9 Zhentong Traces in the Nyingma Tradition Two Texts from Mindroling Copyright © 2019. State University of New York Press. All rights reserved. Matthew T. Kapstein Our knowledge of the reception and assessment of Dolpopa Sherab Gyaltsen’s (1292–1361) distinctive teaching of zhentong1 among adherents of the Nyingma lineages remains spotty at best. Indeed, it is not even clear that we are entitled to speak of a discrete Nyingma “school” at any time in the past that had a definite standpoint with respect to the issue. The two figures now most often cited as fountainheads of Nyingma doctrinal thought—Rongzom Chokyi Zangpo (11th c.) and Longchen Rabjampa (1308–1364)—though aligned with trends that are now considered to be broadly harmonious with zhentong, did not engage with it directly: the former, after all, lived several centuries prior to Dolpopa;2 and Longchenpa, though Dolpopa’s contemporary, never seems to have addressed himself to the Jonang master’s contributions, despite the evident affinities between them on a number of points.3 Over the past several centuries, however, leading Nyingma authors have sometimes made explicit their standpoint regarding zhentong, and it is now evident that there has been no uniform view among them in regard to the matter. Two of the key figures associated with the eighteenth-century renewal of Katok Monastery in Kham are known to have played cardinal roles in introducing zhentong thought into the Nyingma mainstream. Although the first of these, Katok Rikzin Tsewang Norbu (1698–1755), seems to have been moved primarily by his considerable interest in the Jonang and allied traditions as distinct lines of Buddhist tantric teaching in Tibet,4 it was the prolific Katok Getse Pan.d.ita Tsewang Chokdrub (1761–1829) who most forcefully advocated the zhentong approach to “Great Madhyamaka” in the context of properly Nyingma expositions of Mahāyāna doctrine.5 The doctrinal writings of the best-known twentieth-century successor to Getse Pan.d.ita’s line of 235 The Other Emptiness : Rethinking the Zhentong Buddhist Discourse in Tibet, edited by Michael R. Sheehy, and Klaus-Dieter Mathes, State University of New York Press, 2019. ProQuest Ebook Central, http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/uchicago/detail.action?docID=5992418. Created from uchicago on 2021-01-21 02:20:10. Copyright © 2019. State University of New York Press. All rights reserved. 236 Matthew T. Kapstein thought, Dudjom Rinpoche Jikdrel Yeshe Dorje (1904–1987), have contributed to a general impression that the Nyingma are to be placed firmly in the zhentong camp.6 Other voices, however, urge us to be cautious in this regard. The Nyingmapa thinker whose doctrinal and philosophical views have been perhaps the most influential in recent decades, Mipam Namgyel Gyatso (1846–1912), seems to have been reserved in his embrace of zhentong.7 His preferred idiom was clearly that of tazhi trödrel (mtha’ bzhi spros bral), “absence of elaboration with respect to the four extremes,” an “anti-standpoint” that reflects the Madhyamaka thought of the Sakya master Gorampa Sonam Sengge (1429–1489) and that in any case resonates well with Longchenpa’s apophaticism.8 Although those who are partial to the zhentong teaching have sometimes sought to claim Mipam as one of their own, it seems clear, on reading Mipam’s own works, that he was prepared to endorse zhentong discourse chiefly in the relatively restrained context of “conventions pertaining to pure vision” (rnam dag gzigs snang gi tha snyad) and not in regard to the proper characterization of the absolute.9 Some even go so far (at least in oral teaching if not in writing) as to hold that Mipam’s apparent gestures in support of zhentong represent only sketches of positions to adopt in debate, should one be challenged to defend it.10 Still other Nyingma thinkers remained entirely aloof to the zhentong question and, in a few cases, appear to have regarded zhentong with disapproval. One of Mipam’s contemporaries, Tubten Chokyi Drakpa (a.k.a. Minyak Kunzang Sonam, 1823–ca. 1905), for instance, clearly favored a Geluk approach to Madhyamaka, from which any concession to zhentong thought was excluded.11 He was not alone, . by any means, in espousing Prāsangika-Mādhyamika along the lines delineated by Tsongkhapa as marking the summit of the teaching of the sūtras, while affirming practice in the Seminal Essence tradition of the Great Perfection (rdzogs chen snying thig) to be the culmination of the tantras. Indeed, it is my impression that some such synthesis was closer to the norm in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries, particularly in Kham and Amdo, than was any affirmation of Dzokchen teaching . tinged by the zhentong doctrine. This harmonization of Prāsangika-Mādhyamika and the teachings of the Seminal Essence is particularly well exemplified in the work of Jigme Lingpa (1730–1798) and certain of his successors and commentators.12 All of this gives rise to uncertainty concerning the precise relationship between zhentong and Nyingma teaching. Is it best to regard zhentong as a brotherin-arms of Nyingma instruction, a distant cousin, or a complete stranger? And if these and perhaps other options are available, might we not be warranted to conclude that the zhentong problematic is in the last analysis irrelevant when seen from the Nyingma vantage point? This situation reflects in part the fact that, among the Nyingma, the formation of monastic colleges came relatively late. Although the old Zur lineage, during the eleventh and twelfth centuries, appears to have created a well-formed curriculum based principally on tantric exegesis, and though this tradition had some degree of continuity in the subsequent development of a distinct line of teaching at Katok The Other Emptiness : Rethinking the Zhentong Buddhist Discourse in Tibet, edited by Michael R. Sheehy, and Klaus-Dieter Mathes, State University of New York Press, 2019. ProQuest Ebook Central, http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/uchicago/detail.action?docID=5992418. Created from uchicago on 2021-01-21 02:20:10. Copyright © 2019. State University of New York Press. All rights reserved. Zhentong Traces in the Nyingma Tradition 237 monastery in Kham,13 most Nyingma masters, if they received scholastic training at all, did so under the aegis of one or another of the new schools. Longchenpa’s education at the Kadam college of Sangpu is a case in point.14 It is perhaps not surprising, therefore, that Nyingma thought evolved without a clear “party line” formulated in respect to zhentong. In all events, Dolpopa’s teaching was never thought to be integral to the distinctive Nyingma tantric doctrines, despite its apparent affinities with aspects of them,15 and the Nyingma perhaps did not perceive themselves as having much of a stake in fully clarifying their assessment of zhentong doctrine. This all began to change, however, during the seventeenth century, when, in tandem with, and to some degree under pressure from, the rising Ganden Potrang regime in Central Tibet, the modern Nyingma monastic system emerged and with it the formation of a system of Nyingma monastic colleges (bshad grwa). From this time on, and particularly during the nineteenth century, we find clear evidence of a drive to produce suitable Nyingma textbooks to guide instruction in the exoteric subjects as well as in tantra.16 It is in the light of these circumstances that the passages considered here seem particularly pertinent. They derive from the writings of two of the preeminent masters of Mindroling, the leading Central Tibetan Nyingma center,17 whose intimate connections with the Fifth Dalai Lama and the Ganden Potrang government that he founded might lead us to anticipate that they would have either rejected or quietly ignored the whole matter of zhentong. For by their time that doctrine, which was closely associated with the Jonang tradition that had been condemned by the Great Fifth and his court, had come to be considered to all intents and purposes anathema. The first author we shall consider here, Lochen Dharmaśrī (1654–1717), was one of those responsible, under the guidance of his elder brother Terdak Lingpa Gyurme Dorje (1646–1714), for the ascension of Mindroling overall.18 This involved a sustained effort on the part of the brothers to establish the ritual protocols of the Nyingma on the basis of