- Buddha-Nature
- Compassion
- Defining Bodhicitta
- Emptiness
- Equalizing & Exchanging Self and Others
- History of Bodhicitta Teachings
- How to Develop Bodhicitta
- Interdependent Origination
- Lineage of the Profound View
- Lineage of the Vast Conduct
- Mahāyāna
- Mind Training
- Non-Self
- Seven-Point Instructions of Cause and Effect
- The Bodhisattva Ideal
- The Bodhisattva Path
- The Bodhisattva Vow
- The Bodhisattva's Goal
- The Four Immeasurables
- The Six Perfections
- The Three Higher Trainings
- The Two Accumulations
- The Two Truths
- Tonglen: The Practice of Taking and Giving
- Types of Bodhicitta
The Two Truths (satyadvaya) are one of the hallmarks of Buddhist philosophy, in which they reference the two modes of reality, ultimate and relative. Though they are represented in all four of the tenet systems, each of which have their own positions on these, they are an especially prominent theme in the Mahāyāna. And, perhaps nowhere more so than in the Middle Way, or Madhyamaka, school of thought introduced by Nāgārjuna.
The Two Truths
At the center of each of the Buddhist systems of philosophical tenets lies a presentation of their understanding of the two truths (satyadvaya). Each of these school's presentations of the two truths is an exploration into the way that things exist. These two truths act as guides to orient us in our investigation into what is really true—what can be ultimately relied on—and what we should understand to be false.
Mention of the two truths is found throughout the Mahāyāna sūtras, but one of the clearest presentations of the two truths is found in The Root Stanzas of the Middle Way (Mūlamadhyamakakārikā) by Nāgārjuna, where he states:
The Dharma that the buddhas teach Is wholly founded on two truths: The “all-concealing” truth of mundane beings And the truth of ultimate reality. (24.8)[1]
Here, Nāgārjuna explains that all the Buddha's teachings are grounded in the two truths—the relative truth (saṃvṛtisatya) and the ultimate truth (paramārthasatya). Throughout the sūtras, the Buddha repeatedly affirms that all phenomena can be encompassed within these two truths. They explain that there is nothing that exists that is not one of these two truths—there is no third truth apart from these.
The two truths are a way to explain that there is some reality to the phenomena that we encounter in our daily lives, but they also acknowledge that at a deeper level of analysis this surface-level appearance is an illusion. When we look into the deeper nature of things, we start to see how they do not exist in the same way that they superficially appear to us.
This does not mean that the two truths are completely separate and contradictory. Rather, it is important to understand that these two truths are two perspectives in relation to a single phenomena. These two perspectives are revealed at two different levels of analysis, one through relative analysis and one through ultimate analysis.
The nature of each of the two truths is explained in Candrakīrti’s text Entering the Middle Way (Madhyamakāvatāra):
All entities bear dual natures as obtained by correct or false views [of them]. What is seen by perfect vision is the ultimate truth, and what is seen by false vision is conventional truth, it is taught. (6.23)[2]
At the heart of the presentation of the two truths lies the dichotomy between appearance and reality. The relative, or conventional, truth is the world of appearance, the superficial and subjective nature of phenomena, the world that appears as real and "true" to ordinary unenlightened beings. It essentially refers to any phenomena other than emptiness. Its very etymology, from the Sanskrit word saṃvṛti, contains the meaning of a truth that "conceals," such that this relative nature actually obscures the deeper level of reality of phenomena. Relative truth has a certain level of reality to it at a conventional level, but when examined more closely with a discriminating wisdom that searches out the deeper nature of all phenomena, this relative truth cannot be found.
The ultimate truth is the deepest ontological status of phenomena, the truth of the nature of things as they really are. It is the deepest, undeceiving nature of things, and is the nature of phenomena that is revealed under the most intense philosophical analysis.
In a crucial verse of his classic text The Way of the Bodhisattva (Bodhicaryāvatāra), Śāntideva mentions the division of the two truths but also describes the different minds that are able to realize them:
Relative and ultimate, These the two truths are declared to be. The ultimate is not within the reach of intellect, For intellect is said to be the relative. (9.2)[3]
There is a lot of debate about the meaning of this verse in the various commentarial traditions, but the basic understanding is that the realization of the ultimate truth at its most complete level cannot be achieved by a dualistic and conceptual mind. To perceive the ultimate nature of self and all phenomena most completely requires a single-pointed meditative state which is free from all dualistic elaborations of conceptuality and of subject and object.[4]
The Middle Way
All schools of Buddhist philosophy try to solve this conundrum of conventional appearance and ultimate reality by plotting a logical course called the middle way (madhyamapratipad) that avoids the two extreme views of eternalism and nihilism. If we take things to be too "real," we run the danger of falling into the view that everything, and especially the existence of our very selves, is solid and eternal. We can get caught up in their superficiality and think that they have some kind of independent and permanent nature to them. This view provides a firm foundation for the arising of the whole range of strong mental afflictions such as desire and hatred. With these negative states of mind driving us, we commit acts which are harmful to ourselves and others, actions that bring us suffering both now and in the future. And when attempting to negate the false ways that phenomena exist, if we go too far and negate too much, then there is the danger of falling into the extreme of nihilism, where we believe that nothing exists at all. This position places us in grave danger of denying the functioning of karmic cause and effect, which can easily lead to the belief that there is no basis for morality, even on a conventional level. We can trick ourselves into believing that nothing matters at all, whether good or bad. Overcome by this ignorance, and with no moral compass to guide us, we again create suffering for ourselves and others.
