The Great Treatise on the Stages of the Path to Enlightenment
(The Great Treatise on the Stages of the Path to Enlighten...)
The Great Treatise on the Stages of the Path to Enlightenment (Tib. Lam rim chen mo) is one of the brightest jewels in the world’s treasury of sacred literature. The author, Tsong-kha-pa, completed it in 1402, and it soon became one of the most renowned works of spiritual practice and philosophy in the world of Tibetan Buddhism.
The Great Exposition of Secret Mantra, Volume 1: Tantra in Tibet (Revised Edition)
(His Holiness the Dalai Lama illuminates the highly practi...)
His Holiness the Dalai Lama illuminates the highly practical and compassionate use of Tantra for spiritual development in this important classic work. This is the first book in a series presenting The Great Exposition of Secret Mantra. The other two books are Deity Yoga and Yoga Tantra. Tantra in Tibet consists of three parts published under the auspices of the Dalai Lama. "Essence of Tantra" by the Dalai Lama discusses tantra for practice, refuge, the three paths, greatness of mantra, clear light, and initiation. "The Great Exposition of Secret Mantra--Part 1" by Tsongkhapa is one of the principal classic texts on tantra. It presents the main features common to all the Buddhist tantra systems as well as the differences between sutra and tantra. In this volume Tsongkhapa covers paths to Buddhahood, vajra vehicle, deity yoga, and method in the four tantras. "Supplement" by Jeffrey Hopkins discusses the meaning of emptiness, transformation, and the purpose of the four tantras.
The Great Exposition of Secret Mantra, Volume 2: Deity Yoga
(His Holiness the Dalai Lama illuminates the highly practi...)
His Holiness the Dalai Lama illuminates the highly practical and compassionate use of Tantra for spiritual development in this important classic work. Deity Yoga is the second volume in The Great Exposition of Secret Mantra series in which the Dalai Lama offers illuminating commentary on Tsongkhapa’s seminal text on Buddhist tantra. It is preceded by Volume 1: Tantra in Tibet and followed by Volume 3: Yoga Tantra. This revised work describes the profound process of meditation in Action (kriyā) and Performance (caryā) Tantras. Invaluable for anyone who is practicing or is interested in Buddhist tantra, this volume includes a lucid exposition of the meditative techniques of deity yoga from H.H. the Dalai Lama; the second and third chapters of the classic Great Exposition of Secret Mantra text; and a supplement by Jeffrey Hopkins outlining the structure of Action Tantra practices as well as the need for the development of special yogic powers.
Je Tsongkhapa, whose ordained name was Losang Dragpa, was a great 14th century Tibetan Buddhist Master who promoted and developed the Kadampa Buddhism that Atisha had introduced three centuries earlier.
Background
Tsongkhapa Lobzang Drakpa (tsong kha pa blo bzang grags pa) was born in the Tsongkha (tsong kha) region of Amdo in 1357. His mother was Shingza Acho (shing bza' a chos, d.u.) and his father was Lubum Ge (klu 'bum dge, d.u.). Among the numerous miraculous incidents and omens believed to have taken place surrounding his birth, perhaps the most famous is that of a drop of blood from Tsongkhapa's umbilical cord that is said to have fallen on to the ground, giving rise to a sandalwood tree whose leaves bore symbols related to the Simhanāda manifestation of the bodhisattva Mañjuśrī, a deity with whom Tsongkhapa would later be identified. His mother later built a stupa on this spot and over time further structures and temples were added. Today the location of Tsongkhapa's birth is marked by Kumbum Monastery (sku 'bum dgon pa), founded in 1583 by the Third Dalai Lama Sonam Gyatso (ta la'i bla ma 03 bsod nams rgya mtsho, 1543-1588) on the spot of the original stupa.
At the age of three, Tsongkhapa took lay upāsaka vows from the Fourth Karmapa Rolpai Dorje (karma pa 04 rol pa'i rdo rje, 1340-1383) and received the name Kunga Nyingpo (kun dga' snying po). Then at the age of eight he received the novice ordination of a srāmanera, together with the name Lobzang Drakpa (blo bzang grags pa), from the Kadam master Choje Dondrub Rinchen (chos rje don grub rin chen, b. 1309). Dondrub Rinchen, a great practitioner of Vajrabhairava, had been in contact with Tsongkhapa and his family since the boy's birth, and is said to have received prophecies of the child's importance from his own teacher and deity.
