This article sent to me by Dan McNamara. Blessed be his name, for kindly adding to my growing inability to keep track of footnotes.
Before getting on with the article, however, I thought it worth while to record a few notes on a word which causes general incomprehension to those (a) not with French and (b) those who are not raised on French scholarship on Chinese Buddhism. The offending word is 'subitist', (better than the more than disagreeable 'subitizing').
>>The term Subitism as applied to Buddhism is derived from the French 'illumination subite' (lit. 'sudden illumination'), contrasting with 'illumination graduelle'. It gained currency in this use in English from the work of sinologist Paul Demiéville, whose 1947 work 'Mirror of the Mind' was widely read in the U.S. and inaugurated a series by him on subitism and gradualism[1]<<
From Latin adjective subitus (= sudden); but why we cannot retain "sudden" is beyond me. After all: sudden is from: 1290 (implied in suddenly), perhaps via Anglo-Fr. sodein, from O.Fr. subdain "immediate, sudden," from V.L. *subitanus, variant of L. subitaneus "sudden," from subitus "come or go up stealthily," from sub "up to" + ire "come, go."
To use the French is just to cast the debates in Buddhism along the lines of prominent Church Heresies or something with similar cache value. (There is a thought here, which I should have liked another time to have worked out: but the enthymeme may be sketched out as follows: note how you cannot form a term on the model of quietism with English "sudden", but you can with "subite"). This need not mean that seeing the debate in such terms is automatically suspect--it is just a bad argument to stretch our linguistic resources for such reasons.
An article by historically sensitive Bernard Faure also states:
>>As early as 1923, Paul Pelliot, in a seminal essay modestly entitled "Notes on some artists of the Six Dynasties and the Tang," examined the background of the legend of Bodhidharma. In 1947, Paul Demiéville published "The Mirror of the Mind," in which he compared the use of the mirror metaphor in the Chinese and Western philosophical tradition. This article, which inaugurated a series of studies on "subitism" and "gradualism," has exerted a profound influence on the development of Chan studies in the U. S.
In 1949, Jacques Gernet, stimulated by Hu Shi's works, published a translation of Shenhui's "Dialogues"; then, in a rich article published in 1951, he described the eventful biography of this figure. The following year, Demiéville published his monumental Concile de Lhasa, in which he attempted to unveil the history of the controversy over subitism, which animated the enigmatic Council of Tibet (which some scholars today localize, not in Lhasa, but in the BSam yas Monastery, while others deny that such Council ever took place). This work, divided in two parts (doctrinal and historical), is a precious source of information on early Chan, and in particular on the Northern School, to which the Chinese protagonist in the controversy, Moheyan, was heir. It is regretable that Demiéville did not follow up on his initial project, which was to dedicate a second volume to a study of the Chan doctrine. However, in subsequent years, he continued to give lectures at the Collège de France and to publish articles on this topic. It is curious, however, that while that his influence in France remained small, despite the publication in 1973 of two volumes of his collected essays on Chinese Buddhism and sinology, he was beginning to be read in Japan and in the U. S. Among the repercussions of his work in France, we must nevertheless mention the publication in 1970 of a special issue of Hermes on Chan, a second edition of which, greatly expanded (1985), includes not only translation of basic Chan/Zen texts, but a few important articles on Chinese Chan (by Paul Demiéville, Nicole Vandier-Nicolas, Catherine Despeux) and its influence in Tibet (Guilaine Mala).<<
and
>>Among the important contributions to the American discovery of Chan, let us mention Early Chan in Tibet and China (Lai and Lancaster 1983), and Sudden and Gradual: Approaches to Enlightenment in Chinese Thought (Gregory 1987a). The first work contains, among others, the translation of two important articles by Yanagida, one concerning the Lidai fabao ji and the Chan school in Sichuan, and another on the emergence of the "Recorded Sayings" (yulu) of classical Chan; as well as a survey of the studies on Tibetan manuscripts from Dunhuang by Ueyama Daishun. The second work opens with a translation of essays by Demiéville and R. A. Stein on Chinese and Tibetan "subitism."
The question of the relationship between Chan and Tibetan Buddhism was also the object of a number of studies, for instance Jeffrey Broughton's "Early Ch'an Schools in Tibet." The collection in which this essay appeared, Studies in Ch'an and Hua-yen, edited by Gregory and Gimello, also contained essays by Luis Gómez on the teaching of Moheyan, the Chan master studied by Demiéville in Le concile de Lhasa, and by John McRae on the Niutou (Oxhead) School (Gregory and Gimello 1983).<<
From CHAN/ZEN STUDIES IN ENGLISH: THE STATE OF THE FIELD, by Bernard Faure.
On to the main course.
The Great Perfection and the Chinese Monk: Nyingmapa Defenses of Hashang Mahāyāna
by Sam van Schaik
This is an updated version of the article that originally appeared in Buddhist Studies Review 20.2 (2003): 189-204.[1]
1. Simultaneism, gradualism and polemics
A controversy over two apparently opposed approaches to enlightenment runs throughout the history of Tibetan Buddhist thought. Broadly stated, the first position, “the simultaneous approach” (cig car gyi ‘jug pa) was that the cessation of dualistic conceptualisation in meditation was sufficient cause for enlightenment, without any need for the graduated, and much more lengthy, practices of the six pāramitā. On the other hand, the second position, “the gradual approach” (rim gyis ‘jug pa) was that those practices were indispensable.[2]
The conflict between these two approaches was, according to Tibetan tradition, settled in the eighth century in a formal debate. Whether the debate actually occurred as such has been called into doubt, but there is no question of the importance of the legend of the debate to the Tibetan tradition. According to the Tibetan histories, the debate was arranged in Samyé temple in the late eighth century to determine whether Tibet would accept Indian or Chinese Buddhism as normative.[3] In the stories of the debate, the Indian side was identified with gradualism and the Chinese side with simultaneism, a greatly simplified version of the complexities of early Buddhist influences on Tibet which nonetheless became widely accepted in Tibet. According to tradition, the Indian Buddhist scholar Kamalaśīla, arguing for the gradualist position, opposed an Chinese monk called Hashang Mahāyāna, who was arguing for the simultaneist position. In the Tibetan versions of the story, Hashang was defeated, and his method rejected.[4]
For Tibetan scholars of later generations, Hashang Mahāyāna came to be an emblem for a particular kind of erroneous doctrine, the belief in an simultaneous realisation caused by the mere cessation of concepts (mi rtog pa or mi bsam pa), which became a standard object of rebuttal. Later, Hashang’s defeat was put to polemical use against certain Tibetan practice traditions, in particular the Mahāmudrā (phyag chen) of the bKa’ brgyud school and the Great Perfection (rdzogs chen) of the Nyingma school.[5] The Great Perfection’s teachings on technique free meditation were subject to accusations of being no more than the simultaneous method of Hashang. Nyingma scholars were often forced to defend the validity of the Great Perfection against this accusation in polemical texts. The following passage by Khedrupjé (1385-1438) is a good example of the kind of criticisms levelled against Nyingma practitioners:
Many who hold themselves to be meditators of the Snow mountains [of Tibet] talk, in exalted cryptic terms, of theory free from all affirmation, of meditative realisation free from all mentation, of [philosophical] practice free from all denial and assertion and of a fruit free from all wishes and qualms. And they imagine that understanding is born in the conscious stream when - because in a state where there is no mentation about anything at all there arises something like non-identification of anything at all - one thinks that there exists nothing that is either identical or different. By so doing one has proclaimed great nihilism where there is nothing to be affirmed according to a doctrinal system of one’s own, as well as the thesis of the Hashang in which nothing can be the object of mentation.[6]
In view of this kind of criticism it is perhaps surprising that some Nyingma writers, rather than simply defending themselves against such accusations by distancing their own teachings from those of Hashang Mahāyāna, attempted to make a more balanced judgement of the simultaneist doctrine and sometimes went so far as to express their approval of it. Rather than repeating the standard presentations of Hashang’s beliefs as a misguided straying from the true path, as most were content to do, certain Nyingma scholars continued to engage with the problem of simultaneous versus gradual approaches, and its relationship to their own Great Perfection practices.
This article is an examination of the treatment of Hashang by two eighteenth-century writers. The first is Katog Tsewang Norbu (1698-1755), who deals with the teachings of Hashang Mahāyāna in his history of the Chinese simultaneist school. The second is Jigmé Lingpa (1730-1798), in whose Kun mkhyen zhal lung, a discourse on the “three liberations” of the Great Perfection, there is an annotation defending Hashang. This annotation, along with an even more brief comment by Longchenpa (1308-1363), has been taken by some as evidence of the Nyingma school’s longstanding connection with Chan Buddhism.[7] In fact, these eighteenth-century texts tell us little or nothing about the original connections between the Great Perfection and Chan, but a great deal about Nyingma scholars’ attempts to deal with the perceived connection. As will be seen, these two scholars deal with it in quite different ways, but I will suggest that they share a similar motivation, connected to the political events in central Tibet in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries.
