The Madhyamaka School of Indian Buddhist thought has had tremendous influence in the Buddhist world particularly in Tibet, China and Japan. In the West it has become the subject of intense interest in the fields of comparative religion and philosophy. Many aspects of Madhyamaka thought, however, remain obscure especially during the period when Buddhist thought was first introduced to Tibet. frlanagarbha on the Two Truths is a concise and lucid introduction to the issues and personalities that dominated Indian Madhyamaka thought on the eve of its introduction to Tibet. As an example of the influential but little-known Svatantrika branch of the Madhyamaka School, Jnanagarbha's work shows quite vividly how the commitment to reason in the search for ultimate truth shaped not only the dialogue between Madhyamaka thinkers and members of other Buddhist schools, but also the evolution of the Madhyamaka tradition itself.
David Eckel has translated Jnanagarbha's text in its entirety and provided an introduction that situates the text clearly in its historical and philosophical context. Extensive notes, a transliterated version of the Tibetan translation and a reproduction of the original Tibetan block-prints make this volume useful to scholars as well as to the interested general reader.
This study of the philosopher Jnanagarbha grows out of my earlier work on the formation of the Svatantrika Madhyamaka tradition in the works of Bhavaviveka. Jnanagarbha is Bhavaviveka's heir and helps carry Bhavaviveka's philosophical innovations into the period when Madhyamaka thought first took root in Tibet. For some-one whose focus is Tibetan Buddhism, this book could be understood as a study of one formative element in the tradition that eventually came to dominate the intellectual life of Tibet. But it would be wrong to think of jnanagarbha and his Madhyamika contemporaries only as a means to understand the origin of the Tibetan tradition. As I have studied the works of Jnanagarbha and come to appreciate his subtle combination of different points of view, drawn from sources as different as Nagarjuna, Bhavaviveka, Candrakirti, the Yogacara, and the Buddhist logicians, I have come to think of Janagarbha's thought as an example of something very dynamic in the Madhyamaka tradition. Jnanagarbha's work on the two truths records his struggle to adapt Madhyamaka thought to the philosophical innovations of his contemporaries without losing what is distinctive in his own past. What began as a study of one small part of a larger tradition has become a study of the flexibility and liveliness of the tradition itself. Of all the forces that modified and shaped Madhyamaka thought in the period between the time of Bhavaviveka and the time of Atisa, the most important may very well have been the Buddhist logical tradition of Dignaga and Dharmakirti.
In spite of Jnanagarbha's clear identification with the Madhyamaka tradition, the ideas of Dignaga and Dharmakirti permeate his text. A poem attributed to Dharmakirti seems to lament the absence of any worthy successor, but Jnanagarbha shows that Dharmakirti's influence extended well beyond the narrow limits of his own lineage. One of the most important challenges still ahead in the study of Indian Buddhist philosophy is to make clear just how far Dharmakirti’s influence actually extended. The relationships between Buddhist thinkers in the eighth century and beyond are much more complicated than our textbook categories suggest. Jnanagarbha gives a good picture of the way the boundary between schools was crossed, but he also shows how much work lies ahead before we can really claim to understand the evolution of Buddhist thought in its most mature phase in India.
In the course of a study such as this, one incurs many debts. It is a great pleasure finally to acknowledge the help of those who have made this project possible. My pilgrimage through Svatantrika literature has brought me into contact with a number of Tibetan scholars who speak in eloquent ways for the living Madhyamaka tradition. Doboom Tulku, Director of Tibet House in Delhi, helped introduce me several years ago to the works of Bhavaviveka. Palden Dragpa, Librarian of Tibet House, and Geshe Lobsang of Sera Je monastery helped me read portions of Jnanagarbha's text. Among Tibetan scholars I am particularly indebted to Tsultrim Gyatso, Abbot of Go-mang, whose restless intelligence and mastery of the Madhyamaka tradition brought many of Jnanagarbha's arguments to life. Donald Lopez of Middlebury College and Christian Lindtner of the University of Copenhagen were kind enough to read early drafts of this book and allow me to benefit from their knowledge of the Svatantrika tradition. Finally, I would like to express my particular gratitude to Professor Masatoshi Nagatomi of Harvard University, who as my advisor and colleague has encouraged my study of the Madhyamaka tradition and made clear, through his own work on Dharmakirti, how much the later Madhyamaka tradition owes to the tradition of Buddhist logic.
**Sample Pages**
Send as free online greeting card
Email a Friend
Statutory Information
Visual Search
Manage Wishlist