Tantric Techniques (63 page)

an oral commentary by His Holiness the Dalai Lama XIV,
a
I have provided this in
Tantra in Tibet,
which is centered around translation of Tsong-kha-pa’s first section.

The extreme rules of redundancy that often make Tibetan writing laconic to the point of obfuscation do not apply to oral commentary, and thus the Dalai Lama’s explanation provides a more free-flowing introduction to this complex argument, which he gave me privately in his office for eventual publication. It is the type of exposition that a well-versed Tibetan scholar will give to a student before launching into a topic and while reading the text line by line; it smoothes the way and thus is invaluable for a beginner. This more accessible version, however, is not meant to replace the twists and turns of Tsong-kha-pa’s argument; rather, one is encouraged to become acquainted with the system to the point where the implicit principles are explicit to the mind of the reader of Tsong-kha-pa’s text. This is likely the Dalai Lama’s point when, during public lectures, he has encouraged Ge-luk-pas not to forsake Tsong-kha-pa’s writings for later simplified presentations.

In the same spirit of providing an accessible reformulation of Tsong-kha-pa’s exposition, the First Pa
ṇ
chen Lama Lo-sang-chö-kyi-gyel-tsen
b
wrote an extremely readable version of his argument (see Donald S. Lopez’s translation in Appendix 1). Here, I will encapsulate Tsong-kha-pa’s and the Dalai Lama’s arguments for the sake of getting a firm grip on the broad structure of the myriad points being made. I read the argument as follows.

Because people are of different capacities, dispositions, and interests, Sh
ā
kyamuni Buddha taught many different paths. He set forth S
ū
tra and Mantra, and within S
ū
tra he taught four different schools of tenets (Great Exposition School, S
ū
tra School, Mind-Only School, and Middle Way School)
c
and within Mantra, he set out four different tantra sets—Action, Performance, Yoga, and Highest Yoga (literally “Unsurpassed Yoga”).
d

a
The Dalai Lama’s introduction in
Tantra in Tibet,
13-79.

b
blo bzang chos kyi rgyal mtshan,
1567[?]-1662.

c
bye brag smra ba, vaibh
āṣ
ika; mdo sde pa, sautr
ā
ntika; sems tsam pa, cittam
ā
tra; dbu ma pa, m
ā
dhyamika.

d
bya ba, kriy
ā
; spyod pa, cary
ā
; rnal ’byor, yoga; rnal ’byor bla med, anuttarayoga
.

Tsong-kha-pa’s Reasoned Analysis of Path-Structure
265

In each of the four schools of the S
ū
tra system he described three varieties of paths—for Hearers, Solitary Realizers, and Bodhisattvas. Each of the four schools also has internal subdivisions, and the four divisions of Mantra also contain many different types of processes and procedures of meditation. The result is that there are many different levels of commitment—ranging from the assumption of tantric vows down to the assumption of only the refuge vow—many different paths and many different styles.
a

To appreciate the special distinctiveness of Mantra, it is necessary to determine the difference between the S
ū
tra and Mantra vehicles, and to do that, first it is necessary to settle the difference between the vehicles in S
ū
tra—the Hearer Vehicle, Solitary Realizer Vehicle, and Bodhisattva Vehicle or Great Vehicle—and then consider the further division of the latter into its S
ū
tra and Mantra forms.

Difference between the S
ū
tra vehicles

“Vehicle” (
theg pa, y
ā
na
) has two meanings:

1. Since
   y
   ā
   means “to go,” and
   na
   indicates the “means” of going, a vehicle comprises those practices carrying one to a higher state—those practices that when actualized in the mental continuum cause manifestation of a higher type of mind.
   

2. Somewhat unusually, “vehicle” can also refer to the destination—the place or state at which one is aiming. This is because just as a vehicle can bear or carry a certain load, so the state of Buddhahood, which is the goal of the Bodhisattva Vehicle, can bear or carry the welfare of all sentient beings, whereas the state of a Lesser Vehicle Foe Destroyer can bear much less.
   b
   

Since “vehicle” has these two meanings, the distinction between the two Buddhist Vehicles—Hearer and Solitary Realizer (being Lesser Vehicle) and Bodhisattva (or Great Vehicle)—must occur

a
The Dalai Lama’s introduction in
Tantra in Tibet,
20-21.

b
The Dalai Lama’s introduction in
Tantra in Tibet,
43. Tsong-kha-pa’s exposition of these two meanings of “vehicle” was unintentionally deleted from the first edition of
Tantra in Tibet
at the beginning of the last paragraph on p. 106. It should read: “About ‘vehicle,’ there is an Effect Vehicle which is that to which one is proceeding and a cause vehicle which is that by which one proceeds. Due to proceeding [it is called] a vehicle. With respect to…” This change has been incorporated into the reprint by Snow Lion Publications, 1987 and later.