the surest available lines of teaching, an effort reflected above all in their contributions to the redaction of the Nyingma Kama (Rnying ma bka’ ma), the “Oral Tradition of the Nyingma,” embodying the lineages of tantric teaching believed to reach back to the epoch of the Tibetan monarch Tri Songdetsen (r. 755–c. 797).19 Because the proper transmission of the vows, rules, and guidelines associated with each of the three grades of Buddhist practice—respectively, those governing adherence to the prātimoks.a, the lifestyle of the bodhisattva, and the practice of the tantras—provides the framework for the entire edifice, it is not surprising that the establishment of a correct understanding of these regulations became a major preoccupation for the Nyingma order. For this reason, in response to the entreaties of the contemporary Dorje Drak Rikzin, Pema Trinle (1641–1717), who was the head of the Northern Treasure (Jangter) lineage and of the important Nyingma monastery of Dorje Drak,20 we find Lochen Dharmaśrī composing, in 1708, what appears to be the first commentary on the preeminent Nyingma synthesis of the system of the Buddhist vows, the Ascertainment of the Three Vows The Other Emptiness : Rethinking the Zhentong Buddhist Discourse in Tibet, edited by Michael R. Sheehy, and Klaus-Dieter Mathes, State University of New York Press, 2019. ProQuest Ebook Central, http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/uchicago/detail.action?docID=5992418. Created from uchicago on 2021-01-21 02:20:10. Copyright © 2019. State University of New York Press. All rights reserved. 238 Matthew T. Kapstein (Sdom gsum rnam nges) by Ngari Pan.chen Pema Wangyel (1487–1543).21 The perceived importance of Lochen Dharmaśrī’s commentary may be gauged from the fact that, at the request once more of the Dorje Drak Rikzin, and with the additional encouragements of his brother Terdak Lingpa, the finished work was published xylographically at Mindroling within a year of its completion.22 There was, it must be stressed, nothing at all in Ngari Pan.chen’s text that required a comment on zhentong. Nevertheless, in the section treating the vows of the bodhisattva, and the progression along the path of the Six Perfections (pāramitā) that this entails, we find a relatively detailed amplification of the single line of the root text that reads: “One practices the profound wisdom of audition, reflection, and contemplation” (thos bsam sgom pa’i shes rab zab mo spyad).23 Remarkably, it is here that Lochen Dharmaśrī inserts a brief but lucid account of the rangtong / zhentong distinction, elaborating at the same time a synopsis of the path that allows us to see just how he believed this distinction to operate within the system of Nyingma Buddhism overall. The second work to be discussed, intended to supplement Lochen Dharmaśrī’s commentary on the three vows, was written by Lochen’s brilliant nephew, Terdak Lingpa’s son Terse Pema Gyurme Gyatso (1686–1717), following the teaching of the commentary in 1710 by a master he names only as Kenchen Lama-chok, the “venerable guru and great preceptor,” but who was certainly his uncle, who held the title of second Kenchen (“great preceptor, abbot”) of Mindroling.24 Both of these distinguished masters, uncle and nephew, perished as victims of the Dzungar assault on the Nyingma monasteries of Central Tibet in 1717, as did the Dorje Drak Rikzin.25 Given their authoritative status, we may take their remarks on our subject as definitive representations of the assessment of zhentong affirmed at Mindroling during the early eighteenth century and subsequently influential throughout its extensive network of branch monasteries and Nyingma centers at large. Zhentong in Lochen Dharmaśrī’s Wish-Granting Sheaf (Dpag bsam snye ma) The context for Lochen Dharmaśrī’s introduction of zhentong into the exposition of the Ascertainment of the Three Vows appears toward the end of the second section of the work, concerning the vows of the bodhisattva. Ngari Pan.chen’s text includes here a terse summary of the manner in which the aspirant bodhisattva is to adhere to the six perfections, the excellences (pāramitā) of the Mahāyāna path. Concerning the sixth, the perfection of discernment, or wisdom (prajñāpāramitā), he says only, as we have seen, “One practices the profound wisdom of audition, reflection, and contemplation.” This, of course, is the well-known threefold training in wisdom, consisting of the wisdom of receiving the teaching by hearing it from one’s masters (śrutamayī-), of penetrating its meaning through critical investigation of it (cintāmayī-), and, finally, of assimilating it into the fabric of one’s life by means of the discipline of meditation (bhāvanāmayī-prajñā). I translate here Dharmaśrī’s commentary on this short passage in its entirety: The Other Emptiness : Rethinking the Zhentong Buddhist Discourse in Tibet, edited by Michael R. Sheehy, and Klaus-Dieter Mathes, State University of New York Press, 2019. ProQuest Ebook Central, http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/uchicago/detail.action?docID=5992418. Created from uchicago on 2021-01-21 02:20:10. Zhentong Traces in the Nyingma Tradition 239 With respect to its meaning, there are three topics: 1. The essential nature of wisdom is a virtuous attentiveness, endowed with four distinctive characteristics,26 that well analyzes phenomena and is inclusive of the seeds [for the further ripening of such virtuous attentiveness]. 2. The verbal meaning: shes rab (“wisdom”) comes from the Sanskrit word prajñā, in which jñā, “to achieve mastery, to realize,” is preceded by the prefix pra. This root meaning thus suggests “to realize, or to achieve mastery, excellently,” the object of this realization being the supreme objective (don dam pa, paramārtha). What is “supreme” in this case is the gnosis of sublime beings in balanced absorption, while the “objective” is the scope of its activity. It is shes rab, wisdom, due to the realization, or accomplished mastery, of just that. 3. If it be divided, there are three; for Nāgārjuna27 has said: Audition serves to expand wisdom, As does critical reflection. If those two are present, Then contemplation also arises. Copyright © 2019. State University of New York Press. All rights reserved. Accordingly: 3.1. Concerning wisdom that emerges from audition, the objects of audition are the inner sciences, consisting of the scriptures of the Conqueror together with the commentaries on their intention. One should also study the four outer sciences as facets of them, whereby disciples are gathered into the following: grammar and logic, the two sciences for eliminating others as adversaries, and the technical arts and medicine, the two sciences for gathering others into the following.28 For it is the level of omniscience that must be attained. As it says (Mahāyānasūtrālam . kāra, 11.60): Without immersing himself in the five sciences, the superior person cannot advance to omniscience; Hence, to correct and to attract others, and for the sake of his own knowledge, he thus devotes himself to them. It is also said (Bodhicaryāvatāra, 5.100ab): Nowhere is there anything That the Conqueror’s Sons do not learn. The Other Emptiness : Rethinking the Zhentong Buddhist Discourse in Tibet, edited by Michael R. Sheehy, and Klaus-Dieter Mathes, State University of New York Press, 2019. ProQuest Ebook Central, http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/uchicago/detail.action?docID=5992418. Created from uchicago on 2021-01-21 02:20:10. 