Explore/Lineage of the Profound View

From Bodhicitta
< Explore
Revision as of 20:02, 23 September 2025 by AlexC (talk | contribs)


Lineage of the Profound View
Key Concepts


The Profound View lineage, associated with Mañjuśrī and the philosopher Nāgārjuna, emerges from the Prajñāpāramitā sūtras and Madhyamaka philosophy. Its central teaching holds that authentic bodhicitta arises only through profound understanding of emptiness (śūnyatā). The lineage's core practices—"equating self and others" and "exchanging self for others"—involve meditating on beings' fundamental equality and mentally taking on others' suffering while offering one's happiness, directly countering self-cherishing attitudes.

The Lineage of The Profound View

The Mahāyāna system which spread from around 100 BCE saw significant expansion and diversification in the subsequent centuries. Such expansion and variation came about partly through the appearance of numerous sūtras emphasizing different aspects of the bodhisattva path. For instance, while the Perfection of Wisdom highlighted the empty nature of all phenomena, the buddha-nature sūtras underscored the natural purity and intrinsic virtue of sentient beings. Still other sūtras focused on bodhisattva ethics, bodhisattva practices, life stories, and rituals such as stūpa veneration.

In addition to the expansion through a multiplicity of sūtras, the Mahāyāna system also saw diversification through the emergence of different understandings and interpretations of the sūtras. For instance, the Perfection of Wisdom sūtras saw four major traditions of interpretation and hermeneutics propounded by Nāgārjuna, Asaṅga, Daṃṣṭrāsena, and Dignāga. Among the four, Nāgārjuna's interpretation, which focuses on emptiness, the explicit message of the Perfection of Wisdom sūtras, initiated the Madhyamaka (Middle Way) school, while Maitreya/Asaṅga's interpretation focused on the soteriological path, the implicit or hidden message of the Perfection of Wisdom sūtras. The latter was often philosophically aligned with the Cittamātra (Mind Only) school.

Thus, the Mahāyāna system in the Indo-Tibetan tradition became mainly classified into these two groups of what later came to be known as the Profound View Tradition (ཟབ་མོ་ལྟ་བའི་སྲོལ་ zab mo lta ba'i srol) and the Vast Conduct Tradition (རྒྱ་ཆེན་སྤྱོད་པའི་སྲོལ། rgya chen spyod pa'i srol). Kongtrul Lodrö Taye (1813–1899), in his Guidebook for the Path to Great Awakening: The Ritual for Generating Enlightenment Mind according to the System Followed in the Lineage of the Profound View writes:

Following The Stem Array Sūtra and The Sūtra of Ākāśagarbha and others, the tradition passed down from Ārya Māñjuśrī via Lord Nāgārjuna and his disciples and taken up by Śantideva and so forth is known as the Middle Way tradition. Following The Great Bodhisattva Ground and such sūtras, the tradition passed down from Lord Maitreya via Ārya Asaṅga and his brother and taken up by the master Candragomin, Lord Atiśa, and others is known as the Mind Only tradition.[1]

While the tradition names and lineage lists that Kongtrul presents were not clearly defined in India, a philosophical division did exist. Mahāyāna thinkers appear to have been grouped into two camps based on their philosophical positions as early as the time of Bhāvaviveka (c. 500–570). Bhāvaviveka criticizes Asaṅga and Vasubandhu for shamelessly diverging from the Middle Way understanding of Nāgārjuna, who was prophesied by the Buddha and is said to have attained the first sublime stage of the bodhisattva path.[2] There are also ample accounts of philosophical debates between the proponents of the Middle Way school and Mind Only school, confirming that Indian Mahāyānists were clearly divided along philosophical lines.

Beyond the philosophical differences that occupied Bhāvaviveka and others, a general division appears to have emerged in Mahāyāna approaches to understanding and practice. By the time of Ratnākaraśānti (late tenth century), we can see a general classification of the Mahāyāna system into two traditions, with one led by Nāgārjuna and another by Asaṅga. According to Ratnākaraśānti, Ārya Asaṅga presents the gist of the Mahāyāna system through seven topics such as the thought of awakening, while Ārya Nāgārjuna presents it through the six perfections and compassion.[3]

In Tibet, Ratnākaraśānti or his disciple Atiśa is perhaps the first one to expound the two traditions and the two lines of transmission of bodhicitta practice. According to Atiśa:

Although there are many traditions on this among previous scholars, the religious tradition followed by a great number of people and the path set by the great pioneers should be explained to be two: the tradition of Ārya Asaṅga and the tradition of the Lord Śāntideva.[4]

From Atiśa's time onward, bodhisattva vows and bodhicitta practices were presented according to the two main Mahāyāna traditions. Tibetan scholars subsequently adopted this formulation, and bodhicitta teachings were transmitted through these two distinct lineages.

Sakya Paṇḍita Kunga Gyaltsen (1182–1251), in his Illumination of the Sage's Intent, for example, states that the Mahāyāna tradition consists of the Mind Only and Middle Way schools. The cultivation of the thought of awakening in the Mind Only school, he explains, follows the Maitreya lineage coming through Asaṅga and is the tradition of Candragomin's Twenty Bodhisattva Vows (Byang chub sems dpa'i sdom pa nyi shu pa) based on Asaṅga's Bodhisattvabhūmi (Byang chub sems pa'i sa). On the other hand, the tradition of the Middle Way school follows the Mañjuśrī line through Nāgārjuna, is the tradition of Śāntideva's Way of the Bodhisattva based on the Buddhāvataṃsakasūtra, and is the one undertaken by Jetāri and other masters.[5]

It must be noted, however, that Atiśa also presented a trifurcation in terms of the presentation of the general Mahāyāna system of thought. He listed Asaṅga, Vasubandhu, Sthiramati, Prajñākaragupta, et al. as those espousing the Aspectarian and Non-Aspectarian Mind Only school of thought, and Bhāvaviveka, Devaśarman, Buddhapālita, Avalokitavrata, Śāntarakṣita, and Kamalaśīla as expounding the Middle Way school of thought. He categorized Candragomin, Ācārya Śūra, Śāntideva, et al. as masters who promoted the Vast Conduct tradition through a focus on the practice of the four immeasurable thoughts, six perfections, and four means of attraction. Thus, it seems Atiśa divided the general Mahāyāna system into three main lines of thought or approaches[6] but included them into two main traditions with regard to the specific practice of bodhicitta and the bodhisattva vows.

