Reason as the Prime Principle in Tsang kha pa's Delineation of Deity Yoga as the Demarcation Between Sutra and Tantra
In the first of fourteen sections in his Great Exposition ,f Secret Mantra (sNgags rim chen mo),1 Tsong kha pa (1357-14 I 9), founder of the dGe lugs pa, Virtuous or Joyous Way, sect of Tibetan Buddhism, presents his view on the difference be tween sutra and tantra in Buddhism. The section is a long, involved argument in which, although Indian sources arc cited, the central appeal is to reasoning. Typical of much of his writ ing, the argument is so involved and the principles behind the steps in the presentation so taken for granted that an introduf tion which presents the same material in a more straightfor ward manner is needed. I have attempted to provide this in Tantra in Tibet, which is centered around translation of Tsong kha pa's first section, through translating and editing an oral commentary by His Holiness the Dalai Lama XIV.:1
oral commentary, and thus the Dalai Lama's explanation provides a more free-flowing introducion to this complex argument. It is the type of introduction that a well-versed Tibetan scholar will give to a student before launching into a topic; it smoothes the way, and thus is invaluable for a beginner. The simplified ver sion, however, is not meant to replace the twists and turns of Tsong kha pa's argument; rather, one is encouraged to become acquainted with the system to the point where the implicit prin ciples are explicit to the mind of the reader of Tsong kha pa's text. This seems to be the Dalai Lama's point when, during
95
96 J JABS VOL. 7 NO. 2
public lectures, he has encouraged dGe lugs pas not to forsake Tsong kha pa's writings for later simplified presentations. In much the same spirit, it is germane to simplify Tsong kha pa's and the Dalai Lama's arguments even further for the sake of get.ting a firm grip on the broad structure of the myriad points being made. I read the argument as follows (page num bers in parentheses refer to Tantra in Tibet):
Because people are of different capacities, dispositions, and interests, Sakyamuni Buddha taught many different paths. He set forth sutra and tantra; within sutra, he taught four different schools of tenets-Great Exposition School (Vaibha ika), Sutra School (Sautrantrika), Mind Only School (Cittamatra), and Middle Way School (Ma dhyamika)-and within tantra, he set out four different sets of antra-Action (Kriyii), Performance (Caryrl), Yoga, and Highest Yoga (Anuttarayuga, litcralJy "Unsurpassed Yoga").
Within the four schools of the sutra syste111, he de scribed three varieties of paths-for Hearers (Sravaka), Solitary Realizers (Pratyekabuddha), and Bodhisattvas. Each of the four schools has internal sub-divisions, and the four divisions of tantra also contain many different types of processes and procedures of meditation. The result is that there are many different levels of commitment-rang ing from the assumption of tantric vows down to the as sumption of only the refuge vow-many different paths and many different styles. (pp. 20-2 l) In determining the difference between sutra and tan tra, first it is necessary to settle the difference between the vehicles in sutra-the Hearers' Vehicle (Sravakayana), Soli tary Realizers' Vehicle (Pratyekabuddhayana), and Bodhi sattvas' Vehicle (Bodh(r;attvayiina) or Great Vehicle (Ma-. hayana)-and then consider the further division of the latter into its sutra and tantra forms. "Vehicle" (yana) has two meanings:
, l Since ya means to go, and na indicates the means of going, '. a vehicle is comprised of those practices which carry one to a higher state-those practices which, when actualized in the mental continuum, cause manifestation of a higher type of mind.
2 Somewhat unusually, "vehicle" can also refer to the desti nation-that place or state at which one is aiming. This is because just as a vehicle can bear or carry a certain load, so
the state of Buddhahood-the goal of the Bodhisattva Ve hicle--can bear or carry the welfare of all sentient beings, whereas the state of a Hinayana Foe Destroyer (Arhan)4 can bear much less. (p. 43)5
Since "vehicle" has these two meanings, the difference between the two Buddhist Vehicles--Hearer and Solitary Realizer (being Hinayana) n1 Bodhisattva (or_ Ma hayana)-must occur either withm the sense of vehicle as the means by which one progresses or within the sense of vehicle as the destination or state to which one is progress ing, or both.
In the Prasarigika-Madhyamika interpretation of Hin ayana and Mahayana (as delineated by Tsong kha pa), there is a tremendous difference between the two in the sense of vehicle as that to which one is progressing. In Hinayana, practice culminates as a Foe Destroyer, one who has overcome the foe of ignorance but is not omniscient and thus is not a Buddha. Unlike a Buddha, a Foe Destroy er does not have the ability spontaneously to manifest m various forms in order to help all beings. Smee the states of being a Buddha and a Foe Destroyer are very different, there is a significant difference between Hinayana and Ma hayana in the sense of vehicle as that to which one is pr,o gressing-the goal-Buddhahood and Arhanship.
With this difference in goal, there must also be a dif ference in the two vehicles in the sense of the practices by which one progresses to these goals. The difference be tween Hinayana and Mahayana in terms of the means of progress can occur in only two places-method and wis aom, these two comprising the entire path in that method mainly produces the Form Body (Rupakiiya) of a Buddha and wisdom mainly produces the Truth Body (Dharma kaya) (p. 57). In the Prasarigika-Madhyamika interpreta tion, Hinayana and Mahayana do not differ with respect to wisdom, in that both require realization of the subtle emp tiness of inherent existence of all phenomena such as body, mind, head, eye, wall, consciousness, etc. (pp. 38-41, 98- 9). Although Hinayana and Mahayana do differ in terms of how wisaom is cultivated-how many reasonings one uses for getting at the subtle emptiness, Bodhisattvas using myriad reasonmgs and Hinayanists only a few6-in terms of the object of the wisdom consciousness, the subtle emp tiness of mherent existence, there is no difference between the emptiness a Hinayanist realizes and the emptiness a Mahayanist realizes. In this sense, there is no difference in wisdom.
