Your cart is empty now.
Aryadeva’s Catuhsataka along with the work of Nagarjuna provided the philosophical basis for much of subsequent Mahayana Buddhism. Like Nagarjuna’s Mulama-dhyamakakarikas, it too was commented upon by Vijnanavada or Idealist, thinkers as well as by those of the Madhyamaka or “Middle Way” school. Thus the Catuhsataka was interpreted in very different and yet philosophically rich fashion by its sixth century commentator’s dharmapala and Candrakirti the former saw it as only refuting ascription of imagined natures (parikalpitasvabhava) to phenomena while leaving real natures untouched; the latter interpreted Aryadeva’s work as a thoroughgoing rejection of all real intrinsic nature whatsoever. Tom Tillemans, in this reprint of his 1990 doctoral thesis takes up the key themes in Dharmapala and Candrakirti’s philosophies and translate two chapter from their respective works on catuhsataka both commentaries had a strong influence on subsequent Buddhism Candrakirti’s was imported for Tibetan development Dharmapala played a formative role in the increasingly marked differentiations between Vijnanavada and Madhyamaka philosophies.
Tom J.F Tillemans is an expatriate Canadian who since 1992 has been professor of Buddhist studies at the University of Lausanne, Switzerland. He is also the secretary- general of the international association of Buddhist studies.
His research centers on Madhyamaka philosophy and Buddhist logic and epistemology in Indian and Tibetan traditions His published books include scripture logic language essays on Dharmakirti and his Tibetan successor [studies in Indian and Tibetan Buddhism wisdom publication Boston 1999] as well as dharmakirti pramanavarttika An annotated translation of the fourth chapter (pararathanumana volume 1)[ Verlag der Oesterreichischen akademie der wissenschaften Vienna 2000]
The following work takes as it nucleus a series of seminars given by Prof. J. May during which over a number of summer semesters we read the Sanskrit text of Aryadeva’s Catuhsataka (CS) and Candrakirti’s Catuhsatakavrtti (CSV). Subsequently in Japan while working mainly on Dharmakirti with Prof. S. katsura, I began to read the Chinese commentary of Dharmapala and was impressed with the importance and philosophical interest of the latter text not only for understanding Aryadeva in a different manner, but also for its connections with the Epistemological school founded by Dignaga.
Below the reader will find translation of two chapters from Aryadeva Candrakirti and Dharmapala chapter which are diverse in style and contents, CS XII and its commentaries being largely rhetorical- a polemic against the infidels – while the subsequent chapter on perception and its commentaries are full of dense philosophical argumentations My approach has been in effect to show a representative sample of Candrakirti and Dharmapala’s interpretation of Aryadeva. Nonetheless two chapter are hardly exhaustive: we should mention that the eighth chapter Dharmapala’s commentary which is of considerable philosophical and historical interest remains to be translated.
The translations are preceded by a three chapter introduction. The first seeks to present the usual introductory matters such as material on previous research lives dates and works of the authors as well as few methodological points. The subsequent two chapter are loosely based on topics in the commentaries to CS XII and XIII numerous arguments, I have preferred to treat of the dominant themes in CS XIII and XIII by placing them in a larger context of Yogacara and madhyamaka philosophies Nonetheless the structure of the arguments themselves should be comprehensible from the subheading which I have added to the translation and from the presentation of rgyal tshab Dar ma rin chen’s topical outlines which I have appended to the introduction.
A few brief words are in order on the transcription of Tibetan and Chinese words and on some other conventions which I have adopted. Tibetan transcription is in the system recommended by the American Library Association and the “Verein Deutscher Bibliotheakre” that is with the n+ superdot (n) n+ tilde (n) z + accent aigu(z) and s+ accent aigu(s) instead of the ng, ny, zh, sh which one would us in the system of T. Wylie. (see e.g Steinkellner and Tauscher 1983 p. ix or Mimaki 1976 p.185 for the details) Chinese is transcribe in Pinyin with the first tone (flat) being indicated by macrons (i.e a, e, i) second tone (rising) by an accent aigu (i.e a, e, i etc) the third tone (falling rising) by a superscribed v (i.e a, e, i, o, u ) and fourth tone (falling) by means of an accent grave ( a, e, I, etc) I have repunctuated the Trish’s Chinese text by placing a small circle (i.e) beside the character which I take as ending the Chinese sentence The Taisho’s own rather misleading punctuation consisting in points after the character can safely be ignored Footnotes are used in the introductory chapter while endnotes figure in the translations. The former are indicated simply by superscribed numbers whereas the letter are indicated in the text by numbers in parentheses the actual endnotes themselves being found in the section “Notes to the Translation”. In cross-references and in the indexes “footnote” is abbreviation by “fn” and “endnote” by “en.” Finally it may be remarked that many Sanskrit words such as “Dharma” “karma” and “nirvana” have been left unutilized this is because they are now bona fide English words Nonetheless in many cases such as “Skanda”, “sraddha”, “Dharmakya” etc where the reader might very well have difficulties I have still followed a more conservative approach i.e. putting the term in italics and providing a translation for a partial list of these surprising new English words included in Webster’s third new International dictionary see Jackson(1982).
