Gyana Paramita: The Perfection of Knowledge

Reflections on Theravada and Mahayana Buddhism

Dr. Amartya Kumar Bhattacharya

BCE (Hons.) ( Jadavpur ), MTech ( Civil ) ( IIT Kharagpur ), PhD ( Civil ) ( IIT Kharagpur ), Cert.MTERM
( AIT Bangkok ), CEng(I), FIE, FACCE(I), FISH, FIWRS, FIPHE, FIAH, FAE, MIGS, MIGS – Kolkata
Chapter, MIGS – Chennai Chapter, MISTE, MAHI, MISCA, MIAHS, MISTAM, MNSFMFP, MIIBE, MICI,
MIEES, MCITP, MISRS, MISRMTT, MAGGS, MCSI, MMBSI
Chairman and Managing Director,
MultiSpectra Consultants,
23, Biplabi Ambika Chakraborty Sarani,
Kolkata – 700029,
West Bengal,
INDIA.
E-mail: dramartyakumar@gmail.com

This article deals with Gyana Paramita ( the Perfection of Knowledge ). In this article, I am striving to present the essence
of Dharma ( Dharma-Dhatu ) in my own way. Although my family has its ancestral roots in Chittagong ( Chattagram – in
Bengali ), Bangladesh and, naturally, follows Theravada Buddhism, I am trying to be as comprehensive as possible in my
exposition of the Dharma. Sanskrit has been used as the default classical language of this article. Pali has also been
extensively used and Chinese, Japanese and Korean have been used, where appropriate. Diacritical marks have been omitted
as some knowledge of Sanskrit and Pali on the part of the reader is assumed.

Buddhism, a major world faith, was founded by Lord Buddha in India over two thousand five hundred years ago. It has
spread peacefully over much of Asia and also to Kalmykia in eastern Europe and has millions of adherents in India, Nepal,
Bhutan, Sri Lanka, China ( including Tibet ), Taiwan, Mongolia, North and South Korea, Japan, Myanmar, Thailand,
Cambodia, Laos, Vietnam and also in Singapore, Malaysia and Indonesia and Russia ( Buryatia and Tuva in Siberia and
Kalmykia in eastern Europe ). The northern extremity of Buddhism in Asia is the Ivolga Monastery in Siberia, Russia. This
article is an exposition of Buddhism and in it, the word “faith” is used as a synonym of the word “religion”. Buddhism is
also called Saddharma ( the true faith ) or Dharma.

The Sanskrit word “Dharma” literally means “Property”. For example, one says that the Dharma of fire is to burn. This
means that the property of fire is to burn. The fire cannot be separated from its capacity to burn. Similarly, the literal
meaning of Dharma ( Dhamma – in Pali, Fa – in Chinese, Ho – in Japanese ) of man is the basic property of man from
which he cannot be separated. This means the spirituality inherent in man.

A major point is in order here. In religion, as in science, whatever can be proved must be accepted as true; conversely,
whatever cannot be proved must be discarded as pure speculation. The sublimity of Buddhism lies in the fact that it has a
very scientific approach. The universe is in a constant state of flux. When I look up at the night sky, I am looking backwards
in time because light has a finite speed however great that speed may be. Moreover, I cannot see the extremities of the
universe and logic tells me that the universe cannot have a spatial extremity. Similarly, the universe cannot have a zero-time
extremity. Modern science recognises time as the fourth dimension in addition to the three spatial dimensions and also
emphasises the variability of everything in the universe with respect to time. Man lives in a space-time framework, that is,
within a temporal-spatial structure. Buddhism presents the correct scientific position that the universe has evolved and that
it functions according to natural laws.

Too well known to be repeated here, the life of Lord Buddha ( 563-483 B.C.E. ) is a story of the life of one of the greatest
human beings who ever lived. His father was King Suddhodana, king of the Shakya kingdom whose capital was at
Kapilavastu ( Kapilavatthu – in Pali ) and His mother was Queen Mayadevi. At the age of twenty-nine, Prince Siddhartha
Gautama ( Prince Siddhattha Gotama – in Pali ) left home and after six years of ceaseless striving and meditation attained
His Nirvana or Enlightenment at Uruvilva ( Uruvela – in Pali ), now called Buddha Gaya. Lord Buddha ( Buddha is
translated as Fo in Chinese and as Butsu in Japanese; hence Daibutsu is Japanese for Great Buddha ) is also called
Shakyamuni Buddha. Followers of the Vajrayana school of Mahayana Buddhism call Him Sarvarthasiddha, and, sometimes
Shakyasimha or Munendra. Lord Buddha is also referred to as Narasimha, a very common Indian devotional appelation, in
the Avatamsaka Sutra, a Mahayana Sutra. I also identify Him as Amitabha ( He who is of Boundless Light ) and Amitayus
( He who is of Immeasurable Life ). He is also identified as Bhaishajyaguru, that is, the compassionate doctor for the ills of
the world. Lord is translated as Bhargava in Sanskrit and Bhagava in Pali.

Named Siddhartha which means “one who has accomplished his task”, by His parents when He was born, Lord Buddha
claimed that He was a human being, pure and simple. He claimed that whatever He had were human qualities. He always
denied that He was divine or that He was divinely-inspired. Yet he was divinity personified. His family name was Gautama.
Lord Buddha referred to Himself as the Tathagata ( literally, One who has come to Truth, that is, One who has discovered
Truth ). The word Tathagata is translated as Ru-lai in Chinese and as Nyorai in Japanese.

The objective of Buddhism is Nirvana ( liberation, Nibbana – in Pali, Gedatsu – in Japanese ) and Bodhi ( Enlightenment,
P'u-ti – in Chinese, Bodai – in Japanese ). The word Buddhi means intellect and the word Bodha means to understand; it is
from these words that the word Bodhi is derived. Who is it that seeks Nirvana, Bodhi, and to understand? It is “I” ( Aham ),
who is writing right now. Understanding sharpens me, refines me, contextualises me, and keeps me on the path to Bodhi and
Nirvana. I shall have an opportunity to delve deeply into the issue of “I” in Buddhism later. Deep understanding ( Anubodha
) is the context of Bodhi, and Nirvana. Rephrasing Nagarjuna, the founder of the Madhyamika school of Mahayana
Buddhism, Shunyata ( emptiness, Sunnata – in Pali, K'ung – in Chinese, Ku – in Japanese ) is the absence of ignorance.
Avidya Paramam Malam ( Avijja Paramam Malam – in Pali, Ignorance is the greatest impurity ) is what Lord Buddha said.
Nagarjuna can be further re-interpreted to give to me the understanding that Nirvana is not only available for a man in
Samsara ( empirical and phenomenal world ) but, as I am immersed in Samsara, it is only possible within it, subject to the
condition that the Arya Ashtanga Marga ( Noble Eightfold Path ) is rigorously followed. The conclusion Nagarjuna reached,
in his seminal work Mula Madhyamaka Karika, is that all things lack a fixed essence ( Swabhava, Sabhava – in Pa li, Zi-
xing – in Chinese ) or a fixed individual character (Swalakshana ) and that is why they are amenable to change. In other
words, change is possible only if entities are devoid or empty ( Shunya ) of Swabhava. The Madhyamika school of
Mahayana Buddhism split into the Prasangika Madhyamika ( as represented by Chandrakirti ) and the Swatantrika
Madhyamika ( as represented by Bhavaviveka ). Buddhism has two main branches, Theravada and Mahayana, the
difference between the two will be explained in due course.

In spite of the difference between Theravada and Mahayana Buddhism in some respects, Buddhism has a very clear
ecumenical core. A recent Buddhist ecumenical declaration authored by me, where the terms are given in Pali, follows. This
Buddhist Ecumenical Declaration is adapted from the one prepared by Venerable Walpola Sri Rahula in 1981.

1. Whatever our sects, denominations or systems, as Buddhists we all accept the Buddha as our Master who gave us the
Teaching.
2. We all take refuge in the Triple Jewel: the Buddha, our Teacher; the Dhamma, his teaching; and the Sangha, the
Community of holy ones. In other words, we take refuge in the Teacher, the Teaching and the Taught.
3. We do not believe that this world is created and ruled by a god at his will.
4. Following the example of the Buddha, our Teacher, who is embodiment of Great Compassion (mahakaruna) and Great
Wisdom (mahapanna), we consider that the purpose of life is to develop compassion for all living beings without
discrimination and to work for their good, happiness and peace and to develop wisdom leading to the realisation of Ultimate
Truth.
5. We accept the Four Noble Truths taught by the Buddha, namely, Dukkha, the fact that our existence in this world is in
predicament, is impermanent, imperfect, unsatisfactory, full of conflict; Samudaya, the fact that this state of affairs is due to
our egoistic selfishness based on the false idea of self; Nirodha, the fact that there is definitely the possibility of deliverance,
liberation, freedom from this predicament by the total eradication of the egoistic selfishness; and Magga, the fact that this
liberation can be achieved through the Middle Path which is eight-fold, leading to the perfection of ethical conduct (sila),
mental discipline (samadhi) and wisdom (panna).
6. We accept the universal law of cause and effect taught in the Patichchasamuppada (Conditioned Genesis or Dependent
Origination) and accordingly we accept that everything is relative, interdependent and interrelated and nothing is absolute,
permanent and everlasting in this universe.
7. We understand, according to the teaching of the Buddha, that all conditioned things (sankhara) are impermanent
(anichcha) and imperfect and unsatisfactory (dukkha) and all conditioned and unconditioned things (dhamma) are without
self (anatta).
8. We accept the Thirty-seven Qualities conducive to Enlightenment (bodhipakkhiyadhamma) as different aspects of the
Path taught by the Buddha leading to Enlightenment, namely:
Four Forms of Presence of Mindfulness (satipatthana);
Four Right Efforts (sammappadhana);
Four Bases of Supernatural Powers (iddhipada);
Five Faculties (indriya: saddha, viriya, sati, samadhi, panna);
Five Powers (bala, same five qualities as above);
Seven Factors of Enlightenment (bojjhanga);
Eight-fold Noble Path (ariyamagga).
9. We admit that in different countries there are differences with regard to the ways of life of Buddhist monks, popular
Buddhist beliefs and practices, rites and rituals, ceremonies, customs and habits. These external forms and expressions
should not be confused with the essential teachings of the Buddha.

