|
|
| Line 1: |
Line 1: |
| − | | + | #REDIRECT[[:Category:Taranatha]]{{SanskritTerminology}} |
| − | {{DisplayImages|3197|2528|2095|2534|3097|1841|3052}}
| |
| − | <poem>
| |
| − | [[Tāranātha]] (1575-1634) is an example of a [[zhentong]] proponent who used the term [[zhentong]] in a way that encompasses both the [[sense]] of [[philosophical]] [[tenet]] system ([[drupta]]) and of [[practice tradition]] ([[gomluk]]).34 He is said to have had [[visions]] of [[Dölpopa]] during the composition of several of his texts. His writings served in turn as a significant inspiration for [[Jamgön Kongtrül]] Lodrö Ta yé’s writings on [[zhentong]] 35 and other [[subjects]]. [[Jamgön Kongtrül Lodrö Tayé]] is an example of a later [[zhentong]] proponent who presents [[zhentong]] as a separate [[philosophical]] [[tenet]] system.36
| |
| − | | |
| − | We will now use [[Tāranātha’s]] text, The [[Twenty-One Profound Points]] ([[zapdön nyerchikpa]]),37 as a lens into the positions of the first two [[masters]] cited in [[Pema]] Bidza’s list, [[Dölpopa Sherap Gyeltsen]] and [[Shakya Chokden]]. Their positions are compared in detail by [[Tāranātha]] with [[respect]] to twenty-one issues. The fact that [[Tāranātha]] introduces the [[discussion]] using the term [[zhentong]] umé tagom ({{Wiki|theory}} and [[practice]] of the [[Empty]] of Other Central System) indicates that his text seeks to encompass the [[discourse]] of two fields of inquiry: [[philosophical]] point of [[view]] {{Wiki|theory}} ([[tawa]]) and [[meditation]] ([[gom]]). He says:
| |
| − | | |
| − | I think that it is impossible for any {{Wiki|contradiction}} to [[exist]] in the [[intention]] behind the explanation of those who see the profound [[[reality]]]. However, [[seeing]] what is needed for {{Wiki|training}} various [[people]], differences were [explained] {{Wiki|conventionally}}.
| |
| − | | |
| − | Here, the [[Lord of Dharma]], the great [[omniscient]] [[Tönpa Zhiden Dölpopa]], and the great [[pendita]], the victorious [[Shakya Chokden]], agree on the [[essential]] point of the [[view]] and [[meditation]] of [[Zhentong]] [[Madhyamaka]]. However, when ascertaining their [[view]] provisionally there are many minor differences between their [[philosophical]] [[tenet]] systems.38
| |
| − | | |
| − | [[Tāranātha]] presents [[Shakya Chokden’s]] position first, referring to him as “former” ([[ngama]]), and [[Dölpopa’s]] position last, referring to him as “[[latter]]” ([[chima]]).39 They are introduced in this order in the text as a way of expressing a hierarchical order of profundity according to the author. My [[impression]] is that [[Tāranātha]] wishes to restate [[Dölpopa’s]] original [[zhentong]] by showing how it differs from [[Shakya Chokden’s]] version of [[zhentong]]. But does [[Tāranātha’s]] admiration for and identification with [[Dölpopa]] allow for an accurate portrayal of [[Dölpopa’s]] position? [[Tāranātha]] seems in many cases to be {{Wiki|speaking}} on [[Dölpopa’s]] behalf, and so we can to a certain extent read what is portrayed as [[Dölpopa’s]] position as being actually [[Tāranātha’s]] [[own]] position.
