Difference between revisions of "Investigation of the Tathagata"

From Rangjung Yeshe Wiki - Dharma Dictionary
Jump to navigation Jump to search
(Redirected page to bsko gzhag gnang ba)
Line 1: Line 1:
−
Return to '''''main page "[[Mulamadhyamakakarika: Verses from the Centre]]"''''' for information and links.
+
#REDIRECT[[bsko gzhag gnang ba]][[Category:T]]
−
 
 
−
(return to list of '''''[[Contents & Translation of "Mulamadhyamakakarika: Verses from the Centre"]]''''')
 
−
 
 
−
 
 
−
'''22. Investigation of the Tathagata'''
 
−
 
 
−
'''''(Buddhanature)'''''
 
−
 
 
−
[For '''Ts.''' 370, this and the following chapter on error both serve to "demonstate that the flow of becoming is empty of inherent existence."]
 
−
 
 
−
 
 
−
 
 
−
1. phung min phung po las gzhan min/<br>
 
−
de la phung med de der med/<br>
 
−
de bzhin gshegs pa phung ldan min/<br>
 
−
de bzhin gshegs pa gang zhig yin /<br>
 
−
 
 
−
1. Not the aggregates, not other than the aggregates; the aggregates are not in him; he is not in them: the [[Tathagata]] does not possess the aggregates. What is the Tathagata?
 
−
 
 
−
 
 
−
 
 
−
2. gal te sangs rgyas phung po la/<br>
 
−
brten nas rang bzhin las yod min/<br>
 
−
rang bzhin las ni gang med pa/<br>
 
−
de gzhan dngos las ga la yod /<br>
 
−
 
 
−
(Here and below the sanskrit for brten pa is upadaya (upadana). Only from v. 5 does the Tibetan start using forms of [[nyer len]])
 
−
 
 
−
2. If the buddha depends on the aggregates, he does not exist from an own-nature. How can that which does not exist from an own-nature exist from an other-nature?
 
−
 
 
−
 
 
−
 
 
−
3. gang zhig gzhan gyi dngos brten nas/<br>
 
−
de bdag nyid du mi 'thad do/<br>
 
−
gang zhig bdag nyid med pa de/<br>
 
−
ji ltar de bzhin gshegs par 'gyur /<br>
 
−
 
 
−
3. It is not tenable for something dependent on other-nature to be self-existent. How can that which has no self-existence be [[tathagata]]?
 
−
 
 
−
 
 
−
 
 
−
4. gal te rang bzhin yod min na/<br>
 
−
gzhan dngos yod par ji ltar 'gyur/<br>
 
−
rang bzhin dang ni gzhan dngos dag/<br>
 
−
ma gtogs de bzhin gshegs de gang /<br>
 
−
 
 
−
[l. a-b cf. 2.c-d:
 
−
 
 
−
:rang bzhin las ni gang med pa/<br>
 
−
:de gzhan dngos las ga la yod/]<br>
 
−
 
 
−
4. If self-nature does not exist, how can there be the existence of other-nature? What is a Tathagata apart from own-nature and other-nature?
 
−
 
 
−
 
 
−
 
 
−
5. gal te phung po ma brten par/<br>
 
−
de bzhin gshegs pa 'ga' yod na/<br>
 
−
de ni da gdong* rten** 'gyur zhing/<br>
 
−
brten nas de nas 'gyur la rag /<br>
 
−
 
 
−
['''Lha.''' *gdod, **brten.  '''Ts.''' *gzod, **brten].
 
−
 
 
−
5. If there exists a tathagata [who is] not depending on the aggregates, he exists in depending [on them] now and will henceforth depend.
 
−
 
 
−
 
 
−
 
 
−
6. phung po rnams la ma brten par/<br>
 
−
de bzhin gshegs pa 'ga' yang med/<br>
 
−
gang zhig ma brten yod min na/<br>
 
−
des ni ji ltar nyer len 'gyur /<br>
 
−
 
 
−
6. If there does not exist a tathagata [who is]not depending on the aggregates, how does he grasp [depend on? them]?
 
−
 
 
−
[v. 5 & 6 mirror each other grammatically - (cf. Skt.) l.c of v. 6 is effectively redundant; it serves as metric padding for the conditional na]
 
−
 
 
−
 
 
−
 
 
−
7. nye bar blangs pa ma yin pa*/<br>
 
−
nye bar len par** cis mi 'gyur/<br>
 
−
nye bar len pa med pa yi/<br>
 
−
de bzhin gshegs pa ci yang med /<br>
 
−
 
 
−
['''Ts.''' *pas; '''Lha.''' **pa]
 
−
 
 
−
7. [Since] there is nothing to be grasped/dependent on, there can be no grasping/depending. There is no [[tathagata]] at all who is without grasping/depending.
 
−
 
 
−
 
 
−
 
 
−
8. rnam pa lngas ni btsal byas na/<br>
 
−
gang zhig de nyid gzhan nyid du/<br>
 
−
med pa'i de bzhin gshegs pa de/<br>
 
−
nye bar len pas ji ltar gdags /<br>
 
−
 
 
−
8. If having examined in five ways, how can that tathagata who does not exist as that one or the other be [conventionally] understood by grasping/depending?
 