Education
Tsongkhapa spent much of his youth studying with Dondrub Rinchen; he is said to have been so sharp that he easily understood and memorized even the most complicated texts. From Dondrub Rinchen he received numerous tantric empowerments, most importantly that of Vajrabhairava. According to his secret biography, at the age of seven he experienced visions of Atisha Dīpaṃkara (c.982-1054) and the deity Vajrapāṇi. Communication with various historical masters and deities would eventually become particularly central in the development of Tsongkhapa's understanding of Buddhism.
At the age of sixteen Lobzang Drakpa travelled to U-Tsang, never to return to his homeland. In U-Tsang he studied with more than fifty different Buddhist scholars. As noted in his autobiography, Fulfilled Aims (rtogs brjod mdun legs ma), he studied at length texts and topics such the “Five Treatises of Maitreya” (byams chos sde lnga) and related works by Asaṅga (4th century), the Abhidharma of Vasubhandu (4th century), the logic systems of Dignāga and Dharmakīrti (6th century) and the Madhyamaka system of Nāgārjuna (c.150-250) and his followers such as Aryadeva (3rd century). Following figures such as Sakya Paṇḍita Kunga Gyeltsen (sa skya paN Di ta kun dga' rgyal mtshan, 1182-1251) and Buton Rinchen Drub (bu ston rin chen grub, 1290-1364), it was Tsongkhapa's emphasis on philosophical study and logic that would eventually become some of the defining characteristics of the Geluk tradition.
Tsongkhapa's studies were mainly focused on the existing scholarly currents at that time, of which the most important were the Sakya tradition and the tradition of Sangpu (gsang phu), an important Kadam monastery. One of Tsongkhapa's main teachers was the Sakya master Rendawa Zhonnu Lodro (red mda ba gzhon nu blo gros, 1349-1412) who was a strong proponent of the Prāsaṅgika view of Madhyamaka. Tsongkhapa's devotion to Rendawa was so great that he composed the famous Miktsema (dmigs brtse ma) verse in praise of him. According to tradition, Rendawa felt that the verse was more applicable and descriptive of Tsongkhapa's qualities and thus offered the prayer back to him. Today this verse is still considered by the Geluk faithful as the principal method to invoke the blessings of Tsongkhapa.
In addition to Dondrub Rinchen, some of Tsongkhapa's main tantric gurus included Chennga Sonam Gyeltsen (spyan snga bsod nams rgyal mtshan, 1378-1466), a Drigung lama from whom he received the Six Dharmas of Nāropa (na ro'i chos drug); the Jonang lama Chokle Namgyel (phyogs las rnam rgyal, 1306-1386), from whom he received the Kālacakra cycle; and the Sakya master Rinchen Dorje (rin chen rdo rje, d.u.), from whom he received the Lamdre teachings (lam 'bras) and the Hevajra Tantra.
Perhaps most importantly, he received the Guhyasamāja cycle from Khyungpo Lepa Zhonnu Sonam (khyung po lhas pa gzhon nu bsod nams, d.u.) a student of Buton Rinchen Drub, and the cycle of the body maṇḍala (lus dkyil) of Heruka Cakrasaṃvara from the Sakya master Lama Dampa Sonam Gyeltsen Pelzangpo (bla ma dam pa bsod nams rgyal mtshan dpal bzang po, 1312-1375). Tsongkhapa's studies on tantra were not limited to the anuttarayoga tantras; he extensively studied the kriyā, caryā and yoga tantras as well, noting the importance of a gradual approach to the Vajrayāna in his brief autobiography. Furthermore, although it would not become a doctrine of the later Geluk tradition, Tsongkhapa also studied the Dzogchen teachings with Lodrak Drubchen Namkha Gyeltsen (lho brag grub chen nam mkha' rgyal mtshan, 1326-1401).
Career
Through his studies Tsongkhapa's understanding of Madhyamaka philosophy became more concrete and experiential. By his early twenties he had begun composing his most important early work, The Golden Garland (legs bshad gser phreng), which deals with Prajñāpāramitā. Tsongkhapa would continue to write throughout his life, producing an eighteen volume collection of texts.
Although Tsongkhapa is credited with being the author of his writings, it is believed that many were composed through the instruction and inspiration of deities that he saw in visions, particularly Mañjuśrī, as described in his secret biography. Tsongkhapa is said to have initially relied on his teachers to communicate with various deities on his behalf. His Nyingma teacher Namkha Gyeltsen, for example, was believed to be able to communicate with Vajrapāṇi and to have acted as an intermediary between the deity and Tsongkhapa. Later in his life Tsongkhapa was interested in travelling to India but was dissuaded to do so by Vajrapāṇi through this medium.
