Misplaced Pages

#913086

55-592: The name Sānlùn derives from the fact that its doctrinal basis is formed by three principal Madhyamaka texts composed by the Indian Buddhist philosophers Nāgārjuna ( Longshu , 龍樹), and Āryadeva , which were then translated into Chinese by the Kuchean monk Kumārajīva ( pinyin : Jiūmóluóshí ) and his team of Chinese translators in Chang'an 's Xiaoyao garden. These three foundational texts are: Sometimes

110-466: A neo-Kantian and thus making ultimate truth a metaphysical noumenon or an "ineffable ultimate that transcends the capacities of discursive reason", others such as Mark Siderits and Jay L. Garfield have argued that Nāgārjuna's view is that "the ultimate truth is that there is no ultimate truth" (Siderits) and that Nāgārjuna is a "semantic anti-dualist" who posits that there are only conventional truths. Hence according to Garfield: Suppose that we take

165-451: A conventional entity, such as a table. We analyze it to demonstrate its emptiness, finding that there is no table apart from its parts [...]. So we conclude that it is empty. But now let us analyze that emptiness [...]. What do we find? Nothing at all but the table's lack of inherent existence. [...]. To see the table as empty [...] is to see the table as conventional, as dependent. Jizang Too Many Requests If you report this error to

220-501: A favorite in the Chan school who considers him a patriarch. Sēngzhào saw the central problem in understanding emptiness as the discriminatory activity of prapañca . According to Sēngzhào , delusion arises through a dependent relationship between phenomenal things, naming, thought and reification and correct understanding lies outside of words and concepts. Thus, while emptiness is the lack of intrinsic self in all things, this emptiness

275-469: A fourth text is added, changing the collection's title to the "Four Treatises" (Ch. 四論, pinyin: Silun): Another text translated by Kumārajīva and his team, the Satyasiddhi shastra ( Ch'eng-shih lun ), while not being a Madhyamaka text per se, was influential in the study of Chinese Madhyamaka, since it also taught the emptiness of dharmas. Sengrui was one of Kumārajīva's main disciples--he aided in

330-456: A kind of ontological anti-foundationalism or a metaphysical anti-realism . Understanding the nature of the emptiness of phenomena is simply a means to an end, which is nirvana . Thus Nāgārjuna's philosophical project is ultimately a soteriological one meant to correct our everyday cognitive processes which mistakenly posits svabhāva on the flow of experience. Some scholars such as Fyodor Shcherbatskoy and T.R.V. Murti held that Nāgārjuna

385-880: A minority and largely unrecognized movement within the fold of nikāya Buddhism." By the second century, early Mahāyāna Sūtras such as the Aṣṭasāhasrikā Prajñāpāramitā were already circulating among certain Mahāyāna circles. Very little is reliably known of the life of Nāgārjuna and modern historians do not agree on a specific date (1st to 3rd century CE) or place (multiple places in India suggested) for him. The earliest surviving accounts were written in Chinese and Tibetan centuries after his death and are mostly hagiographical accounts that are historically unverifiable. Some scholars such as Joseph Walser argue that Nāgārjuna

440-451: A naga can be a symbol of a realised arhat or wise person. Traditional sources also claim that Nāgārjuna practised ayurvedic alchemy ( rasayāna ). Kumārajīva's biography for example, has Nāgārjuna making an elixir of invisibility, and Bus-ton, Taranatha and Xuanzang all state that he could turn rocks into gold. Tibetan hagiographies also state that Nāgārjuna studied at Nālanda University. However, according to Walser, this university

495-544: A permanent and eternal substance ( svabhava ) because, like a dream, they are mere projections of human consciousness. Since these imaginary fictions are experienced, they are not mere names ( prajnapti ) ." According to David Seyfort Ruegg , the Madhyamakasastrastuti attributed to Candrakirti ( c.  600 – c. 650) refers to eight texts by Nagarjuna: the (Madhyamaka)karikas , the Yuktisastika ,