−
 
 
−
 
 
−
 
 
−
9. gang zhig nye bar blang ba* de/<br>
 
−
de ni rang bzhin las yod min/<br>
 
−
bdag gi dngos las gang med pa/<br>
 
−
de gzhan dngos las yod re skan /<br>
 
−
 
 
−
['''Lha.''' *pa]
 
−
 
 
−
9. That which is grasped/depended on does not exist from its own nature. It is impossible for that which does not exist from its own nature to exist from another nature.
 
−
 
 
−
 
 
−
 
 
−
10. de ltar nyer blang nyer len po/<br>
 
−
rnam pa kun gyis stong pa yin/<br>
 
−
stong pas de bzhin gshegs stong pa/<br>
 
−
ji lta bur na 'dogs par 'gyur /<br>
 
−
 
 
−
[cf. v. 8; [['dogs]] = prajnapyate]
 
−
 
 
−
10. In that way, what is grasped/depended on and what grasps/depends are empty in every aspect. How can an empty tathagata be [conventionally] understood by what is empty?
 
−
 
 
−
 
 
−
 
 
−
11. stong ngo zhes kyang mi brjod de/<br>
 
−
mi stong zhes kyang mi bya zhing/<br>
 
−
gnyis dang gnyis min mi bya ste/<br>
 
−
gdags pa'i don du brjod par bya/<br>
 
−
 
 
−
11. Do not say "empty," or "not empty," or "both," or "neither:" these are mentioned for the sake of [conventional] understanding.
 
−
 
 
−
 
 
−
 
 
−
12. rtag dang mi rtag la sogs bzhi/<br>
 
−
zhi ba 'di la ga la yod/<br>
 
−
mtha' dang mtha' med la sogs bzhi/<br>
 
−
zhi ba 'di la ga la yod /<br>
 
−
 
 
−
12. Where can the four such as permanence and impermanence exist in this peaceful one? Where can the four such as end and no-end [of the world] exist in this peaceful one?
 
−
 
 
−
 
 
−
 
 
−
13. gang gis de bzhin gshegs yod ces/<br>
 
−
'dzin pa stug po* bzung gyur pa/<br>
 
−
de ni mya ngan 'das pa la/<br>
 
−
med ces rnam rtog rtog par byed /<br>
 
−
 
 
−
['''Lha.''' *pos; '''Ts.''' *po]
 
−
 
 
−
13. Those who hold the dense apprehension, "the tathagata exists" conceive the thought, "he does not exist in nirvana."
 
−
 
 
−
['''Ts.''' 378-9 says that while this version is found in [[Chandrakirti]]'s Prasannapada, he prefers the version quoted by [[Buddhapalita]]:
 
−
 
 
−
:gang gis 'dzin stug bzung gyur pa/<br>
 
−
:de ni mya ngan 'das pa la/<br>
 
−
:de bzhin gshegs pa yod ce'am/<br>
 
−
:med ces rnam tog rtog par byed/<br>
 
−
 
 
−
''("Those who hold dense apprehensions conceive thoughts of the tathagata's "existence" or "non-existence" in nirvana.")''
 
−
 
 
−
 
 
−
 
 
−
14. rang bzhin gyis ni stong de la/<br>
 
−
sangs rgyas mya ngan 'das nas ni/<br>
 
−
yod do zhe'am med do zhes/<br>
 
−
bsam pa* 'thad pa nyid mi 'gyur /<br>
 
−
 
 
−
['''Lha.''' *pa'ang]
 
−
 
 
−
14. For that one empty of own-nature, it is entirely inappropriate to think that once the buddha has nirvana-ed he either "exists" or "does not exist."
 
−
 
 
−
 
 
−
 
 
−
15. gang dag sangs rgyas spros 'das shing/<br>
 
−
zad pa med la spros byed pa/<br>
 
−
spros pas nyams pa de kun gyis/<br>
 
−
de bzhin gshegs pa mthong mi 'gyur /<br>
 
−
 
 
−
['''K.''' 310. zad pa med pa = avyaya = non-variable / steadfast]
 
−
 
 
−
15. Those who make fixations about Buddha who is beyond fixations and without deterioration -- all those who are damaged by fixations do not see the tathagata.
 
−
 
 
−
 
 
−
 
 
−
16. de bzhin gshegs pa'i rang bzhin gang/<br>
 
−
de ni 'gro 'di'i rang bzhin yin/<br>
 
−
de bzhin gshegs pa rang bzhin med/<br>
 
−
'gro ba 'di yi rang bzhin med /<br>
 
−
 
 
−
16. Whatever is the own-nature of the tathagata, that is the own-nature of this world. The tathagata has no own-nature. This world has no own-nature.
 
−
 
 
−
de bzhin gshegs pa brtag pa zhes bya ba ste rab tu byed pa nyi shu gnyis pa'o //<br>
 
−
 
 
−
[[Category:I]] [[Category:Teachings]] [[Category:Key Terms]]
 

Revision as of 13:54, 10 November 2009

Redirect to:

Retrieved from "https://rywiki.tsadra.org/index.php?title=Investigation_of_the_Tathagata&oldid=222352"