In the same way Tsongkhapa initially relied on his teacher Umapa Pawo Dorje (dbu ma pa dpa' bo rdo rje, d.u.), to act as an intermediary with Mañjuśrī. Tsongkhapa had met this Kagyu lama when he was thirty-three. By this time Tsongkhapa had completed his work on The Golden Garland and was, with Pawo Dorje, studying Candrakīrti's (seventh century) Madhyamakāvatāra. Pawo Dorje and Tsongkhapa undertook a retreat together during this period and Tsongkhapa is said to have posed numerous questions to Mañjuśrī through Pawo Dorje. Eventually, however, Tsongkhapa himself began to experience visions and was able to communicate with Mañjuśrī directly, receiving instructions and tantric empowerments, most importantly those related to Mañjuśrī and Vajrabhairava. Over the course of his life Tsongkhapa continued to receive visions of Mañjuśrī as well as a host of other deities and masters such as Asaṅga and Nāgārjuna. Although Tsongkhapa is widely regarded as being a manifestation of Mañjuśrī, the nature of his visions has nevertheless been contested by some non-Geluk masters, especially the Sakya scholar Gorampa Sonam Sengge (go rams pa bsod nams seng ge, 1429-1489), who was critical of Tsongkhapa and his approach to Madhyamaka.
Apart from a short period of teaching, Tsongkhapa continued to engage in intensive retreats. He and a community of eight disciples began a long retreat at Chadrel (bya bral) Hermitage in 1392, moving to Olkha Cholung ('ol kha chos lung) several years later. During this retreat they famously completed extensive preliminary practices, for example completing 3,500,000 prostrations in conjunction with the practice of the Triskandhadharmasutra.
Following the retreat, Tsongkhapa travelled to Dzingji ('dzing ji) where he performed his first out of four great deeds: the restoration of a famous statue of Maitreya. During this period, in 1398, Tsongkhapa is believed to have attained realization and a perfect understanding of the Madhyamaka due to a vision of an assembly of the great Indian Prāsaṅgika masters. Immediately following this experience he composed the Praise to Dependent Origination (rten 'brel bstod pa). This experience began a new epoch in Tsongkhapa's life, one which shifted more towards composing and teaching to others what he had discovered. Thus in 1402, at the age of forty-six, while at Reting Monastery (rwa sgreng), he composed the Lamrim Chenmo (lam rim chen mo), known in English as The Great Treatise on the Stages of the Path to Enlightenment, undoubtedly his most famous work. Based on Atisha Dīpaṃkara's Bodhipathapradīpa, it described in detail the gradual path to enlightenment from the perspective of the Sutrayāna. Echoing the doubt the Buddha felt after his Enlightenment that people would understand his teaching, it is said that Tsongkhapa was initially disheartened by the thought that most readers would be unable to comprehend his explanations of emptiness which form the latter part of the work. A vision of Mañjuśrī, however, inspired Tsongkhapa to complete the composition.
In 1402 Tsongkhapa performed his second great deed. While staying at Namtsedeng (rnam rtsed ldeng) during the rainy season with his teacher Rendawa and Kyabchok Pelzangpo (skyabs mchog dpal bzang po, d.u.), he gave a detailed commentary on the Vinaya to a large assembly of monks. Apart from his emphasis on study, Tsongkhapa is perhaps best known for the importance he places on the monastic discipline of the Vinaya.
Following the composition of the Lamrim Chenmo he composed several other works around 1407 and 1408, specifically his commentary on Nāgārjuna's Fundamental Verses on the Middle Way (Mūlamadhyamakakārikā) called The Ocean of Reasoning (rigs pa'i rgya mtsho) and The Essence of Eloquence (legs bshad snying po). In 1415 he composed the Lamrim Dring (lam rim 'bring), known in English as The Medium-Length Treatise on the Stages of the Path to Enlightenment, which is a condensed version of the Lamrim Chenmo.