Man's quest for an end to his suffering ( Duhkha, Dukkha – in Pali ) has led him into an exploration of his inner self ( Wo –
in Chinese ), its working and its dysfunctional behaviour under certain circumstances. Under such conditions,a radical shift
in consciousness, perception and attitude is the only succour for a tormented mind ( Chitta, Manas, Hsin or Xin – in
Chinese, Kokoro – in Japanese ). This process, involving the destruction of suffering, is based on the Four Noble Truths
( Chaturaryasatya, Chattari Aryasachchani – in Pali ) enunciated by Lord Buddha which are as follows:
1. Life contains suffering. ( Duhkha-Aryasatya, Dukkha-Aryasachcha – in Pali )
2. Suffering has a cause, and the cause can be known. ( Duhkha Samudaya-Aryasatya, Dukkha Samudaya-
Aryasachcha – in Pali )
3. Suffering can be brought to an end. ( Duhkha Nirodha-Aryasatya, Dukkha Nirodha-Aryasachcha – in Pali )
4. The path to end suffering has eight parts. ( Marga-Aryasatya, Magga-Aryasachcha – in Pali )

Lord Buddha also laid out the Noble Eightfold Path ( Arya Ashtanga Marga, Arya Atthangika Magga – in Pa li ). The Noble
Eightfold Path is given below:
 Right view ( Samyak Dristi, Samma Ditthi – in Pali)
 Right intention ( Samyak Sankalpa, Samma Sankappa – in Pali) )
 Right speech ( Samyak Vakya, Samma Vacha – in Pali) )
 Right action ( Samyak Karma, Samma Kammanta – in Pali) )
 Right livelihood ( Samyak Jivika, Samma Ajiva – in Pali) )
 Right effort ( Samyak Vyayama, Samma Vayama – in Pali) )
 Right mindfulness ( Samyak Smriti, Samma Sati – in Pali) )
 Right concentration ( Samyak Samadhi, Samma Samadhi – in Pali) )

This Path is also known as The Middle Path ( Madhyama Pratipada, Majjhima Patipada – in Pa li ) because it is neither too
easy nor too difficult. The first five parts of the Path involve maintaining a lifestyle full of virtue ( Shila, Sila – in Pali )
while the last three pertain to the practice ( Patipatti – in Pali ) of meditation. The Path is called The Way ( Tao – in Chinese,
Do, Michi – in Japanese ) in the Far East. The practice of meditation lies at the heart of the spiritual practice of Dharmic
( spiritual ) people. To be a Buddhist means to distinguish between Buddhist and non-Buddhist acts, between ignorance and
Enlightenment, between Samsara and Nirvana. Pancha Shila is for householders; Ashta Shila is for householders practising
Brahmacharya, that is celibacy; and Dasha Shila is for monks.

Lord Buddha expoused Anatmata or Nairatmya ( Anatta – in Pali, Muga – in Japanese ). The Sanskrit word “Atman”, the
Pali word “Atta” and the Chinese word “Shen” mean Soul. In its most fundamental sense, Nairatmya implies selflessness
which has its external manifestion in selfless action in order to benefit others. The wisdom gained by experience ( Bhavana-
maya Pragya, Bhavana-maya Panna – in Pali ) is that Atman is not found even in the deepest meditative experience, that is,
during Samadhi. Further, subscription to a belief in Atman resuls in egoism ( Ahamkara ) and attachment towards mundane
things ( Mamakara ). Lord Buddha's first sermon, at Rishipatana ( Isipatana – in Pali ) near Varanasi, is called the
Dharmachakrapravartana Sutra ( Dhammachakkappavattana Sutta – in Pali ) and His second sermon ( Sutra, Sutta – in Pali,
Ching – in Chinese, Kyo – in Japanese, Gyong – in Korean ), delivered five days later, also at Rishipatana ( modern Sarnath
), is called the Anatmalakshana Sutra ( Anattalakkhana Sutta – in Pali ). Lord Buddha said, in the beginning of the
Anatmalakshana Sutra, “Rupam Anatma, Vedana Anatma, Sangya Anatma, Samskara Anatma, Vigyana Anatma” ( Rupam
Anatta, Vedana Anatta, Sanna Anatta, Sankhara Anatta, Vinnana Anatta – in Pali, Material Form is not the Soul, Sensation is
not the Soul, Perception is not the Soul, Pre-disposition is not the Soul, Consciousness is not the Soul.). In the course of yet
another sermon, at Shravasti, Lord Buddha said “ There is an unborn, unchanging, uncreated, and unconditioned. If there
were not, this that which is unborn, unchanging, uncreated, and unconditioned, there could not be any escape from what is
born, changing, created, and conditioned. But since there is an unborn, unchanging, uncreated, and unconditioned, there is
an escape from what is born, changing, created and conditioned. ”. With these words, Lord Buddha pointed His finger
towards the Paramartha-Satya ( ultimate truth ), which is Nirvana. At another point, Lord Buddha mentioned that one kind
of desire is desire for existence ( Bhava-Trishna ). In the Dhammapada, it is said that “ Sarva Dharma Anatma. ”, that is all
entities are without own-being. It must be kept in mind that Lord Buddha's attitude was practical and His primary concern
was the salvation of suffering human beings. His silence in response to speculative metaphysical questions indicated His
transcendental spirit; that of rising to a plane above lesser beings.

According to Lord Buddha, man is his own master. “Atta hi attano natho” are the exact words of Lord Buddha. He also said
“Atmadvipa viharatha, atmasharana ananyasharana” meaning “Dwell making yourself your island ( that is refuge ), and not
anyone else as your refuge”. Man is however unaware of this fact and abdicates his responsibility of controlling his future,
even death. This is so because man is, in a deep philosophical sense, deluded ( Mohagrasta ), asleep and unaware of his true
nature. He normally identifies himself with his body, which was born and hence will die, some day. This gives rise to vices,
insecurity and belief in that what is not. Man lives in illusions ( Moha ); the illusion that he will never fall sick, the illusion
that no harm will ever befall him. He also believes that he has relatives and friends and, if he clings onto them tightly
enough, he will one day, after death, go to the nebulous place called heaven. But it is not true. The lacuna in man's thinking
becomes disturbingly clear to him when he finds that he is suffering. When a man suffers, the world seems to collapse
around him. Man needs to be awakened and when this awakening process is complete, man will rise from the ashes of the
world of the senses that he has just burnt to the world of pure consciousness. Buddhism is a journey where a man starts
asleep and ends up awake. In doing so, he sheds aside nothingness to awaken to a single state of Being. The process by
which this takes place is meditation.

Lord Buddha's title means one who is awake. He is the messiah who showed the path to eternity. Lord Buddha gave His
teaching “for the good of many, for the happiness of many, for showing compassion to the world” ( Bahujanahitaya,
Bahujanasukhaya, Lokanukampaya ). He told man that though he is asleep, the capacity to be awakened is in him and also
taught man the path to awakening. But man must walk that path himself, alone. Man must realise that he is always alone,
whether it be high atop the mountains, in the company of his relatives or in the morning crowd in the downtown of a
metropolitan city. A positive attitude to aloneness can develop in man when he can take a mental sword and cleave a
distinction between aloneness and loneliness. Loneliness has a negative connotation in the sense that it implies a craving for
company of other human beings, the exact opposite of the self-sufficiency implied by aloneness. The capacity to tread the
path to Nirvana is already in man, he just has to use it. In the Dharmachakrapravartana Sutra ( Dhammachakkappavattana
Sutta - in Pali ), Lord Buddha said that Nirvana is not subject to grief, defilement ( Klesha, Kilesa – in Pali, Bonno - in
Japanese ), disease ( Vyadhi ), decay ( Jara ), and death ( Mrityu, Marana ). In other words, Nirvana is beyond cause and
effect, that is, it transcends conditioned phenomena. Lord Buddha also said “Nirvanam Paramam Sukham”. Nirvana is
Apratitya-samutpanna and Asamskrita ( unconditioned, Apatichcha-samuppanna and Asankhata – in Pali, Wu-yin – in
Chinese ) and, according to Vasubandhu of the Yogachara ( the practice of Yoga ) school of Mahayana Buddhism, is the
Parinishpanna Swabhava ( true self-nature of Being, Zhen-shi-xing – in Chinese ). It is interesting to note that in the
Lankavatara Sutra, a Mahayana Sutra associated with the Yogachara school, Nirvana is described as the seeing of
everything as it is. Nirvana is a positive Absolute and is Nitya ( without beginning and end, Nicca – in Pali ). Nirvana means
a state of Mukti ( Mutti – in Pali )which means freedom or Vimukti ( Vimutti – in Pali ) which means absolute freedom.
Nirvana also denotes Satya ( Sacca – in Pali ) which means Truth and Shanti ( Santi – in Pali ) which means Peace. A
synonym for Nirvana is Moksha ( liberation, Mokkha – in Pali ). Nirvana is a state of absolute perfection. Shariputra, the
famous historical disciple of Lord Buddha, described Nirvana as the extinction of desire, hatred and illusion. In mystical
language, Nirvana is the experience of standing face-to-face with Reality ( Shi – in Chinese ). Nirvana is equated with
Bodhi and is the Paramartha-Satya. In Mahayana Buddhism, Nirvana is also equated with Tathata ( thusness ) and with the
Dharmakaya of Lord Buddha. Nirvana is sometimes expressed as negative of negative such as the cessation of suffering, of
craving, of aversion, etc. This need not result in any confusion. In Sanskrit, sometimes positive things are expressed as
negatives of negatives as the word “Arogya” which means recuperation from illness and the word “Amrita” which means
immortal. Further, as mathematics proves, negative of negative is always positive. Nirvana is a freeing from the chains of a
false sense of individuality. Nirvana is a state of non-duality ( Advaita or Advaya ); a state where the illusion of a false sense
of “I” ( Parikalpita Swabhava, Fen-bie-xing – in Chinese ) does not exist. Expressed differently, liberation from the illusion
of separateness of the individual Self from the Whole is Nirvana. Freedom is, Nirvana is, Truth is.