Numerous are those who have in one way or another assisted me in accomplishing this work amongst them let me single out a few names for special mention First and foremost is Jacques may who was the director of my theses and who has shown me great personal kindness and careful guidance over the years that I have been in Switzerland. My gratitude also goes to the other members of the jury i.e. J.F Billeter, J. Bronkhorst and D.S Ruegg, as well as to Shoryu Katsura and (last but not least) to Ernst steinkellner for his encouragement and willingness to publish this work Karen Lang, who has made and is making important contribution on the catuhsataka has kindly provided Prof. May and me with copies of her publication. Her work has been of constant use to me and has been consulted at every stage in working on the CS and CSV. As in the case of Richard Hayes recent book on Dignaga which is also a valuable contribution my occasional disagreements should not at all be misinterpreted they are hopefully constructive disagreement and are intended as such.
Tony Duff of help computer consulting in boulder, Colorado, has the incalculable merit satisfactorily solving the problem of printing Sanskrit Tibetan and pinyin diacritical marks Georges Dreyfus with whom I’ve had a running dialogue on common philosophical concerns for approximately ten years has had an important influence on the development of my ideas no doubt many of our discussion have in one way or another found their course into the position which I have adopted in this book finally my sincere thanks to my parents and especially to my wife Shelley whose support comments and patience were indispensable to my being able to accomplish this work.
Financial support was gratefully received from the Japanese Ministry of education (1983-85) the social science and humanities Research council of Canada (1984-85) and the Fonds national Suisse de la recherché scientific (1985 until the present ) the university partially subsidized the costs of publications.
Preface | vii | |
Abbreviations | xv | |
Bibliography | xvii | |
1 | Introductory remarks | 1 |
A. past research on the catuhsataka and its commentaries the scope of our project |
1 | |
B. Lives and works of Aryaveda Dharmapala and candrakirti |
5 | |
C. Some methodological remarks | 14 | |
1. The question of an Indo-Tibetan approach | 14 | |
2. can we legitimately speak of Dignaga Dharmapala and Dharmakirti as belonging to one unified school? |
18 | |
II | The problem of Scriptural Authority | 23 |
A. The Epistemological school’s position | 24 | |
B. Aryaveda Dharmapala and Candrakirti | 29 | |
C. Some final remarks on appeals to authority | 32 | |
III | Candrakirti and Dharmapala on Perception | 37 |
A. Candrakirti on perception and the status of the given | 41 | |
B. Dharmapala on perception | 54 | |
IV | A summary of our arguments in chapter II and III | 67 |
A. The problem of scriptural authority | 67 | |
B. candrakirti on perception and the status of the given | 67 | |
C. Dharmapala on perception | 68 | |
Appendix I: texts and translations from PSV and PST; A note on Dharmakirti’s and Dignaga’s apoha |
69 | |
Appendix II: remarks on the catuskoti | 72 | |
Appendix III. Rgyal Tshab Rje’s Topical outlines to catusatakavrtti XII |
77 | |
Appendix III. Rgyal Tshab Rje’s Topical outlines to catusatakavrtti XIII |
81 | |
English translation | 85 | |
Dharmapala’s Commentary to the Catuhsataka | ||
Chapter IV Refutation of heretical Views | 87 | |
A. The Qualities of the auditors of the teaching | 87 | |
B. The outsider’s and Buddhist notions of liberation compared |
88 | |
C. The problem of the authority of the outsiders and Buddhist treatises and scriptures |
90 | |
1. The outsiders objection | 90 | |
2. The Buddhist reply appealing to voidness | 91 | |
3.Voidness | 92 | |
4. The outsiders are untrustworthy | 93 | |
5. Arguments against the Vaisesikas | 94 | |
6. Arguments against the Samkhyas | 96 | |
7. Conclusions and rhetorical | 97 | |
D. The fear of nirvana | 99 | |
E. Moral and philosophical faults compared | 102 | |