550-567: A practical application of Madhyamika thought." In the early part of the 20th century, the laymen Yang Wenhui and Ouyang Jian (Ch. 歐陽漸 ) (1871–1943) promoted Buddhist learning in China, and the general trend was for an increase in studies of Buddhist traditions such as Yogācāra , Madhyamaka , and the Huayan school . A major influential figure in the modern Chinese study of Madhyamaka is Yìnshùn (印順導師, 1906–2005) . Yìnshùn applied his study of

605-513: A similar debate format to Nagarjuna's MMK . Sēngzhào is often seen as the founder of the Sānlùn school proper . His philosophy drew from various sources, including the three treatises, Mahayana sutras such as the Vimalakirti sutra , as well as Taoist works such as Lao-tzu , Chuang-tzu and Neo-Daoist "Mystery Learning" ( xuanxue 玄学) texts. His use of Taoist influenced paradoxes made him

SECTION 10

#1732779995914

660-452: A single, coherent philosophical system," and are attributed to Nagarjuna by a variety of Indian and Tibetan sources. The Tibetan historian Buston considers the first six to be the main treatises of Nāgārjuna (this is called the "yukti corpus", rigs chogs ), while according to Tāranātha only the first five are the works of Nāgārjuna. TRV Murti considers Ratnāvalī , Pratītyasamutpādahṝdaya and Sūtrasamuccaya to be works of Nāgārjuna as

715-787: A thirty-year period at the end of the second century in the Andhra region around Dhanyakataka (modern-day Amaravati )." According to Walser, "the earliest extant legends about Nāgārjuna are compiled into Kumārajīva ’s biography of Nāgārjuna, which he translated into Chinese in about 405 CE." According to this biography, Nāgārjuna was born into a Brahmin family and later became a Buddhist. The traditional religious hagiographies place Nāgārjuna in various regions of India (Kumārajīva and Candrakirti place him in Vidarbha region of South India, Xuanzang in south Kosala ) Traditional religious hagiographies credit Nāgārjuna with being associated with

770-445: A useful summary of this tradition, see Wedemeyer 2007. Lindtner sees the author of some of these tantric works as being a tantric Nagarjuna who lives much later, sometimes called "Nagarjuna II". Nāgārjuna's major thematic focus is the concept of śūnyatā (translated into English as "emptiness") which brings together other key Buddhist doctrines, particularly anātman "not-self" and pratītyasamutpāda "dependent origination", to refute

825-710: Is Nāgārjuna's best-known work. It is "not only a grand commentary on the Buddha's discourse to Kaccayana , the only discourse cited by name, but also a detailed and careful analysis of most of the important discourses included in the Nikayas and the Agamas , especially those of the Atthakavagga of the Sutta-nipata . Utilizing the Buddha's theory of "dependent arising" ( pratitya-samutpada ) , Nagarjuna demonstrated

880-505: Is a disease (ping). It is the root of all erroneous or perverted views. The cure of the disease lies not so much in developing a new metaphysical theory as in understanding the proper nature and function of human conceptualization and language. Chi-tsang, following Nagarjuna, claims that the very language men create and use plays a trick on them and destroys their "eyes of wisdom." Enlightened men should discard conceptualization so as to avoid being taken in by this trick. Emptiness, for Chi-tsang,

935-424: Is a medicine (yao) for curing the "philosophical disease". Jízàng called his philosophical method "deconstructing what is misleading and revealing what is corrective". He insisted that one must never settle on any particular viewpoint or perspective but constantly reexamine one's formulations to avoid rectification of thought and behavior. In addition to popularizing Madhyamaka, Jízàng also wrote commentaries on

990-760: Is known to have had two Buddhist mentors from the Sanron school. Ekan is also known for introducing the Jōjitsu ( Satyasiddhi ) school to Japan and the Satyasiddhi system was taught as a supplement, together with Madhyamaka, in Japanese Sanron. During the Heian period , an important Sanron figure was master Chiko (709–781), whose commentary on the Heart Sutra became a classic work of Heian Buddhist scholarship and

1045-459: Is most likely that when Nāgārjuna wrote the Ratnavali , he lived in a mixed monastery (with Mahāyānists and non-Mahāyānists) in which Mahāyānists were the minority. The most likely sectarian affiliation of the monastery according to Walser was Purvasailya, Aparasailya, or Caityaka (which were Mahāsāṃghika sub-schools). He also argues that "it is plausible that he wrote the Ratnavali within