Y8 JIABS VOL. 7 NO. 2
Since wisdom in Hinayana and Mahayana do not dif fer in terms of the type of emptiness being cognized, the difference between the two vehicles must lie in method (p. 55). "Method" here specifically means motivation and the deeds that it impels. No matter how much compassion a Hinayanist may have, his or her primary motivation is to release him or her self from cyclic existence (sarpara). However, in Mahayana the primary motivation is the altru istic aspiration to highest enlightenment (bodhicitta), in duced by great love and compassion, in which one takes on the burden of the welfare of all beings. Thus, there is a significant difference between Hinayana and Mahayana in terms of method, even though not m wisdom. (pp. 98-9)
Hence, Hinayana and Mahayana differ in both senses of vehicle, as the means by which one progresses as well as that to which one progresses.
In the Mahayana itself, there are two vehicles-the Perfection Vehicle (Paramitayana) and the Mantra or Tan tra Vehicle (Mantrayiina, Tantrayiina).7 The Perfection Ve hicle is siitra Mahayana, and the Mantra Vehicle is mantra or tantra Mahayana.
Do sutra Mahayana and tantra Mahayana differ in the sense of vehicle as that to which one is progressing? The goal of sutra Mahayana is Buddhahood, ana Tantrayana cannot have another goal separate from Buddhahood, as there is no attainment higher than the Buddhahood ex plained in siitra as attainment of the Truth and Form Bo aies. Siitra describes a Buddha as a being who has removed all obstructions and attained all auspicious attributes, a be ing who has no movement of coarse winds (pra ia, inner energies);8 thus, such Buddhahood has to include the at tainments of even Highest Yoga Mantra (Anuttarayogaman tra), the primary aim of which is to stop the movement of all coarse winds and man ifest the most subtle conscious ness-the mind of clear light-simultaneously appearing in totally pure formY Hence, the Vajradharahood often mentioned as the goal of tantra and the Buddhahood de scribed in siHra are the same. (pp. 55, 139-42)
There being no difference between the Perfection Ve hicle and Mantra Vehicle in terms of the goal-the destina tion-they must differ in the sense of vehicle as the means by which one progresses. They must differ either in terms of method, or wisdom, or both. If the difference lay in wisdom, there would be many problems, because the Per fection Vehicle contains Nagarjuna's Madhyamika teach ings on emptiness, and there would have to be some other
more subtle emptiness than that which Nagarjuna estab lishes with many different arguments in the twenty-seven chapters of his Treatise on the Middle Way (Madhyamaldas tra),10 whereas there is none. Thus, there is no difference between sutra and tantra in the view, which here refers to the objective view, that is, the o ject that is viewed (Tib. yul {!,'Yi lta ba)-emptiness or ultimate truth-not the realizmg .msciousness, since sOtra Mahayana and Highest Yoga Tantra do differ with respect to the subtlety of the con sciousness realizing emfltiness. Specifically, in Highest Yoga Tantra, more subt e, enhanced consciousnesses are generated to realize the same emptiness of inherent exis tence. Still, because the oqject realized is the same whether the consciousness is more subtle or not, the "objective view" is the same. (pp. 55- 7,110)
In this way, between the sOtra and tantra Mahayanas there cannot be any difference in the factor of wisdom in terms of the o ject that is understood by a wisdom con sciousness. Hence, the d!_!Ieren e again has to lie in method. In both the sOtra and tantra Mahayanas, the basis of method is the altruistic intention to become enlightened for the sake of all sentient beings (bodhicitta); because of this, the motivational basis of the deeds of the path is the same. The other main factor of method has to do with the deeds induced by that method, which in sutra Mahayana are the practices induced by this altruistic aspiration-the perfections of giving, ethics, and patience. However, since these are also practiced in tantra, the difference cannot be found there, either. Furthermore, tantra has an even greater emphasis than sutra on the deeds of the perfec tions, in that a tantric practitioner is committed to engage
in them at least six times during each day. (pp. 57-8)
Moreover, the distinction could not be made on the basis of speed of progress on the path, because within the four tantra sets-Action, Performance, Yoga, and Highest Yoga Tantra-there are great differences m speed, and in sOtra Mahayana there are five different modes of progress, slow to fast. In addition, the difference must not lie in some small or insignificant feature, but in an important one. (pp 58, l 00-1)
The profound difference occurs in the fact that in tantra there is meditation in· which one meditates on one's bog_y_ as si iiar in aspe_ct t9 Buddha's Form Body, where- as Ln sutra ahayana there is no such meditaticm. This is deity-yoga·iTib. lha'i rnal 'byor), w ich all four tantr sets have, but sutra systems do not. Deity yoga means to 1mag-
ine oneself as having the Form Body of a Buddha now; one meditates on oneself in the aspect of a Buddha's Form Body. (pp. 61-5,115-16) In the Perfection Vehicle, there is meditation similar in aspect to a Buddha's Truth Body-a Buddha's wisdom consciousness. A Bodhisattva enters into meditative equi poise directly realizing emptiness with nothing appearing to the mind except the final nature of phenomena, the emptiness of inherent existence; the wisdom consciousness is fused with that emptiness. Even though, unlike his tan tric counterpart, a sfltra Bodhisattva does not specifically imagine that the state of meditative equipoise is a Buddha's Truth Body, 11 meditation similar in aspect to a Buddha's Truth Body does occur in the sfltra system in the sense that the state of meditative equipoise on emptiness mimics a Buddha's exalted wisdom consciousness in its aspect of perceiving the ultimate. However, the siitra Perfection Ve hicle does not involve meditation similar in aspect to a Buddha's Form Bodr. There is meditation on Buddhas and so forth as objects of offering, etc., but there is no medita tion on oneself in the physical body of a Buddha. (pp. 60, 62, 115)
Such meditative cultivation of a divine body is includ ed within the factor of method because it is mainly aimed at achieving a Buddha's Form Body. In the siitra system, the sole means for achieving a Buddha's Form Body is, on the basis of the altruistic intention to become enlightened, to engage in the first three perfections--giving, ethics, and patience-in limitless ways over a limitless period of time. Though the Mantra Vehicle also involves practice of the perfections of giving, ethics, and patience, it is not in limit less ways over limitfess periods of time. Despite emphasis on the perfections, practice in limitless ways over limitless time is unnecessary, because one is engagmg in the addi tional technique of meditation on oneself ma body similar in aspect to a Buddha's Form Body. 12 In other words, in the tantric systems one meditates on oneself as similar in aspect to a Buddha in terms of both body and mind in order to become a Buddha. This practice is significantly different, and thus those systems which involve it consti tute a separate vehicle, tantra Mahayana.
