Bibliographic record and links to related information available from the Library of Congress catalog.
Note: Contents data are machine generated based on pre-publication provided by the publisher. Contents may have variations from the printed book or be incomplete or contain other coding.
Contents Detailed Outline vii Preface xviii Technical Notes xxi Part One: Background 1 1. Monastic Inquiry 3 2. The Essence Is Emptiness 10 3. God of Wisdom and God of Gods 19 Part Two: The Question 23 4. Identifying First-Wheel Teachings 25 5. Probing the Implications 50 6. Other Views on Own-Character 74 7. Wonch'uk: Refutation and Revival 107 8. Creating Consistency 118 9. Finishing the Question 133 Part Three: Buddha's Answer 147 10. Interpretation 149 11. Other-Powered Natures 170 12. Imputational Natures 191 13. Entering the Maze 220 14. Review: Two Riddles 246 15. Posited by Names and Terminology 272 16. Probing Establishment by way of its Own Character 288 17. Enforcing Consistency 306 18. The First Ultimate-Non-Nature 326 19. Ramifications 349 20. Two Ultimate-Non-Natures 383 21. Comparing Schools on the Three Non-Natures 424 Part Four: Differentiating Scriptures 431 22. Strategies for Interpretation 433 Appendix: Wonch'uk's Influence in Tibet 463 Backnotes 493 Glossary 509 List of Abbreviations 537 Bibliography 539 Index 558 Detailed Outline Detailed Outline vii Preface xviii Technical Notes xxi Part One: Background 1 1. Monastic Inquiry 3 Techniques of Analysis 4 The Characters of the Drama 7 2. The Essence Is Emptiness 10 The Title: The Essence of Eloquence 10 Issue #1: What is "eloquence"? What is "the essence"? 10 Issue #2: Is emptiness the essence of both SOtra and Mantra? 11 Issue #3: What else could the title mean? 13 Promise of Composition and Exhortation to Listen 15 Issue #4: Who are those the author indicates he surpassed? 15 Issue #5: Why exhort the audience to listen? 17 3. God of Wisdom and God of Gods 19 The Homages: Points of Clarification 19 Issue #6: Is Brahm+ egg-born? 19 Issue #7: How could Brahm+ appear first when this world system formed? 20 Part Two: The Question 23 4. Identifying First-Wheel Teachings 25 The S tra Unraveling The Thought 25 Issue #8: Why does Wonch'uk's version of the sOtra have eight chapters and the Tibetan version have ten? 27 Issue #9: Why leave out the fourth chapter? 27 The Question 29 The First Wheel 29 Issue #10: Just what are first wheel sOtras? 29 Issue #11: Do passages teaching the entity also teach the attributes? 31 Issue #12: Does any passage merely teach the production of form? 31 Issue #13: How to take Wonch'uk's two explanations of abandonment and thorough knowledge? 33 Issue #14: Just what are the four foods? 35 Issue #15: Are these s tras deceptive? 37 Issue #16: What are the various and manifold constituents? 39 Issue #17: Why are the eighteen and the six constituents singled out when there are many sets of constituents? 42 Issue #18: How can redundancy be avoided in the last two attributes? 45 Issue #19: Do all first wheel sOtras teach the four noble truths? 46 Issue #20: Do not any and all instances of Buddha's word teach the four noble truths? 48 5. Probing the Implications 50 Issue #21: What does "aggregates and so forth" mean? 50 Issue #22: Is Param+rthasamudgata concerned with the teaching of just compounded phenomena in the first wheel? 55 Issue #23: When the eighteen constituents are taught, are the one hundred eight phenomena taught? 56 Issue #24: Can this topic be trivialized? 56 Issue #25: Does the first wheel teach the actual four noble truths? 58 Issue #26: Does the second wheel explicitly teach the actual twenty emptinesses on the literal level? 59 Own-Character 59 Issue #27: Does "own-character" mean established by way of its own character? 59 Issue #28: Does non-deceptiveness require being literally acceptable? 63 Issue #29: Can Gung-ru Ch"-jung's and Jam-Aang-shay- oa's faux pas of citing a passage that proves the opposite point be explained away? 71 Issue #30: Does the middle wheel teach that phenomena are not established by way of their own character? 72 6. Other Views on Own-Character 74 Jay-rz¿n Ch"-_yi-gyel-tsen's Position 74 Issue #31: Can the teaching of establishment by way of its own character also teach something else? 76 Issue #32: Do the schools following the first wheel assert that uncompounded phenomena are established by way of their own character? 