| |
| − | | |
| − | Another issue is whether [[Tāranātha]] uses a given point in [[time]] as definitive for portraying [[Shakya Chokden’s]] position in regard to the twenty-one points,40 since [[Shakya Chokden’s]] position vis-à-vis the [[rangtong]]/[[zhentong]] problematic is known to have changed during his [[lifetime]]. He has been described by [[Tuken Lozang Chökyi Nyima]] (1737-1802) as starting out as a ([[rangtong]]) [[mādhyamika]], then becoming a [[Cittamātra]] ([[ṃind Only]] ṣystem) proponent, and then ending up as a [[jonangpa]] ([[zhentong]] [[mādhyamika]]). According to Dreyfus,41 the second period, which started when [[Shakya Chokden]] was around the age of forty-nine, is more accurately described as Central [[Yogic]] Conduct System ([[yogācāra-madhyamaka]]), and in particular as False Aspectarian [[Yogic]] Conduct System, which surpasses the [[Mind Only]] System.42 During the last phase, starting when he was around fifty-six, he claimed the [[jonangpa]] position to be “a more appropriate way to account for the experiential side of the [[realization]] of emptiness.”43
| |
| − | | |
| − | Among the points covered in [[Tāranātha’s]] text are the issues of whether the second turning is of literal or non-literal meaning and whether [[zhentong]] might also be [[taught]] in the second turning and not exclusively in the [[third turning of the wheel of dharma]]. [[Tāranātha]] remarks in this connection that there is a difference between the [[rangtong]] [[intention]] of The [[Victorious One]] and his sons, and that which is known as [[rangtong]] “these days”:44
| |
| − | | |
| − | The former [viz., [[Shakya Chokden]]] says, “On the level of [[philosophy]] ([[tawa]]), [[rangtong]] is profound for cutting through elaborations. On the level of [[meditation]] ([[gompa]]), [[zhentong]] is profound for bringing [[experience]] (nyamsu lenpa).”45 Here [[rangtong]] is identified as the [[tradition]] of [[Prāsaṅgika]], of the [[Svātantrika]], as well as that of the model treatises.46 The [[latter]] [viz., [[Dölpopa]]] says that the [[rangtong]] [[philosophy]] explained by the [[Victorious One]] and his sons is {{Wiki|excellent}} for cutting through elaborations, but the [[philosophical]] [[tenet]] ([[tadrup]])47 comprising [[zhentong]] is not different in this [[respect]]. That which is known as [[rangtong]] these days takes the [[view]] of [[Prāsaṅgika]], [[Svātantrika]], as well as the model treatises to mean that the [[Wikipedia:Absolute (philosophy)|ultimate]] is unreal. That is a mistake. It is not a [[wholesome]] way of cutting elaborations through [[philosophy]] since it is a denigration.48
| |
| − | | |
| − | [[Shakya Chokden’s]] position is depicted as sympathetic to [[zhentong]] while remaining within the generally accepted framework of [[logical]] [[discourse]] when it comes to {{Wiki|theory}}. He acknowledges the role that [[zhentong]] plays on the level of [[meditation]]. He is shown to hold [[rangtong]] as the [[highest]] [[view]] since he argues that because [[non-dual]] [[pristine awareness]] ([[nyimé yeshé]]) cannot withstand [[logical]] {{Wiki|scrutiny}} it cannot have an [[Wikipedia:Absolute (philosophy)|ultimate]] place in the context of [[logical]] [[discourse]]. [[Dölpopa]] argues that [[non-dual]] [[pristine awareness]] can withstand [[logical]] {{Wiki|scrutiny}} since it is beyond the reach of the [[logical]] mind.49 In this context the two [[masters]] are obviously {{Wiki|speaking}} from two different perspectives. While [[Shakya Chokden]] is {{Wiki|speaking}} of [[view]], [[Dölpopa]] is {{Wiki|speaking}} of that which {{Wiki|transcends}} [[view]].
| |
| − | | |
| − | The two [[masters]] are shown to differ on the value they give to [[trisvabhāva]] ([[three-fold nature]]) vis-à-vis the [[two truths]], on their positions concerning [[rangrik]], on the {{Wiki|status}} of [[tathāgatagarbha]], and on their [[understanding]] of [[mantra]][-[[yāna]]], but in particular they are shown to differ on whether the [[nature]] of [[non-dual]] [[pristine awareness]] is [[permanent]] or [[impermanent]], whether it is an [[entity]] or a [[non-entity]], and whether it is [[compounded]] or uncompounded. Here [[Dölpopa’s]] arguments transcend (or [[disregard]]) the [[logical]] categories by stating that while [[non-dual]] [[pristine awareness]] is [[permanent]] in the [[sense]] that it is beyond the three times and is uncompounded in the [[sense]] that it is beyond [[compounded]] and uncompounded, it is neither an [[entity]] nor a [[non-entity]].
