Buddhist Studies Review 23(1) 2006, 71–92 ISSN (print): 0256-2897 ISSN (online): 1747-9681 Two Concepts of Meditation and Three Kinds of Wisdom in Kamalaśīla’s Bhāvanākramas: A Problem of Translation MARTIN T. ADAM Religious Studies Program, Department of Pacifi c and Asian Studies, University of Victoria, British Colombia, Canada
[email protected] ABSTRACT: A close reading of the three Bhāvanākramaḥ texts, written by Kamalaśīla (740–795 CE), reveals that their author was aware of two competing concepts of medi- tation prevalent in Tibet at the time of their composition. The two concepts of medi- tation, associated with the Sanskrit words bhāvanā and dhyāna, can be related respec- tively to the Indian and Chinese sides of the well-known debates at bSam yas. The account of the Mahāyāna path outlined in these texts implies an acceptance of the precedence of bhāvanā over dhyāna. In this paper I argue that Kamalaśīla advocated bhāvanā – a conception of meditation which encompasses non-conceptual dhyāna, but which also includes a discernment of reality (bhūta-pratyavekṣā) that is conceptual in nature. Such conceptual discernment should not be understood simply as a process of ordinary rational understanding (cintāmayī prajñā) but rather as constituting a special kind of meditative wisdom (bhāvanāmayī prajñā). A failure to recognize the subtle dif- ferences between Kamalaśīla’s employment of the terms dhyāna and bhāvanā, along with his advocacy of the latter, could easily lead to mistranslation and, with this, a basic misunderstanding of his position. In particular, it could lead to a conception of insight (vipaśyanā) that is overly intellectual in nature.