77 Issue #33: How about fiddling with the subject rather than the predicate? 81 Issue #34: Can the words and the meaning be split? 82 Pa-chen d"-nam-drak-?a's Position 84 Issue #35: Can the teaching of establishment by way of its own character also teach externality? 84 Issue #36: Could the first wheel teach that true cessations are truly established? 85 Issue #37: What to do with the middle wheel? 88 Issue #38: Are the literal level and the explicit teaching to be distinguished? 89 Review 90 Overview of "Own-Character" 91 Issue #39: Could "own-character" mean the unique defining character of an object? 94 Issue #40: Could "own-character" mean the capacity to perform a function? 96 Issue #41: Could "own-character" mean objective establishment? 96 Issue #42: Could "own-character" mean establishment without depending on imputation by terms and conceptual consciousnesses? 97 Issue #43: Could "own-character" mean establishment by way of its own character as the referent of a conceptual consciousness? 98 Forging Consistency 99 Issue #44: How to make ,zong-ka-oa say something else? 99 Implications 102 Issue #45: What does the first wheel say and teach? 102 Issue #46: Is Buddha's speech correct when teaching a non-existent? 104 Issue #47: How to make a mess out of what were, up until now, evocative distinctions? 104 Comment 105 7. Wonch'uk: Refutation and Revival 107 Wonch'uk's Identification 107 Issue #48: Could "own-character" mean an object's unique character? 107 Apologetic 115 8. Creating Consistency 118 Issue #49: How to make ,zong-ka-oa say what you want him to say? 118 Issue #50: Why single out imputational natures? 125 Issue #51: Does anyone assert such own-character? 128 Conclusion On "Own-Character" 131 9. Finishing the Question 133 Issue #52: Does the S tra explicitly teach both types of emptiness? 133 Issue #53: How to pretend that the two textbook authors of Go-mang are saying the same thing? 139 The Middle Wheel 142 Issue #54: What does the denial of establishment by way of its own character mean in the middle wheel? 142 Issue #55: How can ,zong-ka-oa be made to say this? 142 Issue #56: Why does Param+rthasamudgata explicitly ask only about the middle wheel? 143 Part Three: Buddha's Answer 147 10. Interpretation 149 The Answer 149 Issue #57: Does the brief indication explicitly team the three natures with the three non-natures? 150 Issue #58: What was the basis in Buddha's thought for the first-wheel teaching of own-character? 151 Issue #59: What is the structure of the extensive explanation? 152 Issue #60: What does ,zong-ka-oa mean by "clear delineation"? 155 Issue #61: How to handle an untimely citation? 156 Issue #62: But why does ,zong-ka-oa associate the three natures and the three non-natures here? 158 Issue #63: What is the Jo-nang-oa view that ,zong-ka-oa is opposing? 158 Issue #64: Do the Jo-nang-?as hold that the middle wheel teaches the actual ultimate? 164 Issue #65: Do the Jo-nang-?as actually hold that the primordial wisdom consciousness is both permanent and an effective thing? 166 11. Other-Powered Natures 170 Overview of Other-Powered Natures 170 Production-Non-Nature 170 Issue #66: What is the nature of production that other- powered natures lack? 170 Issue #67: Why would anyone think that the nature in terms of production that other-powered natures lack is "production from other-powered natures"? 171 Issue #68: Could the nature of production that other- powered natures lack be production from self? 172 Issue #69: Is the nature of production that other-powered natures lack production that is inherently existent? 175 Issue #70: Is the nature of production that other-powered natures lack production that is established by way of its own character? 175 Issue #71: What does "phenomena" mean? 176 Issue #72: Could the other-powered nature of a permanent phenomenon be the valid consciousness apprehending it? 176 Issue #73: Are all phenomena included in the three natures? 181 Issue #74: How do other tenet systems identify the production-non-nature? 183 Issue #75: How to take ,zong-ka-oa's own loose usage of terminology in the midst of his strict distinctions? 187 Issue #76: Does "production-non-nature" mean non- nature of production? 189 Issue #77: Can this grammatical distinction be extended to the other two non-natures? 