F. Selflessness ( nairatmya) | 102 | |
1. Debates | 102 | |
2. Consequence of inappropriately teaching selflessness |
104 | |
3. Selflessness was not taught for the sake of arguments |
106 | |
G. Arguments against the Brahmins and jains | 108 | |
1. Refutation of the Vedas | 109 | |
2. Jains and Brahmins compared | 109 | |
3. Refutation of asceticism and high birth as means to liberation |
110 | |
H. Resume of the buddhadharma | 112 | |
I. Conclusions | 113 | |
Catuhsatakavrtti XII Refutation of heretical views | 115 | |
A. The qualities of the auditors of the teaching | 115 | |
B. The outsiders and Buddhists notions of liberation compared |
117 | |
1. Citations and some grammatical remarks | 117 | |
2. The outsiders do not know the method for liberation |
119 | |
C. The problem of the authority of the outsiders and Buddhist treatises and scriptures |
120 | |
1. Citations | 120 | |
2. The untrustworthiness of the outsiders | 121 | |
D. Fear of voidness and nirvana | 122 | |
E. Moral and philosophical faults compared | 124 | |
F. Selflessness (nairamya) | 125 | |
1. Consequence of teaching selflessness | 125 | |
2. Explaining what selflessness is | 126 | |
3. Selflessness was not taught for the sake of argumentation |
128 | |
G. Arguments against the Brahmins and jains | 130 | |
1. jains and Brahmins compared | 131 | |
2. Refutation of asceticism and high birth as means to liberation |
132 | |
H. Resume of the buddhadharma | 132 | |
I. Conclusions | 133 | |
Dharmapala’s Commentary to the catuhasataka | ||
chapter V refutation of the sense organs and their objects |
135 | |
Part I: Sense objects | 135 | |
A. Against samkhya refuting sense object because one never sees the whole |
135 | |
B. All sense objects are to be similarly refuted | 136 | |
C. One cannot see the whole object by merely seeing its visual form |
137 | |
1. Discussion as to whether the visual form itself is indeed perceptible |
137 | |
2. The whole form cannot be seen | 138 | |
D. Against Buddhist vaibhasikas and other realists part whole arguments used against various positions on the reality of atoms |
139 | |
1. Sadhyasama | 139 | |
2. Atoms and aksara are anagous | 140 | |
E. Examination of the Abhirdharma’s notion of the domain of visual from (rupayatana) the relationship between shape and colour |
141 | |
1. Shape is not different from colour | 141 | |
2. Shape is not the same as colour | 143 | |
3. Shape colour and atoms | 143 | |
F. Critique of vaisesika position | 144 | |
1. Refuting the Vaisesika views on colour and their causes substance are not the cause for colour |
145 | |
2. Refuting the Vaisesika views on colour and their causes colourness is not the cause for colour |
145 | |
3. The vaisesika view that the eye the body apprehend earth water and fire |
147 | |
4. Substances like earth etc are in fact imperceptible |
148 | |
5. General refutation of the outsiders and the other Buddhist vehicles |
149 | |
Part II Sense Organs | 150 | |
A. Refuting other Buddhist school’s positions on the reality of the sense organs |
150 | |
1. All sense organs are like in being derivatives from the elements why then do only the eyes see? |
150 | |
2. the view that the sense organs characters are the same but their functions differ |
150 | |
3. Could the eyes and other organs have different characters because they exist separately from the elements? |
151 | |
4. The view that it is the combination of karma and the elements which produces the different effects such as vision hearing etc. |
152 | |
5. Does one karma cause different effects? | 152 | |
6. Could the powers of karma alone produce the different effects? |
153 | |
7. Conclusion Karma is responsible for the sense organs but its unanalydable and inconceivable |
154 | |
B. Refutation of the samkhyas view that form etc. are apprehended by the sense organs and the inner mind |
155 | |
C. refuting prapyakaritvavada – contact between the object and the sense organs |
156 | |
D. refuting aprapyakaritvavada – no contact between the object and the sense organs |
157 | |