According to Buddhism, everything is relative and impermanent ( Anitya, Anicca – in Pali ) in the empirical, conditioned
world. Lord Buddha told Rashtrapala “The world is in continuous flux and is impermanent”. In this context, I can correctly
say that one cannot step twice into the same river because although I may continue to see the same river externally from a
gross point of view, the water molecules I am seeing at a particular location at any moment are different from the water
molecules the moment before and the moment after. One thing disappears, conditioning the appearance of the next in a
series of cause and effect. Everything is in a state of becoming something else the next moment. A wheel cannot be
separated from its movement. There is no static wheel “behind” the wheel in motion. Things change over time. Everything
originates dependent on other factors. That is, all things come into existence as the result ( Phala ) of an interaction of
various causes ( Hetu ). Each entity is Pratitya-samutpanna ( conditioned, Patichcha-samuppanna – in Pali ) as well as
Pratitya-samutpada ( conditioning, Patichcha-samuppada – in Pali ). The Law of Dependent Origination is central to
Buddhism. For example, anger cannot arise by itself without a cause. The five aggregates, Rupa, Vedana, Sangya, Samskara
and Vigyana ( Rupa, Vedana, Sanna, Sankhara and Vinnana - in Pali ), all of which are identified as Anatma ( non-Soul ) by
Lord Buddha in the Anatmalakshana Sutra, are called the Pancha Skandha ( the five aggregates, Pancha Khandha – in Pali ).
Sensations ( Vedana ) of the physical world of forms ( Rupa ) are received by the five physical sense organs ( Indriya ) such
as the nose. The mind feels the mental world. The five physical sense organs and the mind are called the six sensory bases.
Sensations lead to perceptions ( Sangya ), which in turn lead through pre-dispositions ( Samskara ), to consciousness
( Vigyana ). In Theravada Buddhism, the concept of Bhavanga ( stream of thought ) is introduced while in the Yogachara
school of Mahayana Buddhism, the concept of Alaya-Vigyana ( literally, the abode of consciousness, but commonly
translated as store-consciousness ) is introduced. The Alaya-Vigyana ( Ariyashiki – in Japanese ), which maintains the
continuum of consciousness, is the mind; hence this school is also called the Chittamatratavada school. Other names of the
same school are Agamanuyayi Vigyanavada and Vigyaptimatratavada. The Vigyanavada school is further divided into the
Nirakaravadi Vigyanavada ( as represented by Asanga ) and the Sakaravadi Vigyanavada ( as represented by Gyanashri
Mitra ).The fundamental concept of the Yogachara ( Wei Shi – in Chinese, Yuishiki – in Japanese ) school may be expressed
by the proposition that the Parinishpanna Swabhava is realised when man pierces ( Patibheda ) through his Parikalpita
Swabhava and Paratantra Swabhava ( conditioned self-nature, Yi-ta-xing – in Chinese ). The Alaya-Vigyana, as conceived
in Mahayana Buddhism, is a permanent entity. The Alaya-Vigyana contains all impressions of past actions and all future
potentialities. It is also the Tathagatagarbha ( Buddha-Matrix, Ru-lai-zang – in Chinese, Nyoraizo – in Japanese ), the basis
on which a man can become a Buddha. So, latent in every man is a Buddha-like faculty called Buddha-Dhatu ( Buddha-
Nature, Fo-hsing or Fo-xing – in Chinese ). Right meditation leads to spiritual Enlightenment, which is nothing but the full
manifestation of the Buddha-Dhatu ( or Tathagata-Dhatu ) in man. Thus, any man can develop himself through appropriate
practice, that is meditation, and become a Buddha. Anyway, for an average man, the summation of all physical and mental
processes, processes in constant flux, is perceived empirically as “I”. The empirical “I” is ephemeral and impermanent, and
is Samvriti-Satya ( conventional truth ). The empirical "I" is sometimes conceived in Theravada Buddhism as Samskara-
Punja ( Sankhara-Punja - in Pali ). Theravada Buddhism also speaks about Pudgala-Shunyata ( Puggala-Sunnata - in Pali )
which is nothing but the concept of Anatma ( Anatta - in Pali ). Conscious of something, one reacts mentally. The mental
reactions are of two types : craving and aversion. Craving ( Trishna, Tanha – in Pali, Raga, Lobha – in Pali ) and aversion
( Dvesha, Dosa – in Pali ) both lead to suffering; it is self-evident that aversion results in suffering and craving results in
suffering because if the object of craving remains out of reach, there is suffering. Thus, ultimately, whatever is impermanent
is Duhkha or suffering. Trishna Nirodha, Upadana ( clinging ) Nirodha ( With the extinction of craving comes the extinction
of clinging ). The renowned sage Buddhaghosa, the writer of the Visuddhimagga ( Vishuddhi Marga, The Path of
Purification ), has dwelt elaborately on suffering. Taking the lead from Nagarjuna, I posit that Duhkha is transient; it arises
dependent on something else and also decays into extinction. Duhkha is not self-determining; its existence and character are
attributable to factors that condition its origin and subsequent transformation. Coming into existence and dying out of
existence, Duhkha lacks any trace of permanence.Thus, it may be said that Duhkha lacks a Swabhava or Swalakshana and is
characterised by Nihswabhava ( absence of Self-Nature ). Thus Duhkha is empty ( Shunya ). I am, therefore, led to
formulate the proposition: Duhkhameva Shunyam. Because Duhkha is ephemeral, I can expand the Sanskrit sentence to
this: Duhkhameva Anityam evam Shunyam The perception of the emptiness of Duhkha allows one to let go of Duhkha and
thus be released of the hold that Duhkha has on him. This is, of course, intended as a Mahayana Buddhist theoretical
complement to Shamatha and Vipashyana meditation and is in no way a substitute for Shamatha and Vipashyana meditation.
I also hold that the notion of Buddha-Dhatu is a very productive concept. Any meditator's meditation is bound to become
better if he remembers during meditating that he has Buddha-Dhatu in him.

It may be mentioned, at this stage, that practitioners who are extremely advanced spiritually are called by the name Arhat
( Arahant – in Pali, A-han – in Chinese, Arakan, Rakan – in Japanese ) in Theravada Buddhism and Bodhisattva ( Bodhisatta
– in Pali, Bosatsu – in Japanese ), or aspirants to Buddhahood ( Buddhatva, or as is rather more commonly termed Buddhata
) in Mahayana Buddhism. A Bodhisattva is any man who has taken a vow to follow the path to Buddhatva taking all other
sentient beings with him. A monk ( Bhikshu, Bhikkhu – in Pali ) and a lay disciple ( Upasaka ) are both Bodhisattvas. Sattva
means a sentient being. In Mahayana Buddhism, mythological figures such as Avalokiteshwara, Manjushrikumarabhuta ( or
Manjushri ), Kshitigarbha and Samantabhadra are prominent Bodhisattvas. The word “Mahasattva” ( great being ) is often
used in conjunction with the word “Bodhisattva” in the Mahayana Buddhist Sutras. The term “Maha”, in Mahayana
Buddhism, is due to its ideal of an aspirant to Buddhatva, that is, a Bodhisattva, endeavouring to take all sentient beings
along with him on the way to Nirvana. Avalokiteshwara is considered to be a symbol of compassion while
Manjushrikumarabhuta ( or Manjushri ) is considered to be a symbol of wisdom.

The concept of Satyadvaya or two categories of truth, Samvriti-Satya ( Sammuti-Sacca – in Pali ) and Paramartha-Satya
( Paramattha-Sacca – in Pali ), is an essential element of Buddhism. The word “Samvrita” literally means “covered”. The
Mahayana Sutralankara, written by Asanga, says that a Pudgala ( person ) exists in Pragyapti ( designation ) ( this is
Samvriti-Satya ) but not in Dravya ( substance ). Asanga's lead is followed throughout this article where the Samvriti-Satya
of the empirical man is considered in the context of Anatmata or Nairatmya.

In response to questioning by devotees in the kingdom of Kosala as to the importance or unimportance of belief, Lord
Buddha pointed out the distinction between knowing and believing. Believing always connotes a second-hand approach to
Truth; knowing about something through the experience of someone else. Knowing means a first-hand direct knowledge of
Truth and the result of this distinction is that the modicum of doubt that always accompanies belief is absent in knowledge
( Gyana ). Freedom of thought is permitted by Lord Buddha to His devotees so that they can discriminate and find Truth.
Nirvana cannot be had via someone else's knowledge. A contemporary scholar Kazuaki Tanahashi describes an incident in
Japan where a Buddhist monk illustrated to his disciples the power of what might be called “positive emptiness” in the
mind. A void in the mind can be filled with spirituality by virtue of positive thinking. A Korean monk, Kyong Ho, echoed
this feeling when he advised one to accept the anxieties and difficulties of this life. He also advised people to use their will
to bring peace between peoples. This is particularly relevant in the modern world where democracy and egalitarianism are
taken for granted. The great Japanese Zen Buddhist monk Dogen said that Samadhi ( which is a transcendental state of mind
) led to Enlightenment of those who found Enlightenment in India and China. Buddhism also strongly believes in the theory
( Pariyapti, Pariyatti – in Pali ) of Karma ( as you sow, so shall you reap ) and in the concept of rebirth. Lord Buddha said
“Monks, I say that volition is action. Having thought, one acts through body, speech and mind.” ( Chetana 'ham bhikkhave
kammam vadami. Chetayitva kammam karoti kayena vachaya manasa. – in Pali ). Body ( Kaya Vajra ), Speech ( Vak
Vajra )and Mind ( Chitta Vajra ) are called Tri Vajra in a certain school of Mahayana Buddhism ( Vajra can mean both
thunderbolt and diamond ). There are two types of Karma, Kushala Karma ( Kusala Kamma – in Pali ) or good actions and
Akushala Karma or bad actions. Kushala Karma is Dharmic while Akushala Karma is Adharmic. The result of both types of
Karma are called Karma Phala, which correspond to the type of Karma performed.

He searched, He meditated, He found: this aptly summarises the awakening of Lord Buddha. When a man suffers, it is
useless for him to talk of God, or to fast and otherwise to torture his body if his suffering is not reduced by any or all of
these. Lord Buddha realised this fact and after His awakening taught the Four Noble Truths and the Noble Eightfold Path.
Meditation is one form of mental culture ( Bhavana ). In meditation, what is required of man is to effect a radical shift in
consciousness from the finite to the infinite using right concentration. Concentration is called Chittaikagrata in Sanskrit
( Chittekaggata – in Pali ). The concentrated focus is always on the elimination of suffering. The law of cause and effect is
at work here too. If one is deluded, one suffers. If one studies the Four Noble Truths, one sees that man should identify the
cause of suffering and systematically go about destroying it using the Noble Eightfold Path. The result of meditation is
tremendous. One transcends the boundaries of his body; he senses that the entire universe has become his body. He senses
that he has exchanged a weak mind for a strong one. He senses that though he may continue to reside in his mortal body, his
consciousness has become irreversibly altered. He feels himself being pervaded by peace. He becomes awakened;
Prabuddha. Lord Buddha did not give the Dharma for strong wills only; His statements are just as applicable to weaker
minds provided they have the determination to follow Him. He asked for nothing more than courage and promised eternity.