In deity yoga, one first meditates on emptiness and then uses that consciousness realizing emptiness--or at least an imitation of it-as thebasis of emanation of a Bud dha. The wisdom consciousness itself appears as the phys ical form of a Buddha. This one consciousness thus has two parts-a factor of wisdom and a factor of method, or fac-
tors of ( l) ascertainment of emptiness and (2) appearance as an ideal being-and hence, through the practice of deity yoga, one simultaneously accumulates the collections of mer it and wisdom, making their amassing much faster. (pp. 62-3)
The systems that have this practice are called the Vajra Vehicle, because the appearance of a deity is the display of a consciousness which is a fusion of wisdom understanding emptiness and compassion seeking the welfare of others anmseparable union symbolized 1:iy a vajra, a diamond, the foremost of stones, as it is "unbreakable" (pp. 22-3, 51, 107-8). Since the two elements of the fusion-compassion ate method and penetrating wisdom-are the very core of the Perfection Vehicle, one can understand that sutra and tantra, despite being different, are integrated systems. One can understand that compassion is not superseded by, but essential to, tantra, and that the wisdom of the Perfection Vehicle is not forsaken for a deeper understanding of re ality in the Tantra Vehicle.
To summarize: the difference between the vehicles must lie in the sense of vehicle as that by which one pro gresses or that t which one prog ess s. Hinayana differs from Mahayana m both. The destmauon of the lower one is the state of a Hearer or Solitary Realizer Foe Destroyer- · and of the higher one, Buddhahood. Concerning "vehicle" in the sense of means by which one progresses, although there is no difference in the wisdom realizing the subtlest nature of phenomena, there is a difference m method Hinayana not having and Mahayana having the altruistic mind of enlightenment (that is, the altruistic intention to become enlightened) and its attendant deeds. Sutra and tantra Mahayana do not differ in terms of the goal, the state being sought, since both seek the highest enlightenment of a Buddha, but there is a difference in the means of progress, again not in wisdom but .in metb_Qd...:
Within method thq..Q .f.f,gJ1ot in the basis or motivation of the deeds, the altruistic mtention to become enlightened, nor in h ving t e eerfections as ee_ds, but in .! .e - d i!:.io_ al techmqtJe of ck1ty _yoga. A deny IS a supfamunaane mg"'Whommself or herself is a manifestation of compassion and wisdom. Thus, in the special practice of deity yoga one joins one's own body, speech, mind, and activities with the exalted body, speech, mind, and activities of a supramun dane being, manifesting on the path a similitude of the state of the effect.
The appeal throughout this presentation is to reason; never-
theless Tsong kha pa also cites supportive Indian sources. For instance, in establishing that according to the Prasangika-Mad hyamika system even those who are f:linayanists b}:'. path-that
is to say, Hearers and Solitary Realizers (as opposed to Hinayanist 9y tenet, the Vaibha ikas and Sautrantikas) 1 : _ must realize the m(ls"i.subtle emptiness, he presents an abridged version of his own extensive argument on this in his commen tary to Candrakirti's Supplement to (Niigiirjuna's) "Treatise on the Middle Way" (Miidhyamakiivatiira), citing Candrakirti's Supple ment (p. 94), Nagarjuna's Precious Garland (Ratnavalz) (p. 94), Nagar:juna's Treatise on the Middle Way (Madhyamaka..iistra) (pp. 95 and 96), Prai,;e of the Non-Conceptual ([?]Nirvikalpastava) (p. 95 ), two Perfection of Wisdom Siitras (pp. 95-96), and a Hinayana sutra (p. 96). (That the Prasangika-Madhyamika view on the emptiness of inherent existence (svabhava-siddhi) is need ed in order to become a Foe Destroyer is extremely controver sial, as it means that no follower of Vaibha ika, Sautrantika, Cittamatra, or even Svatantrika can complete the Hinayana path and become a Foe Destroyer by means of any of those paths alone.)11
Considering counter-arguments, Tsong kha pa makes ref erence (pp. 96-97) to presentations in both Hinayana and Ma hayana texts that propound the opposite, i.e., that to get out of cyclic existence (sa1{l,siira, 'khor ba) it is sufficient to have the fully developed wisdom that understands that the person is not sub stantially existent, a coarser type of selflessness (pp. 179-81). Again, the conflict is settled by reasoning through differentiat ing what is definitive (nitiirtha, nges don) and what is interpret able (nryiirtha, drang don). This not being a main su ject of the Great Exposition of Secret Mantra, the author leaves the matter with a brief admonition to learn how to make such hermeneuti cal distinctions-implicitly indicating the benefit of studying his Essence rf the Good Explanation · (Legs bshad snying po), where the dotninant argument is that scriptural r _f en,c:e } not suffi c _nt, 2-! !:C a supporting scripture .-wo ld require another, which, in t-uri1, would require ~another;-·iul infinitum, and.-thus
e. s2 ing is necessary. The working principles revolve around showing that the . onception of inherent existence is the root of cyclic existence and that some trainees are temporarily incapa ble of receiving teaching on such a subtle topic. The interpreta
tion of the opposing scriptures is made (I) on the basis of the ontological fact, determined by reasoning, that the emptiness of inherent existence is the final mode of subsistence of phe nomena and (2) in the context of the existential situation of the epistemological needs of the trainees to whom the doctrines were taught. Tsong kha pa resolves other seeming contradictions by tak ing into account the frame of reference of a remark. For in stance, Kulika Pm:iqarika's (Rigs ldan Pad ma dkar po) com mentary on the Kalacakra Tantra, called the Stainless Light (Vimiilaprabhii), explains the term "vajra" in "Vajra Vehicle" (Vajrayana) in the context of the Kalacakra Tantra, a Highest Yoga Tantra, in such a way that the meaning applies only to that class of tantra and not to all four classes. Tsong kha pa comments (pp. 107-8):
The meaning of "V jra Vehicle" is given through taking "V jra" as an indivisibility of the effect-the Mantra mode-and the cause-the Perfection mode. Here, "cause and effect" refer to totally supreme emptiness and su preme immutable bliss. The Brif:f Explication of lnitiatiahs (Sekhoddesa) [included in the Kalacakra cycle] says:
That bearing the fr>rm of emptiness is the cause, T'hat bearing immutable compassion is the effect. Emptiness and compassion indivisible Are called the mind of enlightenment.