240 Matthew T. Kapstein In particular, in order to master to the full extent the meaning of the scriptures, one must assess them in terms of definitive and provisional significance, indirect and allusive intention, and so forth. These, however, may be known elsewhere. Here, in fact, wisdom is insight, the ultimate truth. Among the arguments that serve to establish it, there are five great axioms:29 i. The absence of one and many, which investigates the essence; ii. “Diamond fragments,” which investigates the cause; iii. Negating the production of an existent or nonexistent, which investigates the result; iv. Negating production in respect to the four alternatives, which investigates both cause and result. These four are the arguments that exclude the extreme of exaggeratedly imputing existence. Copyright © 2019. State University of New York Press. All rights reserved. v. Fifth is the axiom of interdependent origination that cuts through the elaborations of both existence and nonexistence, because what is not established in essence, by virtue of its dependence upon another, is not nonexistent conventionally. Thus, the five great axioms establish all phenomena in terms of the middle without extremes. Now, concerning the ways to cut through elaborations, there are two, the way of rangtong (rang stong) and that of zhentong (gzhan stong). Of them, the way of rangtong holds that because, except for their mere appearance, the bearers of properties (dharmin, chos can) are empty of a proper essence, it is emptiness as an existential negation (med dgag) that is the ultimate.30 Although, among the proponents of Madhyamaka, who are all antiessentialists, there is no difference in respect to the ultimate, there are those who set forth the autonomous proposition (svātantrika-pratijñā) that what is established ostensibly is apparitional, and those who, by drawing out only the entailments [of . the opponents’ affirmations, prāsangika], refute even the merely ostensible reality (kun rdzob tsam, sam . vr.timātra) that is affirmed. Hence, two systems have appeared. For the proponents of the Madhyamaka who establish the ultimate to be zhentong, all that can be known is held to comprise the three characteristics or to comprise the two, the imaginary and the absolute.31 Based on this distinction, two dissimilar ways of identifying the topic of inquiry have arisen. For, according to the textual tradition of Yogācāra, the ground of emptiness is explained to be that which is dependent, which is absolute insomuch as it is empty with respect to The Other Emptiness : Rethinking the Zhentong Buddhist Discourse in Tibet, edited by Michael R. Sheehy, and Klaus-Dieter Mathes, State University of New York Press, 2019. ProQuest Ebook Central, http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/uchicago/detail.action?docID=5992418. Created from uchicago on 2021-01-21 02:20:10. Zhentong Traces in the Nyingma Tradition 241 the negandum, that which is imputed (kun btags); while, in the Sublime Continuum and elsewhere, it is said that reality is the absolute, which is empty with respect to the negandum, namely, that which is imaginary (kun brtags).32 Thus, in its essence, this absolute, which is the reality of mind, the expanse of the supreme objective, is without taints to be abandoned or unprecedented qualities to be newly achieved. Because it is primordially pure by nature, with its qualities spontaneously achieved, it surpasses fault and virtue (skyon yon), construction and clearing (grub bsal). Hence, that expanse of the supreme objective is not such as to be empty of its own essence (rang gi ngo bos stong pa). And because the elaborated aspects of apprehended object and apprehending subject are phenomena manifest to ephemeral bewilderment, which are not established in the subtending stratum (gshis), the ostensible is empty of its own essence. As such they are extrinsic with respect to the reality that is the supreme objective, so that it is explained that “the supreme objective is empty of extrinsic essence” (don dam gzhan gyi ngo bos stong pa). As it says in the Sublime Continuum (1.155): Copyright © 2019. State University of New York Press. All rights reserved. The elemental stratum is empty of the ephemeral Whose characteristic is to be separable, But not empty of the [buddha] qualities Whose characteristic is to be inseparable. In brief, if this be pondered in respect to the ostensible, there is emptiness, whether as an existential negation or predicate negation. If it be pondered in respect to the expanse of the supreme objective, there is emptiness of the conceptual objects that are extrinsic to it. But if you wonder, “with what intention is it said that the supreme objective is empty of its own essence?” the intention is that, in objectifying the supreme objective, it is not established as the intellect grasps it to be. Concerning these points, because wisdom born of audition is most important on the level of ordinary individuals, we give here just an introduction to how they are to be established, for, without audition, reflection and contemplation are impossible. As is said (Sublime Continuum, 5.15cd): Wisdom is supreme and its ground Is audition; wherefore, audition is supreme. 3.2. As for wisdom born of reflection, not leaving what was learned as just something heard, the ascertainment of its meaning depends upon reflection, for which reason the wisdom associated with The Other Emptiness : Rethinking the Zhentong Buddhist Discourse in Tibet, edited by Michael R. Sheehy, and Klaus-Dieter Mathes, State University of New York Press, 2019. ProQuest Ebook Central, http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/uchicago/detail.action?docID=5992418. Created from uchicago on 2021-01-21 02:20:10. 242 Matthew T. Kapstein reflection must be engendered. As it says in the Wish-Granting Treasury (Yid bzhin mdzod, 13.1ab): Thus adorned with genuine audition, one must then Surely generate the wisdom of reflection in the mind.33 About that, by carefully investigating the literal meaning of what one has heard and turning attention to it within, without leaving it to be mere generality, but by considering with the wisdom of reflection that discerns the particulars, with respect to each and every sequence of word and meaning, whether it is erroneous or not, one must ascertain what one has heard. It says in the Jñānasārasamuccaya: Like gold that is burned, cut, and ground, Investigate my pronouncements And take them up, but not so out of respect.34 Copyright © 2019. State University of New York Press. All rights reserved. According to this example, one does not just enter into the words and meaning of the sūtras and tantras through faith, but they should be taken up following the investigation of these three: scriptures that inspire confidence, reasonings that proceed from the force of reality (vastubalapravr.tta, dngos po stobs zhugs), and the absence of internal contradiction (lit., “noncontradiction before and after”). It says in the Catuh.śataka: The meaning that is well articulated: According to scripture and reason, Without contradiction before or after, Should be accepted by worthy persons.35 Moreover, it is explained that the three knowables36 are to be examined through both scripture and reason. 3.3. Concerning the wisdom born of contemplation, it says in the Wish-Granting Treasury (chap. 18, v. 1ab): Thus, when the objects of reflection are exhausted, Wisdom born of contemplation must be engendered in mind. Hence, in general, through acceptance and rejection one attains the objectives as one has come to know them and cultivates them experientially. In particular, one penetrates the wisdom of insight, the contemplation of nonconceptual gnosis. As it says in the Bodhicaryāvatāra (8.4): The Other Emptiness : Rethinking the Zhentong Buddhist Discourse in Tibet, edited by Michael R. Sheehy, and Klaus-Dieter Mathes, State University of New York Press, 2019. ProQuest Ebook Central, http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/uchicago/detail.action?docID=5992418. Created from uchicago on 2021-01-21 02:20:10. Zhentong Traces in the Nyingma Tradition 243 Copyright © 2019. State University of New York Press. All rights reserved. By insight and well-endowed with tranquility One knows to overcome the afflictions. Now, in respect to the view that is to be experientially cultivated through contemplation, according to the explicit teaching of the middle turn as exposed in the Collection of Reason,37 it is held that it is the existential negation that is of definitive meaning. Hence, it is explained that to contemplate nothing at all is the contemplation of emptiness and to see nothing at all is the realization of just what is. But according to the intention of the final turn, the texts of the Dharmas of Maitreya, as . exposed by Asanga and his brother [Vasubandhu] and in the Collection of Hymns of Venerable Nāgārjuna,38 it is explained that that which is to be experientially cultivated through contemplation is precisely gnosis without duality of apprehended object and apprehending subject. And that, moreover, is in agreement in its intention with the profound tantras of secret mantra. Hence, although you may think that there is a contradiction, because the all-knowing king of Dharma, the