2. Katog Tsewang Norbu
Katog Tsewang Norbu (1698-1755) was the head of Katog monastery, and ranks as one of the most impressive scholars of eighteenth-century Tibet. His studies took in both the texts of the Nyingma and those of the new schools; he exchanged Nyingma for Kagyü teachings with the Twelfth Karmapa, Jangchub Dorjé (1703-1732),[8] and wrote a history of the transmission of Mahāmudrā. Tsewang Norbu studied and championed the forbidden Jonang doctrines, writing several works on the “empty of other” (gzhan stong) theory and on the Kālacakra tantra, the source of “empty of other” in the tantric corpus. He also wrote some non-religious works on history and geography and travelled widely, making several journeys to Nepal.[9]
In his Sa bon tsam smos pa,[10] a study of the Chinese lineages which begin with Bodhidharma and include Hashang Mahāyāna, Tsewang Norbu makes use of a number of old sources including the then rare ninth-century treatise A Lamp for the Eyes of Contemplation (bSam gtan mig sgron) by Nub Sangyé Yeshé. Tsewang Norbu cites two statements from this treatise. The first is that it is important to write about the simultaneous path because of its similarities with the Great Perfection, which could cause a mistaken identification of the two. The second and more controversial statement is that the path of Hashang Mahāyāna is a pure path.[11] In A Lamp for the Eyes of Contemplation itself, the simultaneous path is ranked above the gradualist path, but below the Vajrayāna and the Great Perfection. This is the model followed by Tsewang Norbu, who stresses that the simultaneous path is based on the sutras, specifically, on the sutras of the third turning of the wheel. He defends this statement against the objection that, according to all of the sutras, enlightenment is achieved only after a number of incalculable aeons, with a quotation from the Chinese translation of the Mahāparinirvāṇa sutra:
If one who is skilled in means applies himself diligently to this sutra, that sage will reach perfect enlightenment, unsurpassable and totally pure, before very long.[12]
Having established the legitimacy of the simultaneous path, Tsewang Norbu is keen to show that it is inferior to the Vajrayāna. He states that when the sutras speak of buddhahood, it is intentional, and goes on to discuss the progress towards the goal according to the Pāramitāyāna (or sūtra path) and Vajrayāna (or mantra path).
Having initially travelled the paths of accumulation and application by the sutra path alone, most enter the mantra path at the stage of attaining the first bhūmi. There are those who do not enter it [then], but after the eighth bhūmi in which one is initiated by the Teachers they will have entered into mindfulness in the manner of the mantra path, that is, under their own power without relying on external conditions. Thus although we teach the importance of entering the mantra path rather than the sutra path, from the level of the eighth bhūmi onwards one is on the path of the initiation into the state of awareness where there is no opportunity to negate or purify. This is the case whichever the original entrance gate, sutra or mantra, but because one need practise for a shorter time with mantra, the time in which the fruit of perfect and totally pure buddhahood is attained is the distinction between sutra and mantra. There is no difference in buddhahood itself, so there is no harm in the indirect teachings.[13]
Tsewang Norbu’s position is that whether one starts on the sutra or mantra path is irrelevant from the point of view of the goal. It is possible to progress through all ten bhūmis on the sutra path, but from the eighth bhūmi onwards the practitioner is in effect on the mantra path. The benefit of entering the mantra path at the first bhūmi is that one will attain the goal more swiftly. Tsewang Norbu apparently ignores certain characteristics of the simultaneist doctrine of Hashang in order to fit it to the model of the standard Pāramitāyāna. In contrast to an orderly progression through the ten bhūmis, Hashang is said to have spoken of direct access to the tenth bhūmi.[14] Tsewang Norbu seems to be aware that this treatment is not altogether adequate: remarking on its brevity, he writes that there is no need to elaborate further merely for the sake of a few doubts.[15]
Tsewang Norbu also touches on the contemporary situation in the following passage:
Even today in China there are Hashangs of the Chan school who teach only in the tsung men style.[16] Here in Tibet too, there are a declining few who assert that one should from the beginning aim for the deep inner meaning, saying: “Listen to the instructions on the mind without distinguishing discipline and wildness.” However they have no more than a partial similarity to eachother.[17]
Tsewang Norbu appears to be pointing to certain contemporary Great Perfection and Mahāmudrā teachers who spurn the gradual path - with the interesting aside that these types are in decline. His main point is that there is no more than a partial similarity between the Chinese and the Tibetan teachers. Tsewang Norbu’s opinion is that the Chinese teachers abandon the stages of hearing and contemplating (thos bsam) and make meditation (bsam gtan) the entire path, while the Great Perfection contains all three stages. As evidence for the presence of gradual stages in the Great Perfection he invokes the scriptural authority of the Union of the Sun and Moon (Nyi zla kha spyor), one of the Seventeen Tantras, in which, he says, seven stages of activity are taught as well as the one essential point which encompasses them.[18]
Finally, Tsewang Norbu also sets down what he sees as the correct use of the terms “simultaneist” and “gradualist”. He argues that, while the Chinese Hashangs distinguish between two types of practitioner, the simultaneist and the gradualist, there is no such distinction found in the Indian teachings which came to Tibet. The only true simultaneists are those Chinese Hashangs and their disciples:
Thus past figures like the great monk Ye shes dbang po-a disciple of the Indian abbot Śāntarakṣita-are known as gradualists because they practised the famous three ways to knowledge.[19] The disciples of the Chinese abbot Mahāyāna are known as simultaneists because they applied themselves to contemplation alone.[20]
Tsewang Norbu believes that to use the terms simultaneist and gradualist within the context of Indo-Tibetan Buddhism is an error. Simultaneism is a Chinese phenomenon, unknown to the mainstream Indo-Tibetan tradition. Thus his position is ultimately an orthodox one, although, like Nub Sangyé Yeshé, he does not reject the simultaneous path of Chan, rather he merely attempts to put it in its proper place.
3. Jigmé Lingpa
Jigmé Lingpa (1730-1729) has an important place in the Nyingma tradition as the redactor of a very popular treasure cycle, the Longchen Nyingtig, as the author of a comprehensive exposition of the Buddhist path as it is known to the Nyingma school, the Treasury of Qualities (Yon tan mdzod), and as the editor of one of the best editions of the collected tantras of the Nyingma school. In most of his endeavours he saw himself as reviving the activities of the great fourteenth-century scholar Longchenpa (1308-1353). The Longchen Nyingtig cycle contains several tantras and sādhanas, which said to derive from the eighth century, as well as numerous commentaries upon these texts, the authorship of which is claimed by Jigmé Lingpa himself. In one of these commentaries, calledThe Oral Teachings of the Omniscient One (Kun mkhyen zhal lung), Jigmé Lingpa attempts a response to the criticism that the Great Perfection is equivalent to the non-conceptualisation taught by Hashang Mahayana.
Jigmé Lingpa’s differentiation of the two approaches is based on the distinction, particular to the Instruction Series (man ngag sde) of the Great Perfection, between sems, the samsaric, conceptual mind (sems), and nirvanic, non-conceptual awareness (rig pa). The meditation practices of the Instruction Series found in the Longchen Nyingtig proceed on the basis of this distinction, which comes from the earliest Instruction Series scriptures, the Seventeen Tantras.[21] Therefore it is not surprising that Jigmé Lingpa insists upon the importance of the distinction. He argues that, if the meditator attempts to stop conceptual activity without distinguishing between mind (sems) and awareness (rig pa), the result is a blank indeterminacy (lung ma bstan). In awareness, he argues, conceptualisation is neutralised in a state that is “like a crystal ball”, a simile which points to clarity and vividness, rather than indeterminacy and blankness.[22]
Jigmé Lingpa’s insistence on this distinction between the the simultaneist doctrine and the Great Perfection makes the note he attaches to the above passage quite surprising. Stepping outside of the standard model of accusation and rebuttal, he goes on to defend Hashang:
You have made the assertion that the view of Hashang[23] was like this, based on refutations such as the similarity of non-mentation to an egg.[24] Yet scriptures such as the Buddhāvataṃsaka were known to Hashang. During the debate, Kamalaśīla asked what was the cause of saṃsāra by the symbolic action of whirling his staff around his head. [Hashang] answered that it was the apprehender and apprehended by the symbolic action of shaking his robe out twice.[25] It is undeniable that such a teacher was of the sharpest faculties. If the non-recollection and non-mentation entail the offense of rejecting the wisdom of differentiating analysis, then the Prajñāpāramitā sūtras of the Conqueror also entail this fault. Therefore, what the view of Hashang actually was can be known by a perfect buddha, and no one else.[26]
In his defence of Hashang, Jigmé Lingpa had a precedent in the works of Longchenpa. In one section of his Heart of the Threefold Bliss (sDe gsum snying po), Longchenpa writes on the subject of the transcendence of the consequences of positive and negative actions in the context of Great Perfection practice. There is a famous statement attributed to Hashang Mahāyāna on this same subject, that virtue and sin are like black and white clouds, in that both cover up the sun. Rather than distancing himself from this, Longchenpa uses the same metaphor, and then goes on to say:
When the great master Hashang said this, those of lesser intellects could not comprehend it, but he was in accordance with the [ultimate] truth.[27]
Jigmé Lingpa held Longchenpa in great reverence and was certainly familiar with the Heart of the Threefold Bliss. Longchenpa himself was also following a precendent, set by the twelfth-century Nyingmapa Nyangral Nyima Özer (1124-1192), in his Heart of the Flower: a Dharma History (Chos ‘byung me tog snying po). In this version of the debate between simultaneist and gradualist approaches the Tibetan emperor himself states that there is no ultimate difference between the two paths, but that for those of the best faculties (dbang po, skt. indriya), there is the simultaneous method of Hashang, and for those of medium and below there is the graduated path.[28]
It is interesting to note that, in categorizing Hashang as a particularly astute practitioner of a bygone era, Longchenpa and Jigmé Lingpa are treating him in the same way as they treat the early Indian masters of the Vajrayāna lineages of the Nyingma school. An example of the way these early Indian masters are categorized is found in another of Jigmé Lingpa’s explanatory texts from the Longchen Nyingtig:
Those trainees of the very sharpest faculties like Garab rDorjé, Self-arisen Padmasambhava and Indrabhūti, who were lords of the maṇḍala while seeming to be ordinary students, were spontaneously liberated upon hearing, but gradualist people will not reach the goal in that way. So in this situation there is some further striving for complete liberation.[29]
In this, once again, Jigmé Lingpa is following Longchenpa’s lead, as the following passage by Longchenpa shows:
The great yogis who arrived at that state [of enlightenment], like Padmasambhava, Vimalamitra and Telopa, taught directly, without cause and effect, virtue or sin. Even if we understand this intellectually we have not reached it through becoming truly accustomed to it, so we are taught it after we have distinguished the subtle aspects of cause and effect and are no longer afraid of that state.[30]
Jigmé Lingpa uses the distinctions between the faculties of trainees in his Longchen Nyingtig texts as a way of placing the simultaneous aspects of the Great Perfection beyond the reach of contemporary practitioners. The simultaneous actualisation of the Great Perfection is stated to be possible only for those of the sharpest faculties, and Jigmé Lingpa makes it clear that in his view such types are very rare nowadays, if any exist at all. This qualification would also put the simultaneist path of Hashang, described by Jigmé Lingpa as being for those of the sharpest faculties only, in a purely theoretical role.
