYID RIGS PAS GTZO BOR SGRUB, ZHIB MO RNAM 'THAG GIS ZAB DON RTOGS PA'I YUL CAN GYI YE SHES DE THAR PA DANG THAMS CAD MKHYEN PA GNYIS KA THOB BYED KYI RTZA BAR BSTAN, STONG NYID BDUN CU BAS {%PAS} RANG BZHIN MED PA LA BYA BYED 'THAD TSUL SPYIR BSTAN NAS, RTZONG {%RTZOD} BZLOG GIS BYE BRAG TU DGAG SGRUB 'THAD TSUL BSTAN, RIG {%RIGS} PA
8 The Arya: The Sanskrit word arya refers to one of those rare persons who has seen ultimate reality directly. Master Nagarjuna’s teachings on this reality are considered so fundamental in this world that he is often referred to simply as “The Arya.”
16 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
DRUG CU PAS MTHA' GNYIS SPANGS PA'I LTA BA DE THAR PA THOB BYED KYI RTZA BAR BSTAN NAS, RIN CHEN PHRENG BAS LTA BA DE THAMS CAD MKHYEN PA THOB BYED KYI RTZA BA YANG YIN NO ZHES BSTAN PA'I PHYIR RO,,
The latter of these two statements is itself established by the following facts:
(1) His composition entitled Wisdom: The Root Text uses, primarily, clear reasoning to establish that none of the objects of our perception has any nature of its own;
(2) His Smashing Wrong Ideas to Dust demonstrates that wisdom—the subject state of mind in which we realize this profound truth—is the very foundation which allows us to attain both freedom and the state of omniscience;9
(3) Seventy Verses on Emptiness presents, in a general way, how the normal working of things is still completely reasonable, even with things that have no nature of their own;
(4) Putting an End to All Argument demonstrates that—more particularly—how denying certain ideas and establishing other ideas still works very reasonably;
(5) Sixty Verses on Reasoning shows that the viewpoint in which we reject two different extremes is the foundation for achieving freedom;10 and
(6) The String of Precious Jewels shows that this same viewpoint is, as well, the foundation for achieving the omniscience of enlightenment.
[14] DE RNAMS LAS RTZA SHE NI LUS LTA BU DANG, GZHAN LNGA NI DE LAS 'PHROS PA'I YAN LAG LTA BU'I BSTAN BCOS SO,,
9 Freedom and the state of omniscience: A traditional Buddhist dichotomy; the former refers to nirvana, or the permanent ending of all negative emotions; whereas the latter refers to going further, into total enlightenment. 10 The two extremes: That is—primarily—the two ideas that everything and everyone around us exist just as they seem to; and that if they do not, then they cannot exist all.
17 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
Of these six, Wisdom is like the main body; while the other five are all commentaries which expand upon it, and so are like the limbs of the body.
[15] ZAB DON LA THOS BSAM BYAS PA'I PHAN YON NI RDOR GCOD SOGS LAS GSUNGS PA MDO KUN LAS BTUS SU DRANGS PA LTAR RJE'I GSUNG LAS KYANG 'BYUNG STE GO SLA'O,,
The benefits of studying and contemplating that most profound truth are described in the Diamond Cutter Sutra, as we see it cited in A Compendium of All the Sutras, and referenced as well in the works of Lord Tsongkapa. These benefits are easily understood.11
Why call this book “Wisdom”?
[16] ` ,GNYIS PA LA GSUM, MTSAN GYI DON, GZHUNG GI DON, MJUG GI DON NO,,
Here we begin our explication of each section of the text of Wisdom. This will be done in three broad sections: a discussion of the name of the text; a commentary to the main body of the work; and then an explanation of how the work is completed.
[17] (title) Prajñā Mūlamadhyāmaka Kārikā12
11 Benefits described in the “Diamond Cutter”: See ff. 205a-205b of the Compendium (%S8, TD03934); the citation of course carries extra weight since this work was itself composed by Arya Nagarjuna. We see the same reference made by Je Tsongkapa in, for example, his famed Illumination of the True Thought (f. 78b, %B4, S05408). 12 Prajñā: We will be including the root text of Arya Nagarjuna’s original in bold both as it is treated in Choney Lama’s commentary, and altogether in the appendix. We will include the original Sanskrit (in both technical transcription and simplified pronunciation); Chinese translation of @$$$; and Tibetan translation. We have edited the Sanskrit to the best of our ability—but there are many questions and versions, and our
18 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
Prajna Mulamadhyamaka Karika.
[f. 1b] #, ,RGYA GAR SKAD DU, ,PRA DZNY'A N'A MA M'U LA MA DHY'A MA KA K'A RI K’A ,
In Sanskrit, the title of this work is: Prajna Nama Mulamadhyamaka Karika.
BOD SKAD DU, ,DBU MA RTZA BA'I TSIG LE'UR BYAS PA SHES RAB CES BYA BA,
In Tibetan, this is: Uma tsaway tsik-leur jepa Sherab chejawa.
In English, it is: Wisdom: The Root Text on the Middle Way, Set in Verse
[18] DANG PO NI, BSTAN BCOS 'DI'I MTSAN LA, RGYA GAR GYI SKAD DU, PRA DZNY'A N'A MA M'U LA M'ADHYAM {M’ADHYA MA} KA K'A RI K'A ZHES 'BYUNG ZHING,
Here is the first of these three sections. The title of this classical commentary, in Sanskrit, appears as Prajna Mula Madhyamaka Karika.
[19] work can probably be improved on by later generations with more resources. We have followed primarily J. W. De Jong, as revised by Christian Lindtner; as well as Ye Shaoyong and @ MacDonald’s more recent work (see bibliography entries %E1 & %E2). The Tibetan presented in situ by Choney Lama sometimes differs from the Tengyur edition; we will leave it as is, with corrections from the latter, or as evidently required. Given that the Tibetan of the Derge carving of the Tengyur is so well edited, we will favor the readings of this edition in both the Tibetan and the selection of the corresponding Sanskrit.
19 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
DE BOD SKAD DU BSGYUR NA, PRADZNY'A NI SHES RAB, M'ADHYAM {%MADHY’A MA} KA NI DBU MA, M'U LA NI RTZA BA, K'A RI KA NI TSIG LE'UR BYAS PA, N'A MA NI ZHES BYA BA'O,,
Here is how we translate the pieces of this title. Prajna means wisdom. Madhyamaka is middle way, and mula is root text. Karika means set in verse, while nama is known as. [And so, altogether, we have The Classical Commentary known as “Wisdom”: The Root Text on the Middle Way, Set in Verse.]
[20] DON YANG SHES RAB NI SHER PHYIN STON PA DANG, DBU MA NI RTAG CHAD GNYIS DANG BRAL BA'I DBU MA'I DON STON PA DANG,
When we say “wisdom” here, we’re talking about the perfection of wisdom. “Middle way” refers to a way in the middle, in the sense that we are free of the extremes where nothing can change, or else everything grinds to a stop.13
[21] RTZA BA NI DBU MA'I BSTAN BCOS GZHAN KUN GYI GZHI LTA BU [f. 3a] DANG, TSIG LE'UR BYAS PA'I DON TSIGS BCAD DU BYAS PA DANG, N'A MA NI ZHES BYA BA STE MING DE SKAD CES BYA'O,,
The words “root text” are to indicate that this work by the Arya is like the foundation for all other classical treatises upon the middle way. “Set in verse” conveys to readers that the work is in poetry; and “known as” is meant to indicate that the rest is a name for the text.
The Tibetan translator bows down
[22] [(translator’s prostration) ,'JAM DPAL GZHON NUR GYUR PA LA PHYAG 'TSAL LO,
13 Free of the extremes: Both extremes are a logical consequence which would obtain if things were coming from their own side.
20 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
I bow down to Gentle Voice, become young.14]
14 Translator’s prostration: This line is included in our root text as found in the Tengyur, but not in Choney Lama’s commentary; we have added it for the reader.
21 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
Chapter 1 An Investigation of Conditions
22 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
Chapter 1 An Investigation of Conditions
Praising the Teacher, for dependence
[23] GNYIS PA LA GSUM, STON PA LA RTEN 'BYUNG GSUNG BA'I SGO NAS BSTOD PA, RTEN 'BYUNG MTHA' BRGYAD DANG BRAL BAR 'GREL TSUL, STON PA'I BKA' DRIN DRAN PA'I PHYAG GO
This brings us to our second major section—a commentary to the main body of the work. This itself consists of three parts: a praise of the Teacher, for his enunciation of the principle of dependence; the way in which we interpret this dependence in terms of it being free of eight different extremes; and a prostration for the purpose of remaining mindful of the kindness of our Teacher.
[24] ,DANG PO LA GNYIS, SPYI'I DON DANG, YAN LAG GI DON NO,,
We will cover the first of these in two steps: a general explanation of the praise, followed by ancillary points.
[25] DANG PO LA, RTEN 'BYUNG MTHA' BRGYAD DANG BRAL BA NI 'DI'I BRJOD BYA, 'DI LA BRTEN NAS DON DE KHONG DU CHUD PA NI DGOS PA, SPROS PA THAMS CAD NYE BAR ZHI BA'I MYANG 'DAS MTHAR THUG NI NYID DGOS, CHOS GSUM PHYI MA SNGA MA LA 'BREL BA NI 'DI'I 'BREL BA'O,,
Here is the first. This opening praise contains four parts. First, the mention of the principle of dependence free of eight different extremes reflects the subject matter of our text. Second, the immediate goal is that we come to grasp this principle, by relying upon
23 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
the Arya’s work. Third, the ultimate goal is that we attain the ultimate form of nirvana, where we put to rest each and every fantasy we now possess, about how things exist. Fourth, there is a crucial interrelation here, where each succeeding step of the first three relies upon the step which precedes it.15
[26] DON LA DE LTAR YIN KYANG SKABS 'DIR MCHOD BRJOD KYIS DE LTAR YIN TSUL DNGOS SU STON PA NI MIN NO,,
This is the point of this offering of praise, but at the same time it’s not as if the wording itself at this juncture directly reveals this fact.
[27] THEG DMAN GYI MDO LAS KYANG STONG NYID MDOR BSDUS BSTAN MOD, THEG CHEN DU RIGS PA'I RNAM GRANGS DU MAS RGYAS PAR STON PAS KHYAD PAR YOD DE,
Now it is admittedly the case that—even in the sutras of the lower way—the principle of emptiness is presented, albeit in an abbreviated way. But this is vastly different from the approach here in the greater way, where we cover this subject utilizing a large quantity of different logical proofs.16
[28] MGON POS, ,DE PHYIR DE NI THEG CHEN LAS, ,KHYOD KYIS TSANG BAR BSTAN PA LAGS,
15 A praise in four parts: Here, Choney Lama is fitting the opening praise of Lord Buddha into the traditional opening of a classical Buddhist commentary, where the text is demonstrated to have four qualities—traditionally known as “the four of an immediate goal and the rest”—which make it worthy of our time, in this precious short life. 16 Vastly different in the greater way: The teachings of Buddhism are divided into two great approaches: that of the “greater way,” where the emphasis is upon the pursuit of full enlightenment in order to be of service to countless numbers of beings; and that of the “lower way,” where we are satisfied simply with our own, personal freedom from the suffering of normal existence.
24 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
[29] ,ZHES GSUNGS PAS SO,,
As our Protector himself has put it,
And so you taught these things In their entirety, Within the greater way.17
[30] RTEN 'BREL GYI DON NI, DE'I SKAD ? {%SKAD DOD} LA, PRA TI AI TI {%TYA} MA {%no MA} SA MUD {%MUT} PAD {P’A DA} ZHES YOD PA LA, RKYEN GYI DBANG GIS PRA TI {%T’I} TY'A {%TYA} SA MUD {%MUT} P'A DA ZHES PA STE PHRAD PA DANG BRTEN PA DANG BLTOS NAS 'BYUNG BA'I DON GSUM LA 'JUG CING,
Now what do we mean when we speak of the “principle of dependence”? The original Sanskrit here is pratitya samutpada. We use this term to refer to something that occurs by force of factors—which can refer to three different ideas: something which occurs because things make contact with each other; or which occurs because things are depending upon each other; or which occurs because things are relying on each other.
[31] BRTEN NAS 'BYUNG BA'I DON NI, ,BYED PO LAS LA BRTEN BYAS SHING, ,LAS KYANG BYED PA PO NYID LA,
17 Taught in their entirety: This is from a very brief work by the Arya entitled A Praise of That Which Transcends the World; see f. 69b, %S9, TD01120. The wording here is slightly different, and the entire context translates as: You stated that freedom cannot be For those who have yet to enter That state where things Have no qualities of their own. As such, you described The state of suchness In every teaching of the greater way.
25 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
,BRTEN NAS 'BYUNG PA MA GTOGS PAR, ,'GRUB PA'I RGYU NI MA MTHONG NGO,, ZHES 'BYUNG BA LTAR, $$$$make sure the las here is the correct one; check context What it means when we say that “something occurs because things depend upon each other” is described in the following lines:
An agent comes into being Dependent upon an action; And the action in turn occurs Through dependence upon the agent; We see no other cause than this That can ever make things occur.18
[32] CHOS THAMS CAD PHAN TSUN GCIG CIG SHOS LA BRTEN NAS [f. 3b] 'JOG DGOS BA'I {%PA’I} DON YIN GYI, RGYU RKYEN LAS 'BYUNG BA'I DON TZAM MIN NO,,
And so the point of the “principle of dependence” here is not just that things occur through causes and conditions; but rather that all objects in the universe can only be established through a process of mutual interdependence.
The eight impossibles
[33] GNYIS PA NI,
This brings us to our second step from above: ancillary points in the praise, expressed in the following lines of the root text.
[34] (I.1-2)
18 We see no other cause: This verse comes later in the root text—in Chapter 8, “An Investigation of Agents & Actions.”
26 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
Anirodham anutpādam anucchedam aśāśvatam, Anekārtham anānārtham anāgamam anirgamam, Yaḥ pratītyasamutpādaṃ prapañcopaśamaṁ śivam, Deśayāmāsa Saṁbuddhas taṁ vande vadatāṁ varam.
Anirodham anutpadam anuchedam ashashvatam, Anekartham ananartham anagamam anirgamam, Yah pratityasamutpadam prapanchopashaman shivam, Deshayamasa Sambuddhas tan vande vadatan varam.
,GANG GIS RTEN CING 'BREL BAR 'BYUNG, ,'GAG PA MED PA SKYE MED PA, ,CHAD PA MED PA RTAG MED PA, ,'ONG BA MED PA 'GRO MED PA, ,THA DAD DON MIN DON GCIG MIN, ,SPROS PA NYER ZHI ZHI BSTAN PA, ,RDZOGS PA'I SANGS RGYAS SMRA RNAMS KYI, ,DAM PA DE LA PHYAG 'TSAL LO,, ZHES PA'O,,
I bow down to that highest of teachers; To the fully Enlightened One, Who teaches us to reach that peace Where our fantasies about how things exist Are put to a final rest.
I bow to the one who taught us That things happen in dependence: Nothing ends, and nothing begins; Nothing stops, but nothing Ever lasts forever. Nothing comes, and nothing goes; No two things are different, Nor are any two the same.
[35]
27 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
DON NI, PHYAG 'TSAL LO ZHES DRANG NGO,,
As for the import of these first lines, we can begin from the words, “I bow…”19
[36] GANG LA NA SMON {%STON} PA GANG GIS RTEN CING 'BREL BAR 'BYUNG BA BSTAN PA'I THUB DBANG RDZOGS PA'I SANGS RGYAS DE LA'O,,
To whom does Nagarjuna bow? To the Teacher: to the Lord of the Able Ones—to the fully Enlightened One who taught us that things happen in dependence.
[37] JI LTAR NA RTEN 'BYUNG DE NI MNYAM GZHAG ZAG MED KYI YUL GYI RANG BZHIN LA LTOS NAS SKAD CIG MAR 'JIG PA'I 'GAG PA DANG, RANG GI NGO BO THOB PHYIR SKYE BA DANG SNGA MA RGYUN CHAD PA DANG MI 'JIG PA'I RTAG PA DANG TSUR 'ONG BA DANG PHAR 'GRO BA DANG DGOS {%DE GO SA? 5-214 carving has DGOS$$$check other carving} SOGS KYI DON SO SO BA'I THA DAD PA DANG DON SO SO BA MIN PA'I GCIG PA RNAMS NI MED DO ZHES DGAG TSIG MTHAR SBYAR RO,,
And how did he teach us this dependence? He stated that the fact of dependence—as an object of that immaculate state of meditation20—is none of the following, at least with regard to any nature this object could have of its own. Thus we are to add words of negation—“nothing”—to the each member of this list:
1) Something that could ever end, in the sense of blinking out of existence, moment by moment;
2) Something that could ever begin, in terms of taking on some identity of its own;
19 Begin from the words, “I bow”: Choney Lama will be weaving the words of Arya Nagarjuna’s root text into his commentary; this sometimes makes the Tibetan feel a bit stilted, and that will be reflected, in turn, with the English. We will italicize the weaving in our translation, and bold out the corresponding weaving in the Tibetan. 20 Immaculate state of meditation: Referring to the direct perception of emptiness.
28 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
3) Something that could ever stop, as the flow of how it has existed up to now is discontinued;
4) Something that could ever last forever—never be destroyed;
5) Something that could ever come, from there to here;
6) Something that could ever go, from here to there;
7) Two things that could ever be different from one another, in senses such as occupying some separate space; and
8) Two things that could ever be the same as each other, insofar as not being separate in those same senses.
[38] RTEN 'BYUNG GI CHOS NYID 'PHAGS PA'I YE SHES KYIS JI LTAR GZIGS PA'I GZIGS DOR {%NGOR} SKYE 'GAG LA SOGS PA'I SPROS PA THAMS CAD NYE BAR ZHI BA DANG,
The nature of all things, within their dependence, represents a point where—to the perceptions of a realized being,21 to their state of wisdom—all fantasies about how things exist are put to a final rest.
[39] DER SEMS DANG SEMS BYUNG GI RNAM RTOG GI RGYU BA MED BAS SKYE RGA SOGS KYIS NYE BAR 'TSE BA THAMS CAD DANG BRAL BA'I PHYIR ZHI BA'O,,
21 To the perceptions of a realized being: We are translating the Sanskrit word arya as realized being—meaning that they are a being who has perceived emptiness directly. Again, the description here is referring to the period during which this being is undergoing this direct perception.
29 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
We can also describe this as peace, since—because at this point both our main mind and our mental functions are free of any circulation of mistaken thoughts about things—we are freeing ourselves from the damage done to us by rebirth, aging, and the rest.22
[40] RTEN 'BYUNG GI DE NYID RDZOGS PA'I SANGS RGYAS NYID KYIS JI LTA BA BZHIN DU MNGON SUM DU GZIGS NAS GZHAN LA LEGS PAR BSTAN PAS SMRA BA RNAMS KYI DAM PA ZHES BYA'O,,
This true nature of dependence is something that only a fully Enlightened One can see, directly, in just the way it is. They then teach it to others perfectly—which makes them the highest of all teachers.
[41] 'DIR 'GAG SOGS BRGYAD GSUNGS PA NI RANG GZHAN GYI RTZOD PA'I GZHI'I [f. 4a] GTZO BO YIN PA LA DGONGS LA, DE YANG 'GAG SOGS BRGYAD NI 'PHAGS PA'I MNYAM GZHAG GI GZIGS NGOR MED KYANG THA SNYAD DU YOD DO,,
Now why are these particular eight—of ending and the rest—selected for mention in these first lines? The idea is that, first of all, these are the main points that we would tend to argue about with others. Secondly, we can say that—to the perceptions of a realized being who is inside the direct experience of emptiness—none of these things can be seen to exist; although, on a conventional level, they certainly do exist.
[42] 'GAG PA MED PA NI SKYE BA MED PA ZHES PA'I SNGON DU 'BYUNG BA RANG BZHIN GYIS GRUB NA SKYE 'GAG GO RIM MA NGES PAR 'GYUR BAR STON PA'I CHED DO,,
Now why does Arya Nagarjuna mention ending before beginning? He wants to make the point that—if these things were to exist through some nature of their own—then we could never say with certainty whether things would begin first and then end; or end first and then begin.
22 Rebirth, aging, and the rest: The list is traditionally fourfold, with the addition of illness and death.
30 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
Two self-natures that were never there
[43] GNYIS PA LA GNYIS, RAB BYED KYI GZHUNG NYAMS LEN GYI RIM PAR BSGRIG PA DANG, GZHUNG RNAMS SO SOR BSHAD PA'O,,
This brings us to the second part promised above: on the way in which we interpret this dependence in terms of it being free of eight different extremes. This will be treated in two steps of (1) a presentation of the different chapters arranged in an order in which they might actually be put into practice; and then (2) our explanation of the actual subject matter of each of these chapters.
[44] DANG PO LA, DMIGS PA GANG ZAG LA DMIGS NAS RNAM PA RANG GI MTSAN NYID KYIS GRUB BAR 'DZIN PA'I BLO NI GANG ZAG GI BDAG 'DZIN DANG,
Here is the first. Now when our mind takes, as its object, a person; and then holds it, as its aspect, to exist in and of itself; we call this “the tendency to believe that a person exists as a person.”
[45] DMIGS PA GANG ZAG MA YIN PA'I PHUNG SOGS KYI CHOS LA DMIGS NAS RNAM PA RANG GI MTSAN NYID KYIS GRUB PAR 'DZIN PA'I BLO NI CHOS KYI BDAG 'DZIN TE,
And when our mind takes, as its object, things that are not the person themselves—things like the five parts to a person; and then holds these things, as their aspect, to exist in and of themselves; then we call this “the tendency to believe that things exist as things.”
[46] BLO SNGON MAS BZUNG BA LTAR MED PA NI GANG ZAG GI BDAG MED YIN LA, PHYI MAS BZUNG BA LTAR MED PA NI CHOS KYI BDAG MED DO,,
31 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
And what we call the “lack of any self-nature to the person” is the simple fact that what the former state of mind thinks it sees cannot exist; while the “lack of any self-nature to things” is the fact that what the latter state of mind thinks it sees cannot exist, either.
[47] DES NA MED RGYU'I BDAG CIG GANG ZAG GI STENG DU BKAG PA GANG ZAG GI BDAG MED DANG, CHOS KYI STENG DU BKAG PA CHOS KYI BDAG MED YIN BAS {%PAS} DGAG GZHI SO SO YIN YANG DGAG BYA'I BDAG LA KHYAD PAR MED DO,,
So what’s happening here is that we’re considering a single kind of self-nature that could never exist. When we deny it with reference to a person, then we call it “the lack of any self-nature to the person”; and when we deny it with reference to things, then we call it “the lack of any self-nature to things.” And so although we deny this nature with regard to two different referents, it’s not that there’s any difference in the two self-natures we are denying.
[48] DE'I PHYIR BDAG MED GNYIS MA {%LA} PHRA RAGS KYI KHYAD PAR MED KYANG GANG ZAG GI STENG DU NGES SLA ZHING CHOS KYI STENG DU NGES DKA' BA'I KHYAD PAR NI YOD DO,,
As such, we can’t really say that one of these two lacks of any self-nature is more or less subtle than the other; nonetheless, there is a difference in the relative difficulty of perceiving the two. That is, the fact that nothing is itself is easier to recognize with respect to a person; and more difficult to recognize with respect to things in general.
[49] 'JIG LTA NI GANG ZAG GI BDAG 'DZIN GYI BYE BRAG STE, DE YANG RANG RGYUD KYI NGA LA DMIGS NAS NGA DANG NGA YI'O SNYAM DU RANG GI MTSAN NYID KYIS GRUB PAR 'DZIN PA ZHIG GO
Now what we call the “view of destruction” is a particular variant of the tendency to believe that a person is themselves. This state of mind focuses on the “me” that relates to my own continuum, and holds that it is either “me” or “mine”—but in a way where these exist in and of themselves.
32 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
[50] ,DES NA 'DIR [f. 4b] 'GOG RGYU LA YUL 'GOG PA DANG YUL CAN 'GOG PA GNYIS TE, DE LA BLO DE GNYIS KYIS YUL JI LTAR BZUNG BA'I DON LA RIGS PA'I GNOD PA BSTAN NAS YUL CAN GYI 'DZIN PA YANG 'GOG PA'O,,
As such, there are two divisions to what we need to deny here: we need to deny the object, and we need to deny the subject. In this regard, we can also deny how the subject state of mind holds to its object, when we demonstrate how what those two states of mind think they see can be thrown into question by clear reasoning.
[51] DE'I TSE YUL CAN DE DAG GIS JI LTAR BZUNG BA'I DON THA SNYAD DU YOD PA 'GOG KYANG YUL YUL CAN DE DAG THA SNYAD DU YOD PA MI 'GOG GI, THA SNYAD KYI DBANG GIS BZHAG TZAM MA YIN PAR YOD PA 'GOG STE YOD PA THAMS CAD LA 'DRA'O,,
At this point, we are disproving that what these subject states of mind think they see could exist, in any conventional sense. We are not though denying that—conventionally speaking—the subject and object could not exist at all. All we are doing is disproving that anything could ever exist, unless it were established as existing through the power of the words we use, and nothing more. This methodology remains the same, no matter which of the existing objects in the universe we have taken under consideration.
[52] SKYES SAM MA SKYES 'ONGS SAM MA 'ONGS ZHES SOGS DPYOD PA NI THA SNYAD DU KHAS LEN KYANG, DE TZAM GYIS MA TSIM BAR THA SNYAD BTAGS PA'I BTAGS DON DE JI 'DRA BA ZHIG TU GRUB PAR BTZAL BA NA RNYED PAR KHAS MI LEN TE
Let’s look at how we analyze whether any of these things ever begins, or never begins; how they come, or never come. We do accept that, in a conventional sense, such things do exist. But what we’re saying is that we do not accept that—if a person refused to be satisfied with this description of things, and instead insisted upon seeking out the thing that they have named with their names—they would ever find anything.
33 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
[53] SNGA MA NI THA SNYAD KYI DPYOD PA YIN LA, PHYI MA NI DON DAM LA DPYOD PA YIN PA'I PHYIR RO,,
The former process we would call an “investigation of the conventional nature of things”; and the latter an “investigation of the ultimate nature of things.”
[54] TSUL 'DI LA RIGS PAS DPYAD MI BZOD PA DANG RIGS PAS GNOD PA DANG RIGS SHES KYIS MA RNYED PA DANG, DES BKAG PA RNAMS SO SOR BYED {%PHYED} PA DGOS SHING,
When we’re going through these different processes, we need to learn to distinguish between: (1) deciding whether or not something will stand up under logical analysis; (2) whether or not something is drawn into question by logic; (3) whether or not something can be located by a state of mind acting in a logical mode; and (4) whether or not it is actually disproven by this same state of mind.
[55] YID BDAG GNYIS DANG BDAG MED GNYIS LA ZHUGS MA ZHUGS KYI KHYAD BAR {%PAR} YANG SHES PAR BYA'O,,
We also need to learn to identify when the mind is engaged in one of the two types of a supposed self-nature; and when it is engaged in one of the two types of a lack of any such self-nature.
What does each chapter teach?
[56] RAB BYED RNAMS KYIS JI LTAR BSTAN PA'I BSDUS DON NI,
34 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
Let’s move on to a summary of the topics presented in each of the chapters of The Arya’s masterpiece.23
[57] DE LA THOG MAR BDAG DANG BDAG GIR 'DZIN PA'I MA RIG BA'I {%PA’I} ZHEN YUL MED PAR GTAN LA DBAB DGOS PAS DE RAB BYED BCO BRGYAD PAS STON,
The 18th chapter, “An Investigation of the Person & Things,” could be considered before any of the other chapters, since our very first job is that we have to establish how what misunderstanding believes in—what the tendencies to believe in some self, or something of a self, believe in—could never even exist.
[58] GANG ZAG LA RANG BZHIN MED NA 'JIG RTEN PHA ROL NAS 'DIR 'ONG BA DANG 'DI NAS PHA ROL TU 'GRO BA DANG LAS DGE SDIG BYED PA MI [f. 5a] 'THAD SNYAM PA 'GOG PA LA 'GRO 'ONG PA RTAG {%’ONG BRTAG} PA DANG BYED PA PO BRTAG PA GNYIS,
Once they hear that the person possesses no nature of their own, someone might start to wonder how such a person could come into this life from some other life; or go into another life from this one. They might also wonder, then, about the workings of karma itself: good deeds and bad deeds. And so these topics are covered in Chapter 2—“An Investigation of Going & Coming”; and in Chapter 8—“An Investigation of Agents & Actions.”
[59] BYED PA PO RANG BZHIN MED PAR BSTAN PA LA LEN PA POR MI RUNG NGO SNYAM PA 'GOG BAR {%PAR} SNGA ROL NA GNAS PA BRTAG PA,,
Once they have listened to a presentation on how the agents of actions have no nature of their own, people might begin to think that there could never be anyone who took a rebirth. And so to prevent this idea, the 9th chapter is presented: “An Investigation of Who Might Have Been There, Before.”
23 Summary of the topics: In the list which follows, we will be supplying the full names of the chapters, and their numbers, to ease the reader’s task.
35 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
[60] NYE BAR LEN PA PO LA RANG BZHIN YOD PAR SGRUB PA'I DPE DGAG PA NI BCU PA DANG,
The 10th chapter then—“An Investigation of Fire & Firewood”—is devoted to denying a certain metaphor which people have employed, in an attempt to prove that the one who takes on the different parts of a person at rebirth could possess some nature of their own.
[61] DE'I RTAGS 'GOG PA LA BCU GCIG PA DANG BCU GNYIS PA,
Next we have Chapter 11, “An Investigation of a First Beginning, or a Final Ending, to Things,” and Chapter 12, “An Investigation of Whether Pain was Created by Itself, or by Something Else.” These are meant to disprove the reason given in the metaphor just mentioned.
[62] CHOS KYI BDAG 'GOG PA LA SKYE BA RANG BZHIN GYIS YOD PA 'GOG PA LA RAB BYED DANG PO,,
In seeking to disprove that things could be themselves, we need to show how nothing could begin through any nature of its own—thus, the first chapter: “An Investigation of Conditions.”
[63] LUNG LAS PHUNG SOGS LA RANG BZHIN YOD PAR GSUNGS SO SNYAM PA LA SKYE MCHED BRTAG PA SOGS GSUM,
Someone though might object, thinking to themselves: “But scripture itself describes how the parts to the person, and so on, do have a nature of their own.” To address this idea, we have three chapters, including Chapter 3: “An Examination of the Powers.”24
24 We have three chapters: The other two chapters here are Chapter 4, “An Investigation of the Parts to a Person”; and Chapter 5, “An Investigation of the Elements.”
36 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
[64] CHAGS SOGS DANG SKYE 'JIG GNAS GSUM DANG DE'I RGYU LAS DANG BYED PA PO YOD PAS DE DAG LA RANG BZHIN YOD DO SNYAM PA 'GOG BAR {%PAR} 'DOD CHAGS BRTAG PA SOGS GSUM,
Another thought might occur to some: “Given that we see emotions such as desire; and the three stages of beginning, ending, and staying—as well as the causes for these, karma and agents of action—can’t we say that they have some nature of their own?” Denying this idea is the task of three chapters beginning with Chapter 6, “An Investigation of Desire & Who Feels It”; along with Chapter 7, “An Investigation of Beginning, Staying, & Ending,” and Chapter 13, “An Investigation of Factors.”
[65] GANG ZAG DANG CHOS LA RANG BZHIN YOD PA'I SGRUB BYED DU CHOS RNAMS KYI 'PHRAD PA DANG SKYED PA'I RGYU RKYEN NYE BAR LEN PA DANG GCIG NAS GCIG TU 'KHOR BA YOD CES SMRA BA 'GOG PA LA PHRAD PA DANG RANG BZHIN DANG BCINGS THAR BRTAG PA GSUM,
Some might posit—as proof that both the person, and things, do possess a nature of their own—that things do make contact with each other; and that causes and conditions do lead to their corresponding results; and that beings do circle from one birth to another. To refute these attempted proofs, we have Chapter 14, “An Investigation of Contact between Things”; Chapter 15, “An Investigation of a Nature to Things”; and Chapter 16, “An Investigation of Bondage, and Freedom from Bondage.”
[66] 'KHOR BA LA RANG BZHIN YOD PA'I SGRUB BYED LAS 'BRAS KYI 'BREL BA'I RTEN YIN PA 'GOG PA LA LAS 'BRAS BRTAG PA,
Others assert that the cycle of pain does have its own nature; as proof of this, they cite the very foundation of the connection between karma and its consequences. To deny this position, we see Chapter 17: “An Investigation of Karma & Consequences.”
37 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
[67] DNGOS PO LA RANG BZHIN YOD PA'I SGRUB BYED DU DUS GSUM GDAGS BA'I {%PA’I} RGYU YIN PA'I PHYIR ZHES 'GOG PA LA DUS BRTAG PA,
Still others assert that working things do possess a nature of their own, since this is what allows us to apply the names to the three times; to dispel this belief, we have Chapter 19: “An Investigation of Time.”
[68] DUS LA RANG BZHIN YOD PAR SGRUB PA LA 'BRAS BU'I BYED RKYEN DANG 'BYUNG 'JIG GI RGYU YIN BA {%PA} 'GOG PA LA TSOGS PA DANG 'BYUNG 'JIG BRTAG PA GNYIS,
Some say that time must have a nature of its own, since it acts as the factor that produces results; and is further the cause for things to occur and to pass away. To refute this position we see Chapter 20, “An Investigation of the Convergence of Causes & Conditions”; as well as Chapter 21, “An Investigation of How Things Occur, & Then Pass Away.”
[69] [f. 5b] SRID RGYUN RANG BZHIN MED BAR BSTAN PA NA DE'I RGYUN DE BZHIN GSHEGS PA DANG NYON MONGS YOD PAS MI 'THAD DO SNYAM DU DOGS PA 'GOG PA LA DE BZHIN GSHEGS PA BRTAG PA DANG PHYIN CI LOG BRTAG PA GNYIS,
Others assert that—when we teach that the flow of being has no nature—we must be mistaken, for Those Gone Thus do possess such a flow; as do the negative emotions. To address this doubt, we see Chapter 22, “An Investigation of Those Gone Thus,” and Chapter 23, “An Investigation of Error.”
[70] RANG BZHIN GYIS STONG BA LA BDEN BZHI SOGS MI 'THAD SNYAM PA LA BDEN PA BRTAG PA,
38 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
Some may think that principles like the four truths25 could not apply, if things are empty of any nature of their own; to counter this idea we have Chapter 24: “An Investigation of the Higher Truths.”
[71] DE LA MYANG 'DAS MI 'THAD SNYAM PA 'GOG BAR {%PAR} MYANG 'DAS BRTAG PA,
The idea that, for the same reason, nirvana would not be possible is disproven in Chapter 25, “An Investigation of Nirvana.”
[72] RTEN 'BYUNG MTHONG NA DBU MA'I LAM MTHONG BAR GSUNGS PA'I DON STON PA LA RTEN 'BREL BRTAG PA,
The chapter where we analyze dependence itself—Chapter 26, “An Investigation of the 12 Links of Suffering Existence”—presents what the Buddha meant when he said that “Someone who sees dependence sees the middle way.”
[73] RTEN 'BYUNG GI DE NYID RTOGS NA LTA BA NGAN PA THAMS CAD LDOG PAR STON PA LA LTA BA BRTAG PA GSUNGS TE,
Chapter 27, finally, is devoted to “An Investigation of Viewpoints,”in order to indicate that—once we realize the true nature of dependence—then we are able to stop each and every mistaken viewpoint we might ever entertain.
[74] THAMS CAD KYANG RANG RGYUD LA THAR LAM BSKYED PA DANG BRTAN PA DANG 'PHEL BAR BYA BA'I CHED DU YIN GYI GZHAN DANG RTZOD PA TZAM GYI PHYIR MIN TE,
25 The four truths: The four famous facts of suffering; the cause of suffering; freedom from suffering; and the path to this freedom.
39 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
Now the point of all these different analyses is not simply to engage in dispute with others about their ideas; rather, the purpose of each and every one of these chapters is to first give birth to the path to freedom within our own heart; and then make this path more firm; and further to bring it to increase.
[75] DBU MA 'JUG PA LAS, ,BSTAN BCOS LAS DPYAD RTZOD LA CHAGS PA'I PHYIR, ,MA MDZAD RNAM GROL PHYIR NI DE NYID BSTAN, ,ZHES GSUNGS PA LTAR RO,,
As Entering the Middle Way puts it,
The classical commentary does not engage In analysis, or debate, out of any attachment To these methods in themselves; Rather, they are presented for the sole purpose Of helping us attain liberation.26
Nothing ever grows
[76] GNYIS PA LA GSUM, RTEN 'BYUNG RANG BZHIN GYIS STONG PAR BSTAN PA, DE RTOGS MA RTOGS LAS 'KHOR BAR LDOG 'JUG BYED TSUL, RTOGS NA LTA NGAN LDOG TSUL LO,,
This brings us to our second step from above—an explanation of the actual subject matter of each of these chapters. We proceed in three parts: a demonstration that dependence itself possesses no nature of its own; how the question of whether we escape or engage in the cycle of pain depends upon whether we realize this truth or not; and finally a description of how—if we do realize it—we can put a stop to every mistaken viewpoint.
26 The sole purpose of liberation: See f. 210a of Master Chandrakirti’s masterpiece (%S10, TD03861).
40 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
[77] DANG PO LA GNYIS, DNGOS DANG, RTZOD SPONG NGO,,
The first of these parts has two sections of its own: the actual demonstration; and then a refutation of argument concerning it.
[78] DANG PO LA GNYIS, BDAG MED GNYIS MDOR BSTAN PA DANG, RGYAS PAR BSHAD PA'O,,
The first of these sections, in turn, covers two points: an abbreviated presentation of the way in which things and people cannot be themselves; and then a more detailed treatment of this same point.
[79] DANG PO LA GNYIS, RGYU 'BRAS KYI BYA BYED LA BRTAGS NAS CHOS LA RANG BZHIN DGAG PA DANG, 'GRO 'ONG GI BYA BYED LA BRTAG NAS GANG ZAG LA RANG BZHIN DGAG PA'O,,
The abbreviated presentation proceeds in two steps: an examination of the workings of cause & effect, which leads to disproving that things could have any nature of their own; and then an examination of the workings of going & coming, which leads to disproving that the person could have any nature of their own.
[80] DANG PO LA GSUM, RAB BYED KYI GZHUNG BSHAD PA, NGES DON GYI LUNG DANG SBYAR BA, MTSAN BSTAN PA'O,,
We’ll cover the first of these, in turn, in three sections: an explanation of the text of this chapter; connecting the chapter to literal presentations of these topics in scripture; and then a presentation on the chapter’s name.
[81] DANG PO LA GNYIS, 'BRAS BU LA SKYE BA'I RANG BZHIN DGAG [f. 6a] PA DANG, SKYED BYED LA RKYEN KYI RANG BZHIN DGAG PA'O,,
41 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
The first of these sections comes in two parts of its own: denying that results could have any nature of growing; and then denying that what produces these results could have any nature of being a condition.
[82] DANG PO LA GNYIS, MTHA' BZHI'I SKYE BA DGAG PA DANG, GZHAN SKYE BKAG PA LA LUNG 'GAL SPANG BA'O,,
The first of these has two parts too: denying that things could grow in any of the four extreme ways; and then proving that the idea that things cannot grow from something other than themselves could never contradict, in any way, the teachings of the Buddha.
[83] DANG PO LA GNYIS, SKYE BA 'GOG PA'I DAM BCA' BA DANG, DE 'GOG PA'I RIGS PA'O,,
The first of these as well has two parts: the assertion where we deny that anything could grow; and then the logic behind this denial.
[84] DANG PO LA GNYIS, DNGOS DANG, 'PHROS DON NO, ,DANG PO NI,
Finally then the first of these comes in two parts: the actual assertion; and then additional points raised by this assertion. The first is expressed in the following lines of the root text:
[85] (I.3) Na svato nāpi parato na dvābhyāṃ nāpyahetutaḥ, Utpannā jātu vidyante bhāvāḥ kva cana ke cana.
Na svato napi parato na dvabhyan napyahetutah, Utpanna jatu vidyante bhavah kva chana ke chana.
42 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
,BDAG LAS MA YIN GZHAN LAS MIN, ,GNYIS LAS MA YIN RGYU MED MIN, ,DNGOS PO GANG DAG GANG NA YANG, ,SKYE BA NAM YANG YOD MA YIN, ,ZHES GSUNGS,
Nothing grows from itself; Nothing grows from something else; Nothing grows from both; And nothing grows without a cause. There is nothing at all that grows at all.
[86] DON NI, PHYI NANG GI DNGOS PO GANG DAG CHOS CAN, BDAG LAS YUL DANG DUS DANG GRUB BA'I {%PA’I} MTHA' GANG NA YANG SKYE BA NAM YANG YOD PA MA YIN TE, BDAG LAS SKYEN {%SKYE NA} SLAR YANG SKYE BA DON MED PA DANG SLAR YANG SKYE BA THUG BA {%PA} MED BA'I NYES PAR 'GYUR BA'I PHYIR RO,,
Here is the point that’s being made:27
Consider all the things there are—whether they exist within us, or outside of us.
There is nothing at all that grows at all from itself—regardless of the place, or the time, or the point of view we consider;
Because—if things were to grow from themselves—then there would be two problems: (1) it would be pointless for them to grow once more; and (2) their growing once again would be endless.
27 Here is the point: Choney Lama here breaks into the classical debate mode which has been followed for some 25 centuries; it is a favorite device of his, recalling his early career as one of the fiercest public debaters of his time. In instances we will supply the standard responses of his hypothetical opponent, as these would be assumed by an educated monastic reader.
43 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
[87] JI LTAR NA MYU GU CHOS CAN, SLAR RANG GI RGYU'I SKAD CIG GNYIS PAR SKYE BA DON MED PAR THAL, RANG GI RGYU'I DUS NA RANG GI BDAG NYID DU RDZOGS PAR GRUB ZIN PA'I PHYIR,
And how is that?
Let’s consider a sprout.
It must too be the case that it would be pointless for the sprout to grow again, in the second moment of its existence.
Why do you say that?
Because, according to you, it would already have come into complete existence even in the moment of its cause.
[88] MA KHYAB NA, DE CHOS CAN, KHYOD SLAR YANG SKYE BA THUG PA MED PAR THAL, RANG GI RGYU'I DUS NA RANG GI BDAG NYID THOB ZIN KYANG SLAR YANG SKYE BA DON YOD PA'I PHYIR,
Just because the sprout would already have come into complete existence even in the moment of its cause doesn’t necessarily mean that it would be pointless for the sprout to grow again, in the second moment of its existence.
Well then, let’s take this same sprout. Are you saying that it would continue to grow, again and again, endlessly?
Why do you say that?
Because it has already come out completely at the time of its cause, and yet—according to you—there is some point to its growing once again.
44 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
[89] DNGOS PO GANG DAG CHOS CAN, GZHAN LAS YUL DUS GRUB MTHA' GANG NA YANG SKYE BA NAM YANG YOD PA MA YIN TE, GZHAN LAS SKYEN {%SKYE NA} KUN LAS KUN SKYE BAR 'GYUR BA'I PHYIR,
And let’s take any of these working things, once more.
It is never the case that any of them could at all grow from something else—something other than itself—regardless of the place, or the time, or the point of view we consider;
Because if any of them were to grow from something else, then everything there is could grow from everything else there is.
[90] JI LTAR NA, SA BON CHOS CAN, MYU GU DANG 'BREL MED DON GZHAN DU THAL, MYU GU DANG LTOS MED KYI GZHAN YIN PA'I PHYIR,
And how is that?
Consider a seed.
It must be a thing which is totally other than, and disconnected from, its sprout.
Why do you say that?
Because it is something other than the sprout which in no way relies upon the sprout.
[91] 'DOD NA, KHYOD LAS [f. 6b] MYU GU SKYE BA LTAR RDO SOL SOGS THAMS CAD SKYE BAR THAL, MYU GU KHYOD DANG 'BREL MED DON GZHAN YIN YANG SKYE BA'I PHYIR
45 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
Well then, I agree: A seed is a thing which is totally other than, and disconnected from, its sprout.
If you do agree, then it must be the case that—in the same way that a sprout can grow from this seed—then things like stones or lumps of coal can also grow from it.
Why do you say that?
Because—even though the sprout is totally other than, and disconnected from, the seed—it can still grow from it.
[92] RTAGS KHAS BLANGS,
Well! I disagree with this reason!
But you’ve already accepted the reason!
[93] DE BZHIN DU DNGOS PO GANG DAG CHOS CAN, RANG GZHAN GNYIS LAS YUL DUS GRUB MTHA' GANG NA YANG SKYE BA NAM YANG YOD BA {%PA} MA YIN TE, BDAG LAS KYANG MI SKYE, GZHAN LAS MI SKYE BA'I PHYIR TE, RIGS PA BSTAN ZIN PA'I PHYIR,
Just so, let us consider any of those working things.
Neither are they something which could ever be a thing that grew, at all, from both themselves and from something else— regardless of the place, or the time, or the point of view we consider;
Because they neither grow from themselves, nor from something else; we have already showed you the relevant reasoning!
[94]
46 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
DNGOS PO GANG DAG CHOS CAN, RGYU MED LAS YUL DUS GRUB MTHA' GANG NA YANG SKYE BA NAM YANG YOD PA MA YIN TE, RGYU MED DU SKYE NA YUL DUS SO SOR NGES PA MI 'THAD CING, RGYU SGRUB PA RNAMS DON MED PAR 'GYUR BA'I PHYIR,
Consider, finally, any of those same working things.
Neither are they something that could grow without a cause at all; regardless of the place, or the time, or the point of view we consider;
For if these things could grow with no causes, then it would be incorrect to assert that certain things have to grow in certain places, or at certain times; moreover, it would be pointless then to try to provide them the proper causes for their growth.
[95] JI LTAR NA, MYU GU CHOS CAN, RGYU MED DU MI 'BYUNG STE, YUL DUS SO SOR DES {%NGES} PA'I SKYE BA MTHONG PA {%BA} DANG, 'BRAS BU'I DON DU RGYU RTZOL BAS SGRUB BA {%PA} YANG MTHONG ZHING DON YOD PA'I PHYIR,
And how is that?
Consider a sprout.
It cannot occur without any cause at all;
Because, first of all, we can see with our own eyes that certain things grow only in certain places, and at certain times. Secondly, we can see with our own eyes that when we labor to provide the causes for a certain result, then that result does come about—that there is a point served by all this effort.
47 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
Choosing the right negation
[96] GNYIS PA NI,
This brings us to the second part from above: additional points raised by the assertion that nothing ever grows.
[97] 'DIR DGAG PA GNYIS KYI KHYAD PAR SHES DGOS PAS DE'I TSUL NI RGYAS PAR GZHAN DU BSTAN ZIN PA LAS SHES PAR BYA LA, BSDU NA,
Now in general there exist two different types of negation; and at this point our reader needs to know the difference between the two. I have already presented the details of how this works in other writings, so I would advise you to refer to those. I will though here give you just a brief review.
[98] MED DGAG NI, BLOS DGAG BYA DNGOS SU BCAD NAS CHOS GZHAN MI 'PHEN PA ZHIG STE, RANG BZHIN MED PA DANG, DNGOS PO MED PA LTA BU'O,,
The first type of negation is a simple absence of something. This is where—incidental to the mind denying one thing—it is not the case that another thing is understood. Examples would be the fact that there exists no nature which is inherent to a thing; or the fact that some objects simply don’t exist.
[99] MA YIN DGAG NI BLOS DGAG BYA BCAD NAS CHOS GZHAN 'PHEN PA ZHIG STE, BUM PA MA YIN PA LAS LOG PA DANG, BUM MIN YOD PA LTA BU,
The second type of negation is where we say that something is not something. This is where—incidental to the mind denying one thing—it is the case that another thing is understood. Examples would be the opposite of everything which is not a water pitcher; or the presence of something which is not itself a water pitcher.
48 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
[100] GZHAN YANG JI SKAD DU, ,DGAG PA DON GYIS BSTAN PA DANG, ,TSIG GCIG SGRUB PAR BYED PA DANG, ,DE LDAN RANG TSIG MI STON PA, ,ZHES 'BYUNG BA LTAR BZHI STE SLA'O,,
We also see the following lines, where four different kinds of this second type of negation are listed—and these are easily understood:
There are types of negation Where one thing implies another; Where a single expression asserts another; Where both together are the case; And where the word itself implies nothing.28
[101]
28 These four are easily understood: Not really! The ultimate source for the verse appears to be a series of lines from a Sanskrit grammar text found translated in the Tengyur; it is entitled Verses for a Brief Description of Negation (see f. 251a, %S11, TD04293). We get some help on the verse from the autocommentary, A Commentary to the “Brief Description of Negation,” also in the Tengyur (see f. 256b, %S12, TD04294); but, as usual, it’s Je Tsongkapa who nails the point down—this time, in his renowned Essence of Eloquence, on the Art of Interpretation (see ff. 109a-109b, %B5, S05396). Examples here are easiest; and we draw them from Tsongkapa. A “negation where one thing implies another” is where we say something like, “That monk John, the chubby one, never eats during the day”—implying that (illegally, for a monk) he indulges at night. A “negation where a single expression asserts another” is where we say something like, “When a thing comes into existence, it does not grow from itself”—meaning that, in a single expression, we have both denied one thing and asserted another. A “negation where both together are the case” is where we say something like, “That monk John, the chubby one, never eats during the day; and he is here, no slender fellow!” A “negation where the word itself implies nothing” is where we say something like, “There’s a single person I’m thinking of; and he is—without question—either of the royal caste, or of the Brahmin caste. And I tell you, he is no Brahmin.” But, we say this to a person who doesn’t happen to know the difference between the two castes.