190 12. Imputational Natures 191 Overview of Imputational Natures 191 Character-Non-Nature: The Subject 191 Issue #78: Do proponents of the S tra school realize that being the referent of a conceptual consciousness is not established by way of its own character? 191 Issue #79: How to claim that, when ,zong-ka-oa says "being the referent," he means "superimposed factor"? 194 Issue #80: Is being the referent itself an imputational nature? 196 Issue #81: How to avoid the fault that proponents of S tra could realize that the relevant imputational nature is not established by way of its own character? 196 Issue #82: How to read Jam-Aang-shay-oa's reducing Gung-ru Ch"-jung's dual subject to a single one? 198 Issue #83: How many relevant imputational natures are there? 198 Issue #84: How can the path of purification be one if practitioners of the Low and Great Vehicles meditate on different thoroughly established natures? 201 Issue #85: How to get around ,zong-ka-oa's speaking of imputational phenomena as if they were the imputational natures relevant here? 204 Issue #86: What do the lower schools realize about the three natures? 207 Issue #87: How to quibble against identifying the explicitly indicated imputational nature as "factor imputed in the manner of entity and attribute"? 208 Issue #88: Do the imputational natures indicated here only exist or only not exist? 209 Issue #89: How is an appearance relevant to positing emptiness? 211 Issue #90: How to twist ,zong-ka-oa's clear suggestion that the relevant imputational nature is non-existent into allowing for an existent appearance? 213 Issue #91: Does the relevant have to exist? 214 Issue #92: Is it being refuted that a conceptual appearance is established by way of its own character? 215 Issue #93: Does thinking "This is a pot," involve error? 216 Flexibility 217 13. Entering the Maze 220 Issue #94: Do the "own-character" of the question and the "character-nature" of the answer have the same meaning? 220 Issue #95: Is a character-non-nature an emptiness? 222 Issue #96: What extra understanding is gained by taking a superimposed factor or appearance as the subject? 226 Issue #97: Is there a source in the SOtra Unraveling the Thought for this? 229 Issue #98: If a pot's establishment by way of its own character is not to be refuted, why should a superimposed factor's establishment by way of its own character be refuted? Or, is it amazing if a bird can fly? 231 Issue #99: How to explain away Jam-Aang-shay-oa's inconsistencies? 232 Issue #100: Could the imputational factor be both the nature of character and the character-non-nature? 235 Issue #101: Are the three natures and the three non- natures equivalent? 239 Issue #102: Does the extensive explanation of imputational natures' character-non-nature delineate the thoroughly established nature? 241 Issue #103: Could the character-non-nature explicitly taught in the brief indication be emptiness but the character-non-nature explicitly taught in the extensive explanation be an imputational nature? 242 Looking Back 244 14. Review: Two Riddles 246 The First Riddle 246 "Answer" of the Go-mang Tradition 249 A Few Comments 252 Another "Answer" 254 The Second Riddle 257 The "Answer" of the Go-Mang Tradition 261 Another "Answer" 267 The Import 271 15. Posited by Names and Terminology 272 Issue #104: In "posited by names and terminology" is "terminology" not redundant? 272 Issue #105: What does ,zong-ka-oa mean when he says that some imputational natures are only imputed by conceptuality but are not posited by names and terminology? 272 Gung-tang's Refutation of Others' Explanations 275 Issue #106: Are non-existent imputational natures only imputed by conceptuality? 276 Issue #107: Does something's being posited by names and terminology entail that its appearance to the mind depends upon language? Or, does a bullock see space? 278 Issue #108: Is any existent posited by (only) names and terminology? 282 Issue #109: Is what is posited by only names and terminology an object of comprehension of an inference of renown? 284 16. Probing Establishment by way of its Own Character 288 One Mode of Conception Containing but not Being Another 288 Issue #110: Can a wrong consciousness also be right? 288 Summation 293 Issue #111: Could ,zong-ka-oa's statement be taken another way? 295 Issue #112: When does a person have both of these conceptions? 296 Established by way of its Own Character 296 Issue #113: According to the S tra school are all phenomena established by way of their own character? 