Thus Longchenpa and Jigmé Lingpa seem to have been tempted to place Hashang, as an individual, in the same category as the great masters of the Indian lineage who are said to have achieved enlightenment in an immediate fashion. However, the simultaneist approach of Hashang is, by this same move, placed outside the realm of possibility for ordinary practitioners. In this, as we have seen, Jigmé Lingpa is restating themes from Longchenpa’s works. Perhaps Jigmé Lingpa’s really original contribution in the Kun mkhyen zhal lung is his contention that there is a scriptural basis for the simultaneous path as much as for the gradual path in the Prajñāparamitā sutras, an insight which appears to be based on comparative readings of texts, rather than the standardised rubrics of Tibetan scholarship.
4. Comparisons
Jigmé Lingpa and Tsewang Norbu represent two different approaches to the simultaneist teachings of Hashang Mahāyāna. The first approach, represented by Longchenpa and Jigmé Lingpa, treats Hashang Mahāyāna more as an individual than as the representative of a school, and suggests that his realisation might be equal to the realisation of a Great Perfection practitioner. [31] They imply that the simultaneous method followed by Hashang is similar to the approach of the early Great Perfection and Mahāmudrā masters such as Vimalamitra and Telopa. However, this method is said to be beyond the reach of most, if not all, contemporary practitioners.
The second approach, that of Nub Sangyé Yeshé and Tsewang Norbu, is to deal with Hashang Mahāyāna as the representative of a Chinese school of Buddhism which he calls simultaneism (cig char ‘jug pa), tsen min, or the teaching of the Chan masters (bsam gtan gyi mkhan po). This school is accepted to represent a valid method, which is placed in a hierarchy where it has a status higher than the gradual path but lower than the higher tantras of the Vajrayāna and the Great Perfection.
Jigmé Lingpa’s approach is based on what might be called a yogic point of view, wherein the individual paths are seen from the perspective of the goal, ultimate truth, and there is an emphasis on the individual realisation of the exponents of these paths rather than the categorisation of their doctrines. Tsewang Norbu’s approach is primarily doxographic, and the aim is the classic scholarly Tibetan one of ranking different paths into an inclusive hierarchy. The Great Perfection, and other Tibetan teachings, are protected from contamination by more questionable doctrines.
Neither Jigmé Lingpa nor Tsewang Norbu make any attempt to identify Great Perfection with the simultaneous path. In fact both writers are careful to distance the approach of the Great Perfection of their time from the eighth-century simultaneism of Hashang Mahāyāna, and Tsewang Norbu also takes care to make the distinction between the Great Perfection and the Chinese Chan teachings of his own time. For Tsewang Norbu, the Great Perfection is inherently a gradual path, and simultaneism is restricted to the Chinese Chan schools. For Jigmé Lingpa, the Great Perfection can be a simultaneous path, but only for the those of the very sharpest faculties, and he makes it clear that few if any contemporary practitioners fall into this category; thus his position is actually very close to that of Tsewang Norbu.
There remains the question of why these two eighteenth-century Nyingma writers, both aware of the criticisms of the Great Perfection from other schools which had occured through the preceding centuries should open themselves to further criticism by discussing the doctrines of Hashang in any sort of positive light at all. Both Jigmé Lingpa and Tsewang Norbu were writing within a tradition of openess towards these doctrines, supported by the writings of past scholars from their school. While Tsewang Norbu’s interest in early sources brought him to the bSam gtan mig sgron, Jigmé Lingpa’s general enthusiasm for what was unique in the doctrines of the Nyingma brought him to the comments on Hashang Mahāyāna by Longchenpa. Thus both were maintaining what they saw as the particular approach of the Nyingma tradition to this matter.
Such a motivation may be seen as arising from the developments in the seventeenth century, when the monastic presence of the Nyingma school dramatically increased in Tibet, and certain influential figures such as Terdag Lingpa (1646-1714) and Lochen Dharmaśrī (1654-1717) gathered together and standardized a corpus of Nyingma texts. On the other hand, the Nyingma was also subject to considerable persecution at the hands of the Dzungar invaders, who sacked several of the monasteries in Tibet and killed many of the lamas, including Lochen Dharmaśrī (1654-1717).[32] Some kind of persecution continued through to the lifetimes of Jigmé Lingpa and Katog Tsewang Norbu; the latter composed a letter written to the Seventh Dalai Lama, dated at around 1750, which makes a plea for an end to the persecution of the Nyingma.[33] The combination of an increasing confidence and self-consciousness within the Nyingma school, and intermittent persecutions, suggest a climate in which Nyingma writers would be motivated to preserve and support the unique and unusual aspects of their own school.
Bibliography:
Faber, F. 1985.’A Tibetan Dunhuang Treatise on Simultaneous Enlightenment: The dMyigs su myed pa tshul gcig pa’i gzhung‘ in Acta Orientalia 46, pp47-77.
Faber, F. 1986. ‘The Council of Tibet According to the sBa bzhed‘ in Acta Orientalia 47, pp33-61.
Gomez, L.O. 1983. ‘Indian Materials on the Doctrine of Sudden Enlightenment’, in Lai, Whalen and Lancaster, Lewis (eds.). Early Ch’an in China and Tibet. Berkley, California: Berkley Buddhist Studies Series, pp393-434.
Guenther, H.V. 1989. Tibetan Buddhism in a Western Perspective. Emeryville, California: Dharma Publishing.
Houston, G. 1974. ‘The bSam yas Debate: According to the rGyal rabs gsal ba’i me long’, in Central Asiatic Journal 18, pp209-216.
Karmay, S.G. 1988. The Great Perfection (rDzogs Chen). Leiden: E.J. Brill.
Jackson, D.P. 1994. Enlightenment by Single Means. Vienna, Der Österreichischen Akademie der Wissenschaften.
Meizezahl, R.O. 985. Die grośe Geschichte des tibetischen Buddhismus nach alter Tradition rÑiṅ ma’i chos ‘byuṅ chen mo. Sankt Augustin: VGH Wissenschaftsverlag.
Seyfort Ruegg, D.S. 1989. Buddha-nature, Mind and the Problem of Gradualism. London: SOAS.
Seyfort Ruegg, D.S. 1992. ‘On the Historiography and Doxography of the ‘Great Debate of bSam yas”, Ihara, Shoren (ed.). 1992. Tibetan Studies: Proceedings of the 5th Seminar of the International Associaton for Tibetan Studies (Narika 1989). Tokyo: Naritisan Shinshoji.
Smith, E.G. 1969. Preface. In The Autobiographical Reminiscences of Ngag-dDang dPal-bZang, Late Abbot of Kah-Thog Monastery [Ngagyur Nyingmay Sungrab series], edited by Sonam T. Kazi. Gangtok.
Stein, R.A. 1987. ‘Sudden Illumination or Simultaneous Comprehension’, in Gregory, Peter N. (ed.). Sudden and Gradual: Approaches to Enlightenment in Chinese Thought. Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press, pp41-66. [This is a translation by Neil Donner of "Illumination subite ou simultanée, note sur la terminologie chinoise et tibétaine", Annales du Musée Guimet (Revue de l'histoire des religions)CLXXX (1971), pp.3-30]
Tucci, G. 1978. Minor Buddhist Texts (part I & II). Rinsen Book Company.