Tsongkhapa was a prolific author of tantric literature. As a companion volume to the Lamrim Chenmo, Tsongkhapa wrote the Ngakrim Chenmo (sngags rim chen mo), The Great Treatise on the Tantric Stages of the Path to Enlightenment, in 1405, covering all the four classes of tantra according to the sarma traditions, with a detailed explanation of the two stages of anuttarayoga tantra. Other important tantric works include his works on Guhyasamāja, especially his 1401 Commentary on the Vajrajñānasamuccayanāma Tantra (ye shes rdo rje kun las btus pa zhes bya ba'i rgyud) and the 1411 Exposition of the Five Stages of Guhyasamāja (gsang 'dus rim lnga gsal sgron). Texts on the Guhyasamāja Tantra feature prominently in Tsongkhapa's collected works, making up the majority of his eighteen volumes of writings.
By this time Tsongkhapa's fame as a great scholar and realized practitioner had grown all over Tibet and even China. In 1408 the Yongle Emperor (r. 1402-1424) of the Chinese Ming Dynasty sent an invitation to Tsongkhapa to visit his court and capital in Nanjing. Tsongkhapa refused, and a second invitation was sent in 1413. Although Tsongkhapa again refused he delegated his student Shakya Yeshes (shakya ye shes, 1354-1435) to go in his stead. Shakya Yeshe had a successful trip to China, receiving his title of Jamchen Choje (byams chen chos rje) from the emperor. The materials he received as offerings enabled him to establish Sera Monastery in 1419. Following the death of the Yongle Emperor in 1424, Shakya Yeshe visited the Xuande Emperor's (r. 1425-1435) new capital of Beijing. Through these visits the first links between Tsongkhapa's tradition and the emperors of China were established and would last until the fall of the Manchu Qing Dynasty in 1911.
In 1409 Tsongkhapa instituted the Monlam Chenmo (smon lam chen mo), or Great Prayer Festival, in Lhasa, which is celebrated around the time of the Tibetan New Year, Losar (lo gsar). This celebration is traditionally centered on the Jokhang Temple in Lhasa and is counted as being Tsongkhapa's third great deed. At this time he also offered jeweled ornaments and a crown to the statue of the Jowo Śākyamuni, the most sacred statue in the Jokhang and the whole of Tibet. By offering these ornaments the statue was transformed from being a nirmanakāya representation of the Buddha Śākyamuni to one representing his sambhogakāya manifestation.
At his students' request Tsongkhapa established a monastery which was consecrated in 1410, the year following the inauguration of the Monlam Chenmo. The monastery was given the name of Ganden (dga' ldan), the Tibetan translation of Tuṣita, the pure land of the future buddha Maitreya. The monastery would eventually become the largest monastery in Tibet, perhaps the world, and is considered the principal monastery of the Geluk tradition. It was Tsongkhapa's wish to construct three-dimensional representations of the maṇḍalas of his main three anuttarayoga tantra deities: Guhyasamāja, Vajrabhairava and Cakrasaṃvara. Temples for these constructions were completed in 1415 and the maṇḍalas and deities were installed in 1417. These acts are counted as Tsongkhapa's fourth great deed. He is counted as the first throne-holder of Ganden, or Ganden Tripa (dga' ldan khri pa), a title held by successive abbots of the monastery.
Tsongkhapa died in 1419 at Ganden Monastery, the year after he completed his composition of The Elucidation of the Thought (dbu ma dgongs pa rab gsal) in 1418. He was 62 years old, and is believed to have attained enlightenment through yogic practices during the death process, attaining the illusory body (sgyu lus). His body was entombed inside a jeweled stupa at Ganden. Tsongkhapa's death is commemorated with the annual festival of Ganden Ngacho (dga' ldan lnga mchod), which translates as "The Ganden Offering of the Twenty-Fifth", during which devotees light butter lamps on their roofs and windowsills. Tsongkhapa designated Gyeltsabje Darma Rinchen (rgyal tshab rje dar ma rin chen, 1364-1432) as his successor, who in turn appointed Khedrubje Gelek Pelzang (mkhas grub rje dge legs dpal bzang, 1385–1438) as the next throne-holder of Ganden.
(His Holiness the Dalai Lama illuminates the highly practi...)
Religion
Tsongkhapa was acquainted with all Tibetan Buddhist traditions of his time, and received lineages transmitted in the major schools. His main source of inspiration was the Kadam school, the legacy of Atiśa. Tsongkhapa received two of the three main Kadampa lineages (the Lam-Rim lineage, and the oral guideline lineage) from the Nyingma Lama, Lhodrag Namka-gyeltsen; and the third main Kadampa lineage (the lineage of textual transmission) from the Kagyu teacher Lama Umapa.
