Middle Way Review Class with Jampa Gendun – January 18 – 21, 2000
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
SUPPLEMENT TO THE ‘MIDDLE WAY’ (Madhyamakavatara) TRANSCRIPTS OF REVIEW CLASSES WITH JAMPA GEDUN January 2000 – May 2001 FPMT MASTERS PROGRAM MATERIAL © Jampa Gedun & FPMT, Inc. All rights reserved No part of this work may be reproduced in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, or by any information storage and retrieval system or technologies now known or later developed, without permission in writing from Jampa Gedun & FPMT, Inc. Masters Program: Middle Way Review Class with Jampa Gendun – January 18 – 21, 2000 Review Class with Jampa Gendun January 18 (Tuesday) Motivation for our studies of the Middle Way Without the wisdom realizing emptiness we will never be free from suffering. Kensur Yeshey Tupden (in Path to the Middle) says that to the degree we understand that the referent object of our conception of true existence does not exist, there will result a commensurate diminishment of our suffering. And not only will we understand but we can then impart this wisdom to others. We should be observing this precious opportunity to study Madhyamika with this motivation. Resources We have several resources for this text: A translation by George Churinoff of Chandrakirti’s root text, Supplement to the Middle Way (we will refer to this as Supplement), along with the autocommentary, ‘Explanation of the Supplement to the Middle Way’ (we will refer to this as Autocommentary) A translation by Jeffrey Hopkins of the first five chapters of Lama Tsongkhapa’s commentary, Illumination of the Thought (we will refer to this as Illumination) The transcripts of Geshe-la’s current teachings The transcripts of Geshe-la’s teachings on Supplement ten years ago A translation by Martin Wilson of The Mirror of the Clarification of the Thought, another commentary on Chandrakirti’s Supplement, written by the first Dalai Lama Reviewing the handout: Middle Way – Madhyamika – Studies Background Madhyamika has gone through many different changes in how it has been viewed in the West. At times it was viewed as nihilism, as though nothing existed. At other times it was taken as setting out an absolute ground, like a god. There have also been linguistic views of Madhyamika, equating Nagarjuna with Wittgenstein, who had a great concern with language. Soteriology is the idea that there is a purpose behind the doctrine presented, for Buddhism, namely nirvana, liberation from suffering. All the teachings of Shantideva and Nagarjuna were done for a soteriological purpose – they are not simply a philosophical venture. The purpose of Madhyamika study is to overcome ignorance and thereby free ourselves from suffering and help others to do the same. Chronology & key figures For additional biographical information please refer to the introduction to Robert Thurman’s The Central Philosophy of Tibet (originally published as Speech of Gold) and Jeffrey Hopkins’ Meditation on Emptiness (pp. 353-364). Shakyamuni Buddha – Many of the Buddhist dates are given in reference to the nirvana of Buddha so the chronology uses those dates (A.N. = after nirvana). Nagarjuna – Nagarjuna was prophesied twice by Shakyamuni, once saying that there would be a monk named Naga who would appear 400 years after his death and, secondly, there is a similar reference in the Descent into Lanka Sutra. Nagarjuna’s name comes from two words, naga and Arjuna. Nagas are dragons that have their abode in the ocean and have treasures such as wish-granting jewels and so on (the hooded snakes that often appear in images of Nagarjuna are nagas). Arjuna is a character from Hindu mythology who protected the kingdom and tamed his enemies. Nagarjuna could be translated then as “one who has achieved his goal with the aid of the dragons.” Nagas appeared to Nagarjuna and took him to their land to reveal the Perfection of Wisdom teachings to him. Nagarjuna was completely devoted to Shakyamuni Buddha and his teachings and merely wanted to propagate the Perfection of Wisdom teachings that were in danger of being lost. Among the texts he wrote is Treatise for the Middle Way, also known as Fundamental Treatise on the Middle Way, Called Wisdom (we will refer to this as Fundamental Wisdom). Fundamental Wisdom is tsa wa she rap (rtsa ba shes rab) in Tibetan; tsa wa means “root or fundamental” while she rap means “wisdom.” Some say that Nagarjuna lived for 600 years and that he was a great alchemist, and thereby able to transmute substances into the means to live forever. He kept a local king alive using the 1 Masters Program: Middle Way Review Class with Jampa Gendun – January 18 – 21, 2000 same substances but the king’s son, wanting to succeed his father, became somewhat impatient with his father not dying and asked Nagarjuna for his head. Previously Nagarjuna had gone out to get some kusha grass and was not mindful and stepped on a bug, thus creating the karma to be killed. So, he handed the prince a blade of kusha grass and with it, the prince cut off Nagarjuna’s