Monastic Colleges

by Guy Newland

Goldstein (21) estimates that twenty-six percent of traditional Tibet's male population were monks. Although Tibetans generally regard monks as superior to laymen, this high percentage is one reason that the official charisma of the robes was not potent enough to mark monks as an exclusive élite. In the dGe lugs, the dominant order of Tibetan Buddhism since the seventeenth century, scholarly achievement has been one of the most important paths into the élite circles of leadership. To understand this fact, we must reflect on the relationship between reason and liberation in Tsong kha pa's philosophy.

Like other Buddhists, Tsong kha pa and his dGe lugs pa followers contend that liberation from beginningless cycles of suffering is reached through non-dualistic (advaya, gnyis med) and trans-conceptual insight (nirvikalpajñāna, rtog med ye shes) into reality (dharmatā, chos nyid). However, for the dGe lugs pa this insight is not a spontaneous, naturally arising, objectless intuition. Rather it is something that must be gradually and systematically cultivated, and it has a specific, rationally comprehensible object—emptiness (śūnyatā, stong pa nyid). Although emptiness is the very nature of the mind, realization (rtogs pa) of this natural emptiness is a hard-won accomplishment. Realization of emptiness depends not only upon prior training in ethics, but upon conceptual mastery of what "emptiness" is and how logic can be used to approach it.

This philosophical stance reinforced the religious and political authority of those who controlled educational institutions equipped to provide the requisite training in logic and philosophy.2 Traditionally, much of dGe lugs education was controlled by [page 205] large monasteries near Lhasa, especially 'Bras spungs, Se ra and dGa' ldan.3 Each major monastic university comprised a number of colleges, each college having its own support personnel, its own temples, its own debate manuals, its own faculty, and its own abbot (mkhan po). Some colleges focused on tantric studies, while others existed only in theory or in vestigial forms; the major colleges that concern us here are sGo mang and Blo gsal gling at 'Bras spungs, sMad and Byes at Se ra, and Shar rtse and Byang rtse at dGa' ldan. While education was a major function of these institutions, at any given time most of the monks at the monastic universities were not students. Goldstein (24) reports, for example, that at the middle of this century the monks at the sMad college of Se ra monastery numbered 2,800; of these only 800 were students. Few of these students could expect to complete the entire monastic curriculum; most would find other vocations within the monastery. Thus, degree-holders were, and today remain, a small élite within the monastic community.

An education at a big monastery is not presumed necessary for spiritual development, but there is an implication that study at these monasteries represents a rare and invaluable spiritual opportunity for those who can withstand its rigors. Advancement through the curriculum and academic hierarchy of these institutions is presumed to reflect the attainment of (at least) the conceptual knowledge and analytical skills prerequisite to yogic realization. The colleges of 'Bras spungs, Se ra and dGa' ldan monasteries give the title dge bshes to scholars passing exams at the end of twenty to twenty-five years of study. The charismatic valence of this title is apparent when one considers that the Sanskrit equivalent of the title dge bshes—kalyāṇamitra, usually translated "spiritual friend"—is a standard epithet of a guru, i.e., a spiritual master.

Traditionally, considerable wealth and power accumulated in the hierarchies of these prestigious institutions; they played important religious, political, economic, and even military roles in the history of Tibet. Far-flung networks of affiliated monasteries not only provided a feeder system for promising students and appropriate sinecure for graduates, but also offered channels for political intercourse. The abbots of the major colleges were among the most important figures in Tibetan politics. Because the abbots were always selected from the ranks of the dge bshes, mastery of [page 206] the monastic syllabus—including expert knowledge of the debate manuals—was an important path "out of the ranks" into charismatic office and political power. While incarnate lamas (sprul sku) achieved their status otherwise, they were at least in principle expected to pass through the same educational system.

