Books/Rong-zom-pa's Discourses on Buddhology

Rong-zom-pa's Discourses on Buddhology

Book

Book

 Search online

The present study looks into the investigation of buddhology¹—that is, conceptions of Buddhahood found in various traditional Buddhist systems and scriptures—by the eleventh-century rNying-ma author and translator Rong-zom Choskyi-bzang-po (henceforth Rong-zom-pa). The bulk of attention will be devoted to his work titled Sangs rgyas kyi sa chen mo (henceforth Sangs sa chen mo) (An Extended [Exposition on] the Stage of a Buddha). This treatise—the only known Tibetan (and, as far as I am aware, indeed pan-Indian) work of its kind on buddhology—discusses its subject at length, focusing on the controversy about whether gnosis exists—on the conventional level—at the stage of a buddha.² My attention was first drawn to this controversy when I was working on my Master's thesis, titled "The Life and Works of Rong-zom Paṇḍita," for which I critically edited and translated Mi-pham-rgya mtsho's (1846–1912) Rang zorn gsung 'bum dkar chag me tog phreng ba (Garland of Flowers: A Catalogue to Rong-zom's Collected Works), and prepared a detailed catalogue of Rongzom-pa's three-volume collected works.³ In his catalogue, Mi-pham devotes an entire passage to this issue, with the aim of refuting what he believed to be the wrongly held view that Rong-zom-pa denied the existence of gnosis at the stage of a buddha. Any denial of the existence of gnosis had obviously been difficult to digest by most Tibetan scholars, and the prevailing position in Tibet was and still is that a buddha does possess gnosis. Mi-pham attempts to interpret Rong-zom-pa's statements in which he unquestionably maintains that gnosis does not exist at the stage of a buddha as only referring to gnosis that had been generated on the path but not to gnosis as such, for Rong-zom-pa, Mi-pham argues, is an expounder of rDzogs-chen, a system in which what is called 'self-occurring gnosis' (rang byung gi ye shes: svayaṃbhūjñāna) features prominently. Nonetheless, from my examination of Rong-zom-pa's discussions of the whole issue, it has become evident that he did indeed deny the existence of any cognitive element whatsoever at the stage of a buddha, the sole constituent of Buddhahood being for him the purified dharmadhātu. Although he alludes to self-occurring gnosis on numerous occasions in his works, there is a salient difference between his and Mi-pham's understanding of the term: for Mi-pham self-occurring gnosis is something cognitive, whereas for Rong-zom-pa, who equates it with the dharmadhātu, it is not. Rong-zom-pa, however, does not deny that a buddha's gnosis, as mere appearance, manifests to those who have not yet attained release and thus have not yet eliminated all their delusions. A buddha, on the other hand, whose delusions have been completely exhausted, does not possess such gnosis. This position of Rong-zom-pa's does not seem to be an exceptional case. It can be shown in fact that numerous, if not the majority, of Indian Madhyamaka scholars of the eleventh century took a position similar to that of Rong-zom-pa. Furthermore, several works of early bKa'-gdams scholars that have come to light recently show that Rong-zom-pa was not the only Tibetan of his time to hold such a view. It thus appears that while the latter was indeed current among Tibetan scholars of the eleventh century, for a variety of reasons it was soon superseded by the less radical position which allows for the existence of some kind of cognitive element. (Almogi, preface, 13–14)

Notes

1. Following Paul Harrison, I employ the term 'buddhology' (written in lower case) to refer to theories on and conceptions of the nature of a "buddha" (i.e., Buddhahood), while reserving 'Buddhology' (capitalized) for an alternative designation for Buddhist Studies. See Harrison 1995, p. 24, n. 4.
2. In the present study I differentiate between a buddha (i.e., written in lower case and italicized), a title referring to any unspecified awakened person, and Buddha (i.e., written in roman and capitalized), a title referring to Śākyamuni Buddha or any other particular awakened person. (The same convention has been employed in the case of other titles: for example, bodhisattva versus Bodhisattva.) This differentiation is particularly important for the discussion of buddhology, or conceptions of Buddhahood, since some such conceptions (particularly the earlier ones) are clearly only associated with the person of the historical Buddha, while others, which commonly represent later developments in which a plurality of buddhas is affirmed, concern all awakened persons. To be sure, often there is no clear-cut borderline. In such cases I have employed both forms as alternatives.
3. A considerably revised and enlarged version of the thesis is currently under preparation for publication in the near future.

Citation

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 24. Tokyo: International Institute for Buddhist Studies, 2009.

ContentsSources

• Preface13

Part One Introduction

• Chapter 1: Rong-zoin-pa's Discussion of the Controversy Surrounding the
                    Constituents of Buddhahood: An Overview23
  • 1. Introductory Remarks23
  • 2. Various Positions regarding the Constituents of Buddhahood25
  • 3. The Conceptions of Buddhahood Contained in Various Scriptural
        Systems27
  • 4. The Buddhist Doxographical Systems and Schools as the Basis of
        the Various Positions33
    • A. Three Incorrect Positions regarding the Substratum of Appearances34
      • (i) Undisputed (rtsod gzhi med pa) Positions35
      • (ii) Disputed (rtsod gzhi beas pa) Positions36
    • B. The Fourth and Correct Position regarding the Substratum of
          Appearances37
  • 5. Discussions of the Issue Found in Other Works of Rong-zom-pa38
  • 6. Concluding Remarks43