The indivisibility of these two is a Cause Vehicle in the sense of being the means by which one progresses, and it is an Effect Vehicle in the sense of being that to which one is progressing. Such a V jra Vehicle has reference to Highest Yoga Tantra and cannot occur in the lower tantras. For the supreme immutable bliss can only arise when one has at tained the branch of meditative stabilization [in the system of the Kalacakra] and thus the branches of mindfulness and those below must be the means of achieving it. The three lower tantras do not have all the factors that are included in these causal branches. Therefore, this interpretation of "V jra Vehicle" bears little relation to its general meaning, and the same applies to that of the mean mg of the Vehicles of Cause and Effect. [Or, more literally: Therefore, (this interpretation)
is too narrow here in the context of identifying the general meaning of the V jra Vehicle, and positing the meaning of the Vehicles of Cause and Effect through that mode (of interrretation) is also too narrow in a general presenta tion. Here the meaning of "Vajra Vehicle" should be tak en in accordance with what is said in Ratnakarasanti's Han4ful of J:lowers, Expla!iation of . he.Guhyasamaja. Tantra (KusumtiiiJaliguhyasama1ambandha): With regard to its be ing called the V jra Vehicle, those which included all the Mahayana are the six perfections. Those that include them are method and wisdom; that. which include them as one taste is the mind of enlightenment. That is the Vajrasattva. meditative stabilization; just this is a vajra. Because it is both a vajra and a vehicle, it is the Vajra Vehicle, the Man tra Vehicle." Thus, the V jrasattva yoga that indivisibly unites method and wisdom is the Vajra Vehicle. It occurs at the time of both the path and the fruit.
Tsong kha pa explains that since the three lower tantras do not have the paths necessary for the generation of a fusion of total ly supreme emptiness (here referring to a form empty or de void of material particles) and supreme immutable bliss ("im mutable" here referring to non-emission), this interpretation, in the Kalacakra mode, of "Vajra Vehicle" is too narrow (khyab chung ba). He adds that interpreting "Vehicles of Cause and Effect" in this way is also too narrow for a general presentation. Rather, the general meaning of "Vajra Vehicle" must apply to all four classes of tantra, not just Highest Yoga. As explained above, he indicates that this is an indivisible union of method and wisdom.
In his The Buddhist Tantras, Prof. Alex Wayman condenses Tsong kha pa's presentation to the point where he mistakenly makes it seem that for Tsong kha pa the passages from the Stainless Light and the Brief Explication of Initiations present a properly formulated demarcation between the Perfection and Mantra Vehicles in general. Wayman says: iri
According to passages cited by Ts011-kha-pa in the intro ductory section of his work on the stages of Tantra called S ap rim chen mo,. the Mahayana (Great Vehicle) ha two d1v1s10ns-the pr Jfla param1ta method (that part of Ma hayana which 1s not tantric) and the mantra method (the stnctly tantric part of the Mahayana). In his quotation (fo-
lio l 2b-4) from the (Kalacakra work) Vimalaprabhii, these two wings of the Mahayana are termed "cause" and "ef fect". But also the Diamond Vehicle (Vajrayana)-so called because the diamond is unsplittable and unbrcakable--can be considered the Vehicle that incorporates both the praj niipiiramitii side (the "cause') and the mantra side (the "ef fect"). Therefore, the vehicle of the Bodhisattvas (who are the Mahayana saints) has two degrees, first the perfection of insight (prajitiipiiramitii) and tnen the practice of man tras, imtiauon in the ma1J,/,ala, etc. ... Tson kha pa intro duces fur her terminology (folio l 2b-6) with a passage from the Sekhoddesa':
Holding the form of the void is the cause; The fruit is the adherence to incessant compassion. The indissoluble union of voidness (Junyatii) and com passion (karu1},ii) is called "mind of enlightenment" (bod hicitta).
At l 7a-1, hequotes the Tantra called the Vajrapanjarii ...
Wayman seems to be taking the position of Kulika Pur:ic;iarika's Stainless Light (Vimalaprabhii) and the Brief Explication ol Initi ations (Sekhoddesa), which Tsong kha pa rejects as bei g too
narrow, as being Tsong kha pa's own accepted version of the meaning of "Vajra Vehicle" in general. Hi By citing those two texts and then the Vajrapanjara Tantra as if they are in accord, one misses the movement of Tsong kha pa's critical analysis of the flaws of accepting the first two as applying to a general treatment of the Perfection and Mantra Vehicles and then ex plication of an appropriate opinion. Tsong kha pa is making the point that the type of union of method and wisdom de scribed in those texts applies only to Highest Yoga Tantra and that a meaning of "Vajrayana" applicable to all four tantras must be found elsewhere. Prof. Herbert Guenther cites the same passage in a chapter on "Paramitayana and Mantrayana" in his Tibetan Buddhism Without Mystification:17
... Vajrayana is the indivisibility of cause or Paramita method and effect or Mantra method.-According to the dBang mdor bstan:
Awareness of no-thing-ness is the cause; To feel unchanging bliss is the effect. The indivisibility of no-thing-ness And bliss is known as the enlightenment of mind.