An explanation as to the types of meditation in vogue is in order here. Shamatha ( Samatha – in Pali ) and Vipashyana
( Vipassana – in Pali, Kuan or Guan – in Chinese, Kan – in Japanese ) or Vidarshana ( Pashyana or Darshana means to see
in an ordinary way; Vipashyana or Vidarshana means to see in a special way, that is, with Insight ) meditation are practised
in south Asia and other countries which practice Theravada ( meaning, the way of the Elders ) Buddhism. Lord Buddha
presented the technique of Vipashyana meditation in the Mahasatipatthana Sutta ( Mahasmritipratishthana Sutra ) /
Satipatthana Sutta ( Smritipratishthana Sutra ). Lord Buddha delivered this Sutra in Kammassadhammam near Delhi. The
Mahasatipatthana Sutta is found in the Digha ( Dirgha ) Nikaya and the Satipatthana Sutta is found in the Majjhima
( Madhyama ) Nikaya. Zen Buddhist practice is performed in East Asia, that is, in China, North and South Korea, Taiwan
and Japan, which are among the countries that practice Mahayana ( meaning, the great vehicle ) Buddhism. In fact, Zen is
one of the eight schools of Mahayana Buddhism. Meditation is something that cannot be fully explained in words, it has to
be experienced to be understood completely. Knowing about meditation is one thing; knowing meditation is quite another. A
man can sit alone, cross-legged, in a quiet room in the full lotus posture ( Padmasana or Dhyanasana or Vajraparyankasana )
or, failing that, in the half-lotus posture ( Bhadrasana ) and try to enter into Vipashyana meditation ( the third posture of
sitting is called Sukhasana, literally meaning “the posture that gives happiness” ). If one is unable to start doing meditation
oneself, one should take the help of a Guru ( literally, one who dispels darkness ) who will guide him in the initial stages.
One must sit, preferably, in the lotus posture with one's spine erect. There must be no slumping of the back, the head should
be straight as if suspended by means of a string. Another analogy adopted is that the head should be straight as if bearing the
sky on its top. The hands may be placed in the Bhumisparsha Mudra ( Bhumisparsha gesture ), a Mudra ( Inzo – in Japanese
) in which I find so many statues of Lord Buddha. Bhumisparsha literally means “ touching the ground”. This gesture is also
called Sakshi ( Sanskrit for witness ) Mudra or Bhusparsha Mudra ( the gesture of touching the earth ). Alternatively, a
man's hands may be in the cosmic Mudra with the left hand on top of the right, middle joints of middle fingers together and
the thumbs touching each other. The hands should be held against the body, with the thumbs at about the height of the navel.
This gesture is very popular in East Asia. The Samadhi Mudra consists of the right hand placed on top of the left hand with
the tips of the two thumbs touching each other. Yet another Mudra consists of the hands straight, placed on the knees, and
the thumb and the next finger touching each other with the other fingers straight. This gesture of the hands is called Gyana
Mudra. Other gestures are the Dharmachakra Mudra, Varada Mudra, Abhaya Mudra, Vajrahumkara Mudra and the Samaya
Vajra Mudra. The Dharmachakra Mudra can be seen in the famous Sarnath statue of Lord Buddha. This gesture is also
called the Bodhyangi or Vyakhyana Mudra. The Varada Mudra is the genture of giving boon with the right hand while the
Abhaya Mudra is the gesture of giving protection with the right hand. The Vajrahumkara Mudra, also called the
Trailokyavijaya Mudra, consists of placing both hands crossed over one's chest with the right hand over the left hand and
with both the palms facing the chest. A much less common Mudra is the Samaya Vajra Mudra which consists of the right
thumb touching the right little finger with the middle three fingers of the right hand suggesting the shape of a thunderbolt. A
meditator may also hold a Vajra or a Vishwavajra ( crossed Vajra ) in his right hand - if he does so, he is called Vajradhara
( holder of the Vajra ). After one has sat correctly, he must close his eyes and focus on the inhalation and exhalation of his
breath ( Anapana-smriti or Anapana-sati ). Anapana ( An-pan – in Chinese ) means respiration. There must be no tampering
with the natural respiration, a meditator's job is simply to focus his attention on his nostrils and observe the natural flow of
breath. Respiration is natural, one has no craving or aversion towards it, it is always in the present ( Nitya ) and, since one
breathes from the moment of one's birth to the moment of one's death, it is in fact a convergence of the past, present and
future. Further, it is within the physical framework of the body. Respiration is thus an appropriate object for concentrating
the mind, something that is not too easy. The mind does not usually want to stay in the present moment; it resides either in
the past or in the future. A little effort is needed to prevent the mind from wandering about. This i s called Right Effort. At
this stage, there may be strong distractions in the mind that prevent the mind from concentrating. Sometimes these
distractions appear to be overwhelming. The effort to focus on respiration should be continued in such cases. The key is
never to give up. A learner soon discovers one thing ; meditation is hard work for a beginner. Right Mindfulness, which is
mindfulness of breathing, follows Right Effort immediately. Right Concentration leading to Samadhi ( San-mei – in
Chinese, Sanmai, Zanmai – in Japanese ), which is a transcendental state, follows. It may be described by Sat ( being ), Chit
( consciousness ) and Ananda ( bliss, happiness ). Sometimes, in lifting the mind to Samadhi, hurdles appear in the form of
distractions in the mind. These distractions may be latent feelings of anger, craving, sadness, and so on. The remedy, in such
cases, is to return back to Anapana-sati and try to lift the mind to Samadhi again. Vajropama Samadhi ( Adamantine
Samadhi ) is an expression sometimes used in Mahayana Buddhism as a synonym for Samadhi. Shamatha meditation is an
absorptive meditation whose object is to calm the mind. Vipashyana meditation is an analytical meditation. Shamatha
meditation may be an end in itself or it may be a prelude to Vipashyana meditation. It is also possible to perform Vipashyana
meditation without performing Shamatha meditation first. There are four parts to the practice of Vipashyana meditation.
Kaya anupashyana ( Kayanupassana - in Pali ), Vedana anupashyana ( Vedananupassana - in Pali ), Chitta anupashyana
( Chittanupassana - in Pali ), and Dharma anupashyana ( Dhammanupassana - in Pali ). Anupashyana ( Anupassana - in
Pali ) means to see minutely, that is, to scrutinise Here, Dharma indicates the contents of the mind ( Chaitasika, Chetasika –
in Pali ). Each of the four, Kaya ( body ), Vedana ( sensations ), Chitta ( mind ) and Dharma ( mental contents ), must be
subjected to Anupashyana. The true nature of all four of these reveal themselves to the meditator and he is able to remove
defilement from the innermost recesses of his mind ( Anushaya, Anusaya – in Pali ). Awareness and equanimity ( Upeksha,
Upekkha – in Pali ), together, symbolise Vipashyana meditation. If either part is missing, one cannot attain Enlightenment.
Vipashyana leads to clear insight into the physical and mental structure and thus leads to Bodhi. The complete knowledge of
my physical and mental structure is called Sampragyana ( Sampajanna – in Pali ), if I have it I am called a Sampragya. In
some forms of Mahayana Buddhist meditation, meditation on Lord Buddha ( Buddhanupashyana ) is performed.

Bodhyangas ( Bojjhangas – in Pali ) are factors contributing to Enlightenment. There are seven Bodhyangas: Smriti,
Dharma-Pravichaya, Virya ( courage ), Priti ( rapture and bliss ), Prashiddhi ( deep tranquility and calmness ), Samadhi, and
Upeksha. The Four Sublime States ( Brahmavihara ) are Maitri, Karuna ( compassion ), Mudita and Upeksha. Meditation
entails making a conscious and free choice to withdraw from the affairs of the mundane world to pursue spiritual ends; one
of the objectives being the subsequent re-establishment of contact with the conditioned world as a purer and wiser man. The
decision to meditate is itself an act of freedom. We have, in life, the freedom to pursue an ethical way of living. This
freedom leads us to Bodhi and Nirvana and thus sets us free.

Meditation is a pursuit of liberation, realisation is the end result. Post-realisation, one feels that one had been going about
with his eyes closed and has now suddenly opened them. In the plane of the senses, his external world does not change but
his way of psychologically processing his external world undergoes a drastic change. He becomes more peaceful with
himself and with others. An awakened man, possessing an Enlightened mind ( Bodhichitta ), feels that he is surrounded by
peace at all times ( the process of developing an Enlightened mind is called Bodhichittodpada ). It is important to
understand that nobody tells him this; he feels it himself. He goes about doing his daily activities, but his way of processing
his world has fundamentally altered for the better. He realises that he cannot and need not control all aspects of his external
physical world. He realises that he gains more by letting go. He becomes aware of the non-peaceful moments in his life and
tries to reduce their frequency and intensity. He opts for shifting his consciousness to his mind and becoming aware of his
internal mental processes when waiting, for example, in a traffic jam or while waiting in a queue. He opts for harmony in
his mental processes rather than chaos.

Ordinarily, animal instincts bind a man to the world of the senses. Man lacks the initiative to free himself from them. Rather,
he reposes his faith on some superhuman power whom he tries to propitiate in the hope that he may be rescued from his
troubles. Meditation may also be described as a Tapasya ( a Sanskrit word whose root lies in the Sanskrit word Tapah which
means heat ), a burning of the impurities in the mind.

Zen Buddhism originated in China and is in vogue in East Asia. As mentioned before, it is a school of Mahayana Buddhism.
Mahayana Buddhism was propagated in China by Indian Buddhist monks like Kumarajiva ( 344-413 C.E. ), son of
Kumarayana, who went to China in 401 C.E., and Buddhabhadra ( 359-429 C.E. ), who went to China in 408 C.E., and by
Chinese Buddhist monks who came to India, like Fa-hsien ( or Fa-xian ), who came to India between 399 and 414 C.E., and
Hsuan-tsang ( or Xuan-zang ) ( 600-664 C.E. ), who came to India between 629 and 645 C.E. A lso, Gunabhadra translated
the Lankavatara Sutra into Chinese and Paramartha was another noted translator.

Mahayana Buddhism developed in India a few centuries after the Parinirvana of Lord Buddha. Emperor Kanishka convened
the Fourth Buddhist Council, held probably at Jalandhar, in which the scholar Vasumitra was President and another eminent
scholar Asvaghosha, the author of Buddha Charita, was Vice-President. In this assembly, Buddhists became divided into
Mahayana Buddhists and Theravada Buddhists. The Pali word Thera is derived from the Sanskrit word Sthavira which
means Elder. Theravada Buddhism is the most orthodox form of Buddhism and has preserved the historical teachings of
Lord Buddha in its Pali Canon. The Theravada Sutras ( Suttas - in Pali ) are the earliest available teachings of Lord Buddha,
are in Pali, and are fully historical. The Pali Canon is called the Tripitaka in Sanskrit and the Tipitaka in Pali; Sutra-Pitaka
( Sutta-Pitaka - in Pali ), Vinaya-Pitaka and Abhidharma-Pitaka ( Abhidhamma-Pitaka - in Pali ) forming the three parts of
the Tripitaka. Abhidharma means detailed philosophical discourses. The Sutta-Pitaka has five parts - the Digha Nikaya, the
Majjhima Nikaya, the Khuddaka Nikaya, the Samyutta Nikaya and the Anguttara Nikaya.

Mahayana is a way of Buddhism followed widely across India and northern and eastern Asia. I have written before that in
Mahayana Buddhism, individuals strive to take all others along with them to the ultimate goal of liberation. Mahayana
Buddhism emerged in the context of the development of a different disposition towards Buddhism by some Buddhists; in
terms of concepts relating to the Sangha, the Dharma and Lord Buddha. Firstly, schisms occurred on the level of “Sangha”.
The primary concern of several venerated Buddhist monks was to keep the Dharma and discipline ( Vinaya ) pure. They felt
that this was the only way to sustain Buddhism in the long run. These Buddhist monks became some of the most
sophisticated theoreticians in the Indian intellectual world. Certain other monks wanted the Vinaya to be flexible. The case
of the Mahasanghika monks is the best example to show the conflict between these two viewpoints. These monks had added
ten minor precepts for their group , for example, monks could get, keep and use money. In the Second Buddhist Council,
held at Vaishali, they were called “Papishtha bhikshus” (the sinful monks). Their behaviour was unacceptable from the
viewpoint of the orthodox Buddhists. These monks established their own tradition and called themselves “Mahasanghikas” (
the monks of the Great Sangha ). In this connection, it may be mentioned that there were as many as eighteen early schools
including the Sarvastivadins, the Pragyaptivadins, the Sautantrikas, the Vatsiputriyas, the Sammitiyas, the Dharmaguptakas,
the Lokottaravadins ( an offshoot of the Mahasanghikas who carried the notion of the transcendental nature of Lord Buddha
to the greatest extent among all the early schools ), etc. It would not be out of place to mention that certain typical similes
were employed by some schools as also by a monk like Nagasena who said that a chariot is merely a designation
( Pragyapti, Pannatti - in Pali ) depending on its own parts. The Vatsiputriyas, also called the Pudgalavadins because of their
belief in a Pudgala ( Puggala - in Pali ) as a transmigrating entity, utilised the simile of fire and fuel and the Sautantrikas
utilised the simile of seed and sprout. Nagarjuna's claim that anything that is Pratityasamutpanna is a Pragyapti indicates
that he conceived the meaning of Pragyapti differently from Nagasena.