266
Tantric Techniques

either within the sense of vehicle as the means by which one progresses or within the sense of vehicle as the destination, or state, to which one is progressing, or in both meanings.

In the exposition of the Lesser Vehicle and the Great Vehicle according to the Middle Way Consequence School, considered to be the acme of philosophical systems by most Tibetan schools, there is a tremendous difference between the two in the sense of vehicle as that to which one is progressing. In the Lesser Vehicle, practice culminates as a Foe Destroyer, one who has overcome the foe of ignorance but is not omniscient and thus is not a Buddha. Unlike a Buddha, a Foe Destroyer does not have the ability spontaneously to manifest in myriad forms in order to help beings. Since the states of being a Buddha and a Foe Destroyer are very different, there is a significant difference between the Lesser and Great vehicles in the sense of vehicle as that to which one is progressing—the respective goals of Buddhahood and Foe Destroyerhood.

With this difference in goal, there must also be a difference in the two vehicles in the sense of the practices by which one progresses to these goals. The difference between the Lesser and Great vehicles in terms of the means of progress can occur in only two places—method and wisdom, these two comprising the entire path, in that method mainly produces the form body of a Buddha and wisdom mainly produces the Body of Attributes.
a
In the Consequence School’s explanation, the Lesser and Great vehicles do not differ with respect to wisdom in that both require realization of the subtle emptiness of inherent existence of
all
phenomena such as body, mind, head, eye, wall, consciousness, and so forth.
b
The Lesser and Great vehicles differ in terms of
how
wisdom is cultivated— Bodhisattvas using myriad reasonings for getting at the subtle emptiness and Hearers and Solitary Realizers using only a few to realize the same emptiness; however, in terms of the object of the mind of wisdom, the emptiness of inherent existence, there is no difference between the emptiness a Lesser Vehicle practitioner realizes and the emptiness a Great Vehicle practitioner realizes. In this sense there is no difference in wisdom. Tsong-kha-pa discusses this point in some detail in his commentary on

a
The Dalai Lama’s introduction in
Tantra in Tibet,
57.

b
The Dalai Lama’s introduction in
Tantra in Tibet,
38-41, and Tsong-kha-pa’s exposition, 98-99.

Tsong-kha-pa’s Reasoned Analysis of Path-Structure
267

Chandrak
ī
rti’s
Supplement to (N
ā
g
ā
rjuna’s) “Treatise on the Middle”
a
and also indicates a nuanced way that there is a difference in approach:

To establish that even a single phenomenon does not truly exist, Great Vehicle practitioners use limitless different reasonings as set forth in N
ā
g
ā
rjuna’s
Treatise on the Middle,
due to which their minds become greatly broadened with respect to suchness. Lesser Vehicle practitioners use only brief reasoning to establish suchness by valid cognition, and since they do not establish emptiness the way Great Vehicle practitioners do, they do not have a mind broadened with respect to suchness.…This difference arises because Hearers and Solitary Realizers strive to abandon only the afflictive emotions [the obstructions to liberation], and realization of a mere abbreviation of the meaning of suchness is sufficient for that. Great Vehicle practitioners are intent on abandoning the obstructions to omniscience, and for this it is necessary to have a very broadened mind of wisdom opened to suchness.

Bodhisattvas’ more extensive use of reasoning helps in achieving their greater aim of overcoming the obstructions to omniscience, though how this is accomplished is left for the reader to ponder.

Since wisdom in the Lesser and Great vehicles does not differ in terms of the type of emptiness being realized, the difference between the two vehicles must lie in method.
b
“Method” here specifically means motivation and the deeds that it impels. No matter how much compassion Lesser Vehicle practitioners have, their primary motivation is to release themselves from cyclic existence. However, in the Great Vehicle the primary motivation is the
altruistic
aspiration to highest enlightenment
c
induced by great love and compassion in which one takes on the burden of the welfare of all beings.