In contrast to these extreme views, the middle way is a method by which each school presents the reality of things, such that the philosophical consequence of their position does not fall into either of these positions. Their philosophical position does not lead to the complete nonexistence of any level of conventional existence of phenomena while also not over-reifying them to such an extent that they would have to exist eternally or completely independent from anything else.
For philosophers of what is considered the highest of the four Buddhist philosophical tenet systems, the Middle Way school (Madhyamaka), the two truths are posited in relation to crucial factors—the factor of dependent origination (pratītyasamutpāda), and the factor of the selflessness of things (asvabhāva).
In the relative sense, apparent phenomena are understood to be dependently originated, in that they exist in dependence on something else. This relationship can be a dependence on causes and conditions, a dependence in relation to their parts, or, at the subtlest level, dependence on the mind that perceives them.
In the ultimate sense, this dependence on something else is understood as a proof of the emptiness of phenomena. If phenomena rely on something else for their existence, they must therefore lack any form of independent or intrinsic existence.
While phenomena may appear as independent entities, existing in and of themselves, when investigated, we find that they lack any such self-existence. Therefore, according to the Middle Way school, phenomena are empty of any kind of intrinsic nature (svabhāva). Yet, though they do not have even a single atom of inherent existence, phenomena are still able to perform functions on a conventional level. As Nāgārjuna states in his Root Stanzas of the Middle Way,
Whatever is dependently arisen This has been explained as empty. In dependence upon something else it is imputed [as existent]. This is the Middle Way indeed. (24.18)[5]
Because things are dependently arisen, coming into being in relation to factors other than themselves, they are said to be empty of an inherent nature. Their existence relies not intrinsically on themselves but on factors other than themselves, and this understanding is called the middle way.
It is very important to understand that the two truths are not merely an intellectual framework that aims to classify reality but are a means by which one can actually experience it. As Atiśa states in his Introduction to the Two Truths (Satyadvayāvatāra):
If one investigates with logical examination What this Relative Truth appears to be, The very finding of nothing (there) is the Ultimate (Truth): The True-nature that abides from eternity. (20)[6]
The nonconceptual knowledge or insight into the way things truly are is termed wisdom (prajñā), and with training and analysis we will be able to give rise to this realization in our own minds.
The Two Truths in Relation to Bodhicitta
Bodhicitta is linked to the subject of the two truths in relation to the principal way that bodhicitta is divided up. Just as there are two truths, relative and ultimate, so there are also relative and ultimate forms of bodhicitta.
Relative bodhicitta relates to the conventional wish to attain enlightenment for the highest welfare of others. While this is a very powerful and high level of realization, it is still considered within the world of relative truth. Ultimate bodhicitta, on the other hand, is the direct realization of the deepest nature of the self and phenomena. It is the nondualistic wisdom of emptiness, a state where the ultimate nature of the mind and the emptiness of all phenomena become undifferentiable, like water poured into water.
There are distinct differences between these two forms of bodhicitta. To learn more about this topic, visit the following page:
Notes
- ↑ Helena Blankleder and Wulstan Fletcher (Padmakara Translation Group), trans., The Root Stanzas of the Middle Way: The Mulamadhyamakakarika, by Nāgārjuna (Boulder, CO: Shambhala Publications, 2016), 86.
- ↑ Thupten Jinpa, trans., Illuminating the Intent: An Exposition of Candrakīrti's Entering the Middle Way, by Tsongkhapa (Somerville, MA: Wisdom Publications, 2021), 223.
- ↑ Helena Blankleder and Wulstan Fletcher (Padmakara Translation Group), trans., The Way of the Bodhisattva: A Translation of the Bodhicharyāvatāra, by Śāntideva, rev. ed. (Boston: Shambhala Publications, 2006), 137.
- ↑ For a more detailed discussion of this and similar verses which served as points of debate, see the page on chapter 9 of the Bodhicaryāvatāra in the Study Section.
- ↑ Blankleder and Fletcher, Root Stanzas, 88.
- ↑ Richard Sherburne, trans., The Complete Works of Atīśa, Śrī Dīpaṁkara Jñāna, jo-bo-rje: The Lamp for the Path and Commentary, Together with the Newly Translated Twenty-five Key Texts (New Delhi: Aditya Prakashan, 2003), 357.