Fissures also occurred on the level of “Dharma”. Three months before Lord Buddha’s Parinirvana at Kusinagara, He
declared in the Mahaparinirvana Sutra that the monks and the laity would have the Dharma and the Vinaya as their leaders
in the future. However, some Buddhists, mostly the Mahasanghikas, found themselves having no shelter left except the
Dharma. So they searched for the true Dharma. The statement of Lord Buddha, “He who sees the Dharma, sees me; he who
sees me, sees the Dharma”, also supported their quest. If one uses logical arguments to judge this sentence, an interesting
question emerges. How must one see the Dharma so that one also sees Lord Buddha? For some Buddhist scholars, even
today, Dharma is not merely the sermons of Lord Buddha. His life contains more latent implications, for example, the
implications of His silence in certain contexts as in His silence in response to questions by Vacchagotra. Thus, for the
Buddhist scholars alluded to above, Dharma is something more and wider than the speech of Lord Buddha. The sermons are
merely a part of Him, not the totality. When I return back to the context of the emergence of Mahayana Buddhism, I find
that the Buddhists referred to above had shifted the ethical facet of Buddhism to a metaphysical focus. And what they did
was to seek out the truest Dharma; one which also revealed the status of Lord Buddha after His Parinirvana. Simultaneously,
the assumption that Lord Buddha still existed pervaded and caught the faithful minds of Buddhists. Dharma turned out to be
a means to reach the state of Buddhatva. If man realises the ultimate truth of all things, he is sure to free himself from all
types of bondage. To see Dharma is to see the truth of phenomena. When the truth of phenomena is seen, the wisdom of
Lord Buddha is fulfilled within oneself. That is the reason why when one sees the Dharma, he also sees Lord Buddha.
Further, the state of the mind is linked to liberation. The state of liberation is conceived to be the same as the pure mind. A
human mind, that is pure and detached from all types of impurities, is synonymous with the state of liberation. Also, there
were groups that defined “Dharma” as the Ultimate Truth of Lord Buddha. The more these Buddhists investigated His life,
the less they believed that He had gone away. Hence, to see Dharma is to see Lord Buddha’s power penetrating through all
things. These groups also tended to relate Dharma to Lord Buddha’s great compassion ( Mahakaruna ) and felt that to see
Dharma is to see the Buddha-Dhatu within oneself. Mahakaruna is Karuna ( compassion ) combined with Pragya ( wisdom,
Panna – in Pali, Zhi Hui, Pan-jo, Po-jo – in Chinese, Hannya – in Japanese ). Clearly, the most important duty of man is to
live and spend his life in accordance with Lord Buddha’s intention. As His intention was to liberate all sentient beings from
suffering, in order to realise the Buddha-Dhatu within oneself, it is crucial that one has to assist other sentient beings and
take them along on the way to liberation. Pragya is required, in fact it is vital, because different Upaya ( expedient means )
should be deployed to bring different sentient beings on the path to Bodhi. The notion of Bodhisattva sprang up from this
attitude. Bodhisattvas are perfect in Dana ( charity ), Shila, Kshanti ( perseverence, Khanti - in Pali ), Virya ( Viriya - in
Pali ), Dhyana and Pragya. These are called the six perfections ( Paramita, Parami - in Pali ) of a Bodhisattva. Sometimes,
ten perfections ( Dasha Paramita ) are considered ( Maharatnakuta Sutra, Sutra 45, Taisho 310, pages 648 to 650. Translated
into Chinese by Bodhiruchi ) wherein perfection of ingenuity ( Upaya ), power ( Bala ), volition and knowledge ( Gyana )
are added to the usual six perfections. Also, fault-lines occurred on the level of “Buddha”. When the Vinaya and the Dharma
showed fault-lines, the only way out for unenlightened Buddhists was to go back to Lord Buddha as apart from Him, there
is no other refuge. At that time, many Buddhists conceived the existence of Lord Buddha in the transcendental state. The
Saddharma Pundarika Sutra ( or The Lotus Sutra ), a Mahayana Sutra, conceives of a transcendental Lord Buddha. Lord
Buddha had returned to His universal form after His Parinirvana and He still existed. Lord Buddha had Three Bodies
(Trikaya). The first and most fundamental body is called the Cosmic Body ( Dharmakaya, Hosshin – in Japanese ). The
conceptualisation of Lord Buddha's All-Pervading, Eternal, Omniscient, Omnipresent and Radiant Dharmakaya provided
for a more intense and immersive spiritual experience. The nature of the Dharmakaya is called Dharmakaya-Dhatu. When
meditating, the state of Lord Buddha is the Blissful Body ( Sambhogakaya, Hojin – in Japanese ). The third body is the
Constructed Body ( Nirmanakaya, Keshin – in Japanese ), which signifies the historical Lord Buddha. The Nirmanakaya of
Lord Buddha had come and gone under the Will of the Dharmakaya. He was born to fulfil His human functions in leading
human beings to liberation. It is believed that as long as humans do not realise the true Dharma, the anguish of departure
from Lord Buddha takes place and that when the human mind is able to make a distinction between the pure mind and
Klesha, the truism of Buddha-Dhatu becomes clear. In the conception of the Mahasanghikas, the concept of Rupakaya
existed and Rupakaya was later split into Nirmanakaya and Sambhogakaya in Mahayana.

Mahayana Buddhism combines the emotion of devotion ( Shraddha, Saddha – in Pali ) with the wisdom of logical
reasoning. This is the appeal of Mahayana ( Ta-sheng – in Chinese, Daijo – in Japanese ) Buddhism.

The similarities between Theravada and Mahayana Buddhism are as follows:

1. Lord Buddha is the original and historical founder of Buddhism.
2. The Chaturaryasatya, Arya Ashtanga Marga, Pratitya-samutpada and the Twelve Links of Dependent Origination are the
basic foundations of all schools of Buddhism.
3.The training of Shila, Samadhi and Pragya is universal to all schools.
4.The organisation of the Dharma is in three parts, namely Sutra, Vinaya ( Ritsu – in Japanese ) and S hastra ( Lun – in
Chinese, Ron – in Japanese, Lon – in Korean ).
5.The mind over matter concept is universal and the mind is the principal area of training and control.

The differences between Theravada and Mahayana Buddhism are as follows:

Theravada Buddhism Mahayana Buddhism
 India, Sri Lanka, Myanmar, Thailand, India, Nepal, Bhutan, China ( including Tibet ),
Location Laos, Cambodia and parts of South- Taiwan, North and South Korea, Japan, Mongolia,
East Asia Vietnam and parts of South-East Asia

Eight major schools: three practice-based ( Ch'an –

in Chinese or Zen – in Japanese, Pure Land,
Vajrayana ( Chin-kang-ch'eng – in Chinese or
Kongojo – in Japanese ) ); five philosophy-based
Schools One school ( Madhyamika, Yogachara, Yuktanuyayi
Vigyanavada of Dignaga and Dharmakirti, T'ien-t'ai
– in Chinese or Tendai – in Japanese, Avatansaka (
Hua-yen – in Chinese, Kegon – in Japanese or
Hwaom – in Korean ) )

The Tripitaka ( Theravada ) and the Mahayana

Buddhist Scriptures The Tripitaka Sutras ( for example, The Saddharma Pundarika
Sutra or The Lotus Sutra )

Maitreya, Avalokiteshwara, Manjushrikumarabhuta

( or Manjushri ), Kshitigarbha,
Bodhisattvas Maitreya only
Akashagarbha,Samantabhadra, Mahasthamaprapta,
Vajrapani, etc.

Objective of Training Arhat Buddhatva via the path of Bodhisattva

Original Language Pali Sanskrit

Tripitaka is in Pali and teaching in Pali

Language of
is supplemented by teaching in local The scriptures are translated into local languages
Transmission
languages

Historical disciples and many mythological

Lord Buddha's disciples like Subhuti, Mahamati, Avalokiteshwara,
Historical disciples
Disciples Manjushrikumarabhuta ( or Manjushri ),
Samantabhadra, etc.

Heavily influenced by local religious ideas as

Non-Buddhist Mainly pre-Buddhist Indian influences
Mahayana Buddhism was transmitted to new
Influences like concepts of Karma, Sangha, etc.
regions like China, Japan, Mongolia, etc.

Buddha-Dhatu Not taught Emphasised

Rituals Very few, and they are not emphasised Many, owing to local cultural influences.

Some important Mahayana Sutras are listed below :

➢ The Saddharma Pundarika Sutra ( The Lotus Sutra )
➢ The Mahayana Sutralankara
➢ The Avatamsaka Sutra ( Hua-yen Ching – in Chinese, Kegon-kyo – in Japanese )
➢ The Avalokiteshwara Sutra
➢ The Gandavyuha Sutra
➢ The Dashabhumika Sutra
➢ The Vajrachchhedika Pragyaparamita Sutra ( The Diamond Sutra, Chin-kang Ching – in Chinese )
➢ The Pragyaparamita-Hridaya Sutra ( The Heart Sutra )
➢ Ashtasahasrika Pragyaparamita Sutra ( The Sutra on Perfection of Wisdom in Eight Thousand Lines)
➢ Panchavimshatisahasrika Pragyaparamita Sutra ( The Sutra on Perfection of Wisdom in Twenty-Five Thousand
Lines)
➢ Shatasahasrika Pragyaparamita Sutra ( The Sutra on Perfection of Wisdom in One Hundred Thousand Lines)
 ➢ The Pratyutpanna Samadhi Sutra
➢ The Lankavatara Sutra ( Leng-chie-a-ba-tuo-luo-lao Ching – in Chinese )
➢ The Mahayana Brahmajala Sutra
➢ The Shrimala Simhanada Sutra
➢ The Vimalakirti Nirdesha Sutra
➢ The Sandhi Nirmochana Sutra
➢ The Mahayana Mahaparinirvana Sutra, also called the Nirvana Sutra ( Nieh-pan Ching – in Chinese, Nehangyo –
in Japanese )
➢ The Shurangama Sutra ( Leng Yen Ching – in Chinese )
➢ The Ratnakuta Sutra
➢ The Pratimoksha Sutra
➢ The Shalistamba Sutra
➢ The Angulimaliya Sutra
➢ The Amitabha Sutra
➢ The Larger Amitabha Sutra
➢ The Sukhavati-vyuha Sutra
➢ The Longer Sukhavati-vyuha Sutra
➢ The Amitayurdyhana Sutra ( Kuan Wu-liang-shou Fo Ching – in Chinese )

The primary devotional school of Mahayana Buddhism is the Pure Land School of the Far East, where the Sanskrit “Namah
Amitabha Buddha” is translated into the Chinese “Namo Amito Fo” and the Japanese “Namu Amida Butsu”. The practice of
invoking Lord Buddha's name is known as Buddhanusmriti ( Nien Fo – in Chinese, Nenbutsu – in Japanese ). Devotion is
also directed towards the Saddharma Pundarika Sutra ( The Lotus Sutra ) with the invocation “Namo miao fa lien hua
ching” in Chinese and “Namu myoho rengekyo” in Japanese.