| |
| − | | |
| − | [[Dölpopa]] believes – according to [[Tāranātha]] – that epistemology is insufficient when it comes to establishing the [[Wikipedia:Absolute (philosophy)|ultimate]]. He does accept the [[logic]] of [[non-dual]] [[pristine awareness]] as a [[cognition]], but refutes its inclusion in the [[logical]] category of entities ([[ngöpo]]), where [[cognition]] normally belongs, at least according to a good deal of [[Buddhist]] {{Wiki|epistemological}} {{Wiki|literature}}. He says, “To assert a [[non-entity]] as [[existing]] ultimately is not a [[logical]] [[teaching]], but to assert an [[entity]] as being [[Wikipedia:Absolute (philosophy)|ultimate]] is the [[tradition]] of proponents of substantialism.”50 Whether this last remark in fact is [[Tāranātha’s]] way of defending [[Dölpopa]] against his later critics can only be asserted by studying [[Dölpopa’s]] [[own]] writings in detail. However, this exchange serves to illustrate the complexities involved when an already a historical and fictive [[discussion]] covers more than one level of [[discourse]].
| |
| − | | |
| − | [34] [[Tāranātha]] was a prolific writer on many [[subjects]]. In a short text called The [[Central Causal and Resultant Drop]] ([[gyundré umé tiklé]]), [[Tāranātha]] describes [[tathāgatagarbha]] in its [[sūtra]] and [[tantra]] context; see [[Tāranātha]], The [[Collected Works of Jo-naṅ Rje-btsun Tāranātha]], vol. 13 (Leh, {{Wiki|Ladakh}}: C. [[Namgyal]] & [[Tsewang Taru]], 1982-87), 463-68. In The [[Heart]] of [[Zhentong]] ([[zhentong nyingpo]]; [[Tāranātha]], Collected Works of Jo-naṅ Rje-btsun [[Tāranātha]], vol. 4, 491-514), he outlines the position of [[zhentong]] in [[relation]] to various topics. For a study of this work see Klaus-Dieter Mathes, “[[Tāranātha’s]] Presentation of [[Trisvabhāva]] in the [[gŹan stoṅ sñiṅ po]],” Journal of the [[International Association of Buddhist Studies]] 23, no. 2 (2000): 195-223. Finally, The Ornament of [[Gzhan stong]] [[Madhyamaka]] ([[zhentong]] [[uma gyen]]; [[Tāranātha]], Collected Works of Jo-naṅ Rje-btsun [[Tāranātha]], vol. 4, 797-824) is, according to [[Cyrus Stearns]] in The [[Buddha]] from Dol po: A Study of the [[Life]] and [[Thought]] of the [[Tibetan]] [[Master]] [[Dolpopa Sherab Gyaltsen]] (Albany: SUNY, 1999), 69, one of [[Tāranātha’s]] most important works, devoted solely to the [[explication]] of the [[zhentong]] [[view]]. Lastly, we should mention materials that have only recently come to {{Wiki|light}}, namely texts in the [[Dzamtang]] edition of [[Tāranātha’s]] Collected Works: [[Tāranātha]], Collected Works, ’[[Dzam thang]] Edition, TBRC W22276.