49 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
'DIR BSTAN PA'I DAM [f. 7a] BCA' BZHI'I ZHEN DON MED DGAG YIN LA, MYU GU RANG BZHIN MED PA YANG MED DGAG YIN PAS, RIGS SHES KYIS MYU GU RANG BZHIN MED PAR GRUB KYANG RANG BZHIN MED PA YOD PA NI DNGOS SHUGS GANG RUNG LA GRUB PA MIN NO,,
The thing that we think is there, in the four assertions described in this verse of the Arya’s root text, is a simple absence of something—while the fact that a sprout has no nature of its own is also a simple absence of something. A state of mind where we are reasoning clearly can conclude that the sprout has no nature of its own; but the existence of the fact that there is no nature of its own is not something it concludes—neither directly, nor implicitly.
[102] 'ON KYANG BAR DU TSAD MA GZHAN BRGYUD PA LAM {%LA MA} BLTOS PAR RIG {%RIGS} SHES KYI STOBS LAS MYU GU RANG BZHIN MED PA DE MED PAR DOGS PA'I SGRO 'DOGS DANG 'DZIN STANGS DNGOS SU 'GAL BA'I BLO BSKYED NUS SHING,
Nonetheless, one can—even without relying upon another, intervening perception which is accurate; all through the force of a state of mind where we are reasoning clearly—give rise to a mental state which is in direct contradiction to the way in which a mental overestimation of things holds to its object, as it entertains a suspicion that the fact that a sprout has no nature of its own is itself something that cannot exist.
[103] DE NYID KYIS SGRO 'DOGS DE GCOD NUS TE, 'DI CUNG DKA' BA'I GNAS YIN PAS ZHIB TU DPYAD DGOS SO,,
This in itself though is not enough to cut off this tendency towards overestimation. All this is a somewhat difficult point; as such, it requires some careful examination.
[104] 'DI LEGS PAR MA SHES RNA {%NA} LTA BA SKYONG BA'I TSE, RANG BZHIN MED PA'I MED DGAG NYID BLO'I 'DZIN STANGS KYI YUL DU MI BYED BAR {%PAR} MA YIN DGAG BLO YUL DU SGRUB PAR BYAS NA LTA BA RNYED PA'I GEGS SU 'GYUR RO,,
50 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
If we fail to understand these points well, then as we work to maintain a correct viewpoint of the way things are, we fail in turn to take that simple absence as the object of how we are thinking of these points; rather, we posit—as the object of our mind—a negation of the second type, where we say that something is not something else. And this then becomes an obstacle in our attempts to arrive at an accurate view of reality.
The logic behind the denial
[105] GNYIS PA LA GNYIS, BDAG SKYE 'GOG PA DANG, GZHAN SKYE 'GOG PA'I RIGS PA'O,,
This brings us to the second part in our denial that things could grow in any of the four extreme ways—where we present the logic behind this denial. This itself comes in two steps: the logic behind denying that things could grow from themselves; and the logic behind denying that things could grow from something other than themselves.
[106] DANG PO NI, SANGS RGYAS BSKYANGS KYIS DNGOS PO RNAMS BDAG LAS SKYE BA MED DE, DE DAG GI SKYE BA DON MED PA NYID DU 'GYUR BA'I PHYIR DANG SKYE BA THUG PA MED PA NYID DU 'GYUR BA'I PHYIR, ZHES GSUNGS PA LA,
Here is the first. Master Buddhapalita made the statement as follows:
Things cannot grow from themselves, because—if they did—then their growth would be entirely pointless; and that growth would as well be entirely endless.
[107] SLOB DPON LEGS LDAN 'BYED KYIS SKYON BRJOD PA DANG, ZLA BAS SKYON DE SPONG BA'I TSUL RNAMS NI DBU MA'I GZHUNG LAS SHES PAR BYA STE 'DIR MANG DU DOGS NAS MI BRJOD LA,
Master Bhavaviveka then criticized this position; and Master Chandrakirti, in turn, overturned that criticism. The history here is something you can learn from the great
51 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
books of the middle way; I shall not present it here, for fear that my work would then go on too long.
[108] GNYIS PA GZHAN SKYE BKAG PA LA YANG SKYON BRJOD TSUL DANG DE SPONG TSUL YANG GZHAN DU SHES PAR BYA'O,,
The parallel history—where the way in which things growing from something other than themselves was denied; and where that denial was criticized; and that criticism was itself overturned—is again something you can learn more about from other sources.
[109] MDOR NA RTZA BA'I GZHUNG 'DI DAG GIS MTHA' BZHI'I SKYE BA MED PA'I DAM BCA' DNGOS SU MDZAD NAS SGRUB BYED DNGOS [f. 7b] SU MA BSTAN KYANG GZHUNG 'OG MA RNAMS KYI SKABS PHAL CHAR {%CHER} DANG 'GREL PA LAS GSAL BAR BSTAN PA LTAR RO,,
To put it briefly, the lines of the root text here present—directly—the assertion that nothing can grow in any of the four extreme ways; but in doing so, they do not present, in any direct sense, corresponding proofs that something else is the case. Nonetheless, we are following the way in which these latter points are quite clearly made in the great majority of the lines of the root text to follow; and in the commentary as well.29
[110] MTHA' BA ZHI'I {%BZHI’I} SKYE BA KHAS LEN PA RNAMS KYIS SKYE RGYU'I DNGOS PO RNAMS RANG BZHIN GYIS GRUB PAR BZUNG STE MTHA' BZHI GANG RUNG LAS SKYE BAR 'DOD PA YIN LA,
Those who do believe that things could grow in one of these four extreme ways take the position that the things that grow exist, themselves, through some nature of their own— and then they say that these kinds of things must grow in some one or more of the four different ways.
29 Points made in the commentary: Referring no doubt to Master Chandrakirti’s masterwork.
52 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
[111] 'DIR DNGOS BO {%PO} RNAMS RGYU RKYEN LA BRTEN NAS SKYE BA NYID KYIS MTHA' BZHI'I SKYE BA 'GOG BA {%PA} YIN TE,
Here in Nagarjuna though we would say that the very fact that things grow based upon their causes and conditions itself disproves that these things could grow in any of the four, extreme ways.
[112] 'DI LTAR RGYU MED LAS SKYE BA NI 'GOG SLA ZHING, RGYU YOD KYANG RANG DANG NGO BO GCIG PA DANG THA DAD PA'I RGYU GANG RUNG LAS SKYE DGOS PAS,
How does this go? We can easily disqualify the idea that things could ever grow without any causes at all. Now assuming that they do have to have causes, then they would either have to grow from causes that were one with them, or causes that were distinct from them.
[113] RANG DANG NGO BO GCIG PA'I RGYU LAS SKYE BA 'DOD TSUL NI BDAG SKYE 'DOD TSUL YIN PAS DE SLAR YANG SKYE BA DON MED DU THAL BA SOGS KYIS 'GOG LA,
Saying that things could grow from causes that were one with them is tantamount to saying that things could grow from themselves; which again we deny because it would be pointless for these things to grow once more—and so on.
[114] RANG DANG NGO BO THA DAD BA'I {%PA’I} 'BREL MED DON GZHAN LAS SKYE BAR 'DOD PA NI GZHAN SKYE 'DOD TSUL TE, DE NI THAMS CAD LAS THAMS CAD SKYE BA 'GOG PA'I RIGS PAS 'GOG PA'I PHYIR GNYIS KA LAS SKYE BAR 'DOD PA NI RIGS PA DE RNAMS KYI SA {%KYIS} 'GOG NUS SO,,
Saying that things could grow from causes that were distinct from them—from other things with which they shared no connection—is what it means when we say that someone accepts the idea that things could grow from something else. This idea is itself
53 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
denied by the logic with refuses that everything there is could grow from everything else there is. And all this logic is enough, in turn, to disprove any belief that things could ever grow both from themselves, and from other things, at the same time.
Can things grow from something else?
[115] GNYIS PA LA GNYIS, RTZOD PA DANG, LAN NO,,
We turn now to the logic behind denying that things could grow from something other than themselves. This begins with an argument, and continues on to our response to the argument.
[116] DANG PO NI, RANG SDE DNGOS SMRA BA RNAMS NA RE, RANG GI RGYU'I BDAG NYID LAS SKYE BA MI 'THAD PAS BDAG SKYE MI RIGS SHING, DE MI RIGS PAS GNYIS KA LAS SKYE BA YANG MI RIGS LA, RGYU MED LAS SKYE BA NI SHIN TU THA CHAD PAS MI RIGS NA'ANG, GZHAN LAS MIN ZHES GZHAN SKYE 'GOG PA 'DI MI 'THAD DE, RGYAL BAS RKYEN BZHI GZHAN DU 'GYUR BA KHO NA 'BRAS BU RNAMS KYI SKYED BYED DU GSUNGS PA'I PHYIR,
Here is the first. The functionalist group30 among our own Buddhist schools makes the following statement:
Saying that things grow from themselves is incorrect, since it would be wrong to say that anything could grow from a unit including both the result and its cause. Given that this would be wrong, it would also be wrong to say that something could grow both from itself and from something else. Saying that anything could
30 Functionalist group: This group consists of the first three of the four classical Buddhist schools of ancient India: the Detailist; Sutrist; and Mind-Only Schools—all of whom believe that the way things perform a function is something inherent to them. They would say, for example, that the fact that fire burns things is inherent to fire. See for example the explanation of the group’s name by Kyabje Trijang Rinpoche (1901-1981) in his outline to the middle-length version of Je Tsongkapa’s “Steps to the Path” (ff. 224a- 224b, %B6, S00271).
54 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
grow without any cause at all would be wrong as well, since that would simply be way beyond possible.
Saying though that things cannot grow from something other than themselves— “nothing grows from something else”—could never be correct; for the victorious Buddha himself stated that the four types of conditions (and these only as things other than their results) are what act to cause results to grow.
[117] DE YANG GANG ZHE NA,
“What then,” you may ask, “are these four different conditions?” The answer is found in the following verse.
[118] (I.4) Catvāraḥ pratyayā hetur ārambaṇam anantaram, Tathaivādhipateyaṃ ca pratyayo nāsti pañcamaḥ.
Chatvarah pratyaya hetur arambanam anantaram, Tathaivadhipateyan cha pratyayo nasti panchamah.
,RKYEN RNAM BZHI STE RGYU DANG NI, ,DMIGS PA DANG NI DE MA THAG ,BDAG [f. 8a] PO YANG NI DE BZHIN TE, ,RKYEN LNGA PA NI YOD MA YIN, ,ZHES SO,,
The different types of conditions Are four: the causal condition, And just so then the object condition; The condition for what comes immediate after; And finally the dominant condition. There is no fifth kind of condition.
55 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
[119] 'DI LTAR RKYEN NI RNAM PA BZHI STE, 'BRAS BU GANG GI SGRUB BYED SA BON GYI NGO BOR GNAS RGYU'I RKYEN DANG, YANG DE BZHIN DU DMIGS PA GANG GIS SEMS SEMS BYUNG GAR {%GANG} SKYE BAR 'GYUR BA DMIGS PA'I RKYEN DANG,
The different types of conditions, then, are four. First there is the causal condition, which exists in the form of a seed which acts to bring a particular result into being. And just so then there is the object condition—referring to any particular object of the mind which acts to produce a particular main mind, or mental functions.
[120] RGYU 'GAG MA THAG GANG GIS 'BRAS BU SKYED PAR BYED PA NI DE MA THAG PA'I RKYEN DANG, GANG ZHIG YOD NA GANG RANG DBANG DU SKYED PA BDAG PO'I RKYEN YIN LA,
Next there is the condition for what comes immediately after—the one which produces a result just after that cause has ended. And then finally there is the dominant condition: the one which, if it is present, will of its own accord produce something.
[121] DER MA 'DUS PA'I RKYEN LNGA PA NI YOD PA MA YIN TE, MING MI MTHUN PA'I RKYEN MTSAN NYID PA RNAMS NI BZHI PO DER 'DUS LA, GZHAN GYIS BTAGS PA'I DBANG PHYUG RTAG PA SOGS NI RKYEN DU MI RUNG BA'I PHYIR, DES NA GZHAN SKYE BKAG PA LUNG DANG 'GAL ZHES ZER RO,,
There is no fifth kind of condition: one which is not included among the four just mentioned. Which is to say, actual conditions with names other than the ones you see here can be grouped into the four; whereas things that other groups just call “conditions”—a creator being who is unchanging, for example—could never truly be conditions. And because these actual types of conditions do exist—says the opponent here—you are contradicting the word of the Buddha when you deny that things could grow from something other than themselves.
Can things grow by themselves?
56 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
[122] GNYIS PA LAN LA GNYIS, RANG BZHIN GYIS SKYE BA 'GOG PA DANG, RANG BZHIN GYIS GZHAN YIN PA 'GOG PA'O,,
Our response to these arguments proceeds in two steps: a denial that things could grow through any nature of their own; and a denial that things could even be something else, through any nature of their own.
[123] DANG PO NI,
The first of these is expressed in the following verse of the root text:
[124] (I.5) Na hi svabhāvo bhāvānāṃ pratyayādiṣu vidyate, Avidyamāne svabhāve parabhāvo na vidyate.
Na hi svabhavo bhavanam pratyayadishu vidyate, Avidyamane svabhave parabhavo na vidyate.
,DNGOS PO RNAMS KYI RANG BZHIN NI, ,RKYEN LA SOGS LA YOD MA YIN, ,BDAG GI DNGOS PO YOD MIN NA, ,GZHAN DNGOS YOD PA MA YIN NO,, ZHES SO,,
The nature of things is not something That exists in their conditions or such; If there is no thing that’s a thing itself, Then there is no thing that’s something else.
[125]
57 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
'BRAS BU'I DNGOS PO RNAMS KYI RANG BZHIN TE NGO BO MYU GU LA SOGS PA NI CHOS CAN, SA BON LA SOGS PA'I RKYEN TSOGS PA DANG KHA YAR BA DANG GNYIS KA SOGS GANG LA YANG RANG SKYES PA'I SNGA ROL TU NGO BO THA DAD PA'I TSUL DU BRTEN NAS YOD PA MA YIN TE, DE LTAR YOD PA NI DMIGS RUNG MA DMIGS PAS KHEGS SHING, SLAR YANG SKYE BA DON MED PAR 'GYUR BA'I PHYIR,
Let’s consider the nature, or essence, of things—of results: things like sprouts or the like.
It is not something that exists in their conditions—in their seeds, or whatever the case may be—whether we consider these conditions as they convene; or as they exist individually; as both of these, or any such possibility. That is, this nature is not something which could exist before the result itself had grown, in a form where it depended upon these conditions as things which were essentially separate from it.
And that is impossible because—if that were the way things were—it would be something that we could observe in the world; but in fact we do not. Moreover, it would in that case be pointless for the result to grow over again.
[126] 'BRAS BU'I BDAG GI DNGOS PO MYU GU SOGS CHOS CAN, [f. 8b] RANG RGYU SA BON DON GZHAN LAS 'BYUNG BA'I DNGOS POR NGO BO NYID KYIS YOD PA MA YIN PAS GZHAN LAS SKYE BA MED DE, RANG RGYU SA BON GYI DUS NA YOD PA MA YIN PA'I PHYIR,
And let’s consider a thing that’s a thing—a result—itself: the sprout, or whatever it may be.
It is not a thing which could ever grow from something else, for it is not something which could ever be there as a thing that existed in and of itself, and which came from something that was other than itself: from a seed, for example, acting as its cause.
58 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
And that’s true because it is not something which even exists, at the time of its cause—at the time of the seed.
[127] KHYAB STE, SA BON DON GZHAN LAS NGO BO NYID KYIS SKYES NA SA BON GYI DUS DER YANG BYA BA'I RTEN DU YOD DGOS PA'I PHYIR,
Just because something doesn’t exist at the time of its cause doesn’t necessarily imply that it is not a thing which could ever grow from something else, for the reason you’ve stated.
And yet it does necessarily imply that; for if something were to grow, in and by itself, from a seed that was an object separate from it, then it would have to exist as well—as a basis of the event—at the time of its seed.
[128] DER THAL, RANG BZHIN GYIS GRUB NA, GRUB PA'I DUS THAMS CAD RTEN BRTEN PAR YOD DGOS SHING, DE MED NA RANG BZHIN GYIS GRUB PA'I DON MA TSANG BAS THA SNYAD DU YOD PAR 'GYUR BA'I PHYIR,
I disagree that that is the case.
And yet it is so the case, because—if these things existed through some nature of their own—then for all the time that they did exist they would have to exist as a basis and what rests upon that basis. And if they did not exist in this way, then some part of what it means to “exist through some nature of their own” would be missing; and in that case, they would have to exist only nominally.
[129] DE YANG MYU GU SKYE BA'I BYA BA NI RTEN DANG MYU GU NI BRTEN PA'AM BYED PA POR 'JOG PA YIN LA, RANG BZHIN GYIS GRUB PA LAN CIG RTEN BRTEN PAR SONG NA DUS THAMS CAD DU DER 'GRO DGOS SO,,
In this argument, we are referring to the event of the sprout’s growing as the “basis”; in which case we identify the sprout as what rests upon this basis—or the thing which in
59 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
this case is acting. And if these things were to exist through some nature of their own, then if they acted even once as the basis and as what rests upon this basis, then they would have to do so at every other point in time as well.
[130] MYU GU RANG GI SA BON LAS SKYE ZHES BRJOD PA'I TSE SKYES PA'I MYU GU DE SA BON GYI DUS SU MED CING, SA BON GYI DUS SU YOD PA'I MYU GU ZHIG SKYE BAR MIN MOD,
Now when we say that “a sprout has grown from a seed,” it’s admittedly the case that the sprout does not exist at the time of the seed; and not the case that a sprout which did exist at the time of the seed then grew.
[131] THA SNYAD DU SKYE 'GYUR LA LTOS NAS MYU GU SA BON LAS SKYE ZHES BRDZOD {%BRJOD} PA NI 'THAD PAS SKYE BZHIN PA'I BYA BA BYED PA PO'I MYU GU YOD LA,
Relative though to something which, nominally, is going to grow, it is alright to say that “the sprout grows from the seed”—and that there does exist a sprout which performs the act of being in the process of growing.
[132] RANG BZHIN GYIS SKYE NA MYU GU RANG GI SA BON LAS SKYE ZHES BRJOD PA LTAR MYU GU DE RANG GI SA BON GYI DUS SU YOD BZHIN DU SKYE DGOS KYI, MED NA SKYE BA MI 'THAD PAS BDAG SKYE YOD PAR 'GYUR RO,,
If though things grew through some nature of their own, then as we word it when we say “a sprout is growing from its seed,” then the sprout would have to be growing in a way where it also existed at the time of its seed. If on the other hand it did not, it would be incorrect to say it was growing—and thus, things growing from themselves would have to be something that did exist.
[133]
60 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
RANG LUGS NI, MYU GU RANG GI SA BON GYI DUS SU MED KYANG DE LAS SKYE BAR 'DOD CING DE NI BRDZUN PA'I TSUL LA MI 'GAL YANG BDEN PAR GRUB PA LA 'GAL LO,,
Here is our own position on this issue. It is not the case that the sprout does exist at the time of its seed; nonetheless, we can agree that it does grow from that seed. This kind of thing is no contradiction in a world where things exist in a deceptive way; but it would be a contradiction in a world where things existed as something real.
[134] GZHAN LAS SKYE NA'ANG 'BRAS BU NI SA BON LA LTOS MED YAN GAR DU SKYE BAR 'DOD DGOS PAS
And even where a person agrees that things could grow from something other than themselves, you would have then to agree that they grew in such a way that they were discrete, separate entities from their seeds—and no longer relied upon them.
[135] RGYU 'BRAS DUS MNYAM PAR 'GYUR BA SOGS SHES PAR BYA STE, RIGS PA'I [f. 9a] GNAD 'DI MGON {%MA GO NA} 'OG TU DGAG SGRUB MDZAD PA'I DON LEGS PAR MI GO BAS
Try to understand that, in this case, there would arise certain problems; such as the cause and its result having to be simultaneous. If you fail to comprehend this crucial point in the reasoning process here, then later on in the text you will fail to grasp, perfectly, points that are made in the process of denying certain ideas and asserting others.
[136] SHES PAR BYA'O,,
Do make an effort, then, to absorb these ideas, here at this point.
Can things even be something else?
61 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
[137] GNYIS PA NI, GZHUNG SNGA MA'I MIN NA ZHES PA'I NA ZHES GNAS GZHI DANG SBYAR LA, 'DIR NA ZHES DUS KYI BDUN PA DANG SBYARO {%SBYAR RO},,
Here is that second step: a denial that things could even be something else, through any nature of their own. Let’s look at the particle “if” in the verse of the root text covered earlier in this section. It’s parallel to the particle “in” that came just before it, which is a locative: where something is happening. The “if” though should be understood as a locative (seventh of the classical declensions) in the sense of time: when something is happening.31
[138] 'BRAS BU'I DNGOS PO RNAMS KYI RANG BZHIN NAM NGO BO CHOS CAN, SA BON SOGS RKYEN TSOGS PA DANG KHA YAR GANG YANG RNAM PAR MA 'GYUR PA'I {%BA’I} DUS NA YOD PA MA YIN TE, DE LTAR YOD PA MA MTHONG BA'I PHYIR DANG YOD NA RGYU MED DU 'GYUR BA'I PHYIR RO,,
Let’s consider then the nature, or essence, of things which are results.
They are not something which can exist at a point in time where their conditions—seeds or whatever, considered either once they have convened, or as separate entities—have not yet undergone some transformation;
For we never observe the existence of any such result; and even if we did, it would then occur without a cause.
[139]
31 Seventh of the declensions: Choney Lama is commenting on the closeness of the corresponding Tibetan particles—na here for if, and la for in—which often overlap; he is also taking the opportunity to impress on us emptiness over both space and time. In a presentation of seven, the classical declension of nouns in Tibetan (which reflects that of Sanskrit) is given as: (1) nominative; (2) accusative; (3) instrumental; (4) dative; (5) ablative; (6) genitive; and (7) locative—which can indicate either place or time. The root text verse last listed (I.5) has said “If [Tib: na] there is no thing…” and just before that “in [Tib: la] their conditions.”
62 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
YANG 'BRAS BU BDAG GI DNGOS PO MYU GU CHOS CAN, RANG RGYU SA BON LAS NGO BO NYID KYIS GZHAN GYI DNGOS PO NYID DU YOD PA MA YIN PAS GZHAN LAS SKYE BA MED DE, RANG RGYU SA BON RNAM PAR MA 'GYUR PA'I {%BA’I} DUS NA YOD PA MA YIN PA'I PHYIR ZHES KHYAB PA NYID BSGRUB PO,,
Again let us consider this thing—the sprout—which is itself a result.
It does not exist as this sheer thing which is—in and by itself—something else than its cause, the seed; and thus there is no such thing as something which could grow from something other than it.
Because it is not something which can be present in the time that its cause—the seed—has yet to undergo any transformation. Which is to say, the necessary relationship between the result and the quality to be proven in our argument does hold true.
[140] DE LTAR NA BCOM LDAN 'DAS KYIS RKYEN BZHI GSUNGS PA LTAR 'DOD KYANG, GZHAN SKYE YOD MI DGOS TE, 'BRAS BU RANG DANG 'BREL MED DON GZHAN PA'I RGYU LAS NGO BO NYID KYIS SKYE BA KHEGS PA'I PHYIR,
And so even if we accept the four conditions, as they were described by the Conqueror, it’s not the case that things can grow from something other than themselves. And that’s because we deny that a result can grow, in and by itself, from a cause which is a discrete entity from it, and with which it shares no relationship.
[141] DER THAL, GZHAN SKYE 'DOD PA DAG GIS 'BRAS BU RNAMS RANG GI MTSAN NYID KYIS GRUB PA'I RGYU GZHAN LAS SKYE BAR 'DOD PAS DE LTAR NA RGYU 'BRAS GNYIS SO SOR 'BREL MED DU 'DOD DGOS NA'ANG DE 'DRA MI 'THAD PA'I PHYIR,
And that in turn is the case because those who assert that things do grow from something other than themselves assert that results grow from causes which exist by definition, and thus must in turn assert that the cause and its result are individual entities which share no relationship—and even just accepting this is incorrect.
63 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
[142] 'DI DAG GIS RIGS PA GSUM BSTAN TE, GZHAN DANG SKYE BA'I GZHI MTHUN DANG SKYE BA DANG RGYU 'BRAS GNYIS NGO BO NYID KYIS GZHAN YIN PA LA GNOD BYED BSTAN NAS 'GOG PA'O,,
These sections are presenting three different reasonings, denying what they do by presenting problems with accepting (1) any one thing that could be both a growing and a case where cause and its result are different from one another; (2) the fact of the growing itself; and (3) a cause and its result where the two could be different from each other, in and by themselves.
[143] DGAG BYA YANG SPYIR NI RANG BZHIN GYIS GRUB PA CES 'BYUNG BA DE YIN LA, DE NI GSAR DU BCOS PA MA YIN PA DANG, RANG GI NGO BO GZHAN LA [f. 9b] BLTOS NAS BCOS PA MIN PA DANG, PHYIN CHAD GZHAN DU MI 'GYUR BA'I KHYAD CHOS GSUM TSANG DGOS TE,
What we are denying, stated in general terms, is the very fact that anything could occur in a way where it existed through some nature of its own. If such a thing could ever be, it would have to possess, complete, three different characteristics: (1) it could never be something which was a fresh creation; (2) its essential nature could never be something which was created fresh, through reliance upon something other than itself; and (3) it could never, in all time subsequent to the present, transform in any way.
[144] RAB BYED BCO LNGA PAR, ,RANG BZHIN DAG NI BCOS MIN DANG, ,GZHAN LA BLTOS PA MED PA YIN, ,ZHES ,DANG,
As the 15th chapter of Wisdom itself puts it,
These natures would have to be things That could never be created, And never relied upon something else.
64 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
[145] ,RANG BZHIN GZHAN DU 'GYUR BA NI, ,NAM YANG 'THAD PA MA YIN NO,, ZHES GSUNGS PA LTAR RO,,
And from the same chapter:
The transformation of a nature Into something else Could never be correct.
[146] KHYAD CHOS DE GSUM TSANG BA TZAM GYIS RANG BZHIN GYIS GRUB MI DGOS KYANG, RANG BZHIN GYIS GRUB NA KHYAD CHOS DE GSUM PO TSANG DGOS TE,
Now it’s not the case that—just because these three different characteristics all apply— then the object in question must exist through some nature of its own; but if something did exist through a nature of its own, then it would have to possess all three, complete.
[147] RANG BZHIN GYIS GRUB NA DUS THAMS CAD DU DE LTAR GRUB PA DANG, GZHAN LA MA LTOS PAR DE LTAR GRUB PA DANG, DANG PO NAS DE LTAR GRUB DGOS PAS 'GOG PA'I TSE GNAD DE LTAR DU BSAMS NAS 'GOG DGOS KYI, THA SNYAD DU GNAS PA'I DON NI MI 'GOG GO
This is true because—if something did exist by nature—it would have to exist that way in all the time that it existed; and it would have to exist that way without ever relying on something other than itself; and it would, from the very beginning, have to exist that way. And when we deny that something could exist by nature, we need to make our denial with these descriptions in mind. It is not though the case that we are denying an object which could exist in names alone.
[148]
65 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
,BUM PA LTA BU RANG BZHIN GYIS GCIG TU GRUB NA BUM PA GRUB TZAM NYID NAS CHA THAMS CAD NAS GCIG TU GRUB DGOS PAS BUM PA'I STENG NA THA DAD PA'I CHA YIN PA MI SRID DGOS PA DANG,
If we were to take the example of something like a water pitcher, we can say that—if it existed as a single object, through some nature of its own—then in the moment that the water pitcher came into existence, each and every one of its constituent parts would have to exist as that one single object. Which means that it would have to be impossible for there to be any discrete parts of the pitcher.
[149] SA MYUG GNYIS RANG BZHIN GYIS THA DAD NA DE SO SO'I STENG DU GCIG YIN PA MI SRID PA SOGS SU 'GYUR TE, DE DAG LA GCIG DANG THA DAD YIN PA'I CHA MI 'DRA BA SRID NA NI BDEN PAR GRUB PA'AM RANG BZHIN GYIS GRUB PA'I DON MA TSANG NGO,,
And if these two—the seed and the sprout—were distinct from each other through any nature of their own, then with respect to each one individually it would be impossible for either to be a single thing—and there would be other such problems. If either one of the seed or sprout could possess discrete aspects of being either or of being separate, then the requirements for it to exist in truth, or to exist through some nature of its own, would no longer be complete.
[150] TSUL 'DI NI GNAD DU CHE STE, 'OG NAS 'CHAD PA'I LAM GSUM LA BA GOM {%BGOM} PA RANG BZHIN GYIS GRUB PA 'GOG PA SOGS LA NUS PA CHE'O,,
It’s crucial to understand how all this works; these ideas are very powerful at points covered later on in the presentation—such as where we deny that stepping on any of the three parts of a path could exist through any nature of its own.32
[151]
32 Three parts of a path: Covered by Choney Lama in folios 14a-14b of his commentary, below: (1) that part of a path upon which we have finished stepping; (2) that part on which we are currently stepping; and (3) that part upon which we have yet to step.
66 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
MDOR NA RIGS PA'I 'PHUL MTSAMS PHRA BA RNAMS LA SNGAR BSHAD PA'I KHYAD CHOS GSUM MAM GANG RUNG GI SPYI SHAR BAR BYAS NA NGES PA CHEN PO STER BAR 'GYUR GYI, GZHAN DU TSIG TZAM ZHIG TU 'GRO'O,,
In sum, it imparts to us a firm grasp of these topics if—at delicate points in the flow of the logic—we can recall the three characteristics just presented; or even just the general import of any one or two. Otherwise it will all be just words to us.
What is a condition for something to grow?
[152] GNYIS PA LA GSUM, RKYEN GYI RANG BZHIN THUN MONG DU DGAG PA, SO SOR DGAG [f. 10a] DGAG {%only one DGAG} PA, 'GOG TSUL GZHAN BSTAN PA'O,,
Having denied that results could possess any nature of growing, we now move on to denying that what makes these results grow could possess any nature of being a condition. For this, we proceed in three steps: (1) denying that, as a group, the four conditions could possess any nature of being conditions; (2) denying that, individually, they could possess any such nature; and (3) a presentation of other, relevant denials.
[153] DANG PO LA GNYIS, BYED PA'I SGO NAS RKYEN DU RTOG PA DGAG ,LAS KYI SGO NAS DER RTOG PA DGAG PA'O,,
The first we discuss in two parts of its own: denying the idea that something could be a condition from the point of view of its doing anything; and then denying the idea that something could be a condition from the point of view of the associated action.
[154] DANG PO LA GNYIS, SKYE BA'I BYA BA SGRUB PA'I SGO NAS RKYEN RTOG PA DGAG ,'BRAS BU SKYE BA'I SGO NAS RKYEN DU RTOG PA DGAG PA'O,,
The first of these has two parts of its own: denying the idea that something is a condition because it accomplishes the act of growing; and denying the idea that something is a condition because a result does grow.
67 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
[155] DANG PO NI,
The first of these two is expressed in following lines of the root text:
[156] (I.6-7)
Kriyā na pratyayavatī nāpratyayavatī kriya, Pratyayā nākriyāvantaḥ kriyāvantaś ca santyuta. Utpadyate pratītyemān itīme pratyayāḥ kila, Yāvan notpadyata ime tāvan nāpratyayāḥ katham.
Kriya na pratyayavati napratyayavati kriya, Pratyaya nakriyavantah kriyavantash cha santyuta. Utpadyate pratityeman itime pratyayah kila, Yavan notpadyata ime tavan napratyayah katham.
,BYA BA RKYEN DANG LDAN PA MED,33 ,RKYEN DANG MI LDAN BYA BA MED, ,BYA BA RKYEN DANG MI LDAN MIN, ,BYA BA LDAN TE 'ON TE NA, ,'DI DAG LA BRTEN SKYE BAS NA, ,DE PHYIR 'DI DAG RKYEN ZHES GRAG ,JI SRID MI SKYE DE SRID DU, ,'DI DAG RKYEN MIN JI LTAR MIN, ,ZHES SO,,
There is no act Which has a condition; And there is no act Which has no condition.
33 lDan-pa med: The Derge Tengyur here wrongly reads ldan-pa yin.
68 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
If the act did have it, And in that case Conditions were called What they are because It had grown depending upon them,
Then until such time As it had grown, How could it be that they were not Something that wasn’t a condition?
[157] DE YANG SPYIR MTHO GANG TZAM GYI DU SKYE BA'I MYU GU YOD LA, DES RANG GI SKYE BA'I BYA BA BRTZAMS NAS MTHO GANG TSAD DU MA SKYES KYI BAR RANG NYID SKYE BA'I BYA BA BYED BZHIN PAR BZHAG DGOS KYANG,
Now generally speaking, there does exist such a thing as a sprout which grows to a height of a single handlength.34 And we would have to say that—from the time that the act of growing is initiated, and on up to the point where the sprout is a handlength long—it is in the act of growing.
[158] SKYE BZHIN PA'I DUS SU NI, BYED PA PO MYU GU MED CING, SKYES PA'I TSE SKYE BA'I BYA BA 'GAGS PAS SKYE BZHIN PA YANG MED DE,
During this time though—in which the sprout is in the act of growing—there is no finished sprout which can be the agent of the action. But by the time the sprout has finished growing, then the act of growing has ended; as such, there can be no such thing as “the sprout being in the act of growing.”
[159]
34 One handlength: That is, a mtho-gang, classically defined as the length from the tip of the thumb to the tip of the middle finger, as the fingers are spread out wide.
69 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
'BRAS BU SKYE BA LA MNGON DU PHYOGS PA DANG RGYU 'GAGS PA LA MNGON DU PHYOGS PA GNYIS DUS MNYAM, 'BRAS BU SKYES ZIN PA DANG RGYU 'GAGS ZIN PA'I BYA BA GNYIS KYANG DUS MNYAM PA'I PHYIR RO,,
This is because the point at which the result is approaching having grown, and the point at which the cause is approaching having ended, are simultaneous. And the point at which the result has finished growing, and the point at which the cause has finished ending, are also simultaneous.
[160] DE'I TSE MYU GU LTA BU RANG GI BYA BA SKYE BZHIN PA DANG 'GAG BZHIN PA GNYIS LA THUN MONG DU BRTEN PA YIN GYI BYA BA GNYIS SO SO LA THUN MONG MA YIN PA'I MYU GU RE RE BRTEN PA MA YIN TE,
During this process, something like a sprout depends, mutually, upon these two acts: of one ongoing process of growth, and of another ongoing process of ending. But it’s not as if there are two separate sprouts where each depends upon its own isolated act, from among the two.
[161] YIN NA MYU GU SKYE BZHIN PA'I DUS NA'ANG MYU GU YOD DGOS PAS MYU GU'I CHA THAMS CAD NAS SKYE BZHIN PAR 'GYUR BA'I PHYIR MYU GU SKYES MA ZIN PAR 'GYUR LA,
This is because, if that were the case, then—since the finished sprout would have to be present even during the period in which it was in the act of growing—then each and every component part of the sprout would have still to be in the act of growing; in which case the sprout itself could not have finished growing.
[162] MYU GU LTA BU RANG GI SKYES ZIN GYI BYA BA KHO NA LA BRTEN NA MYU GU SKYE BA'I BYA BA BYED PA PO'I MYU GU MED PAR [f. 10b] 'GYUR BA SOGS YIN PA'I PHYIR,
And if something like a sprout depended only upon its having finished growing, then for example there could be no sprout which was the agent in the growing of a sprout.
70 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
[163] DE BZHIN DU MIG GI RNAM SHES SOGS LA'ANG SBYAR RGYU YIN NO,,
This same reasoning can be applied to something like visual consciousness.
[164] DE LTAR GO BAR BYAS NAS GZHUNG GI DON NI, MIG GI RNAM SHES CHOS CAN, KHYOD SKYE BA'I BYA BA RANG GI NGO BOS GRUB PA'I MI {%MIG} SOGS LA RKYEN DANG LDAN PA'I SGO NAS SGRUB PA MED DE, KHYOD MA SKYES PA SKYED PA'I BYA BA DON DAM PAR MED CING, SKYES ZIN SLAR SKYE BA'I BYA BA YANG MED PA'I PHYIR,
Once we have understood these points, we can turn to the import of the verse here:
Consider visual consciousness.
There is no act of its growing which is accomplished through its having a condition—such as the eye, for example—which exists in and of itself;
Because there is no act of its growing where a version of itself which is yet to grow is made to grow, in any ultimate sense; and yet neither is there any act where a version of itself which has already finished growing grows once again.
[165] DE CHOS CAN, KHYOD SKYE BA'I BYA BA RKYEN DANG MI LDAN PA'I SGO NAS BSGRUB PA YANG MED DE, DE LTAR 'BYUNG BA MI SRID PA'I PHYIR,
Consider this same consciousness.
Neither is there an act of its growing which is accomplished through its not having a condition;
Because it’s impossible for that to happen.
71 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
[166] DE CHOS CAN, MIG SOGS SKYE BA'I BYA BA DON DAM PAR MI LDAN PAR KHYOD KYI RKYEN DU RANG BZHIN GYIS MED DE, DE'I TSE MIG SOGS THA SNYAD DU KHYOD KYI RKYEN YIN YANG DON DAM PA'I RKYEN MA YIN PA'I PHYIR,
Consider this consciousness once again.
The eye and such could never serve as its conditions, through any nature of their own, if they involved no act of growing, in an ultimate sense;
Because in that case the eye and so forth—even though they were serving as its conditions in a nominal sense—would not be conditions in any ultimate sense.
[167] DE CHOS CAN, MIG SOGS RKYEN GYIS BYA BA SGRUB PA'I SGO NAS KYANG DON DAM PAR MI SKYE STE, KHYOD SKYED BYED KYI BYA BA RANG NGOS NAS LDAN PAR YOD PA NI MA YIN PA 'ON TE KHON {%KHO NA} MA YIN PA'I PHYIR,
Once more consider the consciousness.
Neither is it something which could ever grow, in any ultimate sense, through the conditions of the eye and so forth accomplishing this act;
Because the act that they cause to grow is not something that could ever exist in a way where these conditions had it from their own side; that is, this could never be the case.
[168] RANG LUGS NI BRGYUD RGYU DANG DNGOS RGYU GNYIS KAS 'BRAS BU SKYE BA'I BYA BA SGRUB PAR BYED PAS BYA BA RKYEN LDAN YIN YANG, 'DIR BYA BA RKYEN LDAN LA RANG BZHIN 'GOG PA'O,,
72 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
Our own position is that—because both indirect causes and direct causes function to accomplish the act of a result growing—then we can say that acts have their conditions. The purpose of these lines of Wisdom though is to deny that an act which is involved with conditions could ever have any nature of its own.
[169] DE YANG MIG SOGS RNAMS 'BRAS BU RNAM SHES SOGS SKYE BA'I BYA BA SGRUB PA'I RKYEN TE, MTHAR DES BSGRUBS PA'I BYA BA'I KHYAD PAR CIG LAS 'BRAS BU SKYE BAR 'DOD DGOS SO,,
And the eye and so forth are conditions which accomplish the act of the growing of their results—things like the visual consciousness. This is because, in the end, we would have to agree that the results had grown through some aspect of an act that these conditions had accomplished.
If it has results, is it a condition?
[170] GNYIS PA NI,
Here next is the second part of our denial that something could be a condition from the point of view of its doing anything; that is, denying the idea that something is a condition because a result does grow.
[171] MDO SDE PA SOGS NA RE, BYA BA RKYEN DANG LDAN MI LDAN GYI DPYOD PA 'DIS CI BYA, MIG SOGS RKYEN 'DI DAG LA BRTEN NAS MIG GI RNAM SHES SOGS SKYE BAR MTHONG BAS NA, RGYU MTSAN DE'I PHYIR MIG SOGS 'DI DAG RANG DBANG GIS RNAM SHES KYI RKYEN DU 'JOG [f. 11a] GO ZHES GRAG PA STE ZER RO,,
Now groups like the Sutrists make the following claim:
73 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
What’s the use of examining here whether or not acts involve conditions? We can see with our own eyes that things like visual consciousness grow, through a process where they depend upon these conditions; upon the eye and so forth. And it’s because of this—for this very reason—that the eye and such are called what they are: are established, all of their own accord, as being the conditions of consciousness.
[172] DE LTAR SMRA BAR MI RIGS TE, SA BON LAS JI SRID DU 'BRAS BU MI SKYE BA STE SKYE BA'I BYA BA DNGOS SU MA MTHONG BA DE SRID DU SA BON 'DI DAG 'BRAS BU'I RKYEN MIN PA JI LTAR MIN TE RKYEN MIN PA KHO NA YIN PA'I PHYIR TE,
And yet it’s a mistake to make this kind of statement. Until such time as the result has grown from the seed—that is, until such time as we have seen, directly, the act of growing; then how could it be that they—the seeds—would not be things that weren’t conditions? That is, they could never be conditions.
[173] 'BRAS BU SKYE BA LA MNGON DU PHYOGS PA'I DUS SU RKYEN RNAMS BYA BA DANG LDAN GYI, DE'I SNGON DU MI LDAN PAR KHYOD KYIS KHAS BLANGS PA LTAR 'THAD PA'I PHYIR,
And that’s because you yourself have accepted the idea that—during the time that the result is approaching having grown—the conditions involve an act; but before that, do not. And of course, that idea must be correct!
[174] DER THAL, BRGYUD RGYU'I DUS SU 'BRAS BU DE SKYE BA'I BYA BA SGRUB KYANG DE DA DUNG MA SKYES SHING, BYA BA DE DNGOS RGYU'I DUS KHO NAR YOD PA'I PHYIR,
And that is the case, because—when we’re considering an indirect cause—then during the time of the cause the act of the result growing is being accomplished; but the result has not yet grown; and that same act can only exist in the time of the direct cause.
74 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
[175] DES NA RKYEN YIN NA RANG DUS SU 'BRAS BU DE SKYE BA'I BYA BA DNGOS SU YOD MI DGOS SO,,
As such, it is not the case that—just because something is a condition for a certain result— the act of the result growing must actually be present within its own time.
Conditions for what?
[176] GNYIS PA NI,
This brings us to the second part of our denial that the four conditions could possess any nature of being conditions: denying the idea that something could be a condition from the point of view of the associated action.
[177] (I.8)
Naivāsato naiva sataḥ pratyayo‘rthasya yujyate, Asataḥ pratyayaḥ kasya sataś ca pratyayena kim.
Naivasato naiva satah pratyayorthasya yujyate, Asatah pratyayah kasya satash cha pratyayena kim.
,YOD DAM MED PA'I DON LA YANG,35 ,RKYEN NI RUNG BA MA YIN TE, ,MED NA GANG GI RKYEN DU 'GYUR, ,YOD NA RKYEN GYIS CI ZHIG BYA, ,ZHES SO,,
How could a thing ever be
35 Yod dam med: The Tengyur version reverses the order here—med dam yod; Choney Lama follows the yod dam med in his commentary.
75 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
A condition for something, Whether that thing existed or not?
For if it didn’t exist, What would the condition Be a condition for?
And if it did exist, What would be The use of the condition?
[178] 'DI LA BRTEN NAS 'DI SKYE'O ZHES PA'I 'BREL PA 'DI YOD PAS 'DI 'DI'I RKYEN DU 'JOG GO ZHE NA,
Now someone might say the following:
When there is a relationship between two things—and we can say that one of them has grown, based on the other—then that suffices to say that one is a condition for the other.
[179] DE YANG MI 'THAD DE, SA BON LA BRTEN NAS SKYE'O ZHES PA'I 'BREL PA YOD PAS RKYEN LAS RANG BZHIN GYIS SKYE BA MI 'GRUB PA'I PHYIR TE, SA BON GYI DUS SU YOD PA DANG MED PA'I DON GANG LA YANG DON DAM PAR RKYEN DU NI RUNG BA MIN PA'I PHYIR,
And yet that cannot be correct; for there can be a relationship between two things—“this thing has grown, depending upon that condition”; but that doesn’t prove that something has grown, through some nature of its own, from a condition. For how could a thing ever be, in any ultimate sense, a condition for something, whether or not that thing already existed at the time of its seed?
[180] DAM ZHES PAS RKYEN DU YOD NA DE GNYIS GANG RUNG DU YOD DGOS PA DANG, TE ZHES PA LHAG MA 'DREN PA'O,,
76 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
The expression “whether or not” in the verse here is meant to indicate that—if something is a condition for something else, then that other thing must either be something which exists, or something which doesn’t exist. And the word “for” in these lines is meant to indicate that more information is coming.
[181] RTAGS SGRUB PA NI, RANG RGYU SA BON GYI DUS SU 'BRAS BU YOD PAR RANG BZHIN GYIS MED CING, MED PAR YANG RANG BZHIN GYIS MED DE,
Here is how we prove the reason given here. We say first that a result could never exist, through some nature of its own, within the time of its cause—the seed; and secondly, that it could never not exist, through any nature of its own, within this same time period.
[182] SA BON NI 'BRAS BU SKYES PA'I SNGA ROL NA MED PAR RANG BZHIN GYIS GRUB NA SA BON DE 'BRAS BU GANG GI RKYEN DU 'GYUR BAR MED PA'I PHYIR,
If the result were something that didn’t exist before it had grown—and if its seed were something that existed through some nature of its own—then what would the condition be a condition for? There wouldn’t be any result for it to be a seed for.
[183] [f. 11b] GAL TE SA BON GYI DUS SU YOD NA'ANG DE LA 'BRAS BU'I RKYEN MI 'GRUB STE, GRUB ZIN PA LA SLAR 'GRUB BYED KYI RKYEN GYIS CI ZHIG BYA STE MI DGOS PA'I PHYIR RO,,
And even if the result did exist in the time of its seed, the seed could never be the condition for the result—for what would be the use of the condition, if all it had to do was help something that had already come out come out? There’d be no need for it.
Denying that a causal condition has any qualities of its own
77 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
[184] GNYIS PA SO SOR DGAG PA LA BZHI, RGYU RKYEN GYI MTSAN NYID DGAG PA DANG, DE BZHIN DU DMIGS RKYEN DANG, DE MA THAG RKYEN DANG, BDAG RKYEN GYI MTSAN NYID DGAG PA'O,,
Which brings us to the second step from above: denying that, individually, the four conditions could possess any nature of being conditions. We proceed through four sections: denying the defining characteristics of a causal condition; the same for an object condition; for the condition for what comes immediately after; and for the dominant condition.
[185] DANG PO NI,
The first of these is expressed in the following lines of the root text:
[186] (I.9)
Na san nāsan na sad asan dharmo nirvartate yadā, Kathaṃ nirvartako hetur evaṃ sati hi yujyate.
Na san nasan na sad asan dharmo nirvartate yada, Kathan nirvartako hetur evan sati hi yujyate.
,GANG TSE CHOS NI YOD PA DANG, ,MED DANG YOD MED MI 'GRUB PAS, ,CI LTAR SGRUB BYED RGYU ZHES BYA, ,DE LTAR YIN NA MI RIGS SO,, ZHES SO,,
Where something that neither exists, Nor doesn’t exist, Nor both does and doesn’t exist Cannot be produced, How can you call something a cause
78 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
That worked to produce it? It would be wrong, If that’s the way it is.
[187] GAL TE RGYU RKYEN GYI MTSAN NYID YOD PAS RGYU RKYEN DON DAM PAR YOD DO ZHE NA,
Someone may come now and assert the following:
Causal factors do exist in an ultimate way, because they do possess certain defining characteristics.
[188] DE NI MI RIGS TE, GANG GI TSE 'BRAS BU'I CHOS NI RANG GI RGYU RU YOD PA DANG MED PA DANG YOD MED GNYIS KAR DPYAD NA DON DAM PAR RGYUS MI 'GRUB PAS DE'I PHYIR TE,
And yet that’s wrong. Where we check to see whether something—the result—does exist in its cause; or doesn’t; or both does and doesn’t; we find that it cannot be produced, in any ultimate sense, by a cause.
[189] RTAGS DE LTAR NA JI LTAR SGRUB PAR BYED PA'I RGYU'I MTSAN NYID RANG GI NGOS {%NGO BOS} YOD PA YIN ZHES BYA BAR MI RUNG BA'I PHYIR,
As such, it would be a mistake to call—how could you call—something a cause that worked to produce this result; that is, a cause in the sense of its possessing the defining characteristics of a cause, in and by itself.
[190] RGYU MTSAN DE LTAR YIN NA STE YIN PA DE'I TSE RGYU RKYEN DON DAM PAR YOD CES SMRA BA DE MI RIGS SO,,
79 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
If that’s the way it is—meaning, for this reason, since that is the way it is—it would be wrong, in this circumstance, to say that the causal condition existed, in any ultimate way.