A certain school of Mahayana Buddhism conceives of four centres called Chakras located at different levels of the spine
( the spine itself is called Avadhuti in this school ). At the level of the navel is the Nirmana Chakra. At the level of the heart
is the Dharma Chakra. At the level of the neck is the Sambhoga Chakra and at the level of the head is the Mahasukha
Chakra ( Mahasukha means great happiness ). Meditation may also be initiated by focussing on the Nirmana Chakra with
progressive focus on higher Chakras with the last focus being on the Mahasukha Chakra. In addition, while the meditator is
focussing on the Dharma Chakra, he may imagine a five-pronged white thunderbolt ( Vajra ) emitting beams of light on the
Dharma Chakra. At this stage, the meditator imagines himself to be Vajrasattva ( thunderbolt being or diamond being ).
After the last focus on the Mahasukha Chakra, the meditator can perform Shamatha meditation. If he so wishes, the
meditator may conclude his meditation by performing Vipashyana meditation after Shamatha meditation.

Reverting back to Zen Buddhism, we find that although Zen Buddhist experts were found amongst the laity, Zen
Buddhism's greatest geniuses were found in the highly regulated life of the monasteries. Zen Buddhism spread to Korea and
Japan from China. In Japan, circular brushworks called enshos are calligraphic motifs often used in Zen Buddhism.

In Zen Buddhist practice ( the Sanskrit word Dhyana is a synonym of the Pali word Jhana, the Chinese word Ch'an, the
Vietnamese word Thien, the Korean word Son and the Japanese word Zen ), one can take the help of Koans ( Japanese,
Kung-an – in Chinese, Kongan – in Korean ) or spiritual puzzles with the aid of which he can propel the mind to a
transcendental state in which he can meditate. Zazen ( Japanese, Tso-ch'an – in Chinese, the practice of Zen Buddhist
meditation ) leads to Enlightenment. At the usual existential level, Koans cannot be said to have any coherence and an
existential leap is needed to bring harmony. The spiritual puzzle posed by a Koan may be such that even a strong will may
be unable to go to the transcendental plane. The role of the Zen Buddhist master is important here. He can deliver a shock,
an emotional one usually suffices, but a physical blow or other corporal shock may be needed so that the spiritual aspirant is
propelled into a higher level of consciousness. The fundamental viewpoint of Zen Buddhism is that one is to point directly
to one's mind, see it as it is ( Yatha Bhutam ) and become a Buddha. A very important difference between Theravada
Buddhism and Zen Buddhism is that the former believes that Enlightenment is obtained slowly ( or gradually ) by means of
practice while the latter is a believer in sudden Enlightenment ( Tun-yu – in Chinese ).

I give below an example of a Koan:

Before Enlightenment, chopping wood, carrying water;
After Enlightenment, chopping wood, carrying water.
The meaning is self-explanatory. Bodhi does not change the Samsara I am immersed in but it does change and completely
restructures my attitude towards that Samsara. Hsuan-tsang, the great Chinese monk who visited India during the time of
Emperor Harshavardhana, once made the following remark about the state of realisation : “It is like a man drinking water;
he knows by himself whether it is cold or hot.”. Once, Hui-hai Tai-chu came to the Zen master Ma-tsu Tao-i, the first of
possibly the four greatest Chinese Zen masters. Ma-tsu asked him: “Why are you here searching when you already possess
the treasure you are looking for?”. “What treasure?”, his interlocutor asked. Ma-tsu replied: “The one who is questioning me
right now.”. Ma-tsu had an unswerving ability to bring the empirical “I” into focus at just the right moment. On another
occasion, when asked, “What is the meaning of Bodhidharma's coming from India?”, Ma-tsu replied with a classic answer:
“What is the meaning of your asking this at precisely this moment?”. Ma-tsu followed the Hung-chou style of Zen. Ma-tsu
Tao-i's disciple ( Dharma heir, Fa-ssu – in Chinese ) was Pai-chang Huai-hai. Pai-chang Huai-hai's disciple was Huang Po
Hsi-yun whose disciple was Lin-chi I-hsuan, the founder of Rinzai Zen. Soto Zen is the other major form of Japanese Zen.

Because contact of the six sensory bases with the external world do not result in any reactions in a liberated man, he is free.
His mind is like a lamp that does not flicker. Non-attachment towards all beings and everything including the concepts of
“I” and “Mine” is a characteristic of a liberated mind. The absence of ego in an Enlightened man leads him to adopt an
attitude of dispassion and selflessness towards everything in his physical and mental world. He is virtuous. Temptations do
not affect him. He is always cheerful, happy and optimistic. He radiates light wherever he goes. He is wise and
compassionate ( Mahakarunika ) and does everything for the good of the world. He has risen above his previous mental
conditioning ( Samskara ). He has risen above craving and aversion.

It must be remembered that in Buddhism, the only valid reason for waging a war is to fight evil forces. Any other war is
unjust. Lord Buddha went to the field of battle and intervened to stop a war between the Shakyas and their neighbours and
his words stopped King Ajatashatru of Magadha from attacking a neighbouring kingdom. Taking a life unjustly defiles a
man. However, there is no sin in Buddhism, only delusion. Severely deluded men are unlikely to find cessation ( Nirodha,
Nivritti ) from suffering ( Shoka, Soka – in Pali ) in this birth and the wheel of birth and death will roll on for them.

Optimism is a virtue and is the natural state of man. Pessimism sometimes arises in him owing to his circumstances. Lord
Buddha exuded optimism about humanity when he proclaimed “ Suffering can be brought to an end ”. A true follower of
Lord Buddha has an optimistic attitude towards life and an ability to erase any pessimism that may arise in him.

Buddhism discourages superstitious practices.

Buddhism transformed the life of Emperor Ashoka of India. The greatest Indian Emperor ever, belonging to the Maurya
dynasty, and ruling over a territory much larger than the current Republic of India, he did much to spread Buddhism. In his
younger days, he was a warrior and conquered many territories. After he conquered Kalinga, or the modern east Indian state
of Orissa, he was moved by the suffering of the people. Mentally tormented, he found peace after embracing Buddhism. He
also convened the Third Buddhist Council at Pataliputra ( modern Patna ) which was presided over by Maudgalyaputra
Tishya. Emperor Kanishka of the Kushana dynasty was another great Buddhist ruler whose vast empire encompassed a
large part of India as well as a vast territory in western China ( modern Sinkiang ) and Central Asia. His capital was
Purushapura ( modern Peshawar ). The next great Buddhist emperor of India was Emperor Harshavardhana.

In India and China, legends surround Lord Buddha. A legend in India believes that the Hindu god of creation, Brahma,
requested Lord Buddha to teach the Dharma. A legend in China says that a great Buddhist sage named Bodhidharma
brought Buddhism from India to China. Another legend in China, recorded in the text Jen-t'ien-yien-mu, says that Lord
Buddha explained the Dharma to his historical disciple Mahakashyapa by silently holding up a flower and Mahakashyapa
( Mahakassapa – in Pali, Mahakasho – in Japanese ) merely smiled, having understood the meaning. The sound of silence
has a distinguished place in Buddhism, from Lord Buddha onwards stretching right upto the mythological householder
disciple Vimalakirti. Historically, Emperor Ashoka was the first Indian emperor to spread Buddhism outside India. He sent
his son, Mahendra ( Mahinda – in Pali ), and daughter, Sanghamitra ( Sanghamitta – in Pali ), to Sri Lanka.

Lord Buddha showed how man can integrate himself to the cosmos. In this and in many other aspects, He was a student of
life and a leader of men. In a caste-ridden society, Lord Buddha strove to establish the equality of all men. In this, He was
the world's first great socialist. Lao-tzu of ancient China in his book Tao Te Ching described the qualities a true leader
should have; leaders tread fresh grass amongst other things. Lord Buddha possessed all of them and much more. He was the
ultimate Tyagi, that is, renunciant; renouncing a throne, comforts of a palace, a wife and a son to leave his palace on
horseback in search of Truth at night. In this, He showed Himself to be an exemplar of Holiness inspiring millions of others
to follow suit. He elevated Himself to the level of a Purushottama and a Mahapurusha ( Superhuman Man ).

In India and China, legends surround Lord Buddha. A legend in India believes that the Hindu god of creation, Brahma,
requested Lord Buddha to teach the Dharma. A legend in China says that a great Buddhist sage named Bodhidharma
brought Buddhism from India to China. Another legend in China, recorded in the text Jen-t'ien-yien-mu, says that Lord
Buddha explained the Dharma to his historical disciple Mahakashyapa by silently holding up a flower and Mahakashyapa
( Mahakassapa – in Pali, Mahakasho – in Japanese ) merely smiled, having understood the meaning. The sound of silence
has a distinguished place in Buddhism, from Lord Buddha onwards stretching right upto the mythological householder
disciple Vimalakirti. Historically, Emperor Ashoka was the first Indian emperor to spread Buddhism outside India. He sent
his son, Mahendra ( Mahinda – in Pali ), and daughter, Sanghamitra ( Sanghamitta – in Pali ), to Sri Lanka.

Buddhism preaches ultimate tolerance to all faiths. A Buddhist hates none, loves all. Lord Buddha's love for man was like a
father's love for his sons. The overarching philosophy of Buddhism encompasses loving-kindness ( Maitri, Metta – in Pali )
for all sentient beings. Buddhists co-exist peacefully with all religions on earth. It is invigorating to keep a statue of Lord
Buddha in one's place of meditation just as a Christian keeps a crucifix in his room. It is not idolatry.

Buddhism is particularly relevant in the violence-ridden world today. As a Buddhist, I feel that mankind can do much better.
Pacifism and non-violence ( Ahimsa – Sanskrit and Pali, Avihimsa – Pali ) are fundamental tenets of Buddhism. However,
this does not mean that a man should not resist aggression. If an evil power engages in aggression, then a man should resist
it with all powers at his disposal. Something called “Engaged Buddhism” is emerging in the West now. In this, Buddhists
take up environmental and social issues as a part of their practice of the Dharma.

Let us take a closer look at the Madhyamika school of Mahayans Buddhism. A common accusation made against the
Madhyamika philosophy of emptiness ( shunyata ) is that it entails nihilism. One needs to look no further than Nagarjuna's
own works — such as the Stanzas on the Middle Way, the Refutation of Objections, and the Seventy Stanzas on Emptiness
—to find this criticism made by his opponents. If everything is empty, the opponents contend, then nothing exists at all.
Madhyamika philosophy thus destroys the entire world and with it the very possibility of Buddhist spiritual life. However,
Madhyamikas are quick to refute this claim that the emptiness of things means that these things do not exist at all.
Nagarjuna warns against such a nihilistic misunderstanding of emptiness, saying that by this misconception of emptiness 'a
person of little intelligence is destroyed, like by a snake wrongly seized or a spell wrongly cast'. His intention is not to
negate the world, nor does the teaching of emptiness, when rightly understood, destroy the possibility of Buddhist spiritual
life.

On the contrary, emptiness means, Nagarjuna says, not that entities are non-existent but rather that they are empty of, i.e.
lack, independent or autonomous being. Entities are without inherent existence ( swabhava ). Emptiness denotes that things
exist but their existence is never self-standing. The existence of entities is always dependent on many conditions.