TIBETAN TEXTS
Ka’ thog rig ‘dzin tshe dbang nor bu
The Collected Works (gSuṅ ‘bum) of Ka˙-thog Rig-’dzin Chen-po Tshe dBaṅ-nor-bu (6 vols.). Dalhousie, H.P, India, 1977.
rGya nag Hashang gi byung tshul grub mtha’i phyogs snga bcas sa bon tsam smos pa (vol.V pp419-450).
Klong chen rab ‘byams pa dri med ‘od zer
mDzod bdun (7 vols). Edited by the Yeshe De Project. India, 1992.
sDe gsum snying po don ‘grel gnas lugs rin po che’i mdzod(vol.VII, pp51-347).
‘Jigs med gling pa
Klong chen snying tig. (3 vols). Edited by Ngawang Sopa. New Delhi, 1973.
rDo rje’i tshig rkang gi don ‘grel kun mkhyen zhal lung(vol.III (huṃ), pp520-546).
rDo rje theg pa smin grol lam gyi rim pa las ‘phros pa’i man ngag gi rgyab brten padma dkar po (vol.III (huṃ), pp463-516);
rDzogs pa chen po klong chen snying tig gi gdod ma’i mgon po’i lam gyi rim pa’i khrid yig ye shes bla ma (vol.III (huṃ), pp293-463)
gNubs sangs rgyas ye shes
rNal ‘byor mig gi bsam gtan or bSam gtan mig sgron. Edited by ‘Khor-gdon gTer-sprul Chi-med-rig-’dzin. Leh, 1974.
Nyang ral Nyi ma ‘Od zer
Chos ‘byung me tog snying po. Facsimile in Meisezahl 1985.
Author Unknown
Rnying ma’i rgyud bcu bdun, A ‘dzom chos sgar redaction (3 vols.). Edited by Sanje Dorje. New Delhi, 1973-1977.
sBa bzhed. Edited by mGon po rgyal mtshan. Beijing: Mi rigs dpe skrung khang, 1982.
Names in phonetic transliteration and Wylie transcription:
Garab Dorjé dGa’ rab rDo rje
Hashang Mahāyāna Hwa shang Ma hā yan
Jangchub Dorjé Byang chub rdo rje
Jigmé Lingpa ‘Jigs med gling pa
Kagyü Bka’ brgyud
Katog Tsewang Norbu Ka’ thog tse dbang nor bu
Khedrupjé Mkhas grub rje
Lochen Dharmaśrī Lo chen Dharmaśrī
Longchenpa Klong chen pa
Nub Sangyé Yeshé gNubs sangs rgyas ye shes
Nyangral Nyima Özer Nyang ral nyi ma ‘od zer
Nyingma Rnying ma
Samye Bsam yas
Terdag Lingpa gTer bdag gLing pa
Footnotes
1] Since the current version of this article has undergone several minor changes, citations should be to Sam van Schaik. 2007. “The Great Perfection and the Chinese Monk: rNyingmapa defences of Hwashang Mahāyāna in the Eighteenth Century”. http://earlytibet.com. I would like to thank Dan Martin for his useful suggestions, which lead to some of these changes.
2] In this context, “simultaneous” indicates that all methods are encompassed by a single method, and all stages of realisation are traversed at once. The secondary signification is a time-based distinction: immediate, sudden accomplishment versus gradual, slow accomplishment. The Chinese words are tun-wu (gradual enlightenment) and chien-wu (simultaneous enlightenment), the respective schools of thought being tun-men and chien-men. These terms and their translation has been discussed in Stein 1987, pp46-51.
3] On the questions regarding the historical occurance of the debate, see Gomez 1983 and Ruegg 1992, which also summarize previous discussions of this topic. Whatever the debate occured as a historical event or not, the stories of the debate had particular symbolic significance for later generations of Tibetans.
4] In this article I use the Tibetan version of the name of this Chinese monk, because we are dealing here with the Tibetan discussion of the Tibetan version of the monk’s teachings. The name in pinyin transcription would be Heshang Moheyan. On the evidence for the actual teachings of Moheyan, which are subtler than the Tibetan tradition ever acknowledged, see Gomez 1983.
5] One early and influential polemical statement is found in the Sa skya Paṇḍita’s (1182-1251) treatise sDom gsum rab byed, which criticised the teaching of a doctrine of simultaneous realisation called “the white panacea” (dkar po cig thub) in Mahāmudrā. There have been several discussion of this subject, of which perhaps the best are Seyfort Ruegg 1989 and Jackson 1994.
6] Translation in Ruegg 1981, p223. The text is the sTong thun skal bzang mig byed, f.152, in volume ka of the gSung ‘bum (Zhol edition). mKhas grub rje’s presentation of the faulty doctrine in terms of view, meditation, activity and fruit identifies it as the Great Perfection, as these are standard definitions of the Great Perfection found in many of the texts of that system. The polemics directed against the Great Perfection are also discussed in Karmay 1988, pp121-133, 178-184, 186-189, 195-197. See also Jackson 1994, p53 n.118, on Rong zom Chos kyi bzang po’s defence of the Great Perfection.
7] The passage by Klong chen pa is in his sDe gsum snying po, a commentary to the gNas lugs rin po che’i mdzod, from the mDzod bdun collection. This passage is used to show rNying ma and Chan affinities in Guenther 1989, pp140-141, n.2 and Karmay 1988, p96.
8] Thinley 1980, p114.
9] Smith 1969, pp8-9.
10] rGya nag hwa shang gi byung tshul grub mtha’i phyogs snga bcas sa bon tsam smos pa: Collected Works, vol.V pp419-450.
11] Sa bon tsam smos pa p434: dgos pa ni rdzogs chen dang cha ‘dra bas mi nor ba’i tshad du yin par gsung ba dang/ Hwashang gi chos de yang yang dag pa’i lam du bzhed pa’o//
12] Sa bon tsam smos pa pp435-436: de bas na shin tu thabs mkhas pas mdo sde ‘di la brtson ‘grus su nan tan byas na skyes bu de ni ring por mi thogs par bla na med pa yang dag par rdzogs pa’i byang chub par ‘gyur ro//
13] Sa bon tsam smos pap.437: thog mar tshogs sbyor gyi lam mdo lam ‘ba’ zhig pas bsgrod nas sa dang po thob pa’i skabs su sngags lam la ‘jug par shas che zhing gal te tshul ston gyi dbang gi sa brgyad pa’i bar du mi ‘jug pa dag yod srid kyang sa brgyad pa nas gzhan rkyen la ltos pa ma yin par sngags kyi ngang tshul rang stobs kyi shes bzhin du ‘jug tu yod pa yin pas des na mdo lam du sngags la ‘jug dgos so zhes la bstan kyang sa bgyad pa yan chad nas ngang gi shes pa’i dbang gi lam la ‘tshang pa dang chad pa’i go skabs med la/ gzhan yang thog ma’i ‘jug sgo mdo sngags gang yin kyang rtung mthar sngags la gzhol dgos pas yang dag par rdzogs pa’i sangs rgyas kyi ‘bras bu thob tshe mdo sngags tha dad kyi sangs rgyas bye du med pa’i phyir de ltar dgongs te gsungs pas skyon med pa’o//
14] sBa bzhed p68 and other sources. See Faber 1986 pp47-48.
15] Sa bon tsam smos pa p437.
16] tsung men is one of the Tibetan transliterations of Chinese chien min.
17] Sa bon tsam smos pa p438: da lta yang rgya nag tu bsam gtan mkhan hva shang tshung men rnams tshul kho na yin ‘dug la/ bod ‘dir yang btsun pa dang khyim pa ris su med par sems khrid nod do zhes thog ma nas zab mo nang don la gzhol bar ‘dod pa phal cher ‘di nyams kyang de dang cha mthun pa las gzhan du ma dmigs so//
18] Sa bon tsam smos pa p438.
19] The three ways to knowledge (shes rab gsum) are the classic trio of listening (thos pa), thinking (bsam pa) and meditating (sgom pa).
20] Sa bon tsam smos pa p439: des na sngon gya gar mkhan po zhi ba ‘cho yi rjes su brangs ba bandhe chen po ye shes dbang po la sogs pas shes rab gsum bsgrags mar mdzad pa la brten rim gyis pa dang rgya nag mkhan po ma ha yā na’i rjes brang rnams kyi bsam gtan kho na la gzhol bas cig char bar grags pa shes par bya’o/
21] Nyingma’i rgyud bcu bdun.
22] Kun mkhyen zhal lung pp527-528.
23] ‘Jigs med Gling pa and Klong chen pa prefer the spelling Ha shang to the more usual Hwa shang.
24] This appears to be a reference to the summary of the refutations of Hwa shang’s position in the sBa bzhed (pp71-72) where it is spoken by Ye shes dbang po.
25] This is a reference to the account of the first meeting of the two opponents before the debate had taken place. It is found in the rGyal rabs gsal ba’i me long (see Sørenson 1994, p401 and Tucci 1978, p365), where the text has Hwa-shang casting his robe to the ground (sa la brdabs) rather than shaking it (sprugs). The story is also found in the sBa bzhed (pp66-67), to which ‘Jigs-med Gling-pa’s account has a greater similarity.
Note however that while this version has Hwa shang throwing his robe to the ground (sa la brdabs), ‘Jigs med gling pa’s has him shaking the folds out of it (sprugs).