[191] DE YANG RGYU DUS SU YOD PA RGYUS SGRUB NA NI SKYE BA DON MED THUG MED DU 'GYUR LA,
If the result were something that existed within the time of the cause, and were still brought about by the cause, then its growing would be pointless; and also repeated endlessly.
[192] RGYU DUS SU MED PA'I DNGOS MED RGYUS SGRUB MI NUS KYANG, DE'I TSE 'BYUNG 'GYUR TZAM ZHIG RGYUS SGRUB PAR BYED DO,,
On the other hand, a completely non-existent entity—a result that was not present within the time of its cause—is not something that a cause could ever bring about. Note though that we can say that, at this point in time, a result which is going to come into being is being brought about by its cause.
Denying that an object condition has any qualities of its own
[193] GNYIS PA NI,
The second section here, denying defining characteristics for a causal condition, is presented in the next verse of the root text:
[194] (I.10)
Anārambaṇa evāyaṃ san dharma upadiśyate,
80 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
Athānārambaṇe dharme kuta ārambaṇaṃ punaḥ.
Anarambana evayan san dharma upadishyate, Athanarambane dharme kuta arambanam punah.
,YOD PA'I CHOS 'DI DMIGS PA NI, ,MED PA KHO NA NYE BAR BSTAN, ,CI STE CHOS NI MED DMIGS NA, ,DMIGS PA YOD PA GA LA 'GYUR, ,ZHES SO,,
You take something which already exists And invariably refer to it As not yet having an object. And if you say, “Well then, It does not exist,” then how Could entities of perception Ever possess an object?
[195] GAL TE RNAM SHES KYI GNAS DMIGS RKYEN RANG BZHIN GYIS YOD DO SNYAM NA,
Now some may think to themselves, “The locus of a state of consciousness—the object which is its condition—must exist through some nature of its own.”
[196] 'O NA DMIGS RKYEN DE RANG GI DMIGS BYA DMIGS PA'I SNGA ROL NA YOD PA DANG MED PA'I SHES PA GANG LA 'DOD,
In reply we ask, “Well then; let’s consider the object condition here. Does it exist, as an object of its perception, before the state of mind which perceives it? Or does it not?”
[197]
81 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
[f. 12a] DANG PO MI RIGS TE, YOD PA'I CHOS SEMS LA SOGS PA 'DI DMIGS PA NI MED PA KHO NAR KHYED RANG 'DOD KYIS DMIGS PA DANG BCAS SO {%SO ZHES} NYE BAR BSTAN PA TZAM DU ZAD PAR 'GYUR BA'I PHYIR TE, DMIGS RKYEN DE DMIGS BYA DMIGS PA LA MA LTOS PAR DE'I SNGAR YOD PAR KHAS BLANGS PA'I PHYIR,
The first of these options cannot be the case, because you yourselves take something which does already exist—a state of mind, and so on—and invariably refer to it as not yet having an object of perception; and then you say, “Now it has taken on an object.” And that’s precisely because you believe that the object condition exists prior to the perception of the object of perception—and thus need not rely upon it.
[198] CI STE BRTAG PA PHYI MA LTAR DMIGS RKYEN DE DMIGS BYA DMIGS PA'I SNGAR MED CING PHYIS YOD PAR 'DOD DO ZHE NA,
“Well then,” you may say in return, “Then it must be the way that you said it in the second option: the object condition does not exist prior to the perception of the object of perception; rather, we would have to say that it exists after this perception.”
[199] DE YANG MI 'THAD DE, DE LTAR NA DMIGS PA'I CHOS SEMS SEMS BYUNG LA NI DMIGS PA YOD PA GA LA 'GYUR TE MI 'GYUR BA'I PHYIR TE, DMIGS PA'I BYIS {%PHYIS} YOD PA NYID DMIGS RKYEN DU KHAS BLANGS PA'I PHYIR,
But that would also have to be incorrect; for in that case, how could the entities which did the perceiving—the main mind and associated mental functions—ever possess an object of their perception? It would be impossible. Because then you would be accepting that something which occurred after the perceiving could be an object condition.
[200] KHYOD LTAR NA DMIGS BYA DMIGS BYED GNYIS MA 'BREL TE, DMIGS BYA'I DUS SU DMIGS BYED MED CING DMIGS BYED KYI DUS SU DMIGS BYA MED PA'I PHYIR,
82 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
According to you, the object being perceived and the state of mind doing the perceiving could never have any connection. Because that state of mind could never exist within the time of what it was perceiving; while the thing being perceived could never exist within the time of what was perceiving it.
[201] 'DIR DMIGS PA TZAM THA SNYAD DU DGAG MI NUS PAS BLTOS MED DAM DON DAM PAR GRUB PA 'GOG PA'O,,
Denying that the object of perception per se existed in a nominal way is something which would be impossible; as such, what we are denying here is that it could exist without relying upon anything else: that it could exist in an ultimate way.
[202] MDO SDE BA SOGS KYIS SHES PA DE'I DMIGS RKYEN NI RANG GI SNGA ROL TU 'BYUNG BAR 'DOD DE CUNG DKA' BA'I GNAS SO,,
The assertion of groups such as the Sutrist School that the object being perceived by a state of mind must exist prior to that state is a point which presents some difficulty.
Denying that a condition for what comes immediately after has any qualities of its own
[203] GSUM PA NI,
The third section—a denial that the condition for what comes immediately after it could have any qualities of its own—is presented in the next verse of Wisdom:
[204] (I.11)
83 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
Anutpanneṣu dharmeṣu nirodho nopapadyate, Nānantaram ato yuktaṃ niruddhe pratyayaś ca kaḥ.
Anutpanneshu dharmeshu nirodho nopapadyate, Nanantaram ato yuktan niruddhe pratyayash cha kah.
,CHOS RNAMS SKYES PA MA YIN NA, ,'GAG PA 'THAD PAR MI 'GYUR RO, ,DE PHYIR DE MA THAG PA'I RIGS {%THAG MI RIGS},36 ,'GAGS NA RKYEN YANG GANG ZHIG YIN, ,ZHES SO,,
If things had not yet grown, then it Would be incorrect for them to end. Thus the idea of the one for what Comes immediately after is wrong; If it were to end, then how Could it ever be a condition?
[205] GAL TE DNGOS PO GZHAN 'GAGS MA THAG PA LAS 'BRAS BU GZHAN SKYES PAS DE RANG BZHIN GYIS YOD DO ZHE NA,
Now someone might come and say, “Just after one entity ends, a result which is something other than it grows; thus we can say that such conditions exist through a nature of their own.”
[206] MYU GU SOGS 'BRAS BU'I CHOS RNAMS CHOS CAN, RANG RGYU SA BON 'GAGS MA THAG PA DE KHYOD KYI DE MA THAG ,RKYEN DU MI RIGS TE, SKYES PA
36 Thag mi-rigs: An important correction from the Derge Tengyur to the root text as it is presented in Choney Lama’s commentary. Since the wording in the latter often seems to be correct in such cases, it seems possible that the root text was added to his work subsequently by a less qualified editor.
84 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
MA YIN NA STE SKYES PA'I SNGA ROL DU KHYOD KYI SA BON 'GAGS PA [f. 12b] 'THAD PAR MI 'GYUR BA DE'I PHYIR,
Let’s consider then things that are results—things like sprouts.
It would be wrong to say that some seed for them—their cause— which had ended just before them could ever be this type of condition which is for what comes immediately after it;
Because if a result had not yet grown, then it would be incorrect to say that its seed had already ended, before the growth occurred.
[207] DER THAL, KHYOD SKYES PA DANG KHYOD KYI SA BON 'GAGS PA DUS MNYAM PA'I PHYIR,
I disagree that this would be incorrect to say.
And yet it would; for the sprout’s growing, and the ending of its seed, should be simultaneous.
[208] GAL TE KHYOD KYI LTAR 'GAG PAR 'DOD NA NI MI 'THAD PAR THAL, DE LTAR NA, 'BRAS BU'I RKYEN YANG GANG ZHIG YIN TE MED PA'I PHYIR,
And if someone were to agree that this seed were to end in the way you describe it, that would further be incorrect,
Because—if that were the case—then how could it ever be a condition for the result? It wouldn’t even exist!
[209] RANG LUGS NA {%NI} RNAM SHES SNGA MA 'GAG KHA MA PHYI MA'I DE MA THAG RKYEN DU 'DOD KYI, 'GAGS ZIN DER KHAS MI YIN? {%LEN} NO,,
85 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
Our own position is that the consciousness of the moment before—the one which is just about to end—is what we call the “condition for what comes immediately after” it: the next moment of consciousness. We don’t agree though that a previous moment of consciousness which had already ended could ever act as such a condition.
[210] GZHUNG 'DIS GZUGS LA'ANG DE MA THAG RKYEN 'DOD PA'I RGOL BA ZHIG BSTAN TE BYE SMRA ZHIG LA DGONGS SO,,
These lines of the root text are also referring to those who hold an opposing position which says that instances of physical form can also act as conditions for what comes just after them. What the Arya had in mind when he wrote the lines is certain members of the Detailist School.
Denying that a dominant condition has any qualities of its own
[211] BZHI PA NI,
Our fourth and final section here is a denial that the dominant condition could have any qualities of its own. This is covered in the next lines of the root text:
[212] (I.12)
Bhāvānāṃ niḥsvabhāvānāṃ na sattā vidyate yataḥ, Satīdam asmin bhavatītyetan naivopapadyate.
Bhavanan nihsvabhavanan na satta vidyate yatah, Satidam asmin bhavatityetan naivopapadyate.
,DNGOS PO RNAMS KYI RANG BZHIN NI,
86 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
,YOD PA GANG PHYIR YOD MIN NA, ,'DI YOD PAS NA 'DI 'BYUNG ZHES, ,BYA BA 'DI NI 'THAD MA YIN, ,ZHES SO,,
Things though do possess a nature, For if it were the case they didn’t, The statement made where it was said That “This will happen, if that is there” Could never have been correct.
[213] GAL TE BDAG RKYEN RANG BZHIN GYIS YOD DO ZHE NA,
Someone may come, finally, and make the following statement: “Dominant causes do though exist through a nature of their own.”
[214] SHES BYA CHOS CAN, RGYU 'DI RANG BZHIN GYIS YOD PAS NA 'BRAS BU 'DI RANG DBANG DU 'BYUNG NGO ZHES BYA BA 'DI NI BDAG RKYEN GYI MTSAN NYID DU 'THAD PA MA YIN TE, RGYU MTSAN GANG GI PHYIR NA DNGOS PO RNAMS KYI YOD PA NI RANG BZHIN GYIS YOD PA MA YIN PA'I PHYIR TE,
Consider all knowable things.
It could not be correct to say that “that cause is there through some nature of its own; and thus, this result will happen, all of its own accord.” Making this kind of statement could never have been correct, where it was said as a description of some qualities of its own that the dominant condition could ever possess.
And this is for the reason—this is because it’s the case—that the existence of things is not something that could ever be there,
87 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
through any nature of its own.37
[215] RTEN 'BREL LA RANG BZHIN GYIS GRUB PA KHEGS PA'I PHYIR RO,,
And that’s because we deny that dependence itself could ever exist through any nature of its own.
Concluding remarks on results that never grow
[216] GSUM PA LA GNYIS, 'BRAS BU LA SKYE BA BKAG PA'I MJUG BSDU BA DANG, SKYED BYED LA RKYEN GYI RANG BZHIN BKAG PA'I MJUG BSDU BA'O,,
With this, we have reached the third step in our denial that what makes certain results grow could possess any nature of being a condition. This is a presentation of other, relevant denials. That presentation itself comes in two parts: a wrap-up to our refusal that results could ever grow; and a similar wrap-up to our refusal that things which cause things grow could ever possess any nature of being a condition.
[217] DANG PO NI,
The first of these is expressed in the next lines to appear in the root text:
[218] (I.13-14)
37 Through any nature: The verse as it appears in Wisdom would seem to be a statement of a position which opposes our own; but Choney Lama re-organizes the elements of the verse here into a statement of our own position. He has been playing with the root text in similar ways intentionally, to increase our understanding of the points being made. It’s a useful exercise for the careful reader to work out the differences between the two presentations.
88 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
Na ca vyasta samasteṣu pratyayeṣvasti tat phalam, Pratyayebhyaḥ kathaṃ tac ca bhaven na pratyayeṣu yat. Athāsad api tat tebhyaḥ pratyayebhyaḥ pravartate, Apratyayebhyo 'pi kasmān nābhipravartate phalam.
Na cha vyasta samasteshu pratyayashvasti tat phalam, Pratyayebhyah kathan tach cha bhaven na pratyayeshu yat. Athasad api tat tebhyah pratyayebhyah pravartate, Apratyayebhyo’pi kasman nabhipravartate phalam.
,RKYEN RNAMS SO SO 'DUS PA LA, ,'BRAS BU DE NI MED PA NYID, ,RKYEN RNAMS LA NI GANG MED PA, ,DE NI RKYEN LAS JI LTAR SKYE, ,CI STE 'BRAS BU DE MED KYANG,38 ,RKYEN DE DAG LAS SKYE 'GYUR NA, ,RKYEN MIN RNAMS LAS 'BRAS BU NI, ,CI YI PHYIR NA SKYE MI 'GYUR, ,ZHES SO,,
There cannot be any result at all In the convening of each Of the individual conditions.
How could something grow from conditions If it had never been in those conditions?
For if the result were to grow from these Conditions without being in them, Then why couldn’t the same result Begin to grow from things That weren’t conditions?
38 Ci ste ‘bras-bu: The Derge Tengyur, for this line, reads ci ste de ni med-par yang; and two lines below in the Tibetan reads rkyen ma-yin-pa dag las kyang.
89 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
[219] GAL TE RKYEN LAS 'BRAS BU 'BYUNG BA [f. 13a] MTHONG BAS DE LA DE YOD DO ZHE NA,
One may begin like this: “We can see, with our own eyes, that results come from conditions; and so those results must be there, in the conditions.”
[220] SNAL MA LA SOGS PA'I RKYEN RNAMS SO SO BA DANG 'DUS PA CHOS CAN, KHYOD GANG LA YANG 'BRAS BU SNAM BU DE NI MED PA KHO NA NYID YIN PAR THAL, DE LTAR DMIGS RUNG MA DMIGS PA'I PHYIR,
Let’s consider then the convening of each of the individual conditions for something; for example, the way many lines of yarn go into an entire length of woolen cloth.
It must then be the case that there can never be any result at all—any such length of wool cloth—within the ball of yarn;
Because if there were, it should be something we can observe there; but we cannot.
[221] RKYEN RNAMS LA NI GANG MED PA'I SNAM BU DE NI CHOS CAN, RKYEN SNAL MA SOGS LAS RANG DBANG DU JI LTAR SKYE STE MI SKYE BAR THAL, DE LA MED PA'I PHYIR,
Consider then it—this length of wool cloth—the one which has never been in those conditions.
How could it ever grow from the conditions, from the yarn and such, all of its own accord? It could in fact never do so.
Because it has never been in them.
90 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
[222] CI STE 'BRAS BU DE NI RKYEN RNAMS LA MED KYANG RKYEN DE DAG LAS RANG BZHIN GYIS SKYE BAR 'GYUR NA SNAM BU DE CHOS CAN, RKYEN MIN PA 'JAG MA LA SOGS PA RNAMS LAS KYANG SKYE BAR 'GYUR BAR THAL, DE LTAR NA DE DAG LAS KYANG CI YI PHYIR NA SKYE BAR MI 'GYUR TE SKYE RIGS PA'I PHYIR TE, RKYEN LA MED KYANG RANG BZHIN GYIS SKYE BA'I PHYIR,
Consider what would happen if the same result—the length of woolen cloth—were to grow, through some nature of its own, from these conditions, without being in them—in the conditions.
It would then have to grow from things that weren’t conditions for wool cloth: from things like the kusha grass that is sometimes woven into mats;
Because why couldn’t the wool cloth then begin to grow, even from these other things? It would be perfectly appropriate for it to do so—for, despite the fact that it wasn’t there in its conditions—it would still be growing through some nature of its own.
[223] RKYEN RE RE KHO NAS SNAM BU GCIG PA SKYED {%GCIG BSKYED) PAR BYAR MI NUS TE, NUS NA SNAM YUG GCIG NYID DUM BU MAR {%DUM BU DU MAR} SKYE BAR THAL BA'I PHYIR DANG,
Individual conditions acting on their own could never create an entire single length of woolen cloth, for if they could then a single length of the cloth then would have to grow into multiple whole bolts of it.
[224] RGYU RKYEN TSOGS PA LA MA BLTOS PAR 'GYUR BA'I PHYIR,
Moreover, all this would no longer have to rely upon the convening of the necessary causes and conditions.
91 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
[225] GAL TE SNAM BU DE NI RKYEN TSOGS PA LAS NGO BO NYID KYIS SKYE'O ZHE NA,
And suppose someone at this point said, “The length of woolen cloth grows, in and by itself, from the convening of its conditions.”
[226] DE YANG MI 'THAD PAR THAL, RKYEN CHOGS {%TSOGS} PA LA'ANG SNAM BU NGO BO NYID KYIS MED PA'I PHYIR,
But that couldn’t be correct, because—even if its conditions do convene—a length of such cloth could never even exist in and by itself.
[227] DPER NA BYE MA TSOGS PA LA TIL MAR MI 'BYUNG BA BZHIN NO,,
After all, you don’t get butter when grains of sand have convened.
Concluding remarks on causes with no nature
[228] GNYIS PA NI,
Here is our second part from above: another wrap-up, this time to our refusal that things which cause things grow could ever possess any nature of being a condition. It is expressed in the final two verses of the first chapter:
[229] (I.15-16)
Phalaṃ ca pratyaya mayaṃ pratyayāś cāsvayaṃ mayāḥ,
92 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
Phalam asvamayebhyo yat tat pratyaya mayaṃ katham. Tasmān na pratyaya mayaṃ nāpratyaya mayaṃ phalam, Saṃvidyate phalābhāvāt pratyayāpratyayāḥ kutaḥ.
Phalan cha pratyaya mayam pratyayash chasvayam mayah, Phalam asvamayebhyo yat tat pratyaya mayan katham. Tasman na pratyaya mayan napratyaya mayam phalam, Sanvidyate phalabhavat pratyayapratyayah kutah.
,'BRAS BU RKYEN GYI RANG BZHIN NA, ,RKYEN RNAMS BDAG GI RANG BZHIN MIN, ,BDAG DNGOS MIN LAS 'BRAS BU GANG, ,DE NI JI LTAR RKYEN RANG BZHIN, ,DE PHYIR RKYEN GYI RANG BZHIN MIN, ,RKYEN MIN RANG BZHIN 'BRAS BU NI, ,YOD MIN 'BRAS BU MED PAS NA, ,RKYEN MIN RKYEN DU GA LA 'GYUR, [f. 13b] ZHES SO,,
Suppose you assert that results Constitute a nature Of their conditions; But conditions are not things With a nature of their own.
And so how could those, Regardless of how you look at it, Be some nature of their conditions? Because there is none With the nature of its conditions.
Neither is there a result That could have a nature Of not being its condition. Since results cannot exist, How could something not a condition Ever act as a condition?
93 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
[230] GAL TE 'BRAS BU RKYEN GYI RANG BZHIN NAM RNAM 'GYUR YIN PAS SNGAR GYI RIGS PAS MI GNOD DO ZHE NA,
Suppose someone comes and asserts the following:
Results constitute a nature—or we can say, manifestation—of their conditions. Therefore the logic that you have been presenting up to here does nothing to throw our points into question.
[231] DE YANG MI RIGS TE, SNAL MA SOGS RKYEN RNAMS BDAG GI NGO BOS GRUB PA'I RANG BZHIN DU YOD PA MA YIN PA'I PHYIR TE,
But that too is mistaken, for the conditions themselves—the lines of yarn and so on—are not things which exist as a thing having some self-existent nature of their own.
[232] DE RNAMS NI RANG RANG GI CHA SHAS TSOGS PA LA BTAGS NAS BZHAG PA TZAM YIN PA'I PHYIR,
And that’s because these lengths of cloth are nothing more than the results of projections imposed upon the combination of their parts.
[233] BDAG GI DNGOS PO STE NGO BO NYID KYIS GRUB PA MIN PA'I SNAL MA SOGS LAS BYUNG BA'I 'BRAS BU SNAM BU SOGS GANG YIN PA DE NI CHOS CAN, JI LTAR YANG RNAL {%SNAL} MA LA SOGS PA'I RKYEN GYI RANG BZHIN DU NGO BOS YOD PA MI RUNG STE, RKYEN GYI RANG BZHIN CAN DU NGO BOS GRUB PA'I 'BRAS BU YOD PA MA YIN PA DE'I PHYIR TE,
Let’s consider all these things that are results—bolts of cloth which have come from lines of yarn, or the like—objects which themselves are no self-contained things: not things which exist in and by themselves.
94 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
It could never be right, regardless of how you look at it, to say that they existed—in and by themselves—as some kind of nature of their conditions; of their lines of wool, or whatever the case might be.
And that’s because there is no such thing as a result which has the nature of its conditions and is, at the same time, something which exists in and by itself.
[234] DE SKAD DU 'ANG BZHI BRGYA PA LAS, ,SNAM BU RGYU LAS GRUB 'GYUR ZHING, ,RGYU YANG GZHAN LAS 'GRUB 'GYUR NA, ,GANG ZHIG RANG GIS GRUB MED PA, ,DES GZHAN SKYED PAR JI LTAR 'GYUR, ,ZHES GSUNGS PA LTAR RO,,
As the 400 Verses puts it,
Lengths of cloth are made From causes of their own; And in turn these causes Are made from something else. Nothing then can ever come In and of itself; how so could it Ever make something else instead?39
[235] GAL TE RKYEN YIN PA'I RANG BZHIN DU GRUB PA'I 'BRAS BU NI YOD PAR 'DOD NA'ANG RIGS PA MA YIN TE, DE 'DRA MI SRID PA'I PHYIR,
39 Lengths of cloth are made: See f. 15b of the text (%S13, TD03846) by Arya Nagarjuna’s spiritual son, Master Aryadeva. The version in the Derge Tengyur reads “water pitcher” (bum-pa) for the “length of cloth” (snam-bu) here; but by the time of Master Buddhapalita’s commentary we see the latter reading, attributed to Aryadeva. Master Chandrakirti includes the lines this way as well in his Clarification of the Verses (f. 30a, %S14, TD03860).
95 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
One may assert as well that there could be a result which had a nature of not being its condition; but that’s neither is that correct; for such a thing is not even possible.
[236] KHO NA RE, RKYEN DANG RKYEN MA YIN PA'I NGES PA YOD DE, TIL LAS 'BRU MAR 'BYUNG GI 'O MA MI 'BYUNG, ZHO LAS MAR 'BYUNG GI 'BRU MAR MI 'BYUNG, BYE MA LAS DE GNYIS KA MI 'BYUNG BAS RKYEN DANG RKYEN MIN RANG BZHIN GYIS YOD DO ZHE NA,
Someone may respond with the following:
But there is a certainty as to what can be a specific condition, and what cannot. You get sesame butter from sesame seeds; but you don’t get cow’s milk from them. And you get butter from curds; but you don’t get sesame butter form them. And you don’t get either one from grains of sand. Therefore, things which can be conditions and things which cannot be conditions both exist through a nature of their own.
[237] RKYEN DANG RKYEN CAN GYI 'BRAS BU RANG BZHIN GYIS MED PAR BSHAD ZIN PAS NA 'DI NI 'DI'I RKYEN DU YOD DO, ,'DI NI RKYEN MIN NO ZHES PA'I NGES PA RANG BZHIN GYIS YOD PAR GA LA 'GYUR TE, RKYEN DANG RKYEN MIN GNYIS PHAN TSUN BLTOS [f. 14a] NAS 'JOG PA'I PHYIR RO,,
And yet we have already explained why conditions, and the things which possess these conditions—that is, their results—cannot exist through any nature of their own. How then could there ever be then any certainty, which existed through some nature of its own, where you could say “This can act as a condition for that”—or “This cannot act as such a condition.” For these two—things which are conditions, and things which are not conditions—can only be posited through mutual reliance.
Connecting the chapter to scripture
[238] GNYIS PA NI,
96 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
Here next is the second section from above: connecting this chapter to literal presentations of these topics in scripture.
[239] RANG BZHIN GYIS SKYE BA MED BZHI RIGS PA TZAM GYIS BSGRUB PA MIN GYI, RANG BZHIN GYIS SKYE MED STON PA'I GSUNG RAB THAMS CAD NAS BSHAD PA'I DON RAB BYED 'DIS STON NO ZHES PHYOGS TZAM MTSON PA NI 'PHAGS PA DKON MCHOG 'BYUNG GNAS KYI MDO DRANGS PA STE, 'OG MA RNAMS LA'ANG DE LTAR SHES PAR BYA'O,,
Now these four ways in which things never grow through any nature of their own are not ideas that we establish only by using clear reasoning; rather, “what this chapter presents is nothing less than the import of each and every high teaching which describes how nothing can grow through any nature of its own.” To make this point, in just a “small representative example,”40 an excerpt from The Sutra on the Source of the Jewels has been used—and you should understand that the same was done for subsequent chapters as well.41
[240] DE LTAR MDZAD PA THAMS CAD NI RGYU RKYEN LA SOGS PA'I 'KHOR 'DAS KYI BYA BYED KYI RNAM GZHAG THAMS CAD BTAGS DON MA BTZAL BAR MING GI THA SNYAD KYI DBANG GIS BZHAG PA TZAM YIN PA'I PHYIR, DON RANG GI YUL STENG NAS NGO BOS GRUB PA'I TSUL GYIS MIN NO ZHES GO BA'I CHED DE MTSON PA TZAM MO,,
This is just a little taste of all these teachings, which are meant to help us understand that the entire structure of all the workings of things in the world—whether we’re talking about the cycle of pain, or what is beyond this cycle; things like causes and conditions— are something that is established by nothing more than the power of terms, in the sense of names…and there is no use in trying to seek out the object the names refer to,
40 Nothing can grow: Choney Lama snips the bits in quotation marks directly from Je Tsongkapa; see f. 51a of The Sea (%B2, S05401). 41 Excerpt from the “Sutra on the Source”: We have included this first excerpt, as a sample, in an appendix below entitled “An Excerpt from The Sutra on the Source of the Jewels,” as this has been covered by Je Tsongkapa himself.
97 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
independent of them. The fact that any object in the universe has any meaning is not because that meaning applies to the object in a way that exists in and of itself.
The name of the chapter
[241] GSUM PA NI,
Which brings us to the third and final section of our examination of the workings of cause & effect, which leads to disproving that things could have any nature of their own. This is the presentation of the name of the chapter.
[242] (I.chapter title)
[Pratyaya parīkṣā.42
Pratyaya pariksha.
,RKYEN BRTAG PA ZHES BYA BA STE RAB TU BYED PA DANG PO'O,,
Here ends the first chapter of Wisdom: “An Investigation of Conditions.”]
[243] RKYEN BRTAG PA ZHES BYA BA RAB BYED DANG PO STE DE'I RNAM PAR BSHAD PA'O,,
42 Pratyayaparīkṣā: We have moved the Sanskrit name of the chapter from the beginning of our Sanskrit reference edition to the end here, to match the Tibetan and Choney Lama’s commentary. Choney Lama throughout the chapter inserts the relevant root text original in his commentary, except for these chapter titles, which we have included in square brackets.
98 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
And this ends our explication of the first chapter of Wisdom: “An Investigation of Conditions.”
99 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
Chapter 2 An Investigation of Going & Coming
100 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
Chapter 2 An Investigation of Going & Coming
Cancelling three parts to a path
[244] ` ,GNYIS PA 'GRO 'ONG GI BYA BYED LA BRTAG PA GANG ZAG LA RANG BZHIN DGAG PA LA GSUM, GZHUNG DON BSHAD PA, LUNG DANG SBYAR BA, MTSAN BSTAN PA'O,,
Here secondly is an investigation of the workings of going & coming—a denial that the person could have any nature of their own. We proceed in three steps: an explanation of the import of the text; drawing connections to scripture; and finally presenting the name of the chapter.
[245] DANG PO LA GNYIS, RGYAS PAR BSHAD PA DANG, MJUG BSDU BA'O,,
There are two parts to our explanation of the text: an expanded explication, followed by a concluding summary.
[246] DANG PO LA BZHI, LAS LA BRTAG NAS DGAG PA, DE BZHIN DU BYED PA PO LA, BYA BA YOD PA'I SGRUB BYED LA, BYA BA'I NGO BO LA BRTAG NAS DGAG PA'O,,
The explication has four parts: (1) denying any nature to the person, by analyzing the action; (2) the same, by analyzing the agent; (3) by analyzing proofs for the existence of the act; and, finally, (4) undertaking this denial by analyzing the essence of the act.
[247]
101 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
DANG PO LA GNYIS, LAM GSUM LA BYA BA SPYIR DGAG PA DANG, BGOM BZHIN PA LA BYE BRAG TU DGAG PA'O,,
The first of these has two sections of its own: denying the act in general, with regard to the three parts of a path; and denying, more particularly, being in the process of stepping.
[248] DANG PO NI, SPYIR 'DI LAM DU 'GRO'O ZHES BRJOD PA NA BYED PO LAM DU 'GRO BA PO GCIG DANG, DE LAM GANG DU 'GRO BA'I BYA BA YANG GCIG YIN GYI DU MA MIN NO,,
Here’s the first. Now generally speaking, when we say that “this person is going down the path,” we are referring to a single agent—a single person going down the path; and we are referring as well to a single act—going down the path to a certain place. It’s not that these would be more than one.
[249] 'GRO [f. 14b] MA'I {%SA’I} LAM NI GSUM STE, SONG ZIN PA DANG 'GRO BZHIN PA DANG MA SONG ZHING BYA BA MA RTZOM PA'O,,
Now the path on which we’re going has three parts: there’s the part that we’ve finished going down; there’s the part that we’re going down now; and there’s the part that we haven’t travelled yet: where we have yet to undertake that act.
[250] 'DIR SONG MA SONG GNYIS LA 'GRO BA'I BYA BA THA SNYAD DU 'GOG CING, DER BGOM BZHIN PA LA DGAG BYA SBYAR NAS 'GOG BA {%PA} YIN TE,
We deny, even in a nominal sense, that the two of the having gone, and the yet to go, could be acts of going. And then we deny as well the being in the process of stepping— but by applying the concept of the thing that emptiness denies.
[251]
102 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
SONG BA LA BYA BA 'GAGS ZIN LA, MA SONG BA'I BYA BA MA BRTZAM PA LA BYA BA MA SKYES SHING, DA LTA BGOM BZHIN PA LA BYA BA 'JOG PA'I PHYIR, DE YID LA BZHAG NAS,
In the case of having gone, the act has already stopped. In the case of not yet having gone—where we have not yet undertaken the act—the act has yet to begin. What we do say is an act is where we are, at present, in the process of stepping. Keep these points in mind as we proceed here.
[252] (II.1)
Gataṃ na gamyate tāvad agataṃ naiva gamyate, Gatāgata vinirmuktaṃ gamyamānaṃ na gamyate.
Gatan na gamyate tavad agatan naiva gamyate, Gatagata vinirmuktan gamyamanan na gamyate.
,RE ZHIG SONG LA MI 'GRO STE, ,MA SONG BA LA {%LA’ANG} 'GRO BA MIN, ,SONG DANG MA SONG MA GTOGS PAR, ,BGOM PA BYED PAR MI 'GYUR RO,, ZHES SO,,
First of all, having gone Is not going; Neither is not having gone Going. And yet except for having gone And not having gone, You can never be stepping.
[253] RE ZHIG NI DGAG PA'I RIM PA STON PA YIN LA,
103 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
The words first of all in this first verse of the second chapter are meant to indicate that our denial is going to go in stages.
[254] SHES BYA TSES {%CHOS} CAN, 'GRO BA PO GANG ZHIG 'GRO BA'I BYA BA 'GAGS PA SONG BA'I LAM LA MI 'GRO BA STE 'GRO BA'I BYA BA MED CING,
Consider all the knowable things in the universe.
A person who is going down a path is not going down the part of the path where they have already gone—where their act of going has already drawn to an end;
Because there is no act of going there.
[255] 'GRO BA'I BYA BA MA SKYES PA MA SONG BA'I LAM LA 'GRO BA'I BYA BA YOD PA MA YIN TE, 'GRO BA'I BYA BA NI DA LTA BA NYID YIN PA'I PHYIR,
Neither is there any act where they are going down the part of the path that they have not gone down yet;
Because the act of going is something that belongs to the immediate present.
[256] GAL TE 'GRO BZHIN PA'I LAM LA BYA BA RANG MTSAN PA YOD DO ZHE NA,
And suppose someone says: “But there does exist a definitive act of this kind with regard to the part of the path on which we are currently going.”
[257] DE YANG MED DE, BGOM BZHIN PA'I LAM RANG DBANG DU MED PA'I PHYIR TE, RKANG PAS SONG BA'I CHA 'GA' ZHIG GI BYA BA 'GAGS PA DANG, DES MA
104 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
SONG BA'I CHA 'GA' ZHIG GI BYA BA MA SKYES PA MA GTOGS PAR BGOM BZHIN PA'I LAM BDEN PA BA TSAD MAS SHES PAR MI 'GYUR BA'I PHYIR TE,
But the fact is that not even that exists—for there is no part of the path upon which we are presently going, and which exists in isolation. We have some sections of the path down which we have already gone, with our feet; and that action has ended. And then we have some other parts of the path that we have not yet gone down, with our feet; and that action has yet to begin. Except for these two, though, there is never any truly existing path upon which you can be in the act of stepping: no such thing can be confirmed by a state of mind which is an accurate perception.43
[258] RKANG PA LA CHA DU MA YOD PA'I RKANG PA'I SOR MO'I RGYAB KYIS MNAN PA'I CHA NI DES SONG BA'I KHONGS SU GTOGS LA, RTING BAS MNAN PA'I MDUN GYI PHYOGS NI DES MA SONG BA'I KHONGS SU GTOGS PA'I PHYIR,
After all, the foot has a great many parts, doesn’t it? As you step forward, the part of the path behind, where your toes are pushing off, has to be counted as a section that you have gone down; and the part ahead, where you’ve yet to set down your heel, has to be counted as a part of the path where you haven’t yet gone down.
[259] [f. 15a] 'ON KYANG BGOM BZHIN PA'I LAM MED PAR MI 'DOD DE, RKANG BA'I {%PA’I} CHA DANG CHA CAN GANG GIS MNAN PA'I PHYOGS DE DE'I BGOM BZHIN PAR THA SNYAD DU 'JOG RIGS PA'I PHYIR TE,
But then we’d have to say that there’s no part of the path that you are in the process of going down: in the end, we could never apply this expression to parts of the path being pressed underfoot, by parts of a foot and a foot made of those parts.
[260] MI 'JOG NA GANG LA BLTOS TE SONG MA SONG YANG BZHAG MI NUS PAR 'GYUR BA'I PHYIR RO,,
43 No such thing can be confirmed: The definition of “existing thing” in Buddhism is, of course, “that thing which can be confirmed by an accurate perception.”
105 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
And if we could never apply the expression, then we’d be left with no means at all by which we could ever decide, either, which parts of the path we’d gone down, and which we’d yet to go down.
[261] RIGS PA DES SONG MA SONG BGOM BZHIN PA GSUM LTOS NAS GRUB PAR SHES TE DE GSUM RANG BZHIN GYIS MED PAR SHES PAR 'GYUR LA, DE SHES NA LAM DE GSUM DU 'JOG PA'I RKANG PA DANG DES 'GRO BA PO RANG BZHIN MED PAR SHES PAR 'GYUR RO,,
Using this kind of clear reasoning, we can come to the realization that having gone, and having yet to go, and being in the process of going—all three—are things that exist only relative to one another. That is, we finally understand that this triad cannot exist through any nature of its own. Once we understand that, then we come to realize that the feet, and the person who uses these feet to go—that is, the two things which define the three parts of the path—have no nature of their own either.
Cancelling stepping
[262] GNYIS PA LA GNYIS, PHYOGS SNGA MA DANG, DE DGAG PA'O,,
This brings us to our second point from above: denying, more particularly, being in the process of stepping. We proceed in two steps: a presentation of our opponent’s position; and then a refutation of that position.
[263] DANG PO NI,
The first of these is expressed in the next verse of Wisdom:44
44 The next verse of Wisdom: In Arya Nagarjuna’s style of writing, we often get a verse expressing an opposing position, followed by a verse refuting that position—this is very
106 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
[264] (II.2)
Ceṣṭā yatra gatis tatra gamyamāne ca sā yataḥ, Na gate nāgate ceṣṭā gamyamāne gatis tataḥ.
Cheshta yatra gatis tatra gamyamane cha sa yatah, Na gate nagate cheshta gamyamane gatis tatah.
,GANG NA G-YO BA DE NA 'GRO, ,DE YANG GANG PHYIR BGOM PA LA, ,G-YO BA SONG MIN MA SONG MIN, ,DE PHYIR BGOM LA 'GRO BA YOD, ,CES SO,,
Wherever one is in motion, There is going. And why is that so? When we are stepping, The motion is not having gone, Nor is it not having gone. And so there is going Where there is stepping.
[265] KHO NA RE, BGOM BZHIN PA'I LAM LA 'GRO BA'I BYA BA YOD TZAM MIN PAR NGO BOS YOD DE, YUL GANG NA RKANG PA 'DEGS 'JOG LA SOGS PA'I LUS G- YO BA DE NA 'GRO BA'I BYA BA YOD LA, G-YO BA DE YANG 'GRO BA PO GANG GI PHYIR DU BGOM BZHIN PA'I LAM LA YOD KYI, G-YO BA DE SNGAR LTAR SONG ZIN MIN PA DANG MA SONG BA'I LAM DU YOD PA MIN PA DE'I PHYIR ZHE NA,
useful to keep in mind, so we don’t drop into the pitfall of thinking that every verse he wrote is expressing his own beliefs.
107 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
Someone may come and make the following assertion:
The act of going down a path that we are in the process of stepping on doesn’t just exist; rather, it exists in and of itself. Here’s the reason why that is so. The act of going does exist, in whatever location where one is in motion: where we are doing things like raising our foot, and then setting it down.
And so because we have that motion going on, and we have as well someone who is going, then there we have a path upon which the stepping is in process. But this motion is not something that consists of having gone down the path; nor does it consist of not yet having gone down the path—it is not something that is found on those parts of the path.
Can words have a meaning of their own?
[266] GNYIS PA LA GSUM, LAS TSIG DON DANG BCAS NA BYA BA'I TSIG DON GYIS STONG PA, DE LAS LDOG PA, GNYIS KA DON DANG BCAS NA HA CANG THAL BA'O,,
The second point here—a refutation of the position just expressed—comes in three parts. First, we’ll demonstrate that if something embodied the meaning of the word “action,” then it would have to exhibit a lack of the meaning of the word “act.” Then we’ll demonstrate the opposite: if something embodied the meaning of the word “act,” then it would have to exhibit a lack of the meaning of the word “action.” Finally, we’ll demonstrate how it would exceed the bounds of reason if anything were to embody the meanings of both words.
[267] DANG PO NI, The first of these three is expressed in the next verse of Wisdom:
(II.3)
108 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
Gamyamānasya gamanaṃ kathaṃ nāmopapatsyate, Gamyamānaṃ vigamanaṃ yadā naivopapadyate.
Gamyamanasya gamanan kathan namopapatsyate, Gamyamanan vigamanan yada naivopapadyate.
,BGOM LA 'GRO BA YIN PAR NI, ,JI LTA BUR NA 'THAD PAR 'GYUR, ,GANG TSE 'GRO BA MED PA YI, ,BGOM PA 'THAD PA MED PHYIR RO,, ZHES SO,,
How could it be correct to say That there was going Where there was stepping? For it would never be correct To say there was a stepping Where there was no going.
[268] BGOM BZHIN PA'I [f. 15b] LAM LA 'GRO BA'I BYA BA RANG NGOS NAS GRUB PA YIN PAR NI TSUL JI LTA BUR NA 'THAD PAR 'GYUR ZHES PA MI 'THAD DE,
How could it be correct to say—that is, it would be incorrect to say—that there was some way that, on a part of the path where we are in the process of stepping, anything there could be an act of going that existed from its own side.
[269] GANG GI TSE STE GANG GI PHYIR 'GRO BA'I BYA BA TSIG GI DON DU MED PA YI BGOM BZHIN PA'I LAM ZHES PA NI 'THAD PA MED PA'I PHYIR,
For—since—it would never be correct to say there could be a path where we are in the process of stepping, but where there was nothing present that embodied the meaning of the expression, “the act of going.”
109 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
[270] BYA BA PA {%BYA BA} YOD DE, 'GRO BA'I BYA BA DE BGOM BZHIN PA'I LAM {%LAS} ZHES PA'I LAS TSIG GI DON DU YOD PA'I TSUL GYIS NGO BOS YOD NA, BYA BA DE 'GRO'O ZHES PA'I BYA TSIG GI DON DU MED DGOS KYANG DE'I DON DU YOD PA'I PHYIR TE,
And yet there is the act. If the act of going existed in and by itself, in a way where it embodied the meaning of the words for the action—“an action where they are stepping”—then it would be impossible for it to embody as well the meaning of the words for the act: “they go.” But in fact the act of going does embody, as well, the meaning of these latter words.45
[271] YOD KYANG BYA BA DE DE 'DRA'I LAS TSIG GI DON DU NGO BOS GRUB NA LAM {%LAS} GYI NGO BOR GRUB DGOS LA, 'GRO ZHES PA'I BYA TSIG GI DON DU GRUB NA 'GRO BA PO'I NGO BOR GRUB DGOS PA LAS, BYA BA NGO BOS GRUB PA GCIG NYID GZHI SO SO LA BLTOS PAR 'GAL BA'I PHYIR RO,,
And even though it does embody them, if the act embodied the words of such an action in a way that existed in and of itself, then it would have to be, in essence, the action. The fact though is that when something embodies the words for the act—”they go”—then it would rather have to be, in essence, the goer. It could not be some other way: it would be a contradiction to say that a single entity which existed in and of itself relied upon two bases that were separate from each other.
Can meanings have a word of their own?
45 Be, in essence, the action: The manuscripts of Choney Lama’s commentary available to us begin, at this point, to display a serious carving error, where in multiple, critical instances the word lam (path) is mistakenly substituted for the word las (action). In Tibetan writing, the two words have some visual similarity; and because both are critical to this chapter, we might easily miss the substitution, struggling unnecessarily in a section which already requires some struggle. The incorrect substitution of the word bsgom (to meditate) for bgom (to step) in some of the manuscripts should also be watched for and sidestepped.
110 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
[272] GNYIS PA NI,
Which brings us to our second part from above, where we demonstrate the opposite: if something embodied the meaning of the word “act,” then it would have to exhibit a lack of the meaning of the word “action.” This part is expressed in the next verse of Wisdom:
[273] (II.4)
Gamyamānasya gamanaṃ yasya tasya prasajyate, Ṛte gater gamyamānaṃ gamyamānaṃ hi gamyate.
Gamyamanasya gamanan yasya tasya prasajyate, Irte gater gamyamanan gamyamanan hi gamyate.
,GANG GI BGOM PA LA 'GRO BA, ,DE YI BGOM LA 'GRO MED PAR, ,THAL BAR 'GYUR TE GANG GI PHYIR, ,BGOM LA 'GRO BA YIN PHYIR RO,, ZHES SO,,
Where there is a going Where there is a stepping, The stepping would Of a necessity Lose the going— For there is a going In a stepping.
[274] RGOL BA GANG GI LTAR NA 'GRO BA'I BYA BA DE 'GRO'O ZHES PA'I BYA TSIG GI DON DU NGO BOS GRUB PA'I SGRO {%SGO} NAS BGOM PA LA 'GRO ZHES BRJOD PA DE YI PHYOGS LA CHOS CAN, BGOM PA'I LAM ZHES PA'I LAS TSIG GI DON LA 'GRO BA'I BYA BA MED PAR THAL BAR 'GYUR TE, RGYU MTSAN GANG
111 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
GI PHYIR NA 'GRO BA'I BYA BA GCIG LAS MED CING, GCIG PO DE BGOM PA LA 'GRO BA ZHES PA'I BYA TSIG GI DON DU NGO BOS YOD PA YIN PA'I PHYIR RO,,
Consider the position of this particular person: where a debater who says that where there is a stepping, then there is a going; in the same way that the act of going is, in and of itself, the meaning of the expression “they go.”
The act of going must of a necessity be lost, as one of the meanings of the expression used to express the action here: “a path down which one steps”;
And this is because—for the reason that—there is no more than a single act of going; and that one embodies, in and of itself, the meaning of the expression “going” in reference to a stepping.
[275] 'DI YANG NGO BOS GRUB PA 'GOG GI ,THA SNYAD DU BYA BA GCIG NYID TSIG DE GNYIS KYI DON DU YOD PA MI 'GOG STE, THA SNYAD DU DE LTAR 'DOD PA MI 'GAL [f. 16a] BA'I PHYIR,
What we are denying here is an embodiment which exists in and of itself; we are not though saying that—nominally speaking—a single act could not be what both of these two expressions refer to. And that’s because—when we’re speaking nominally—it’s no contradiction to accept that they could.
[276] 'DI NI, ,GANG DAG RANG MTSAN NYID KYIS SO SO BA, ,DE DAG RGYUD GCIG GTOGS PAR RIGS MA YIN,
This recalls the following statement:
It would be wrong to say that things Which were separate by definition Could ever be combined
112 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
Within the single stream of a being.46
[277] ,ZHES GSUNGS PA LTAR RANG GI MTSAN NYID KYIS GRUB PA LA CHOS GCIG THUN MONG DU BRTEN PA 'GAL BA'I DON NO,,
What this is saying is that—in a case where things existed by definition—it would be a contradiction for them to refer, mutually, to a single object.
Can multiple words have single meanings?
[278] GSUM PA NI,
Here third is our demonstration of how it would exceed the bounds of reason if anything were to embody the meanings of both the words, for the act and the action; this is expressed in the following two verses of the root text:
[279] (II.5-6)
Gamyamānasya gamane prasaktaṃ gamana dvayam, Yena tad gamyamānaṃ ca yac cātra gamanaṃ punaḥ. Dvau gantārau prasajyete prasakte gamana dvaye, Gantāraṃ hi tiraskṛtya gamanaṃ nopapadyate.
Gamyamanasya gamane prasaktan gamana dvayam, Yena tad gamyamanan cha yach chatra gamanam punah. Dvau gantarau prasajyete prasakte gamana dvaye, Gantaran hi tiraskirtya gamanan nopapadyate.
46 Separate by definition: See f. 207a of Master Chandrakirti’s Entering the Middle Way (%S10, TD03861).
113 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
,BGO {%BGOM} LAM {%LA} 'GRO BA YOD NA NI, ,'GRO BA GNYIS SU THAL 'GYUR TE, ,GANG GIS DE BA GOM {%DE BGOM} GYUR PA DANG, ,DE LA 'GRO BA GANG YIN PA'O, ,'GRO BA GNYIS SU THAL 'GYUR NA, ,'GRO BA PO YANG GNYIS SU 'GYUR, ,GANG PHYIR 'GRO BO MED PAR NI, ,'GRO BA 'THAD PAR MI 'GYUR RO, ZHES SO,,
If there existed a going With the stepping, Then there would have to be Two goings: The one where one was stepping, And the one where that was going.
And if there had to be two goings, Then there would have to be Two goers too; for it would never be Correct to say there was a going Where there is no goer.
[280] GAL TE 'GRO BA'I BYA BA GCIG PO DE BGOM PA DANG 'GRO ZHES PA'I TSIG GNYIS KA'I DON DU NGO BOS YOD DO ZHE NA,
Now suppose someone comes and asserts the following—
The fact is that a single act of going can exist, in and of itself, which is what both the expressions “stepping” and “going” refer to.
[281] DE YANG MI RIGS TE, DE LTAR NA DE'I TSE LAM {%LAS} DANG NGO BO GCIG PA'I 'GRO BA'I BYA BA DANG, LAM {%LAS} LAS NGO BO THA DAD PA'I 'GRO BA'I BYA BA GNYIS SU YOD PAR THAL BAR 'GYUR BA'I PHYIR TE,
114 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
But this option too is mistaken. If this were the case, then at that point there would have to be two different acts of going: one which was one with the action; and another which was distinct from the action.47
[282] JI LTAR NA, BYA BA GANG GIS BGOM BZHIN PA'I LAM {%LAS} DE BGOM ZHES PA'I THA SNYAD 'THOB PAR 'GYUR BA'I BYA BA DE LAM {%LAS} DANG NGO BO GCIG PA DANG,
And how is that? It’s because the act which is an act which was referred to as the action of being in the process of stepping—“they are stepping”—is the act that would be one with the action.
[283] LAM {%LAS} DE LA 'GRO ZHES PA'I THA SNYAD BYA BA'I TSIG GI DON DU GYUR PA'I BYA BA GANG YIN PA DE 'GRO BA PO'I {%DE’I} NGO BOR YOD CING LAM {%LAS} GYI NGO BOR MED PA'I PHYIR DANG,
And the act which is an act which was said to refer to the action—“we call it going,” where the action is the meaning of the word for the act—is the act which would be, in its essence, that same going;48 and not, in its essence, the action.