Here the indivisibility of awareness which directly in tuits no-thing-ness and the unchanging, supreme bhss is conceived as consisting of the two phenomena of goal-ap proach and goal attainment. Such an interpretation of Vaj rayana, however, applies to the Anuttarayogatantras, not to the three lower tantras, because, if this unchanging, su preme bliss has to be effected by meditative practices pre ceding and including inspection, since it settles after the bliss-no-thing-ness concentration has been realized, these causal factors are not present in their entirety in the lower tantras. Therefore, while this is correct for the general idea of Vajrayana, it is not so for the distinction in a causal situauon course or in one anticipating the goal.
The last sentence (des na 'dir rdo rje theg pa spyi'i don ngos 'dz.in pa'i skabs su khyab chungs pa yin la tshul des rgyu 'bras kyi theg pa'i don
)og pa yang spyi'i rnam bzhag la ma khyab pa yin no)18 literally reads, 'Therefore, (this interpretation] is too narrow here on the occasion of identifying the general meaning of the Vajra Vehicle, and positing the meaning of the Vehicles of Cause and Effect through that mode [of interpretation] is also too narrow in a general presentation." Guenther, however, has Tsong kha pa saying that this interpretation is "correct for the general idea of Vajrayana," thereby contradicting his own explanation in the previous sentence that the interpretation of Vajra Vehicle ac cording to the Stainless Light applies only to Highest Yoga Tan tra and is not wide enough to apply to all four tantras.
Both Wayman and Guenther have missed the argument of this section of the Great Exposition 1" Secret Mantra, though the former worse than the latter. As this section is mainly com pris d of critical analysis that appeals to reason, it would have to be said that they have misconstrued the main point being made in Tsong kha pa's elaborate argument on the difference between the Perfection and Mantra Vehicles. That these schol ars, who are indeed luminaries in the field of Tibetan Bud dhism, miss such a fundamental point is itself sufficient justifi cation for a style of translation and exposition that spends more time on the ground of the tradition itself.
With respect to scriptual authority for the distinction be tween the siitra and tantra Mahayanas, Tsong kha pa quotes a passage from the Vajrapaiijara Tantra (p. 117), rejects the com mentaries of Kr Qapada and Indrabodhi (p. 120), and critically uses the commentary of Devakulamahamati (pp. 120-1), ac cepting some parts and rejecting others. Having established that deity yoga is the dividing line between the two Mahayanas, he reinforces this with citations from or references to works on
Highest Yoga Tantra by Jfianapada (pp. 122-8), Ratnakara
santi (pp. 129, 134), Abhayakara (pp. 129-30), Durjayacandra (p. 130), Sridhara (p. 130), Samayavajra (p. 131), Jinadatta (p. 131), and Vinayadatta (p. 131-2). The general drift is illustrat ed by a passage (p. 129) from Ratnakarasanti's Commentary on (Dipankarabhadra's) "Four Hundred and Fifty" (bZhi rgya lnga cu pa) as Tsong kha pa cites the title, or Commentary on (Dipankarabhadra's) "Rite of the Guhyasamiija MarJ,t/,ala" (Gu hyasamajamarJ,if,alavidhi(ika), as it is listed in the Tibetan Tripi (aka19:
If one cultivates only [a path] having the nature of a deity, one cannot become fully enlightened through that because the fulfillment of [[[yogic]]] activities is not complete. Or, if one meditates on the suchness of a deity and not on that deitv, one will attain Buddhahood in many countless aeons but 'not quickly. Through meditating on both, one will at tain the highest perfect complete enlightenment very quickly because to do so is very appropriate and has special empowering blessings.
In short, the path to speedy attainment of enlightenment must involve both deity yoga and emptiness yoga; one without the other is not sufficient. Prof. Wayman criticizes my translation of that passage and offers his corrections:10 (emphases his)
If one cultivates only with adoption ,f thf ego fa deity, one cannot become fully enlightened merely through that, be cause the completion f the ritual part is not fulfilled. Or, ilthere
are no deities m the sense f cultivating tht' reality f deities, one
mil{ht attain Buddhahood in many countless aeons but not qmckly. Hence, the cultivation of both [[[reality]] of deities and ritual part], because it is highly grat f.ving, and because it has special empowering blessings, quickly achieiws the highest perfect complete enlightenment.
108 JIABS VOL. 7 NO. 2
Let us cite the Tibetan: 1
yang na lha'i hdag nyid can 'ha' zhig lmrn hsgoms na de lta22 na ni de tsam gyis 'tshang rgya ba nyid du mi 'gyur tel las rdwgs pa ma tslumg ba'i phyir roll yang na lha rnams kyi de kho na nyid b.\gom gyi lha rnams ma yin na nil de lta na yang bskal pa grangs med Jm mang por sangs rf!:Ja,\· nyid thob par 'gyur gyi myur du ni ma yin no/I de bas na gnyzs ka sgom pa ni shm tu yid du 'ong ha yin pa'i phyir danf(I byin gyi hrlabs kyi khyad gyis mchog tu myur bar bla na rned pa yang dag par rdzogs pa i byang chub tlwb par 'gyur ro
His changes miss the point. First, bdag nyid here is synonymous with n{(o bo and ran!( bzhin, and thus means "nature" or "entity"; that which has such a divine nature could be a mar_u,lala, a divine body itself, or a path that involves cultivation of such. There is no need to construe bdag nyid as "ego," though indeed the pride of being that deity (lha'i nga rgyal) must be cultivated. Wayman is forced not only to add in the word "adoption" but also to supply an instrumental ending ("with"). Rather, lha'i hdag nyid 'ha' zhig Isam is the direct oqject of bsgorns: "cultivates [or literally, cultivated] only [a path] having the nature of a deity."