1100-608: Is not itself an absolute and cannot be grasped by the conceptual mind, it can be only be realized through non-conceptual wisdom ( prajña ). An important Sānlùn figure during the Tang dynasty was Fa-lang (507–581). He studied widely under various teachers, including the Madhyamaka master Seng-chuan (470–528) and eventually received an imperial decree to reside at Hsing Huang monastery in Ch'ien-k'ang , where he continued to give sermons on

1155-616: Is the Shih-erh-men-lun or 'Twelve-topic treatise' (* Dvadasanikaya or * Dvadasamukha-sastra ); one of the three basic treatises of the Sanlun school ( East Asian Madhyamaka ). Several works considered important in esoteric Buddhism are attributed to Nāgārjuna and his disciples by traditional historians like Tāranātha from 17th century Tibet. These historians try to account for chronological difficulties with various theories, such as seeing later writings as mystical revelations. For

SECTION 20

#1732779995914

1210-569: The Dà zhìdù lùn ( Taisho 1509, "Commentary on the great prajñaparamita ") which has been influential in Chinese Buddhism, has been questioned as a genuine work of Nāgārjuna by various scholars including Lamotte . This work is also only attested in a Chinese translation by Kumārajīva and is unknown in the Tibetan and Indian traditions. Other works are extant only in Chinese, one of these

1265-528: The Mūlamadhyamakakārikā provides one of Nāgārjuna's most famous quotations on emptiness and co-arising: sarvaṃ ca yujyate tasya śūnyatā yasya yujyate sarvaṃ na yujyate tasya śūnyaṃ yasya na yujyate All is possible when emptiness is possible. Nothing is possible when emptiness is impossible. As part of his analysis of the emptiness of phenomena in the Mūlamadhyamakakārikā , Nāgārjuna critiques svabhāva in several different concepts. He discusses

1320-1130: The Bhavasamkranti, and the Dasabhumtkavibhāsā. Furthermore, Ruegg writes that "three collections of stanzas on the virtues of intelligence and moral conduct ascribed to Nagarjuna are extant in Tibetan translation": Prajñasatakaprakarana , Nitisastra-Jantuposanabindu and Niti-sastra-Prajñadanda. Meanwhile, those texts that Lindtner considers as questionable and likely inauthentic are: Aksarasataka, Akutobhaya (Mulamadhyamakavrtti), Aryabhattaraka-Manjusriparamarthastuti, Kayatrayastotra, Narakoddharastava, Niruttarastava, Vandanastava, Dharmasamgraha, Dharmadhatugarbhavivarana, Ekaslokasastra, Isvarakartrtvanirakrtih (A refutation of God/Isvara), Sattvaradhanastava, Upayahrdaya, Astadasasunyatasastra, Dharmadhatustava, Yogaratnamala. Meanwhile, Lindtner's list of outright wrong attributions is: Mahāprajñāpāramitopadeśa (Dà zhìdù lùn), Abudhabodhakaprakarana , Guhyasamajatantratika , Dvadasadvaraka , Prajñaparamitastotra, and Svabhavatrayapravesasiddhi. Notably,

1375-707: The Guanzhong-chu chanjing xu ( Preface to the Meditation Manual Translated in the Guanzhong Area , T. 55: 65 a–b) (dates uncertain) . Another of Kumārajīva's main disciples, Sēngzhào continued to promote Madhyamaka teachings, and wrote several works from this standpoint, his main one being the Zhao Lun . Two of the essays in this work ( Prajña Is Without Dichotomizing Knowledge and Nirvana Is Without Conceptualization ) follow

1430-589: The Mahāyāna movement. His Mūlamadhyamakakārikā ( Root Verses on Madhyamaka , MMK) is the most important text on the Madhyamaka philosophy of emptiness . The MMK inspired a large number of commentaries in Sanskrit, Chinese, Tibetan, Korean and Japanese and continues to be studied today. India in the first and second centuries CE was politically divided into various states, including the Kushan Empire and