head. There are predictions that his body and head will be rejoined someday. Aryadeva – He was the chief disciple of Nagarjuna. Geshe-la related the story of Aryadeva in class today. Thurman’s text relates other parts of this story. Aryadeva and Nagarjuna are called Model Madhyamikas since everything they say can be taken as being from an authority on the subject. Asanga – Asanga was the charioteer or founder of the Mind-Only system. Buddhapalita – Some actually call Buddhapalita the founder of the Prasangika-Madhyamika. He wrote a commentary on Fundamental Wisdom called Buddhapalita’s Commentary on (Nargarjuna’s) ‘Treatise on the Middle Way’ in which he used many consequences in clarify the Madhyamika. Bhavaviveka – Bhavaviveka in his Lamp for (Nagarjuna’s) Wisdom’, Commentary ‘Treatise on the Middle Way’ refuted Buddhapalita while trying to comment on Nagarjuna’s Fundamental Wisdom, using autonomous syllogisms extensively in his text. He insisted that, although phenomena do not truly exist, they do exist by way of their own character. From the point of view of Prasangika, this was fallacious and not a point to be taken lightly, since liberation was at stake. Bhavaviveka became the founder of the Svatantrika- Madhyamika. Chandrakirti – Chandrakirti rejected Bhavaviveka’s position and wrote his Supplement to the Middle Way (in Tibetan, dbu ma la ‘jug pa), saying that Buddhapalita in fact got it right and had interpreted Fundamental Wisdom correctly. How Chandrakirti refuted Bhavaviveka is explained on p.2 of the handout, primarily involving the assertion that using autonomous syllogisms is incorrect and only consequences are correct for generating an inferential understanding of emptiness. This is why Geshe-la and others call Chandrakirti the founder of the Prasangika-Madhyamika. He is called a Partisan Prasangika because he commented on the Madhyamika in a way as to differentiate views his position from Mind-Only and Svatantrika interpretations of Madhyamika. Shantarakshita – He is the founder of the Yogachara-Svatantrika while Buddhapalita was considered the founder of the Sautrantika-Svatantrika sub-school. Lama Tsongkhapa – He composed Illumination of the Thought. Jedzun Chogyi Gyeltshen – He was the author of the textbooks of the Sera Je Monastery and composed a commentary clarifying the difficult points of Lama Tsongkhapa’s text. Model vs. Partisan Prasangikas For clarification of the distinctions of these terms, see pp. 431-432 of Meditation on Emptiness. Texts which are the basis for study Chandrakirti wrote the Supplement, his commentary on Fundamental Wisdom, in verse and then wrote the Autocommentary in prose to comment on his text. Fundamental Wisdom mainly set out the profound, that is, the view of emptiness. Chandrakirti supplements this from the point of view of the profound by differentiating the Madhyamika view of Nagarjuna from the Mind-Only and the Svatantrika interpretation and from the point of view of the vast, the bodhisattva practices, by setting out the stages of path, grounds, and results. January 19 (Wednesday) Concerning tenets The Buddha did not teach tenets but rather taught people according to their needs and dispositions – it was only much later that the schools of thought systematized, given various names and classifications. The four tenet systems of Great Exposition, Sutra, Mind-Only and Middle Way represent a gradation of teachings, with the view of Prasangika (within the Middle Way) as the final thought of the Buddha. Consequences vs. autonomous syllogisms The issue regarding using consequences as opposed to autonomous syllogisms will come into play in the sixth chapter. Buddhapalita commented on Fundamental Wisdom using a great number of consequences primarily to refute the Samkhya position. He himself did not use the name Prasangika (meaning “consequence”) to define 2 Masters Program: Middle Way Review Class with Jampa Gendun – January 18 – 21, 2000 his view since he was simply elaborating on the Madhyamika view that he held. In refuting Buddhapalita, Bhavaviveka wrote the Lamp of Wisdom, making extensive use of autonomous syllogisms, from where his school of thought derives its name Svatantrika (meaning “autonomy”). The idea of an autonomous syllogism presupposes inherent existence – the Autonomy School holds that all three elements of a syllogism (subject, predicate and sign) inherently exist. Prasangika holds that they do not inherently exist. Chandrakirti defended the views of Buddhapalita as the reflecting the true intent of Nagarjuna and therefore of the Buddha through writing the Supplement. The dispute between these two systems of thought involved the method for developing an inferential realization of emptiness and this disagreement on whether to use consequences or autonomous syllogisms is what gave these two Madhyamika sub-schools their names. Reviewing Illumination of the Thought Introduction After Lama Tsongkhapa’s homage to the key figures we’ve discussed, the actual text begins. There are four parts to Illumination, beginning with the meaning of the title.