Second, Wayman's preference for "because completion of the ritual part is not fulfilled" becomes self-contradictory when later in brackets he identifies the two factors that are necessary for speedy attainment of Buddhahood as "cultivation of both [[[reality]] of deities and ritual part]," whereby "ritual part" comes to stand for deity yoga, since the "reality of deities" clearly refers to their emptiness and the two topics of the passage are deity yoga and emptiness yoga. This is self-contradictory be cause in the first sentence the reason clause is speaking of the incompleteness of the yoga due to the absence of emptiness yoga, the specific activity or "ritual part" that is lacking clearly being identified as emptiness yoga, not cultivation of a divine body, as 1 Wayman would have it. The basic point of the passage and the reason for Tsong kha pa's citing it have been lost in Wayman's translation. The context clearly indicates that the incomplete ness of yogic activities in the first sentence refers specifically to the absence of emptiness yoga, the yogic activities themselves standing for the entire corpus of the path and not just one part.
Third, his translation of thob par 'gyur in its two occurrences first as "might attain" and then as "achieves" is unfounded. The 'gyur ending with a present verb makes that verb future, and my original translation in both cases as "will attain" reflects this meaning.i:
Fourth, shin tu yid du 'ong ba (literally, "very much coming to the mind') means not "highly gratifying" as Wayman prefers but, literally, "very attractive," in the sense that since a Buddha has both a Truth Body (Dharmakaya) and a Form Body (Rupa kiiya) it is very appropriate or attractive that on the path one cultivate both emptiness yoga and deity yoga, the former hav ing as its main result the Truth Body and the latter, the Form Body.
Fifth, in yang na lha rnams kyi de kho na nyid bsgom gyi lha rnams ma yin na the particle gyi in bsgom gyi is not a genitive ending but a non-case particle meaning "and" or "but." As Tibet's foremost grammarian, Si-tu Pai:i-chen, says: 4
There is also a usage of those [[[Wikipedia:genitive|genitive]] endings,] gi and so forth, for a non-case meaning, for they are also used as word-ornaments indicating that the latter word is contra dictory or discordant, as in, "This is true, and/but the other is obscured," "Our refuge is the Teacher Buddha and/but is not Rudra and so forth," "It indeed is correct this way but "(gila sogs pa de rnams rnam dbve'i don ma yin pafzhan
la'ang 'jug pa yod de/ 'di ni bden gyi gzhan ni gti mug go bdag cag skyahs ni ston pa sangs rgyas ym gyi drag po sogs ma yin nol/ di ltar 'thad mod kyi 'on kyangl zhes pa lta bu fhyi tshig 'gal ba'am mi mthun par ston pa'i tshig gi rgyan la'ang jug pa'i phyir ro).
Wayman mistakes the non-case particle gyi for a genitive case particle, seeking to reform the clause to "if there are no deities in the sense of cultivating the reality of deities." He thereby suggests that if one meditates on the reality or suchness (tattva, de kho na nyid) of a deity one cannot simultaneously perceive a divine body. This is not true to the system, since the very asser tion of the difference between the sfltra and tantra Mahayanas is made on the basis of the simultaneous union in one con sciousness of the factors of method and wisdom, specifically the appearance of the divine form and ascertainment of its empti ness.
Wayman cites this passage and gives his "corrections" as a sole sample of what he considers my error-laden translation of prose citations in Tsong kha pa's work:
... while Hopkins does reasonably well with Tsori-kha-pa's own prose, he has continual difficulty with the citations in prose or verse, and despite the labor of tracing out these passages in the canon-taking up most of the notes-he still exhibits a result which is more typical of language be ginners, of giving an obscure and non-cogent rendition as though it represents the original, while in truth the trans later 'does not understand the original.
His attempt at correction doubles back on him, displaying his own failure to catch even the general thread of the argument of the text.
Having cited such passages in Highest Yoga Tantras and commentaries to show the distinctive presence of deity yoga, Tsong kha pa makes brief citations for Yoga, Performance, and Action Tantras by referring to Sakyamitra (p. 132), Ananda garbha (p. 13:-J), and Buddhaguhya (p. 133), skirting for the time being the considerable controversy on whether Action and Performance Tantras have deity yoga, since he tackles that problem at the beginning of the section on Action Tantra.1:i Despite Tsong kha pa's many citations of tantras and Indian commentaries, it is clear that they are used only as supportive evidence for his argument. Tradition is only supportive, not the ultimate authority. The arbiter is reason, specifically in the sense of determining coherence and consistency within a path structure. Tsong kha pa refutes Ratnarak ita and Tripitaka mala (pp. 143-50), for instance, not because they differ from the aforementioned sources, but because their presentations fail in terms of consistency with the path structure. By doing so, he moves the basis of the argument from scriptural citation to reasoned analysis of a meditative structure.
To determine the context of Tsong kha pa's analysis and investigate whether it is correct, it will be necessary first to examine the presentations on the difference between siitra and tantra given by ( 1) his predecessor and chief source, the Sa skya
-
scholar Bu ston Rin chen grub (1290-1364), (2) his near con- - - ,.- - -..-•---
temporary, the rNying-ma scholar kLo g_ chen rab 'bya .s (1308-63), who exemplifies the type of presentation Tsong kha pa is refuting, (3) the later bKa' brgyud pa scholar Pad ma dkar po (1527-92) who sided with a different tradition while ac knowledging Tsong kha pa's well-reasoned argument, (4) Tsong kha pa's critic Bo dong Phyogs las rnam i:gyal (1376- 1451), who opposes Tsong kha pa's argument with reason, and
(5) later dGe lugs scholars who wrote condensations or elabora tions of Tsong lha pa's presentation as the implications of his work came to the fore.26 With such data, we will be well grounded for pursuing our own analyses. In the meantime, we can say, upon determining Tsong kha pa's argument, that his procedure is that of a thorough scholar, analyzing sources and counter-opinions with careful scrutiny and determining the place of the pillars of his analysis in the general structure of a system. His intention is clearly not just to present a catalogue of views as Bu ston mainly did, but to adjudicate conflicting sys tems of interpretation, thereby, at least by style, establishing a new one.