[284] BYA BA DE GNYIS RANG BZHIN GYIS GRUB PA'I SO SO BAR KHAS BLANGS PA'I PHYIR,
And this would have to be the case; for our opponent has accepted that the act and the action are, through a nature of their own, distinct from one another.
47 Distinct from the action: Here again, in multiple editions, we repeatedly see the deadly carving error replacing las with lam. 48 That same going: Despite what we see here in the various editions (‘gro-ba-po’i), the sentence only makes sense if that is a carving error for ‘gro-ba-de’i.
115 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
[285] KHYAB STE, RANG BZHIN GYIS GRUB PA CIG GZHI SO SO GNYIS LA BRTEN PA MI 'THAD PA'I PHYIR TE, 'THAD NA DE'I TSE 'GRO BA PO YANG NGO BO THA DAD PA GNYIS SU 'GYUR BA'I PHYIR TE,
And the one does imply the other—for it would be incorrect to say that a single thing which existed through some nature of its own rested upon two separate bases; because if that could happen, then there would have to be two goers too—each one distinct from the other.
[286] RGYU MTSAN GANG GI PHYIR NA RTEN 'GRO BA PO MED PAR BRTEN PA 'GRO BA'I BYA BA 'THAD PAR MI 'GYUR BA'I PHYIR RO,,
And this is true for the reason that—without that thing which is relied upon, a goer—it would never be correct to say that there was something that relied upon it: an act of going.
[287] GAL TE SKYON MED DE, GANG ZAG GCIG NYID KYIS SMRA BA DANG 'DUG PA DANG LTA [f. 16b] BA'I BYA BA GSUM DUS GCIG TU BYED PA LTA BU YIN PA'I PHYIR ZHE NA,
Now someone might come and say,
But there’s no such problem. It’s just the same as where, for example, a single person can undertake three acts at the very same time: speaking, sitting, and looking at something.
[288] MI MTSUNGS TE, GANG ZAG GCIG LA DUS GCIG TU LCE LA SOGS PA'I NUS PA'I BYED PA PO GSUM LAS SMRA BA LA SOGS PA'I BYA BA GSUM 'BYUNG BA MI 'GAL YANG,
The case here though is not the same. It’s true that there’s no contradiction for three different acts to be occurring with a single person, at the same time, where three agents which have the capacity to do so—the tongue and so on—are speaking, and such.
116 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
[289] LAM {%LAS} GYI STENG DU 'GRO BA'I BYA BA LAM {%LAS} DANG NGO GCIG MI GCIG , {%no comma} GNYIS RKANG PA GCIG GIS DUS GCIG TU BYED MI NUS PAS, DE LTA BU'I BYA BA GNYIS DUS GCIG TU YOD NA BYA BA DE BYED PA PO YANG GNYIS SU 'GYUR BA'I PHYIR RO,,
But when we’re talking, with reference to an action, about acts of going which are either one with the action or not one with the action, these are not both something that a single foot would have the capacity to do at a single point in time. And this means that—if both acts were present in the same moment of time—then there would have as well to be two agents performing the acts.
Does going make a goer?
[290] GNYIS PA BYED PA PO LA BRTAGS NAS DGAG PA LA GSUM {%,} 'GRO BA PO'I {%PO} BYA BA'I RTEN DU YOD PA DGAG ,RNAM GRANGS GSUM GYI GANG ZAG LA 'GRO BA SPYIR DGAG ,'GRO BA PO LA 'GRO BA BYE BRAG TU DGAG PA'O,,
This brings us to our second part from above: denying any nature to the person, by analyzing the agent of an action. We proceed in three steps: denying that there is a goer who is based upon the action; denying going, in general, with a person—using three different variations; and denying, more specifically, going with a goer.
[291] DANG PO,
The first of these is expressed in the following verse of Wisdom:
[292] (II.7)
Gantāraṃ cet tiraskṛtya gamanaṃ nopapadyate,
117 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
Gamane‘sati gantātha kuta eva bhaviṣyati.
Gantaran chet tiraskirtya gamanan nopapadyate, Gamane’sati gantatha kuta eva bhavishyati.
,GAL TE 'GRO BA {%PO} MED GYUR NA, ,'GRO BA 'THAD PAR MI 'GYUR TE, ,'GRO BA MED NA 'GRO BA PO, ,YOD PA NYID DU GA LA 'GYUR, ,ZHES SO,,
Now going could never be correct In a case where there’s no goer; For how could there ever be The goer themselves, In a case where there’s no going?
[293] GAL TE LHAS BYIN 'GRO'O ZHES PA'I THA SNYAD 'THAD PA LAS NA {%NI} 'GRO BA PO DMIGS LA, DE'I PHYIR 'GRO BA'I BYA BA YANG NGO BOS YOD DO SNYAM NA,
Now someone may come and say:
When it is appropriate to use the expression, “John is going,” then we can say there is a goer present. This proves that the act of going too is something that exists in and of itself.
[294] SNGAR 'GRO BA PO MED CING BSAL BAR GYUR NA DE LA BLTOS PA'I 'GRO BA'I BYA BA 'THAD BAR {%PAR} MI 'GYUR TE,
If it’s the case that at first there’s no goer, and then they manifest; then the act of going that relied upon this person could never be correct.
118 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
[295] DPYAD PA'I TSE 'GRO BA MED NA 'GRO BA'I BYA BA RANG MTSAN DANG LDAN PA'I SGO NAS 'GRO BA PO YOD PA NYID DU GAL {%GA LA} 'GYUR TE MI 'GYUR BA'I PHYIR,
For if we really examine the question, then—in a case where there’s no going—how could there ever be the goer themselves, in the sense of someone who was undertaking some definitive act of going? The fact is that there could never be.
[296] MI 'GYUR TE, 'GRO BA DANG 'GRO BA PO GNYIS PHAN TSUN BLTOS PA'I RTEN BRTEN PA YIN PA'I PHYIR RO,,
And that’s because going and a goer rely upon each other: each is the basis of the other, and each is what rests upon the basis of the other.
None of three “possibilities”
[297] GNYIS PA NI,
This brings us to the second point in our denial of any nature to the person, through analyzing the agent of an action; that is, denying going, in general, with a person—using three different variations. This is presented in the next verse of Wisdom:
[298] (II.8)
Gantā na gacchati tāvad agantā naiva gacchati, Anyo gantur agantuś ca kas tṛtīyo 'tha gacchati.
Ganta na gachati tavad aganta naiva gachati, Anyo gantur agantush cha kas tirtiyo tha gachati.
119 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
,RE ZHIG 'GRO PO MI 'GRO STE, ,'GRO BA PO MIN 'GRO BA MIN, ,'GRO PO 'GRO PO MIN LAS GZHAN, ,GSUM PA GANG ZHIG 'GRO BAR 'GYUR, ,ZHES SO,,
First of all, no goer goes; But neither does someone Who’s no goer go. How so too could someone go Who was some third possibility: Someone besides a goer, or not?49
[299] RE ZHIG 'GRO BA PO CHOS CAN, ,NGO BO NYID KYIS 'GRO'O ZHES PA [f. 17a] JI LTAR 'THAD PA NYID DU 'GYUR TE MI 'GYUR BAR THAL, BSHAD PA DANG 'CHAD PA'I RIGS PAS GNOD PA'I PHYIR,
Let us consider, first of all, a goer.
How could it ever be correct to say that they were going, in and and of themselves? It would never be—
Because this idea is thrown into question by the clear reasoning already presented, and still to be presented.
49 First of all, no goer goes: For this verse, we have used the Tibetan from the Derge Tengyur, which seems to match both the Sanskrit and Choney Lama’s commentary. The verse in the carving available to us appears to be seriously corrupted, or a different translation from the Sanskrit, perhaps even from a different original (albeit it also comes out one line too long in the Tibetan); this verse reads instead: ,re-zhig 'gro-po 'gro'o zhes, ,ji-ltar 'thad- pa nyid du 'gyur, ,'gro-ba-po min 'gro-ba min, ,'gro-po 'gro-po min pa las, ,gsum-pa gang-zhig 'gro-bar 'gyur. There are also problems with the carving of the last part of this section, which as the reader can see we’ve corrected.
120 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
[300] 'GRO BA PO MIN PA CHOS CAN, 'GRO BA MIN TE, 'GRO BA'I BYA BA MED PA'I PHYIR,
Let’s consider as well someone who is no goer.
Neither do they ever go;
Because with them there is no act of going.
[301] 'GRO BA {%‘GRO BA PO} DANG 'GRO BA PO {DANG ‘GRO BA PO MIN PA} DE LAS PHUNG GSUM PA ZHIG 'GRO BAR 'GYUR BA MI 'THAD DE, DE 'DRA MI SRID PA'I PHYIR TE 'GRO BA DANG 'GRO MIN DNGOS 'GAL YIN PA'I PHYIR,
And it would be incorrect to say that some third possibility between the two—someone besides someone who was going and someone who was not—was doing the going. That’s because such a thing would be impossible, since being going and not being going are mutually exclusive, and cover themselves all possibilities.
Does going involve a goer?
[302] GSUM PA LA GSUM, BYED TSIG DON DANG BCAS NA BYED PA PO'I TSIG DON GYIS STONG PA, DE LAS LDOG PA, GNYIS KA DON DANG BCAS NA HA CANG THAL BA'O,,
With this we have reached the third part in our investigation of the agent: denying, more specifically, going with a goer. This comes in three sections: showing that if something embodies the meaning of the term for going, then it must exhibit a lack of the meaning of the term for the goer; showing next the reverse; and then demonstrating finally how it would exceed the bounds of reason if anything were to embody the meanings of both terms.
121 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
[303] DANG PO NI,
The first of these is found in the next verse of the root text:
[304] (II.9)
Gantā tāvad gacchatīti katham evopapatsyate, Gamanena vinā gantā yadā naivopapadyate.
Ganta tavad gachatiti katham evopapatsyate, Gamanena vina ganta yada naivopapadyate.
,GANG TSE 'GRO BA MED PAR NI, ,'GRO BA {%PO} 'THAD PAR MI 'GYUR NA, ,RE ZHIG 'GRO BO {%PO} 'GRO'O ZHES, ,JI LTAR 'THAD PA NYID DU 'GYUR, ,ZHES SO,,
In a case where there’s no going, It would never be correct For there to be a goer. And so how could it ever Be correct to say That a goer now was going?
[305] 'DIR 'GRO BA PO 'GRO ZHES PA'I SNGA MA BYED PA PO'I TSIG DANG PHYI MA BYED TSIG YIN LA, DE YANG 'DI 'GRO BAR BYED CES PA'O,,
Now when we say “A goer is going,” the former term expresses who is doing something; while the latter expresses what they are doing. We could also say it as: “They are doing some going.”
122 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
[306] DES NA, RE ZHIG 'GRO BA PO 'GRO'O ZHES PA'I DON NGO BOS YOD PA JI LTAR 'THAD PA NYID DU 'GYUR BA MI 'THAD DE, GANG GI TSE 'GRO BA'I BYA BA TSIG GI DON DU MED PAR NI 'GRO BA PO ZHES PA'I BYED PA PO'I TSIG 'DI 'THAD PAR MI 'GYUR BA'I PHYIR,
And so how then could it ever be correct to say “one who is a goer now is going,” where the meaning of this phrase exists in and of itself? It would in fact be incorrect, because in such a case where there was nothing that embodied the meaning of the term for the act of going, it would never be correct for there to be this term for someone who is doing something: “one who is a goer.”
[307] DER THAL, 'GRO BA PO 'GRO ZHES PA'I DON RANG NGOS NAS GRUB NA 'GRO BA'I BYA BA GCIG PO DE 'GRO BA PO ZHES PA'I TSIG GI DON DU MED CING, 'GRO ZHES PA'I TSIG GI DON DU YOD DGOS KYI, TSIG DE GNYIS KYI DON DU NGO BOS GRUB PA'I TSUL GYIS YOD PA MI RUNG BA'I PHYIR,
And this is indeed the case, for if the meaning of the phrase “the one who is a goer is going” existed from its own side, then the act of going alone could not be what the term “one who is a goer” referred to; and it would have to be what the term “is going” refers to. But it would be inappropriate for the act of going alone to be what both these terms refer to, in a way where it existed in and of itself.
[308] DER THAL, 'GRO BA PO ZHES PA'I TSIG GI DON DU YOD NA 'GRO BA'I BYA BA BYED PA PO LA YOD DGOS LA, 'GRO ZHES PA'I TSIG GI DON DU YOD NA LAM {%LAS} LA YOD DGOS PAS, NGO BOS GRUB NA GZHI SO SO [f. 17b] PA {%BA} LA BYA BA GCIG THUN MONG DU BRTEN PA MI RIGS PA'I PHYIR,
And that would so be the case, because if something embodied the meaning of the term “the one who is a goer,” it would have to be there with the one doing the act of going; whereas if it embodied the meaning of the term “is going,” then it would have to be there with the action. Therefore, if a single act were to exist in and of itself, it would be inappropriate for it to apply, in common, to two different referents.
123 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
Do goers involve a going?
[309] GNYIS PA NI,
Which brings us to the second section, where we demonstrate the reverse of the point we just made. This is expressed in the lines of Wisdom which follow next:
[310] (II.10)
Pakṣo gantā gacchatīti yasya tasya prasajyate, Gamanena vinā gantā gantur gamanam icchataḥ.
Paksho ganta gachatiti yasya tasya prasajyate, Gamanena vina ganta gantur gamanam ichatah.
,GANG GI PHYOGS LA 'GRO BA PO, ,'GRO BA DE LA 'GRO MED PA'I, ,'GRO BO {%PO} YIN PAR THAL 'GYUR TE, ,'GRO BO {%PO} 'GRO BAR 'DOD PHYIR RO, ,ZHES SO,,
In any position that says That a goer is going, There would have to be A goer that wasn’t, Because you’d be saying That the goer was going.
[311] GAL TE RGOL BA GANG GI PHYOGS LA 'GRO BA'I BYA BA DE 'GRO BA PO'I TSIG GI DON DU NGO BOS YOD PAR 'DOD PA DE LA CHOS CAN, 'GRO ZHES PA'I TSIG GI DON DU 'GRO BA'I BYA BA MED PA'I 'GRO BA PO YIN PAR THAL BAR 'GYUR
124 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
TE, 'GRO BA'I BYA BA GCIG LAS MED LA, GCIG PO DE 'GRO BA PO ZHES PA'I TSIG GI DON DU YOD PA'I SGO NAS 'GRO BA PO 'GRO BAR 'DOD PA'I PHYIR RO,,
Suppose that a debater takes a position in which it is said that there is an act of going, in and of itself, within what the term “one who is a goer” refers to.
In such a case, though, the person going would have to be someone where the term “going” applied to them had no meaning of an act of going.
And that’s because there is no more than a single act of going; and you’d be saying then that the goer was going in a way where this one going is there in what the expression “the one who is going” refers to.
[312] RTAGS KHYAB SNGAR BZHIN BSGRUB PAR BYA'O,,
The reason given here, and the necessary relationship between the reason and the quality we seek to prove, are both confirmed in the same way they were before.
Neither both goer & going
[313] GSUM PA NI,
The third section here—demonstrating, finally, how it would exceed the bounds of reason if anything were to embody the meanings of both terms—is presented in the next verse:
[314] (II.11)
Gamane dve prasajyete gantā yadyuta gacchati, Ganteti cājyate yena gantā san yac ca gacchati.
Gamane dve prasajyete ganta yadyuta gachati, Ganteti chajyate yena ganta san yach cha gachati.
125 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
,GAL TE 'GRO BO {%PO} 'GRO 'GYUR NA, ,'GRO BA GNYIS SU THAL 'GYUR TE, ,GANG GI {%GIS} 'GRO BOR {%POR} MNGON PA DANG, ,'GRO BOR {%POR} GYUR NAS GANG 'GRO BA'O, ,ZHES SO,,
If the goer were going, Then there would have to be Two goings: one which Specified the goer, And the other the going Once one was a goer.
[315] GAL TE 'GRO BA PO ZHES DANG 'GRO ZHES PA'I TSIG GNYIS KYI DON DU 'GRO BA'I BYA BA NGO BOS YOD PAR 'GYUR NA NI
Now suppose if the act of going embodied, in and of itself, the meaning of both the terms “goer” and “going.”
[316] 'GRO BA PO'I STENG NA RANG GI NGO BOR GYUR PA'I 'GRO BA'I BYA BA DANG RANG LAS NGO BO THA DAD PA'I 'GRO BA'I BYA BA GNYIS SU YOD PAR THAL BAR 'GYUR TE,
In that case then there would have to be two different acts of going. First there would be the act of going that applied to the goer, and was inherent in them. And then there would be a second going which was distinct from the goer.
[317] 'GRO BA'I BYA BA GANG GIS 'GRO BA BOR {%POR} MNGON PA STE BRJOD PA'I 'GRO BA'I BYA BA 'GRO BA PO'I NGO BOR GYUR PA DANG, 'GRO BA POR GYUR NAS 'GRO BA'I BYA BA GANG ZHIG BYED PA'I TSIG GI DON DU GYUR PA'I 'GRO
126 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
BA'I BYA BA DE 'GRO BA PO LAS NGO BO THA DAD PA'I TSUL GYIS YOD PAR 'GYUR BA LAS
The one act of going which allowed us to specify—that is, to express—the goer would be the act of going which was inherent in the goer. And the other act of going is the act of going which embodied the meaning of the term which expressed how someone undertook to go, once they were the goer; this is the one which would exist in a way where it was distinct from the goer.
[318] DE LTAR MI RUNG BAR BSGRUBS ZIN PA'I PHYIR,
But we have already demonstrated why these would not be possible.
[319] DE NI BYA BA DE GNYIS LA BLTOS PA'I 'GRO BA PO NGO BO THA DAD GNYIS KYANG YOD DGOS PA'I SKYON STON PA'O,,
These lines are expressing the problem that there would have to be two distinct goers, each relying upon one of those two acts of going.
[320] RANG LUGS NI, TSIG GNYIS KA'I DON DU BYA BA GCIG YOD KYANG THA [f. 18a] SNYAD PA'I YOD TSUL DU 'DOD PAS MI 'GAL LO,,
Our own position is that there is no contradiction; for we would say that—even though there is only a single act which embodies the meaning of both terms—they can both still be there, albeit in a nominal manner.
Going is impossible
[321]
127 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
GSUM PA BYA BA YOD PA'I SGRUB BYED LA BRTAGS NAS 'GOG PA LA GNYIS, 'GRO BA'I BYA BA YOD PA'I SGRUB BYED 'GOG PA DANG, DES GNAS PA'I BYA BA YANG RANG MTSAN PA KHEGS PAR BSTAN PA'O,,
This brings us to our third part from above: denying any nature to the person, by analyzing proofs for the existence of the act. We proceed in two steps: denying attempted proofs for the existence of the act of going; and showing how this denial, in turn, already disproves a definitive act of staying as well.
[322] DANG PO LA BZHI, THOG MA'I RTZOM PA DGAG ,'GRO BA'I LAM DGAG ,'GRO BA'I GNYEN PO DGAG ,THA MA'I LDOG PA DGAG PA'O,,
The first of these two will have four sections of its own: denying that anyone could, at the outset, undertake to go; denying that there could be a path down which we go; denying that there could be an alternative to going; and denying that there could be, in the end, a turning back.
[323] DANG PO LA GNYIS, RTZOM PA NYID DGAG PA DANG, GANG DU BRTZAM PA'I LAM DGAG PA'O, ,DANG PO NI,
The first of these has two further parts: denying the undertaking of a going itself; and then denying that there could be a part of the path where we do the undertaking of a going. The first of these is expressed in the next verse of Wisdom:
[324] (II.12)
Gate nārabhyate gantuṃ gantuṃ nārabhyate‘gate, Nārabhyate gamyamāne gantum ārabhyate kuha.
Gate narabhyate gantun gantun narabhyate’gate, Narabhyate gamyamane gantum arabhyate kuha.
128 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
,SONG LA 'GRO BA'I RTZOM MED DE, ,MA SONG BA LA'ANG 'GRO RTZOM MED, ,BGO {%BGOM} LA RTZOM PA YOD MIN NA, ,GANG DU 'GRO LA {%BA} RTZOM PAR BYED, ,ZHES SO,,
You cannot undertake to go Where you’ve already gone; Neither can this be done Where you’ve yet to go. If the undertaking is not something That could ever be there with stepping, Then where could you ever Undertake to go?
[325] KHO NA RE, SKYES BU SDOD PA BTANG NAS 'GRO BAR RTZOM PAR BYED PAS 'GRO BA'I BYA BA NGO BOS YOD DO SNYAM NA,
Someone may come and express the following thought:
When a person decides to stop staying and does something to undertake to go, there is an act of going there which exists in and of itself.
[326] SHES BYA CHOS CAN, SKYES BU 'GRO BA'I BYA BA 'GAGS PA SONG BA'I LAM LA DE'I 'GRO BA'I BYA BA RTZOM PA MED CING, DE MA SONG BA'I LAM LA'ANG DE'I 'GRO BA'I RTZOM PA MED DE,
Consider all the knowable things in the universe.
You cannot undertake the act of going somewhere along that part of the path where you have already gone—where this person has discontinued the act of going. Neither can this be done along that part of the path where you have yet to go.
[327]
129 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
'GRO BA'I BYA BA 'GAGS PA NI 'DAS LA, MA SKYES PA NI MA 'ONGS PA YIN PAS DE GNYIS DANG 'GRO BAR RTZOM BZHIN PA'I BYA BA DA LTAR YIN PA RNAMS 'GAL BA'I PHYIR,
That’s because the act of going has been discontinued, and so is in the past. And the act of going which has yet to begin is in the future. This means that it would be a contradiction to say that these two, and being in the process of undertaking to go, could be something of the present time.
[328] 'GRO BZHIN PA'I BGOM PA LA YANG 'GRO BA'I RTZOM PA THA SNYAD DU YOD KYANG NGO BOS YOD PA MA YIN TE, BGOM BZHIN PA'I LAM {%LAS} RANG MTSAN PA MED PAR SNGAR BSTAN ZIN PA'I PHYIR,
Now there can exist, nominally speaking, the undertaking to go with stepping—where we are in the process of going; but this undertaking cannot be something which could ever be there in and of itself. That’s because—as we have already demonstrated—there is no definitive action of being in the process of stepping.
[329] DE LTAR NA GANG DU 'GRO BA LA RTZOM PAR BYED PA'I LAM RANG BZHIN GYIS MED PAS DER 'GRO RTZOM BYED PA RANG BZHIN GYIS GRUB PA MED DE, DE LTAR YOD PA 'GAL BA'I PHYIR,
There is no part of the path where you could ever undertake to go and which exists through some nature of its own. Thus too there is no undertaking to go which can exist through some nature of its own.
Is there anywhere on a path to go on?
[330] GNYIS PA NI [f. 18b],
This brings us to the second point here: a denial that there could be a part of the path where we undertake to go. This is found in the next verse of the root text:
130 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
[331] (II.13)
Na pūrvaṃ gamanārambhād gamyamānaṃ na vā gatam, Yatrārabhyeta gamanam agate gamanaṃ kutaḥ.
Na purvan gamanarambhad gamyamanan na va gatam, Yatrarabhyeta gamanam agate gamanan kutah.
,'GRO BA RTZOM PA'I SNGA ROL NA, ,GANG DU 'GRO BA RTZOM 'GYUR BA'I {%BA}, ,BGOM PA MED CING SONG BA MED, ,MA SONG 'GRO BA GA LA YOD, ,CES SO,,
There exists no spot for stepping— Where they are undertaking to go— Before they have undertaken to go.
Neither does there exist a spot Where they have already gone.
And how could a person undertake To go down a spot That they hadn’t gone down yet?
[332] SKYES BU 'GRO BA RTZOM PA'I SNGA ROL BSDAD PA'I GNAS SKABS NA SKYES BU GANG 'GRO BAR RTZOM PAR 'GYUR BA'I PA GOM {%BA’I BGOM} PA'I LAM MED CING, ,DE SONG BA'I LAM YANG MED DE, DE'I TSE LAM GYI NGO BO DE GNYIS MA SKYES PA'I PHYIR,
At that point when a person is standing still—before they have undertaken to go somewhere—there exists no spot of the path where they are stepping: where they are undertaking to go. Neither does there exist a spot of the path down which they have already
131 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
gone—for at that point, there is nothing that has already begun and possesses the nature of a path.
[333] KHYAB STE, NGO BO NYID KYIS 'GRO BAR RTZOM PAR BYED PA ZHIG YOD NA 'GRO BAR RTZOM PA'I SNGA ROL TU YOD DGOS PA'I PHYIR,
And it would have to be this way; because if there were an undertaking to go somewhere which existed in and of itself, it would have to exist before we undertook to go.
[334] DER THAL, 'GRO RTZOM BYED PA'I LAM NI RANG DUS SU YOD PAR 'JOG DGOS PA'I PHYIR TE,
And that’s true because we’d have to say that the path down which we undertook to go would have to be there, by its own time.
[335] DE LTAR MIN NA, DUS KUN TU 'GRO RTZOM BYED DGOS PAR 'GYUR BAS, 'GRO RTZOM MI BYED PA MED PAR 'GYUR BA'I PHYIR RO,,
And that in turn is true because—if it were not that way—then we’d have to be undertaking to go at all the points of time there are; and then there would never be a time when we were not undertaking to go.
[336] DE LTAR 'DOD NA MI 'THAD DE, LHAS SBYIN BSDAD PA BTANG NAS 'GRO BA'I BYA BA LA 'JUG PAR 'DOD DGOS PA'I PHYIR,
And yet we could never agree that this was the case, because we’d have to agree instead that John engages in the act of going once he has discontinued the act of standing still.
[337]
132 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
SKYES BU MA SONG BA'I LAM LA 'GRO BA'I RTZOM PA GA LA YOD DE, DE LA 'GRO BA'I BYA BA MA RTZOM PA'I PHYIR RO,,
And how could a person undertake to go down a spot of the path that they hadn’t gone down yet? You couldn’t undertake the act of going on it.
Is there any path with parts?
[338] GNYIS PA NI,
This brings us to the second section from above: denying that there could be a path down which we go.
[339] (II.14)
Gataṃ kiṃ gamyamānaṃ kim agataṃ kiṃ vikalpyate, Adṛśyamāna ārambhe gamanasyaiva sarvathā.
Gatan kin gamyamanan kim agatan kin vikalpyate, Adirshyamana arambhe gamanasyaiva sarvatha.
,'GRO BA {%’GRO RTZOM} RNAM PA THAMS CAD DU, ,SNANG BA MED PA NYID YIN NA, ,SONG BA CI ZHIG BGOM PA CI, ,MA SONG CI ZHIG RNAM PAR BRTAG ,CES SO,,
At the point where undertaking To go disappears completely, Then where is the part gone done; And where is the part Being stepped upon; And where is the part
133 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
We’ve yet to go down, That we seek to investigate?
[340] GAL TE SONG MA SONG DANG BGOM BZHIN PA'I LAM GSUM YOD PAS, 'GRO BA MED NA NI DE GSUM MI RUNG NGO ZHE NA,
One may ask the following question:
You’ve been talking about three parts of a path: the part that a person has already walked down; the part that a person has yet to walk down; and the part that they are in the process of walking down. But if there is no going, how can these three be possible?
[341] DE YANG MI RIGS TE, GANG GI TSE DON DAM DBYED? {%DPYOD BYED} KYI RIGS PAS DPYAD PA'I TSE 'GRO BA'I RTZOM PA RNAM PA THAMS CAD DU SNANG BA MED PA NYID YIN PA DE'I TSE NA, SONG BA NI CI ZHIG DANG MA SONG BA NI CI ZHIG CES RNAM PAR BRTAG PAR BYA BAR MED PA'I PHYIR,
This question though is mistaken. When you make an analysis with clear reasoning which is investigating the ultimate, undertaking to go disappears completely. That is, at this point there is no longer anything that you can investigate, asking “Where is the part of the path we have already gone down?” and “Where is the part of the path we have yet to go down?”50
[342] DER THAL, 'GRO BA'I RTZOM PA MED NA 'GRO BA'I LAM GSUM [f. 19a] BZHAG TU MI RUNG BA'I PHYIR RO,,
And that is too the case, because if there can be no undertaking to go, then we can no longer posit three different parts of the path.
50 Where is the part? In the edition available to us, Choney Lama does not here mention “the part being stepped upon” from the root text; but it can be assumed.
134 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
Can we stand still?
[343] GSUM PA NI,
Which brings us to the third section above: denying that there could be an alternative to going. This is expressed in the root text as follows—
[344] (II.15-16)
Gantā na tiṣṭhati tāvad agantā naiva tiṣṭhati, Anyo gantur agantuś ca kas tṛtīyo’tha tiṣṭhati. Gantā tāvat tiṣṭhatīti katham evopapatsyate, Gamanena vinā gantā yadā naivopapadyate.
Ganta na tishthati tavad aganta naiva tishthati, Anyo gantur agantush cha kas tirtiyo’tha tishthati. Ganta tavat tishthatiti katham evopapatsyate, Gamanena vina ganta yada naivopapadyate.
,RE ZHIG 'GRO BO {%PO} MI SDOD DE, ,'GRO BA PO MIN SDOD PA MIN, ,'GRO PO 'GRO BA YIN PA LAS, {%’GRO PO MIN LAS GZHAN,} ,GSUM PA GANG ZHIG SDOD PAR 'GYUR, ,GANG TSE 'GRO BA MED PAR NI, ,'GRO BO {%PO} 'THAD PAR MI 'GYUR NA, ,RE SHIG 'GRO PO SDOD DO ZHES, ,CI {%JI} LTAR 'THAD PA NYID DU 'GYUR, ,ZHES SO,,
First of all, a goer Cannot stand still; But neither can someone Not a goer stand still.
135 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
There would be someone Standing still Who was a third possibility Between one who was a goer And someone not a goer.
At the point where No going was there, A goer then Could never be correct.
How could it at all be correct To say, in the first place, That a goer was standing still?
[345] BSDAD PA RANG BZHIN GYIS YOD PAS 'GRO BA YOD DO ZHE NA,
Now suppose someone comes and says:
Standing still is something that exists through a nature of its own; therefore, going does exist.
[346] RE SHIG 'GRO BA PO CHOS CAN, RANG BZHIN GYIS MI SDOD DE, 'OG TU 'CHAD PA'I RIGS PAS GNOD BA'I PHYIR,
Let’s consider, first of all, someone who is a goer.
That cannot stand still, through some nature of their own;
Because the idea that they could is drawn into question by the clear reasoning that follows below.
[347]
136 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
'GRO BA PO MIN PA SDOD PA PO CHOS CAN, RANG BZHIN GYIS SDOD PA MIN TE, SDOD PA'I SNGA ROL NAS SDOD PA POR MA GRUB PA'I PHYIR,
And let’s also consider someone who is not a goer; that is, someone who is standing still.
They are not someone who stands still through some nature of their own;
Because you cannot have someone who stands still before there is a standing still.
[348] KHYAB STE, RANG BZHIN GYIS SDOD NA 'DUG PA'I BYA BA LA MA BLTOS PAR SDOD DGOS PA'I PHYIR TE SDOD PA'I BYA BA LA BLTOS TE SDOD DGOS NA THA SNYAD DU BSDAD KYI, RANG BZHIN GYIS BSDAD PAR MA SONG BA'I PHYIR,
And this is necessarily the case; for if someone stood still through some nature of their own, then they would have to stand still without depending on the act staying. And that’s because—if they did have to stand still by depending on the act of staying51—then they would be standing still in a nominal sense: it would no longer qualify as standing still through some nature of its own.
[349] SDOD PA'I SNGA ROL NAS SDOD PA POR MA GRUB STE, GRUB NA'ANG DUS THAMS CAD DU'ANG SDOD PA POR 'GYUR BAS 'GRO BA PO DANG 'GRO BA SOGS MI 'THAD DGOS PA'I PHYIR,
You can’t say that someone is “one who is standing still” before there has been any standing still; if you could, then they would be a person who was standing still at every possible point in time. And then it would have to be incorrect to say that someone had become a goer; that there was any going; and so on.
51 Depending on the act of staying: We have supplied the “staying” (Tib: ‘dug pa) here, rather than repeating sdod-pa, based on the preceding sentence.
137 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
[350] 'GRO BA PO DANG 'GRO BA PO MIN PA LAS GZHAN GSUM PA GANG ZHIG SDOD PAR 'GYUR TE, DE 'DRA MI SRID PA'I PHYIR RO,,
And then there would be someone standing still who was a third possibility: someone other than someone who was a goer, and other than someone who was not a goer. But a person like that is an impossibility.
[351] RGYU MTSAN GANG GI TSE STE PHYIR 'GRO BA'I BYA BA TSIG GI DON DU MED PAR NI 'GRO BA PO 'THAD BAR {%PAR} MI 'GYUR NA, RE SHIG 'GRO BA PO SDOD DO ZHES SMRA BA JI LTAR 'THAD PA NYID DU 'GYUR TE MI RIGS SO,,
The reason here—that’s because—at the point where the thing that the term “act of going” refers to was not there, then it could never be correct to say there was a goer. And if that were so, then how could it at all be correct to say—to make the statement that—a goer was, in the first place, standing still? It would be wrong.
Can we turn back?
[352] BZHI PA NI,
And with this we have reached our fourth and final section from above: denying that there could be, in the end, a turning back. This is found in the first part of the next verse of Wisdom:
[353] (II.17a)
Na tiṣṭhati gamyamānān na gatān nāgatād api…
Na tishthati gamyamanan na gatan nagatad api…
138 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
,BGOM LAS LDOG PAR MI 'GYUR TE, ,SONG DANG MA SONG LAS KYANG MIN, ,ZHES SO,,
There can be no turning back Where we are stepping; And not with where we’ve gone, Or where we’ve yet to go.
[354] SNGAR SONG ZIN DANG MA SONG BA [f. 19b] GNYIS LA 'GRO BA'I BYA BA LAS PHYIR LDOG PA THA SNYAD DU MED DO {%DE}, DE GNYIS LAS 'GRO BA'I BYA BA 'GAGS PA DANG MA SKYES PA'I PHYIR,
Now there is no turning back, even in a nominal sense, from the act of going—from either the part of the path where we have already gone, or the part where we have yet to go. And that’s because, for these two parts, the act of going has already stopped; or else not yet begun.
[355] BGOM BZHIN PA LAS NGO BO NYID KYIS SLAR LDOG PAR MI 'GYUR TE, BGOM BZHIN PAR NGO BOS GRUB NA DUS KUN TU BGOM BZHIN PAR 'GYUR BAS LDOG BZHIN PA MI 'THAD PA'I PHYIR,
Neither can there be a turning back, in and of itself, on that part of the path where we are in the process of stepping. And that’s because—if being in the process of stepping existed in and of itself, and thus existed in every point of time—then it would be wrong to say that we were also in the process of turning back.
[356] DER THAL, GZHI GCIG LA BLTOS PA'I PHAR BGOM BZHIN PA DANG TSUR LDOG BZHIN PA GNYIS 'GAL BA'I PHYIR RO,,
And that is so the case, because it would be contradictory—with regard to a single basis— to both be in the process of stepping, and be in the process of turning back.
139 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
[357] SONG ZIN PA DANG MA SONG BA'I LAM LAS KYANG 'GRO BA'I BYA BA LDOG PA MIN TE, RIM PA LTAR 'GRO BA'I BYA BA ZHIG PA DANG MA SKYES PA'I PHYIR RO,,
And it’s not as if we can turn back from the act of going down a path, either with that part of the path that we have already gone down, or with that part of the path that we are yet to go down, because—respectively—the act of going has already disappeared; and has yet to begin.
When staying is going
[358] GNYIS PA NI,
With this we have reached the second step in our denial of any nature to the person, by analyzing proofs for the existence of the act. Here we demonstrate how denying attempted proofs for the existence of the act already disproves a definitive act of staying. This is presented in the second half of the verse already begun:
[359] (II.17b)
…Gamanaṃ saṃpravṛttiś ca nivṛttiś ca gateḥ samā.
…Gamanan sampravirttish cha nivirttish cha gateh sama.
,'GRO BA DANG NI 'JUG PA DANG, ,LDOG PA YANG NI 'GRO BA DANG, {%’GRO DANG MTSUNGS,} ,ZHES SO,,
This is the same as with The going: as regards Going; engaging;
140 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
Or turning back.
[360] GAL TE GNAS PA RANG BZHIN GYIS YOD DO SNYAM NA,
Now you might think to yourself, “But it seems to me that there must exist some kind of staying which exists through a nature of its own.”
[361] GNAS PA RANG BZHIN GYIS MED DE DE DANG DE'I SGRUB BYED DU BKOD PA'I 'GRO BA DANG GNAS PA LA 'JUG PA RTZOM PA DANG, GNAS PA LA LDOG PA LA YANG NI 'GRO BA 'GOG PA'I SUN 'BYIN BRJOD TSUL SNGA MA DANG MTSUNGS PAS NGO BOS GRUB PA 'GOG NUS PA'I PHYIR,
And yet staying is not something that exists through any nature of its own. That’s because the various proofs that have already been attempted to support this kind of going apply here as well—being in the act of going; first engaging in or undertaking some staying; or turning back from some staying. These ideas are overthrown in the same way that we overthrew those before, with going—the clear reasoning already presented possesses all the power to defeat as well the idea that anything here could exist in and of itself.
[362] JI LTAR MTSUNGS NA, RE ZHIG GNAS PO MI 'GRO STE, ,ZHES SOGS DANG, GNAS LA GNAS PA'I RTZOM MED DE, ,ZHES SOGS BSGYUR NAS 'GOG TSUL 'GRO? {%’GRE} BA'I PHYIR RO,,
When we say “overthrown in the same way” what we mean is that you just follow the pattern that we saw in the verses before, substituting “staying” for “going.” And so you’d have verses that included wording like “First of all, a stayer / Cannot go…”; or “You cannot undertake to stay / Where you’ve already stayed…”52
52 You’d have verses: Referring to root text verses I.15 and I.12, respectively.
141 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
Goer & going: one or separate?
[363] BZHI PA BYA BA'I NGO BO LA BRTAGS NAS 'GOG PA LA GNYIS, 'GRO BA PO DANG GCIG DANG THA DAD BRTAGS NAS DGAG PA DANG, 'GRO BA POR 'JOG PA'I BYA BA LA BYA BA GNYIS PA YOD MED BRTAG PA'O, ,DANG PO NI,
And this brings us to the fourth and final part of our expanded explication here. This is undertaking the denial of any nature to the person, by analyzing the essence of the act. We proceed in two sections: denying any nature to the person, by examining whether they are one with or distinct from the one who is going; and then denying any such nature by examining whether or not there is any second going, along with the going that establishes someone as one who is going. The first of these is covered in the next four verses of Wisdom:
[364] (II.18-21)
Yad eva gamanaṃ gantā sa eveti na yujyate, Anya eva punar gantā gater iti na yujyate.
Yad eva gamanaṃ gantā sa eva hi bhaved yadi, Ekībhāvaḥ prasajyeta kartuḥ karmaṇa eva ca.
Anya eva punar gantā gater yadi vikalpyate, Gamanaṃ syād ṛte gantur gantā syād gamanād ṛte.
Ekībhāvena vā siddhir nānābhāvena vā yayoḥ, Na vidyate tayoḥ siddhiḥ kathaṃ nu khalu vidyate.
Yad eva gamanan ganta sa eveti na yujyate, Anya eva punar ganta gater iti na yujyate.
Yad eva gamanan ganta sa eva hi bhaved yadi, Ekibhavah prasajyeta kartuh karmana eva cha.
Anya eva punar ganta gater yadi vikalpyate,
142 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
Gamanan syad irte gantur ganta syad gamanad irte.
Ekibhavena va siddhir nanabhavena va yayoh, Na vidyate tayoh siddhih kathan nu khalu vidyate.
,'GRO BA DE DANG 'GRO BA PO, ,DE NYID CES KYANG BYAR [f. 20a] MI RUNG, ,'GRO BA DANG NI 'GRO BA PO, ,GZHAN NYID CES KYANG BYAR MI RUNG,
,GAL TE 'GRO BA GANG YIN PA, ,DE NYID 'GRO PO YIN GYUR NA, ,BYED PA PO DANG LAS GNYIS KYANG, ,GCIG PA NYID DU THAL PAR 'GYUR,
,GAL TE 'GRO DANG 'GRO BA PO, ,GZHAN PA NYID DU RNAM BRTAG NA, ,'GRO PO MED PA'I 'GRO BA DANG, ,'GRO BA MED PA'I 'GRO BOR {%POR} 'GYUR,
,GANG DAG DNGOS PO GCIG PA DANG, ,DNGOS PO GZHAN PA NYID DU NI, ,GRUB PAR GYUR PA YOD MIN NA, ,DE GNYIS GRUB PA JI LTAR YOD, ,CES SO,,
It would be wrong to call The going and the goer Just that; but it would be Just as wrong to say That the going and goer Were completely separate.
Suppose that the exact thing Which was the act of going Was the one who was going; Then the agent and action as well
143 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
Would have to be one.
Suppose you look into the question Of whether the going, and the goer, Are entirely separate. There would be a going Where there was no goer; And there would be a goer Where there was no going.
Since this pair Could never be a thing Where they were one and the same, And could never be a thing Where they were entirely separate, How then could these two Even exist?
[365] SKYES BU GOM PA 'DOR BA YOD PAS 'GRO BA PO RANG BZHIN GYIS YOD DO ZHE NA,
Someone may come and make this assertion:
There does exist someone who is a goer and who exists through a nature of their own; because there does exist a person who takes steps.
[366] DE MI 'THAD PAR THAL, SKYES BU GOM PA 'DOR BA'I 'GRO BA'I BYA BA DE DANG 'DOR MKHAN GYI 'GRO BA PO SKYES BU GNYIS NI, RANG BZHIN GYIS GCIG PA DE NYID CES KYANG BYAR MI RUNG ZHING 'GRO BA DANG NI 'GRO BA PO GNYIS NI RANG BZHIN GYIS GZHAN PA NYID CES KYANG BYAR MI RUNG BA'I PHYIR,
And yet that’s incorrect. Let’s look at these two: the act of going—of taking steps—by a person; and the person who is a goer: who is someone taking the steps. It would be wrong to call them “just that”—one and the same—through some nature of their own; but it would
144 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
be just as wrong to say that the pair of the going and the goer were, by nature, completely separate from one another.
[367] GAL TE RTAGS DANG PO MA GRUB NA, BYED PA PO DANG LAS SU BYA BA GNYIS KYANG THA DAD MED PA'I GCIG PA NYID DU THAL BAR 'GYUR TE, 'GRO BA'I BYA BA GANG YIN PA DE NYID DANG 'GRO BA PO GNYIS RANG BZHIN GYIS GCIG TU KHAS BLANGS PA'I PHYIR,
And suppose you disagree to the first part of the reason we’ve given here. In that case, these two—the agent undertaking an action, and the action in which they are engaged, as well—would have to be one and the same thing: nothing separate at all. And that’s because you would have already accepted that the exact thing which was the act of going was at the same time one and the same with the one who was going, through some nature of their own.
[368] GAL TE RTAGS PHYI MA MA GRUB NA, DE YANG MI 'THAD PAR THAL, YANG 'GRO BA'I BYA BA DANG 'GRO BA PO NGO BO NYID KYIS GZHAN PA'I THA DAD PA NYID DU GRUB MA GRUB BRTAGS NA DE'I TSE, 'GRO BA PO LA BLTOS PA MED PA'I 'GRO BA'I BYA BA DANG, 'GRO BA'I BYA BA LA BLTOS PA MED PA'I 'GRO BA PO BZUNG DU YOD PAR 'GYUR NA NI DE LTAR [f. 20b] 'DZIN PA YANG MIN PA'I PHYIR,
Suppose then that you disagree to the second part of the reason we gave. That too must be mistaken, since again you’d have to look into the question of whether the act of going, and the person who is the goer, are—in and of themselves—entirely separate from each other. And you would have to end up accepting that there would be an act of going where there was no reliance upon a goer; and there would be a goer where there was no reliance upon an act of going. And it’s not the case that taking this position would be right.
[369] SNGA PHYI GNYIS KAS BZLOG PA 'PHEN NO,,
Both the former and latter parts of our reason serve to imply that, in fact, their opposite is the case.
145 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
[370] DE'I PHYIR BYED PA PO DANG BYA BA GANG DAG DNGOS PO STE RANG BZHIN GCIG PA DANG, DNGOS PO STE RANG BZHIN GZHAN PA NYID DU GRUB PAR GYUR PA YOD PA YIN {%MIN} NA, DE GNYIS RANG BZHIN GYIS GRUB PA JI LTAR YOD PAR 'GYUR TE MI RIGS PAR THAL, DE LTAR YOD PA LA RIGS PAS GNOD PA'I PHYIR,
And so this pair—the agent of an action and the action itself—could never be a thing, in the sense where they were, by nature, one and the same; and they could never be a type of thing where they were, by nature, entirely separate from one another. How then could these two exist in a way where they existed by nature? It would not be correct at all. Because the idea that something could exist in that way is thrown into question, by clear reasoning.53
Could there not be any going before?
[371] GNYIS PA LA GNYIS, BYA BA GNYIS PA MED PA DGAG PA DANG, YOD PAR 'DOD PA DGAG PA'O,,
This brings us to the second section from above: denying any nature to the person, by examining whether or not there is any second going, along with the going that establishes someone as one who is going. We proceed in two parts: denying that there is no second going; and then denying the position that there is such a going.
[372] DANG PO NI, The first of these is expressed in the following verse of the root text:
[373] (II.22)
53 Clear reasoning: Based on the Sanskrit of the root text—and the corresponding Tibetan, as found in the Derge Tengyur—we have adjusted the yin na here to min na.
146 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
Gatyā ya yājyate gantā gatiṃ tāṃ sa na gacchati, Yasmān na gati pūrvo‘sti kaścit kiṃcid dhi gacchati.
Gatya ya yajyate ganta gatin tan sa na gachati, Yasman na gati purvosti kashchit kinchid dhi gachati.
,'GRO BA GANG GIS 'GRO BOR {%POR} MNGON, ,'GRO BA DE NI DE 'GRO MIN, ,GANG PHYIR 'GRO BA'I SNGA ROL MED, ,GANG ZHIG GANG DU 'GRO BAR 'GYUR, ,ZHES SO,,
Any going which specified One going Could never a going. And that’s because When someone goes somewhere There is no one there Before the going.
[374] GAL TE KHYOD 'GRO BA'I BYA BA GCIG NYID KYIS 'GRO BA PO ‘GRO BAR 'JOG PAS KHYOD RANG LA MTSUNGS SO ZHE NA,
Someone may come and assert the following:
If it’s the case that you yourselves establish someone who goes as going through but a single act of going, then the criticisms you’ve made of our position apply equally to yours.
[375] NGED 'GRO BA PO DANG 'GRO BA'I BYA BA THA SNYAD DU YOD PAR 'DOD PAS SKYON MED LA, RANG BZHIN GYIS GRUB PAR 'DOD PA LA SKYON YOD DE, 'DI LTAR 'GRO BA'I BYA BA GANG GIS 'GRO BA BOR MNGON PAR GSAL BAR BYED PA'I 'GRO BA'I BYA BA DE NI 'GRO BA POR RANG BZHIN GYIS GRUB PA DE 'GRO BAR BYED PA MIN PA'I PHYIR TE,
147 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
And yet there is no such problem, because what we say is that the one who goes, and the act of going, exist nominally. If we were to assert that they existed through some nature of their own, then there would be a problem. And that’s because an act of going in this way—any such act of going which functioned to specify, or clarify, someone as one who was going—could never mark, as something that existed though a nature of its own, someone as going: as the agent of the going.
[376] GANG GI PHYIR NA SKYES BU GANG ZHIG GRONG NGAM GRONG KHYER GANG DU 'GRO BAR MTHONG BA BZHIN DU, 'GRO BA'I SNGA ROL DU 'GRO BA'I BYA BA LA MA BLTOS PAR 'GRO BA PO MED PA'I PHYIR,
And that’s because of the reason which applies as we watch someone—some person—going somewhere, such as to a village or a town. That is, before the going—without dependence on some act of going—there is no one there who is going.
[377] DER THAL, 'GRO BA PO NI 'GRO BA'I BYA BA LA BLTOS NAS 'JOG GI ,'GRO BA'I BYA BA LA BLTOS PA MED PAR SNGAR NAS 'GRO BA BOR {%POR} 'JOG NA DUS THAMS CAD DU 'GRO BA POR 'GYUR BAS SDOD PA PO MED PAR THAL BA'I PHYIR RO,,
And that is too the case, because we establish someone as a person who is going based on the action of going. But if someone could be established—from the beginning—as a goer, without relying on the action of going, then they would have to forever be one who was going. And in that case, they’d never be someone standing at rest.
[378] DES NA 'GRO BA'I BYA BA GCIG BO {%PO} DE'I SNGAR 'GRO BA'I BYA BA [f. 21a] GNYIS PA ZHIG KYANG MED DE, 'GRO BA PO MED PAR DE 'GRO BA'I BYA BA SNGAR GRUB PA MED PA'I PHYIR RO,,
Neither then can we say that there is any second action of going that happens before this one action of going: no previous action of going could exist in the absence of someone who was going.
148 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
Could there be any going before?
