Bhāvanākrama (Kamalaśīla)
Description
(See also: "Bhāvanākrama." In The Princeton Dictionary of Buddhism, 112-13. Princeton University Press, 2014. http://www.jstor.org/stable/j.ctt46n41q.27.)
- Bhāvanākrama. (T. Sgom rim). In Sanskrit, "Stages of Meditation," the title of three separate but related works by the late eighth century Indian master Kamalaśīla (RKTST 4228, RKTST 4229, and RKTST 4230). During the reign of the Tibetan king Khri srong lde btsan at the end of the eighth century, there were two Buddhist factions at court, a Chinese faction led by the Northern Chan (Bei zong) monk Heshang Moheyan (Mahāyāna) and an Indian faction of the recently deceased Śāntarakṣita, who with the king and Padmasambhava had founded the first Tibetan monastery at Bsam yas (Samye). According to traditional accounts, Śāntarakṣita foretold of dangers and left instructions in his will that his student Kamalaśīla should be summoned from India. A conflict seems to have developed between the Indian and Chinese partisans (and their allies in the Tibetan court) over the question of the nature of enlightenment, with the Indians holding that enlightenment takes place as the culmination of a gradual process of purification, the result of perfecting morality (śīla), concentration (samādhi), and wisdom (prajñā). The Chinese spoke against this view, holding that enlightenment was the intrinsic nature of the mind rather than the goal of a protracted path, such that one need simply to recognize the presence of this innate nature of enlightenment by entering a state of awareness beyond distinctions; all other practices were superfluous. According to both Chinese and Tibetan records, a debate was held between Kamalaśīla and Moheyan at Bsam yas, circa 797, with the king himself serving as judge. According to Tibetan reports (contradicted by the Chinese accounts), Kamalaśīla was declared the winner and Moheyan and his party banished from Tibet, with the king proclaiming that thereafter the Madhyamaka school of Indian Buddhist philosophy (to which Śāntarakṣita and Kamalaśīla belonged) would have pride of place in Tibet. According to Tibetan accounts, after the conclusion of the debate, the king requested that Kamalaśīla compose works that presented his view, and in response, Kamalaśīla composed the three Bhāvanākrama. There is considerable overlap among the three works. All three are germane to the issues raised in the debate, although whether all three were composed in Tibet is not established with certainty; only the third, and briefest of the three, directly considers, and refutes, the view of "no mental activity" (amanasikāra, cf. wunian), which is associated with Moheyan. The three texts set forth the process for the potential bodhisattva to cultivate bodhicitta and then develop śamatha and vipaśyanā and progress through the bodhisattva stages (bhūmi) to buddhahood. The cultivation of vipaśyanā requires the use of both scripture (āgama) and reasoning (yukti) to understand emptiness (śūnyatā); in the first Bhāvanākrama, Kamalaśīla sets forth the three forms of wisdom (prajñā): the wisdom derived from leaming (śrutamayīprajñā), the wisdom derived from reflection (cintāmayīprajñā), and the wisdom derived from cultivation (bhāvanāmayīprajñā), explaining that the last of these gradually destroys the afflictive obstructions (kleśāvaraṇa) and the obstructions to omniscience (jñeyāvaraṇa). The second Bhāvanākrama considers many of these same topics, stressing that the achievement of the fruition of buddhahood requires the necessary causes, in the form of the collection of merit (puṇyasaṃbhāra) and the collection of wisdom (jñānasaṇbhāra). Both the first and second works espouse the doctrine of mind only (cittamātra); it is on the basis of these and other statements that Tibetan doxographers classified Kamalaśīla as a Yogācāra-Svātantrika-Madhyamaka. The third and briefest of the Bhāvanākrama is devoted especially to the topics of śamatha and vipaśyanā, how each is cultivated, and how they are ultimately unified. Kamalaśīla argues that analysis (vicāra) into the lack of self (ātman) in both persons (pudgala) and phenomena (dharma) is required to arrive at a nonconceptual state of awareness. The three texts are widely cited in later Tibetan Buddhist literature, especially on the process for developing śamatha and vipaśyanā.
- 1) བསྒོམ་པའི་རིམ་པ། 1
- 2) བསྒོམ་པའི་རིམ་པ། 2
- 3) བསྒོམ་པའི་རིམ་པ། 3