The intellectual intricacy of his presentation is no match for the immediately evocative style of the great r Nying-ma scholar kLong chen rab 'byams, for instance. However, when the principles of his position have been so internalized that the reader can supply the unspoken interstices, the experience of re-reading the text can evoke palpable glimpses into the experi ence of deity yoga. The argument itself becomes an exercise moving the mind toward developing the ability to combine the profound realization of emptiness and manifestation as an ideal being, such that one begins to sense the possibility of consciousness itself appearing as form-the union of method and wisdom that, for Tsong kha pa, is at the very heart of tantra. dGe lugs is often criticized, both in Tibet and in the West, for being overly verbal, overly abstract, but I would sug gest that this is due to the critics not having put sufficient time into first getting the positions of the dGe lugs scholars straight and then allowing the metaphysical imagination to be stimulat ed. The danger of over-abstraction in some areas of dGc lugs thought is great, but the intricately woven arguments, when probed over time, lead to an internalization of knowledge and palpable experience of principles, which are then the basis for
verbalization. In the beginning, the words seem to use the per son, hut later, a changed person is using the words.
As scholars, we need both patience to go through this pro cess as well as wariness against being trapped by our own will ingness to become absorbed in these complex systems. The dilemma posed by such openness and the need for discrimina tion is certainly not solved by refusing to spend the time needed to probe the material or by an affectation of distance that pre vents involvement. Tsong kha pa seems to have conquered this dilemma within his own culture with his startlingly refreshing reasoned analysis of traditional accounts, which functions as a hermeneutic, bringing all the more focus to a pivotal practice in tantra-deity yoga-itself founded on the reasoned analysis performed in emptiness yoga.27 The lesson may be that the type of mind needed to follow his argument is also needed in this central practice. Seen in this light, there is a harmony be tween the form of Tsong kha pa's elaborately reasoned argu ment on the difference between sOtra and tantra and the con tent, the identification of deity yoga-the first step of which is reasoned meditation on emptiness-as the central tantric fea ture. The style itself makes the point that reason is not cast aside in tantra.
NOTES
</poem> ⦁ The longer title of Tsong kha pa's text is Stages of the Path to a Conquer or and Pervasive Master, a Great Vajradhara: Revealing All Secret T()picJ (rGyal ba khyab hdag rdo rje 'chang chen po'i lam p;yi rim pa gsang ba kun p;yi gnad rnam par phye ba). In the Peking edition it is P6210, Vol. 161 (Toh. 5281), but I have mainly used the Dharamsala (Shes rig par khang) edition of 1969, despite flaws, because of its legibility, checking questionable passages against the Ngawang Gelek edition (New Delhi, 1978), which is a retouched version of the 1897 Lhasa old Zol blocks.
21 Several Tibetan scholars have reported that dge, "virtuous," was ori ginally dga', 'joyous." ⦁ (London: George Allen and Unwin, 1977), pp. 13-79. ⦁ The translation of Arhan as "Foe Destroyer" accords with the Tibetan translation as dgra bcom pa; for discussion of the etymology and justification of the translation see my Meditation on Emptiness (London: Wisdom Publications, 1983), n. 553. ⦁ The page reference here is to the Dalai Lama's commentary. Tsong kha pa also speaks of these two meanings of "vehicle," but the line was unin-
DEMARCATION BETWEEN SUTRA AND TANTRA 113 tentionally deleted from Tantra in Tibet at the beginning of the last paragraph on p. l 06. It should read: "About 'vehicle', there is an effect vehicle which is that to which one is proceeding and a cause vehicle which is that by which one proceeds. Due to proceeding fit is called] a vehicle. With respect to " ⦁ Tsong kha pa discusses this point in some detail in his commentary (dGongs pa rab gsal) on Chandrakirti's Supplement to (Niigarjuna's) "Treatise on the Middle Way" (Madhyamakiivatara), the first five chapters of which are trans lated in Compassion in Tibetan Buddhism (London: Rider and Co., 1980), pp. I 74-5. (For justification of my translation of Madhyamakiivatiira as Suj,plement to the "Treatise on the Middle Way", see my Meditation of Emptiness, pp. 462-9 and 866-9.) Tsong kha pa says (p. 175, diacritics added):
To establish that even a single phenomenon does not truly exist, Ma hayanists use limitless different reasonings as set forth in the Treati. e on the MiddlR Way. Hence their minds become greatly broadened with re spect to suchness. Hinayanists use only brief reasoning to establish such ness by valid cognition, and since they do not establish emptiness the way Mahayanists do, do not have a mind broadened with respect to such ness.... This difference arises because Hearers and Solitary Realizers strive to abandon only the afflictions [the obstructions to liberation]. and cognizing a mere abbreviation of the meaning of suchness is sufficient for that. Mahayanists are intent on abandoning the obstructions to om niscience, and for that it is necessary to have a very broadened mind of wisdom opened to suchness.