Some of these conditions are external to the entities themselves. The existence of a tree, for example, depends upon various
extrinsic conditions — such as the earth in which it is rooted, rain, sunshine, the seed from which it grew, and so on.
Without these conditions, the tree would not exist. But the Madhyamika also says that entities depend for their existence
upon intrinsic factors —namely, the various necessary parts which make up the entity. The tree cannot exist without its
essential constituents, such as the roots, the trunk, the branches, and so forth. So, the tree does not have an autonomous
existence. It does not and cannot stand alone in the world, as it were, unsupported by other entities and independent of its
indispensable parts.

And what is true of the tree in this respect is equally the case, according to the Madhyamika, for all other things. This can be
most potently realized in the case of one's own self. One's existence is clearly dependent on numerous factors both external
and internal. One's existence depends, for instance, on the benign environmental conditions in which one lives — that there
is enough oxygen to breathe, that the sun has heated the world to a temperature which makes human life possible, that one
lives in a peaceful society and in a society without epidemics. Further, one's existence depends on the continued functioning
of one's various parts — one would cease to exist if one's essential parts such as one's heart, lungs or brain stopped working.
In terms of traditional Buddhist categories, one's existence relies on the five constituent aggregates ( skandhas ) of form,
feeling, perception, volition, and consciousness.

Thus, Nagarjuna is able to claim — in both the Stanzas on the Middle Way and the Refutation of Objections — that it is
only because things are empty, i.e. devoid of autonomous existence, that they can come into existence in dependence upon
various conditions. It is the rejection, rather than the acceptance, of emptiness which in fact destroys all entities. If things
were not empty of autonomous existence then there could be no explanation of the manifold dependently originating entities
which undeniably do occur. The world would be static, unchanging, which is evidently not the case. Nagarjuna declares :
'Since a phenomenon not dependently originating does not exist, a non-empty phenomenon certainly does not exist.'

Most importantly for Buddhist practitioners, it is, according to Nagarjuna, the emptiness of all things which makes spiritual
life possible. It is because all entities lack autonomous existence that change can occur. Things change when the things upon
which they depend change. And Buddhist practice is fundamentally about change. That is, Buddhism is about transforming
— by means of ethical conduct, meditation, mindfulness and so forth — unskilful mental events into skilful mental events.
Buddhism is about progressing from a state of ignorance to a state of enlightenment, from ignorance to wisdom. If entities
were not empty — if they possessed an independent existence unaffected by any alterations in other things — they would be
unchanging and unchangeable. And, thus, if we were autonomously existing beings, we would be unable to gain
enlightenment, or indeed to make any spiritual progress at all. We would be stuck, spiritually speaking, with the way we are
at present.

So, the Madhyamika claim is that everything — including, most importantly, the spiritual life itself — is made possible by
emptiness. The contention that entities are not empty contradicts the empirically verifiable reality that things change when
the factors upon which these things rely alter, and would, furthermore, completely undermine the possibility of spiritual
transformation. As Nagarjuna says:
'For whom emptiness exists, all things are possible. For whom emptiness does not exist, nothing is possible.'
The teaching of emptiness is actually an affirmation of the dynamic interconnectedness of all things.

Thus, the Madhyamika teaching of emptiness appears to be a re-statement of the venerable and central Buddhist teaching of
dependent origination ( pratityasamutpada ). Indeed, Nagarjuna proclaims in the auto-commentary to the Refutation of
Objections that emptiness and dependent origination are synonyms. And in the Seventy Stanzas on Emptiness he declares
that 'since all entities are empty of inherent existence, the unequalled Tathagata taught the dependent origination of entities'.
This Madhyamika rejection of the accusation of nihilism is expressed succinctly by Chandrakirti, in his commentary on
Nagarjuna's Stanzas on the Middle Way:
He proclaims:
'Some people insist that the Madhyamikas are not different from nihilists, since the Madhyamikas say that good and bad
acts, the agent, the consequences of acts, and the entire world are empty of an inherently existing nature. As the nihilists also
say that these things do not exist, the Madhyamikas are the same as nihilists. We reply that this is not the case. Why?
Because Madhyamikas are proponents of dependent origination.'

In which case, it appears that the Madhyamika philosophy is not really saying anything new. Madhyamika is re-affirming a
doctrine which seems to have been at the heart of Buddhism from the earliest times. The doctrine of emptiness —
understood as a re-statement of the dependently originating nature of all things — is the true Middle Way ( Madhyamika )
philosophy. It avoids the extremes of nihilism ( which says that all entities are non-existent in reality ) and eternalism
( which says that some or all entities in reality have existence independent of conditions ). The Middle Way of dependent
origination promulgated by Lord Buddha has been expressed again by Madhyamika, albeit perhaps in a somewhat novel
and developed form. The charge of nihilism is thus easily refuted.

However, the accusation of nihilism actually has more weight to it than this analysis indicates. Let me explain. The claim of
Madhyamikas is not limited to the fact that the emptiness, the absence of inherent existence, of entities means that these
entities originate in dependence upon conditions. In addition, many Madhyamika statements indicate that all entities lack
inherent existence in the sense that they are conceptual constructs, mental fabrications. It is not just that the tree, for
example, originates in dependence upon numerous conditions — such as the water, the earth, the sun and the seed. It is,
furthermore, the case that the tree, the water, the earth, the sun, the seed, etc. originate in dependence upon the mind. As this
is sometimes expressed in Madhyamika texts, all entities are simply conventions ( samvriti, samvrita ) or fictions
( kalpana ). And other Madhyamika statements declare entities to be name-only ( namamatra ) and to have a merely
conceptual existence. Hence, Madhyamikas often compare all entities to illusions, dreams, mirages and so forth. Entities are
— like illusions, etc. — simply fabrications, merely appearances to the mind which have no further reality. This is why in
Madhyamika texts one finds statements that dependently originating entities do not really originate. In other words, the
whole world of dependently originating entities is simply a phantasm, a show, a mental creation, a mere appearance. So, the
absence of inherent existence, the emptiness, of all things in the final analysis means, for Madhyamika, not simply that all
things dependently originate. It means, furthermore, that all these dependently originating things are mere mental
fabrications.

But how does the Madhyamika reach this conclusion? The Madhyamika contention, it appears, is that the dependent
origination of entities actually entails that these entities are conceptual constructs. This is because an entity, by virtue of its
origination in dependence on various internal and external conditions, is always analysable into these conditions. Thus,
according to Madhyamika, the entity is simply a name or concept attributed to the conglomeration of conditions. The
Madhyamika would challenge us to examine any entity whatsoever. A tree, for example, is made up of various components
— the trunk, roots, branches, bark, leaves and so forth. And the tree is also dependent on various external factors, such as
soil, sunshine, water, and so forth. The Madhyamika contends that, if one examines the entity which one calls 'tree' one
finds that, in reality, there is nothing there other than these various parts and external conditions operating in conjunction.
There is not in fact a separate 'tree-entity'. As the Madhyamikas sometimes put this point, when analysed, an entity, any
entity, is actually unfindable. When one searches for the tree-entity, for instance, it dissolves — so to speak — into its
components and external conditions. Actually, the Madhyamika would say, the entity which we call 'tree' is simply a name, a
concept, which the mind attributes to these various conditions. There is no mind-independent tree-entity. Hence, dependent
origination means that dependently originating entities have a merely conceptual existence.

Buddhism is well-known for carrying out this sort of analysis with regard to the self ( atman ). The self, when examined, is
discovered to be composed of five ever-changing psycho-physical factors, physical form, feelings, conceptions, volitions,
and consciousness. What one calls 'the self' is simply the inter-play and constant flow of these various factors. If one looks
closely at one's experience, there is no additional factor, it is argued, which might be called the self. The self is, then, just a
name, a concept, which is attributed by the mind to this ever-changing psycho-physical process. The Milindapanha
famously compares the self in this respect to a chariot, which ( it is claimed ) is simply a name imputed to the collection of
its parts—the axle, wheels, frame, reins, yoke, and so forth.

Madhyamika applies this reasoning to each and every thing. Just as the self or a chariot cannot withstand analysis, so it is
with every entity. If one examines any entity, it can be analysed into internal and external conditions. The entity itself will
be found to be nothing more than a name or concept which is used to label the conjunction of these conditions. These
conditions will themselves be found to be mere names or concepts used to label their own conditions, and so on. In no case
is an entity anything in itself; it does not exist inherently, mind-independently. In all cases, entities will be found, in other
words, to be empty. Thus, every entity whatsoever is simply a name, a concept, a mental fabrication with no further
existence.

And one must not make the mistake, according to Madhyamika, of thinking that the mind itself escapes this analysis. The
mind too is empty. When analysed it is found to be just a name or concept given to its components and external conditions,
and the components and external conditions are themselves liable to the same sort of analysis into their components and
external conditions. This appears to be the principal objection of Madhyamika to the Yogachara philosophy, an objection
which stimulated a number of sustained critiques by Madhyamikas of what they claim to be the Yogachara contention that
consciousness or the mind has inherent existence. The Madhyamika is insistent that the entire dependently originating world
— both physical and mental — has a merely conceptual existence.

But this Madhyamika claim that everything is mentally fabricated is surely problematic. Contrary to the Madhyamika
position, it does not seem to follow that, because all entities can be analysed in terms of their internal and external
conditions, the entities are nothing more than names or concepts attributed to the conglomeration of conditions. The
Madhyamika equation of dependently originating existence with conceptual existence is questionable. It is true that entities
exist in dependence on internal and external conditions. But this does not entail that these entities are merely mental
fabrications. Arguably, an entity may be a mind-independent reality, but nevertheless depend for its existence on a variety of
external conditions and essential components. A tree, for instance, may exist independently of the mind even though it is
dependent on numerous external conditions and components for its existence. An entity is not necessarily simply a concept,
entirely reducible to the intrinsic and external factors on which its existence depends. The Madhyamika claim — a form of
extreme ontological reductionism — that entities which can be analysed into external and internal conditions have a merely
conceptual existence can be resisted.

In fact, many Buddhists and non-Buddhists have found unacceptable the Madhyamika contention that all entities have a
merely conceptual existence. Their objection would be that, even if it is true that everything dependently originates, it is not
true that everything whatsoever is a fabrication. One can see here why opponents of Madhyamika — as represented even in
Madhyamika texts — accused the Madhyamikas of nihilism. They perhaps have a point after all. For an entirely fabricated
world — with no basis at all which is real, i.e. anything more than a conceptual construction — would seem to be hardly
distinguishable from a non-existent world. Conceptually constructed things, it can be contended, need an unconstructed
basis out of which they are constructed. Arguably, also, conceptual construction requires an agent of the construction —
someone or something which is doing the constructing — which is not him / itself a conceptual construction. Perhaps, then,
Madhyamikas have gone too far in asserting the merely fabricated nature of all things. The Madhyamika philosophy, it can
be claimed, is not the Middle Way after all. It has fallen into the extreme of nihilism.