venerable Longchenpa Chokyi Ozer, when identifying that which is to be established through audition, in his works including the Treasury of Philosophical Systems (Grub mtha’ mdzod) and the root text and commentary of the . Wish-Granting Treasury, proves the Prāsangika-Mādhyamika to be the pinnacle of the causal Mahāyāna, but when he treats the experiential establishment of contemplation, he holds that what is to be experienced is the individual, intuitive gnosis (so so rang rig pa’i ye shes, *pratyātmasam . vedanīyam . jñānam) without duality of apprehended object and apprehending subject, nonetheless there is no contradiction here.39 For, on the level of the ordinary individual, when establishing the view through audition and reflection, it is difficult to undo the intellect’s grasping of signs (mtshan ‘dzin), so that it is wisdom born from audition and reflection that acts to negate [the grasping of signs] and, for . that, the Prāsangika reasoning that cuts through exaggerated projections is acute. But when establishing the wisdom born of contemplation, it is the Mādhyamika view taught in the final turn that is profound and most excellent. For it is just the expanse that is naturally pure, the truth of the supreme objective and self-emergent gnosis, that is the primordially abiding nature of all phenomena and accords, as well, with the experiential cultivation of the view as explained in the profound tantras of secret mantra—this thought was his intention. For these reasons, in accord with the intention of the sūtras teaching the nucleus,40 as taught in the Sublime Continuum and the Mādhyamika Collection of Hymns, having mastered the tenet of the nucleus of buddha-nature (tathāgatagarbha), one who is “of the clan,”41 The Other Emptiness : Rethinking the Zhentong Buddhist Discourse in Tibet, edited by Michael R. Sheehy, and Klaus-Dieter Mathes, State University of New York Press, 2019. ProQuest Ebook Central, http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/uchicago/detail.action?docID=5992418. Created from uchicago on 2021-01-21 02:20:10. 244 Matthew T. Kapstein cultivating a spirit bent on enlightenment (bodhicittotpāda), [comprehends that] the disclosure of the final significance of the elemental stratum, the abiding nature, depends upon entering into a nonconceptual concentration (nirvikalpasamādhi). Therefore, sitting with legs crossed upon a comfortable seat, in accord with the words (Sublime Continuum, 1.154, and Abhisamayālam . kāra, 5.21), Here nothing is to be removed, Nothing at all to be established. Really viewing the real, By really seeing, one is free. one mulls over none of the signs or objects of discursive thought, and, in the face of whatever arises, acting neither to remove nor establish them, one settles in equipoise, one-pointed with regard to one’s own true face, limpid and transparent, without any apprehensive assertions at all. Thus, all the proliferations of mind and mental events being arrested, one comes to behold the nonconceptual gnosis, free from the dichotomy of apprehended object and apprehending subject, the very essence of which is intuited individually. As it says in the Sublime Continuum (4.26cd): Copyright © 2019. State University of New York Press. All rights reserved. The body of reality that is the inner nature Is seen with the eye of gnosis. And in the Hymn to the Expanse of Reality (Dharmadhātustava, 38ab): Relying on eye and form Taintless appearance arises. And in Rāhula’s Hymn to the Mother: Homage to the mother of the Conquerors of the Three Times, Perfection of Wisdom, not spoken, thought, or uttered, Unborn, unceasing, essence of space, in the range of individual, intuitive gnosis. Moreover, as when clouds are dispersed so that the orb of the sun shines forth, the final significance of equipoised awareness, gnosis beyond intellect without any apprehensive assertions, resting nakedly in its self-radiance, is intuited from within as mind that is naturally luminous gnosis. It says in the Introduction to the Conduct of a Bodhisattva (9.35): The Other Emptiness : Rethinking the Zhentong Buddhist Discourse in Tibet, edited by Michael R. Sheehy, and Klaus-Dieter Mathes, State University of New York Press, 2019. ProQuest Ebook Central, http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/uchicago/detail.action?docID=5992418. Created from uchicago on 2021-01-21 02:20:10. Zhentong Traces in the Nyingma Tradition 245 When neither being nor nonbeing Stand before the mind, Then, with no further recourse, Without objectification, one finds peace. Copyright © 2019. State University of New York Press. All rights reserved. In that way, when certitude in regard to the final significance of the nucleus is obtained through wisdom born of contemplation, owing to the great force of compassion for beings who have not realized the gnosis abiding within themselves, an uncontrived courage to reach the level of unsurpassed enlightenment arises. On that basis, one’s engagement in the contemplation of nonconceptual concentration is reinforced, thereby forming a cycle, like a wheel, in relation to profound causality (zab mo’i rgyu ‘bras). In brief, one contemplates nonconceptual gnosis in equipoise and, rising from that, in the aftermath (pr.s.t.halabdha, rjes thob), views all appearances as illusory, appearing without an established nature. Then, a dedication [of merit] should be performed on behalf of illusory beings. There are many interesting features of this passage that seems often to be ignored, even among Nyingma scholars who have studied the Wish-Granting Sheaf. I have more than once had the experience of discussing zhentong with learned Nyingmapas who were not particularly well disposed to it, who were bemused to be reminded of Dharmaśrī’s words on the subject. Perhaps because they occupy only a few paragraphs in a very large commentary, where the root text offers no hint that such a digression is required, it is easy to pass lightly over them; and perhaps, for the same reason, Dharmaśrī’s affirmation of zhentong seems to have gone unnoticed in the pronouncedly anti-zhentong milieu of early eighteenth-century Central Tibet. It is notable, too, that Dharmaśrī, though introducing in cursory manner the distinction between intrinsic and extrinsic emptiness, or zhentong, and mentioning . the Svātantrika- and Prāsangika-Mādhyamika traditions that, after all, were generally predominant in Tibetan Madhyamaka thought, has relatively little to say about these things and treats his subject almost exclusively in relation to zhentong and . the question of buddha-nature. He considers Longchenpa’s avowal of Prāsangika to be restricted in scope to the domain of audition and reflection and affirms that master’s treatment of contemplation to resemble the zhentong approach he himself espouses here. In so doing, he seems to attribute to Longchenpa something like the position that during the nineteenth century would be articulated by the great Jonang scholiast Bamda Gelek, which I have described elsewhere in writing that he . held Prāsangika “to be an inferior, but nevertheless legitimate, and propaedeutically valuable, approach to Madhyamaka thought, which, once mastered, opened the way for an appropriate engagement in the ‘Great Madhyamaka,’ that is, the teaching of extrinsic emptiness.”42 The Other Emptiness : Rethinking the Zhentong Buddhist Discourse in Tibet, edited by Michael R. Sheehy, and Klaus-Dieter Mathes, State University of New York Press, 2019. ProQuest Ebook Central, http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/uchicago/detail.action?docID=5992418. Created from uchicago on 2021-01-21 02:20:10. 