[379] GNYIS PA NI, Which brings us to our denial of the position that there is a second going. This is presented as follows in the original verses—
[380] (II.23)
Gatyā ya yājyate gantā tato‘nyāṃ sa na gacchati, Gatī dve nopapadyete yasmād ekatra gantari.
Gatya ya yajyate ganta tatonyan sa na gachati, Gati dve nopapadyete yasmad ekatra gantari.
,'GRO BA GANG GIS 'GRO BOR {%POR} MNGON, ,DE LAS GZHAN PA DE 'GRO MIN, ,GANG PHYIR 'GRO PO GCIG PU LA, ,'GRO BA GNYIS SU MI 'THAD DO,, ZHES SO,,
It is not a going which is different From that going which specifies The one going; This is because it would be Incorrect to have A pair of goings With a single one going.
[381] CI STE 'GRO BAR 'JOG PA'I BYA BA DE LAS GZHAN BA'I {%PA’I} BYA BA GNYIS BA {%PA} DUS MNYAM PA ZHIG GI SGO NAS 'GRO BAR 'JOG GO ZHE NA,
149 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
Suppose next that someone makes this claim:
Well then, suppose we say that someone is established as going through a second act of going which is different from the going that establishes the going, and which is simultaneous to the one going.
[382] 'GRO BA'I BYA BA GANG GIS 'GRO BA PO LA MNGON PAR GSAL BAR BYED PA'I BYA BA DE LAS GZHAN BA'I {%PA’I} BYA BA GNYIS PA DUS MNYAM PA ZHIG GI SGO NAS DE 'GRO BAR BYED PA NI 'THAD PA MIN TE,
And yet it would not be correct to say that there is a second act of going which marks the going and which is different from that act of going which specifies, or clarifies, someone as the one going, in a way where it is simultaneous to them.
[383] GANG GI PHYIR NA 'GRO BA PO GCIG PU ZHIG LA 'GRO BA PO DANG NGO BO GCIG PA DANG NGO BO THA DAD PA'I BYA BA GNYIS SU YOD PA MI 'THAD PAR BSHAD ZIN PA'I PHYIR RO,,
This is because of the fact that—as we have already explained—it would be incorrect to have, with a single one person who was going, a pair of acts of going: one which was essentially the same as the person who was going, and the other which was essentially different from them.
Summary on three variations
[384] GNYIS PA THUN MONG DU MJUG BSDU BA LA GNYIS, RNAM GRANGS GSUM GYI MJUG BSDU BA DANG, DES GRUB PA'I DON NO,,
This brings us back to our second original part: a concluding summary of the chapter, common to all its topics. Here we proceed in two steps: a concluding summary of the three variations from above; followed by a description of the point they establish.
150 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
[385] DANG PO NI,
The first of these is expressed in the following lines of the root text:
[386] (II.24-25a)
Sad bhūto gamanaṃ gantā triprakāraṃ na gacchati, Nāsad bhūto‘pi gamanaṃ triprakāraṃ sa gacchati.
Gamanaṃ sad asad bhūtas triprakāraṃ na gacchati…
Sad bhuto gamanan ganta triprakaran na gachati, Nasad bhutopi gamanan triprakaran sa gachati.
Gamanan sad asad bhutas triprakaran na gachati…
,'GRO BO {%PO} YIN PAR GYUR PA NI, ,'GRO RNAM GSUM DU 'GRO MI BYED, ,MA YIN PAR NI GYUR DE YANG, ,'GRO RNAM GSUM DU 'GRO MI BYED,
,YIN DANG MA YIN GYUR PA YANG, ,'GRO RNAM GSUM DU 'GRO MA {%MI} BYED, ,CES SO,,
Someone who is someone going Is not doing any going Going down three variations.
Neither is someone Who is not someone going Doing any going
151 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
Going down three variations.
Neither is someone Who both is and is not Doing any going Going down three variations.
[387] 'GRO BA PO MIN {%YIN} PAR GYUR PA DE NI CHOS CAN, RANG BZHIN GYIS MI 'GRO STE, SONG MA SONG BGOM BZHIN PA'I 'GRO BA'I LAM RNAM PA GSUM DU RANG BZHIN GYIS 'GRO BAR MI BYED PA'I PHYIR,
Consider then someone who is someone who is going.
They are not going, through any nature of their own;
Because they are not doing any going, by nature, down any three variations of a path: not going down the path where they go where they’ve gone before; or are yet to go; or are stepping across at the moment.
[388] 'GRO BA {%BA PO} MA YIN BAR {%PAR} NI GYUR PA DE YANG CHOS CAN, RANG BZHIN GYIS MI 'GRO STE LAM DE RNAM PA GSUM DU 'GRO BAR MI BYED PA'I PHYIR,
Consider as well someone who is not someone who is going.
Neither are they going, through any nature of their own;
Because they are not doing any going down any three variations of the path.
[389]
152 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
'GRO BA PO YIN PA DANG DE MA YIN PA GNYIS [f. 21b] KAR GYUR PA YANG CHOS CAN, RANG BZHIN GYIS MI 'GRO STE, DE RNAM PA GSUM GANG DU 'GRO BAR MI BYED PA'I PHYIR,
Consider too someone who both is and is not someone who is going.
Neither are they going, through any nature of their own;
Because they are not doing any going either, down any of the three variations.
Is there anything about going we could ever find?
[390] GNYIS PA NI,
Here then is our second point: a description of the point thus established.
[391] (II.25b)
…Tasmād gatiś ca gantā ca gantavyaṃ ca na vidyate.
…Tasmad gatis cha ganta ca gantavyan ca na vidyate.
,DE PHYIR 'GRO DANG 'GRO BO {%PO} DANG, ,BGROD PAR BYA BA'ANG YOD MA YIN, ,ZHES SO,,
Thus can we say That there is no such thing As going, or anyone going, Or anywhere to reach.
153 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
[392] SHES BYA CHOS CAN, DE LTAR 'GRO BA'I BYA BA DANG 'GRO BA PO DANG 'GROD BAR {%PAR} BYA BA'I GZHI RANG BZHIN GYIS YOD PA MA YIN TE, BRTAGS SHING DPYAD PA'I TSE DPYAD DON MI RNYED PA DE'I PHYIR RO,,
Consider all the things that could ever be known.
There is no such thing as an act of going these ways; nor anyone doing the going; nor anywhere, any site, to reach—which could exist through some nature of their own.
And that’s because—when we examine the question, and analyze it—there is thus nothing our analysis can ever locate.
Connections to the scriptures
[393] GNYIS PA NI,
Next is our second major step from above: drawing connections on these points to scripture.
[394] 'GRO 'ONG RANG BZHIN MED PAR STON PA'I RGYA CHER ROL PA LA SOGS PA'I LUNG GRANGS PA RNAMS SO,,
And we can do so by citing scriptures, such as Playing Everywhere, which say that going and coming have no nature of their own.54
54 Going & coming have no nature: See, for example, the lines around ff. 145a-145b, where it says that “When you examine east and west, and everywhere inbetween, you see there is no coming there, nor going.”
154 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
[395] DE LTAR MDZAD PA THAMS CAD KYANG RANG BZHIN GYIS GRUB PA LA BYA BYED KYI RNAM GZHAG MI 'THAD CING THA SNYAD DU YOD BA {%PA} LA 'GRO 'ONGS SONGS {%’ONG SOGS} BYA BYED KYI RNAM GZHAG THAMS CAD 'THAD PA YIN NO ZHES GO BAR BYA BA'I CHED DE, MTSON PA TZAM ZHIG BRJOD LA RGYAS PAR RJE'I t'IKKA SOGS LAS SHES PAR BYA'O,,
The reason that Lord Buddha gave all these kinds of teachings was so that we could come to an understanding of how, first of all, the entire structure of how things work in the world would be incorrect with objects which existed through some nature of their own; while, on the other hand, all the workings of things—such as coming and going—is perfectly correct with things that exist only in name. Here I have only touched on these points briefly, as a representative example; if you seek a more detailed explanation, you may find it in works such as Je Tsongkapa’s commentary.55
The title of the chapter
[396] GSUM PA NI,
Which brings us to our third step from above: presenting the name of the chapter.
[397] (II.chapter title)
[Gatāgata gamyamāna parīkṣā.
Gatagata gamyamana pariksha.
55 Je Tsongkapa’s commentary: A reference, again, to the Master’s Sea of Reasoning (%B2, S05401). The concept of how the working of things is still correct in emptiness is referred to there no less than some 40 times; the section pertaining specifically to coming & going begins at f. 54a.
155 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
,'GRO BA DANG 'ONG BA BRTAG PA ZHES BYA BA STE RAB TU BYED PA GNYIS PA'O,,
Here ends the second chapter of Wisdom: “An Investigation of Coming & Going”56]
[398] 'GRO BA DANG 'ONG BA BRTAG PA ZHES BYA BA'I RAB TU BYED PA GNYIS PA'I RNAM BAR {%PAR} BSHAD PA'O,,
This then ends our explication of the second chapter: “An Investigation of Coming & Going.”57
57 An Investigation of Coming & Going: The Sanskrit version of the chapter’s title includes coming, going, “and stepping”—recalling the three variations.
156 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
Chapter 3 An Investigation of the Powers
157 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
Chapter 3 An Investigation of the Powers
A structure for discussing how nothing is itself
[399] ` ,,GNYIS PA BDAG MED GNYIS RGYAS PAR BSHAD PA LA LNGA, CHOS DANG GANG ZAG SO SOR PHYI {%PHYE} STE BSHAD PA, DNGOS PO TZAM RANG BZHIN GYIS STONG PAR BSTAN PA, BDAG MED PA'I DE KHO NA NYID LA 'JUG TSUL, DUS RANG BZHIN GYIS STONG BAR BSTAN PA, SRID PA'I RGYUN RANG BZHIN GYIS STONG BAR BSTAN PA'O,,
This brings us to our second point from above: a more detailed treatment of the way in which things and people cannot be themselves. This will be covered in five different sections:
(1) Separate explanations concerning things and people; (2) A description of how entities taken as such are devoid of any nature of their own; (3) How it is that we engage in suchness, in the form of the fact that nothing is itself; (4) A description of how time is devoid of any nature of its own; and (5) A description of how the flow of the cycle of pain is devoid of any nature of its own.
[400] DANG PO LA GNYIS, CHOS KYI BDAG MED PA DANG, GANG ZAG GI BDAG MED BSHAD PA'O,,
158 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
The first of these has two parts of its own: an explanation of the way in which things cannot be themselves; followed by an explanation of the way in which people cannot be themselves.
[401] DANG PO LA GNYIS, CHOS GSUM BDAG MED PAR BSHAD PA DANG, DE LA BDAG YOD PA'I SGRUB BYED DGAG PA'O,,
The first of these, in turn, has two subsections: an explanation of the way in which three specific types of entities cannot be themselves; and then a refutation of attempted proofs that these objects can be themselves.
[402] DANG PO LA GSUM, SKYE [f. 22a] MCHED DANG, PHUNG PO DANG, KHAMS LA CHOS BDAG DGAG PA'O,,
The first of these we will cover with a refutation that the doors of sense can be themselves; that the parts to the person can be themselves; and that the elements could be themselves.
[403] DANG PO LA GSUM, RAB BYED KYI GZHUD {%GZHUNG,} DE LUNG DANG SBYAR BA, MTSAN BSTAN PA'O,,
The first refutation covers three topics: a discussion of the actual text of the chapter; applying that to scripture; and finally presenting the name of the chapter.
[404] DANG PO LA GNYIS, PHYOGS SNGA DGOD PA DANG, DE DGAG PA'O,,
There will be two sections on the actual text: setting forth the position of the opponent, and then refuting it.
Are senses & their objects themselves?
159 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
[405] DANG PO NI,
The first of these is presented in the following lines of the root text:
[406] (III.1)
Darśanaṃ śravaṇaṃ ghrāṇaṃ rasanaṃ sparśanaṃ manaḥ, Indriyāṇi ṣaḍ eteṣāṃ draṣṭavyādīni gocaraḥ.
Darshanan shravanan ghranan rasanan sparshanam manah, Indriyani shad eteshan drashtavyadini gocharah.
,LTA DANG NYAN DANG SNOM PA DANG, ,MYANG BAR BYED DANG REG BYED YID, ,DBANG PO DRUG STE DE DAG GI ,SPYOD YUL BLTA BAR BYA LA SOGS, ,ZHES SO,,
The six powers act To see; and hear; and smell; And taste; and feel— Along with the thought.
The spheres of activity For these are the things Which are seen, and so forth.
[407] KHO NA RE, YUL DANG DBANG PO RNAMS RANG BZHIN GYIS YOD DE, MNGON PA NAS LTA BA DANG NYAN PA DANG SNOM PA DANG MYANG BAR BYED PA DANG REG BAR BYED PA DANG SEMS PAR BYED PA'I YID KYI DBANG PO DRUG STE, DBANG PO DE DAG GI SPYOD YUL BLTA BAR BYA BA DANG LA
160 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
SOGS PAS NYAN PAR BYA BA NAS SHES PAR BYA BA'I BAR DRUG GSUNGS PA'I PHYIR ZHE NA,
Now someone may come and make the following argument:
It must be that objects of the senses, and the senses themselves, exist through some nature of their own;
Because the teachings on higher knowledge speak of the six sense powers which act to see; and hear; and smell; and taste; and feel—and the power of the thought, which acts to think.
That is, the spheres of activity for these powers are said to be those six things which are seen, and “so forth”—referring to their being heard, on up to being known.
But the eye cannot see itself
[408] GNYIS PA DGAG PA LA GNYIS, LTA BA'I CHOS GSUM LA RANG BZHIN DGAG PA DANG, RIGS PA DES GZHAN LA'ANG RANG BZHIN LEGS {%KHEGS} TSUL LO,,
Our second section—refuting this argument—will proceed in two steps: a refutation that the three elements involved in seeing could have any nature of their own; and then a description of how we deny, with this same reasoning, the idea that other perceptions could have any nature of their own either.
[409] DANG PO {%LA} GNYIS, LTA BA'I BYED PA PO DGAG PA DANG, LTA BA'I LAS DANG BYA BA DGAG PA'O,,
The first of these covers two parts: a refutation of the agent who performs the act of seeing; and then a refutation of both the object and the action of seeing.58
58 Object and the action: These two translations are not what we would first expect for the Tibetan las and bya-ba here; but at the end of the chapter, in section $$$$, Choney Lama
161 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
[410] DANG PO LA GNYIS, MIG BYED PA PO YIN PA DGAG PA DANG, BDAG GAM RNAM SHES BYED PA POR GRUB PA DGAG PA'O,,
The first point here is covered in two sections of its own: a refutation of the assertion that the eye could be the agent; and then a refutation of the assertion that the self, or the consciousness, could be the agent.
[411] DANG PO LA GNYIS, RANG LA MI LTA BA'I RTAGS KYIS DGAG PA DANG, LTA BA'I BYA BA DANG 'BREL MA 'BREL BRTAGS NAS DGAG PA'O,,
The first refutation, again, comes in two steps: refuting this assertion by utilizing the reasoning that the eye cannot see itself; and then refuting it by examining whether it is connected to the act of seeing, or not.
[412] DANG PO LA GSUM, RTAGS 'GOD PA, MA NGES PA SPANG BA, DON BSDU BA'O,,
The first step we’ll treat in three parts: setting forth our reasoning; denying that it is indefinite; and then presenting a summary of the point.
[413] DANG PO NI,
The first of these three is presented in the following lines of the root text:
[414] (III.2)
clarifies that certain terms in this chapter are meant to be read differently than they normally are—and we have followed that explanation in the translation.
162 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
Svam ātmānaṃ darśanaṃ hi tat tam eva na paśyati, Na paśyati yad ātmānaṃ kathaṃ drakṣyati tat parān.
Svam atmanan darshanan hi tat tam eva na pashyati, Na pashyati yad atmanan kathan drakshyati tat paran.
,LTA DE RANG GI BDAG NYID NI, ,DE LA LTA BA MA YIN NYID, ,GANG ZHIG RANG LA MI LTA BA, ,DE DAG GZHAN LA JI LTAR LTA [f. 22b], ,ZHES SO,,
The seeing is not something Which can ever see Its every own self.
The two are not things Which can see themselves; How then could they See others?
[415] YUL GZUGS LA LTA BAR BYED PA'I MIG DBANG DE CHOS CAN, RANG GI BDAG NYID DE LA NI LTA BA MA YIN PA NYID KHO NA STE, RANG NYID RANG GI BLTA BYA YIN PA'I SGO NAS RANG LA BYA BA BYED PA 'GAL BA'I PHYIR,
Consider the sense power of the eye, which acts to see its particular object: visible things.
It is not something which can ever, under any circumstances, see its very own self;
Because it would be a contradiction of terms to say that it performed an action towards itself, in the sense of the eye being, itself, what the eye was seeing.
163 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
[416] DE LTAR GANG ZHIG RANG LA MI LTA BA'I MIG DE DAG CHOS CAN, KHYOD SNGO SOGS YUL GZHAN LA YANG NGO BO NYID GYIS JI LTAR LTA BA YOD DE MED PAR THAL, RANG LA MI LTA BA'I PHYIR, DPER NA, RNA BA LA SOGS PA BZHIN NO,,
Let us consider then the two eyes, which—as such—are not things which can see themselves.
How could they exist then, as things which could—in and of themselves—see other objects, such as the color blue, or any such thing? They could never exist as such things.
And that’s because they cannot see themselves.
They are, for example, like the ears and the rest.
[417] 'DI NI NGO BO NYID KYIS LTA NA RKYEN LA MI BLTOS PAS GZHAN LA LTA BA BZHIN DU RANG LA'ANG LTA DGOS PA'I DON NO,,
What this is saying is that—if the eyes could, in and of themselves, see anything at all— then they would not rely on any particular condition to do their seeing; and if that were the case, then they would have to see themselves, just as they see other objects.
Why fire doesn’t work
[418] GNYIS PA NI,
Which brings us to the second part: denying that our reasoning is indefinite. This is covered in the next lines of the root text—
[419]
164 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
(III.3)
Na paryāpto'gni dṛṣṭānto darśanasya prasiddhaye, Sadarśanaḥ sa pratyukto gamyamāna gatāgataiḥ.
Na paryaptogni dirshtanto darshanasya prasiddhaye, Sadarshanah sa pratyukto gamyamana gatagataih.
,LTA BA RAB TU BSGRUB PA'I PHYIR, ,ME YI DPE YIS NUS MA YIN, ,SONG DANG MA SONG BA GOM {%BGOM} PA YIS, ,DE NI LTA BCAS LAN BTAB PO, ,ZHES SO,,
Fire as an example To establish seeing Is not something Which can.
Having gone, or not gone, Or stepping down Offers a reply To that one tied To seeing.
[420] GAL TE RANG LA MI LTA YANG GZHAN LA RANG BZHIN GYIS LTA STE, MES RANG MI SREG KYANG GZHAN SREG BAR BYED PA BZHIN NO, ,ZHE NA,
One may now argue as follows:
Even if it’s true that the eyes don’t see themselves, they can still—through a nature of their own—see other objects. After all, a fire can act to burn other things, even if it cannot burn itself.
[421]
165 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
MIG GIS LTA BA NGO BO NYID KYIS YOD BAR {%PAR} RAB TU BSGRUB PA'I PHYIR DU ME YI DPE BKOD PAS NI SGRUB PAR BYED NUS PA MA YIN TE, SDANG {%SNGAR} SONG DANG MA SONG BGOM {%BA GOM} BZHIN PA LA 'GRO 'ONG BA'I BYA BA RANG MTSAN PA 'GOG PA'I RIGS PA YIS, ME'I DPE DNGOS DE NI DON LTA BA DANG BCAS PA LHAN CIG YAN {%LAN} BTAB CING BKAG PA'I PHYIR TE,
Using fire as an example to establish that—when the eyes see an object—the seeing is something that exists in and of itself, is not something which can prove your point.
That’s because we can refer back to the reasoning which we used to deny that there could be any definitive actions of going or coming along a path down which we had already gone, or not gone, or were stepping down now. This reasoning offers a reply to—it denies—the idea that the overt example of a fire could be tied to—together with—seeing, as that object which the example refers to.
[422] JI LTAR NA, RE SHIG BLTAS LA MI LTA STE, ,ZHES DANG, RE SHIG SREG PO MI SREG STE, ,ZHES SBYOR BA'I TSUL GYIS BKAG PA'I PHYIR,
And why is that the case? Because the reasoning would deny this possibility in the sense we derive by using the previous lines as a model; we can say—
First of all, having seen Is not seeing…
Or we can say,
First of all, one that burns Does not burn…59
[423]
59 First of all: Both pieces are modeled after the reasoning presented in the first verse of the second chapter, above: “First of all, having gone is not going,” and so on.
166 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
MIG GIS RANG LA MI LTA BA NI MIG LDAN GYI GANG ZAG LA MI LTA BA'I DON MIN GYI, MIG NYID KYIS MIG NYID LA DNGOS SU MI LTA BA'I DON NO,,
By the way, when we say that the eyes cannot see themselves, we’re not saying that they can’t see a person who has eyes; what we’re saying is that one set of eyes cannot— directly—see the same set of eyes.
A summary on seeing
[424] GSUM PA NI,
Which brings us to our third part: a summary of the point. This is found in the next lines of the root text:
[425] (III.4)
Nāpaśyamānaṃ bhavati yadā kiṃ ca na darśanam, Darśanaṃ paśyatītyevaṃ katham etat tu yujyate.
Napashyamanam bhavati yada kin cha na darshanam, Darshanam pashyatiyevan katham etat tu yujyate.
,GANG TSE CUNG ZAD MI LTA BA, ,LTA BAR BYED PA MA [f. 23a] YIN? N? {%MA YIN NO}, ,LTA BAS LTA BAR BYED CES BYAR, ,DE NI JI LTAR RIGS PAR 'GYUR, ,ZHES SO,,
At no time does it see, The very least bit; It is nothing that acts To see.
167 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
How could this idea That something is an instrument Of seeing, in that it sees, Ever be correct?
[426] MIG DBANG CHOS CAN, GZUGS LA LTA BYED DU RANG BZHIN GYIS MA GRUB BAR {%PAR} THAL, DUS GANG GI TSE RANG DANG GZHAN LA NGO BO NYID KYIS CUNG ZAD KYANG MI LTA BA'I PHYIR,
Consider the sense power of the eye;
It cannot be the case that it is a thing which functions, through some nature of its own, to see visible objects;
Because at no time, under no circumstances, at all does it see either itself, nor other things, the very least bit in and of itself.
[427] DES NA GZUGS LA RANG BZHIN GYIS LTA BAR BYED PA MA YIN TE, LTA BYED DU RANG BZHIN GYIS MA GRUB PA'I PHYIR,
Therefore the eye is nothing that acts—through some nature of its own—to see visible objects; for it does not exist, through some nature of its own, as an agent which sees.
[428] 'DOD NA, GZUGS LA RANG BZHIN GYIS LTA BAS NA LTA BAR BYED CES BYA BAR BRJOD PA DE NI CHOS CAN, JI LTAR RIGS PAR 'GYUR BA MI 'THAD PAR THAL, DE 'DRA MED PA'I PHYIR,
And if you say that it does, then we ask you to consider this idea: that something is said to be an instrument of seeing, in that it sees—through some nature of its own—visible objects.
168 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
How could it ever be correct to speak of it this way? In fact, it would be incorrect,
For there is no such thing.
Is the eye connected to seeing?
[429] GNYIS PA NI,
This brings us to our second step from above: refuting our opponent’s assertion that the eye could be the agent, by examining whether the eye is connected to the act of seeing, or not.
[430] (III.5a)
Paśyati darśanaṃ naiva naiva paśyatyadarśanam…
Pashyati darshanan naiva naiva pashyatyadarshanam…
,LTA BA LTA NYID MA YIN TE, ,LTA BA MIN PA MI LTA NYID, ,CES SO,,
Seeing cannot In any way see; For one not seeing Could never see.
[431] MIG CHOS CAN, KHYOD LTA BA'I BYED PA POR RANG BZHIN GYIS MA GRUB STE, KHYOD LTA BA POR GRUB ZIN NAS SLAR LTA BA'I BYA BA DANG 'BREL BA NYID MA YIN PA'I PHYIR,
169 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
Consider the eye.
It does not exist, through any nature of its own, as the agent of sight;
Because once it has already become the seer, it cannot in any way once again have any connection to the act of seeing.60
[432] KHYAB STE, SNGAR LTA BA'I BYED PA POR GRUB ZIN NA, SLAR LTA BA'I BYA BA LA BLTOS PAR MI RIGS PA'I PHYIR TE, GAL TE SLAR BLTOS NA KHYOD KYI STONG {%STENG} NA LTA BA'I BYA BA RANG DANG NGO BO GCIG PA DANG NGO BO THA DAD PA GNYIS DUS GCIG TU YOD PAR 'GYUR BAS, DE LA NI SNGAR BSHAD PA'I RIGS PAS GNOD PA'I PHYIR,
And this necessarily is the case, because once something has already become a seer, it would be illogical for it to rely, once again, upon the act of seeing.
This in turn is true because, if it were once again to rely upon that seeing, then it would be the case that to be the seeing is to be the seer; and at the same time that to be the seeing would be something other than the seer—whereas this idea is thrown into question by the reasoning we presented before.
[433] DER THAL, LTA BA'I BYA BA GCIG NYID DU BYED PO DANG BYA BA GZUGS GNYIS KYI STENG NA NGO BOS GRUB BA {%PA} MI 'THAD PA'I PHYIR,
And that is indeed the case, because it would be incorrect to say that one act of seeing could, in and of itself, relate to both the agent and to what it acts upon, in the sense of visible form.
60 Act of seeing: Again, the reader should remain aware that we are following the idiosyncratic translations prescribed by Choney Lama at the end of the chapter.
170 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
[434] GAL TE MIG LTA BA'I RANG BZHIN MIN PA DANG 'BREL ZHE NA,
Now suppose that someone counters by saying that to see is not the nature of the eye.
[435] DE YANG MI RIGS PAR THAL, MIG LTA BA'I RANG BZHIN MIN PA YANG GZUGS LA MI LTA BA NYID DU NGES PA'I PHYIR TE, DE LTA BA'I BYA BA DANG BRAL BA'I PHYIR ,SOR [f. 23b] RTZE BZHIN NO,,
That too would have to be mistaken, because it is absolutely certain that an eye which did not have a nature of seeing could never see visible forms.
And that’s true because it would be entirely divorced from the thing which it sees.
It would resemble the case of the tip of a person’s finger.
Understanding seers with seeing
[436] GNYIS PA BDAG GAM RNAM SHES BYED PA PO YIN PA DGAG PA LA GNYIS, RIGS PA SNGA MAS KHEGS TSUL, RIGS PA GZHAN BSTAN PA'O,,
This brings us to our second section from above: a refutation of the assertion that the self, or the consciousness, could be the agent in an act of seeing. We proceed in two steps: the way in which we deny this idea with the previous reasoning, followed by a presentation of some different reasoning.
[437] DANG PO NI,
The first of these is covered in the following section of the root text:
171 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
[438] (III.5b)
…Vyākhyāto darśanenaiva draṣṭā cāpyavagamyatām.
…Vyakhyato darshanenaiva drashta chapyavagamyatam.
,LTA BA NYID KYIS LTA BA PO'ANG, ,RNAM PAR BSHAD PAS SHES PAR BYA, ,ZHES SO,,
The explanation of The very same, seeing, Allows us to understand The seer as well.
[439] GAL TE BDAG GAM RNAM SHES LTA BA POR NGO BO NYID KYIS YOD DO ZHE NA,
Now suppose someone comes and says, “The self, and the consciousness, are—in and of themselves—seers.”
[440] SHES BYA CHOS CAN, BDAG GAM RNAM SHES LTA BA POR RANG BZHIN GYIS MA GRUB PAR THAL, MIG LTA BA'I BYED POR RANG BZHIN GYIS GRUB PA 'GOG PA'I RIGS PA DE NYID KYIS BDAG DANG RNAM SHES GNYIS RANG BZHIN GYIS LTA BA PO YIN PA'ANG BKAG PA RNAM PAR BSHAD PAS SHES PAR BYA BA YIN PA'I PHYIR,
Consider, in that case, all knowable things.
It cannot in fact be the case that the self, and the consciousness, are— through some nature of their own—seers.
172 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
And that’s because the very same reasoning which we used to deny that the eye could be an agent—one which existed through some nature of its own—in an act of seeing denies as well that either the self or the consciousness could, through any nature of their own, be a seer. That explanation then is something which allows us to understand this fact.
[441] DE YANG, ,LTA BO RANG GI BDAG NYID NI, ,LTA BAS LTA BA NYID MA YIN, ,ZHES SOGS SBYAR NAS 'GOG PA'O,,
You could again use the previous lines61 as a model, then, and say:
The seer is not something Which can ever see By seeing itself.
[442] 'DIR LTA BAR BYED PA BO {%PO} DANG, LTA BAR BYED PA DANG, LTA BA'I BYA BA'ANG THA SNYAD DU 'JOG KYANG, DE GSUM NGO BO MA GRUB {%NGO BOS GRUB} PAR 'DOD NA LTA BA'I BYA BA YANG GSUM YOD DGOS SHING, LTA BA PO YANG GSUM DUS GCIG TU YOD PAR 'GYUR RO,,
In this regard, it is true that we posit—at least nominally—an agent who sees; an instrument of seeing; and an act of seeing. But if we were to assert that these three existed in and of themselves, then there would as well have to be three acts of seeing; and at the same time three seers.
Seers after seeing
[443] GNYIS PA NI,
61 The previous lines: That is, the lines at III.2.
173 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
Here secondly we make our presentation of some different reasoning, to prove the same point. This is covered in the root text with:
[444] (III.6a)
Draṣṭā nāstyatiraskṛtya tiraskṛtya ca darśanam…
Drashta nastyatiraskirtya tiraskirtya cha darshanam…
,MA SPANGS LTA PO YOD MIN TE, ,LTA BA SPANGS PA GYUR KYANG NGO, ,ZHES SO,,
It cannot be That there is a seer. Where it is not relinquished; Neither can there be Once the seeing Has been relinquished.
[445] GAL TE LTA BA'I LAS DANG BYED PA YOD PAS LTA BA PO RANG BZHIN GYIS YOD DO ZHE NA,
Someone may assert the following:
If the object which is seen exists, and the instrument of seeing exists, then the seer must also—through a nature of their own—be there.62
[446]
62 Object and instrument: Again, we are following Choney Lama’s clarification at the end of the chapter on a special way of reading the Tibetan las and byed-pa in this section.
174 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
DE YANG MI 'THAD DE, LTA BA'I BYA BA MA SPANGS PA STE DE LA BLTOS PA'I LTA BA PO RANG BZHIN GYIS YOD BA {%PA} MA YIN ZHING, LTA BA'I BYA PA {%BA} SPANGS PAR GYUR PA STE DE LA MI BLTOS PA'I LTA BA PO YANG YOD PA MIN PA'I PHYIR,
But that too is mistaken. And that’s because—for so long as we have still not relinquished the act of seeing—it cannot be that there is a seer who relies upon this seeing, through some nature of their own. But neither can we say that—once the act of seeing has been relinquished—there could be some seer who did not rely upon this act.
[447] RTAGS DANG PO GRUB STE, LTA BA'I BYA BA BLTOS NA LTA BA BOR {%POR} RANG BZHIN GYIS YOD PAR MI RIGS PA'I PHYIR,
The first reason we’ve given here is true because it would be incorrect to say that someone existed—through some nature of their own—as a seer, if they did rely upon the act of seeing.
[448] GNYIS PA GRUB STE, LTA BA'I BYA BA LA MI [f. 24a] LTOS PA'I LTA BA PO MED PAR BSGRUBS ZIN PA'I PHYIR,
And the second reason is true because—as we’ve already demonstrated—there exists no seer who does not rely upon the act of seeing.
No seeing, nothing seen
[449] GNYIS PA NI,
Having refuted the agent who performs the act of seeing, we move on now to a refutation of both the object and the act of seeing.
[450]
175 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
(III.6b-7)
…Draṣṭavyaṃ darśanaṃ caiva draṣṭaryasati te kutaḥ.
Draṣṭavya darśanābhāvād vijñānādi catuṣṭayam, Nāstītyupādānādīni bhaviṣyanti punaḥ katham.
…Drashtavyan darshanan chaiva drashtaryasati te kutah.
Drashtavya darshanabhavad vijnanadi chatushtayam, Nastityupdanadini bhavishyanti punah katham.
,LTA BO {%PO} MED NA LTA BYA DANG, ,LTA BA DE DAG GA LA YOD,
,BLTA BYA LTA BA MED PA'I PHYIR, ,RNAM PAR SHES PA LA SOGS BZHI, ,YOD MIN NYE BAR LEN PA SOGS, ,JI LTAR BUR NA YOD PAR 'GYUR, ,ZHES SO,,
If no seer exists, Then how could The act of seeing, And what is seen, Ever exist?
Because neither The act of seeing Nor what is seen exist, Then neither do the four Of consciousness And the rest exist— How then could grasping And such ever be?
176 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
[451] GAL TE BLTA BYA LAS DANG LTA BA RANG BZHIN GYIS YOD SNYAM NA,
Now someone may think to themselves, “The thing which is seen—the object of seeing— and the act of seeing must exist through some nature of their own.”
[452] DE MI 'THAD PAR THAL, LTA BA PO RANG BZHIN GYIS MED NA, DE LA BLTOS PA'I BLTA BYA DANG LTA BA DE DAG RANG BZHIN GYIS GA LA YOD DE MED PA'I PHYIR,
That though cannot be correct; for if the seer is not something that exists through any nature of its own, then how could these two—what is seen, and the seeing itself—ever exist through some nature of their own? They could not!
[453] DER THAL, BYED PO MED NA DE'I BYA BA MI 'GRUB PA'I PHYIR,
And that, in turn, must truly be the case—for if there is no agent, then there can be no action of the agent either.
[454] RNAM PAR SHES PA LA SOGS TE REG PA DANG TSOR BA DANG SRED PA BZHI PO YANG RANG BZHIN GYIS YOD PA MIN TE, BLTA BYA DANG LTA BA SOGS RANG BZHIN GYIS MED PA'I PHYIR,
Neither then is it the case that the four of consciousness “and the rest”—itself a reference to contact; feeling; and craving—exist through any nature of their own. And that’s true because neither do what is seen, nor the seeing and so forth, exist through any nature of their own.
[455] NYE BAR LEN PA DANG SOGS KYIS SRID PA DANG SKYE RGA SOGS KYANG JI LTAR BUR NA RANG BZHIN GYIS YOD PAR 'GYUR TE, RNAM SHES SOGS BZHI RANG BZHIN GYIS MED PA'I PHYIR,
177 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
How then could grasping and “the rest” (referring to ripe karma, birth & aging and the rest) ever be, through some nature of their own—given that none of the four of consciousness and the rest exist through any such nature?
Applying it to the other senses
[456] GNYIS PA RIGS PA DE GZHAN LA SBYAR BA NI,
This brings us to our second step from above: denying, with the same reasoning, the idea that other perceptions could have any nature of their own either. This is expressed in the following sections of the root text:
[457] (III.8)
Vyākhyātaṃ śravaṇaṃ ghrāṇaṃ rasanaṃ sparśanaṃ manaḥ, Darśanenaiva jānīyāc chrotṛ śrota vyakādi ca.
Vyakhyatan shravanan ghranan rasanan sparshanam manah, Darshanenaiva janiyach chrotir shrota vyakadi cha.
,LTA BAS NYAN DANG SNOM PA DANG, ,MYANG BAR BYED DANG REG BYED YID, ,NYAN PA PO DANG MNYAN PO {%LA} SOGS, ,RNAM PAR BSHAD PAS {%PAR} SHES PAR BYA, ,ZHES SO,,
Use this explanation of seeing For coming to an understanding Of hearing and smelling; The instrument for tasting, The instrument of touching; And the thought—
178 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
As well as the agent Of the hearing; the hearing; And everything else.
[458] LTA BA'I CHOS GSUM LA RANG BZHIN 'GOG PA'I RIG {%RIGS} PA DE NYID KYIS, RNA BAS NYAN PA DANG, SNAS SNOM PA DANG, LCES MYANG BAR BYED PA DANG, LUS KYIS REG PAR BYED PA DANG, YID KYIS SEMS PAR BYED PA DANG, NYAN PA PO DANG, MNYAN PAR BYA BA DANG, SOGS KYIS SNOM PA PO DANG, SNAM PAR BYA BA NAS SEMS SO SO {%SEMS PA PO} DANG SEMS PAR [f. 24b] BYA BA RNAMS KYANG RANG BZHIN MED PAR RNAM PAR BSHAD PAR SHES PAR BYA STE,
We have covered, then, the logic we use to deny the idea that the three elements in an act of seeing could have any nature of their own. We can use this same explanation for coming to an understanding of how there is no such nature when the ears do their hearing; when the nose smells scents; when the tongue acts as an instrument for tasting things; when the skin is the instrument of touching; and when the thought does its thinking. And we can use it to see that neither the agent of the hearing; nor the hearing itself; nor “anything else”—a reference to the agent of smelling things; and the things that it smells, all the way on up to the agent of thinking thoughts, and the thoughts it thinks—has any nature of its own.
[459] ,NYAN PA RANG GI BDAG NYID NI, ,DE LA NYAN PA NYID MA YIN, ,ZHES SOGS SBYAR BA'I TSUL GYIS 'GOG PA YIN PA'I PHYIR,
And that’s because we can deny any nature to those three elements by applying the same model that we used before: we can adjust wording that we’ve seen already, 63 such as:
The hearing is not something Which can ever hear Its very own self.
63 Wording we’ve seen: Again, we are meant to use the lines at III.2.
179 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
A clarification of terms
[460] LAS NI YUL DRUG DANG, BYA BA NI LTA BA DANG NYAN PA SOGS DANG, BYED PA PO LA GNYIS TE MIG SOGS BYED PA PO DANG, YANG NA BDAG GAM RNAM SHES DRUG BYED PA POR 'JOG STE, PHYI MA BYED PA POR 'JOG PA'I TSE, DBANG PO DRUG LA NI BYED PA ZHES BYA'O,,
Some clarification on the native terminology used here. The Tibetan word las in this chapter can refer to the six objects of the senses; whereas bya-ba refers to the seeing, the hearing, and so on. Byed-pa-po then means “agent of the action,” and can have two different senses. That is, we can speak of the eye and so on as this agent; or else we can refer to the self, or the six types of consciousness, as the agent. When we use the term in this last sense, then the six sense powers are spoken of as “instruments” (byed-pa).
Scriptural sources
[461] GNYIS PA NI, SRID PA 'PHO BA'I MDO LA SOGS PA RNAMS SO,,
This brings us, finally, to our second topic from the very beginning: applying the text of this chapter to classical scripture. That is, the chapter relates to teachings such as The Sutra on Moving to Another Life.64
64 The sutra on moving: Je Tsongkapa, in his Sea of Reasoning (f. 77b, %B2, S05401), directs us for example to the beautiful lines found on f. 286b of the sutra (%S@, KL00226). Here is a sample: The eye sees nothing Visible; The mind knows none Of things. This is the pinnacle Of truth itself— Something the world Cannot grasp.
180 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
The chapter’s name
[462] GSUM PA NI,
Our third and final topic in the chapter is to present its name.
[463] (III.chapter title)
[Āyatana parīkṣā.
Ayatana pariksha.
,DBANG PO BRTAG PA ZHES BYA BA RAB TU BYED PA GSUM PA’O,,
Here ends the third chapter of Wisdom: “An Investigation of the Powers.”]
[464] DBANG PO BRTAG PA ZHES BYA BA RAB TU BYED PA GSUM PA'I RNAM PAR BSHAD DO,,
This then ends our explication of the third chapter: “An Investigation of the Powers.”
181 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
Chapter 4 An Investigation of the Parts to a Person
182 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
Chapter 4 An Investigation of the Parts to a Person
Can causes be separate from their results?
[465] ,,GNYIS PA PHUNG PO LA CHOS BDAG DGAG PA LA GSUM, RAB BYED KYI GZHUD {%GZHUNG}, LUNG SBYAR BA, MTSAN BSTAN PA'O,,
With this, we have reached our second section from above: a refutation that the parts to a person can be themselves. We cover this, again, in three steps of a discussion of the actual text of the chapter; applying this to scripture; and finally presenting the chapter’s name.
[466] DANG PO LA GSUM, GZUGS PHUNG RANG BZHIN GYIS GRUB PA DGAG ,RIGS PA DE PHUNG PO LHAG MA LA SBYAR BA, RTZOD 'CHAD KYI LAN GDAB TSUL LO,,
We present the first of these in three parts of its own: a refutation of the idea that the heap of physical form could exist through some nature of its own; applying this same reasoning to the remainder of the parts to a person; and then finally how we respond to points made in dispute of our ideas.
[467] DANG PO LA, KHO NA RE, MNGON PA LAS GZUGS NI 'BYUNG BA BZHI DANG, 'BYUNG GYUR GYI GZUGS SU GSUNGS PAS, RGYU 'BRAS RNAMS LA RANG BZHIN YOD DO ZHE NA,
Here is the first. Someone may come and make the following claim:
183 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
The teachings on higher knowledge describe physical matter in terms of the four elements and the products of these elements. As such, we would have to say that cause and effect has some nature of its own.
[468] DE DGAG PA LA GSUM, DON GZHAN PA LA RGYU 'BRAS DGAG ,YOD MED LA RGYU 'BRAS DGAG ,'DRA MI 'DRA LA RGYU 'BRAS DGAG PA'O,,
Our refutation of this position comes in three sections: denying cause and effect with things that are separate from each other; denying cause and effect in terms of existing or not existing; and finally denying cause and effect with entities that are either similar or not similar.
[469] DANG PO LA GNYIS, DAM BCA' BA DANG, SGRUB BYED BSTAN PA'O, ,DANG PO NI,
For the first of these sections, we will lay out our assertion, and then present proofs for it. The first of these comes in the next lines of the root text:
[470] (IV.1)
Rūpa kāraṇa nirmuktaṃ na rūpam upalabhyate, Rūpeṇāpi na nirmuktaṃ dṛśyate rūpa kāraṇam.
Rupa karana nirmuktan na rupam upalabhyate, Rupenapi na nirmuktan dirshyate rupa karanam.
,GZUGS KYI RGYU NI MA GTOGS PAR, ,GZUGS NI DMIGS PAR MI 'GYUR RO, ,GZUGS ZHES BYA BAS? {%BA} MA GTOGS PAR, ,GZUGS KYI RGYU YANG MI [f. 25a] SNANG NGO, ,ZHES SO,,
184 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
There cannot exist Physical form Not taken in by The causes of form.
Neither can there appear The causes of form Not taken in by what We call “physical form.”
[471] MIG DBANG LA SOGS PA'I 'BRAS GZUGS KYI RGYU BA {%LA} SOGS 'BYUNG BA BZHI PO DE DAG LAS NI MA GTOGS PAR TE NGO BO NYID KYIS THA DAD PA'I MIG SOGS 'BYUNG GYUR GYI GZUGS NI DMIGS PAR MI 'GYUR LA,
There cannot exist an eye or the like—physical form which is a product of the elements— which is, in and of itself, something distinct from (“not taken in by”) the four elements which act as causes, or the like, of form—such as the sense power of the eye—which results from them.
[472] DER MA ZAD 'BRAS BU 'BYUNG GYUR GYI GZUGS ZHES BYA BA MA GTOGS PAR TE NGO BO NYID KYIS THA DAD PA'I 'BYUNG GYUR GYI GZUGS KYI RGYU 'BYUNG BA BZHI YANG MI SNANG STE, 'BYUNG BA DANG 'BYUNG GYUR GNYIS PHAN TSUN BLTOS NAS GRUB PA'I PHYIR RO,,
And not only that. Neither can there ever appear those four elements—the causes of form which is the product of the elements—which are, in and of themselves, not taken in by, things in and of themselves distinct from, what we call “physical form”: that which is a result, or a product of the elements.
Causes & results, without
[473] GNYIS PA NI,
185 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
Our second step here, the presentation of the proofs, comes in the following lines of the root text:
[474] (IV.2-3)
Rūpa kāraṇa nirmukte rūpe rūpaṃ prasajyate, Āhetukaṃ na cāstyarthaḥ kaścid āhetukaḥ kva cit.
Rūpeṇa tu vinirmuktaṃ yadi syād rūpa kāraṇam, Akāryakaṃ kāraṇaṃ syād nāstyakāryaṃ ca kāraṇam.
Rupa karana nirmukte rupe rupam prasjyate, Ahetukan na chastyarthah kashchid ahetukah kva cit.
Rupena tu vinirmuktan yadi syad rupa karanam, Akaryakan karanan syad nastyakaryan cha karanam.
,GZUGS KYI RGYU NI MA GTOGS PAR, ,GZUGS NA GZUGS NI RGYU MED PAR, ,THAL BAR 'GYUR TE DON GANG YANG, ,RGYU MED PA NI GANG NA'ANG MED,
,GAL TE GZUGS NI MA GTOGS PAR, ,GZUGS KYI RGYU ZHIG YOD NA NI, ,'BRAS BU MED PA'I RGYUR 'GYUR TE, ,'BRAS BU MED PA'I RGYU MED DO, ,ZHES SO,,
If form were not taken in By the causes of form, The form would have to be Without any causes: There is no entity at all, Anywhere at all,
186 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
Which could exist Without a cause.
And suppose that There could be A cause of form Not taken in by form; They would be causes That had no result— And there is no such thing As a cause with no result.
[475] NGO BO NYID KYIS YOD NA 'BRAS GZUGS KYI RGYU 'BYUNG BA LA NI MA GTOGS PAR TE NGO BO THA DAD PA'I 'BRAS GZUGS MIG SOGS YOD PAR 'GYUR LA, DE LTAR NA 'BRAS GZUGS DE DAG NI RGYU MED PAR 'BYUNG BAR THAL BAR 'GYUR ZHING, DE LA 'DOD MI NUS TE, DON DNGOS PO GANG YANG RGYU MED PA NI GANG NA'ANG MED PA'I PHYIR,
If these things existed in and of themselves, then there could be things like the eye— physical form as a result—that were “not taken in by,” that were essentially distinct from, the causes of this resultant form; which is to say, the elements. And if that were the case, the resulting types of form would have to occur without any causes at all. This in turn is not something that we could ever agree to, for there is no entity—no functioning thing—at all, anywhere at all, which could ever exist without a cause.
[476] GAL TE 'BRAS BU'I GZUGS NI MA GTOGS PAR TE DER BLTOS MED DU GZUGS KYI RGYU ZHIG NGO BO NYID KYIS YOD NA NI DE MI RIGS TE, RGYU'I GZUGS 'BYUNG BA BZHI NI 'BRAS BU MED PA'I RGYUR 'GYUR BA'I PHYIR,
And suppose that there could be, in and of itself, a cause of form which was “not taken in by” that resulting form—meaning, which did not rely upon it. This idea too would be incorrect, since the four elements—causal form—would then be causes that had no result.
[477]
187 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
'BRAS BU MED PA'I RGYU NI MED DE, RGYUR RNAM PAR 'JOG BYED [f. 25b] MED PA'I PHYIR, NAM MKHA'I ME TOG BZHIN NO,,
But there is no such thing as a cause which has no result, since in that case there would be nothing to establish it as being a cause. It would be like a flower growing in mid-air.
[478] RANG BZHIN GYIS GRUB NA BLTOS MED DU YOD DGOS PA'I RIGS PA STE SNGAR BSHAD PA'I RANG BZHIN GYI DON DRAN DGOS SO,,
This then is logic which says that—if something were to exist through some nature of its own—then it would never rely on something else; when you get to this point, you should be bringing to mind the meaning of the term “a nature of its own,” as this was explained above.
Neither there or not
[479] GNYIS PA NI,
This brings us to our second section from above: denying cause and effect in terms of existing or not existing. This is presented in the next lines of the root text:
[480] (IV.4-5)
Rūpe satyeva rūpasya kāraṇaṃ nopapadyate, Rūpe'satyeva rūpasya kāraṇaṃ nopapadyate.
Niṣkāraṇaṃ punā rūpaṃ naiva naivopapadyate, Tasmād rūpagatān kāṃścin na vikalpān vikalpayet.
Rupe satyeva rupasya karanan nopapadyate, Rupesatyeva rupasya karanan nopapadyate.
188 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
Nishkaranam puna rupan naiva naivopapadyate, Tasmad rupagatan kanshchin na vikalpan vikalpayet.
,GZUGS YOD NA YANG GZUGS KYI NI, ,RGYU YANG 'THAD PAR MI 'GYUR NYID, ,GZUGS MED NA YANG GZUGS KYI NI, ,RGYU YANG 'THAD PAR MI 'GYUR NYID,
,RGYU MED PA YI GZUGS DAG NI, ,'THAD PAR MI RUNG RUNG MIN NYID, ,DE PHYIR GZUGS KYI RNAM PAR RTOG ,'GA' YANG RNAM PAR BRTAG MI BYA, ,ZHES SO,,
If—on the one hand— Form were to exist, A cause of the form Would be completely incorrect. If—on the other hand— This form didn’t exist, Then a cause of form Would be completely incorrect.
Forms that had no cause Would be incorrect— Absolutely incorrect. And so none should ever Imagine an idea Of any form at all.