| |
| − | | |
| − | Here we find his extremely [[interesting]] interpretations of The [[Heart Sūtra]] from a [[zhentong]] point of [[view]]; see {{Wiki|Matthew Kapstein}}, Reason’s Traces (Boston: [[Wisdom Publications]], 2001), 304-6. The texts are the Sherapkyi Paröltu Chinpé Nyingpö [[Dön]] [[Nampar Shepa]] Ngönmé Lekshé ([[Tāranātha]], Collected Works, ’[[Dzam thang]] Edition, vol. 17, 571-759) and the Shernyinggi Tsikdrel ([[Tāranātha]], Collected Works, ’[[Dzam thang]] Edition, vol. 17, 759-83). Here [[Tāranātha]] identifies three different passages (762, 765, and 771) that he maintains clearly show that The [[Heart Sūtra]] teaches [[zhentong]]. While [[zhentong]] presentations of [[tathāgatagarbha]] are quite common, it is rare to see [[zhentong]] elucidations of the [[second turning of the wheel]]. Although, for [[Yogic]] Conduct System ([[yogācāra]]) precursors to these, see [[Wikipedia:Donald S. Lopez, Jr.|Donald S. Lopez]], Jr., The [[Heart Sūtra]] Explained: [[Indian]] and [[Tibetan]] Commentaries (Albany: SUNY, 1988), 60, where the statement “[[form]] is [[emptiness]], [[emptiness]] is [[form]], [[emptiness]] is not other than [[form]]; [[form]] is not other than [[emptiness]]” is interpreted as an [[affirming]] negative.
| |
| − | | |
| − | [35] Such as [[Jamgön Kongtrül Lodrö Tayé]], [[Gzhan stong]] [[dbu ma]] [[chen]] po’i lta [[khrid]] [[rdo rje]] [[zla ba]] dri ma med pa’i ’od zer, in Rgya [[chen]] bka’ [[mdzod]] ([[Paro]]: Ngodrug, 1975/6), vol. [[nya]] (8), 581-621; [[Nges don]] [[dbu ma chen po]] la ’khrul rtog nyer [[gsum]] gyi [[’bur]] ’[[joms]] pa {{Wiki|legs}} bshad [[gser]] gyi [[tho ba]], in Rgya [[chen]] bka’ [[mdzod]], vol. ta (9), 211-18; [[Lta ba]] gtan la [[bebs pa]] las phro ba’i gtam skabs [[lnga pa]] lung dang rig pa’i [[me tog]] rab tu dgod pa, in Rgya [[chen]] bka’ [[mdzod]], vol. ta (9), 29-68; and [[Ris med]] [[chos kyi]] ’byung [[gnas]] mdo tsam smos pa blo gsal mgrin pa’i mdzes [[rgyan]], in Rgya [[chen]] bka’ [[mdzod]], vol. ta (9), 69-100.
| |
| − | | |
| − | [36] See his [[Shes bya]] kun la khyab pa’i gzhung [[lugs]] nyung ngu’i tshig gis [[rnam]] par ’[[grol ba]] {{Wiki|legs}} bshad yongs ’[[du shes]] bya mtha’ yas pa’i [[rgya mtsho]] ({{Wiki|Beijing}}: [[Mi rigs dpe skrun khang]], 1985), 35.1-41.1: [[glegs bam]] [[gsum pa]]/ skabs [[bdun]] pa/ [[lhag pa]] [[shes rab kyi bslab pa]] rim par [[gye]] ba/ [[’khor]] lo [[gsum]] gyi drang nges dang bden [[gnyis]] rten ’brel [[rnam]] par nges pa’i skabs/ [[lnga pa]]/ [[grub mtha]]’ so so’i ’dod tshul. Translated into English by Anne Burchardi and [[Ari]] Goldfield, Gaining Certainty about the Provisional and Definitive Meanings in the [[Three Turnings of the Wheel of Dharma]], the [[Two Truths]], and [[Dependent Arising]]: The [[Root Text]] and Commentary Section Two of [[Chapter]] Seven from The [[Treasury of Knowledge]] by [[Jamgön Kongtrül Lodrö Thaye]] ([[Kathmandu]]: [[Marpa]] Institute, 1997). Here he presents the [[Vaibhāṣika]], the [[Sautrāntika]], the [[Cittamātra]], the [[Svātantrika]] [[Madhyamaka]], the [[Prāsaṅgika]] [[Madhyamaka]], and the [[Zhentong]] [[Madhyamaka]] [[view]] of the [[two truths]] as an ascending scale. The presentation of [[zhentong]] as a [[form]] of [[Madhyamaka]] contrasts with, for example, [[Mikyö Dorjé’s]] position that [[zhentong]] is more correctly a [[form]] of [[Yogācāra]]. See Brunnhölzl, Center of the Sunlit Sky, 445.