  1. ↑ See Treasury of Precious Instructions, 3:282: སྡོང་པོ་བཀོད་པ་དང༌། ནམ་མཁའི་སྙིང་པོའི་མདོ་ལ་སོགས་པའི་རྗེས་སུ་འབྲངས་པ། འཕགས་པ་འཇམ་དཔལ་ནས་བརྒྱུད་དེ་མགོན་པོ་ཀླུ་སྒྲུབ་ཡབ་སྲས་དང་རྒྱལ་སྲས་ཞི་བ་ལྷ་སོགས་ཀྱི་ཕྱག་བཞེས་དབུ་མ་ལུགས་སུ་གྲགས་པ་དང༌། བྱང་ཆུབ་སེམས་དཔའི་ས་ཆེན་པོའི་མདོ་ལ་སོགས་པའི་རྗེས་སུ་འབྲངས་པ། མགོན་པོ་བྱམས་པ་ནས་བརྒྱུད་དེ་འཕགས་པ་ཐོགས་མེད་སྐུ་མཆེད་དང༌། སློབ་དཔོན་ཆེན་པོ་ཙནྡྲ་གོ་མི་དང་ཇོ་བོ་ཨ་ཏི་ཤ་སོགས་ཀྱི་ཕྱག་བཞེས་སེམས་ཙམ་ལུགས་སུ་གྲགས་པ་གཉིས་ཡོད།
  2. ↑ Bhāvaviveka, Madhyāmakāhṛīdayavṛīttitarakājvāla (Dbu ma snying po'i 'grel pa rtog ge 'bar ba), in Derge Tengyur, D3856, dbu ma, vol. 98, 199a: ཐེག་པ་ཆེན་པོ་ཉིད་ཀྱི་སློབ་དཔོན་ཐོགས་མེད་དང་། དབྱིག་གཉེན་ལ་སོགས་པ་གཞན་དག་ནི་དེ་བཞིན་གཤེགས་པས་ལུང་བསྟན་ཅིང་། ས་རབ་ཏུ་བརྙེས་པའི་འཕགས་པ་ཀླུ་སྒྲུབ་ཀྱིས་ཡང་དག་པར་རྟོགས་པའི་ཐེག་པ་ཆེན་པོའི་དོན་གྱི་ལུགས་གཞན་དུ་འདྲེན་པར་བྱེད་ཅིང་ངོ་ཚ་དང་ཁྲེལ་མེད་པ་དོན་རྣམ་པར་མི་ཤེས་པ་དེ་བཞིན་དུ་རྣམ་པ་ཤེས་ཤིང་མཁས་པར་ང་རྒྱལ་བྱེད་པ་དག་འདི་སྐད་སྨྲ་སྟེ།
  3. ↑ Ratnākaraśānti, Sūtrasamuccayabhāṣyaratnālokālaṃkāra-nāma (Mdo kun las btus pa'i bshad pa rin po che snang ba'i rgyan ces bya ba) in Derge Tengyur, D3935, dbu ma, vol. 110, 251b: འཕགས་པ་ཐོགས་མེད་ཀྱིས་ནི་སེམས་བསྐྱེད་པ་ལ་སོགས་པ་རྣམ་པ་བདུན་བཤད་དོ། །འཕགས་པ་ཀླུ་སྒྲུབ་ཀྱིས་ནི་ཕ་རོལ་ཏུ་ཕྱིན་པ་དྲུག་དང་སྙིང་རྗེ་ལ་བཤད་དོ། །
  4. ↑ Atiśa Dīpaṃkara Śrījñāna, Bodhimārgapradīpapañjikā-nāma (Byang chub lam gyi sgron ma'i dka' 'grel), in Derge Tengyur, D3948, dbu ma, vol. 111, 265a: འདིར་སྔོན་གྱི་མཁས་པ་ཆེན་པོ་དུ་མའི་ལུགས་ཡོད་མོད་ཀྱི་འོན་ཀྱང་སྐྱེ་བོ་ཆེན་པོའི་ཆོས་ལུགས་ཤིང་རྟ་ཆེན་པོའི་ལམ་ཆེན་པོ་ཡིན་པས། སློབ་དཔོན་ཐོགས་མེད་ཀྱི་ལུགས་དང་། རྗེ་བཙུན་ཞི་བ་ལྷའི་ལུགས་གཉིས་བཤད་པར་བྱའོ། །
  5. ↑ Sakya Paṇḍita Kunga Gyaltsen, Thub pa'i dgongs pa rab tu gsal ba, in Sa skya bka' 'bum (Dehra Dun: Sakya Center, 1992–1993), 10:18, http://purl.bdrc.io/resource/MW22271_925536.
  6. ↑ Atiśa Dīpaṃkara Śrījñāna, Ratnakaraṇḍodghāṭanāmamadhyamakopadeśa (Dbu ma'i man ngag rin po che'i za ma tog kha phye ba), in Derge Tengyur, D3930, dbu ma, vol. 110:112b.