246 Matthew T. Kapstein There are, indeed, indications scattered about Longchenpa’s copious writings that would support such an interpretation; we cannot imagine that Dharmaśrī would have been either inaccurate or tendentious in his citation of the “Second Samantabhadra.” However, I would suggest that Longchenpa’s position about this shifts somewhat according to context, so that the reading proposed by Dharmaśrī may not be the sole one available. In particular, we must note that in some of his writings on meditation, Longchenpa is strikingly apophatic in his approach; this is, for instance, quite apparent throughout his Trilogy on Natural Liberation (Rang grol skor gsum). I suspect that Longchenpa’s shifting use of affirmative and negative dialectic contributed, in some respects, to the emergence of differing lines of interpretation within the Nyingma that favored one strategy or the other.43 Copyright © 2019. State University of New York Press. All rights reserved. The Unmentioned Presence of Zhentong However we assess Lochen Dharmaśrī’s commitment to zhentong—and a thorough assessment must await a broader consideration of relevant themes throughout the considerable body of his writings—it is immediately striking that he is fully explicit in his embrace of it in what is certainly one of his fundamental works. That this was not quite exceptional and that the current of zhentong thought made manifest here was normative at Mindroling at the beginning of the eighteenth century may be seen in one of the texts of his nephew Pema Gyurme Gyatso, the minling tersé (smin gling gter sras), that is, the son of Mindroling’s founder (and the Fifth Dalai Lama’s protégé) Terdak Lingpa. In this case, however, the word “zhentong” is never used, though there can be little doubt that it is the teaching intended. The text in question is presented as a supplement to the Ascertainment of the Three Vows and bears the full title Heart of the Definitive Philosophical System, Intimate Instructions on Ground, Path, and Fruition, Following from the Ascertainment of the Three Vows.44 In essence, the work responds to the problem of demonstrating the background by virtue of which adherence to the course of practice embodied in the three vows is warranted. That is to say, how do the reality of things and the possibilities of actualization that this reality affords render the spiritual discipline of Nyingma Buddhism both possible and desirable? In presenting a treatise on ground, path, and fruition as an adjunct to the teaching of the three vows in this manner, Pema Gyurme Gyatso seems to have been following the lead of the Sakya master Gorampa Sonam Senge (1429–1489), who similarly supplemented Sakya Pan.d.ita’s Analysis of the Three Vows with a work on the same three basic topics, but of course from the Sakyapa perspective.45 If this was indeed his source of inspiration, however, Pema Gyurme Gyatso nowhere acknowledges it. He tells us only, as mentioned earlier, that the work was composed following his uncle’s teaching of the Wish-Granting Sheaf during the summer retreat of 1710. It must be stressed at the outset that Pema Gyurme Gyatso, unlike Lochen Dharmaśrī, does not explicitly reference the rangtong / zhentong distinction, and in The Other Emptiness : Rethinking the Zhentong Buddhist Discourse in Tibet, edited by Michael R. Sheehy, and Klaus-Dieter Mathes, State University of New York Press, 2019. ProQuest Ebook Central, http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/uchicago/detail.action?docID=5992418. Created from uchicago on 2021-01-21 02:20:10. Zhentong Traces in the Nyingma Tradition 247 fact does not use these terms at all. In introducing the three topics of ground, path, and fruition, he identifies the first, the ground (gzhi), precisely with buddha-nature (here *sugatagarbha, bde gshegs snying po) and proceeds to define this briefly in relation to the teachings of the four philosophical schools—Vaibhās.ika, Sautrāntika, Yogācāra, and Madhyamaka—in turn. Much of the treatise, in fact, is then devoted to elaborating his understanding of the Madhyamaka treatment of buddha-nature, which he introduces in these words: Concerning the fourth school, the Madhyamaka, we present both a sketch of others’ systems and the established order of our own. As for the first: though they generally agree in holding spiritual-affinity (gotra, rigs) to be the tainted reality (samaladharmatā, dri bcas chos nyid) just as it is, there appear to be many different ways of recognizing it: • The great translator Ngok Loden Sherab and his followers held it to be the expanse pervading the whole trio of ground, path, and fruition, unqualified by attributes such as the buddhas’ powers (bala, stobs), [and identified as] naturally pure emptiness, the aspect of existential negation (prasajyapratis.edha, med dgag). Copyright © 2019. State University of New York Press. All rights reserved. • The lord of the Dharma Sakya Pan.d.ita and others recognized it as qualified by attributes such as the buddhas’ powers but held that its presence within sentient beings was of heuristic significance (neyārtha, drang don). • Most of the readers / reciters46 of Tibet, in recognizing buddha-nature, hold it to be the aspect of natural purity alone. • The venerable Pakmodrupa and others held the powers and other such attributes of buddha-nature to be the potential attributes of the realized body of reality (rtogs pa chos sku). • Bodong Pan.chen Jikme Drakpa47 was among those who held them to be the attributes of the natural body of reality (rang bzhin chos sku). And there have been many other tenets besides. Second is the order of our own system: Here, we accord with the expositions of the uncommon system of the Mahāyāna as presented in the writings of the all-knowing king of the Dharma, Longchen Drime Ozer, the great, all-knowing Jonang Master of the Four Reliances,48 and the venerable Rangjung Dorje,49 among others, as well as the uncommon The Other Emptiness : Rethinking the Zhentong Buddhist Discourse in Tibet, edited by Michael R. Sheehy, and Klaus-Dieter Mathes, State University of New York Press, 2019. ProQuest Ebook Central, http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/uchicago/detail.action?docID=5992418. Created from uchicago on 2021-01-21 02:20:10. 248 Matthew T. Kapstein intended meaning of the supreme scholar, Buton Rinpoche, expounded in, for instance, the section on the explanation of the causal continuum (rgyu rgyud) in his General Presentation of the Tantras (Rgyud sde spyi rnam). . . . According to these sources, mind as such, which is primordially pure by nature, empty, limpid, incessant, and abiding without change or transformation in its all-pervading essence, is the base, buddha-nature (*sugatagarbha, bde gshegs snying po). For as it says in the Sūtra of the King of Samādhi: Copyright © 2019. State University of New York Press. All rights reserved. Pure, limpid, and luminous, Unagitated and unconditioned, The buddha-nature Is primordially abiding reality.50 The text that follows these prefatory remarks provides, in essence, a thorough summary of the content of the Sublime Continuum of the Mahāyāna, supplemented by discussions of specifically tantric approaches to the topics at hand, where the focus is primarily upon the Web of Illusion (Māyājāla, Sgyu ‘phrul drwa ba) tantras, with occasional references to the teachings of Dzokchen as well. In the context of the present chapter, it will not be necessary to enter into the details of all this, interesting though they may be. Readers of the present work, it is assumed, will already have some idea of the buddha-nature teaching of the Sublime Continuum and its capital significance for zhentong thought. A question may be raised, however, concerning what, if anything, this has to tell us of Pema Gyurme Gyatso’s opinion of zhentong, which, as we have mentioned, is nowhere explicitly named in his text. The buddha-nature theory of the Sublime Continuum, after all, formed part of the standard śāstric curriculum in all schools of Tibetan Buddhism, though interpretation of it varied considerably, some taking . it to be a Yogācāra work, others holding it to represent Prāsangika-Mādhyamika, and still others reading it as an expression of zhentong or allied viewpoints.51 Just where does the teacher from Mindroling stand on this? A response of sorts may be found by attending closely to the passage cited earlier. It is clear that Pema Gyurme Gyatso excludes reading buddha-nature as equivalent to the existential negation equated with emptiness in some Tibetan . approaches to Prāsangika-Mādhyamika, and it is equally clear that he rules out interpretations that would treat it and its qualities as merely metaphorical, potential, or heuristic. And as he has already made explicit that he is presenting here the Mādhyamika view of the ground, having rapidly dispensed with the three lower schools, including Yogācāra, it is evident that he will not accept a hermeneutic privileging the latter tradition. Pema Gyurme Gyatso, therefore, considers buddhanature, as taught in the Sublime Continuum, to represent the Madhyamaka teaching of definitive significance