Views
Tsongkhapa first sets forth this mature philosophy linking dependent origination and emptiness in a special section at the end of his Great Exposition. There, in the context of an investigation into the end-product of an authentic, intellectual investigation into the truly real (Sk. tattva, Tib. de kho na), and into the way things finally are at their deepest level (Sk. tathatā, Tib. de bzhin nyid),[2] he says you have to identify the object of negation (Tib. dgag bya), i.e., the last false projection to appear as reality, by avoiding two errors: going too far (Tib. khyab che ba) and not going far enough (Tib. khyab chung ba).
That his project does not presuppose a privileged, soul-like, state of consciousness that surveys and categorizes phenomena is evident from his assertion that these two errors originate in a latent psychological tendency in philosophers: first, to hold on to vestiges of truth (reality) where there is in fact an absence of it, and second, to fall back on some version of truth (reality) in ordinary appearance after failing to avoid nihilism in a futile quest for meaning.
In his monograph Essence of Eloquence, Tsongkhapa employs a hermeneutics that treats language and knowledge as equally semiotic in nature. This is consistent with Tsongkhapa's view that any intellectual act is itself utterly devoid of any essential reality, yet functions on a conventional level through the natural workings of dependent origination (Sk. dharmatā). This view allows him to conclude that Dignāga and Dharmakīrti's Logico-epistemological school is equivalent to Asaṅga's Yogācāra school insofar as the former school asserts a specific mark, seen by direct sense perception, that is necessary in order to retain the reality of the conventional world. Tsongkhapa takes the strong position that no datum that appears to (or is there but unknown to) thought or sense perception, has any essential reality. All are, equally, simply labeled by thought construction (Tib. rtog pas btags tsam). Only convention makes the actual sense-faculties, for example, real, and success or failure experienced in a dream, for example, false. This dependent origination (between a label and what is labeled) precludes the essential existence implicit in the Epistemologist's sva-lakṣaṇa.
Tsongkhapa's strong rejection of Yogācāra idealism leads him to assert the existence of external objects (the third point). His (discredited) Yogācāra school, based on either the works of Asaṅga or the Epistemologists, explains the absence of subject-object bifurcation as non-dual with thought or mind (Sk. citta). Realizing this in a non-conceptual, meditational state constitutes a liberating vision. Ultimately, therefore, external objects are projections of a deluded mind. Tsongkhapa rejects this, though he suggests only those who have understood the emptiness of inherent existence through reflecting on the natural workings of dependent origination can set it aside.
From the perspective of ordinary convention there are external objects, so it is sufficient, on that level, to assert that they are there.
Tsongkhapa does not accept svātantra (“autonomous”) reasoning (the fourth point). He asserts that it is enough, when proving that any given subject is empty of intrinsic existence, to lead the interlocutor, through reasoning, to the unwelcome consequences (prasaṅga) in their own untenable position; it is not necessary to demonstrate the thesis based on reasoning that presupposes any sort of intrinsic (=autonomous) existence. This gives Tsongkhapa's philosophy its name *Prāsaṅgika-madhyamaka, i.e., a philosophy of a middle way (between nihilism and eternalism) arrived at through demonstrating the unwelcome consequences (in any given position that presupposes intrinsic existence).
In the context of this assertion, Tsongkhapa offers a distinctive explanation of the well-known Nayāyika objection to Nāgārjuna's philosophy, namely, if the statements he uses to prove his thesis are themselves without any final intrinsic reality, they will be ineffective as proofs. Tsongkhapa says *Prāsaṅgika-madhyamakas do not simply find faults in all positions and reject all positions as their own. They only deny any thesis that presupposes an intrinsic existence. They do hold a specific thesis, to wit, that all phenomena lack an intrinsic existence. They use reasoning and logic that lacks any essential reality to establish this thesis. Such reasoning derives its efficacity on a conventional level through the natural workings of dependent origination. This is one of the most contentious assertions of Tsongkhapa.
Tsongkhapa's rejection of any form of self-referential consciousness (Sk. sva-saṃvitti, sva-saṃvedana) (the fifth point) is in essence a rejection of Śāntarakṣita's position that such self-referential or reflexive awareness is necessary to explain the self-evidential nature of consciousness, and to explain the privileged access the conscious person has to their own consciousness as immediate and veridical (Garfield 2006b).[3] At issue is the status of the knowing subject engaged in the intellectual pursuit of the truly real. Tsongkhapa holds that such a knowing subject has no essential reality at all.