1485-533: The Mahāyāna sūtras such as the Lotus Sūtra , the Vimalakīrti Nirdeśa Sūtra and Tathāgatagarbha teachings. After Jízàng , the school declined considerably, though its texts remained influential for other traditions such as Tiantai and Chan Buddhism. In, Chan (Zen), Nagarjuna is seen as one of the patriarchs of the school and thus its key figures such as Huineng must have been familiar with

1540-607: The Satavahana Kingdom . At this point in Buddhist history , the Buddhist community was already divided into various Buddhist schools and had spread throughout India. At this time, there was already a small and nascent Mahāyāna movement. Mahāyāna ideas were held by a minority of Buddhists in India at the time. As Joseph Walser writes, "Mahāyāna before the fifth century was largely invisible and probably existed only as

1595-687: The Sunyatasaptati , the Vigrahavyavartani , the Vidala (i.e. Vaidalyasutra/Vaidalyaprakarana ), the Ratnavali , the Sutrasamuccaya , and Samstutis (Hymns). This list covers not only much less than the grand total of works ascribed to Nagarjuna in the Chinese and Tibetan collections, but it does not even include all such works that Candrakirti has himself cited in his writings. According to one view, that of Christian Lindtner,

1650-539: The Chinese Agamas to Madhyamaka, and argued that the works of Nagarjuna were "the inheritance of the conceptualisation of dependent arising as proposed in the Agamas ". Yìnshùn saw the writings of Nagarjuna as the correct Buddhadharma while considering the writings of the Sānlùn school as being corrupted due to their synthesizing of the Tathagata-garbha doctrine into Madhyamaka. While he

1705-638: The Four Treatises for twenty five years. The most influential Sānlùn scholar of the Tang was Fa-lang's pupil Jízàng (549–623), a prolific writer who composed commentaries on these three treatises. One of his most famous works is the Erdi Yi (二諦意), or "Meaning of the Two Truths", referring to the conventional and ultimate truths. In one passage of the Erdi Yi , Jizang cites Falang, and argues that

East Asian Mādhyamaka - Misplaced Pages Continue

1760-433: The development of the two truths doctrine , which claims that there are two levels of truth in Buddhist teaching, the ultimate truth ( paramārtha satya ) and the conventional or superficial truth ( saṃvṛtisatya ). The ultimate truth to Nāgārjuna is the truth that everything is empty of essence, this includes emptiness itself ('the emptiness of emptiness'). While some (Murti, 1955) have interpreted this by positing Nāgārjuna as

1815-538: The emptiness school”,  however, “I do not belong to any particular school of thought within the emptiness schools”. Many modern Chinese Mādhyamaka scholars such as Li Zhifu, Yang Huinan and Lan Jifu have been students of Yìnshùn . The school was known in Japan as Sanron (三論宗) and was introduced around 625 by the Korean Goguryeo monk Hyegwan (Jp. = Ekan 慧灌) who resided at Gangōji Temple . Prince Shōtoku

1870-499: The first two are quoted profusely by Chandrakirti and the third by Shantideva . In addition to works mentioned above, numerous other works are attributed to Nāgārjuna, many of which are dubious attributions and later works. There is an ongoing, lively controversy over which of those works are authentic. Christian Lindtner divides the various attributed works as "1) correctly attributed, 2) wrongly attributed to him, and 3) those which may or may not be genuine." Lindtner further divides

1925-488: The four treatises have the same goal, "to explain the two truths and manifest the doctrine of non-duality". Jízàng criticized numerous Chinese Buddhists for their unwarranted metaphysical assumptions. He ultimately rejects all metaphysical assertions of being and non-being as dogmatic conceptual confusions. Thus according to Hsueh-Lu Cheng, for Jízàng : True wisdom (prajña) is the abandonment of all views. Chi-tsang argues that metaphysical speculation of Being and Nothingness

1980-406: The four treatises. According to Hsueh-li Cheng, "Zen masters such as Niu-t'ou fa-yung (594–657) and Nan-ch'uan P'u-yuan (748–834) were San-Iun Buddhists before they became Zen masters." Furthermore, major Sānlùn tenets such as the negation of conceptualization, the rejection of all views, and the twofold truth were adopted by Zen, thus Hsueh-li Cheng concludes that "in many respects Zen appears to be