• Chapter 2: Buddhology in Its Historical and Philosophical Context:
                    An Overview45
  • 1. Introductory Remarks45
  • 2. Non-Mahayana Buddhology47
    • A. Nirvāṇa without Remains and the Indirect Activities of the
          Buddha in the World47
    • B. The Notions of Transcendental and Multiple Buddhas and
          Their Fields51
  • 3. Non-Tantric Mahāyāna Buddhology53
    • A. The True Nature of the World as Nirvāṇa and the Inconceivability of Buddhahood56
    • B. Buddhahood as Defined by Qualities and the Notion of Unfixed Nirvāṇa57
    • C. The Theory of the Three Kāyas61
    • D. The Four Gnoses68
    • E. The Notion of Bliss70
  • 4. Tantric Buddhology76
    • A. Mantras, Vidyās, and Dhāraṇīs81
    • B. Mudrās88
    • C. Manifold Expressions of Buddhahood106
      • (i) Multiple Bodies108
      • (ii) Multiple Gnoses114
      • (iii) Multiple Buddha Families119
    • D. The Notion of Ādibuddha125
    • E. Wrathful Manifestations128
    • F. Maṇḍalas130
    • G. The Notion of Great Bliss134
  • 5. Concluding Remarks137
• Chapter 3: The Controversy Surrounding the Existence of

Gnosis at the Stage of a Buddha139

• • 1. Introductory Remarks139
  • 2. The Problem of Ascribing a Mental Element to the Absolute139
  • 3. The Mental Element of the Absolute and Yogācāra Theories of Knowledge142
  • 4. A Buddha's Knowledge (jñāna: ye shes): A Brief

Discussion of the Key Terms160

• • • A. On the Tibetan Term ye shes160
    • B. Non-conceptual Gnosis and Pure Mundane Gnosis163
  • 5. Unfixed Nirvāṇa: The Absolute and Its Activity in the World171
  • 6. The Various Positions and Their Proponents176
    • A. Indian Authors177
    • (i) Proponents of the Purified Dharmadhātu as the Sole Constituent of Buddhahood (Position 1)177
      • (a) *Madhyamaka-Siṃha177
      • (b) Mañjuśrīmitra178
      • (c) Atiśa179
      • (d) Candraharipāda180
      • (e) Bhavya180

(ii) Proponents of the Existence of the Purified Dharmadhiitu and Non-Conceptual Gnosis (Position 2) ..................................................... 181 (a) Nligamitra and Jfilinacandra .............................. 18 I (b) Dharmamitra .......... ......... ...... ...... ..... ..... ......... ... 182 (iii) Proponents of the Existence of Pure Mundane Gnosis (Positions 3-6) ...... ..... ..... ............ ........ ....... ..... I 84 (a) SrIgupta ............................................................. 184

1. Rong zom chos kyi bzang po. sangs rgyas kyi sa chen po.
   1. In rong zom bka' 'bum. pp. 453-489. Thimpu: Kunsang Topgay, 1976.
   2. In rong zom gsung 'bum, vol. 2, ff. 203-221. 3 vols. Śrī-seng, Khams: Padma Kun-grol, early 1980s.
   3. In rong zom gsung 'bum (Yeshe De), vol. 2, pp. 113-158. 3 vols. Odiyan, Berkeley: Yeshe De Project, 1980s-1990s.
   4. In rong zom chos bzang gi gsung 'bum, vol. 2, pp. 69-87. 2 vols. Chengdu: Si khron mi rigs dpe skrun khang, 1999.
2. _____. sgyu 'phrul gsang ba snying po'i rtsa rgyud tshul bzhi yan lag bco lngas bkral ba dkon cog 'grel.
   1. In rong zom gsung 'bum, vol. 1, ff. 6-214. 3 vols. Śrī-seng, Khams: Padma Kun-grol, early 1980s.
   2. In rong zom gsung 'bum (Yeshe De), vol. 1, 597 pp. (separate pagination). 3 vols. Odiyan, Berkeley: Yeshe De Project, 1980s-1990s.
   3. In rong zom chos bzang gi gsung 'bum under the title rgyud rgyal gsang ba snying po dkon cog 'grel, vol. 1, pp. 31-250. 2 vols. Chengdu: Si khron mi rigs dpe skrun khang, 1999.
   4. In rnying ma bka' ma rgyas pa, vol. 25 (ra). 58 vols. Kalimpong: Dupjung Lama, 1982-1987.
   5. Indian reprint of the dga' ldan phun tshogs gling (zhol pa khang) edition, n.p., n.d., 145 fols.
3. Klong chen pa. dpal gsang ba snying po'i spyi don legs par bshad pa'i snang bas yid kyi mun pa thams cad sel ba. In rnying ma bka' ma rgyas pa, vol. 26 (sha), pp. 5-182. 58 vols. Kalimpong: Dupjung Lama, 1982-1987.
4. Mādhyamikasiṁha. Saṃkṣiptanānādṛṣtivibhāga. (D 3898) dbu ma, a 1b1-7b6; (Q 5295) dbu ma, ha 58a2-64b2 (vol.101, p.141-144); (N 4067) dbu ma, ha 52a1-52b7. ACIP AIBS