26] Kun mkhyen zhal lung pp527-528: khyed cag gi ‘dod pa ha shang la lta ba nor ‘di lta bu zhig yod de snyam pa ci yang mi sems pa sgo nga lta bu’i phyogs snga ji bzhin ‘dir bkod nas brjod kyi gzhan du na sangs rgyas phal po che la sogs pa’i gsung rab mang po ha shang gi blo la bzhugs shing/ kā ma la shi las sgra rtsod dris pa’i tshe phyags shing klad la bskor ba’i brdas ‘khor ba’i rgyu dris pa na/ ber gyi thu ba gnyis sprugs nas gzung ‘dzin gyis lan bya ba’i brda lan ston nus pa sogs dbang po shin tu rnon po’i gang zag yin par bsnyon du med la/ gang dran pa med cing yid la byar med pa la so sor rtog pa’i shes rab spangs pa’i nyes pa ‘jug na skyon ‘di rgyal ba’i yum la’ang ‘jug pas don dam par ha shang gi lta ba yin min rdzogs pa’i sangs rgyas kho nas mkhyen gyis gzhan gyis ma yin no/
27] sDe gsum snying po p97: /slob dpon chen po ha shang gis gsungs pas de dus blo dman pa’i blor ma shong yang don la de bzhin du gnas so/
28] Meisezahl 1985, p294, f.435b: de nas btsan po’i zhal nas don la mi thun pa tsam mi ‘dug ste lam spyong lugs la ha shang gi chos cig char du ‘jug mchis pa’o/ dbang po yang rab sbyangs pa can gyis chos yin la/ dbang po ‘bring yan chad chos spyod bcu la skyon bskal/
29] Padma dkar po p478: de yang dbang po rnon mchog gi gdul bya dga’ rab rdo rje dang/ rang byung padma indra bhū ti sogs pa ni dkyil ‘khor gyi bdag po nyid thun mong gdul bya’i snang ngor lam la ‘jug pa’i tshul bstan pa tsam yin phyir rang byung thos grol du gyur kyang/ gang zag rim gyis pa la ni/ de lta’i reg pa mi ‘gro ste/ de’i phyir skabs ‘dir yang grol ba don du gnyer ba zhig yin phyin chad/
30] This passage is cited in ‘Jigs med gling pa’s Ye shes bla ma p332: gshis der phebs pa’i rnal ‘byor pa chen po rnams la rgyu ‘bras dge sdig med pa thod drang du bshad de padma dang/ bi ma la dang/ te lo pa la sogs pa bzhin no/ rang cag rnams la blos de ltar rtogs kyang goms pas thog du ma ‘phebs pas/ gshis la mi skrag cing
I have not been able to locate the passage in Klong-chen-pa’s works.
31] The equivalence between the realisation of Chinese simultaneists and Great Perfection meditators is also asserted in the Blon po bka’ thang, the gter ma of O rgyan Gling pa (1329-1367), which has been translated in Tucci 1978.
32] See Petech 1950 for an account of this period.
33] Ka’ thog Tshewang Norbu, Selected Writings, pp743-758.
And this is a paper worth keeping in mind generally:
THE SUDDEN/GRADUAL POLARITY:
A RECURRENT THEME IN CHINESE THOUGHT
PETER N. GREGORY
JOURNAL OF CHINESE PHILOSOPHY
Vol.9 1982
PP. 471-486
COPYRIGHT @ 1982 BY DIALOGUE PUBLISHING COMPANY, HONOLULU,
HAWAII, U.S.A.
.
P.471
During the weekend of May 22-24, 1981, the Institute for
Transcultural Studies sponsored a conference on "The
Sudden/Gradual Polarity: A Recurrent Theme in Chinese
Thought." Funding for the conference was provided by a grant
from the American Council of Learned Societies. The purpose
of the conference was to explore the various historical and
philosophical issues constellated around the sudden/gradual
polarity in an effort to recast its significance in as broad
an intellectual context as possible. It focused, however, on
the manifestations of this polarity within Chinese Buddhism.
While the controversy surrounding the sudden/gradual
polarity was not without precedent in other Buddhist
traditions, it assumed its greatest significance in the
Chinese Buddhist tradition, where its articulation displayed
a number of characteristically Chinese features linking it to
non-Buddhist modes of thought. The fact that this polarity
assumed particular importance in the Chinese Buddhist
tradition suggests that it resonated with, or gave form to, a
similar pre-existent polarity within Chinese thought. One of
the main objectives of the conference, therefore, was to
explore how this polarity formed part of a larger discourse
in Chinese intellectual history.
The conference thus sought to take an approach different
from those of previous discussions of the significance of the
sudden/gradual controversy in Chinese Buddhism. Instead of
trying to locate the source of the debate within the Indian
Buddhist heritage, the conference attempted to provide a new
perspective on the process of Buddhism's accommodation with
some of the dominant themes in Chinese intellectual history,
as well as Buddhism's effect upon that tradition. While
exploring the fundamental religious and moral issues behind
the sudden/gradual controversy as it was conducted within the
Chinese Buddhist tradition, the conference also investigated
how it could be reformulated as a paradigm by which to
elucidate some of the
P.472
tensions inherent in other traditions of moral and spiritual
cultivation.
In order to achieve as broad an interdisciplinary
approach as possible, the conference assembled thirteen
scholars from a variety of fields, including Indian Buddhism,
Chinese Buddhism, Religious Studies, Chinese Intellectual
History, Neo-Confucian Studies, Chinese Literature, and
Chinese Art History. Following is a brief summary of the
twelve papers presented at the conference.
1. Luis Gomez, University of Michigan, "Purifying Gold: The
Metaphor of Effort and Intuition in Buddhist Thought."
This paper provided a comprehensive historical and
philosophical overview of the sudden/gradual controversy in
Buddhism. As a working hypothesis, the paper began by
characterizing the fundamental philosophical rift at stake in
the controversy as lying between (1) the understanding of
enlightenment as a sudden leap into a state or realm of
experience that is integral, ineffable, and innate and (2)
the understanding of enlightenment as a gradual process of
accumulation (or reduction), as being describable, as having
degrees, and as being susceptible to progressive cultivation.
As a corollary to this, the first position considers the
state of bondage as the result of an error of perception (or
conception), thus comparing enlightenment to the experience
of opening the eyes, while the second position considers the
state of bondage as the result of attachment (or karmic
conditioning), thus comparing enlightenment to the process of
overcoming a bad habit. Whereas the first position represents
the situation seen from the perspective of enlightenment, the
second position represents the point of view of those seeking
enlightenment. Thus, in the context of Indian Buddhism, the
philosophical framework for the sudden/gradual controversy
lay in the doctrine of the two truths.
The first main section of the paper analyzed the two most
famous historical instances of the sudden/gradual
controversy. The first began in China in the fourth decade of
the eighteenth century with Shen-hui's attack on the
"gradualistic" teachings of the Northern Line of Ch'an,
against which he promoted the "sudden teaching" of the
Southern Line. The second took place in Tibet during the last
decade of the eighth century in the debate between the
Chinese subitist Mo-ho-yen and the Indian gradualist
Kamalasila. An examination of the content of these debates
reveals that the putative
P.473
issue-the sudden/gradual controversy-included a whole complex
of issues which can be grouped into various sets of
polarities (e.g., insight vs. concentration, activity vs.
rest, developed vs. innate Buddhahood, the obligatory nature
of moral practices vs. their natural unfolding, etc.). When
the positions of the various figures in the debates are
compared, they line up differently in regard to the various
doctrinal issues involved, the subitist in one context
holding some of the doctrinal positions of the gradualist in
another context. The sudden/gradual controversy thus does not
divide along any single polarity. Nor does there seem to be
any way to predict the specific doctrinal positions of a
proponent of one side or the other in the debates.
Nevertheless, there is considerable overlap in the way
clusters of positions group together in the actual debates.
Sudden and gradual therefore do not form a simple and static
polarity,but represent more,two opposing modes of thought
which can best be translated into the basic, and very
general, dichotomy of intuition and effort.
The second section of the paper explored two of the
polarities at issue in the controversy -those of insight vs.
concentration and activity vs. restexamining the former from
a strictly Buddhist perspective and the latter from a
comparative perspective. The issue of insight vs.
concentration illustrates how the sudden and gradual
positions intertwine. Kamalasila's position on the necessary
cooperation of insight and concentration, for example, is
essentially the same as that advocated by Shen-hui.
Kamalasila's misinterpretation of Mo-ho-yen's position
suggests that he was probably responding more to issues
relevant to his own polemical context than to the actual
position of his opponent. The second polarity discussed in
this section -that of activity vs. rest- raises the question
of quietism, in terms of which the controversy has often been
discussed. Despite the frequent use of this term, it is not
clear to which side in the debate it should be applied. While
the issues raised by the Buddhist debates may call to mind
the controversy over quietism in the Christian tradition, an
examination of the particular historical and theological
contexts in which the debates were conducted in each
religious tradition shows that they were so different as to
render the use of the term "quietism" meaningless when
referring to Buddhism.