⦁ The term "Tantrayana" has great favor in the West, but it does not appear to have been popular in Tibet. There the favored term is Guhyaman trayana (gsang sngags kyi theg pa). ⦁ This is one among many points that 'jam dbyangs bzhad pa makes in defending the position that the Buddhahoods of sutra and tantra are the same. See his Great Exposition of Tenets" (Grub mtha' chen mo), (Mussoorie: Da Lama, 1962), ca 44b. 6-47a. 8. ⦁ See Lati Rinbochay's and Hopkins' Death, Intermediate State and Rebirth in Tibetan Buddhi.5m (London: Rider and Co., 1979), pp. 69-73. ⦁ Also known as the Madhyamakakiirikii. ⦁ The source here is Kensur Losang Wangdu, abbot of the Tantric College of Lower Lhasa during the time of its re-location in South India; he is currently residing atjang-dzay (Byang rtse) College at Gan-den (dGa' ldan) in Mundgod, Karnataka, having been appointed head of the dGe lugs order. ⦁ See the Mongolian scholar Ngag dbang dpal ldan's statement of this in Tsong ka pa's Yoga of Tibet (London: George Allen and Unwin, 1981), pp. 211-12. ⦁ For a discussion of this, see the first appendix in Tantra in Tibet, pp. 173-7. ⦁ Tsong kha pa's argument can be found in Compassion in Tibetan Bud dhism, pp. 150-81. ⦁ The Buddh 5t TantraJ (New York: Samuel Weiser, 1973), p. 4. In this chapter, Wayman is engaged in the admirable task of refuting those who view tantra as a corruption. Tsong kha pa's finely worked argument is itself an indication that Wayman is right in this.
114 J IABS VOL. 7 NO. 2
Wayman's equation of paramitt1yana with prajfulparamitayiina is question able, since in the Perfection Vehicle the emphasis is on practice of all six perfections, not just the perfection of wisdom, .fr>r a "limitless" period of time in "limillru" ways. This is clear in the Mongolian scholar Ngag dhang dpal ldan's (h. 1797) / llumirUltim1 of" thr Texl\ o{ Tantra, Presmtation o{ th11 Ground.\ mul Pat/ts of lhf' Four Grf'at Secrrt Tantra S11L\ (gSang chm rgyud sdl' ln.hi'i sa lam gyi rnam bi.hag rgyud l(Zhung g.w} byed. 6b. 7-7b.3) cited in Tsong ka pa's Yoga of Tibfl (London: George Allen and Unwin. 1981), p. 210. "... In the Perfection Vehicle this wisdom consciousness is caused to possess the capadty to aban don the obstructions to omniscience through training for a limitless time in limitless varieties of giving and so forth...."From Ngag dbang dpal ldan's explanation, it would seem that the Perfection Vehicle is so named because of calling for practice of the six perfections f,,r a "limitlt's.1" paiod of timt' in "limit less" way., due to lacking the practice of deity yoga. ⦁ Wayman's problem with this passage may revolve around the term khyab dtung Im ("to narrow"); his mis-interpretation of this term in his transla tion of the special insight section of Tsong kha pa's GrPal f,"xpositiou of'thP Stagt's of thP Path to f,'nliglttt•11mml (lam rim rlm1 mo) in his Calming ihf Mind and Disurning thl' Rm/ (New York: Columbia, 1978) is documented at length in Gcshc Sopa's cxcellenl review, JIABS, Vol. 3, No. I, 1980, pp. 68-100. ⦁ Tibetan Buddhism Without Mystification (Leiden: Brill, 1966), p. !>4. Guenther treats the same topic from the rNying ma viewpoint in his Buddlti,·t Pltilo.w/Jlty iu Tltnny and Pmf·tia (Baltimore: Penguin, 1972). pp. 155-170. Of the six passages which are quoted by Tsong kha pa in Guenther's citation, Guenther gives the Sanskrit titles for only two, leaving the other four in Tibetan transliteration and thus giving the misleading impression that they arc texts written in Tibetan. I prefer to I ranslate titles imo English (with the Sanskrit al each first citation) in order to give some idea of the contents of the texts, the titles often being named by way of their contents. I have also chosen a style of translation different from Guenther, trying to keep with the literal vocabulary of the tradition as much as possible, building up the meaning of words through establishing context. By doing this, multi-worded translation equivalents from a cognate western system are not needed. However, I deeply appreciate the effort that he has made in this regard; my only quarrel is with his insistence that everyone follow his style. ⦁ (Dharamsala, I 969), IOa.4. 19 (Tokyo-Kyoto: Suzuki Research Foundation. 1955), Vol. 65, Table of Contents. 20. Kaiuult (Kathmandu), V. 7 No. 3-4 ( 1979). p. 321. 2L I 7a.3-5 of the Dharamsala 1969 edition. 22';. Read dt• /ta na ford,, Iha ua in accordance with the Ngawang Gclek edition of the Collected Works (Delhi, 1978). ga 42.6. ⦁ For the usage of '10•1ff with the future, see the exposition by the grammarian Si tu in his ExjJ/mwtiou of' "The Thirty" mul "U.wtgP of Grndt•r," Speria.l Trn,tiw• on lht' Tlwrou!(h AjJ/Jliralion of tlu• lmt1:f1Ul!(l' of' tltl' Snowy C'mmlry, llNmtiful Pmrl Nl'rklacl' of lhP Wist' (Yul l{m,gs can fm'i Im/a ymtg dag par sbyor ba'i b.\·tan bcos kyi byt' hmg sum cu pa dang rtag.\· kyi _'jug pa'i Kzlt1mf( gi rnam par b.,luul pa
mkhas pa'i ml{Ul rgyan mu tig j,hreng mdu.s), 58.5 (Dharamsala, n.d.): "Sounds {used for] future actions {are, for instance,] 'grub par 'gyurl 'chad par 'gyur " (bya 'gyur ma 'ongs pa'i sgra nil 'grub par 'gyurl 'chad par 'gyur ) Note that 'duul is the present form of the verb to explain, the future being bshad. ⦁ 27.lff (see the previous note for the text.) ⦁ The Yoga of Tibet (London: George Allen and Unwin, 1981), pp. 47- 62. ⦁ I did this work in preparation for Tantra in Tibet and intend to present it in a separate, more historically oriented work. ⦁ Examples of the reasonings required in emptiness yoga are present ed in my Meditation ml Emptiness (London: Wisdom Publications, )983), espe cially in Parts One and Two (pp. 47-196), as well as the last chapter of Part Five (pp. 549-60). </poem>