296 Issue #114: What does "established by way of its own character" mean in the Mind-Only School? 297 Issue #115: Could established by way of its own character mean established through the force of its own measure of subsistence? 298 Issue #116: Could any meaning of "established by way of its own character" meet the criteria it must satisfy? 299 17. Enforcing Consistency 306 Issue #117: Does ,zong-ka-oa slip up when he identifies the "nature of character" as inherent existence? 306 Issue #118: Does Jam-Aang-shay-oa slip up when he identifies the "nature of character" as inherent existence? 309 Issue #119: What does ,zong-ka-oa mean when he says that according to the Mind-Only School all phenomena are established by way of their own character? 310 Issue #120: What does DharmakYrti mean when he says that all objects are specifically characterized phenomena? 312 Issue #121: When ,zong-ka-oa suggests that in the S tra School existent imputational natures are established by way of their own character as the referents of their respective conceptual consciousnesses, what does "established by way of its own character" mean? 313 Issue #122: In the Mind-Only School are imputational natures established from their own side as the referents of conceptual consciousnesses? Tell me it isn't true! 315 Issue #123: Do Proponents of S tra realize that imputational natures are not established by way of their own character? 316 Issue #124: Don't Proponents of S tra realize that imputational natures are imputational natures? 318 Issue #125: What is "the self-isolate of the conceived object of a conceptual consciousness"? How to handle a cryptic passage? 319 Issue #126: How to keep ,zong-ka-oa from contradicting one's own exposition of his system? 323 Concluding Remark 324 18. The First Ultimate-Non-Nature 326 Other-Powered Natures as Ultimate-Non-Natures 326 Issue #127: Is an other-powered nature's ultimate-non- nature an actual ultimate-non-nature? 329 Issue #128: If there are two modes of positing the ultimate-non-nature, are there two modes of ultimate- non-nature? 330 The Qualm 330 Issue #129: Since existent imputational natures, such as uncompounded space, are also not final objects of observation of a path of purification, why are they too not called ultimate-non-natures? Why does Buddha single out other-powered natures? 330 Issue #130: Does the qualm stem from the fact that other- powered natures are observed in the process of realizing their emptiness and thus might seem to be final objects of observation of a path of purification? 332 Issue #131: Or, is this a qualm that Autonomists and Consequentialists would have? 334 Issue #132: Does the qualm stem from the fact that other- powered natures are established by way of their own character? 336 Issue #133: Does the qualm stem from the fact that the S tra teaches that other-powered natures are bases of emptiness? 337 Issue #134: Does the qualm arise in practitioners of the mind-only view? 338 Issue #135: Is there no qualm that the non-existent imputational nature negated in selflessness might be the final object of observation by a path of purification? 340 Issue #136: Is it that other-powered natures are the main basis of the debate about true existence between the Proponents of Mind-Only and the Proponents of the Middle? 341 Issue #137: Is there less qualm or no qualm that imputational natures are ultimate-non-natures? 342 Issue #138: Is a qualm a doubt? 346 19. Ramifications 349 Existent Imputational Natures as Bases of Emptiness 349 Issue #139: If the three natures include all phenomena, what is uncompounded space? 349 Issue #140: Is there an actual other-powered nature of uncompounded space? 353 Issue #141: Is the real nature of an imputational nature not an emptiness? 358 Issue #142: Does the real nature of uncompounded space fulfill the meaning of a real nature? 359 Issue #143: Since uncompounded space is not truly established but its emptiness is, why does ,zong-ka-oa say that if the real nature of an object is truly established, the object also must be truly established? 359 Jam-Aang-shay-oa's Refutation of Gung-ru Ch"-jung 361 Issue #144: Do Solitary Realizers comprehend that objects are not established by way of their own character as the referents of their respective conceptual consciousnesses? 361 Issue #145: Do beings innately misconceive true cessations to be external objects? 