[481] RGYU 'BYUNG BA RNAMS NI 'BRAS BU 'BYUNG GYUR YOD MED GANG GI RGYUR NGO BO NYID KYIS MA GRUB STE, GAL TE 'BRAS GZUGS NI NGO BO NYID KYIS YOD NA YANG RGYUS 'BRAS BU LA CI YANG MI NUS PAS GZUGS KYI RGYU YANG 'THAD PAR MI 'GYUR BA NYID DANG, 'BRAS GZUGS MED NA YANG
189 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
RGYUS DGOS PA MED PAS 'BRAS GZUGS KYI NI RGYU YANG 'THAD PAR MI 'GYUR BA NYID YIN PA'I PHYIR,
Now neither can we say that causes—that is, the elements—exist, in and of themselves, as causes of resulting products of these elements which either exist or do not exist. And that’s because—on the one hand—if resulting form were to exist in and of itself, then its cause would be unable to do anything at all for the result: a cause of the form would be completely incorrect. And if—on the other hand—this resulting form didn’t exist, then there would be no purpose fulfilled by its cause; in which case a cause of form as a result would be completely incorrect as well.
[482] RGYU GZUGS MED NA'ANG 'BRAS GZUGS RANG BZHIN GYIS YOD DO SNYAM NA,
Now one may think to themselves: “Even if there is no form there to act as a cause, still there could exist—through a nature of its own—resulting form.”
[483] DE NI SHIN TU MI RIGS TE, RGYU MED PA YI 'BRAS BU'I GZUGS DAG NI 'THAD PAR MI RUNG ZHING RUNG BA MIN PA NYID KYI PHYIR TE, RGYU MED PAS SKYE BA NI SHIN TU THA CHAD PA'I PHYIR,
That would be completely inappropriate: resulting forms that had no cause would be incorrect—they would be absolutely incorrect. Saying that something could grow in the absence of a cause is perfectly ridiculous.
[484] RGYU MTSAN DE'I PHYIR RNAL 'BYOR BA {%PA} DE NYID RIG PAS GZUGS KYI RNAM PAR RTOG PA THOGS BCAS THOGS MED CES BYA BA LA SOGS PA 'GA' YANG RANG BZHIN GYIS YOD PAR RNAM PAR BRTAG PAR MI BYA ZHING BYAR MI 'OS SO,,
And so—for these reasons—no real practitioner, nobody who understands the suchness of things, should ever imagine that an idea of any form at all that existed through some nature
190 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
of its own—regardless of whether we said it were something concrete, or ephemeral, or anything else. Such thoughts would, simply, not be something worthy of them.
Neither similar nor not
[485] GSUM PA RGYU DANG 'DRA MI 'DRA LA 'BRAS BU DGAG PA NI,
With this, we have reached the third section from above: denying cause and effect with entities that are either similar or not similar.
[486] (IV.6)
Na kāraṇasya sadṛśaṃ kāryam ityupapadyate, Na kāraṇasyāsadṛśaṃ kāryam ityupapadyate.
Na karanasya sadirshan karyam ityupapadyate, Na karanasyasadirshan karyam ityupapadyate.
,'BRAS BU RGYU DANG 'DRA BA ZHES, ,BYA BA 'THAD PA MA YIN TE, ,'BRAS BU RGYU [f. 26a] DANG MI 'DRA ZHES, ,BYA BA'ANG 'THAD PA MA YIN NO, ,ZHES SO,,
It would be incorrect to say That results were similar To their causes. Neither would it be correct To say they were not similar To their causes.
[487]
191 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
GZHAN YANG, 'BRAS BU'I GZUGS MIG SOGS NI RGYU 'BYUNG BA RNAMS DANG NGO BO NYID KYIS 'DRA BA ZHES BYA BA NI 'THAD PA MA YIN TE, 'BYUNG BA BZHI NI SRA GSHER DRE {%DRO} G-YO BA'I RNAM PA CAN YIN LA, 'BYUNG 'GYUR DBANG PO SOGS NI DE LTAR MA YIN PA'I PHYIR,
Moreover, it would be incorrect to say that resulting forms, such as the eye or such, were— in and of themselves—similar to the elements which acted as their causes. This is because the four elements exhibit the qualities of being solidity, wetness, warmth, and motion; whereas the powers and such which result from them are not this way.
[488] KHYAB STE, NGO BO NYID KYIS 'DRAN {%DRA NA} CHA THAMS CAD NAS 'DRA DGOS PA'I PHYIR,
And this necessarily is the case, since—if these things were in and of themselves similar— then they would have to be similar in every respect.
[489] 'BRAS BU'I GZUGS MIG SOGS CHOS CAN, RANG RGYU 'BYUNG BA RNAMS DANG RIGS MI 'DRA BAR 'BYUNG ZHES BYA BA'ANG 'THAD PA MA YIN PAR THAL, RIGS GTAN MI 'DRA BAR BSKYED NA GZUGS KYI RIGS CAN BSKYED PA MI 'THAD PAS, MI 'DRA BA THAMS CAD KYANG BSKYED PAR 'GYUR BA'I PHYIR,
And consider resulting forms, of the eye and the rest.
Neither can it be the case that it would be correct for us to say they were not similar to the elements which act as their causes;
And that’s because—if these forms were produced as something of an entirely different type—it would be incorrect to say that they could be produced as a physical type of thing; since in such a case, they would have to be produced as every dissimilar type of thing.
And the rest of the parts
192 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
[490] GNYIS PA RIGS PA DE PHUNG PO LHAG MA LA SBYAR PA NI,
Which brings us to our second major part from above: applying this same reasoning to the remainder of the parts to a person.
[491] (IV.7)
Vedanā citta saṃjñānāṃ saṃskārāṇāṃ ca sarvaśaḥ, Sarveṣām eva bhāvānāṃ rūpeṇaiva samaḥ kramaḥ.
Vedana chitta sanjnanan sanskaranan cha sarvashah, Sarvesham eva bhavanan rupenaiva samah kramah.
,TSOR DANG 'DU SHES 'DU BYED DANG, ,SEMS DANG DNGOS PO THAMS CAD KYANG, ,RNAM PA DAG NI THAMS CAD DU, ,GZUGS NYID KYIS NI RIM PAR MTSUNGS, ,ZHES SO,,
Feeling, discrimination, The other factors, the mind, And every other entity Are the same as form— Identical types of steps, With no such option.
[492] TSOR BA DANG 'DU SHES DANG 'DU BYED DANG SEMS DANG MTSAN MTSON DANG RGYU 'BRAS DANG CHA DANG CHA CAN LA SOGS PA'I DNGOS PO THAMS CAD KYANG RANG BZHIN GYIS MED DE,
Neither do the capacity of feeling; of discrimination; the other factors that make up a person; or the mind; or definitions and what they define; or cause & effect; or parts and wholes, or any other entity exist through any nature of their own.
193 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
[493] GZUGS DE RANG GI RGYU LAS DE NYID DANG GZHAN DU YOD MED RNAM PAR DPYOD PA'I RIGS PAS DPYAD NAS MI RNYED PA'I RIGS PA DE NYID KYIS NI, 'GOG TSUL GYI RIM PA JI LTA BA BZHIN DU RNAM PA DAG NI THAMS CAD DU MI RNYED PAR MTSUNGS PA'I PHYIR,
And that’s because of that same line of reasoning as before—where we use logic to examine where or not our physical form exists as something which is the same as its cause, or something different. When we apply this logic, we discover that neither option can be confirmed. And so we employ the same types of steps in the process of denying that these other entities could exist through some nature of their own; and our conclusion is identical: that we discover that no such option can be confirmed with them.
Using what’s to be proven, to prove
[494] GSUM BRTZOD 'CHAD KYI TSE LAN GDAB TSUL NI,
This brings us to the third major part from above; that is, how we respond to points made in dispute of our ideas. This is presented in the following lines of the root text:
[495] (IV.8-9)
Vigrahe yaḥ parīhāraṃ kṛte śūnyatayā vadet, Sarvaṃ tasyāparihṛtaṃ samaṃ sādhyena jāyate.
Vyākhyāne ya upālambhaṃ kṛte śūnyatayā vadet, Sarvaṃ tasyānupālabdhaṃ samaṃ sādhyena jāyate.
Vigrahe yah pariharan kirte shunyataya vadet, Sarvan tasyaparihirtan saman sadhyena jayate.
194 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
Vyakhyane ya upalambhan kirte shunyataya vadet, Sarvan tasyanupalabdhan saman sadhyena jayate.
,STONG PA NYID KYIS BRTZAD BYAS TSE, ,GANG ZHIG LAN 'DEBS SMRA BYED PA, ,DE YI THAMS CAD LAN BTAB MIN, ,[f. 26b] BSGRUB PAR BYA DANG MTSUNGS PAR 'GYUR,
,STONG PA NYID KYIS BSHAD BYAS TSE, ,GANG ZHIG SKYON 'DOGS SMRA BYED PA, ,DE YI THAMS CAD SKYON BTAGS MIN, ,BSGRUB PAR BYA DANG MTSUNGS PAR 'GYUR, ,ZHES SO,,
When someone has come And argued for emptiness, Some may come and answer; But none of these Represents a reply: It’s exactly the same As the quality to prove.
And when they make Their explanation About simple emptiness, Someone may make Criticisms; And yet none Of their criticisms Are assigned: It’s exactly the same As the quality to prove.
[496] RANG BZHIN STONG PA NYID KYI DON BSTAN PA'I SGO NAS GZUGS LA RANG BZHIN MED DO ZHES BRTZAD PA STE RTZOD PA BYAS PA'I TSE, RGOL GANG
195 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
ZHIG GZUGS LA RANG BZHIN YOD DE, TSOR BA LA RANG BZHIN YOD PA'I PHYIR ZHES LAN 'DEBS SMRA BAR BYED PA
Now when someone has come and argued—when they have made the argument—that “physical form has no nature of its own,” as they make their presentation of the meaning of emptiness (the emptiness of a nature), some opponent may come and answer them by saying, “But form does have a nature of its own; for feelings do have a nature of their own.”
[497] DE YI DE LTA BU THAMS CAD NI YANG DAG BA'I {%PA’I} LAN BTAB PA MA YIN TE, DE 'DRA BA DE SGRUB BYED BSGRUB PAR BYA BA DANG MTSUNGS PA CAN DU 'GYUR BA'I PHYIR,
But none of these—no such arguments—represent a reply which is correct, for these responses are types where the quality given to prove the point is exactly the same as the quality one is attempting to prove.
[498] YANG RANG BZHIN STONG PA NYID DU SMRA BA RGYUR BYAS PA NYID KYI SGO NAS GZUGS LA RANG BZHIN MED PA'I BSHAD PA BYAS PA'I TSE, SLOB MA LTA BU GANG ZHIG SNGAR BZHIN SKYON 'DOGS SMRA BAR BYED CING RGOL BAR BYED PA
Furthermore, when those who assert that things are simply empty of any nature of their own make their explanation of how physical form lacks any such nature by pointing to the very fact that it is produced by causes, a disciple such as someone who is still learning65 may make criticisms of their position—argue against their position, as we have described above.
[499]
65 A disciple who is still learning: This is a technical expression for someone who has not yet attained the levels of nirvana or enlightenment, and who thus still possesses subtle imprints to see things as having a nature of their own.
196 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
DE YANG DE YI RGAL BA DE THAMS CAD SKYON LEGS PAR BTAGS PA MIN TE, SGRUB BYED NI BSGRUB PAR BYA BA DANG BSGRUB DGOS MTSUNGS PA'I PHYIR TE,
And yet none of their arguments—not any of these criticisms—are assigned correctly; for the quality given to prove the point is again exactly the same as the quality one is trying to prove; that is, it too is still to be proven.
[500] DE'I TSE SGRUB BYED KYANG RANG BZHIN MED BAR {%$$$check another scan that this is not YOD PAR!} BSGRUB DGOS BSAM {%DGOS PAS MA} GRUB PA'I GTAN TSIGS SU 'GYUR BA'I PHYIR RO,,
In a situation like this, the argument becomes one which is incorrect, by virtue of the fact that the quality given to prove the point must still be shown to lack any nature of its own.
Scriptural sources
[501] GNYIS PA NI, SHES RAB SNYING PO DANG TING NGE 'DZIN RGYAL PO'I MDO LA SOGS PA RNAMS SO,,
Here is our second step from the beginning of the chapter: applying this chapter to scripture. Applicable here are The Heart Sutra; The King of Concentration Sutra; and other such works.66
The chapter’s name
66 Applicable scripture: Je Tsongkapa identifies the relevant section of the King of Concentration in his Sea of Reasoning: see f. 106b (%B2, S05401). Although he is using a different translation of the sutra, we can match it to the lines found in the Lhasa Kangyur version of the King at f. 73a (%S17, KL00127). The relevant Heart Sutra section is of course the one that goes through the emptiness of the five parts of a person (see ff. 259b-260a, %S16, KL00021).
197 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
[502] GSUM PA NI,
Our third and final topic in the chapter is to present its name.
[503] (IV.chapter title)
[Skandha parīkṣā.
Skandha pariksha.
,PHUNG PO BRTAG PA ZHES BYA BA RAB TU BYED PA BZHI PA’O,,
Here ends the fourth chapter of Wisdom: “An Investigation of the Parts to a Person.”]
[504] PHUNG PO BRTAG PA ZHES BYA BA RAB TU BYED PA BZHI PA'I RNAM BSHAD DO,,
This then ends our explication of the fourth chapter: “An Investigation of the Parts to a Person.”
198 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
Chapter 5 An Investigation of the Elements
199 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
Chapter 5 An Investigation of the Elements
Which comes first: The definition, or the defined?
[505] ,,GSUM PA KHAMS LA CHOS BDAG DGAG PA LA GSUM, RAB BYED KYI GZHUNG, LUNG DANG SBYAR BA, MTSAN BSTAN PA'O,,
With this, we have reached our third major point from above: a refutation that the elements could be themselves. Once more, we cover the point in three steps of a discussion of the actual text of the chapter; applying this to scripture; and finally presenting the chapter’s name.
[506] DANG PO LA GNYIS, KHAMS DRUG RANG BZHIN GYIS GRUB PA DGAG PA, YOD MED KYI MTHAR LTA BA SMAD PA'O [f. 27a],,
The actual text we cover in two sections: a refutation that the six elements could exist through some nature of their own; and censuring the viewpoint that holds to the extremes of saying that things exist, or that they do not exist.
[507] DANG PO LA GNYIS, NAM MKHA'I KHAMS RANG BZHIN GYIS GRUB PA DGAG PA DANG, RIGS PA DE SA {%DES} KHAMS LHAG MA LA RANG BZHIN KHEGS PAR BSTAN PA'O,,
The first of these two sections has two parts of its own: denying that the element of space could exist through some nature of its own; and then using this same reasoning to
200 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
demonstrate how we deny that the rest of the elements could have any nature of their own either.
[508] DANG PO LA GNYIS, NAM MKHA' MTSAN MTSON DU GRUB PA DGAG PA DANG, MJUG BSDU BA'O,,
We cover the first of these, in turn, with two topics: denying that, with space, there could be either a definition, or something defined; and then a concluding summary.
[509] DANG PO LA GSUM, MTSAN GZHI DGAG PA, MTSAN NYID DGAG PA, MJUG BSDU BA'O,,
The first of these topics comes in three steps: denying that there could be a classical example; denying that there could be a definition; and here again a concluding summary.
[510] DANG PO LA GNYIS, NAM MKHA' LA MTSAN NYID 'JUG PA DGAG PA DANG, MTSAN GZHI KHEGS PAR BSTAN PA'O,,
The first step has two parts: denying that a definition could apply to space; and then an explanation of how the classical example is as well denied.
[511] DANG PO LA GNYIS, SNGA PHYI GANG DU 'JUG BRTAG PA DANG, MTSAN NYID YOD MED GANG LA 'JUG BRTAG PA'O,,
The first of these two parts, finally, subsumes two sections: an examination of whether a definition would apply first, or later; and whether the definition would apply to something that either possessed, or did not possess, defining qualities.
[512] DANG PO NI,
201 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
The first of these final two is found in the following lines of the root text:
[513] (V.1-2)
Nākāśaṃ vidyate kiṃcit pūrvam ākāśa lakṣaṇāt, Alakṣaṇaṃ prasajyeta syāt pūrvaṃ yadi lakṣaṇāt.
Alakṣaṇo na kaścic ca bhāvaḥ saṃvidyate kva cit, Asatyalakṣaṇe bhāve kramatāṃ kuha lakṣaṇam.
Nakashan vidyate kinchit purvam akasha lakshanat, Alakshanam prasajyeta syat purvan yadi lakshanat.
Alakshano na kashchich cha bhavah sanvidyate kva chit, Asatyalakshane bhave kramatan kuha lakshanam.
,NAM MKHA'I MTSAN NYID SNGA ROL NA, ,NAM MKHA' CUNG ZAD YOD MA ZIN {%YIN}, ,GAL TE MTSAN LAS SNGA GYUR NA, ,MTSAN NYID MED PAR THAL BAR 'GYUR,
,MTSAN NYID MED PA'I DNGOS PO NI, ,'GA' YANG GANG NA'ANG YOD MA YIN, ,MTSAN NYID MED PA'I DNGOS MED NA, ,MTSAN NYID GANG DU 'JUG PAR 'GYUR, ,ZHES SO,,
Not even the slightest bit Of space Could exist prior To the definition of space. Suppose it were present Prior to the qualities Which define it;
202 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
It would have to be One which lacked Its defining qualities.
An entity which had None of the qualities Which define it Is not something That could ever exist, In any way at all. If an entity had no Defining characteristics, And were absent, Then what would we apply The definition to?
[514] 'DIR MTSAN GZHI NI MTSON BYA ZHES PA YIN PAS, MTSON BYA NAM MKHA' NI MA BSGRIBS PA'I MTSAN NYID DU SNGAR 'JUG MI SRID DE NAM MKHA'I MTSAN NYID THOGS MED SGRIB PA MED PA'I SNGA ROL NA, MTSAN GZHI 'AM MTSON BYA NAM MKHA' CUNG ZAD KYANG YOD PA MA YIN PA'I PHYIR,
When we say “classical example” in the present context, we are referring to the object which is being defined (the definiendum). When the thing that we define is space, it is impossible for it to come before the lack of obscuration which defines it. That is, not even the slightest bit of the classical example—or thing defined—of space itself could ever exist prior to the definition of this space, which is “a lack of obstruction,” or “a lack of obscuration.”
[515] DER THAL, GAL TE NAM MKHA'I MTSAN NYID DE LAS NAM MKHA' SNGA BAR GYUR NA, SNGA BA'I NAM MKHA' DE LA MTSAN NYID MED PAR THAL BAR 'GYUR NA DE YANG MI 'THAD PA'I PHYIR,
And that must indeed be the case. Suppose, instead, that space were to be present prior to the qualities which define space. In that scenario, this previously present space would have to be a space which lacked its defining qualities—and that in turn could never be right.
203 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
[516] MI 'THAD DE MTSAN NYID MED PA'I MTSON BYA'I DNGOS PO NAM MKHA' NI 'GA' YANG GANG NA'ANG YOD PA MA YIN PA'I PHYIR,
It could never be right, because space as an entity to be defined which had none of the qualities which define it is not something that could ever exist, in any way at all.
[517] MTSAN NYID KYI SNGA ROL [f. 27b] NA MTSAN NYID MED PA'I DNGOS PO STE DON MTSON BYA MED CING DE MED NA MTSAN NYID DE, ? ,NGA {%DE GANG} DU 'JUG PAR 'GYUR TE, 'JUG PA'I GZHI MED PA'I PHYIR,
Just think about this thing: an entity that had no defining characteristics—for it would be here before these characteristics. The object being defined then would be absent; and if it were absent, then what would we apply the definition to? There would be nothing there for the definition to apply to.
[518] RANG LUGS LA MTSAN MTSON GNYIS DUS MNYAM PA YIN YANG, MTSAN NYID MTSON BYA LA NGO BO NYID KYIS 'JUG NA MTSON BYA SNGA MA MTSAN NYID PHYI DGOS TE, 'JUG GZHI GRUB ZIN NAS MTSAN NYID 'JUG DGOS PA'I PHYIR RO,,
Our own position holds that these two—the definition, and the thing to be defined—are simultaneous. If though the definition applied, in and of itself, to what is being defined, then the thing being defined would have to come before, and the definition come later. And that’s because the definition would have to be applied after what it refers to had already come into being.
With or without what defines it
[519]
204 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
GNYIS PA NI,
This brings us to our second part, an investigation of whether the definition would apply to something that either possessed, or did not possess, defining qualities. This point is presented in the following lines of the root text:
[520] (V.3)
Nālakṣaṇe lakṣaṇasya pravṛttir na salakṣaṇe, Salakṣaṇālakṣaṇābhyāṃ nāpyanyatra pravartate.
Nalakshane lakshanasya pravirttir na salakshane, Salakshanalakshanabhyan napyanyatra pravartate.
,MTSAN NYID MED LA MTSAN NYID NI, ,MI 'JUG MTSAN NYID BCAS LA MIN, ,MTSAN BCAS MTSAN NYID MED PA LAS, ,GZHAN LA 'JUG PAR MI 'GYUR RO, ,ZHES SO,,
No definition Could ever apply To one which had No qualities to define it. Where it did possess Qualities which defined it, None would apply.
Neither could they apply To something else That neither possessed These qualities, nor lacked Defining qualities.
[521]
205 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
YANG MTSAN NYID MED PA'I NAM MKHA' LA MTSAN NYID SGRIB MED NI MI 'JUG CING, MTSAN NYID BCAS PAR RANG BZHIN GYIS GRUB PA LA'ANG SLAR MTSON PA'I PHYIR DU 'JUG PA MIN TE, SLAR MTSON PA LA DGOS PA MED PA'I PHYIR,
We could say as well that no definition—“a lack of obscuration”—could ever apply to a space which had no qualities that defined it. And where it did possess qualities which defined it, but existed through some nature of its own, then no qualities would apply to it, in order to define it once again. That in turn is because there would be no point to these qualities defining space a second time.
[522] MTSAN NYID DANG BCAS PA DANG MTSAN NYID MED LAS GZHAN PA LA'ANG 'JUG PAR MI 'GYUR TE, DE 'DRA MI SRID PA'I PHYIR,
Neither could the qualities which define space apply to something else: something that neither already possessed these qualities, nor lacked its defining qualities—for such a thing would be impossible.
Nothing to define
[523] GNYIS PA DES MTSAN GZHI KHEGS TSUL NI,
This brings us to our second part from above, which is explaining how the classical example is as well denied. This is presented in the following lines of the root text:
[524] (V.4a)
Lakṣaṇāsaṃpravṛttau ca na lakṣyam upapadyate.
Lakshanasampravirttau cha na lakshyam upapadyate.
206 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
,MTSAN NYID 'JUG PA MA YIN NA, ,MTSAN GZHI 'THAD PAR MI 'GYUR RO, ,ZHES SO,,
Where there is no application Of a definition, Neither can the classical example Be correct.
[525] GANG GI TSE MTSAN NYID 'JUG PA NGO BOS YOD PA MA YIN NA DE'I TSE MTSAN GZHI RANG BZHIN GYIS YOD PA 'THAD PAR MI 'GYUR TE, MTSAN MTSON GNYIS PHAN TSUN BLTOS NAS BZHAG PA'I PHYIR,
In a scenario where the application of a definition is not something which exists in and of itself, neither can it be correct to say that the classical example were something that existed through some nature of its own. That’s because definitions and the things they define are established in mutual dependence.
No definition, if nothing to define
[526] GNYIS PA MTSAN NYID DGAG PA NI,
Which brings us to our second step from before: denying that there could be a definition. This appears in the following words of the root text—
[527] (V.4b)
Lakṣyasyānupapattau ca lakṣaṇasyāpyasaṃbhavaḥ.
Lakshyasyanupapattau cha lakshanasyapyasambhavah.
207 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
,MTSAN GZHI 'THAD PA MA YIN NA, ,MTSAN NYID KYANG NI YOD MA YIN, ,ZHES SO,,
If the classical example Were not correct, Then neither could The definition exist.
[528] GANG GI TSE MTSAN GZHI STE MTSON BYA RANG BZHIN GYIS YOD PA 'THAD PA MA [f. 28a] YIN NA DE'I TSE MTSAN NYID KYANG NI RANG BZHIN GYIS YOD PA MA YIN TE, 'JUG GZHI MED NA 'JUG BYED MI RIG PA'I PHYIR,
In a scenario where it could not be correct to say that the “classical example”—meaning the thing we are defining—existed through some nature of its own, then it could not be the case that the definition existed through some nature of its own either. For it would be incorrect to say that—even though there was nothing there for the definition to be applied to—the definition would still apply.
A summary on the impossibility of definition
[529] GSUM PA DON BSDU BA NI,
[530] (V.5a)
Tasmān na vidyate lakṣyaṃ lakṣaṇaṃ naiva vidyate.
Tasman na vidyate lakshyan lakshanan naiva vidyate.
208 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
,DE PHYIR MTSAN GZHI YOD MIN NA, ,MTSAN NYID KYANG NI YOD MA YIN, ,ZHES SO,,
And so neither Is the definition Something that could exist; For the classical example Is not something That could ever exist.
[531] RGYU MTSAN DE'I PHYIR NAM MKHA'I MTSAN NYID KYANG NI RANG BZHIN GYIS YOD PA NYID MA YIN TE, MTSAN GZHI NAM MKHA' NGO BOS YOD PA NYID MIN PA'I PHYIR,
And so—for this reason—we can say that neither is the definition of space something that could ever exist through some nature of its own; for the classical example—space—is not something that could ever exist in and of itself.
When what’s not there never was
[532] GNYIS PA LA GNYIS, DNGOS KYI DON DANG, DE'I RTZOD SPANG NGO, ,DE'I DANG PO NI,
This brings us to our second topic from before, which is the concluding summary of this section. This is covered in two parts: the actual point, and then disproving some argument concerning it. The first is treated in the following lines of the root text:
[533] (V.5b-6a)
Lakṣyalakṣaṇa nirmukto naiva bhāvo'pi vidyate,
209 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
Avidyamāne bhāve ca kasyābhāvo bhaviṣyati.
Lakshyalakshana nirmukto naiva bhavopi vidyate, Avidyamane bhave cha kasyabhavo bhavishyati.
,MTSAN GZHI MTSAN NYID MA GTOGS PA'I, ,DNGOS PO 'GA' YANG YOD MA YIN, ,DNGOS PO YOD PA MA YIN NA, ,DNGOS MED GANG GI YIN PAR 'GYUR, ,ZHES SO,,
There does not at all exist Any entity which is not subsumed Either by definitions, Or by things which are defined.
If there is no such thing As an entity, Then how could there be Something Which was its absence?
[534] BYE BRAG SMRA BAS NI NAM MKHA' DNGOS PO'I RANG BZHIN DU 'DOD LA, RANG SDE GZHAN RNAMS KYIS NAM MKHA' NI THOGS REG DANG BRAL BA'I STONG CHA LA 'DOD DO,,
Now those who belong to the Detailist School assert that space has a nature of being a functional entity; whereas the other Buddhist schools say that space consists of that state of absence which devoid of concrete substance.
[535] DES NA BYE SMRA NA RE NAM MKHA' DNGOS PO'I RANG BZHIN DU NGO BOS YOD DO ZHE NA,
And so suppose a member of the Detailist school comes and says that space exists, in and of itself, with the nature of a functional thing.
210 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
[536] NAM MKHA' CHOS CAN, DNGOS PO'I RANG BZHIN DU MA GRUB PAR THAL, SNGAR BSHAD PA LTAR MTSAN GZHI DANG MTSAN NYID GANG DU'ANG RANG BZHIN GYIS MED PA'I PHYIR,
Let us consider, then, space.
No it’s not the case that it exists with the nature of a functional thing,
Because it exists—as we have just explained—neither, through some nature of its own, as something to be defined, nor as a definition.
[537] KHYAB STE, MTSAN MTSON DE GANG DU MA GTOGS PA'I NAM MKHA'I DNGOS PO 'GA' YANG YOD PA MA YIN PA'I PHYIR,
And the one does indeed imply the other, for there does not at all exist any such entity: some kind of space which is not subsumed either by definitions or by things which are defined.
[538] MDO SDE BA {%PA} SOGS NA RE, NAM MKHA' DNGOS MED DU RANG BZHIN GYIS GRUB PO ZHE NA,
Suppose then that a member of the Sutrist or some similar school comes and says that space is an entity which exists but performs no function—and which possesses some nature of its own.
[539] DE NI MI 'THAD DE, SNGAR LTAR DGAG BYA GZUGS KYI DNGOS PO NGO BO NYID KYIS YOD PA MA YIN NA DE'I TSE, DGAG BYA {i.e. absence of gzugs} GANG GI DNGOS PO MED PA'I NAM MKHA' NGO BOS GRUB PA JI LTAR YIN PAR 'GYUR TE 'GYUR MI RUNG BA'I PHYIR [f. 28b] RO,,
211 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
That position though would be mistaken, for if there is no such thing as a physical entity which exists in and of itself (the very thing we denied earlier on), then how could it be the case that the space which was the absence of this same entity—for which that entity is in fact what it is absent of—would be something which in turn existed in and of itself? It would be entirely mistaken.
Do existing things with no function have a nature?
[540] GNYIS PA NI,
Here secondly we disprove some argument concerning the summary, something presented in these words of the root text:
[541] (V.6b)
Bhāvābhāva vidharmā ca bhāvābhāvāv avaiti kaḥ.
Bhavabhava vidharma cha bhavabhavav avaita kah.
,DNGOS DANG DNGOS MED MI MTHUN CHOS, ,GANG GI {%GIS} DNGOS DANG DNGOS MED SHES, ,ZHES SO,,
Who is it then that knows Functioning things And existing things With no function As the dissimilar Working thing, And an existing thing Which does no work?
212 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
[542] GAL TE BRTAG BYA'I DNGOS MED NGO BOS YOD DO SNYAM NA,
Now someone might think to themselves, “Doesn’t though an existing thing which has no function—something which we simply imagine—exist through some essence of its own?”
[543] DE YANG MI RIGS TE, GANG GIS DNGOS PO DANG DNGOS MED SHES SHING DPYOD PAR BYED PA PO DE NI DNGOS PO DANG DNGOS MED KYI CHOS MI MTHUN PA GNYIS DANG DE GNYIS GANG YANG MIN PA'I PHUNG GSUM GYI RTOG PA POR RANG BZHIN GYIS MED PA'I PHYIR,
But that idea too is mistaken. And that’s because the person who acts to know, and to explore, both functioning things and existing things which have no function does not exist— through any nature of their own—as someone who can imagine the dissimilar pair of a working thing and an existing thing which does no work, as well as a third option which is neither of these two.
[544] KHYAB STE, RTOG BYED RANG BZHIN GYIS MED NA BRTAG BYA RANG BZHIN GYIS YOD PA MI 'THAD PA'I PHYIR RO,,
And that necessarily is the case, because if no agent which exists through any nature of their own can do the imagining, then it would be incorrect to say that the thing they were imagining existed through any nature of its own, either.
[545] [(V.7a-7b1) Tasmān na bhāvo nābhāvo na lakṣyaṃ nāpi lakṣaṇam, Ākāśam…
Tasman na bhavo nabhavo na lakshyan napi lakshanam, Akasham…
213 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
,DE PHYIR NAM MKHA' DNGOS PO MIN, ,DNGOS MED MA YIN MTSAN GZHI MIN, ,MTSAN NYID MA YIN…
As such, space is neither A functional thing, Nor an entity which exists But performs no function; Neither something to be defined, Nor a definition.67]
Application to the other elements
[546] GNYIS PA RIGS PA DE KHAMS LHAG MA LA SBYAR BA NI,
With this we have reached our second general part from above: using this same reasoning to demonstrate how we deny that the rest of the elements could have any nature of their own either. This we find in the following words of the root text:
[547] (V.7b2)
…Ākāśa samā dhātavaḥ pañca ye'pare.
…Akasha sama dhatavah pancha yepare.
67 Nor a definition: This part of the root text has been left out of the commentary. It appears throughout that the root text lines have possibly been inserted by some later person; and in this case they have been thrown off by the fact that Choney Lama glosses these later lines prior to the lines before it. It doesn’t help that the placement of the line split here is very unusual. Our reader will find the corresponding intertwined words up in section $$$$, covered in the separate positions of the Detailist and Sutrist schools. Placing the root text lines here would have also more clearly fulfilled the promise of a concluding summary for the section.
214 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
…KHAMS LNGA PO, ,GZHAN GANG DAG KYANG NAM MKHA' MTSUNGS, ,ZHES PA STE,
The other five elements Are the same As space as well.
[548] NAM MKHAR MA ZAD SA SOGS KHAMS LHAG MA GZHAN GANG YIN PA DE DAG KYANG CHOS CAN, RANG BZHIN GYIS MED DE, NAM MKHA' LA BSHAD PA'I RIGS PAS 'GOG NUS PAR MTSUNGS PA'I PHYIR TE,
Consider then not just space, but the other ones—the remaining elements— as well.
Neither do they exist through any nature of their own,
Because that would be the same: we can deny this possibility by utilizing the logic that we presented for space.
[549] DE YANG ,SA KHAMS MTSAN NYID SNGA ROL NA, ,SA NI CUNG ZAD YOD MIN TE, ,ZHES SOGS SBYAR NAS 'GOG RIGS PA'I PHYIR RO,,
And that in turn is true because it’s appropriate for us to apply the model of the lines above to deny that it could be so; for example:
Not even the slightest bit Of earth Could exist prior
215 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
To the definition of earth.68
Beyond existing, or not existing
[550] GNYIS PA YOD MED KYI MTHAR LTA BA SMAD PA NI,
Next comes the second section from above, where we censure the viewpoint that holds to the extremes of saying that things exist, or that they do not exist. This is covered in the following verse of the root text:
[551] (V.8)
Astitvaṃ ye tu paśyanti nāstitvaṃ cālpa buddhayaḥ, Bhāvānāṃ te na paśyanti draṣṭavyopaśamaṃ śivam.
Astitvan ye tu pashyanti nastitvan chalpa buddhayah, Bhavanan te na pashyanti drashtavyopashaman shivam.
,BLO CHUNG GANG DAG DNGOS RNAMS LA, ,YOD PA NYID DANG MED NYID DU, ,BLTA BA DES NI BLTA BYA BA, ,NYE BAR ZHI BA ZHI MI MTHONG, ,ZHES SO,,
Those of lesser intellect Cannot see the peace Of putting to rest What they think they see: They hold the view That things can only exist And that they can never exist.
68 Not even the slightest bit: Refer to the root text lines at V.1 above.
216 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
[552] YOD MED KYI MTHAR LTA BA'I BLO CHUNG GANG DAG CHOS CAN, BLTA BAR BYA BA SPROS PA NYE BAR ZHI BA'I ZHI PA {%BA} MYA NGAN LAS 'DAS PA MNGON SUM DU MI MTHONG STE, DNGOS PO RNAMS LA RANG BZHIN GYIS YOD PA NYID DANG THA SNYAD DU MED PA NYID DU BLTA BA DE DAG DE'I DBANG GIS RTAG CHAD KYI MTHA' GNYIS SU LHUNG BA'I PHYIR,
Let’s consider those of lesser intellect, who entertain the viewpoint which holds to the extremes of saying that things exist, or do not exist.
They cannot see, directly, that nirvana which is the peace of putting to rest what they think they see: their elaborations of reality.
And that’s because these people have fallen off the edge of the two extremes: of believing that things are either unchanging, or have discontinued. And what’s forced them to do so is that they are persons who hold the view that things can only exist through some nature of their own, and that they can never exist in words alone.
Scriptural sources
[553] GNYIS PA NI, TSANGS PA KHYAD PAR SEMS KYIS ZHUS PA LA SOGS PA RNAMS SO,,
With this we have come to the second of the three steps we promised at the outset of the chapter: applying the chapter to scripture. Applicable works here would include, for example, The Sutra Requested by Brahma Vishesha Chinti.69
69 Sutra Requested by Brahma: Je Tsongkapa gives prose and verses from the sutra in his Sea of Reasoning (ff. 88a-88b, %B2, S05401). The prose seems rather to be drawn from another sutra, Gentle Voice Plays (see f. 363a, %S18, KL00096), which Je Rinpoche refers to shortly after. The verses though are indeed found in the sutra requested by Brahma Vishesha Chinti at f. 57a (%S19, KL00160).
217 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
The chapter’s name
[554] GSUM PA NI [f. 29a],
Here is the third and final step, where we present the name of the chapter.
[555] (V.chapter title)
[Dhātu parīkṣā.
Dhatu pariksha.
,KHAMS BRTAG PA ZHES BYA BA RAB TU BYED PA LNGA PA’O,,
Here ends the fifth chapter of Wisdom: “An Investigation of the Elements.”]
[556] KHAMS BRTAG PA ZHES BYA BA RAB TU BYED PA LNGA PA'I RNAM BSHAD DO,,
This then ends our explication of the fifth chapter: “An Investigation of the Elements.”
218 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
Chapter 6 An Investigation of Desire & Who Feels It
important: Choney Lama says chags pa = the desirer (whether person or mind), but not the emotion; so it is not so much a discussion between desire & attachment as between desire & desirer; the Skt here is raga for ‘dod chags and rakta for chags pa; could take it as: which comes first, emotion or feeling?
219 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
Chapter 6 An Investigation of Desire & Who Feels It
Does the one who feels it come before desire?
[557] ,,GNYIS PA DE LA BDAG YOD PA'I SGRUB BYED DGAG PA LA GSUM, BRTEN PA KUN NAS NYON MONGS YOD PA DGAG ,MTSAN NYID SKYE 'JIG GNAS GSUM DGAG, LAS DANG BYED PA PO YOD PA DGAG PA'O,,
We have now come to the second great subsection from above: a refutation of attempted proofs that three entities (the doors of sense; the parts of a person; and the elements) can be themselves. This itself covers three topics: denying that what rests upon its basis— this thing that “rests” referring to total negativity—could exist; denying the three defining characteristics of starting, stopping, and staying; and denying the existence of an action and an agent.
[558] DANG PO LA GSUM, RAB BYED KYI GZHUNG, LUNG DANG SBYAR BA, MTSAN BSTAN PA'O,,
Yet again, we cover the point in three steps of a discussion of the actual text of the chapter; applying this to scripture; and finally presenting the chapter’s name.
[559] DANG PO LA GSUM, 'DOD CHAGS DANG CHAGS PA RANG BZHIN GYIS YOD PA DGAG ,BKAG PA'I MJUG BSDU BA'O, DE GZHAN LA SBYAR BA'O,,
220 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
The first of these three has three parts of its own: denying that desire and the person who feels the desire could exist through any nature of their own; a concluding summary of this denial; and applying this to other things.
[560] DANG PO LA GNYIS, SNGA PHYIR 'BYUNG BA DGAG PA DANG, LHAN CIG 'BYUNG BA DGAG PA'O,,
The first part has two different sections: a denial that the two could come before or after each other; and a denial that they could come at the same moment.
[561] DANG PO {%LA} GNYIS, 'DOD CHAGS KYI SNGA ROL NA CHAGS PA YOD MED DGAG PA DANG, DE LAS LDOG STA {%STE} YOD MED DGAG PA'O,,
The first of these then has two subsections: a denial that the one who feels the desire could exist, or not exist, before the desire; and a denial that either case could apply to the reverse.
[562] DANG PO NI,
The first of these is found in the following lines of the root text:
[563] (VI.1-2a)
Rāgād yadi bhavet pūrvaṃ rakto raga tiraskṛtaḥ, Taṃ pratītya bhaved rāgo rakte rāgo bhavet sati.
Rakte'sati punā rāgaḥ kuta eva bhaviṣyati.
Ragad yadi bhavet purvan rakto raga tiraskirtah, Tam pratitya bhaved rago rakte rago bhavet sati.
221 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
Raktesati puna ragah kuta eva bhavishyati.
,GAL TE 'DOD CHAGS SNGA ROL NA, ,'DOD CHAGS MED PA'I CHAGS YOD NA, ,DE LA BRTEN NAS 'DOD CHAGS YOD, ,CHAGS YOD 'DOD CHAGS YOD PAR 'GYUR,
,CHAGS PA YOD PAR MA GYUR NA'ANG, ,'DOD CHAGS YOD PAR GA LA 'GYUR, ,ZHES SO,
If there were to exist One who did not feel The desire prior To the desire itself, Then based on this They would possess it.
The desire would have To exist, since there Would exist someone Who felt the desire.
If there were none Who felt the desire, How could there be Any desire there?
[564] ,KHO NA RE, 'DOD CHAGS YOD PAS CHAGS PA PO RANG BZHIN GYI {%GYIS} YOD DO ZHE NA,
Someone may come and say: “Because they possess desire, the person who feels desire must exist through some nature of their own.”
222 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
[565] 'DOD CHAGS DANG CHAGS PA PO'I SEMS SAM GANG ZAG RANG BZHIN GYIS MED DE, GAL TE 'DOD CHAGS KYI SNGA ROL NA 'DOD CHAGS MED PA'I CHAGS PA PO ZHIG YOD NA DE LA BRTEN NAS PHYIS 'DOD CHAGS YOD PAR 'GYUR DGOS PA LAS DE MI 'THAD PA'I PHYIR,
And yet neither the desire, nor the one who feels it—whether we take this to be the mind or the person—exists through any nature of their own. For if there were to exist someone who did not feel the desire prior to the desire itself, then based on this desire they would have to come to possess it subsequently—whereas such a thing would be incorrect.
[566] YANG 'DOD CHAGS MA SKYES PA'I SNGA ROL NA 'DOD CHAGS KYANG YOD PAR 'GYUR TE, DE'I SNGA ROL NA CHAGS PA PO YOD PA'I PHYIR,
In that case too the desire would have to exist prior to the desire starting, since prior to that there would exist someone who felt the desire.
[567] GAL TE CHAGS PA PO [f. 29b] YOD PA'I {%PAS} 'DOD CHAGS YOD DO ZHE NA {%,}
Now someone may come and assert that “Since the person who feels the desire is present, then desire must be present.”
[568] DA {%DE} NI MI RIGS TE, SNGAR CHAGS PA PO YOD PAR MA GYUR NA DE LA BRTEN PA'I 'DOD CHAGS YOD PAR GA LA 'GYUR TE MI RIGS PA'I PHYIR TE,
But that could not be correct. If there were no prior person there who felt the desire, then how could there be any desire there which was based on the person? That would be wrong.
[569]
223 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
'DOD CHAGS RANG BZHIN GYIS GRUB NA RTEN SNGAR YOD LA BRTEN PA 'DOD CHAGS PHYIS YOD DGOS PA'I PHYIR TE, 'DOD CHAGS 'DI GZHI 'DI LA BRTEN NAS GRUB PO ZHES BYA BAR RIG {%RIGS} PA'I PHYIR,
If desire were something that existed through some nature of its own, then what the desire rested upon would have to come first, and then what rested upon this thing—the desire—would have to come later. Because it would be reasonable to say that “the desire came about depending upon this.”
[570] DES NA CHAGS PA PO GANG ZAG DANG SEMS NI 'DOD CHAGS DANG SNGA PHYI YOD PA MI 'THAD DE, 'DOD CHAGS KYI RTEN MED PAR 'GYUR BA'I PHYIR,
Therefore it is correct to say that there is no before or after between the one who feels the desire—the person or the mind—and the desire that they feel. That’s because the desire then would not be based in anything.
[571] SKABS 'DI'I CHAGS PA NI GANG ZAG DANG RNAM SHES CI RIGS LA BYA'I, 'DOD CHAGS LA MI BYA'O,,
The root text here uses the words “desire” and “attachment,” but you should understand that—in our present context—the “attachment” is meant to refer either to the person or to the state of mind; it is not meant to refer to wanting something.
Does desire come before one who feels it?
[572] GNYIS PA NI,
Here is the second subsection from above: a denial that either case—the one who feels the desire existing, or not existing, before the desire—could apply to the reverse; where the desire could exist or not before this person.
224 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
[573] (VI.2b)
Sati vāsati vā rāge rakte'pyeṣa samaḥ kramaḥ.
Sati vasati va rage raktepyesha samah kramah.
,CHAGS PA LA YANG 'DOD CHAGS NI, ,YOD DAM MED KYANG RIM PA MTSUNGS, ,ZHES SO,,
It’s the same from either stage Whether the desire exists, Or doesn’t exist, With the one who feels it.
[574] CHAGS PA'I SNGA ROL NA 'DOD CHAGS MED DE, YOD NA 'DOD CHAGS LA RTEN MED PAR 'GYUR ZHING, 'DOD CHAGS PHYIS YOD PA'I CHAGS PA PO 'DOD NA 'DOD CHAGS DANG BRAL BA'I DGRA BCOM LA'ANG 'DOD CHAGS YOD PAR 'GYUR BA'I RIM PA MTSUNGS PA'I PHYIR RAM,
Now the desire cannot come before the person who feels the desire, for if it did, then there would be no place for the desire to rest upon. And if you assert that there could be someone feeling the desire who came after the desire itself, then even an enemy destroyer—someone who is free of desire—would also have to have desire. Taking it from the viewpoint of either stage, we arrive at exactly the same problem.
[575] YANG NA CHAGS PA LA YANG 'DOD CHAGS NI SNGA ROL DU YOD DAM MED KYANG SNGAR BSHAD PA DANG RIM PA MTSUNGS PA'I PHYIR,
You can also put this as saying that we get the same problem as explained before from the viewpoint of either stage when we examine whether the desire exists, or doesn’t exist, prior to the one who feels it.
225 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
Are desire and the one who desires simultaneous?
[576] GNYIS PA LHAN CIG 'BYUNG BA DGAG PA LA GNYIS KYI DANG PO NI,
This brings us to our second section from above: a denial that the desire and the person feeling the desire could come at the same moment. We proceed in two parts; here is the first:
[577] (VI.3)
Sahaiva punar udbhūtir na yuktā rāgaraktayoḥ, Bhavetāṃ rāgaraktau hi nirapekṣau parasparam.
Sahaiva punar udbhutir na yukta ragaraktayoh, Bhavetan ragaraktau hi nirapekshau parasparam.
,'DOD CHAGS DANG NI CHAGS PA DAG ,LHAN CIG NYID DU SKYE MI RIGS, ,'DI LTAR 'DOD CHAGS CHAGS BDAG {%PA DAG} ,PHAN TSUN BLTOS PA MED PAR 'GYUR, ,ZHES SO,,
If would be incorrect For the desire and The person who feels it To just grow together;
Because if it were that, They could not rely Upon each other.
[578]
226 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
GAL TE 'DOD CHAGS DANG CHAGS PA NGO BO NYID KYIS THA DAD YIN NO SNYAM NA,
Now suppose someone thinks to themselves: “The desire, and the person who feels it, are—in and of themselves—distinct from one another.”
[579] 'DOD CHAGS DANG NI CHAGS PA PO DAG CHOS CAN, NGO BO NYID KYIS LHAN CIG THA DAD PA NYID DU SKYE BA MI RIGS [f. 30a] PAR THAL, DE LTAR NA KHYOD PHAN TSUN BLTOS PA MED PAR 'GYUR BA LAS PHAN TSUN BLTOS PA'I PHYIR,
Let’s consider then the desire, and the person who feels it.
It would be incorrect to say that they just grew together—as things that were, in and of themselves, distinct from each other;
Because if that were the case, then they could not be things that relied upon each other; whereas they do rely in this way.
Alone together
[580] GNYIS PA LA GNYIS, GCIG DANG THA DAD LA LHAN CIG SPYIR DGAG PA DANG, THA DAD LA LHAN CIG BYE BRAG TU DGAG PA'O,,
The second part has two steps of its own: denying, in general, the idea that two things which are either one thing or separate things could exist together; and then denying, more particularly, that idea that separate things could exist together.
[581] DANG PO NI,
The first of these is expressed in the following lines of the root text:
227 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
[582] (VI.4-5)
Naikatve sahabhāvo'sti na tenaiva hi tat saha, Pṛthaktve sahabhāvo'tha kuta eva bhaviṣyati.
Ekatve sahabhāvaś cet syāt sahāyaṃ vināpi saḥ, Pṛthaktve sahabhāvaś cet syāt sahāyaṃ vināpi saḥ.
Naikatve sahabhavosti na tenaiva hi tat saha, Pirthaktve sahabhavotha kuta eva bhavishyati.
Ekatve sahabhavash chet syat sahayan vinapi sah, Pirthaktve sahabhavash chet syat sahayan vinapi sah.
,GCIG NYID LHAN CIG NYID MED DE, ,DE NYID DE DANG LHAN CIG MIN, ,CI STE THA DAD NYID YIN NA, ,LHAN CIG NYID DU CI LTAR 'GYUR,
,GAL TE GCIG PU LHAN CIG NA, ,GROGS MED PAR YANG DER 'GYUR RO, ,GAL TE THA DAD LHAN CIG NA, ,GROGS MED PAR YANG DER 'GYUR RO, ,ZHES SO,,
As but a single thing, They could never exist In a state of being together: It would not be Together with that Alone.
And how could it Ever be That the two were
228 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
Perfectly separate? How could they Ever exist In a state Of being together?
If they were a single thing Together, Something standing by itself Would also have to be. If they were distinct Together, Something standing by itself Would also have to be.