2035-648: The futility of [...] metaphysical speculations. His method of dealing with such metaphysics is referred to as "middle way" ( madhyama pratipad ). It is the middle way that avoided the substantialism of the Sarvastivadins as well as the nominalism of the Sautrantikas . In the Mūlamadhyamakakārikā , "[A]ll experienced phenomena are empty ( sunya ) . This did not mean that they are not experienced and, therefore, non-existent; only that they are devoid of

2090-625: The medieval period, and the 3rd-4th century inscriptions found at the site make it clear that it was known as "Vijayapuri" in the ancient period. There are a multitude of texts attributed to "Nāgārjuna", many of these texts date from much later periods. This has caused much confusion for the traditional Buddhist biographers and doxographers . Modern scholars are divided on how to classify these later texts and how many later writers called "Nāgārjuna" existed (the name remains popular today in Andhra Pradesh). Some scholars have posited that there

2145-434: The metaphysics of some of his contemporaries. For Nāgārjuna, as for the Buddha in the early texts, it is not merely sentient beings that are "selfless" or non-substantial; all phenomena (dhammas) are without any svabhāva , literally "own-being", "self-nature", or "inherent existence" and thus without any underlying essence. They are empty of being independently existent; thus the heterodox theories of svabhāva circulating at

2200-532: The most authoritative commentary on the Heart Sutra in the early Heian. This commentary criticized the Hosso (Yogacara) school's interpretation of the Heart Sutra, promoted the Heart Sutra as a text of definitive meaning (nītārtha) while also drawing on the work of Jizang. This school was later overshadowed by other Japanese schools such as Tendai and Zen. Nagarjuna Nāgārjuna ( Sanskrit : नागार्जुन, Nāgārjuna ; c.  150  – c.  250 CE )

2255-553: The mountain of Śrīparvata near the city that would later be called Nāgārjunakoṇḍa ("Hill of Nāgārjuna"). The ruins of Nāgārjunakoṇḍa are located in Guntur district , Andhra Pradesh . The Caitika and Bahuśrutīya nikāyas are known to have had monasteries in Nāgārjunakoṇḍa. The archaeological finds at Nāgārjunakoṇḍa have not resulted in any evidence that the site was associated with Nagarjuna. The name "Nāgārjunakoṇḍa" dates from

East Asian Mādhyamaka - Misplaced Pages Continue

2310-461: The problems of positing any sort of inherent essence to causation, movement, change and personal identity. Nāgārjuna makes use of the Indian logical tool of the tetralemma to attack any essentialist conceptions. Nāgārjuna's logical analysis is based on four basic propositions: To say that all things are 'empty' is to deny any kind of ontological foundation; therefore Nāgārjuna's view is often seen as

2365-491: The same name who was said to have travelled to the Himalayas. Walser thinks that it is possible that stories related to this figure influenced Buddhist legends as well. [REDACTED] Religion portal There exist a number of influential texts attributed to Nāgārjuna; however, as there are many pseudepigrapha attributed to him, lively controversy exists over which are his authentic works. The Mūlamadhyamakakārikā

2420-822: The teaching of the Prajñāpāramitā sūtras as well as with having revealed these scriptures to the world after they had remained hidden for some time. The sources differ on where this happened and how Nāgārjuna retrieved the sutras. Some sources say he retrieved the sutras from the land of the nāgas . Nāgārjuna himself is often depicted in composite form comprising human and nāga characteristics. Nāgas are snake-like supernatural beings of great magical power that feature in Hindu , Buddhist and Jain mythology . Nāgas are found throughout Indian religious culture, and typically signify intelligent serpents or dragons that are responsible for rain, lakes, and other bodies of water. In Buddhism,

2475-480: The texts that he considers "least controversial": Mūlamadhyamaka-kārikā, Vigrahavyāvartanī, Śūnyatāsaptati, Yuktiṣāṣṭika , Catuḥstava , Vaidalyaprakaraṇa and Ratnāvalī . Similarly, Jan Westerhoff notes how there is uncertainty about the attribution of Nagarjuna's works (and about his life in general). He relies on six works: MMK, Vigrahavyāvartanī, Śūnyatāsaptati, Yuktiṣāṣṭika , Vaidalyaprakaraṇa and Ratnāvalī, all of which "expound