as was previously taught by a number of masters he names, including Dolpopa. The Other Emptiness : Rethinking the Zhentong Buddhist Discourse in Tibet, edited by Michael R. Sheehy, and Klaus-Dieter Mathes, State University of New York Press, 2019. ProQuest Ebook Central, http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/uchicago/detail.action?docID=5992418. Created from uchicago on 2021-01-21 02:20:10. Zhentong Traces in the Nyingma Tradition 249 Copyright © 2019. State University of New York Press. All rights reserved. But is this sufficient to demonstrate our author’s embrace of zhentong? The answer, I think, is “yes and no.” Yes because, given the range of positions he excludes, some variety of zhentong appears to be the last man standing. But no because, in view of the four figures he references as representative of his standpoint, he is perhaps reaching for the common ground to be found behind their approaches, without quite endorsing zhentong per se, at least in its Jonang formulation. This would suggest that he sought to defend a sort of mitigated zhentong, much as Jamgon Kongtrul would do a century and a half later. Perhaps we may even ask whether it is a mere coincidence that the monastery at which Kongtrul received his Nyingma formation, Zhechen, was the major branch of Mindroling in Kham? Seen in this fashion, Pema Gyurme Gyatso’s simultaneous endorsement of the teachings of Karmapa III Rangjung Dorje, Longchen Rabjam, and Kunkyen Dolpopa makes good sense and, indeed, appears to offer a clear precedent for the zhentong-friendly doctrinal orientations of the so-called Rimé movement. More unusual is the stress he lays upon Buton Rinchen Drub as representing a similar doctrinal lineage, for Buton, as we know, is more frequently presented as Dolpopa’s arch rival in respect to the interpretation of buddha-nature thought. Interestingly, though, Pema Gyurme Gyatso pointedly emphasizes certain of Buton’s tantric writings here and not his famed treatise on buddha-nature.52 It remains a question for subsequent research to determine whether, indeed, Buton espoused a second doctrine of buddha-nature, more in line with the thinking of the other three masters mentioned, in his discussions of the causal continuum. If so, it would go a long way toward explaining the attempt on the part of another of the great fourteenth-century scholar-adepts, the Kagyupa Barawa Gyaltsen Pelzang (1310–1391), to demonstrate how the positions of Buton and Dolpopa might be reconciled.53 Conclusion As we have seen, it was by no means incumbent upon Nyingmapa thinkers to affirm zhentong and, as a matter of fact, many did not. It may therefore seem remarkable that two of the leading figures in the Nyingma lineage most closely associated with the Fifth Dalai Lama should have steered so close to dangerous shoals. The reasons for which they did are not entirely clear. Although Terdak Lingpa’s “Record of Teachings Received” establishes that he had some familiarity with works by Jonang masters Kunga Drolchok (1507–1566) and Tāranātha (1575–1634), there is little there to suggest that zhentong was a particular point of interest for him.54 And it remains an open question whether the tantric ritual traditions of the Nyingma Kama, and particularly those of the cycle of the Magical Net, lend themselves to a harmonization with zhentong thought, perhaps more so than do the teachings of the Seminal Essence of the Great Perfection, which seem often to be emphasized when we find mergers of the Nyingma and Geluk traditions. The cardinal position of Longchenpa for both sides of the discussion, however, urges circumspection in this regard. The Other Emptiness : Rethinking the Zhentong Buddhist Discourse in Tibet, edited by Michael R. Sheehy, and Klaus-Dieter Mathes, State University of New York Press, 2019. ProQuest Ebook Central, http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/uchicago/detail.action?docID=5992418. Created from uchicago on 2021-01-21 02:20:10. 250 Matthew T. Kapstein What we are left with, then, is a puzzle that one hopes to see cleared up in the course of future research. In all events, it is evident that among the closest Nyingma protégés of the Fifth Dalai Lama, who was himself celebrated as a Nyingma visionary, we find the continuing affirmation of a stream of the zhentong teaching that the Great Fifth and his followers are supposed to have banned. Copyright © 2019. State University of New York Press. All rights reserved. Notes 1. My preference is to use the phrase “extrinsic emptiness” as an approximate English equivalent to zhentong (gzhan stong), but I concur with the editors that it is best to employ one standard throughout the volume as a whole. 2. Almogi’s Rong-zom-pa’s Discourses and “Writings of Rong zom Chos kyi bzang po” treat issues in Rongzompa’s thought that intersect with aspects of the later zhentong controversies. 3. Mathes, Direct Path 98–113, usefully surveys Longchenpa’s approach to buddhanature. 4. See, for instance, Kah.-thog rig-’dzin, Kah. thog rig ‘dzin tshe dbang nor bu’i bka’ . ‘bum vol. 1, 662–667 (on the Jonang teaching of the s.ad.angayoga); vol. 2, 404–411 (on the iconography of the eighty-four mahāsiddhas as established by Tāranātha); and vol. 2, 447–453 (on the ritual cycle maintained at the former Jonang seat of Rtag brtan dga’ ldan phun tshogs gling), among other works similarly referencing a Jonang background. 5. Makidono’s “Kah. thog Dge rtse Mahāpan.d.ita’s Doxographical Position” and Great Middle Way of Other-Emptiness detail Katok Getsé Pan.d.ita’s contributions on zhentong. 6. Dudjom, Nyingma School vol. 1, 169–216, precisely follows Katok Getsé Pan.d.ita (usually verbatim in fact) in treating “Great Madhyamaka” as the pinnacle of the teaching of the sūtras. 7. Kapstein, “Mipam Namgyel,” and Pettit, Mipham’s Beacon of Certainty. See also Duckworth, chapter 10, and Wangchuk, chapter 11, both in the present volume; and, for Mipam’s treatment of buddha-nature thought more broadly, Duckworth, Mipam on BuddhaNature. For a brief, judicious assessment of Mipam’s view of zhentong thought, refer to Karma Phuntsho, Mipham’s Dialectics 17. 8. Karma Phuntsho, 93ff. and chap. 4. For background on Gorampa’s approach, see Cabezón, Freedom from Extremes. Longchenpa’s cleaving to the via negativa is perhaps best exemplified by his Trilogy on Natural Liberation (Rang grol skor gsum). 9. Mipam himself puts it this way: “The inerrant ultimate is affirmed to exist as the object of the inerrant intellect, as veridical, and as empty with respect to relative error. Conventionally, it is held to be intrinsically not empty, and to exist in the vision of those who are sublime” (Kapstein, “Mipam Namgyel” 71). It is important to note that the second sentence takes away what the first seems to offer, for the discourse of an “inerrant ultimate,” and so forth, is itself only conventional. 10. I am particular grateful to the late Rahor Khenpo Thubten (1931–2010) for his comments about this. 11. Thub bstan Chos kyi grags pa, Spyod ‘jug gi ‘grel bshad rgyal sras yon tan bum bzang. A French translation of the commentary on the ninth chapter of the Bodhicaryāvatāra included there is available in Padmakara, Comprendre la vacuité. 12. In the main doctrinal work of Jigmé Lingpa, the Yon tan rin po che’s mdzod and its two-volume autocommentary, there appears to be no hint of zhentong at all, and indeed, The Other Emptiness : Rethinking the Zhentong Buddhist Discourse in Tibet, edited by Michael R. Sheehy, and Klaus-Dieter Mathes, State University of New York Press, 2019. ProQuest Ebook Central, http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/uchicago/detail.action?docID=5992418. Created from uchicago on 2021-01-21 02:20:10. Copyright © 2019. State University of New York Press. All rights reserved. Zhentong Traces in the Nyingma Tradition 251 as Karma Phuntsho, Mipham’s Dialectics 250, n. 120, remarks, some contemporary Nyingma Khenpos have been troubled by its evident proximity to Tsongkhapa’s thinking. Nor does one find zhentong invoked by later commentators on this work. In the English translation of the commentary by the noted recent teacher Kangyur Rinpoche (1897–1975), one brief reference to zhentong does occur, but in a note added by the translators, not in Kangyur Rinpoche’s own text (Padmakara, Treasury of Precious Qualities 459 n. 108). And in the most substantial treatise inspired by the Yon tan mdzod, the five-volume Mdo rgyud rin po che’i mdzod of Choying Tobden Dorje (1785–1848), zhentong seems also to be ignored, though topics associated with zhentong thought, chiefly Tathāgatagarbha and the definitive status of the “third turning of the wheel,” are embraced by him and treated in some detail. Moreover, reliable oral tradition reports that zhentong was alien to the college (bshad grwa) of the Dodrup Chode, perhaps the foremost center in Amdo of the Longchen Nyingtik tradition stemming from Jigme Lingpa. Finally, we may add that the scholastic curriculum favored at the Śrīsim.ha College of Dzokchen Monastery and its affiliates, that of Khenpo Zhenpen Chokyi Nangwa (Zhenga, 1871–1927), in its strict adherence to Indian textual models also steers clear of zhentong. 