| |
| − | | |
| − | [37] [[Tāranātha]], Collected Works of Jo-naṅ Rje-btsun [[Tāranātha]], vol. 4, 781-95. For an {{Wiki|excellent}} study and translation of this text see Klaus-Dieter Mathes, “[[Tāranātha’s]] ‘Twenty-one Differences with Regard to the [[Profound Meaning]]’ – Comparing the [[Views]] of the Two gŹan stoṅ [[Masters]] [[Dol po pa]] and [[Shakya]] mchog ldan,” Journal of the [[International Association of Buddhist Studies]] 27, no. 2 (2004): 285-328.
| |
| − | | |
| − | [38] om swa sti/ zab mo gzigs pa [[rnams]] la ni/ bzhed [[dgongs]] ’[[gal ba]] mi srid snyam/ on [[kyang]] [[gdul bya]] [[tha dad]] dang / dgos pa’i [[dbang]] gzigs [[tha dad]] bsnyad/ ’dir [[chos]] rje [[kun mkhyen]] [[chen po]] brton pa bzhi ldan dang / [[paṇḍi ta chen po]] [[rgyal ba]] shākya mchog ldan [[gnyis]]/ [[gzhan stong]] dbu ma’i lta [[sgom]] gyi gnad gcig [[kyang]] / [[gnas]] skabs [[lta ba]] de gtan la ’bebs pa’i skabs/ [[grub mtha]]’ mi ’[[dra ba]] than thun [[mang]] dag [[yod pa]] [[rnams]] ’dir ngos bzungs bar bya ste ([[Tāranātha]], Zab don nyer cig pa, 782.1-782.3).
| |
| − | | |
| − | [39] Even though [[Shakya Chokden]] was born sixty-seven years after [[Dölpopa’s]] [[death]].
| |
| − | [40] See Mathes, “[[Tāranātha’s]] ‘Twenty-one Differences,’” 315 for an analysis of this.
| |
| − | | |
| − | [41] Georges B. Dreyfus, [[Recognizing]] [[Reality]]: [[Dharmakirti’s]] [[Philosophy]] and Its [[Tibetan]] Interpretations ({{Wiki|Delhi}}: Sri [[Satguru]] Publications, 1997), 28-29.
| |
| − | [42] See also Iaroslav Komarovski, Three Texts on [[Madhyamaka]] by [[Shakya Chokden]] ({{Wiki|Dharamsala}}: Library of [[Tibetan]] Works & Archives, 2000), 59 n. 27.
| |
| − | [43] Dreyfus, [[Recognizing]] [[Reality]], 29. [[Shakya]] Chokden’s brilliant [[expositions]] relevant to [[zhentong]] research include, among others: Byams [[chos]] lnga’i [[nges don]] rab tu [[gsal ba]] [[zhes bya]] ba’i [[bstan bcos]], in Collected Works, vol. 11 ([[Thimphu]]: Kunzang Tobgye, 1975), 1-38; Byams [[chos]] lnga’i lam gyi rim pa gsal bar [[byed]] pa’i [[bstan bcos]] [[rin chen]] [[sgron]] gyi sgo ’[[byed]], in Collected Works, vol. 11, 39-156; and Rgyud bla’i [[rnam]] bzhad sngon med [[nyi ma]], in Collected Works, vol. 13, 113-58. For a translation of the [[latter]] see Anne Burchardi, [[Shakya]] mchog ldan’s {{Wiki|Literary}} Heritage in [[Bhutan]] (The National Library of [[Bhutan]], forthcoming).