The third and final section of the paper pointed out the
danger inherent in assuming that a metaphor common to
different religious traditions
P.474
indicates some kind of relation in the deep structure of
those religions. The mirror, for example, serves as one of
the most frequent metaphors for sudden enlightenment in
Buddhism (although it is also used to illustrate the opposite
position as well). The same metaphor is found in the
Christian tradition in the thought of Gregory of Nyssa, where
it has several points in common with some of the doctrinal
positions usually associated with the subitist position of
Southern Ch'an. Nevertheless, when taken within the total
context of his thought, the metaphor of the mirror turns out
to be based on an entirely different complex of theological
assumptions and expresses a gradualistic vision of the soul's
progress. We must thus be cautious in comparing religious
metaphors cross-culturally and can only do so meaningfully by
remaining sensitive to the particular doctrinal and
historical context in which they are articulated.
2. John McRae, Yale University, "On Shen-hui's Early
Teaching Career."
This paper discussed the historical background and doctrinal
milieu of Shen-hui's early teaching career. Shen-hui was to
gain fame for his attack on the Northern Line of Ch'an for
its allegedly "gradualistic" teachings and his concomitant
championing of the teaching of "sudden enlightenment," which,
in a series of public sermons given in 830, 831, and 832, he
claimed represented the authentic Ch'an transmission handed
down to his teacher, Hui-neng. The paper argued that despite
the image of Shen-hui as a vehement anti-Northern polemicist,
his early teachings were developed within the general
doctrinal framework of Northern Ch'an. The paper went on to
examine three Tun-huang texts associated with the Northern
School which demonstrate the close affinity between, if not
the mutual influence of, Shen-hui's early teachings and those
of Northern Ch'an. The paper concluded with a discussion of
two metaphors -those of the sun underlain by clouds and the
mirror- which can be taken as defining the conceptual
matrices of early Ch'an.
3. Robert Zeuschner, University of Southern
California,"Sudden and Gradual in the Division Between
the Northern and Southern Lines of Ch'an."
P. 475
This paper began by analyzing the Southern Ch'an charge,
first made by Shen-hui, that the Northern teachings were
"gradualistic" and did not even admit the possibility of
sudden enlightenment. It then went on to examine some
relevant passages in the Northern Ch'an texts to ascertain
the validity of Shen-hui's allegations. While Northern Ch'an
literature never explicitly advocates a step-by-step form of
practice gradually leading to enlightenment, it does,
nevertheless, lend itself to such an interpretation. A
further examination of Northern Ch'an writings, however,
reveals that the Northern Line did not -as the author claims
Shen-hui to have charged- reject the possibility of sudden
enlightenment. The Kuan-hsin lun for example, clearly states
that 'enlightenment takes place in a moment." The paper
suggested that, whereas the Southern position can be
characterized as "sudden enlightenment followed by gradual
cultivation," the Nothern position can be characterized as
"gradual cultivation followed by sudden enlightenment." The
paper then argued that part of the confusion that has usually
attended discussions of the sudden/gradual controversy as it
pertains to the split between these two lines of Ch'an has to
do with the fact that key terms such as "enlightenment" were
actually being used in different ways in each tradition. In
order to clarify the debate, the paper proposed a fourfold
scheme of the various stages of practice and enlightenment:
(1) a prepatory stage involving progressive proficiency in
moral and meditative practices, (2) an initial and
transforming experience of insight, (3) a process of further
cultivation wherein one's life is gradually brought into
accord with one's insight, and (4) the ultimate perfection of
Buddhahood which leaves no room for further improvement or
attainment. When the Northern and Southern positions are
analyzed in terms of this scheme, the Northern position will
be seen to place great emphasis on the first stage, virtually
none on the second, and some on the third; the Southern
position, by constrast, minimizes the importance of the first
stage, places greatest emphasis on the second, and gives only
some consideration to the third. Both lines tacitly take the
fourth and final stage for granted.
4. Jeffrey Broughton, California State University, Long
Beach, "The Tibetan Ston-mun: Contant Examination and
Sudden Seeings."
P.476
This paper discussed, and included a translation of a major
portion of, the late Northern Ch'an text Tun-wu chen-tsung
yao-chueh ("Determining the Essentials of the True Teaching
of Sudden Enlightenment"), which exists in a number of
partial Chinese Tun-huang manuscripts as well as one complete
Tibetan translation. This text is of particular interest in
that it reveals the fusion of Northern and Southern motifs
that seems to have been characteristic of late Northern Ch'an
writings. The text also seems to have circulated widely among
the proponents of sudden enlightenment (stonmun) in Tibet in
the later part of the eighth century, and is thus of further
interest in revealing the general doctrinal background out of
which Mo-ho-yen, the principal spokesman for the subitist
position in the Tibetan debates-emerged. The text focuses
upon "examining the mind" (k'an-hsin), a major theme running
through Northern Ch'an meditation texts. The text lacks the
polemical tone of the statements attributed to Mo-ho-yen in
the records of the Tibetan debates and seems to have been
written for followers within the tradition. A comparison of
this text to the position of Mo-hoyen as it was defined in
the course of the debates suggests that the polemical context
of the debates might have forced Mo-ho-yen into taking a more
radical position than that generally found in the teaching
tradition in which he stood.
5. Peter Gregory, Stanford University "Sudden Enlightenment
Followed by Gradual Cultivation: Tsung-mi's Analysis of
Mind."
This paper examined the meaning of sudden enlightenment as it
was understood by Kuei-feng Tsung-mi (780-841), traditionally
reckoned as the fifth patriarch in the Ho-tse lineage of
Southern Ch'an founded by Shen-hui. It began with a
discussion of Tsung-mi's analysis of the various meanings of
"sudden" and "gradual" as they were used in his day by
Buddhists in different traditions. Tsung-mi first
differentiates between the use of these terms as they apply
to classifications of the Buddha's teachings and descriptions
of the course of Buddhist practice. In regard to the latter,
he goes on to enumerate five different ways in which the
terms are used in reference to practice and enlightenment:
(1) gradual cultivation followed by sudden enlightenment (a
position which he identifies as that of Northern Ch'an), (2)
sudden
P. 477
cultivation followed by gradual enlightenment, (3) gradual
cultivation and gradual enlightenment, (4) sudden
enlightenment followed by gradual cultivation, and (5) sudden
enlightenment and sudden cultivation. The remainder of the
paper was devoted to the discussion of the fourth position,
that of sudden enlightenment followed by gradual cultivation,
which Tsung-mi attributed to Shen-hui. Tsung-mi held that
although the experience of enlightenment entailed a sudden
insight into one's true nature, it was still only the first
stage in a ten-staged process culminating in the complete
realization of Buddhahood. Tsung-mi thus contended that
sudden enlightenment did not obviate the necessity of a
gradual process of further spiritual cultivation; rather, it
formed the indispensible ground upon which authentic Buddhist
practice had to be carried out. The paper went on to examine
Tsung-mi's analysis of Mind, which derives from the Awakening
of Faith, as providing the rationale for his theory of sudden
enlightenment followed by gradual cultivation, underlining
the importance of the tathagatagarbha doctrine in furnishing
an explanation of the ontological basis for enlightenment.
6. Neal Donner, Institute for Transcultural Studies,"The
Perfect and the Sudden: Tien-t'ai Light on the Platform
Sutra. "
This paper consisted of three major parts. The first
discussed Chih-i's understanding of the terms "sudden" and
"gradual" in the context of his thought on teaching and
practice. Chih-i's thought is highly complex and dynamic--he
uses various classificatory rubrics in different discussions
of the Buddha's teaching, for example- and defies the kind of
procrustean formulation into which later interpreters
attempted to make it fit (such as Chan-jan's "Five Periods
and Eight Teachings"). In terms of the rubric that Chih-i
uses in his Fu-hua hsuan-i ("The Profound Meaning of the
Lotus Sutra "), his primary work on doctrine, "sudden" refers
to the Avatamsaka, because in that sutra the Buddha directly
expounded the context of his enlightenment without making any
concessions to the limited capacity of his audience to
understand. "Gradual" refers to all other sutras expounded by
the Buddha, who, conscious of his disciples' limitations,
used a variety of expedients to communicate his message. In
terms of meditation, "sudden" (or "sudden-perfect" as it is
more often referred to in this context) designates that type
of
P.478
practice outlined in the Mo-ho chih-kuan ("Great Calming and
Contemplation"), Chih-i's magnumopus on Buddhist practice, in
which ultimate reality is taken as the object of meditation
from the very beginning. "Gradual" designates that type of
practice in which ultimate reality is approached through a
series of proximate meditational objects.
The second part of this paper discussed the attitude
toward meditation found in the Platform Sutra, making the
controversial argument that its teaching of sudden
enlightenment, and its concomitant repudiation of the
necessity of meditation practice, should be seen as
reflecting its proselytizing effort to make enlightenment
accessible to the mass of lay Buddhists. The third part of
the paper discussed a number of striking similarities between
the practices, ideas, and terms found in the Platform Sutra
and those found in Chih-i's opera, suggesting the likelihood
of T'ien-t'ai influence, if not directly upon the sutra
itself, then at least upon the formative tradition out of
which it developed.
7. Robert Gimello: University of Arizona,'The Sudden and
the Gradual in Early Hua-yen: A Study in the Emergence
of a T'ang Religious Discourse."