13. Kapstein, “All-Encompassing Lamp.” 14. Dudjom, Nyingma School vol. 1, 577–579. 15. Karmay, Great Perfection 179 and passim. 16. Dza Patrul Rinpoche (1808–1887) is often regarded as spearheading the drive to create a distinctively Nyingma yig-cha. However, a precedent seems to be apparent at Mindroling, in Lochen Dharmaśrī’s extensive commentary on Ngari Pan.chen’s Ascertainment of the Three Vows, as will be discussed herein, and Terse Pema Gyurme Gyatso’s commentary on the fundamental Indian treatise for Tibetan scholastic education, the Abhisamayālam . kāraśāstra. 17. It should be recalled that, under the Ganden Potrang government, Mindroling was officially the primary seat of the Nyingma, the holder of its throne (the Minling Trichen) or his regent being the recognized head of the order. 18. On Lochen Dharmaśrī, see Dudjom, Nyingma School vol. 1, 728–732, and on Terdak Lingpa, Nyingma School vol. 1, 825–834. 19. In this regard it may be noted that the original Dzokchen monastery xylographic edition of the Oral Traditions of the Nyingma (Rnying ma bka’ ma), compiled by Gyelse Zhenpen Taye during the first half of the nineteenth century, was nine volumes in extent. Lochen Dharmaśrī’s writings on the Oral Traditions, by contrast, occupy a full seven volumes of his twenty-volume Collected Works, and much of this was in fact included in the Dzokchen edition. 20. On Pema Trinle, see Dudjom, Nyingma School vol. 1, 719–720. 21. Dudjom, 805–808, summarizes the life and work of this figure. Dudjom Rinpoche’s own commentary on Ngari Pan.chen’s Ascertainment of the Three Vows is summarized in Dudjom, Perfect Conduct, on which see the comments of Sobisch, Three-Vow Theories 6–8. Chapter 15 of Sobisch’s book provides a fine survey of Nyingma contributions to the “threevow” theories, with particular attention to Ngari Pan.chen and Lochen Dharmaśrī. 22. Lochen Dharmaśrī, Dpag bsam gyi snye ma, 358–359. 23. Lochen Dharmaśrī, Dpag bsam gyi snye ma, 198. 24. Padma ’Gyur med rgya mtsho, Gzhi lam ‘bras bu’i man ngag, 406–407. 25. Dudjom, Nyingma School vol. 1, 957, and vol. 2, n. 1371. 26. Khyad chos bzhi ldan. Skyed tshal Pan.d.ita, in his commentary on the Abhisamayālam . kāra, explains these as (1) absence of the opposing force of stinginess and the like (mi mthun phyogs ser sna sogs dang bral ba), (2) possession of the allied force of nonconceptual The Other Emptiness : Rethinking the Zhentong Buddhist Discourse in Tibet, edited by Michael R. Sheehy, and Klaus-Dieter Mathes, State University of New York Press, 2019. ProQuest Ebook Central, http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/uchicago/detail.action?docID=5992418. Created from uchicago on 2021-01-21 02:20:10. Copyright © 2019. State University of New York Press. All rights reserved. 252 Matthew T. Kapstein gnosis that directly realizes emptiness (grogs stong nyid mngon sum du rtogs pa’i mi rtog ye shes ldan), (3) the function of fulfilling the wishes of others (byed las gzhan gyi ‘dod don rdzogs par byed pa), and (4) causing disciples to mature to the awakening of the three vehicles (gdul bya rnams theg pa gsum gyi byang chub tu smin par byed pa). 27. Though the verse that follows is often attributed to Nāgārjuna in Tibetan works that cite it, the source text in fact seems to be the Samādhisambharaparivarta (Ting nge ‘dzin gyi tshogs kyi le’u), whose author, according to the colophon, is Bodhibhadra. The verse cited here will be found in the Bstan ‘gyur dpe bsdur ma, vol. 64, 238. 28. On the treatment of the sciences here, with references to earlier scholarship, see Kapstein, “Spiritual Exercise.” 29. Mipam’s treatment of these arguments is summarized in Kapstein, Reason’s Traces 325–326; for a more detailed treatment, see Karma Phuntsho, Mipham’s Dialectics chap. 3. 30. See, by way of comparison, Karma Phuntsho 120–131. 31. The “three characteristics” are those of classical Yogācāra, as listed in n. 36 in this chapter. I am not familiar with the textual background for Dharmaśrī’s reduction of these to two. 32. It is not entirely clear to me whether the spelling variation we find here—kun btags / kun brtags—quite warrants the distinction I am making by translating them as “imputed” and “imagined,” respectively. Bod rgya tshig mdzod chen mo, 18, treats them as mere orthographical variants. 33. Literally, “continuum” (santāna, rgyud). 34. This verse is known from a number of sources, including the Jñānasārasamuccaya, referenced here: Bstan ’gyur dpe bsdur ma vol. 57, 854. The original Sanskrit is conserved in Śāntaraks.ita’s Tattvasam . graha, v. 3587. 35. The verse does not in fact appear in the Catuh.śataka but does occur in the commentary to the Jñānasārasamuccaya: Bstan ’gyur dpe bsdur ma vol. 57, 898. 36. Shes bya gsum. An alternative designation for the “three natures” (trisvabhāva, rang bzhin gsum) or “three characteristics” (trilaks.an.a, mtshan nyid gsum) taught in classical Yogācāra: the imaginary (parikalpita, kun b(r)tags), the dependent (paratantra, gzhan dbang), and the absolute (parinis.panna, yongs grub). 37. That is, the six major philosophical works attributed to Nāgārjuna and enumerated in Dudjom, Nyingma School vol. 1, 94. 38. Dudjom vol. 1, 95, and vol. 2, 208. . 39. On Longchenpa’s treatment of Prāsangika-Mādhyamika thought, see also Higgins, Philosophical Foundations. 40. An influential enumeration of these may be found in Kah. thog Rig ’dzin, Bka’ ‘bum, vol. 2, 412–413. 41. rigs can, that is, of the bodhisattvagotra. 42. Kapstein, Reason’s Traces 311. 43. Refer to Higgins, Philosophical Foundations, for discussion of Longchenpa’s dialectical strategies. 44. Padma ’Gyur med rgya mtsho, Gzhi lam ‘bras bu’i man ngag. 45. Go rams pa, Sdom gsum kha skong. Refer to Sobisch, Three-Vow Theories 29. 46. klog pa po. It is not clear to me who, exactly, he has in mind in using this expression. If we take the phrase as meaning “reciters,” then it is possible that he refers to “ritualists,” that is, monks and lay priests trained to perform the rites (especially funerals) required for services on behalf of the laity, but not often educated in the śāstras. 47. That is, Bodong Pan.chen Chokle Namgyel (1376–1451). The Other Emptiness : Rethinking the Zhentong Buddhist Discourse in Tibet, edited by Michael R. Sheehy, and Klaus-Dieter Mathes, State University of New York Press, 2019. ProQuest Ebook Central, http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/uchicago/detail.action?docID=5992418. Created from uchicago on 2021-01-21 02:20:10. Zhentong Traces in the Nyingma Tradition 253 48. rton pa bzhi ldan, one of Dolpopa’s frequently used epithets, referring to the four pratisaran.a, the canonical injunctions to rely upon the teaching (dharma), not the person (pudgala); to rely upon the meaning (artha), not the words (śabda); to rely upon the definitive significance (nītārtha), not heuristics (neyārtha); and to rely upon gnosis (jñāna), not consciousness (vijñāna). 49. Among past masters, the Third Karmapa seems to have been particularly esteemed at Mindroling. Dudjom, Nyingma School vol. 1, 827, refers to Terdak Lingpa’s having memorized Rangjung Dorje’s Profound Inner Meaning (Zab mo nang don) in the course of his studies. 50. The first half of this verse corresponds to Samādhirāja Sūtra 13.28bc. 51. See, by way of comparison, Mathes, Direct Path chaps. 1–2. 52. Buton’s treatise on buddha-nature has been studied and translated into French in Seyfort Ruegg, Traité du Tathāgatagarbha; however, his several Rgyud sde spyi’i rnam gzhag, to which Pema Gyurme Gyatso alludes, have yet to receive attention. 53. ‘Ba’ ra ba, Collected Writings; Mathes, Direct Path 113–125. 