[583] 'DOD CHAGS DANG CHAGS PA GNYIS LHAN CIG GCIG GAM THA DAD GANG LA 'DOD,
Now which do you assert: that desire and the person who feels it exist together, or that they are distinct from one another?
[584] DANG PO LTAR NA, MI 'THAD DE, DE GNYIS GCIG NYID YIN NA NI LHAN CIG PA NYID DU MED PA'I PHYIR TE, 'DOD CHAGS LTA BU GCIG PU DE NYID DE DANG LHAN CIG TU YOD CES PA 'THAD PA MA YIN PA'I PHYIR,
If you say the first is the case, you cannot be correct. For if these two existed as but a single thing, then they could never exist in a state of being together. And that’s because it would not be correct to say that something like desire could be there together with that singularity alone.
[585] GNYIS PA LTAR NA, CI STE DE GNYIS NGO BO NYID KYIS THA DAD PA NYID YIN NA YANG MI 'THAD DE, NGO BO NYID KYIS THA DAD NA LHAN CIG PA NYID DU JI LTAR 'GYUR TE MI RIGS PA'I PHYIR, SNANG MUN BZHIN NO,,
229 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
And if you say that the second above were the case, then how could it ever be that the two were—in and of themselves—perfectly separate things? For if they were, that too would be incorrect: how could two things that were, in and of themselves, distinct from each other ever exist in a state of being together? That wouldn’t make any sense—for they would be like light and darkness.
[586] BRTAG PA GNYIS KA LTAR NA'ANG GAL TE DE GNYIS GCIG PU GANG YIN YANG LHAN CIG TU RTOG NA DE YANG MI 'THAD DE, GROGS MED PA'I BA LANG SOGS GCIG PU YANG LHAN CIG PA DER 'GYUR BA'I PHYIR,
And there’s yet another issue with the second scenario: Even if the two could somehow be a single thing, then it would be wrong if we imagined that they could be together. Because if that could be the case, then single things like a cow standing by itself would also have to be that kind of together.
[587] GAL TE DE GNYIS NGO BO NYID KYI THA DAD PA YANG LHAN CIG YIN NA'ANG MI 'THAD DE, GROGS MED PAR SO SOR GNAS PA'I GCIG PU YANG LHAN CIG PA DER 'GYUR BA'I PHYIR,
And if the two were—in and of themselves—distinct from one another, then still it would be a mistake to say that they could be together. In that case, then one thing standing on its own—by itself—would also have to be that kind of together.
[588] SPYIR 'DOD CHAGS DANG CHAGS PA GNYIS DUS MNYAM PA DANG LHAN CIG GNAS PAR 'DOD DGOS KYANG, NGO BO NYID [f. 30b] KYIS GRUB NA BLTOS MED DU GNAS DGOS PA DE LA NI RTEN BRTEN PAR LHAN CIG PA'I GCIG DANG THA DAD KYANG MI RUNG BA'O,,
Generally speaking, we have to accept the idea that these two—desire, and the one who feels it—exist at the same point in time, and stand together. But if they were things that existed in and of themselves, then they would have to stand without any reliance upon each other. And in that case, we could never say that they were either one thing or
230 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
distinct things where they were together, and where one acted as the basis and the other as the thing that rests upon this basis.
The impossible together of separate things
[589] GNYIS PA LA GSUM, THA DAD DU MA GRUB PAS LHAN CIG MI 'GRUB PA DANG, THA DAD DU GRUB NA LHAN CIG DGOS PA MED PA DANG, THA DAD LHAN CIG LA BLTOS NA PHAN TSUN BRTEN PAR BSTAN PA'O,,
And we come to our second step here: denying, more particularly, that idea that separate things could exist together. This denial has three parts of its own: demonstrating that— if things cannot be distinct from one another—then they cannot be together; showing that if things are distinct from one another, there is no point to their being together; and describing how—since things’ being distinct from one another depends upon their being together, they are mutually dependent.
[590] DANG PO {%NI?},
The first of these comes in the next verse of the root text:
[591] (VI.6)
Pṛthaktve sahabhāvaś ca yadi kiṃ rāgaraktayoḥ, Siddhaḥ pṛthakpṛthag bhāvaḥ sahabhāvo yatas tayoḥ.
Pirthaktve sahabhavash cha yadi kin ragaraktayoh, Siddhah pirthakpirthag bhavah sahabhavo yatas tayoh.
,GAL TE THA DAD LHAN CIG NA, ,CI GO 'DOD CHAGS CHAGS PA DAG
231 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
,THA DAD NYID DU 'GRUB 'GYUR RAM, ,DES NA DE GNYIS LHAN CIG 'GYUR, ,ZHES SO,,
Suppose these were Distinct and also together.
Are you saying then That the pair of desire And the one who feels it Are perfectly distinct One from the other?
Given that, these two Would be together.
[592] GAL TE 'DOD CHAGS DANG CHAGS PA NGO BO NYID KYIS THA DAD PA YA {%LA} LTAN {%LHAN} CIG 'DOD NA DE NI MI 'THAD DE, CI GO 'DOD CHAGS DANG CHAGS PA DAG PHAN TSUN MI BLTOS PA'I THA DAD PA NYID DU 'GRUB PAR 'GYUR RAM STE MI 'GYUR BA'I PHYIR,
Now suppose you assert that desire and the one who feels it are, in and of themselves, distinct from one another and also together. That idea though would be incorrect; for are you saying then that the pair of desire and the one who feels it are perfectly distinct from one another, in a way where they do not share a mutual dependence? And yet they could never be.
[593] DES NA DE GNYIS RTA DANG BA LANG LTAR 'BREL MED KYI LHAN CIG NYID DU 'GYUR BAR THAL, DE GNYIS PHAN TSUN BLTOS MED KYI SO SO BA YIN PA'I PHYIR TE, NGO BO NYID KYIS SO SO BA YIN PA'I PHYIR,
Given that, then these two—unconnected from each other like a horse and a cow—would still have to be together, for the pair are separate things in a way where they share no mutual dependence. And that’s the case because they are separate things in and of themselves.
232 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
Should distinct things be together?
[594] GNYIS PA NI,
Which brings us to the second part: showing that if things are distinct from one another, there is no point to their being together.
[595] (VI.7)
Siddhaḥ pṛthakpṛthagbhāvo yadi vā rāgaraktayoḥ, Sahabhāvaṃ kimartham tu parikalpayase tayoḥ.
Siddhah pirthakpirthag bhavo yadi va ragaraktayoh, Sahabhavn kimartham tu parikalpayase tayoh.
,GAL TE 'DOD CHAGS CHAGS PA DAG ,THA DAD NYID DU GRUB 'GYUR NA, ,DE DAG LHAN CIG NYID DU NI, ,CI YI PHYIR NA YONGS SU RTOG CES SO,,
Suppose desire, And the one who feels it, Were perfectly distinct From one another.
Why then Would you ever imagine These two in a state Of being together?
233 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
[596] GAL TE 'DOD CHAGS DANG CHAGS PA DAG RANG BZHIN GYIS THA DAD PA NYID DU GRUB PAR GYUR NA MI 'THAD DE, DE LTAR NA 'DOD CHAGS 'DIS CHAGS LDAN 'DI YUL 'DI LA CHAGS ZHES PA'I BLTOS PA MI 'GRUB PA'I PHYIR,
Now suppose you said that desire, and the one who feels it, were perfectly distinct from one another, through some nature of their own. That would be incorrect; for if it were that way, then we could never express any dependence here, by stating “This person—this one who possesses the desire—is feeling this desire where they desire this certain object.”
[597] 'DOD CHAGS DANG CHAGS PA DE DAG CHOS CAN, LHAN CIG PA NYID DU NI CI YI PHYIR NA YONGS SU RTOG STE MI RIGS PAR THAL, NGO BO NYID KYIS THA DAD NA BLTOS PA MED PAS LHAN CIG PA NYID DU MI RUNG BA'I PHYIR,
Let’s consider these two: the desire, and the person who feels the desire.
Why would you ever imagine that they were in a state of being together?
That would have to be incorrect, for if two things were—in and of themselves—distinct from one another, then they would share no dependence. And in that case, it would be inappropriate to say that they were in a state of being together.
Not as an elephant who washes themselves
[598] GSUM PA NI,
This brings us to the third part from above: describing how—since things’ being distinct from one another depends upon their being together—they are mutually dependent. This point is described in the following lines of the root text:
234 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
[599] (VI.8-9a)
Pṛthag na sidhyatītyevaṃ sahabhāvaṃ vikāṅkṣasi, Sahabhāvaprasiddhyarthaṃ pṛthaktvaṃ bhūya icchasi.
Pṛthagbhāvāprasiddheś ca sahabhāvo na sidhyati…
Pirthag na sidhyatityevan sahabhavan vikankshasi, Sahabhava prasiddhyartham pirthaktvam bhuya icchasi.
Pirthagbhava prasiddhesh cha sahabhavo na sidhyati…
,THA DAD GRUB PAR MA GYUR PAS, ,DE PHYIR LHAN CIG 'DOD BYED NA, ,LHAN [f. 31a] CIG RAB TU SGRUB PA'I PHYIR, ,THA DAD NYID DU YANG 'DOD DAM,
,THA DAD DNGOS PO MA GRUB PAS, ,LHAN CIG DNGOS PO 'GRUB MI 'GYUR, ,ZHES SO,,
If they were Distinct from one another, There could be none. And suppose that— To arrive at this, You instead assert That they are together, As a single thing.
And to truly prove They were a single thing, Wouldn’t you assert That the two were distinct?
But because they cannot
235 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
Exist as entities That are distinct, Then neither can They be An entity together.70
[600] DE GNYIS THA DAD KHO NA LA 'DIS 'DI LA CHAGS ZHES PA'I BLTOS PA GRUB PAR MA GYUR PA MTHONG NAS,
Now we can see that—if the desire and the person who feels it are exclusively distinct from one another—then you could never say “they feel desire for this thing”: there could be no dependence between the two.
[601] DGOS PA DE 'GRUB PA'I PHYIR, LHAN CIG TU GNAS PAR 'DOD PAR BYED NA MI 'THAD DE, DE LA PHAN TSUN BLTOS PA'I LHAN CIG TU YOD PA MI RUNG LA,
70 An entity together: Given the Tibetan from the Tengyur here, and the Sanskrit available to us which matches it, apparently half a verse is missing from the commentary at this point; this would be verse VI.9b. In Sanskrit it reads: Katam asmin pṛthag bhāve sahabhāvaṃ satīcchasi. pronounced: Katam asmin pirthag bhave sahabhavan satichasi. In Tibetan, it reads: ,THA DAD DNGOS PO GANG YOD NA, ,LHAN CIG DNGOS POR 'DOD PAR BYED,. In English this would be translated as: We would have to say That any entities Which existed as Distinct from one another Existed as entities Which were together.
236 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
And then suppose that—to arrive at this kind of dependence—you instead assert that the two stand together, as a single thing. This idea though would be mistaken, since it’s incorrect to say that there could be a single thing that was mutually dependent.
[602] DE RUNG BAR RAB TU SGRUB PA'I PHYIR DU THA DAD PA NYID DU YANG 'DOD PAR BYED DGOS NA DE NI TSUGS MA THUB PAS GLANG PO CHE'I KHUS {%KHRUS} BYED PA 'DRA BA'AM SLAR YANG SKYON CAN DU 'GYUR BA'I PHYIR {%,?}
To truly prove that such a thing were possible, you would also have to continue on to assert, as well, that the two were at the same time distinct from one another. In this instance, though, they could no longer stand on their own. And so even if you go the route of saying that their relationship is similar to where an elephant uses their trunk to wash themselves,71 you run into problems.
[603] DES NA DE GNYIS NGO BOS THA DAD PA'I DNGOS PO MA GRUB PAS LHAN CIG PA'I DNGOS PO YANG 'GRUB PAR MI 'GYUR TE, DE NI THA DAD PA KHO NA LA 'JOG PA'I PHYIR,
As such, we can say that—because the desire and the person feeling it cannot exist, in and of themselves, as entities that are distinct from one another—then neither can they be together as a single entity. For a single entity can only ever be described as distinct.
[604] SPYIR LHAN CIG PA LA PHAN TSUN BLTOS PAS MA KHYAB KYANG, NGO BO NYID KYIS LHAN CIG TU GRUB NA DUS KUN TU LHAN CIG MI 'BRAL BAR YOD DGOS PAS DE 'GOG PA YIN NO,,
Now generally speaking, it’s not the case that—when we have a case of two things together—they must necessarily be dependent upon each other. Nonetheless, if things
71 An elephant washing themselves: As a clever, attempted example of one thing that relates to itself as two separate things.
237 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
existed as together in a way that existed in and of itself, then in every moment of time they would have to exist in a way where they were never separated; and this then is what’s being denied.
The denial, in summary
[605] GNYIS PA NI,
Which brings us to our second part from the very beginning: a concluding summary of our denial that desire and the person who feels the desire could exist through any nature of their own. This is found in the following words of the root text:
[606] (VI.10a)
Evaṃ raktena rāgasya siddhir na saha nāsaha.
Evan raktena ragasya siddhir na saha nasaha.
,DE LTAR 'DOD CHAGS CHAGS PA DANG {%DAG}, ,LHAN CIG LHAN CIG MIN MI 'GRUB, ,CES SO,,
Thus it is that the two Of desire and The person who feels it Cannot exist Either as things together, Or as things which are not.
[607] DE LTAR JI SKAD BSHAD PA'I RIGS PAS 'DOD CHAGS DANG CHAGS PA DAG CHOS CAN, RANG BZHIN GYIS MA GRUB STE, DUS MNYAM PA'I LHAN CIG PA
238 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
DANG LHAN CIG PA MIN PA GANG YANG NGO BOS YOD PA MI 'GRUB PA'I PHYIR RO,,
Thus it is that we can say the following, based on the logic that we have presented here:
Consider the two of desire, and the person who feels the desire.
They cannot exist through any nature of their own,
Because they cannot exist—through any nature of their own, and at the same time—either as things which are together; or as things which are not together.
And the same with every other thing
[608] GSUM PA RIGS PA DE GZHAN LA SBYAR BA NI,
And so we reach the third part from above: applying this same reasoning to other things.
[609] (VI.10b)
Rāgavat sarvadharmāṇāṃ siddhir na saha nāsaha.
Ragavat sarva dharmanan siddhir na saha nasaha.
,'DOD CHAGS BZHIN DU CHOS RNAMS KUN, ,LHAN CIG LHAN CIG MIN MI 'GRUB, ,CES SO,,
Just as with desire, There are no other things Which can exist
239 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
As together, Or not together.
[610] 'DOD CHAGS LA BSHAD PA BZHIN DU ZHE SDANG DANG SDANG BA PO LA SOGS PA'I CHOS RNAMS KUN CHOS CAN, LHAN CIG [f. 031b] DANG LHAN CIG MIN PA GANG DU YANG RANG BZHIN GYIS YOD PAR MI 'GRUB STE, JI SKAD BSHAD PA'I RIGS PAS GNOD PAR MTSUNGS PA'I PHYIR RO,,
Let’s consider—just as we have explained with desire—every other thing; which is to say, things like anger and the person who feels the anger.
They cannot exist as things which are there as either—together, or not together—through some nature of their own;
Because that idea would be thrown into question by the very same logic that we have just presented.
Scriptural sources
[611] GNYIS PA NI TING NGE 'DZIN RGYAL PO'I MDO LA SOGS PA RNAMS SO,,
And so we arrive at the second of the three steps we promised at the outset of the chapter: applying the chapter to scripture. Applicable works here would include, for example, the sutra called The King of Concentration.72
The chapter’s name
[612] GSUM PA NI,
72 Applicable works: In his Sea, Je Tsongkapa relates this chapter to ff. 36a-36b of the sutra (%S17, KL00127).
240 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
And then here is the third and final step, where we present the name of the chapter.
[613] (VI.chapter title)
[Rāga rakta parīkṣā.
Raga rakta pariksha.
,’DOD CHAGS DANG CHAGS PA BRTAG PA ZHES BYA BA RAB TU BYED PA DRUG PA’O,,
Here ends the sixth chapter of Wisdom: “An Investigation of Desire, and the One Who Feels It.”]
[614] 'DOD CHAGS DANG CHAGS PA BRTAG PA ZHES BYA BA RAB TU BYED PA DRUG PA'I RNAM BSHAD DO,,
This then ends our explication of the sixth chapter: “An Investigation of Desire, and the One Who Feels It.”
To be continued!!!
241 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
Appendices
242 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
Wisdom Nagarjuna’s Root Text
[f. 1b] (title) Prajñā Mūlamadhyāmaka Kārikā Prajna Mulamadhyamaka Karika.
#, ,RGYA GAR SKAD DU, ,PRA DZNY'A N'A MA M'U LA MA DHY'A MA KA K'A RI KA ,
In Sanskrit, the title of this work is: Prajna Nama Mulamadhyamaka Karika.
BOD SKAD DU, ,DBU MA RTZA BA'I TSIG LE'UR BYAS PA SHES RAB CES BYA BA,
In Tibetan, this is: Uma tsaway tsik-leur jepa Sherab chejawa.
[In English, it is: Wisdom: The Root Text on the Middle Way, Set in Verse]
(Tibetan translator’s prostration) ,'JAM DPAL GZHON NUR GYUR PA LA PHYAG 'TSAL LO,
I bow down to Gentle Voice, become young.
Chapter 1 An Investigation of Factors
243 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
(I.1-2) Anirodham anutpādam anucchedam aśāśvatam, Anekārtham anānārtham anāgamam anirgamam, Yaḥ pratītyasamutpādaṃ prapañcopaśamaṁ śivam, Deśayāmāsa Saṁbuddhas taṁ vande vadatāṁ varam.
Anirodham anutpadam anuchedam ashashvatam, Anekartham ananartham anagamam anirgamam, Yah pratityasamutpadam prapanchopashaman shivam, Deshayamasa Sambuddhas tan vande vadatan varam.
,GANG GIS RTEN CING 'BREL PAR 'BYUNG, ,'GAG PA MED PA SKYE MED PA, ,CHAD PA MED PA RTAG MED PA, ,'ONG BA MED PA 'GRO MED PA, ,THA DAD DON MIN DON GCIG MIN, ,SPROS PA NYER ZHI ZHI BSTAN PA, ,RDZOGS PA'I SANGS RGYAS SMRA RNAMS KYI, ,DAM PA DE LA PHYAG 'TSAL LO,
I bow down to that highest of teachers; To the fully Enlightened One, Who teaches us to reach that peace Where our fantasies about how things exist Are put to a final rest.
I bow to the one who taught us That things happen in dependence: Nothing ends, and nothing begins; Nothing stops, but nothing Ever lasts forever. Nothing comes, and nothing goes; No two things are different, Nor are any two the same.
(I.3)
244 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
Na svato nāpi parato na dvābhyāṃ nāpy ahetutaḥ, Utpannā jātu vidyante bhāvāḥ kva cana ke cana.
Na svato napi parato na dvabhyan napyahetutah, Utpanna jatu vidyante bhavah kva chana ke chana.
,BDAG LAS MA YIN GZHAN LAS MIN, ,GNYIS LAS MA YIN RGYU MED MIN, ,DNGOS PO GANG DAG GANG NA YANG, ,SKYE BA NAM YANG YOD MA YIN,
Nothing grows from itself; Nothing grows from something else; Nothing grows from both; And nothing grows without a cause. There is nothing at all that grows at all.
(I.4) Catvāraḥ pratyayā hetur ārambaṇam anantaram, Tathaivādhipateyaṃ ca pratyayo nāsti pañcamaḥ.
Chatvarah pratyaya hetur arambanam anantaram, Tathaivadhipateyan cha pratyayo nasti panchamah.
,RKYEN RNAM BZHI STE RGYU DANG NI, ,DMIGS PA DANG NI DE MA THAG, ,BDAG PO YANG NI DE BZHIN TE, ,RKYEN LNGA PA NI YOD MA YIN,
The different types of conditions Are four: the causal condition, And just so then the object condition; The condition for what comes immediate after; And finally the dominant condition. There is no fifth kind of condition.
245 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
(I.5) Na hi svabhāvo bhāvānāṃ pratyayādiṣu vidyate, Avidyamāne svabhāve parabhāvo na vidyate.
Na hi svabhavo bhavanam pratyayadishu vidyate, Avidyamane svabhave parabhavo na vidyate.
,DNGOS PO RNAMS KYI RANG BZHIN NI, ,RKYEN LA SOGS LA YOD MA YIN, ,BDAG GI DNGOS PO YOD MIN NA, ,GZHAN DNGOS YOD PA MA YIN NO,
The nature of things is not something That exists in their conditions or such; If there is no thing that’s a thing itself, Then there is no thing that’s something else.
(I.6-7) Kriyā na pratyayavatī nāpratyayavatī kriya, Pratyayā nākriyāvantaḥ kriyāvantaś ca santyuta. Utpadyate pratītyemān itīme pratyayāḥ kila, Yāvan notpadyata ime tāvan nāpratyayāḥ katham.
Kriya na pratyayavati napratyayavati kriya, Pratyaya nakriyavantah kriyavantash cha santyuta. Utpadyate pratityeman itime pratyayah kila, Yavan notpadyata ime tavan napratyayah katham.
,BYA BA RKYEN DANG LDAN PA YIN {%MED}, ,RKYEN DANG MI LDAN BYA BA MED, ,BYA BA MI LDAN RKYEN [f. 2a] MA YIN, ,BYA BA LDAN YOD 'ON TE NA, ,'DI DAG LA BRTEN SKYE BAS NA, ,DE PHYIR 'DI DAG RKYEN CES GRAG ,JI SRID MI SKYE DE SRID DU, ,'DI DAG RKYEN MIN JI LTAR MIN,
246 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
There is no act Which has a condition; And there is no act Which has no condition.
If the act did have it, And in that case Conditions were called What they are because It had grown depending upon them,
Then until such time As it had grown, How could it be that they were not Something that wasn’t a condition?
(I.8) Naivāsato naiva sataḥ pratyayo ‘rthasya yujyate, Asataḥ pratyayaḥ kasya sataś ca pratyayena kim.
Naivasato naiva satah pratyayorthasya yujyate, Asatah pratyayah kasya satash cha pratyayena kim.
,MED DAM YOD PA'I DON LA YANG, ,RKYEN NI RUNG BA MA YIN TE, ,MED NA GANG GI RKYEN DU 'GYUR, ,YOD NA RKYEN GYIS CI ZHIG BYA,
How could a thing ever be A condition for something, Whether that thing existed or not?
For if it didn’t exist, What would the condition Be a condition for?
And if it did exist,
247 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
What would be The use of the condition?
(I.9) Na san nāsan na sad asan dharmo nirvartate yadā, Kathaṃ nirvartako hetur evaṃ sati hi yujyate.
Na san nasan na sad asan dharmo nirvartate yada, Katham nirvartako hetur evan sati hi yujyate.
,GANG TSE CHOS NI YOD PA DANG, ,MED DANG YOD MED MI 'GRUB PA, ,JI LTAR SGRUB BYED RGYU ZHES BYA, ,DE LTA YIN NA MI RIGS SO,
Where something that neither exists, Nor doesn’t exist, Nor both does and doesn’t exist Cannot be produced, How can you call something a cause That worked to produce it? It would be wrong, If that’s the way it is.
(I.10) Anārambaṇa evāyaṃ san dharma upadiśyate, Athānārambaṇe dharme kuta ārambaṇaṃ punaḥ.
Anarambana evayan san dharma upadishyate, Athanarambane dharme kuta arambanam punah.
,YOD PA'I CHOS 'DI DMIGS PA NI, ,MED PA KHO NA NYE BAR BSTAN, ,CI STE CHOS NI DMIGS MED NA, ,DMIGS PA YOD PAR GA LA 'GYUR,
248 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
You take something which already exists And invariably refer to it As not yet having an object. And if you say, “Well then, It does not exist,” then how Could entities of perception Ever possess an object?
(I.11) Anutpanneṣu dharmeṣu nirodho nopapadyate, Nānantaram ato yuktaṃ niruddhe pratyayaś ca kaḥ.
Anutpanneshu dharmeshu nirodho nopapadyate, Nanantaram ato yuktan niruddhe pratyayash cha kah.
,CHOS RNAMS SKYES PA MA YIN NA, ,'GAG PA 'THAD PAR MI 'GYUR RO, ,DE PHYIR DE MA THAG MI RIGS, ,'GAGS NA RKYEN YANG GANG ZHIG YIN,
If things had not yet grown, then it Would be incorrect for them to end. Thus the idea of the one for what Comes immediately after is wrong; If it were to end, then how Could it ever be a condition?
(I.12) Bhāvānāṃ niḥsvabhāvānāṃ na sattā vidyate yataḥ, Satīdam asmin bhavatītyetan naivopapadyate.
Bhavanan nihsvabhavanan na satta vidyate yatah, Satidam asmin bhavatityetan naivopapadyate.
,DNGOS PO RANG BZHIN MED RNAMS KYI, ,YOD PA GANG PHYIR YOD MIN NA,
249 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
,'DI YOD PAS NA 'DI 'BYUNG ZHES, ,BYA BA 'DI NI 'THAD MA YIN,
Things though do possess a nature, For if it were the case they didn’t, The statement made where it was said That “This will happen, if that is there” Could never have been correct.
(I.13-14) Na ca vyastasamasteṣu pratyayeṣvasti tat phalam, Pratyayebhyaḥ kathaṃ tac ca bhaven na pratyayeṣu yat. Athāsad api tat tebhyaḥ pratyayebhyaḥ pravartate, Apratyayebhyo 'pi kasmān nābhipravartate phalam.
Na cha vyastasamasteshu pratyayashvasti tat phalam, Pratyayebhyah kathan tach cha bhaven na pratyayeshu yat. Athasad api tat tebhyah pratyayebhyah pravartate, Apratyayebhyo’pi kasman nabhipravartate phalam.
,RKYEN RNAMS SO SO 'DUS PA LA, ,'BRAS BU DE NI MED PA NYID, ,RKYEN RNAMS LA NI GANG MED PA, ,DE NI RKYEN LAS JI LTAR SKYE, ,CI STE DE NI MED PAR YANG, ,RKYEN DE DAG LAS SKYE 'GYUR NA, ,RKYEN MA YIN PA DAG LAS KYANG, ,CI YI PHYIR NA SKYE MI 'GYUR,
There cannot be any result at all In the convening of each Of the individual conditions.
How could something grow from conditions If it had never been in those conditions?
For if the result were to grow from these
250 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
Conditions without being in them, Then why couldn’t the same result Begin to grow from things That weren’t conditions?
(I.15-16) Phalaṃ ca pratyayamayaṃ pratyayāścāsvayaṃmayāḥ, Phalamasvamayebhyo yat tat pratyayamayaṃ katham. Tasmān na pratyayamayaṃ nāpratyayamayaṃ phalam, Saṃvidyate phalābhāvāt pratyayāpratyayāḥ kutaḥ.
Phalan cha pratyayamayam pratyayashchasvayammayah, Phalamasvamayebhyo yat tat pratyayamayan katham. Tasman na pratyayamayan napratyayamayam phalam, Sanvidyate phalabhavat pratyayapratyayah kutah.
,'BRAS BU RKYEN GYI RANG BZHIN NA, ,RKYEN RNAMS BDAG GI RANG [f. 2b] BZHIN MIN, ,BDAG DNGOS MIN LAS 'BRAS BU GANG, ,DE NI JI LTAR RKYEN RANG BZHIN, ,DE PHYIR RKYEN GYI RANG BZHIN MIN, ,RKYEN MIN RANG BZHIN 'BRAS BU NI, ,YOD MIN 'BRAS BU MED PAS NA, ,RKYEN MIN RKYEN DU GA LA 'GYUR,
Suppose you assert that results Constitute a nature Of their conditions; But conditions are not things With a nature of their own.
And so how could those, Regardless of how you look at it, Be some nature of their conditions? Because there is none With the nature of its conditions.
251 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
(I.chapter title) [Pratyaya parīkṣā.
Pratyaya pariksha.]
,RKYEN BRTAG PA ZHES BYA BA STE RAB TU BYED PA DANG PO'O,,
Here ends the first chapter of Wisdom: “An Investigation of Conditions.”
Chapter 2 An Investigation of Coming & Going
(II.1) Gataṃ na gamyate tāvad agataṃ naiva gamyate, Gatāgatavinirmuktaṃ gamyamānaṃ na gamyate.
Gatan na gamyate tavad agatan naiva gamyate, Gatagatavinirmuktan gamyamanam na gamyate.
,RE ZHIG SONG LA MI 'GRO STE, ,MA SONG BA LA {%LA’ANG} 'GRO BA MIN, ,SONG DANG MA SONG MA GTOGS PAR, ,BGOM PA BYED PAR MI 'GYUR RO,,
First of all, having gone Is not going; Neither is not having gone Going. And yet except for having gone And not having gone, You can never be stepping.
252 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
(II.2) Ceṣṭā yatra gatis tatra gamyamāne ca sā yataḥ, Na gate nāgate ceṣṭā gamyamāne gatis tataḥ.
Cheshta yatra gatis tatra gamyamane cha sa yatah, Na gate nagate cheshta gamyamane gatis tatah.
,GANG NA G-YO BA DE NA 'GRO, ,DE YANG GANG PHYIR BGOM PA LA, ,G-YO BA SONG MIN MA SONG MIN, ,DE PHYIR BGOM LA 'GRO BA YOD,
Wherever one is in motion, There is going. And why is that so? When we are stepping, The motion is not having gone, Nor is it not having gone. And so there is going Where there is stepping.
(II.3) Gamyamānasya gamanaṃ kathaṃ nāmopapatsyate, Gamyamānaṃ vigamanaṃ yadā naivopapadyate.
Gamyamanasya gamanan kathan namopapatsyate, Gamyamanan vigamanan yada naivopapadyate.
,BGOM LA 'GRO BA YIN PAR NI, ,JI LTA BUR NA 'THAD PAR 'GYUR, ,GANG TSE 'GRO BA MED PA YI, ,BGOM PA 'THAD PA MED PHYIR RO,,
How could it be correct to say That there was going Where there was stepping? For it would never be correct
253 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
To say there was a stepping Where there was no going.
(II.4) Gamyamānasya gamanaṃ yasya tasya prasajyate, Ṛte gater gamyamānaṃ gamyamānaṃ hi gamyate.
Gamyamanasya gamanan yasya tasya prasajyate, Irte gater gamyamanam gamyamanan hi gamyate.
,GANG GI BGOM PA LA 'GRO BA, ,DE YI BGOM LA 'GRO MED PAR, ,THAL BAR 'GYUR TE GANG GI PHYIR, ,BGOM LA 'GRO BA YIN PHYIR RO,,
Where there is a going Where there is a stepping, The stepping would Of a necessity Lose the going— For there is a going In a stepping.
(II.5-6) Gamyamānasya gamane prasaktaṃ gamanadvayam, Yena tad gamyamānaṃ ca yac cātra gamanaṃ punaḥ. Dvau gantārau prasajyete prasakte gamanadvaye, Gantāraṃ hi tiraskṛtya gamanaṃ nopapadyate.
Gamyamanasya gamane prasaktam gamanadvayam, Yena tad gamyamanan cha yach chatra gamanam punah. Dvau gantarau prasajyete prasakte gamanadvaye, Gantaran hi tiraskirtya gamanan nopapadyate.
,BGO {%BGOM} LAM {%LA} 'GRO BA YOD NA NI, ,'GRO BA GNYIS SU THAL 'GYUR TE,
254 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
,GANG GIS DE BA GOM {%DE BGOM} GYUR PA DANG, ,DE LA 'GRO BA GANG YIN PA'O, ,'GRO BA GNYIS SU THAL 'GYUR NA, ,'GRO BA PO YANG GNYIS SU 'GYUR, ,GANG PHYIR 'GRO BO MED PAR NI, ,'GRO BA 'THAD PAR MI 'GYUR RO,
If there existed a going With the stepping, Then there would have to be Two goings: The one where one was stepping, And the one where that was going.
And if there had to be two goings, Then there would have to be Two goers too; for it would never be Correct to say there was a going Where there is no goer.
(II.7) Gantāraṃ cet tiraskṛtya gamanaṃ nopapadyate, Gamane ‘sati gantātha kuta eva bhaviṣyati.
Gantaran chet tiraskirtya gamanan nopapadyate, Gamane’sati gantatha kuta eva bhavishyati.
,GAL TE 'GRO BA {%PO} MED GYUR NA, ,'GRO BA 'THAD PAR MI 'GYUR TE, ,'GRO BA MED NA 'GRO BA PO, ,YOD PA NYID DU GA LA 'GYUR,
Now going could never be correct In a case where there’s no goer; For how could there ever be The goer themselves, In a case where there’s no going?
255 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
(II.8) Gantā na gacchati tāvad agantā naiva gacchati, Anyo gantur agantuś ca kas tṛtīyo 'tha gacchati.
Ganta na gachati tavad aganta naiva gachati, Anyo gantur agantush cha kas tirtiyo tha gachati.
,RE ZHIG 'GRO PO MI 'GRO STE, ,'GRO BA PO MIN 'GRO BA MIN, ,'GRO PO 'GRO PO MIN LAS GZHAN, ,GSUM PA GANG ZHIG 'GRO BAR 'GYUR,
First of all, no goer goes; But neither does someone Who’s no goer go. How so too could someone go Who was some third possibility: Someone besides a goer, or not?
(II.9) Gantā tāvad gacchatīti katham evopapatsyate, Gamanena vinā gantā yadā naivopapadyate.
Ganta tavad gachatiti katham evopapatsyate, Gamanena vina ganta yada naivopapadyate.
,GANG TSE 'GRO BA MED PAR NI, ,'GRO BA {%PO} 'THAD PAR MI 'GYUR NA, ,RE ZHIG 'GRO BO {%PO} 'GRO'O ZHES, ,JI LTAR 'THAD PA NYID DU 'GYUR,
In a case where there’s no going, It would never be correct For there to be a goer. And so how could it ever
256 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
Be correct to say That a goer now was going?
(II.10) Pakṣo gantā gacchatīti yasya tasya prasajyate, Gamanena vinā gantā gantur gamanam icchataḥ.
Paksho ganta gachatiti yasya tasya prasajyate, Gamanena vina ganta gantur gamanam ichatah.
,GANG GI PHYOGS LA 'GRO BA PO, ,'GRO BA DE LA 'GRO MED PA'I, ,'GRO BO {%PO} YIN PAR THAL 'GYUR TE, ,'GRO BO {%PO} 'GRO BAR 'DOD PHYIR RO,
In any position that says That a goer is going, There would have to be A goer that wasn’t, Because you’d be saying That the goer was going.
(II.11) Gamane dve prasajyete gantā yadyuta gacchati, Ganteti cājyate yena gantā san yac ca gacchati.
Gamane dve prasajyete ganta yadyuta gachati, Ganteti chajyate yena ganta san yach cha gachati.
,GAL TE 'GRO BO {%PO} 'GRO 'GYUR NA, ,'GRO BA GNYIS SU THAL 'GYUR TE, ,GANG GI {%GIS} 'GRO BOR {%POR} MNGON PA DANG, ,'GRO BOR {%POR} GYUR NAS GANG 'GRO BA'O,
If the goer were going, Then there would have to be
257 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
Two goings: one which Specified the goer, And the other the going Once one was a goer.
(II.12) Gate nārabhyate gantuṃ gantuṃ nārabhyate 'gate, Nārabhyate gamyamāne gantum ārabhyate kuha.
Gate narabhyate gantun gantun narabhyate’gate, Narabhyate gamyamane gantum arabhyate kuha.
,SONG LA 'GRO BA'I RTZOM MED DE, ,MA SONG BA LA'ANG 'GRO RTZOM MED, ,BGO {%BGOM} LA RTZOM PA YOD MIN NA, ,GANG DU 'GRO LA {%BA} RTZOM PAR BYED,
You cannot undertake to go Where you’ve already gone; Neither can this be done Where you’ve yet to go. If the undertaking is not something That could ever be there with stepping, Then where could you ever Undertake to go?
(II.13) Na pūrvaṃ gamanārambhād gamyamānaṃ na vā gatam, Yatrārabhyeta gamanam agate gamanaṃ kutaḥ.
Na purvan gamanarambhad gamyamanan na va gatam, Yatrarabhyeta gamanam agate gamanan kutah.
,'GRO BA RTZOM PA'I SNGA ROL NA, ,GANG DU 'GRO BA RTZOM 'GYUR BA'I {%BA}, ,BGOM PA MED CING SONG BA MED,
258 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
,MA SONG [f. 3a] 'GRO BA GA LA YOD,
There exists no spot for stepping— Where they are undertaking to go— Before they have undertaken to go.
Neither does there exist a spot Where they have already gone.
And how could a person undertake To go down a spot That they hadn’t gone down yet?
(II.14) Gataṃ kiṃ gamyamānaṃ kim agataṃ kiṃ vikalpyate, Adṛśyamāna ārambhe gamanasyaiva sarvathā.
Gatan kin gamyamanan kim agatan kin vikalpyate, Adirshyamana arambhe gamanasyaiva sarvatha.
,'GRO BA {%’GRO RTZOM} RNAM PA THAMS CAD DU, ,SNANG BA MED PA NYID YIN NA, ,SONG BA CI ZHIG BGOM PA CI, ,MA SONG CI ZHIG RNAM PAR BRTAG
At the point where undertaking To go disappears completely, Then where is the part gone done; And where is the part Being stepped upon; And where is the part We’ve yet to go down, That we seek to investigate?
(II.15-16) Gantā na tiṣṭhati tāvad agantā naiva tiṣṭhati,
259 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
Anyo gantur agantuś ca kas tṛtīyo 'tha tiṣṭhati. Gantā tāvat tiṣṭhatīti katham evopapatsyate, Gamanena vinā gantā yadā naivopapadyate.
Ganta na tishthati tavad aganta naiva tishthati, Anyo gantur agantush cha kas tirtiyo’tha tishthati. Ganta tavat tishthatiti katham evopapatsyate, Gamanena vina ganta yada naivopapadyate.
,RE ZHIG 'GRO BO {%PO} MI SDOD DE, ,'GRO BA PO MIN SDOD PA MIN, ,'GRO PO 'GRO BA YIN PA LAS, {%’GRO PO MIN LAS GZHAN,} ,GSUM PA GANG ZHIG SDOD PAR 'GYUR, ,GANG TSE 'GRO BA MED PAR NI, ,'GRO BO {%PO} 'THAD PAR MI 'GYUR NA, ,RE SHIG 'GRO PO SDOD DO ZHES, ,CI {%JI} LTAR 'THAD PA NYID DU 'GYUR,
First of all, a goer Cannot stand still; But neither can someone Not a goer stand still.
There would be someone Standing still Who was a third possibility Between one who was a goer And someone not a goer.
At the point where No going was there, A goer then Could never be correct.
How could it at all be correct To say, in the first place, That a goer was standing still?
260 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
(II.17a) Na tiṣṭhati gamyamānān na gatān nāgatād api…
Na tishthati gamyamanan na gatan nagatad api…
,BGOM LAS LDOG PAR MI 'GYUR TE, ,SONG DANG MA SONG LAS KYANG MIN,
There can be no turning back Where we are stepping; And not with where we’ve gone, Or where we’ve yet to go.
(II.17b) …Gamanaṃ saṃpravṛttiś ca nivṛttiś ca gateḥ samā.
…Gamanan sampravirttish cha nivirttish cha gateh sama.
,'GRO BA DANG NI 'JUG PA DANG, ,LDOG PA YANG NI 'GRO BA DANG, {%’GRO DANG MTSUNGS,}
This is the same as with The going: as regards Going; engaging; Or turning back.
(II.18-21) Yad eva gamanaṃ gantā sa eveti na yujyate, Anya eva punar gantā gater iti na yujyate.
Yad eva gamanaṃ gantā sa eva hi bhaved yadi, Ekībhāvaḥ prasajyeta kartuḥ karmaṇa eva ca.
Anya eva punar gantā gater yadi vikalpyate, Gamanaṃ syād ṛte gantur gantā syād gamanād ṛte.
261 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
Ekībhāvena vā siddhir nānābhāvena vā yayoḥ, Na vidyate tayoḥ siddhiḥ kathaṃ nu khalu vidyate.
Yad eva gamanan ganta sa eveti na yujyate, Anya eva punar ganta gater iti na yujyate.
Yad eva gamanan ganta sa eva hi bhaved yadi, Ekibhavah prasajyeta kartuh karmana eva cha.
Anya eva punar ganta gater yadi vikalpyate, Gamanan syad irte gantur ganta syad gamanad irte.
Ekibhavena va siddhir nanabhavena va yayoh, Na vidyate tayoh siddhih kathan nu khalu vidyate.
,'GRO BA DE DANG 'GRO BA PO, ,DE NYID CES KYANG BYAR [f. 20a] MI RUNG, ,'GRO BA DANG NI 'GRO BA PO, ,GZHAN NYID CES KYANG BYAR MI RUNG,
,GAL TE 'GRO BA GANG YIN PA, ,DE NYID 'GRO PO YIN GYUR NA, ,BYED PA PO DANG LAS GNYIS KYANG, ,GCIG PA NYID DU THAL PAR 'GYUR,
,GAL TE 'GRO DANG 'GRO BA PO, ,GZHAN PA NYID DU RNAM BRTAG NA, ,'GRO PO MED PA'I 'GRO BA DANG, ,'GRO BA MED PA'I 'GRO BOR {%POR} 'GYUR,
,GANG DAG DNGOS PO GCIG PA DANG, ,DNGOS PO GZHAN PA NYID DU NI, ,GRUB PAR GYUR PA YOD MIN NA, ,DE GNYIS GRUB PA JI LTAR YOD,
It would be wrong to call The going and the goer
262 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
Just that; but it would be Just as wrong to say That the going and goer Were completely separate.
Suppose that the exact thing Which was the act of going Was the one who was going; Then the agent and action as well Would have to be one.
Suppose you look into the question Of whether the going, and the goer, Are entirely separate. There would be a going Where there was no goer; And there would be a goer Where there was no going.
Since this pair Could never be a thing Where they were one and the same, And could never be a thing Where they were entirely separate, How then could these two Even exist?
(II.22) Gatyā ya yājyate gantā gatiṃ tāṃ sa na gacchati, Yasmān na gati pūrvo‘sti kaścit kiṃcid dhi gacchati.
Gatya ya yajyate ganta gatin tan sa na gachati, Yasman na gati purvosti kashchit kinchid dhi gachati.
,'GRO PA {%BA} GANG GIS 'GRO POR MNGON, ,'GRO BA DE NI DE 'GRO MIN, ,GANG PHYIR 'GRO BA'I SNGA ROL MED,
263 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
,GANG ZHIG GANG DU 'GRO BAR 'GYUR,
Any going which specified One going Could never a going. And that’s because When someone goes somewhere There is no one there Before the going.
(II.23) Gatyā ya yājyate gantā tato‘nyāṃ sa na gacchati, Gatī dve nopapadyete yasmād ekatra gantari.
Gatya ya yajyate ganta tatonyan sa na gachati, Gati dve nopapadyete yasmad ekatra gantari.
,'GRO BA GANG GI 'GRO POR MNGON, ,DE LAS GZHAN PA DE 'GRO MIN, ,GANG PHYIR 'GRO PO GCIG PU LA, ,'GRO BA GNYIS SU MI 'THAD DO,
It is not a going which is different From that going which specifies The one going; This is because it would be Incorrect to have A pair of goings With a single one going.
(II.24-25a) Sad bhūto gamanaṃ gantā triprakāraṃ na gacchati, Nāsad bhūto‘pi gamanaṃ triprakāraṃ sa gacchati.
Gamanaṃ sad asad bhūtas triprakāraṃ na gacchati…
264 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
Sad bhuto gamanan ganta triprakaran na gachati, Nasad bhutopi gamanan triprakaran sa gachati.
Gamanan sad asad bhutas triprakaran na gachati…
,'GRO PO YIN PAR GYUR PA NI, ,'GRO RNAM GSUM DU 'GRO MI BYED, ,MA YIN PAR NI GYUR DE YANG, ,'GRO RNAM GSUM DU 'GRO MI BYED,
,YIN DANG MA YIN GYUR PA YANG, ,'GRO RNAM GSUM DU 'GRO MI BYED,
Someone who is someone going Is not doing any going Going down three variations.
Neither is someone Who is not someone going Doing any going Going down three variations.
Neither is someone Who both is and is not Doing any going Going down three variations.
(II.25b) …Tasmād gatiś ca gantā ca gantavyaṃ ca na vidyate.
…Tasmad gatis cha ganta ca gantavyan ca na vidyate.
,DE PHYIR 'GRO DANG 'GRO PO DANG, ,BGROD PAR BYA BA'ANG YOD MA YIN,
Thus can we say That there is no such thing
265 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
As going, or anyone going, Or anywhere to reach.
(II.chapter title) [Gatāgata gamyamāna parīkṣā.
Gatagata gamyamana pariksha.]
,'GRO BA DANG 'ONG BA BRTAG PA ZHES BYA BA STE RAB TU BYED PA GNYIS PA'O,,
Here ends the second chapter of Wisdom: “An Investigation of Coming & Going”
Chapter 3 An Investigation of the Powers
(III.1) Darśanaṃ śravaṇaṃ ghrāṇaṃ rasanaṃ sparśanaṃ manaḥ, Indriyāṇi ṣaḍ eteṣāṃ draṣṭavyādīni gocaraḥ.
Darshanan shravanan ghranan rasanan sparshanam manah, Indriyani shad eteshan drashtavyadini gocharah.
,LTA DANG NYAN DANG SNOM PA DANG, ,MYONG BAR BYED DANG REG BYED YID, ,DBANG PO DRUG STE DE DAG GI, ,SPYOD YUL BLTA BAR BYA LA SOGS,
The six powers act To see; and hear; and smell; And taste; and feel— Along with the thought.
The spheres of activity
266 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
For these are the things Which are seen, and so forth.
(III.2) Svam ātmānaṃ darśanaṃ hi tat tam eva na paśyati, Na paśyati yad ātmānaṃ kathaṃ drakṣyati tat parān.
Svam atmanan darshanan hi tat tam eva na pashyati, Na pashyati yad atmanan kathan drakshyati tat paran.
,LTA DE RANG GI BDAG NYID NI, ,DE LA LTA BA MA YIN NYID, ,GANG ZHIG BDAG LA MI LTA BA, ,DE DAG GZHAN LA JI LTAR LTA,
The seeing is not something Which can ever see Its every own self.
The two are not things Which can see themselves; How then could they See others?
(III.3) Na paryāpto'gni dṛṣṭānto darśanasya prasiddhaye, Sadarśanaḥ sa pratyukto gamyamāna gatāgataiḥ.
Na paryaptogni dirshtanto darshanasya prasiddhaye, Sadarshanah sa pratyukto gamyamana gatagataih.
,[f. 3b] LTA BA RAB TU BSGRUB PA'I PHYIR, ,ME YI DPES NI NUS MA YIN, ,SONG DANG MA SONG BSGOM PA YIS, ,DE NI LTA BCAS LAN BTAB PO,
267 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
Fire as an example To establish seeing Is not something Which can.
Having gone, or not gone, Or stepping down Offers a reply To that one tied To seeing.
(III.4) Nāpaśyamānaṃ bhavati yadā kiṃ ca na darśanam, Darśanaṃ paśyatītyevaṃ katham etat tu yujyate.
Napashyamanam bhavati yada kin cha na darshanam, Darshanam pashyatiyevan katham etat tu yujyate.
,GANG TSE CUNG ZAD MI LTA BA, ,LTA BAR BYED PA MA YIN NO, ,LTA BAS LTA BAR BYED CES BYAR, ,DE NI JI LTAR RIGS PAR 'GYUR,
At no time does it see, The very least bit; It is nothing that acts To see.
How could this idea That something is an instrument Of seeing, in that it sees, Ever be correct?
(III.5a) Paśyati darśanaṃ naiva naiva paśyatyadarśanam…
Pashyati darshanan naiva naiva pashyatyadarshanam…
268 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
,LTA BA LTA NYID MA YIN TE, ,LTA BA MIN PA MI LTA NYID,
Seeing cannot In any way see; For one not seeing Could never see.
(III.5b) …Vyākhyāto darśanenaiva draṣṭā cāpyavagamyatām.
…Vyakhyato darshanenaiva drashta chapyavagamyatam.
,LTA BA NYID KYIS LTA BA PO'ANG, ,RNAM PAR BSHAD PAR SHES PAR BYA,
The explanation of The very same, seeing, Allows us to understand The seer as well.
(III.6a) Draṣṭā nāstyatiraskṛtya tiraskṛtya ca darśanam…
Drashta nastyatiraskirtya tiraskirtya cha darshanam…
,MA SPANGS LTA PO YOD MIN TE, ,LTA BA SPANGS PAR GYUR KYANG NGO,
It cannot be That there is a seer Where it is not relinquished; Neither can there be Once the seeing Has been relinquished.
269 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
(III.6b-7) …Draṣṭavyaṃ darśanaṃ caiva draṣṭaryasati te kutaḥ.
Draṣṭavya darśanābhāvād vijñānādi catuṣṭayam, Nāstītyupādānādīni bhaviṣyanti punaḥ katham.
…Drashtavyan darshanan chaiva drashtaryasati te kutah.
Drashtavya darshanabhavad vijnanadi chatushtayam, Nastityupdanadini bhavishyanti punah katham.