E. Refutations of the samkhyas position that the eye and its object are fundamentally identical |
159 | |
F. Refutations of the aulukyas (vaiesesikas) | 160 | |
1. Refuting the vaisesikas four condition for vision |
161 | |
2. Buddhist Hinayana views also refuted by the same arguments |
161 | |
3. Conclusions | 162 | |
G. Critique of sounds and words | 162 | |
1. Critique of sounds universal characters | 163 | |
2. Refuting prapyakaritvavada and aprapyakaritavavada with regard to sound |
165 | |
3. Sounds cannot be cognized in their totality | 165 | |
4. Temporal arguments against the reality of sounds | 166 | |
H. Critique of some Samkhyas view on the mind (manas) | 167 | |
I. Discussion of notions (samjna) | 168 | |
J. The unreality of consciousness | 169 | |
1. Debates about illusions | 170 | |
2. dharmapala’s position | 171 | |
K. Replying to the charge that the madhyamaka is simply counterintuitive |
171 | |
L. Similes for dhrama’s mode of existence | 172 | |
Catuhsatakavrtti XIII Refutation of the sense organs and their objects |
175 | |
Part I sense objects | 175 | |
A. Refuting sense objects because one never sees the whole |
175 | |
1. Debate with the logicians on pratyaksa | 176 | |
2. Candrakirti’s view it is the object which is prayaksa rather than the mind |
178 | |
3. Conclusions | 179 | |
B. All sense objects are to be similarly refuted | 179 | |
C. One cannot see the whole object by merely seeing its visual form |
180 | |
D. Part whole arguments applied to visual form and atoms |
180 | |
1. Sadhyasama | 181 | |
2. Atoms and aksara are analogous | 181 | |
E. Examination of the abhidharma notion rupayatana the relationship between shape and colour |
182 | |
F. critique of form and its causes i.e the elements | 183 | |
1. The view that form and its causes are not different |
183 | |
2. the view that form and its causes are different | 184 | |
G. Refuting perceptibility | 184 | |
Part II Sense Organs | 185 | |
A. Refuting other Buddhist school’s positions on the reality the sense organs |
185 | |
1. All sense organs are alike in being derivatives from the elements why then do only the eyes see? |
185 | |
2. Karma is responsible for the sense organs but is unanalysable and inconceivable |
186 | |
B. The view that the eyes etc must exist because we observe their effects viz the sense consciousness |
187 | |
C. Refuting aprapyakaritvavada – contact between the object and the sense organs |
188 | |
D. Refuting aprapyakaritvavada – no contact between the object and the sense organs |
189 | |
E. Sight is not the nature of the eye | 190 | |
F. Refuting the Buddhist three conditions for vision | 190 | |
G. Critique of sounds and words | 191 | |
H. Critique of the mind (manas) | 192 | |
I. Discussion of notions (samjna) | 193 | |
J. The unreality of consciousness | 194 | |
K. Replying to the charge that the Madhyamaka is simply counterintuitive |
196 | |
L. Similes for dharma mode of existence | 197 | |
1. Explanation | 197 | |
2. Citations | 198 | |
Notes to the Translations | 201 | |
A. Notes to Dharmapala’s commentary chapter IV | 203 | |
B. Notes to Catuhsatakavrtti XII | 234 | |
C. Notes to Dharmapala’s commentary chapter V | 246 | |
D. Notes to Catuhsatakavrtti XIII | 271 | |
|
||
Preface to the texts and indexes | iii | |
Table of contents | v | |
Abbreviations and Sigla | vi | |
Sanskrit and Tibetan texts of Catuhsatakavrtti XII | 1 | |
Sanskrit and Tibetan texts of Catuhsatakavrtti XIII | 59 | |
Chinese of dharmapala’s commentary | 129 | |
Chapter IV | 131 | |
Chapter V | 138 | |
Indexes | 147 | |
Sanskrit terms | 149 | |
Tibetan terms | 160 | |
Chinese terms | 165 | |
Proper terms | 180 |
Domestic Shipping: 3-4 Days (after shipping)
International Shipping: 1-2 weeks (based on your location)
You will receive an email once your order has been shipped or you can email us if you didn't receive tracking details (info@mlbd.co.in)
Every book that we sell is the latest edition except all the rare books
Yes, we do provide free shipping, only on domestic orders (within India) above Rs.1500