54. Gter bdag gling pa, Record of Teachings Received 781–783, references several works of Tāranātha, including the zhentong treatise Dbu ma snying po (i.e., the Gzhan stong snying po), and on 596 we find an entry for the Jo nang khrid brgya of Rje bstun Kun dga’ grol mchog. Bibliography Copyright © 2019. State University of New York Press. All rights reserved. Tibetan Sources ‘Ba’ ra ba Rgyal mtshan dpal bzang po. Chos rje rnam gnyis kyi dgongs bshad nyi ma’i ‘od zer. In A Tibetan Encyclopedia of Buddhist Scholasticism: The Collected Writings of ‘Ba’ ra ba rgyal mtshan dpal bzang, vol. 11, 512–573. Dehra Dun: Ngawang Gyaltsen and Ngawang Lungtok, 1970. Bstan ’gyur dpe bsdur ma. 120 vols. Beijing: Krung-go’i bod-rig-pa’i dpe-skrun-khang, 1994–2008. Go rams pa Bsod nams seng ge. Sdom pa gsum gyi rab tu dbye ba’i kha skong gzhi lam ‘bras gsum gsal bar byed pa’i legs bshad ‘od kyi snang ba. In Sdom gsum, Dpal ldan sa skya pa’i gsung rab, vol. 12 (stod cha), 128–180. Beijing: Mi-rigs dpe-skrun-khang, 2004. . Gter bdag gling pa. Record of Teachings Received: The Gsan yig of Gter-bdag-glin-pa ‘Gyur. med-rdo-rje of Smin-grol-glin. New Delhi: Sanje Dorje, 1974. Kah. thog Rig ’dzin tshe dbang nor bu. Kah. thog rig ‘dzin tshe dbang nor bu’i bka’ ‘bum. 3 vols. Beijing: Krung-go’i bod-rig-pa dpe-skrun-khang, 2006. Lo chen Dharmaśrī. Sdom pa gsum rnam par nges pa’i ‘grel pa legs bshad ngo mtshar dpag bsam gyi snye ma. In Rnying ma’i sdom gsum phyogs bsgrigs, edited by Mkhan-po ‘Jamblo, vol. 1, 19–359. Chengdu: Rgyal-khab dpe-mdzod-khang dpe-skrun-khang, 2015. Mkhan po ‘Jam blo, editor. Rnying ma’i sdom gsum phyogs bsgrigs. 5 vols. Chengdu: Rgyalkhab dpe-mdzod-khang dpe-skrun-khang, 2015. Padma ’Gyur med rgya mtsho. 2015. Sdom gsum rnam nges las ‘phros pa gzhi lam ‘bras bu’i man ngag nges don grub mtha’i snying po. In Rnying ma’i sdom gsum phyogs bsgrigs, edited by Mkhan-po ‘Jam-blo, vol. 1, 367–407. Chengdu: Rgyal-khab dpe-mdzodkhang dpe-skrun-khang, 2015. Thub bstan Chos kyi grags pa. Spyod ‘jug gi ‘grel bshad rgyal sras yon tan bum bzang. 3 vols. Beijing: Krung-go’i bod-rig-pa dpe-skrun-khang, 1990. The Other Emptiness : Rethinking the Zhentong Buddhist Discourse in Tibet, edited by Michael R. Sheehy, and Klaus-Dieter Mathes, State University of New York Press, 2019. ProQuest Ebook Central, http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/uchicago/detail.action?docID=5992418. Created from uchicago on 2021-01-21 02:20:10. 254 Matthew T. Kapstein Thub bstan smon lam, editor. Skyed tshal ‘Jam dbyangs-kun dga’ chos bzang gi gsung ‘bum. 5 vols. Chengdu: Bod-ljongs bod-yig dpe-rnying dpe-skrun-khang, 2015. Zhāng, Yísūn. Bod rgya tshig mdzod chen mo. 3 vols. Beijing: Mi rigs dpe skrun khang, 1985. Copyright © 2019. State University of New York Press. All rights reserved. Secondary Sources Almogi, Orna. Rong-zom-pa’s Discourses on Buddhology: A Study of Various Conceptions of Buddhahood in Indian Sources with Special Reference to the Controversy Surrounding the Existence of Gnosis (jñāna: ye shes) as Presented by the Eleventh-Century Tibetan Scholar Rong-zom Chos-kyi-bzang-po. Studia Philologica Buddhica Monograph Series XXIV. Tokyo: The International Institute for Buddhist Studies, 2009. ———. “Yogācāra in the Writings of the Eleventh-Century Rnying ma Scholar Rong zom Chos kyi bzang po.” In The Foundation for Yoga Practitioners: The Buddhist Yogācārabhūmi Treatise and Its Adaptation in India, East Asia, and Tibet, edited by Ulrich Timme Kragh, 1330–1361. Harvard Oriental Series 75. Cambridge: Department of South Asian Studies, Harvard University, 2013. Cabezón, José Ignacio. Freedom from Extremes: Gorampa’s “Distinguishing the Views” and the Polemics of Emptiness. Somerville: Wisdom, 2007. Duckworth, Douglas S. Mipam on Buddha-Nature: The Ground of the Nyingma Tradition. Albany: State University of New York Press, 2008. Dudjom Rinpoche, Jikdrel Yeshe Dorje. The Nyingma School of Tibetan Buddhism: Its Fundamentals and History, 2nd ed. Trans. Gyurme Dorje and Matthew Kapstein. Boston: Wisdom, 2002. Dudjom Rinpoche, Jikdrel Yeshe Dorje. Perfect Conduct: Ascertaining the Three Vows. Trans. Khenpo Gyurme Samdrub and Sangye Khandro. Boston: Wisdom, 1996. Higgins, David. The Philosophical Foundations of Classical Rdzogs chen in Tibet: Investigating the Distinction between Dualistic Mind (sems) and Primordial Knowing (ye shes). Wiener Studien zur Tibetologie und Buddhismuskunde 78. Vienna: Arbeitskreis für Tibetische und Buddhistische Studien, 2013. Kapstein, Matthew T. “We Are All Gzhan stong pas.” Journal of Buddhist Ethics 7 (2000): 105–125. ———. Reason’s Traces: Identity and Interpretation in Indian and Tibetan Buddhist Thought. Boston: Wisdom, 2001. ———. “Mipam Namgyel: The Lion’s Roar Affirming Extrinsic Emptiness.” In Buddhist Philosophy: Essential Readings, edited by William Edelglass and Jay L. Garfield, 61–71. New York: Oxford University Press, 2009. ———. “ ‘Spiritual Exercise’ and Buddhist Epistemologists in India and Tibet.” In The Blackwell Companion to Buddhist Philosophy, edited by Steven Emmanuel, 270–289. Oxford: Blackwell, 2013. ———. “The All-Encompassing Lamp of Awareness: A Forgotten Treasure of the Great Perfection, Its Authorship and Historical Significance.” In Unearthing Himalayan Treasures. Festschrift for Franz-Karl Ehrhard, edited by Volker Caumanns, Marta Sernesi, and Nikolai Solmsdorf, 259–286. Marburg: Indica et Tibetica, 2019. Karma Phuntsho. Mipham’s Dialectics and the Debates on Emptiness. London: Routledge, 2005. Karmay, Samten G. The Great Perfection: A Philosophical and Meditative Teaching of Tibetan Buddhism. Leiden: Brill, 1988. The Other Emptiness : Rethinking the Zhentong Buddhist Discourse in Tibet, edited by Michael R. Sheehy, and Klaus-Dieter Mathes, State University of New York Press, 2019. ProQuest Ebook Central, http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/uchicago/detail.action?docID=5992418. Created from uchicago on 2021-01-21 02:20:10. Zhentong Traces in the Nyingma Tradition 255 Copyright © 2019. State University of New York Press. All rights reserved. Makidono, Tomoko. “Kah. thog Dge rtse Mahāpan.d.ita’s Doxographical Position: The Great Madhyamaka of Other-Emptiness (gzhan stong dbu ma chen po).” Indian International Journal of Buddhist Studies 12 (2011): 77–119. ———. Dge-rtse Mahāpan.d.ita’s Great Middle Way of Other-Emptiness. Bibliotheca Tibetica et Buddhica 2. Tokyo: Sankibo Busshorin, 2016. Mathes, Klaus-Dieter. A Direct Path to the Buddha Within: Gö Lotsāwa’s Mahāmudrā Interpretation of the Ratnagotravibhāga. Boston: Wisdom, 2008. Padmakara Translation Group. Comprendre la vacuité: Deux commentaires du chapitre IX de la marche vers l’éveil de Shântideva. Plazac: Éditions Padmakara, 1997. ———. Treasury of Precious Qualities: Commentary by Longchen Yeshe Dorje, Kangyur Rinpoche. Book 1. Boston: Shambhala, 2010. Pettit, John. Mipham’s Beacon of Certainty. Boston: Wisdom, 1999. Rhoton, Jared. A Clear Differentiation of the Three Codes: Essential Distinctions Among the Individual Liberation, Great Vehicle, and Tantric Systems. Albany: State University of New York Press, 2002. Seyfort Ruegg, David. Le Traité du Tathāgatagarbha de Bu ston rin chen grub. Publications de l’École française d’Extrême-Orient 88. Paris: École française d’Extrême-Orient, 1973. Sobisch, Jan-Ulrich. Three-Vow Theories in Tibetan Buddhism: A Comparative Study of Major Traditions from the Twelfth through Nineteenth Centuries. Wiesbaden: Ludwig Reichert Verlag, 2002. Stearns, Cyrus. The Buddha from Dolpo: A Study of the Life and Thought of the Tibetan Master Dolpopa Sherab Gyaltsen. Albany: State University of New York Press, 1999. The Other Emptiness : Rethinking the Zhentong Buddhist Discourse in Tibet, edited by Michael R. Sheehy, and Klaus-Dieter Mathes, State University of New York Press, 2019. ProQuest Ebook Central, http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/uchicago/detail.action?docID=5992418. Created from uchicago on 2021-01-21 02:20:10. Copyright © 2019. State University of New York Press. All rights reserved. The Other Emptiness : Rethinking the Zhentong Buddhist Discourse in Tibet, edited by Michael R. Sheehy, and Klaus-Dieter Mathes, State University of New York Press, 2019. ProQuest Ebook Central, http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/uchicago/detail.action?docID=5992418. Created from uchicago on 2021-01-21 02:20:10.