,LTA PO MED NA BLTA BYA DANG, ,LTA BDE DAG GA LA YOD,
,BLTA BYA LTA BA MED PA'I PHYIR, ,RNAM PAR SHES PA LA SOGS BZHI, ,YOD MIN NYE BAR LEN LA SOGS, ,JI LTA BUR NA YOD PAR 'GYUR,
If no seer exists, Then how could The act of seeing, And what is seen, Ever exist?
Because neither The act of seeing Nor what is seen exist, Then neither do the four Of consciousness And the rest exist— How then could grasping And such ever be?
(III.8)
270 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
Vyākhyātaṃ śravaṇaṃ ghrāṇaṃ rasanaṃ sparśanaṃ manaḥ, Darśanenaiva jānīyāc chrotṛ śrota vyakādi ca.
Vyakhyatan shravanan ghranan rasanan sparshanam manah, Darshanenaiva janiyach chrotir shrota vyakadi cha.
,LTA BAS NYAN DANG SNOM PA DANG, ,MYONG BAR BYED DANG REG BYED YID, ,NYAN PA PO DANG MNYAN LA SOGS, ,RNAM PAR BSHAD PAR SHES PAR BYA,
Use this explanation of seeing For coming to an understanding Of hearing and smelling; The instrument for tasting, The instrument of touching; And the thought— As well as the agent Of the hearing; the hearing; And everything else.
(III.chapter title) [Āyatana parīkṣā.
Ayatana pariksha.]
,DBANG PO BRTAG PA ZHES BYA BA STE RAB TU BYED PA GSUM PA'O,
Here ends the third chapter of Wisdom: “An Investigation of the Powers.”
Chapter 4 An Investigation of the Parts to a Person
(IV.1)
271 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
Rūpa kāraṇa nirmuktaṃ na rūpam upalabhyate, Rūpeṇāpi na nirmuktaṃ dṛśyate rūpa kāraṇam.
Rupa karana nirmuktan na rupam upalabhyate, Rupenapi na nirmuktan dirshyate rupa karanam.
,GZUGS KYI RGYU NI MA GTOGS PAR, ,GZUGS NI DMIGS PAR MI 'GYUR RO, ,GZUGS ZHES BYA BA MA GTOGS PAR, ,GZUGS KYI RGYU YANG MI SNANG NGO,
There cannot exist Physical form Not taken in by The causes of form.
Neither can there appear The causes of form Not taken in by what We call “physical form.”
(IV.2-3) Rūpa kāraṇa nirmukte rūpe rūpaṃ prasajyate, Āhetukaṃ na cāstyarthaḥ kaścid āhetukaḥ kva cit.
Rūpeṇa tu vinirmuktaṃ yadi syād rūpa kāraṇam, Akāryakaṃ kāraṇaṃ syād nāstyakāryaṃ ca kāraṇam.
Rupa karana nirmukte rupe rupam prasjyate, Ahetukan na chastyarthah kashchid ahetukah kva cit.
Rupena tu vinirmuktan yadi syad rupa karanam, Akaryakan karanan syad nastyakaryan cha karanam.
,GZUGS KYI RGYU NI MA GTOGS PAR, ,GZUGS NA GZUGS NI RGYU MED PAR, ,THAL BAR GYUR TE DON GANG YANG,
272 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
,RGYU MED PA NI GANG NA'ANG MED,
,GAL TE GZUGS NI MA GTOGS PAR, ,GZUGS KYI RGYU ZHIG YOD NA NI, ,'BRAS BU MED PA'I RGYUR 'GYUR TE, ,'BRAS BU MED PA'I RGYU MED DO,
If form were not taken in By the causes of form, The form would have to be Without any causes: There is no entity at all, Anywhere at all, Which could exist Without a cause.
And suppose that There could be A cause of form Not taken in by form; They would be causes That had no result— And there is no such thing As a cause with no result.
(IV.4-5) Rūpe satyeva rūpasya kāraṇaṃ nopapadyate, Rūpe'satyeva rūpasya kāraṇaṃ nopapadyate.
Niṣkāraṇaṃ punā rūpaṃ naiva naivopapadyate, Tasmād rūpagatān kāṃścin na vikalpān vikalpayet.
Rupe satyeva rupasya karanan nopapadyate, Rupesatyeva rupasya karanan nopapadyate.
Nishkaranam puna rupan naiva naivopapadyate, Tasmad rupagatan kanshchin na vikalpan vikalpayet.
273 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
,GZUGS YOD NA YANG GZUGS KYI NI, ,RGYU YANG 'THAD PAR MI 'GYUR NYID, ,GZUGS MED NA YANG GZUGS KYI NI, ,RGYU YANG 'THAD PAR MI 'GYUR NYID,
,RGYU MED PA YI GZUGS DAG NI, ,'THAD PAR MI RUNG RUNG MIN NYID, ,DE PHYIR GZUGS KYI RNAM PAR RTOG, ,'GA' YANG RNAM PAR BRTAG MI BYA,
If—on the one hand— Form were to exist, A cause of the form Would be completely incorrect. If—on the other hand— This form didn’t exist, Then a cause of form Would be completely incorrect.
Forms that had no cause Would be incorrect— Absolutely incorrect. And so none should ever Imagine an idea Of any form at all.
(IV.6) Na kāraṇasya sadṛśaṃ kāryam ityupapadyate, Na kāraṇasyāsadṛśaṃ kāryam ityupapadyate.
Na karanasya sadirshan karyam ityupapadyate, Na karanasyasadirshan karyam ityupapadyate.
,'BRAS BU RGYU DANG 'DRA BA ZHES, ,BYA BA 'THAD PA MA YIN TE, ,'BRAS BU RGYU DANG MI 'DRA ZHES,
274 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
,BYA BA'ANG 'THAD PA MA YIN NO,
It would be incorrect to say That results were similar To their causes. Neither would it be correct To say they were not similar To their causes.
(IV.7) Vedanā citta saṃjñānāṃ saṃskārāṇāṃ ca sarvaśaḥ, Sarveṣām eva bhāvānāṃ rūpeṇaiva samaḥ kramaḥ.
Vedana chitta sanjnanan sanskaranan cha sarvashah, Sarvesham eva bhavanan rupenaiva samah kramah.
,TSOR DANG 'DU SHES 'DU BYED DANG, ,SEMS DANG DNGOS PO THAMS CAD KYANG, ,RNAM PA DAG NI THAMS CAD DU, ,GZUGS NYID KYIS NI RIM PA MTSUNGS,
Feeling, discrimination, The other factors, the mind, And every other entity Are the same as form— Identical types of steps, With no such option.
(IV.8-9) Vigrahe yaḥ parīhāraṃ kṛte śūnyatayā vadet, Sarvaṃ tasyāparihṛtaṃ samaṃ sādhyena jāyate.
Vyākhyāne ya upālambhaṃ kṛte śūnyatayā vadet, Sarvaṃ tasyānupālabdhaṃ samaṃ sādhyena jāyate.
Vigrahe yah pariharan kirte shunyataya vadet,
275 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
Sarvan tasyaparihirtan saman sadhyena jayate.
Vyakhyane ya upalambhan kirte shunyataya vadet, Sarvan tasyanupalabdhan saman sadhyena jayate.
,STONG PA NYID KYIS BRTZAD BYAS TE, ,GANG ZHIG LAN 'DEBS SMRA BYED PA, ,DE YIS THAMS CAD [f. 4a] LAN BTAB MIN, ,BSGRUB PAR BYA DANG MTSUNGS PAR 'GYUR,
,STONG PA NYID KYIS BSHAD BYAS TSE, ,GANG ZHIG SKYON 'DOGS SMRA BYED PA, ,DE YIS THAMS CAD SKYON BTAGS MIN, ,BSGRUB PAR BYA DANG MTSUNGS PAR 'GYUR,
When someone has come And argued for emptiness, Some may come and answer; But none of these Represents a reply: It’s exactly the same As the quality to prove.
And when they make Their explanation About simple emptiness, Someone may make Criticisms; And yet none Of their criticisms Are assigned: It’s exactly the same As the quality to prove.
(IV.chapter title) [Skandha parīkṣā.
276 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
Skandha pariksha.]
,PHUNG PO BRTAG PA ZHES BYA BA STE RAB TU BYED PA BZHI PA'O,,
Here ends the fourth chapter of Wisdom: “An Investigation of the Parts to a Person.”
Chapter 5 An Investigation of the Elements
(V.1-2) Nākāśaṃ vidyate kiṃcit pūrvam ākāśa lakṣaṇāt, Alakṣaṇaṃ prasajyeta syāt pūrvaṃ yadi lakṣaṇāt.
Alakṣaṇo na kaścic ca bhāvaḥ saṃvidyate kva cit, Asatyalakṣaṇe bhāve kramatāṃ kuha lakṣaṇam.
Nakashan vidyate kinchit purvam akasha lakshanat, Alakshanam prasajyeta syat purvan yadi lakshanat.
Alakshano na kashchich cha bhavah sanvidyate kva chit, Asatyalakshane bhave kramatan kuha lakshanam.
,NAM MKHA'I MTSAN NYID SNGA ROL NA, ,NAM MKHA' CUNG ZAD YOD MA YIN, ,GAL TE MTSAN LAS SNGA GYUR NA, ,MTSAN NYID MED PAR THAL BAR 'GYUR,
,MTSAN NYID MED PA'I DNGOS PO NI, ,'GA' YANG GANG NA'ANG YOD MA YIN, ,MTSAN NYID MED PA'I DNGOS MED NA, ,MTSAN NYID GANG DU 'JUG PAR 'GYUR,
Not even the slightest bit Of space Could exist prior
277 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
To the definition of space. Suppose it were present Prior to the qualities Which define it; It would have to be One which lacked Its defining qualities.
An entity which had None of the qualities Which define it Is not something That could ever exist, In any way at all. If an entity had no Defining characteristics, And were absent, Then what would we apply The definition to?
(V.3) Nālakṣaṇe lakṣaṇasya pravṛttir na salakṣaṇe, Salakṣaṇālakṣaṇābhyāṃ nāpyanyatra pravartate.
Nalakshane lakshanasya pravirttir na salakshane, Salakshanalakshanabhyan napyanyatra pravartate.
,MTSAN NYID MED LA MTSAN NYID NI, ,MI 'JUG MTSAN NYID BCAS LA MIN, ,MTSAN BCAS MTSAN NYID MED PA LAS, ,GZHAN LA'ANG 'JUG PAR MI 'GYUR RO,
No definition Could ever apply To one which had No qualities to define it. Where it did possess
278 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
Qualities which defined it, None would apply.
Neither could they apply To something else That neither possessed These qualities, nor lacked Defining qualities.
(V.4a) Lakṣaṇāsaṃpravṛttau ca na lakṣyam upapadyate.
Lakshanasampravirttau cha na lakshyam upapadyate.
,MTSAN NYID 'JUG PA MA YIN NA, ,MTSAN GZHI 'THAD PAR MI 'GYUR RO,
Where there is no application Of a definition, Neither can the classical example Be correct.
(IV.4b) Lakṣyasyānupapattau ca lakṣaṇasyāpyasaṃbhavaḥ.
Lakshyasyanupapattau cha lakshanasyapyasambhavah.
,MTSAN GZHI 'THAD PA MA YIN NA, ,MTSAN NYID KYANG NI YOD MA YIN,
If the classical example Were not correct, Then neither could The definition exist.
279 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
(V.5a) Tasmān na vidyate lakṣyaṃ lakṣaṇaṃ naiva vidyate.
Tasman na vidyate lakshyan lakshanan naiva vidyate.
,DE PHYIR MTSAN GZHI YOD MIN TE, ,MTSAN NYID YOD PA NYID MA YIN,
And so neither Is the definition Something that could exist; For the classical example Is not something That could ever exist.
(V.5b-6a) Lakṣyalakṣaṇa nirmukto naiva bhāvo'pi vidyate, Avidyamāne bhāve ca kasyābhāvo bhaviṣyati.
Lakshyalakshana nirmukto naiva bhavopi vidyate, Avidyamane bhave cha kasyabhavo bhavishyati.
,MTSAN GZHI MTSAN NYID MA GTOGS PA'I, ,DNGOS PO YANG NI YOD MA YIN, ,DNGOS PO YOD PA MA YIN NA, ,DNGOS MED GANG GI YIN PAR 'GYUR,
There does not at all exist Any entity which is not subsumed Either by definitions, Or by things which are defined.
If there is no such thing As an entity, Then how could there be Something Which was its absence?
280 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
(V.6b)
Bhāvābhāva vidharmā ca bhāvābhāvāv avaiti kaḥ.
Bhavabhava vidharma cha bhavabhavav avaita kah.
,DNGOS DANG DNGOS MED MI MTHUN CHOS, ,GANG GIS DNGOS DANG DNGOS MED SHES,
Who is it then that knows Functioning things And existing things With no function As the dissimilar Working thing, And an existing thing Which does no work?
(V.7a-7b1) Tasmān na bhāvo nābhāvo na lakṣyaṃ nāpi lakṣaṇam, Ākāśam…
Tasman na bhavo nabhavo na lakshyan napi lakshanam, Akasham…
,DE PHYIR NAM MKHA' DNGOS PO MIN, ,DNGOS MED MA YIN MTSAN GZHI MIN, ,MTSAN NYID MA YIN…
As such, space is neither A functional thing, Nor an entity which exists But performs no function; Neither something to be defined, Nor a definition.
281 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
(V.7b2) …Ākāśa samā dhātavaḥ pañca ye'pare.
…Akasha sama dhatavah pancha yepare.
…KHAMS LNGA PO, ,GZHAN GANG DAG KYANG NAM MKHA' MTSUNGS,
The other five elements Are the same As space as well.
(V.8)
Astitvaṃ ye tu paśyanti nāstitvaṃ cālpa buddhayaḥ, Bhāvānāṃ te na paśyanti draṣṭavyopaśamaṃ śivam.
Astitvan ye tu pashyanti nastitvan chalpa buddhayah, Bhavanan te na pashyanti drashtavyopashaman shivam.
,BLO CHUNG GANG DAG DNGOS RNAMS LA, ,YOD PA NYID DANG MED NYID DU, ,LTA BA DE NI BLTA BYA BA, ,NYE BAR ZHI BA ZHI MI MTHONG,
Those of lesser intellect Cannot see the peace Of putting to rest What they think they see: They hold the view That things can only exist And that they can never exist.
(V.chapter title)
[Dhātu parīkṣā.
282 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
Dhatu pariksha.]
,KHAMS BRTAG PA ZHES BYA BA STE RAB TU BYED PA LNGA PA'O,,
Here ends the fifth chapter of Wisdom: “An Investigation of the Elements.”
Chapter 6 An Investigation of Desire & Who Feels It
(VI.1-2a) Rāgād yadi bhavet pūrvaṃ rakto raga tiraskṛtaḥ, Taṃ pratītya bhaved rāgo rakte rāgo bhavet sati.
Rakte'sati punā rāgaḥ kuta eva bhaviṣyati.
Ragad yadi bhavet purvan rakto raga tiraskirtah, Tam pratitya bhaved rago rakte rago bhavet sati.
Raktesati puna ragah kuta eva bhavishyati.
,GAL TE 'DOD CHAGS SNGA ROL NA, ,'DOD CHAGS MED PA'I CHAGS YOD NA, ,DE LA BRTEN NAS 'DOD CHAGS YOD, ,CHAGS YOD 'DOD CHAGS YOD PAR 'GYUR,
,CHAGS PA YOD PAR 'GYUR NA'ANG, ,'DOD CHAGS YOD PAR GA LA 'GYUR,
If there were to exist One who did not feel The desire prior To the desire itself, Then based on this They would possess it.
283 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
The desire would have To exist, since there Would exist someone Who felt the desire.
If there were none Who felt the desire, How could there be Any desire there?
(VI.2b) Sati vāsati vā rāge rakte'pyeṣa samaḥ kramaḥ.
Sati vasati va rage raktepyesha samah kramah.
,CHAGS PA LA YANG 'DOD CHAGS NI, ,YOD DAM MED KYANG RIM PA MTSUNGS,
It’s the same from either stage Whether the desire exists, Or doesn’t exist, With the one who feels it.
(VI.3) Sahaiva punar udbhūtir na yuktā rāgaraktayoḥ, Bhavetāṃ rāgaraktau hi nirapekṣau parasparam.
Sahaiva punar udbhutir na yukta ragaraktayoh, Bhavetan ragaraktau hi nirapekshau parasparam.
,'DOD CHAGS DANG NI CHAGS PA DAG, ,LHAN CIG NYID DU SKYE MI RIGS, ,'DI LTAR 'DOD CHAGS CHAGS PA DAG , ,[f. 4b] PHAN TSUN LTOS PA MED PAR 'GYUR,
284 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
If would be incorrect For the desire and The person who feels it To just grow together;
Because if it were that, They could not rely Upon each other.
(VI.4-5) Naikatve sahabhāvo'sti na tenaiva hi tat saha, Pṛthaktve sahabhāvo'tha kuta eva bhaviṣyati.
Ekatve sahabhāvaś cet syāt sahāyaṃ vināpi saḥ, Pṛthaktve sahabhāvaś cet syāt sahāyaṃ vināpi saḥ.
Naikatve sahabhavosti na tenaiva hi tat saha, Pirthaktve sahabhavotha kuta eva bhavishyati.
Ekatve sahabhavash chet syat sahayan vinapi sah, Pirthaktve sahabhavash chet syat sahayan vinapi sah.
,GCIG NYID LHAN CIG NYID MED DE, ,DE NYID DE DANG LHAN CIG MIN, ,CI STE THA DAD NYID YIN NA, ,LHAN CIG NYID DU JI LTAR 'GYUR,
,GAL TE GCIG PU LHAN CIG NA, ,GROGS MED PA YANG DE 'GYUR RO, ,GAL TE THA DAD LHAN CIG NA, ,GOGS MED PAR YANG DER 'GYUR RO,
As but a single thing, They could never exist In a state of being together: It would not be Together with that
285 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
Alone.
And how could it Ever be That the two were Perfectly separate? How could they Ever exist In a state Of being together?
If they were a single thing Together, Something standing by itself Would also have to be. If they were distinct Together, Something standing by itself Would also have to be.
(VI.6) Pṛthaktve sahabhāvaś ca yadi kiṃ rāgaraktayoḥ, Siddhaḥ pṛthakpṛthag bhāvaḥ sahabhāvo yatas tayoḥ.
Pirthaktve sahabhavash cha yadi kin ragaraktayoh, Siddhah pirthakpirthag bhavah sahabhavo yatas tayoh.
,GAL TE THA DAD LHAN CIG NA, ,CI GO 'DOD CHAGS CHAGS PA DAG, ,THA DAD NYID DU GRUB 'GYUR RAM, ,DES NA DE GNYIS LHAN CIG 'GYUR,
Suppose these were Distinct and also together.
Are you saying then That the pair of desire
286 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
And the one who feels it Are perfectly distinct One from the other?
Given that, these two Would be together.
(VI.7) Siddhaḥ pṛthakpṛthagbhāvo yadi vā rāgaraktayoḥ, Sahabhāvaṃ kimartham tu parikalpayase tayoḥ.
Siddhah pirthakpirthag bhavo yadi va ragaraktayoh, Sahabhavn kimartham tu parikalpayase tayoh.
,GAL TE 'DOD CHAGS CHAGS PA DAG, ,THA DAD NYID DU GRUB GYUR NA, ,DE DAG LHAN CIG NYID DU NI, ,CI YI PHYIR NA YONGS SU RTOG
Suppose desire, And the one who feels it, Were perfectly distinct From one another.
Why then Would you ever imagine These two in a state Of being together?
(VI.8-9) Pṛthag na sidhyatītyevaṃ sahabhāvaṃ vikāṅkṣasi, Sahabhāvaprasiddhyarthaṃ pṛthaktvaṃ bhūya icchasi.
Pṛthagbhāvāprasiddheś ca sahabhāvo na sidhyati, Katam asmin pṛthag bhāve sahabhāvaṃ satīcchasi.
287 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
Pirthag na sidhyatityevan sahabhavan vikankshasi, Sahabhava prasiddhyartham pirthaktvam bhuya icchasi.
Pirthagbhava prasiddhesh cha sahabhavo na sidhyati, Katam asmin pirthag bhave sahabhavan satichasi.
,THA DAD GRUB PAR MA GYUR PAS, ,DE PHYIR LHAN CIG 'DOD BYED NA, ,LHAN CIG RAB TU GRUB PA'I PHYIR, ,THA DAD NYID DU YANG 'DOD DAM,
,THA DAD DNGOS PO MA GRUB PAS, ,LHAN CIG DNGOS PO 'GRUB MI 'GYUR, ,THA DAD DNGOS PO GANG YOD NA, ,LHAN CIG DNGOS POR 'DOD PAR BYED,
If they were Distinct from one another, There could be none. And suppose that— To arrive at this, You instead assert That they are together, As a single thing.
And to truly prove They were a single thing, Wouldn’t you assert That the two were distinct?
But because they cannot Exist as entities That are distinct, Then neither can They be together.
We would have to say That any entities
288 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
Which existed as Distinct from one another Existed as entities Which were together.
(VI.10a) Evaṃ raktena rāgasya siddhir na saha nāsaha.
Evan raktena ragasya siddhir na saha nasaha.
,DE LTAR 'DOD CHAGS CHAGS PA DAG, ,LHAN CIG LHAN CIG MIN MI 'GRUB,
Thus it is that the two Of desire and The person who feels it Cannot exist Either as things together, Or as things which are not.
(VI.10b) Rāgavat sarvadharmāṇāṃ siddhir na saha nāsaha.
Ragavat sarva dharmanan siddhir na saha nasaha.
,'DOD CHAGS BZHIN DU CHOS RNAMS KUN, ,LHAN CIG LHAN CIG MIN MI 'GRUB,
Just as with desire, There are no other things Which can exist As together, Or not together.
289 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
(VI.chapter title) [Rāga rakta parīkṣā.
Raga rakta pariksha.]
,'DOD CHAGS DANG CHAGS PA BRTAG PA ZHES BYA BA STE RAB TU BYED PA DRUG PA'O,,
Here ends the sixth chapter of Wisdom: “An Investigation of Desire, and the One Who Feels It.”
To be continued!
290 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
An Excerpt from The Sutra on the Source of the Jewels
Arya Nagarjuna relies most famously upon sheer logic to prove emptiness in his masterpiece, Wisdom. Commentators since his time have added samples from some of the original sutras, typically at the end of chapters, to show that the Arya’s ideas are firmly based as well on the direct word of the Buddha.
A popular source, mentioned by Choney Lama himself at the end of Chapter 1, is The Sutra on the Source of the Jewels—which is cited by Master Chandrakirti for example as he concludes his own explanation of the chapter. In his Sea of Emptiness, Je Tsongkapa offers his usual insightful commentary upon these lines, which we present here, to give our reader a taste of the original sources for Nagarjuna’s wisdom.73
RIGS PA MI SHES SHING LUNG TZAM SKYABS SU GYUR PA RNAMS KYIS RTOG GE SKAM PO'I BSTAN BCOS TZAM GYIS BSGRUBS PA YIN NO ZHES SMRA BA DGAG PA'I PHYIR DANG,
Now some people might say:
All these books are just the product of some dry logicians who know nothing about clear reasoning—who hide in quotations from scripture, and use them to try to prove something.
One of the purposes of this chapter is to address these objections.
73 A taste of the original sources: For Je Rinpoche’s treatment, see ff. 51a-52a of the Sea (%B2, S05401). For Master Chandrakirti’s citation, refer to f. 30b of Clarification of the Verses (%S14, TD03860). Those lines found in the original sutra are at f. 433a of the teaching (%S15, KL00124).
291 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
CHOS RNAMS SKYE BA MED PAR STON PA'I GSUNG RAB THAMS CAD RAB TU BYED PA 'DIS BSHAD PAR BYA BA YIN PAR BSTAN PA'I PHYIR NGES PA'I DON GYI LUNG DANG SBYOR BA'I PHYOGS TZAM STON PA NI,
At the same time, we can present just a sampling of scripture which is literal—and not figurative—in order to show that this first chapter manages to explain the entire body of Buddhist scripture which treats the fact that nothing ever starts.
'PHAGS PA DKON MCHOG 'BYUNG GNAS KYI MDO LAS,
And so here we go, from the Sutra on the Source of the Jewels:
(1a) ,GANG NA'ANG STONG PAR RIG PA MA MCHIS PAR,74 ,NAM MKHA' BAR SNANG BYA YI RJES DANG MTSUNGS,
The mind that understands emptiness In anything at all Is simply an impossibility;
It’s just the same as the track That a bird leaves behind As it crosses the empty sky.
,ZHES DE KHO NA NYID DANG RO GCIG TU GYUR PA SPROS PA MED PA'I YE SHES DPE DE DANG 'DRA BAR BSTAN NO,,
These lines are using a metaphor to refer to the wisdom which is free of all imagined things, and which becomes a single song with suchness.
74 Gang na-ang stong-par: We have presented the line as currently found in the Lhasa edition of the Kangyur; both Je Tsongkapa and Master Chandrakirti give it slightly differently.
292 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
DE KHO NA NYID NI,
The suchness itself is then presented in the lines that come next:
(1b) ,GANG NA'ANG NGO BO NYID 'GA' YOD MIN PA, ,DE NI NAM YANG GZHAN GYI RGYUR MI 'GYUR, (2a) ,GANG GI NGO BO NYID NI MI RNYED PA, ,RANG BZHIN MED DE JI LTAR GZHAN GYI RKYEN,
Nothing that never had Any essence of its own Could ever act as a cause For something other than it.
How could something That had no essence— Something without a nature Of its own— Ever act as a cause, For something else?
,ZHES RGYU DANG RKYEN LA SKYED BYED KYI RANG BZHIN MED PA DANG,
What these lines are saying is that neither causes nor conditions have any nature of their own, where they make things start.
(2b) ,RANG BZHIN MED PA GZHAN GYIS CI ZHIG SKYED, ,RGYU DE BDE BAR GSHEGS PAS BSTAN PA'O,
And how could something Without a nature Ever be started
293 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
By something else?
These are the reasons That the One Gone to Bliss Taught for us.
,ZHES 'BRAS BU LA BSKYED BYA'I RANG BZHIN MED PA'I STONG NYID RGYAL BAS RGYU MTSAN DANG BCAS TE BSTAN PA DE NYID DO ZHES GSUNGS SO,,
These lines are expressing that results have no nature of their own either—of being started by something. This then is exactly the kind of place in scripture where the victorious Buddha says that things have no nature at all of these two kinds—of causing something else or being caused by something else. They are empty of any such nature.
(3) ,THAMS CAD CHOS KYANG MI GA-YO BRTAN PAR GNAS, ,[f. 51b] MI 'GYUR 'TSE BA MED CING ZHI BA STE, ,JI LTAR NAMKHA' {%NAM MKHA’} SHES PA MED PA BZHIN, ,DE LA MI SHES 'GRO BA RMONGS PAR 'GYUR,
Of everything in the world, It is the one thing that never wavers; It stays steadfast, and never changes; The one thing that can never hurt us, The one thing that is peace.
You should not understand it In the way you understand empty space; And those who never understand it Continue to live in darkness.
,ZHES PAS NI CHOS RNAMS KYI DE KHO NA NYID DE MI GA-YO BA SOGS SU BSTAN ZHING DE YANG NAM MKHA' RI BO LA SOGS PA'I THOGS BCAS BKAG TZAM LA 'JOG PA MIN PA
294 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
In these lines the Buddha is saying, first of all, that the suchness of things is something that never wavers—and so on. And he is saying secondly that this suchness is not something that we arrive at through a process such as where we deny some kind of concreteness: where we say for example that empty space consists of the simple elimination of physicality, in the form of mountains or the like.
GZHAN DU SHES PAR BYAR MED PAR BZHIN DU GA-YO BA DANG BRTAN PA SOGS KYI SPROS PA BCAD TZAM DU SHES PAR BYA BA DANG, DON DE MA RTOGS PAS 'KHOR BAR GSUNGS SO,,
Suchness is not something that we can understand in these other ways; rather, we must understand it through the simple elimination of the ways we imagine things to be: that they are wavering, or that they are steadfast. And because we fail to understand this point—the Buddha is saying—then we continue to wander, in the cycle of pain.
(4) ,JI LTAR RI BO DAG NI MI SGUL PA, ,DE BZHIN CHOS RNAMS RTAG TU BSKYED MI NUS, ,'CHI 'PHO MED CING SKYE BA MED PA YI, ,CHOS RNAMS DE LTAR RGYAL BAS RAB TU BSTAN,
Mountains never get up And move some other place; Neither can anything ever start Anything at all.
Thus did the Victor Teach us of things Where there is no death, And no moving on; And where there is no birth.
,ZHES PAS NI CHOS RNAMS RANG BZHIN GYIS STONG PA RNAM PA GZHAN DU DRANG DU MI NUS PA DANG 'CHI 'PHO SOGS MED PAR BSTAN NO,,
295 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
What this is saying is that the fact that things are empty of any nature of their own is not something you could ever try to understand in some other way. It is also saying that there is no death, and no moving on after death, nor anything of the like.
(5) ,CHOS GANG SKYE BA MED CING 'BYUNG BA MED, ,'CHI 'PHO MED CING RGA BAR MI 'GYUR BA, ,MI YI SENG+GE YIS NI DER STON ZHING, ,SEMS CAN BRGYA PHRAG DAG NI DE LA BKOD,
That lion among all humankind75 Taught us in these verses That there is nothing at all that ever Starts, or happens at all;
That there is no death, no moving on, And that we will never get old. This is the place that we are leading Billions of beings to go.
,CES PAS NI RANG BZHIN GYIS SKYE 'CHI MED PA'I DON DE GDUL BYA GZHAN DU MA ZHIG KYANG 'DZIN DU BCUG CES DNGOS SU BSTAN PA'I SHUGS KYIS GZHAN DAG GIS KYANG DE LA SEMS CAN RNAMS DGOD PAR BYA'O ZHES BSTAN NO,,
What this is saying is that we should encourage as many other disciples as we can to grasp this idea that there is no birth, and no death, that happens through any nature of its own. By implication the verse is saying that we should lead living beings to that same place, by using the other ideas presented here as well.
75 Lion among all humankind: Verses 5-7 here are found in Chandrakirti’s Clarification twice, the first time just after verses 1-4; and the second time, attributed to our sutra; but they are not found there in the edition available to us—although there is much similar language. They feel like they might be a wrap-up by the Master, or perhaps part of another version of the sutra; in any case, they are glossed by Je Tsongkapa together with the first four verses and we retain them here.
296 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
(6) ,GANG LA NGO BO NYID NI GANG YANG MED, ,GZHAN YANG MA YIN SUS KYANG MI RNYED PA, ,NANG NA MA YIN PHYI ROL DAG NA YANG, ,MI RNYED DE DAG LA NI MGON POS BKOD,
Our Savior leads them to the place Where there is no essence, to anything— But which is nothing else either: The place that no one could find, The place that is neither inside us, Nor found outside of us either.
,CES PAS NI CHOS GANG LA TSOL BA PO SUS GNAS SKABS GANG DU BTZAL YANG RANG DANG GZHAN GYI NGO BO NYID MI RNYED PA'I DON DE LA SEMS CAN RNAMS BKOD CES BSTAN TE GDUL BYA LA NGES DON GYI [f. 52a] GO BA BSKYED LUGS BSTAN NO,,
What this is saying is that the Buddha leads living beings to a place where—no matter how hard anyone at all worked to find it—they would never find any nature, of things being themselves, or things being something else. These lines are meant to indicate how we help disciples to grasp what the Buddha really meant.
(7) ,BDE BAR GSHEGS PAS ZHI BA'I 'GRO GSUNGS KYANG, ,'GRO BA GANG YANG RNYED PAR MI 'GYUR TE, ,DE DAG 'GRO LAS GROL BAR RNAM PAR GSUNGS, ,GROL NAS SEMS CAN MANG PO GROL BAR MDZAD,
It’s true that the Ones Gone to Bliss Have taught about how to go to peace; But it’s not as if you can find any going at all— Which is why they said that these beings Who go through births can be liberated.
297 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
And once they are freed, they free as well Many other suffering beings.
CES PAS NI ZHI BAR 'GRO MKHAN DE YANG BTZAL NA MI RNYED PA DANG, DE LTA NA'ANG DE DAG 'GRO BA LNGA'I 'KHOR BA LAS GROL BA DANG RANG GROL NAS GZHAN MANG PO SGROL BAR GSUNGS TE RIGS PAS DPYAD NA MI RNYED PAS THAR PA DANG DE THOB MKHAN DANG DES DE THOB PA SOGS THAMS CAD MI 'GOG PA'I DON NO,,
This verse is talking about those people who go to peace; because if you look for them, you won’t find anyone. Nonetheless, it has been stated by the Buddha that these same beings can be liberated from the five forms of suffering life; and that once they are liberated, they can lead many others to liberation. The point is that—once you analyze them—you cannot find these things; but that in turn means that we are not denying them: neither freedom itself, nor the person who attains it, nor the act of attaining freedom, or anything of the kind.
DE LTAR NA RAB BYED DANG PO'I RIGS PA 'DI RNAMS NI 'DI DANG 'DI 'DRA BA'I SKYE MED STON PA'I GSUNG RAB THAMS CAD LTA BA'I MIG TU SHES PAR GYIS SHIG,
As such, you should understand that studying all the clear reasoning found in the first chapter of Wisdom is giving yourself the eyes to see into these words of the Buddha—and any others like them—which teach us what it means to say that “things never begin.”
{The “rab byed ‘dis…” is a quotation; Je Rinpoche:
/Users/michaelroach/Documents/C DRIVE FILES/A/SUNGBUM UPDATED 6:22:16 NL/DBU MA_MIDDLE-WAY PHILOSOPHY (MADHYAMIKA PRASANGIKA SCHOOL)/RTZA BA SHES RAB GYI 'GREL PA_COMMENTARIES ON THE ROOT TEXT CALLED 'WISDOM' (MULAPRAJNA)/RJE TZONG KHA PA BLO BZANG GRAGS PA_JE TSONGKAPA LOBSANG DRAKPA (1357-1419)/S05401D_DBU MA RTZA BA'I TSIG LE'UR BYAS PA SHES RAB CES BYA BA'I RNAM BSHAD RIGS PA'I RGYA MTSO_The Ocean of Reasoning, an Explication of the Root Verses on the Middle Way entitled 'Wisdom'_RJE TZONG KHA PA BLO BZANG GRAGS PA (1357-1419).TXT
298 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
CHOS RNAMS SKYE BA MED PAR STON PA'I GSUNG RAB THAMS CAD RAB TU BYED PA 'DIS BSHAD PAR BYA BA YIN PAR BSTAN PA'I PHYIR NGES PA'I DON GYI LUNG DANG SBYOR BA'I PHYOGS TZAM STON PA NI, 'PHAGS PA DKON
MCHOG 'BYUNG GNAS KYI MDO LAS, GANG NA'ANG STONG PA RIG PA MED PA NI, ,NAM MKHA' BAR SNANG BYA YI RJES DANG MTSUNGS, ,ZHES DE KHO NA NYID DANG RO GCIG TU GYUR PA SPROS PA MED PA'I YE SHES DPE DE DANG 'DRA BAR BSTAN NO, ,
This language is repeated by him throughout his commentary; to the effect that “this chapter summarized all the content from the scriptures on this particular subject too…”}
299 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
Bibliography of works originally written in Sanskrit
S1 (Ārya) Nāgārjuna (Tib: Klu-sgrub) c. 200AD. The Foundational Verses on the Middle Way entitled “Wisdom” (Prajñā Nāma Mūla Madhyāmaka Kārika) (Tib: dBu-ma rtza-ba’i tsig-le’ur byas-pa shes-rab ces-bya-ba, Tibetan translation at TD03824, ff. 1b-19a of Vol. 1 [Tza] in the Middle-Way Section [Madhyāmaka, dBu-ma] of the bsTan-‘gyur [sDe-dge edition]). For the original Sanskrit used in this translation, we have primarily used two sources: (1) De Jong, J.W., editor; revised by Christian Lindtner. Nāgārjuna’s Mūlamadhyamakakārikā Prajñā Nāma (Chennai: The Adyar Library and Research Centre, The Theosophical Society, Adyar, n.d.). (2) Ye Shaoyong: see Chinese section of this bibliography.
S2 Vasubandhu (Tib: dByig-gnyen), c. 350AD. The Treasure House of Higher Knowledge, Set in Verse (Abhidharmakoṣakārikā) (Tib: Chos mngon-pa’i mdzod kyi tsig-le’ur byas-pa, Tibetan translation at TD04089, ff. 1b-25a of Vol. 2 [Ku] in the Higher Knowledge Section [Abhidharma, mNgon-pa] of the bsTan-‘gyur [sDe-dge edition]).
S3 (Ārya) Nāgārjuna (Tib: Klu-sgrub) c. 200AD. Smashing Mistaken Ideas to Dust (Vaidalya Sūtra Nāma) (Tib: Zhib-mo rnam-par ‘thag-pa, Tibetan translation at TD03826, ff. 22b-24a of Vol. 1 [Tza] in the Middle-Way Section [Madhyāmaka, dBu-ma] of the bsTan-‘gyur [sDe-dge edition]).
S4 (Ārya) Nāgārjuna (Tib: Klu-sgrub) c. 200AD. Seventy Verses on Emptiness (Śūnyatā Sapti Kārikā Nāma) (Tib: sTong-pa-nyid bdun-cu-pa’i tsig-le’ur byas-pa, Tibetan translation at TD03827, ff. 24a-27a of Vol. 1 [Tza] in the Middle-Way Section [Madhyāmaka, dBu-ma] of the bsTan-‘gyur [sDe-dge edition]).
S5
300 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
(Ārya) Nāgārjuna (Tib: Klu-sgrub), c. 200AD. Putting an End to All Argument (Vigraha Vyāvartanī Kārikā) (Tib: rTzod-pa bzlog-pa'i tsig-le'ur byas-pa, Tibetan translation at TD03828, ff. 27a-29a of Vol. 96 [Tza] in the Middle-Way Section [Madhyāmaka, dBu-ma] of the bsTan-‘gyur [sDe-dge edition]).
S6 (Ārya) Nāgārjuna (Tib: Klu-sgrub), c. 200AD. Sixty Verses on Reasoning (Yuktiṣaṣṭikā Kārikā) (Tib: Rigs-pa drug-cu-pa’i tsig-le’ur byas pa, Tibetan translation at TD03825, ff. 20b-22b of Vol. 1 [Tza] in the Middle-Way Section [Madhyāmaka, dBu-ma] of the bsTan-‘gyur [sDe-dge edition]).
S7 (Ārya) Nāgārjuna (Tib: Klu-sgrub), c. 200AD. The String of Precious Jewels, Words Offered to the King (Rāja Parikathā Ratna Mālī) (Tib: rGyal-po la gtam-bya-ba Rin-po-che'i phreng-ba, Tibetan translation at TD04158, ff. 107a-126a of Vol. 93 [Ge] in the Epistles Section [Lekha, sPring-yig] of the bsTan-‘gyur [sDe-dge edition]).
S8 (Ārya) Nāgārjuna (Tib: Klu-sgrub), c. 200AD. A Compendium of All the Sutras (Sūtra Samuccāya), (Tib: mDo kun las btus-pa, Tibetan translation at TD03934, ff. 148b-215a of Vol. 15 [Ki] in the Middle-Way Section [Madhyāmaka, dBu-ma] of the bsTan-‘gyur [sDe-dge edition]).
S9 (Ārya) Nāgārjuna (Tib: Klu-sgrub), c. 200AD. A Praise of That Which Transcends the World (Lokātīta Stava), (Tib: ‘Jig-rten las ‘das-par bstod-pa, Tibetan translation at TD01120, ff. 68b- 69b of Vol. 1 [Ka] in the “Songs of Praise” Section [Stotra, bsTod-tsogs] of the bsTan-‘gyur [sDe-dge edition]).
S10 Candrakīrti (Tib: Zla-ba grags-pa), c. 650AD. Entering the Middle Way (Madhyāmaka Avatāra) (Tib: dBu-ma la ‘jug-pa, Tibetan translation at TD03861, ff. 201b-219a of Vol. 7 [‘A] in the Middle-Way Section [Madhyāmaka, dBu-ma] of the bsTan-‘gyur [sDe-dge edition]).
S11 Nabidharma (Tib: Na-bi dharma), @. Verses for a Brief Description of Negation (Piṇḍa Nivartana Nirdeśa Kārikā) (Tib: Ldog-pa bsdus-pa bstan-pa’i tsig-le’ur byas-pa, Tibetan
301 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
translation at TD4293, ff. 250b-254a of Vol. 3 [She] in the “Study of Sanskrit Language” Section [Śabda, sGra] of the bsTan-‘gyur [sDe-dge edition]).
S12 Nabidharma (Tib: Na-bi dharma), @. A Commentary to the “Brief Description of Negation” (Piṇḍa Nivartana Nirdeśa Vārtika) (Tib: Ldog-pa bsdus-pa bstan-pa’i rnam-‘grel, Tibetan translation at TD4294, ff. 254a-277a of Vol. 3 [She] in the “Study of Sanskrit Language” Section [Śabda, sGra] of the bsTan-‘gyur [sDe-dge edition]).
S13 Āryadeva (Tib: ‘Phags-pa lha), c. @AD. Stanzas entitled “A Classical Commentary in 400 Verses” (Catuḥśataka Śāstra Kārikā Nāma) (Tib: bsTan-bcos bzhi-brgya-pa zhes-bya-ba’i tsig- le’ur byas-pa, Tibetan translation at TD03846, ff. 1b-18a of Vol. 2 [Tsa] in the Middle-Way Section [Madhyāmaka, dBu-ma] of the bsTan-‘gyur [sDe-dge edition]).
S14 Candrakīrti (Tib: Zla-ba grags-pa), c. 650AD. A Clarification of the Verses: A Commentary upon the “Root Text on the Middle Way” (Mūla Madhyāmika Vṛtti Prasanna Pada Nāma) (Tib: dBu-ma rtza-ba’i ‘grel-pa Tsigs-gsal-ba, Tibetan translation at TD03860, ff. 1b-200a of Vol. 7 [‘A] in the Middle-Way Section [Madhyāmaka, dBu-ma] of the bsTan-‘gyur [sDe-dge edition]).
S15 Śākyamuni Buddha (Tib: Sh’akya thub-pa), 500BC. An Exalted Sutra of the Greater Way entitled “The Source of the Jewels” (Ārya Ratnākara Nāma Mahāyāna Sūtra) (Tib: ‘Phags-pa dKon-mchog ‘byung-gnas zhes-bya-ba theg-pa chen-po’i mdo, Tibetan translation at KL00124, ff. 321b-443b of Vol. 8 (Nya) of the Collection of Sutras Section [Sūtra, mDo-mang] of the bKa’-‘gyur [lHa-sa edition]).
S16 Śākyamuni Buddha (Tib: Sh’akya thub-pa), 500BC. The Exalted One, the Lady of Conquest, the Sutra on the Heart of the Perfection of Wisdom (Ārya Bhagavatī Prajñā Pāramitā Hṛdaya) (Tib: 'Phags-pa bCom-ldan-'das-ma shes-rab kyi pha-rol tu phyin-pa'i snying-po, Tibetan translation at KL00021, ff. 259a-261a of Vol. 1 [Ka] in the Other Teachings on the Perfection of Wisdom Section [Vicitra Prajñā Pāramitā*, Sher-phyin sna-tsogs] of the bKa’-’gyur [lHa-sa edition]). Commonly known in English as The Heart Sutra.
S17
302 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
Śākyamuni Buddha (Tib: Sh’akya thub-pa), 500BC. An Exalted Sutra of the Greater Way entitled “The Various Manifestations of the Single Nature of Things, the King of Concentration” (Ārya Sarva Dharma Svabhāva Samatā Vipañcita Samādhi Rāja Nāma Mahāyāna Sūtra) (Tib: ‘Phags-pa Chos thams-cad kyi rang-bzhin mnyam-pa nyid rnam-par spros-pa Ting-nge-’dzin gyi rgyal-po zhes-bya-ba theg-pa chen-po’i mdo), Tibetan translation at KL00127, ff. 1b-269b of Vol. 9 (Ta) of the Collection of Sutras Section [Sūtra, mDo-mang] of the bKa’-’gyur [lHa-sa edition]).
S18 Śākyamuni Buddha (Tib: Sh’akya thub-pa), 500BC. An Exalted Sutra of the Greater Way entitled “Manjushri’s Play” (Ārya Mañjuśrī Vikrīḍita Nāma Mahāyāna Sūtra) (Tib: ‘Phags-pa ‘Jam-dpal rnam-par rol-pa zhes-bya-ba theg-pa chen-po’i mdo, Tibetan translation at KL00096, ff. 352a-391a of Vol. 2 (Kha) of the Collection of Sutras Section [Sūtra, mDo-mang] of the bKa’-‘gyur [lHa-sa edition]).
S19 Śākyamuni Buddha (Tib: Sh’akya thub-pa), 500BC. An Exalted Sutra of the Greater Way Requested by Brahma Vishesha Chinti (Ārya Brahma Viśeṣa Cinti Paripṛcchā Nāma Mahāyāna Sūtra) (Tib: 'Phags-pa Tsangs-pa khyad-par sems kyis zhus-pa zhes-bya-ba theg-pa chen-po'i mdo, Tibetan translation at KL00160, ff. 34b-159a of Vol. 13 (Pa) of the Collection of Sutras Section [Sūtra, mDo-mang] of the bKa’-‘gyur [lHa-sa edition]).
303 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
Bibliography of works originally written in Chinese
C1 叶少勇，作者，《中论颂:梵藏汉合校·导读·译注》（中西书局， 2011）
304 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
Bibliography of works originally written in Tibetan
B1 Co-ne bla-ma Grags-pa bshad-sgrub (1675-1748). A Ship for Entering the “Sea of Reasoning, an Explanation of ‘Wisdom,’ the Root Text on the Middle Way.” (dBu-ma rtza-ba shes-rab kyi rnam-bshad Rigs-pa'i rgya-mtsor 'jug-pa‘i gru-gzings, ACIP digital text S00028), 108ff.
B2 rJe Tzong-kha-pa Blo-bzang grags-pa (1357-1419). The Sea of Reasoning, and Explanation of “Wisdom,” the Root Text on the Middle Way, Set in Verse (dBu-ma rtza-ba'i tsig-le'ur byas-pa Shes-rab ces-bya-ba'i rnam-bshad Rigs-pa'i rgya-mtso, ACIP digital text S05401), 280ff.
B3 mKhas-grub bstan-pa dar-rgyas (1493-1568). A String of Lotus Blooms of Purest White: A Dialectic Analysis of that Classical Commentary, the “Jewel of Realizations,” along with its Traditional Explication (bsTan-bcos mNgon-par rtogs-pa'i rgyan 'grel-pa dang bcas-pa'i mTha'- dpyod legs-par bshad-pa pad-ma dkar-po'i 'phreng-ba, ACIP digital text S00001), in eight volumes: Chapter 1, part 1 (S00001-1, 77ff.); Chapter 1, part 2 (S00001-2, 54ff.); Chapter 1, part 3 (S00001-3, 56ff.); Chapter 2 (S00001-4, 55ff.); Chapter 3 (S00001-5, 20ff.); Chapter 4 (S00001-6, 68ff.); Chapters 5-7 (S00001-7, 25ff.); and Chapter 8 (S00001-8, 27ff.).
B4 rJe Tzong-kha-pa Blo-bzang grags-pa (1357-1419). The Illumination of the True Thought, an Explanation of the Magnificent Classical Commentary entitled “Entering the Middle Way” (bsTan-bcos chen-po dBu-ma la ‘jug-pa’i rnam-bshad dGongs-pa rab-gsal, ACIP S05408), 219ff.
B5 rJe Tzong-kha-pa Blo-bzang grags-pa (1357-1419). The Essence of Eloquence: A Classical Commentary on the Art of Interpreting What Is Figurative, and What Is Literal (Drang-ba dang nges-pa'i don rnam-par 'byed-pa'i bstan-bcos Legs-bshad snying-po, ACIP S05396), 114 ff.
B6
305 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
sKyabs-rje Khri-byang rin-po-che Blo-bzang ye-shes bstan-‘dzin rgya-mtso (1901-1981). A Narrative Outline of the Medium-Length Version of the Steps of the Path to Enlightenment to be Followed by Persons of the Three Different Scopes, with Appended Material (sKyes-bu gsum gyis nyams-su blang-ba'i byang-chub lam gyi rim-pa 'bring-po sa-bcad kha-skong dang bcas-pa Lam-rim 'bring gi sa-bcad, ACIP S00271), 264ff.
306 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
Bibliography of works originally written in English
307 A Ship on the Sea of Emptiness The Wisdom of Nagarjuna
Note: match these later sections already mentioned in commentary:
{RAB BYED BCO LNGA PAR, ,RANG BZHIN DAG NI BCOS MIN DANG, ,GZHAN LA BLTOS PA MED PA YIN, ,ZHES ,DANG,
As the 15th chapter of Wisdom itself puts it,
These natures would have to be things That could never be created, And never relied upon something else.
,RANG BZHIN GZHAN DU 'GYUR BA NI, ,NAM YANG 'THAD PA MA YIN NO,, ZHES GSUNGS PA LTAR RO,,
And from the same chapter:
The transformation of a nature Into something else Could never be correct.}
308