Die Erzahlstoffe des Mulasarvastivadavinaya. Jampa Losang Panglung. Studia Philologica Buddhica Monograph Series III, The Reiyukai Library, Tokyo 1981. xxxv+313 pp.

Que faire quand tout est perdu? Céder la place aux fantômes.

Let a great Tibetan scholar guide you through one of Nagarjuna’s masterworks. In Practical Ethics and Profound Emptiness Khensur Jampa Tegchok walks us carefully through a classic of Indian Buddhist philosophy, explaining the implications of its philosophical arguments and grounding its advice in a recognizable day-to-day world. In Precious Garland, the source text for this commentary, Nagarjuna advises his patron king on how best to take advantage of human life to secure a happy rebirth in the next life while (...) making progress toward the goal of enlightenment. Known primarily for his incisive presentation of emptiness, here Nagarjuna shows his wise understanding of how to navigate the intricacies of worldly life to balance everyday needs with spiritual practice. Loaded with equal measures of penetrating explanations of the highest reality and inspiring encouragement towards the bodhisattva practices, Practical Ethics and Profound Emptiness makes the case for living a thoughtful, morally upright life in the world to achieve immediate and ultimate spiritual goals. (shrink)

English description: Red mda' ba gZhon nu blo gros (1348-1412) played a pivotal role in the history of Tibetan Buddhists' engagement with Indian Madhyamaka, especially with regard to Candrakirti's interpretation of Nagarjuna. The lasting impact of this historical figure on the shape of Buddhist philosophy in Tibet - and particularly that of Madhyamaka - has been highly underestimated to date. Red mda' ba was an important teacher of scholastic Buddhist philosophy to the three main founders of Tibetan dGe lugs tradition. (...) On the basis of this biography, Red mda' ba's contribution to the spiritual culture of Buddhism at his time can now be analyzed. It elucidates his influence in upgrading philosophical studies and dialectics, and expanding scholastic education in the monasteries, as well as his contribution to Tsong kha pa's foundation of the dGe lugs pa school, the lineage to which the Dalai Lamas belong. This work therefore aims to present the first detailed exposition of this crucial figure of Tibetan culture. The thesis presents a critical edition and English translation of the biography of Red mda' ba. German description: Red mda' ba gZhon nu blo gros (1348-1412) spielte eine entscheidende Rolle in der Geschichte der Beschaftigung tibetischer Buddhisten mit der indischen Madhyamaka Philosophie, insbesondere hinsichtlich Candrakirtis Auslegung von Nagarjuna. Der nachhaltige Einfluss dieser historischen Figur auf die Form der buddhistischen Philosophie in Tibet - vor allem die des Madhyamaka - wurde bislang wesentlich unterschatzt. Red mda' ba war ein wichtiger Lehrer fur scholastische Buddhismus-Philosophie der drei Grundergestalten der tibetischen dGe lugs-Tradition. Auf der Grundlage dieser Biografie kann nun Red mda' bas Beitrag zur geistigen Kultur des Buddhismus seiner Zeit untersucht werden. Sie zeigt beispielsweise, wie Red mda' ba den Ausbau der philosophischen Studien und der Dialektik beeinflusste, die scholastische Ausbildung in den Klostern erweiterte und massgeblich an Tsong kha pas Grundung der dGe lugs pa-Schule mitwirkte, einer Richtung, der auch die Dalai Lamas angehoren. Daher ist es Ziel dieser Arbeit, eine erste umfassende Darstellung des Lebenswerkes und Vermachtnisses dieser Schlusselfigur tibetischer Kultur und Geistesgeschichte zu geben. Sie umfasst die kritische Edition und die englische Ubersetzung der Biografie von Red mda' ba. (shrink)

In his Precious Garland, a classic of Indian Buddhist philosophy, Nagarjuna advises a king on how best to secure a happy rebirth while making progress toward the ultimate goal of enlightenment. In Practical Ethics and Profound Emptiness, Khensur Jampa Tegchok walks us through the Precious Garland, drawing out the implications of its arguments and grounding its advice in our world today, with equal measures of penetrating explanation and inspiring encouragement.

Indian schools -- Introduction to Tibetan Buddhism -- The Nyingma tradition -- The Kadam tradition -- The Kagyü tradition -- The Shijé tradition -- The Sakya tradition -- The Jonang and minor traditions -- The Geluk tradition 1: Tsongkhapa -- The Geluk tradition 2: Tsongkhapa's successors -- The Geluk tradition 3: the distinctiveness of Geluk -- The Bon tradition -- Chinese traditions 1: non-Buddhist -- Chinese traditions 2: Buddhist -- Central Asian traditions.