| |
| − | | |
| − | [44] deng [[sang]] [[rang stong]] gi lta bar [[grags pa]] ([[Tāranātha]], Zab don nyer cig pa, 783.5). I assume that deng [[sang]] refers to [[Tāranātha’s]] [[time]] and not to [[Dölpopa’s]]. [[Tāranātha]] has the following comment on what he considers the original meaning of [[rangtong]] in his [[Gyundré Umé Tiklé]]. He says: “When it was [[taught]] that the [[Wikipedia:Absolute (philosophy)|ultimate]] is [[empty]] of [[own]] [[essence]], the [[intention]] was that, when observing the [[Wikipedia:Absolute (philosophy)|ultimate]], there is nothing for the [[intellectual]] [[mind]] to hold on to” ([[don dam]] rang gi [[ngo bo stong pa]] ltar/ [[gsung]] pa’i [[dgongs pa]] [[don dam]] la dmigs nas/ blo yis bzung ltar ma [[grub pa]] la [[dgongs]]; [[Tāranātha]], Rgyu ’bras dbu ma’i [[thig le]], in [[Collected Works of Jo-naṅ Rje-btsun Tāranātha]], vol. 13, 466.7-467.1).
| |
| − | [45] Nyamsu len is often translated as “[[practice]],” meaning “bringing into [[experience]].”
| |
| − | | |
| − | [46] The [[Madhyamaka]] treatises of [[Nāgārjuna]] and [[Āryadeva]].
| |
| − | [47] Combined abbreviation of [[tawa]] and [[drupta]].
| |
| − | | |
| − | [48] [[yang]] snga mas/ lta bas [[spros pa]] [[gcod pa]] la [[rang stong]] zab/ [[sgom]] pas [[nyams]] su [[len pa]] la [[gzhan stong]] zab ces te/ de’i [[rang stong]] [[yang]] thal rang gzhung phyi [[gsum]] gyi [[lugs]] la ngos ’dzi[n]/ phyi mas ni/ [[rgyal ba]] sras bcas bzhed pa’i [[rang stong]] gi [[lta ba]] de [[spros pa]] [[gcod]] [[byed]] mchog [[yin yang]] / [[gzhan stong]] du ’dus pas lta grub logs logs pa min la/ deng [[sang]] grags pa’i [[rang stong]] thal rang gzhung phyi [[gsum]] gyi [[lta ba]] [[don dam]] bden med du ’dod pa ni nor pa [[yin]] pas/ lta bas [[spros pa]] [[gcod pa]] la bzang ba min te/ skur ’debs su ’gyur ba’i [[phyir]] [[yin]] zhes [[gsung]] / ([[Tāranātha]], Zab don nyer cig pa, 784.4-784.7).
| |
| − | | |
| − | [49] Literally: “Since [[non-dual wisdom]] withstands [[logical]] analysis, when analyzing it, it is said that it is one’s [[own]] [[confusion]] [that one ends up analyzing]” ([[gnyis med]] [[ye shes]] [[rigs]] pas [[dpyad bzod]] [[yin]] pas/ de la [[dpyod pa]] de rang gi ’khrul [[gsung]]; [[Tāranātha]], Zab don nyer cig pa, 785.4).
| |
| − | [50] [[dngos med]] [[don dam]] du ’dod pa [[chos]] mi [[rigs]] la/ [[don dam]] dngos [[por]] ’dod pa dngos smra ba’i [[lugs]] so ([[Tāranātha]], Zab don nyer cig pa, 788.1-788.2).
| |
| − | | |
| − | see also: [[Taranatha]]
| |
| − | </poem>
| |
| − | {{R}} | |
| − | [http://www.thlib.org/collections/texts/jiats/#!jiats=/03/burchardi/b3/ www.thlib.org]
| |
| − | [[Category:Taranatha]]
| |
| − | [[Category:Jonang]]
| |
| − | [[Category:Tibetan Buddhist Philosophy]]
| |