Intercollegiate solidarity within the large monasteries tends to be weak. Each functioning college has its own chapel ('du khang), staff, and debate manuals. As Goldstein (26-29) notes, when monks at Se ra Byes revolted against the central government in 1947, Se ra sMad did not help them; when 'Bras spungs Blo gsal gling quarrelled with the Dalai Lama in 1921, 'Bras spungs sGo mang did not take their side. A monk's strongest loyalties are to his college and his regional house (khang tshan), a sub-collegiate unit with membership traditionally based on natal province. Some colleges have traditional regional affiliations based on the provinces represented by their constituent houses; thus, rivalries between colleges within a monastery may have a regional flavor. Each college maintains the hagiographical tradition of its most important author and, to a certain extent, takes his assertions as orthodoxy. Rivalries still rage between contiguous colleges using different textbooks. At 'Bras spungs, doctrinal disputes between Blo gsal gling and sGo mang turn on differences so thin that one hesitates to call them "philosophical." Yet analytical debate of such differences plays an enormous role in the manuals and the lives of those who use them. In debate with other colleges (during the winter session and at sMon lam) each monk is expected to uphold, insofar as possible, the assertions of his college's manuals. Outside the context of debate with other colleges, dGe lugs monks differ greatly in their attitudes toward "debate manual orthodoxy." Many regard their teachers and manuals as sources of unassailable truth, using their definitions as absolute reference points. On the other hand, there are always those who "consider the knowledge imparted to them as a tool...accepted provisionally in order to advance" on a quest that is at once philosophical and spiritual (Dreyfus: 10-12).

Notes

[2] The following paragraphs describe the general situation in the monastic universities, considering both the traditional context (pre-1959) and the contemporary context of the dGe lugs monasteries reestablished in exile near Mundgod and Bylakuppe, India. [3] Tsong kha pa established dGa' ldan in 1409; his student Byams chen chos rje founded 'Bras spungs in 1416 and Se ra (spelled Se rwa by some authorities) in 1419. Each held several thousand monks. Other major dGe lugs monastic universities include bKra shis lhun po, bKra shis 'kyil, and sKu 'bum. [page 212] Established in 1445 in gZhis ga rtse by dGe 'dun grub pa (who was posthumously entitled "First Dalai Lama"), bKra shis lhun po became the seat of the Paṇ chen Lama in the seventeenth century. bKra shis 'kyil was founded in eastern Tibet by the dGe lugs scholar 'Jam dbyangs bzhad pa Ngag dbang brtson 'grus, and sKu 'bum was founded in the sixteenth century at Tsong kha pa's birthplace.

The dGe lugs Curriculum The outline of the curriculum varies only slightly from college to college, and always includes five main phases (see also Onoda, in this volume):[page 207]

(1) study of logic, epistemology and psychology, based on Tibetan "Summarized Topics" (bsdus grwa) debate manuals deriving their content from Dharmakīrti's Pramānavārttika and other sources (three to six years) (2) study of the bodhisattva path and related topics in Prajñāpāramitā (phar phyin) literature, based mainly on Maitreya's Abhisamayālaṃkāra, its Indian and Tibetan commentaries, and the related debate manuals (five to seven years) (3) study of Mādhyamika (dbu ma) philosophy, based mainly on Candrakīrti's Madhyamakāvatāra, Tsong kha pa's dGongs pa rab gsal and Legs shes snying po, and the related debate manuals (four years\) (4) study of Abhidharma, based especially on Vasubandhu's Abhidharmakośa (mNgon par mdzod) and its commentaries (four years) (5) study of monastic discipline (vinaya, 'dul ba), based especially on Guṇaprabha's Vinayasūtra and the associated debate manuals (four years) Geshe Sopa (41-42) reports that the curriculum at the Byes college of Se ra includes three years for the first phase, five years for the second, and four years for each of the other three phases. At the sGo mang college of 'Bras spungs, six years are dedicated to the first phase and six or seven years to the second phase (Hopkins: 15; Klein: 220). Once a day classes meet with a teacher for about two hours of text-study; twice daily they meet in the courtyard for sessions of oral debate among students. Five or six weeks out of every year are set aside for an inter-monastic session of debate and study of Dharmakīrti's Pramāṇavarttika and related texts. Those who complete the five phases of the curriculum normally spend additional years reviewing and sharpening their debate skills before undergoing examination for the dge bshes degree at the Prayer Festival (sMon lam) celebrated during the first three weeks of the new year.

In this limited space we will mention some of the debate manuals used in the third (dbu ma) phase of this curriculum.