What are the most important points of difference between the major schools of Buddhist philosophy? This rich, medium-length survey offers a lively answer. The introduction, aimed at those new to Buddhist thought, sets up a dialogue between the schools on the most controversial topics in Buddhist philosophy. Jamyang Shayba was the greatest Tibetan writer on philosophical tenets. Losang Gonchok's Clear Crystal Mirror, a concise commentary on Jamyang Shayba's root text, represents a distillation of many centuries of Indian and Tibetan (...) scholarship. Buddhist Philosophy skims the cream of Jamyang Shayba's intellect, providing a rare opportunity to sharpen our intellect and expand our view of Buddhist thought. (shrink)

It is well known in contemporary Madhyamaka studies that the seventh century Indian philosopher Candrakīrti rejects the foundationalist Abhidharma epistemology. The question that is still open to debate is: Does Candrakīrti offer any alternative Madhyamaka epistemology? One possible way of addressing this question is to find out what Candrakīrti says about the nature of buddha’s epistemic processes. We know that Candrakīrti has made some puzzling remarks on that score. On the one hand, he claims buddha is the pramāṇabhūta-puruṣa (person of (...) epistemic and moral authority), sarvākārajñatājñānaṃ (omniscient, wise), pratyakṣalakṣaṇam (exclusively perceptual in characteristic) [Candrakīrti (MABh VI.214)], and claims that there are clearly four pramāṇas—epistemic warrants—direct perception (pratyakṣa), inference (anumāna), testimony (āgama) and analogy (upamāna) [Candrakīrti (Pp I.3), cf. MacDonald 2015, pp. 287–288]. On the other hand, somewhat paradoxically, Candrakīrti claims that buddhahood is an embodiment of a complete cessation of “mind and mental processes” [Candrakīrti (MABh XI.1, 155a; MAB XI.17d)] Now how are we to make sense of these two seemingly contradictory statements? Do these statements reflect any deeper conflicts within Candrakīrti’s system or is there a coherent way to interpret these statements? The Tibetan Prāsaṅgika interpreters of Candrakīrti’s Madhyamaka largely agree that there is no internal contradiction in Candrakīrti’s system, and agree there is a way to make coherent sense of these statements. Nevertheless, the Tibetans exegetes bring to the table two radically conflicting proposals to approach Candrakīrti’s Mādhyamaka; both claiming to successfully address the apparent tension arising from Candrakīrti’s statements. One proposal is made by Tsongkhapa Losang Dakpa (Tsong kha pa bLo bzang grags pa, 1357–1419), who maintains the tension can be plausibly resolved by demonstrating that Candrakīrti’s unique non-foundationalist epistemological program renders him an epistemological coherentist. In contrast Taktsang Lotsawa Sherap Rinchen (sTag tshang Lo tsā ba Shes rab rin chen, 1405–1477) argues that according to Candrakīrti buddha is a global agnostic, on the ground of the nonexistence of mind and mental processes for those who have attained fully awakening. Taktsang instead proposes the no-mind thesis as a more plausible way to resolve the tension in Candrakīrti’s philosophy, categorically refusing to attribute to buddha any cognitive processes and epistemic warrants. This paper is an analysis of Taktsang’s no-mind thesis—the claim that buddhas utterly lack any knowledge of the world because they do not have epistemic processes and warrants to perceive the world—in what follows a rational reconstruction of his arguments is developed in order to evaluate his thesis. We shall then assess the implications of accepting Taktsang’s no-mind thesis. (shrink)

As a Madhyamaka philosopher, Taktsang Lotsawa Sherab Rinchen 1 is perhaps most widely known for his claim to have identified eighteen major contradictions in the thought of Tsongkhapa Losang Drakpa, a polemic discussion that appears in the Madhyamaka chapter of his encyclopedic Freedom from Extremes through Comprehensive Knowledge of Philosophy.2 In this article we will not pursue this critique, both renowned and infamous, but instead focus on Taktsang Lotsawa's own pragmatic hermeneutics of emptiness in context. Taktsang Lotsawa argues that (...) *Svātantrika 3 Mādhyamikas, in their drive to furnish the two... (shrink)

In the seven chapters constituting Khedrup Jé's presentation of mind and awareness, he primarily explains the full range of objects, including all phenomena that can be known, and object possessors, things that engage objects, such as consciousness and persons. In the first chapter, Khedrup Jé starts by explaining objects of knowledge. Chapter 2 gives an explanation of various non-valid awarenesses. Chapter 3 explains what it means to be a valid cognizer and divides valid cognizers into various categories. In chapter 4, (...) the first division, valid direct perceivers, is discussed. Chapter 4 further defines the four main categories of direct perceivers: sense direct perceivers, mental direct perceivers, self-knowing direct perceivers, and yogic direct perceivers. In chapter 5, Khedrup Jé gives a brilliant elucidation of this essential teachings of the Buddha. The realizations of the path, explained in chapter 6, are results of valid cognizers. Direct realization of selflessness can only come about by having realized it in a conceptual manner-that is, by generating a valid inference realizing selflessness-first. How to generate this kind of inference is precisely explained in chapter 7. In order to give readers some sense of the two main authors involved here, Khedrup Jé Gelek Palsang and Purbu Chok Jampa Gyatso, whom we mainly rely on for additional explanations, brief biographies of these two eminent Buddhist scholars are given at the close of this introduction. (shrink)