The paper presented at the conference was only the
prolegomena to a more extensive study that would discuss the
establishment in early Hua-yen thought of the p'an-chiao
distinction between "the sudden teaching" and "the gradual
teaching," and treat the relation between it and other early
Hua-yen notions regarding the duration of the course to
enlightenment, against the background, and as an example, of
the dominant styles of religious and secular discourse taking
shape in the early T'ang. This effort would not only involve
tracing the sudden/gradual distinction and its attendent
doctrines back into the early history of Chinese Buddhism,
but would also involve tracing the "lateral" or synchronic
connections between these explicitly religious concepts and
certain ideas or modes of discourse seen in contemporary
literature, non-Buddhist thought, and political culture. The
actual conference paper set forth a series of philosophical
reflections which sought to develop a theoretical framework
for applying structuralist methods of analysis to such a
discussion. The paper went on to discuss the earliest
manifestation of the sudden/gradual controversy in China,
docu-
P.479
mented in Hsieh Ling-yun's Pien-tsung lun, as revealing the
particularly Chinese Problematik out of which the terms were
to come into general currency in the Chinese Buddhist world.
It then discussed the emergence of the sudden/gradual
distinction in the various doctrinal classification schemes
employed by Chih-yen, the figure responsible for the
systematic formulation of early Hua-yen doctrine.
8. Miriam Levering, Oberlin College, "The Sudden/Gradual
Polarity as Reflected in Sung Intellectual Discourse: The
Case of Ta-hui Tsung- kao (1089-1163)."
This paper discussed the critical role that doubt played in
the writings of the Sung dynasty Ch'an Master Ta-hui, and the
innovative revaluation that he gave to it in his practical
methods of Ch'an instruction. In the recorded sayings of
earlier Ch'an figures such as Lin-chi, doubt was seen
primarily as an obstacle to the realization of one's own
inherently enlightened nature. Ta-hui also regarded doubt as
a hindrance to enlightenment, casting it as the very
expression of the unenlightened mind. Enlightenment
accordingly consists in the elimination of the basis of
doubt. Ta-hui's originality lay in his use of doubt as a
means to the realization of enlightenment by emphasizing the
importance of hua-t'ou as a device for focusing all of one's
doubts into one Great Doubt. The more intense one's doubt,
the deeper one's eventual enlightenment. The paper went on to
venture that Ta-hui's emphasis on the role of doubt as a
vehicle for precipitating an experience of enlightenment
might be depicted as a subitist move to counter some of the
more "gradualistic" forms of Ch'an practice--such as "silent
illumination Ch'an"- prevalent in his day. As the title
suggests, the paper presented at the conference was but a
preliminary draft of a larger project discussing Ta-hui's
thought in the context of Sung intellectual discourse.
9. Rodney Taylor, University of Colorado, Boulder,
"Sudden/Gradual: A Persistent Paradigm Within
Neo-Confucian Self-Cultivation."
This paper examined the role of quiet-sitting (ching-tso)
within the regimen of Neo-Confucian self-cultivation.
Buddhist terminology has often been used to characterize the
different attitudes toward self-cultivation in the Ch'eng-Chu
P.480
and Lu-Wang traditions: while the former's emphasis on effort
can be likened to gradual cultivation, the latter's emphasis
on intuition can be likened to sudden enlightenment.
Moreover, since the practice of quiet-sitting is frequently
cited as a prime example of Buddhist influence on
Neo-Confucianism, a discussion of the different attitudes
toward this practice within the Neo-Confucian tradition
naturally gives rise to questions of the nature and degree of
Buddhist influence on Neo-Confucianism. The paper explored
such questions by examining the development of the practice
of quiet-sitting. It began with a discussion of the two Sung
dynasty figures primarily responsible for its incorporation
into Neo-Confucianism, Lo Tsung-yen and Li T'ung. It went on
to discuss Wang Yang-ming's reaction against the practice in
his effort to redefine the investigation of things (ko-wu).
The paper then discussed the two Tung-lin scholars Ku
Hsien-ch'eng and Kao P'an-lung who, in response to the
excesses of some of Wang Yang-ming's more radical followers,
reinstituted the practice as a major component of
Neo-Confucian self-cultivation. As Kao P'an-lung's writings
on quiet-sitting furnish one of the most extensive and
articulate discussions of the practice available, they are
discussed in more detail. In conclusion, the paper took up
some of the questions raised at the beginning, discussing the
relative applicability of a number of theoretical models for
characterizing the influence of Buddhism on Neo-Confucianism
(historical interrelationship, eclecticism, syncretism, and
synthesis).
10. James Cahill, University of California, Berkeley,"Tung
Ch'i-ch'ang's 'Southern and Northern Schools' in the
History and Theory of Painting: A Reconsideraion."
Tung Ch'i-ch'ang's theory of the Southern and Northern
Schools of painters was one of the most influential
formulations in traditional Chinese art criticism. The paper
discussed it in relation to the sudden/gradual
polarity,arguing that the sectarian division of Ch'an into a
southern and northern lineage furnished Tung with an
analogical, rather than a substantive,model for classifying
painters into broad, stylistic groupings. Tung identified the
painters of colored landscapes with the Northern School and
painters of ink monochrome using graded washes with the
Southern School. Tung's scheme generally followed earlier
formulations in contrasting Sung dynasty profes-
P.481
sionals working in detailed, decorative, academic styles with
Yuan dynasty amateurs working in free, spontaneous styles.
However, since its adoption of "Southern" and "Northern" as
categories for classifying painters was not bound by any
rigid, objectifiable criteria (such as Sung vs. Yuan or
professional vs. amateur) , but was based on a wholly
subjective evaluation of style, it avoided the kind of
objections that could inevitably be raised against earlier
schemes whose classification of painters was always somewhat
arbitrary and forced. Since rational reasons could not be
used to justify stylistic preferences, an appeal to lineage,
or to orthodoxy, provided Tung with the only available form
of justification for his theory. Tung's formulation, then,
did not imply a Ch'an aesthetic, or that there was a Ch'an
content to landscape painting. Rather,it functioned in much
the same way as Yen Yu's use of the Ch'an analogy in his
theory of poetry. Ultimately, the intellectual context for
understanding Tung's theory has more to do with NeoConfucian
ideas than with Ch'an.
11. Richard Lynn, University of British Columbia,"The Sudden
and the Gradual as Concepts in Chinese Poetry Criticism:
An Examination of the Ch'an-Poetry Analogy."
This paper examined the use of the Ch'an-poetry analogy first
given definitive expression in the Sung dynasty by Yen Y ü
in his Tsang-lang shih-hua. The paper argued that the use of
terms such as "sudden" and "gradual" as critical categories
in Chinese poetics is best understood analogically- that is,
the student of poetry somehow acquires poetic genius "just
like" the student of Ch'an achieves enlightenment. The paper
explored the nature of this analogy, traced its origins, and
followed its various ramifications in Sung and post-Sung
critical texts. It showed that some critics were as much
influenced by Neo-Confucian interests in self-cultivation as
by elements borrowed from Ch'an. In some cases it is possible
to discern a three-way analogy between Ch'an,
Neo-Confucianism, and poetry. The situation became more
complicated in mid-Ming times with the emergence of Wang
Yang-ming's School of Mind and its committment to
individualistic forms of the search for selfrealization, for,
from then on, theorists of poetry often allied themselves
with either a "gradualist" approach to genius analogous to
Ch'eng-Chu orthodox methods of self-realization or a "sudden"
approach analogous to the
P.482
heterodox (and even iconoclastic) methods advocated by Wang
Yang-ming and his later school.
12. Francis Cook, University of California,
Riverside,"Sudden Enlightenment in Dogen's Zen."
This paper confuted the common misconception that Dogen's
form of Zen teaching is gradualistic. It argued,instead, that
Dogen, faithful to the Chinese Ch'an tradition to which he
was heir, maintained that the experience of enlightenment was
sudden. His teaching concerning the nature and attainment of
enlightenment is based on his understanding of Buddha-nature
and is given its most explicit formulation in the principle
of the oneness of practice and enlightenment (shusho itto).
While Dogen's position had its antecedents in the Platform
Sutra and other Chinese sources, it also exhibited features
that are novel and unique. His understanding of enlightenment
thus derived from his own religious experience as well as the
Zen tradition in which he stood. Moreover, one of the primary
issues in the various historical manifestations of the
sudden/gradual controversy had to do with the necessity of
moral and intellectual preparation for the attainment of
enlightenment. Dogen's teachings that practice and
enlightenment are identical and that moral cultivation is the
organic unfolding of practice-enlightenment can therefore be
seen as representing both a continuation and radicalization
of continental ideas of sudden enlightenment.
In his closing remarks Professor Wei-ming Tu currently at
Harvard University discussed a number of the issues raised at
the conference. Among these, he pointed out that the
discussion of the sudden/gradual polarity raises the problem
of how enlightenment should be understood by scholars of the
various Chinese religious traditions. As useful and necessary
as historical and cultural analyses are to such an
understanding, the problem cannot be explained away by
reducing it to a parochial concern of a particular culture at
a particular point in history. He argued that, unless an
attempt is made to understand the larger, and far more
difficult, problem of the meaning of enlightenment as a
religious experience, it will be impossible to understand the
religious issues at stake in the sudden/gradual controversy.
Professor Tu suggested that scholars need to take the truth
claims of the religious traditions seriously and should adopt
what anthropologists call an "emic"
P.483
approach. Nevertheless, while scholars should be empathetic
towards these traditions, they should, at the same time, also
approach them with critical self-awareness.