367 Issue #146: Do proponents of sOtra assert that external objects are truly established? 372 Meditating on the Emptiness of Emptiness 373 Issue #147: Are thoroughly established natures empty of the imputational nature that is the self of phenomena? If so, is the thoroughly established nature the mode of being of the thoroughly established nature? Is emptiness the mode of being of emptiness? 373 Issue #148: Is emptiness the object found by a wisdom consciousness realizing the emptiness of emptiness? 374 Issue #149: What is the object found by a totally non- dualistic consciousness directly realizing the emptiness of emptiness? 375 Issue #150: Is emptiness ever a conventional truth? 377 Issue #151: If a thoroughly established nature is not its own ultimate, should a thoroughly established nature be posited as an ultimate-non-nature? 379 Issue #152: Oddity of oddities, could an other-powered nature's ultimate-non-nature be an emptiness? 381 20. Two Ultimate-Non-Natures 383 Overview of Thoroughly Established Natures 383 The Selflessness of Persons 384 Issue #153: Is the selflessness of persons an actual ultimate-non-nature? 384 Issue #154: Is the selflessness of persons an emptiness? 392 Issue #155: If the selflessness of persons is not an actual thoroughly established nature, is it an imputational nature? 395 Issue #156: How to deal with Ke-drup's statement that the selflessness of persons is not an ultimate truth? 397 Issue #157: Does any Buddhist school assert that the conception of a permanent, unitary, independent person is innate? 399 Issue #158: What is the "generality-isolate of the selflessness of persons"? 400 Issue #159: Has someone who has realized the coarse selflessness of persons realized the selflessness of persons? 401 Issue #160: Why do ChandrakYrti, Ke-drup, and ,zong- ka-oa speak of other Buddhist schools as asserting what is only a coarse selflessness of persons? 402 Issue #161: Is the basis of a division into a coarse and subtle selflessness of persons a selflessness of persons undifferentiated into coarse and subtle? 408 Issue #162: Is a selflessness of persons a thoroughly established nature but not an ultimate truth? 409 Issue #163: Why does Ke-drup say that a selflessness of persons is an other-powered nature? 412 Issue #164: Is a reasoning consciousness realizing the selflessness of persons a reasoning consciousness that has found the ultimate? 416 Issue #165: Is the selflessness of persons the mode of subsistence of persons? 418 Issue #166: Is the selflessness of persons an element of attributes? 420 Issue #167: How to deal with Ke-drup's contradictions? 422 21. Comparing Schools on the Three Non-Natures 424 Issue #168: How do the Mind-Only, Autonomy, and Consequence Schools take the three non-natures? 424 Issue #169: What do "ultimate" and "nature" mean in the two ultimate-non-natures? 427 Issue #170: Since external objects are thoroughly negated, how do Buddhas-who have removed all predispositions giving rise to appearances-perceive their own extraordinary bodies and perceive suffering sentient beings? 429 Part Four: Differentiating Scriptures 431 22. Strategies for Interpretation 433 Interpretation in the Great Vehicle Schools 434 Four Reliances 434 Four Reasonings 435 Four Thoughts 435 Four Indirect Intentions 436 Principal Fourfold Mode of Interpretation in The Essence of Eloquence 439 The Basis in Buddha's Thought in the First Wheel of Doctrine 441 The Purpose of the First Wheel of Doctrine 443 Damage to the Explicit Teaching of the First Wheel of Doctrine 444 The Thought of the First Wheel of Doctrine 446 Basis in Buddha's Thought in the Middle Wheel of Doctrine 447 The Purpose of the Middle Wheel of Doctrine 450 Damage to the Literal Teaching of the Middle Wheel of Doctrine 452 The Thought of the Middle Wheel of Doctrine 455 How to Explain the Teaching of One Final Vehicle? 455 Definitions of the Interpretable and the Definitive 457 Appendix: Wonch'uk's Influence in Tibet 463 1. References to Wonch'uk in ,zong-ka-oa's The Essence of Eloquence 465 2. References to Wonch'uk by Ge-luk-?a scholars other than ,zong-ka-oa 483 Backnotes 493 Glossary 509 List of Abbreviations 537 Bibliography 539 1. SOtras and Tantras 539 2. Other Sanskrit and Tibetan Works 540 3. Other Works 556 Index 558
Library of Congress Subject Headings for this publication:
Tsoçn-kha-pa Blo-bzaçn-grags-pa, 1357-1419. Legs bsad sñiçn po.
Dge-lugs-pa (Sect) -- Doctrines.