2530-544: The third category of dubious or questionable texts into those which are "perhaps authentic" and those who are unlikely to be authentic. Those which he sees as perhaps being authentic include: Ruegg notes various works of uncertain authorship which have been attributed to Nagarjuna, including the Dharmadhatustava (Hymn to the Dharmadhatu , which shows later influences), Mahayanavimsika, Salistambakarikas,

2585-467: The time were refuted on the basis of the doctrines of early Buddhism. This is so because all things arise always dependently: not by their own power, but by depending on conditions leading to their becoming —coming into existence —, as opposed to being . Nāgārjuna means by real any entity which has a nature of its own (svabhāva), which is not produced by causes (akrtaka), which is not dependent on anything else (paratra nirapeksha). Chapter 24 verse 14 of

2640-675: The translation project of numerous texts, including the Middle Treatise and the Pañcaviṃśatisāhasrikā Prajñāpāramitā Sūtra . Six days after Kumārajīva arrived in Chang'an, Sengrui requested that he translate a meditation manual now understood to be the Zuochan sanmei jing ( Sutra of sitting dhyāna samādhi , Taisho 15 no. 614). Sengrui refers to this manual as "Chanyao" 禪要 in the preface he wrote for it:

2695-489: The works definitely written by Nāgārjuna are: Other scholars have challenged and argued against some of the above works being Nagarjuna's. David F. Burton notes that Christian Lindtner is "rather liberal" with his list of works and that other scholars have called some of these into question. He notes how Paul Williams argued convincingly that the Bodhicittavivaraṇa must be a later text. In his study, Burton relies on

2750-403: Was a separate Aryuvedic writer called Nāgārjuna who wrote numerous treatises on Rasayana . Also, there is a later Tantric Buddhist author by the same name who may have been a scholar at Nālandā University and wrote on Buddhist tantra . According to Donald S. Lopez Jr. , he originally belonged to a Brahmin family from eastern India and later became Buddhist. There is also a Jain figure of

2805-466: Was an Indian monk and Mahāyāna Buddhist philosopher of the Madhyamaka (Centrism, Middle Way) school. He is widely considered one of the most important Buddhist philosophers. Jan Westerhoff considers him to be "one of the greatest thinkers in the history of Asian philosophy ." Nāgārjuna is widely considered to be the founder of the Madhyamaka school of Buddhist philosophy and a defender of

SECTION 50

#1732779995914

2860-573: Was an advisor to a king of the Sātavāhana dynasty which ruled the Deccan Plateau in the second century. This is supported by most of the traditional hagiographical sources as well. Archaeological evidence at Amarāvatī indicates that if this is true, the king may have been Yajña Śrī Śātakarṇi (c. second half of the 2nd century). On the basis of this association, Nāgārjuna is conventionally placed at around 150–250 CE. Walser thinks that it

2915-456: Was not a strong monastic center until about 425. Also, as Walser notes, "Xuanzang and Yijing both spent considerable time at Nālanda and studied Nāgārjuna’s texts there. It is strange that they would have spent so much time there and yet chose not to report any local tales of a man whose works played such an important part in the curriculum." Some sources ( Bu-ston and the other Tibetan historians) claim that in his later years, Nāgārjuna lived on

2970-597: Was seen among his colleagues as a Sānlùn scholar, he himself did not claim such direct affiliation: In Zhōngguān jīnlùn (中觀今論 Modern Discussion on the Madhyamaka) [pg. 18, 24], I stated:  “Amongst my teachers and friends, I am seen as a scholar of either the Three Treatise (三論 sanlun) or the Emptiness schools”, although I “certainly do have great affinities with the fundamental and essential doctrines of

3025-508: Was the inventor of the Shunyata doctrine; however, more recent work by scholars such as Choong Mun-keat, Yin Shun and Dhammajothi Thero has argued that Nāgārjuna was not an innovator by putting forth this theory, but that, in the words of Shi Huifeng, "the connection between emptiness and dependent origination is not an innovation or creation of Nāgārjuna". Nāgārjuna was also instrumental in

#913086