* * * * *
The papers presented at the conference, and the discussion
that they precipitated, revealed the complexity of the
sudden/gradual Problematik. As it was manifested in Buddhism,
the sudden/gradual rubric was seen to contain a host of
epistemological, ontological, and ethical issues, such as the
nature of delusion (is it fundamentally an error in
perception or is it rooted in the whole personality
structure?), the nature of enlightenment (Does it admit of
degrees or is it indivisible? Can it be approached through a
series of progressive approximations or is it given
all-at-once in its entirety?), the nature of ethical and
religious action (Is it something that must be consciously
cultivated as a necessary precondition for enlightenment or
is it rather the spontaneous and natural outflowing of the
experience of enlightenment itself and therefore something to
which no special attention need be directed at all?), the
nature of religious language (Is ultimate reality ineffable
or can
something meaningful in fact be said about it?).
A particularly interesting and significant conclusion
reached by the conference -and demonstrated most notably by
Luis Gomez' paper- was that, in the specific historical
instances of the sudden/gradual controversy, there was no
necessary or even predictable way in which the positions
taken by the actual participants could be correlated with the
complex of issues contained within the sudden/gradual rubric.
In fact, it was seen that the subitist on one occasion might
very well hold a number of doctrinal positions maintained by
the gradualist on another. The complexity of the doctrinal
issues involved suggested that "sudden" and "gradual" did not
represent clearly defined doctrinal positions so much as they
did a general stance towards religious cultivation that could
best be characterized in terms of the relative emphasis given
to effort and intuition.
Despite the vague sense of the polarity, several attempts
were made to define it more precisely. It was generally
agreed that, within the Buddhist context, the basic
philosophical framework for the sudden/gradual polarity was
provided by the doctrine of the two truths. Accordingly, the
subitist
P.484
position could be generally characterized as one in which
enlightenment was regarded from the absolute perspective of
the goal, i.e., as talking about the issue from the point of
view of ultimate truth, whereas the gradualist position could
be generally characterized as one in which enlightenment was
regarded from the relative perspective of the means by which
the goal was attained, i.e., as talking about the issue from
the point of view of conventional truth. As a corollary to
this characterization, the subitist position would tend to
emphasize apophasis; the gradualist, kataphasis.
Another very suggestive attempt was made by Robert
Gimello, who defined the issue in the following terms: "Is
ultimate reality so distant from and yet so continuous with
the mundane that one can have only a mediated and step by
step access to it? Or is it so proximate, and yet so
autonomous and so utterly unlike our illusions or
expectations of it, that one can reach it only all-at-once
and only without any mediation whatsoever?" While this was
one of the more interesting and viable definitions of the
polarity put forth at the conference, it also served to
underline the complexity of the issue. That is, the subitist
position is often identified with a radical assertion of
nondualism. Yet, if we define the two positions in terms of
continuity and discontinuity, then, on an empirical level at
least, the subitist position is seen to presuppose a
fundamental dualism, as any sudden leap into enlightenment
can only be possible if there is a radical cleavage between
the unenlightened and enlightened states.
The conference also did much to clarify the discussion of
sudden and gradual enlightenment by analyzing how the terms
were used in different contexts. A point that was made in
several of the papers was that the terms "sudden" and
"gradual" contained a wide spectrum of meanings and were, in
fact, used in quite different ways. This meant that the
various participants in the debates were often employing the
same terms to argue about different things. Within the
context of Chinese Buddhism, the terms had a specific range
of meanings as they were used by the scholastic tradition to
classify types of doctrines taught in different Buddhist
texts. They also had another, although partially overlapping,
range of meanings as they were used by the Ch'an schools to
characterize different approaches to Buddhist practice. To
make matters even more confusing, the term "enlightenment"
was also used to cover a variety of different meanings. It
could refer to the fundamental ontological ground that made
religious practice possible, an initial
P.485
experience of insight, or the culmination of religious
practice. Thus, in the debates whether enlightenment was
sudden or gradual, the participants were often talking at
cross purposes.
Although it was not addressed explicitly, the general
working assumption around which the conference was organized
proved to have provided a fruitful approach to what has often
been treated as a purely Buddhological problem. The papers
and discussion gave support to the idea that the importance
of the sudden/gradual controversy in Chinese Buddhism could
be understood, in part, by seeing it as elaborating a tension
already present in Chinese thought (such as that between what
Richard Mather, in an article on the Chinese intellectual
world in the third century, has characterized as naturalness
and conformity). Because this tension was given one of its
most articulate expressions in the Buddhist debates of the
eighth century, we are justified in using the Buddhist terms
"sudden" and "gradual" to characterize this polarity without
thereby implying that it was a specifically Buddhist
paradigm, or that its use in later non-Buddhist contexts
necessarily reflected a Buddhist influence. In fact, it seems
to have been due to their very vagueness and generality that
the terms could be adopted by Yen Yu and Tung Ch'i-ch'ang as
categories in their theories of Chinese poetry and painting,
as Richard Lynn and James Cahill ably demonstrated, without
necessarily suggesting any explicitly Buddhist content.
When considered in terms of the very broad polarity of
intuition vs. effort, the sudden/gradual rubric has a wide
applicability which can be seen as operating at different
levels of generality throughout the course of Chinese
intellectual history. On the most general level, the polarity
can be seen as reflected in the tension between the early
Confucian and Taoist traditions. Moreover, within the
Confucian tradition itself, it can be seen as reflected in
the different points of emphasis between Mencius and
Hsun-tzu, or between the Ch'eng-Chu and Lu-wang schools of
Neo-Confucianism. Even within the latter, it can further be
seen as operative in the different interpretation of Wang
Yang-ming's Four Sentence Teaching given by his disciples
Ch'ien Te-hung and Wang Chi.
P.486
* * * * * *
As was originally intended, papers presented at the
conference are being revised for publication in a volume to
be edited by Robert Gimello and Peter Gregory, the conference
directors. This volume will constitute the second in a series
on East Asian Buddhism to be published jointly by the
Institute for Transcultural Studies and the University Press
of Hawaii. The first volume in the series, Studies in Ch'an
and Hua-yen Buddhism, also edited by Gimello and Gregory,
grew out of a conference held at the Institute for
Transcultural Studies in May, 1980 and is scheduled for
publication in the autumn, 1982. Another volume, dealing with
the significance of the Japanese Zen Master Dogen and to be
edited by William LaFleur of the University of California at
Los Angeles, is being planned as the third in the series.
(Here is some more, from SAM VAN SCHAIK, at "earlytibet.com" in his blog "Tibetan Chan II):
Great work on piecing together the Dunhuang fragments of Moheyan’s writings has been done by Luis Gomez, and I will look at just one of these manuscripts here, IOL Tib J 468. I want to ask if we can establish whether Moheyan really taught a kind of ‘blank’ meditation, or something a little less extreme. Let’s see.
In his description of meditation, Moheyan writes this:
When you are engaged in contemplation itself, look at your own mind. Then, the lack of any mental activity at all is non-thought. If there is movement of the conceptual mind, be aware of it. “How should one be aware?” Do not analyse the mind which is moving in terms of any kind of quality at all: do not analyse it as moving or not moving; do not analyse it as existing or not exising; do not analyse it as virtuous or non-virtuous; and do not analyse it as defiled or pure. If you are aware of mind in this way, it is natureless. This is the practice of the dharma path.
Well, there is certainly mention here of “the lack of any mental activity.” But the rest of the passage concerns what to do when there is mental “movement”. Interestingly, Moheyan does not suggest suppressing this movement. What he says is: be aware of it without analysing it. What kind of awareness is he talking about? The Tibetan word is tshor, which is used here as a translation for the Chinese character jue 覺 meaning ‘awakening’, ‘illumination’ or ‘awareness’. These words seem a long way from the blankness that Moheyan is supposed to have experienced in his meditation practice. Indeed it seems that he is telling his students here not to suppress mental movement, but to leave it to move in the context of an awareness that does not distinguish it into dualistic extremes.
References
1. Demieville, Paul. 1952. Le Concile de Lhasa. Paris: Imprimeries Nationale de France.
2. Gomez, Luis. 1983. “The Direct and Gradual Approaches of Zen Master Mahāyāna: Fragments of the Teachings of Moheyan,” in Studies in Ch’an and Hua-yen, edited by Gimello and Gregory: 393–434.
3. Schrempf, Mona. 2006. “Hwa shang at the Border: Transformations of History and Reconstructions of Identity in Modern A mdo.” JIATS 2: 1-32
Tibetan text
IOL Tib J 468: (1v) //bsam gtan nyId du ‘jug pa’I tshe/ bdag gI sems la bltas na/ cI yang sems dpa’ myed de myI bsam mo/ rtog pa’I sems g.yos na tshor bar bya/ cI ltar tshor bar bya zhe na/ gang g.yos pa’I sems de nyId/ g.yos pa dang ma g.yos par yang myI brtag/ yod pa dang myed par yang (2r) myI brtag/ dge ba dang myI dge bar yang myI brtag/ nyong mongs pa dang rnam par byang bar yang myI brtag/ ste// chos thams cad cI lta bur yang myI brtag go// sems g.yos pa de lta bur tshor na rang bzhin myed pa yIn te/ /de nI chos lam spyod pa zhes bya’//
.jpg)