Such a position requires of Tsongkhapa an explanation of memory. His solution is to deny that when you remember seeing object X you also remember the conscious act of seeing it. (Were you to do so, there would have to be an aspect of the earlier consciousness of the object that was equally conscious of itself, i.e., self-referential.) Instead, Tsongkhapa argues, memory is simply the earlier consciousness of object X, now designated “past.” When designated past, inexorably (or inferentially, as it were) the presence of a consciousness of the past object X is required to make sense of the present reality.
Tsongkhapa characterizes basic ignorance (Sk. avidyā), the root cause of suffering in Buddhist philosophy, not as a latent tendency, but as an active defiling agency (Sk. kleśāvaraṇa) that projects a reality onto objects that is in fact absent from them. This ignorance affects even sense perception and explains the veridical aspect that is, in fact, just error. The residual impressions left by distortion (literally “perfumings” Sk. vāsanā) explain the mere appearance of things as real. Beyond that, he asserts that habituation to this distortion prevents conventional and ultimate reality from appearing united in an appearing object. This explanation of the psychology of error differs markedly from earlier Tibetan explanations and constitutes the sixth difficult point.
In Tsongkhapa's mature philosophy the Mahāyāna altruistic principle (bodhicitta) is the sole criterion for distinguishing authentic Mahāyāna views and practices from non-Mahāyāna ones. By privileging the principle in this way he is able to assert that any authentic realization of truth is a realization of the way things are, namely, a realization of no sva-bhāva (Sk.) (“own-being, own-nature, intrinsic identity”). For Tsongkhapa, therefore, Hīnayānists (by which he intends followers of the basic Buddhist doctrine of the Four Noble Truths set forth in the earliest scriptures), necessarily have the same authentic knowledge of reality. Were they not to have such knowledge, he argues, they could not have reached the goals they reached (the seventh point).
Finally, Tsongkhapa has a robust explanation of the difference between true and false on the covering or conventional level. He denies any difference between a false object (a dream lottery ticket, for example) and a real one; as appearances, he asserts, both are equally false, only convention decides which is true. All phenomena equally lack truth. In Tsongkhapa's mature philosophy, therefore, all appearance is false––to appear is to appear as being truly what the appearance is of, and the principle of dependent origination precludes such truth from according with the way things actually are.
Tsongkhapa holds that sentences and their content, on the one hand, and minds and what appears to them on the other, function in the same way. Saying (1) of a set of “true” and “false” statements that they are all equally untrue, and (2) saying of unmediated sense-based perception or mistaken ideas that they are equally untrue is to say the same thing. The truth in both is decided by convention, not by something inhering in the true statement (or its content), or the valid perception (or its object). For Tsongkhapa, therefore, since all appearance is false, the Buddha knows, but without any appearance of truth (the eighth difficult point).
Quotations:
Since all living beings are bound by their craving for existence, you must begin by finding the determination to be free.
Even if a bodhisattva investigates the highest wisdom, one is not a proper bodhisattva unless one applies skillful means for the benefit of other sentient beings.
Emptiness is the track on which the centered person moves.
Svatantrikas (like Bhavaviveka) are those Madhyamikas who accept that, at a conventional level, things actually do have intrinsic nature just as they are perceived. To exist at all entails having intrinsic existence. However, since there is nothing that holds up under ultimate analysis, everything is ultimately empty. Emptiness is the lack of ultimate existence.
Whatever depends on causes and conditions
Is empty of intrinsic reality
What excellent instruction could there be
More marvellous than this discovery?
Since objects do not exist through their own nature, they are established as existing through the force of convention.
Personality
Quotes from others about the person
Tsongkhapa describes a procedure for establishing the non-existence of a substantial, abiding essence in either the self or in ‘exterior’ phenomena, such as pots or potatoes. It is essential during this procedure that one does not confuse the non-findability of a substantial, non-relational self with the refutation of the existence of a relative or conventional self – the self as it appears to ordinary cognition and which is subject to the law of cause and effect.
- Patrick Jennings
Though the Sakya had their own teachings on these subjects, Tsongkhapa was coming to realize that he wanted to create something new, not necessarily a school, but at least a new formulation of the Buddhist Path.
- Sam van Schaik
Connections
His mother was Shingza Acho (shing bza' a chos, d.u.) and his father was Lubum Ge (klu 'bum dge, d.u.).