However, Madhyamika texts are notoriously difficult to unravel, and they can often admit of a variety of interpretations. It
is also possible that the Madhyamika tradition is not entirely internally consistent. There may be more than one
philosophical stance advanced in Madhyamika texts. Furthermore, it may be that the Madhyamikas in some respects had not
considered the possible implications of their often laconic statements, and that some of these statements may be compatible
with more than one philosophical position. In studying Madhyamika, one is often faced with the problem of interpretative
uncertainty. But it is this very interpretative uncertainty which can perhaps offer some possible ways out of the nihilistic
predicament. While the reading of Madhyamika which I have presented is supported by many textual passages, and the
nihilistic interpretation of Madhyamika is thus plausible, it need not be the only understanding of Madhyamika which can
be countenanced. Even if one finds that the nihilistic interpretation of Madhyamika is a credible reading of many
Madhyamika texts, it is worth investigating some ways in which the Madhyamika might claim that things have a fabricated,
conceptually constructed existence, while avoiding the charge of nihilism. I will consider briefly three non-nihilistic
readings of this Madhyamika contention.

(1). Emptiness and the Unconditioned. The nihilistic interpretation of Madhyamika says that everything is empty in the
sense that everything lacks inherent existence, which means both that everything is dependently originating and that all
these dependently originating things are mere fabrications. But surely, it might be suggested, this philosophy of emptiness
does not for Madhyamika apply to Nirvana? Buddhists often say that Nirvana is an unconditioned ( asamskrita ) sphere
attained by the liberated person. There is some room for interpretation about the nature of this unconditioned sphere.
However, quite a few Buddhist texts seem to suggest that it is a permanent Reality which transcends the conditioned
( samskrita ) world of dependently originating entities, a permanent Reality which is apprehended by the liberated person
and, it seems, into which the liberated person passes — in some undefined sense — after his death. It is a true refuge and the
source of real bliss, unlike the conditioned, mundane things of this world. In which case, the Buddhist claim that everything
is dependently originating actually means that every conditioned thing is dependently originating. The Unconditioned is, by
contrast, not subject to dependent origination. Similarly, perhaps the Madhyamika claim that everything is a mental
fabrication applies only to the conditioned world, and there is for the Madhyamika an Unconditioned Reality which is real,
unfabricated and blissful.

There are a number of Madhyamika texts which might be understand as advocating such an Unconditioned Reality.
Passages that might support this reading of Madhyamika are found even in the writings attributed to Nagarjuna himself,
especially but not exclusively in his corpus of hymns. Thus, for example, the Hymn to the Inconceivable says that:
'Convention arises from causes and conditions and is dependent. The dependent is proclaimed in this way [by the Buddha].
But the ultimate is uncreated. Also, it is called swabhava, nature, Reality, substance, essence, and true being.'

This Unconditioned Reality can be called 'emptiness', but not in the sense that it lacks inherent existence. Rather, this
Unconditioned Reality is empty in the sense that it is beyond all words, beyond all conceptualisation and empty of all the
taints / defilements of the conditioned world. There are certainly passages in Madhyamika works which refer to Reality as
ineffable and as transcending conceptualisation. Thus, the Stanzas on the Middle Way state:
'Not dependent on another, calm, not diffused by verbal diffusion, free from conceptual discrimination, without diversity —
this is the description of Reality.'

In this case, even the word 'emptiness' is merely a provisional aid, which will at best point us towards the ineffable Reality
which words cannot possibly describe. When talking about the Unconditioned Reality, only metaphors and not descriptions
are appropriate. There is always a degree of distortion or falsification of the Unconditioned Reality whenever it is expressed
in words, yet some words are required in order to assist those who have not yet realised this Unconditioned Reality for
themselves. Chandrakirti declares:
'What hearing and what teaching can there be of the unutterable truth (dharma)? And yet, the unutterable [truth] is heard and
taught through superimposition.'

Even emptiness is itself empty, i.e. unable to describe the Unconditioned Reality as it actually is. It is itself a
superimposition. This explains, it might be argued, the common Madhyamika claim that the Madhyamika has no view,
position or thesis. The Madhyamika, according to this interpretation, has no philosophical stance at all about the nature of
the Unconditioned Reality, knowing that this Reality is in fact quite indescribable.

It is of course debatable whether this notion of an indescribable Reality is intelligible. One might object that the claim that
Reality is indescribable is itself a description of this Reality. And it is perhaps difficult to comprehend how the Madhyamika
can avoid incoherence if he treats as metaphors rather than descriptions his claims that the Unconditioned Reality is
unconditioned, permanent, and unfabricated.

Leaving aside these philosophical problems, such an understanding of Madhyamika need not deny that Madhyamika
teaches that the things of the conditioned world are empty in the sense that they are mental fabrications. But this mundane
sense of emptiness needs to be complemented by the teaching of the higher emptiness, which points us towards the ineffable
Unconditioned Reality.
However, here we are faced again by the problem of interpretative uncertainty. For many Madhyamika texts seem to imply
that emptiness is not an ineffable Unconditioned Reality, itself exempted from the general rule that all entities are empty of
inherent existence. Rather, emptiness is nothing more than the ultimate truth about entities — it is how they actually are. It
is purely and simply their lack of inherent existence. The Hymn to the Inconceivable says:
'The ultimate truth is the teaching that objects are without inherent existence.'
In the Seventy Stanzas on Emptiness, Nagarjuna declares that the ultimate is no more than the teaching that things are
dependently originating, because they lack inherent existence.

Furthermore, Nagarjuna's famous claim that 'there is no difference between Samsara and Nirvana' can be interpreted to
mean that, just like the entities which constitute cyclic existence, Nirvana as an unfabricated Unconditioned Reality is itself
a fiction, a mental creation. So, Chandrakirti proclaims that Nirvana is simply a convention and thus lacks inherent
existence. It is not in fact an inherently existing Unconditioned Reality. It is true that these statements might be read as an
attack on the term 'Nirvana', if understood as ultimately denoting what is actually an ineffable Reality. But it is also possible
that Nagarjuna and Chandrakirti are here negating the ineffable Reality itself, and not just the ability of the term 'Nirvana' to
describe it. In this latter case, it would appear that the only genuine Nirvana which the Madhyamika can accept is the
psychological state of freedom from craving, attachment and suffering which supposedly results from the realisation that all
things are empty. The Sixty Verses of Reasoning declares:
'The thorough knowledge of Samsara is Nirvana.'
On this verse, Chandrakirti comments that the thorough knowledge in question is the fact that Samsara arises without
inherent existence. Nirvana — far from being an unfabricated, unconditioned ontological realm — is simply the insight into
the merely conventional nature of all things.

The Madhyamika texts which state that Madhyamikas have no views, positions or theses are thus to be understood as
meaning only that Madhyamikas have no views, positions or theses which assert the inherent existence of anything.
Madhyamikas do assert the emptiness, the absence of inherent existence, of all entities. This emptiness is permanent only in
the sense that the absence of inherent existence is always and everywhere the true nature of things. Emptiness is the
emptiness of the chair, the emptiness of the tree, the emptiness of the person, and so forth. There is an emptiness, an absence
of inherent existence, for each and every thing. Emptiness is itself empty, according to this interpretation of Madhyamika,
precisely because it is not an autonomous, Unconditioned Reality. On the contrary, emptiness only exists in dependence on
the things of which it is the emptiness. Without entities, there would be no emptiness. Emptiness is itself dependently
originating.

This disagreement about the meaning of emptiness entails, or is entailed by, quite divergent and incompatible
understandings of Madhyamika philosophy. On the one hand, there is the understanding of Madhyamika as asserting that
reality is simply the lack of inherent existence of all entities. On the other hand, there is the understanding of Madhyamika
as advocating, in addition, a further reality — the higher emptiness — which is quite beyond all conceptual and linguistic
categories. It is undefinable and indescribable. Madhyamika understood in this latter way is, it might be argued, not nihilism
for, even if the conditioned world is envisaged by them as totally fabricated, there is for the Madhyamika an entirely
unfabricated Unconditioned Reality. However, it might be objected that such a version of Madhyamika simply combines
nihilism with regard to the fabricated, conditioned world with an eternalistic belief in a permanent and blissful Nirvana. If
this objection is correct, far from treading the Middle Way, such a Madhyamika appears to fall into both extreme views
simultaneously.

(2). Madhyamika as Process Philosophy. The nihilistic reading of Madhyamika contends that for Madhyamika all things are
conceptual constructs. There is no unconstructed basis on which the conceptual construction takes place. But perhaps the
Madhyamika might claim that, although all entities are indeed conceptually constructed, there is nevertheless an
unfabricated substratum for conceptual construction. This substratum is to be envisaged as an entity-free flow of pure
change with no divisions or distinctions. When conceptual construction occurs, this undifferentiated process gets carved up,
so to speak, into distinct entities. What is really there is the entity-free flow of change. The manifold world of entities is a
superimposition on this basic and unfabricated flow. Nihilism is thus averted, because there is a substratum on the basis of
which conceptual construction can take place. And the Madhyamika claim that all entities are conceptual constructs or
conventions is also preserved, because the substratum is not itself an entity — it is the undifferentiated stuff out of which the
conceptually constructed world of entities is fashioned.

A difficulty is, however, that there seems to be little textual evidence which would give any explicit support to this reading
of Madhyamika. If the Madhyamikas did think that there is such an undifferentiated substratum for conceptually constructed
entities, they certainly have not, as far as I can see, expressed this vital point in their texts. The interpretation is thus rather
speculative, being ungrounded in textual evidence. Nevertheless, one might argue that, though the Madhyamikas do not
articulate that there is such a substratum, it remains a possible philosophical solution to the problem of nihilism, which is
compatible with what they do say.

However, though it overcomes the problem of nihilism, this reading involves philosophical problems of its own, two of
which I shall highlight.

First, it can be argued that the idea of 'change' always presupposes something which is changing. Change is arguably always
a characteristic of an entity. The notion of change without an entity of which it is the change is of is perhaps
incomprehensible. In other words, the notion of an entity-free substratum of change, upon which conceptually constructed
entities are imposed, may be incoherent.

Second, it is far from clear that it is correct to claim that the world as it exists independently of the fabricating mind is
undifferentiated into distinct entities. This interpretation is philosophically suspect in that it contends that all distinctions, all
differentiations between and within entities, are a result of conceptual construction. This seems to give the constructing
mind an inordinate amount of power. It seems far more likely that many of the distinctions which are made between and
within entities have a basis is a mind-independent reality, even if this mind-independent reality is distorted or added to in the
process of the perception of it.

(3). Emptiness as an Epistemological Doctrine. In this case, perhaps the Madhyamika means that, although the world is not
entirely a mental fabrication, it is difficult to disentangle what is actually the case about the world as it exists independently
of one's own mind from the interpretations and valuations which one imposes upon the world.

It seems undeniable that many of our perceptions and understandings of the world are heavily influenced by our prejudices
and fantasies. Most importantly, from the Buddhist point of view, we are ( it is thought ) afflicted by the fantasy that entities
have a permanence and reliability which they simply do not have in reality. According to Buddhist analysis, on the basis of
this fantasy we crave, get attached and then suffer. We would do well to see this fantasy for what it is. We must, in this case,
see that the permanence and reliability which we attribute to the things which we covet do not actually inhere in the entities
themselves; these characteristics of things are simply false attributions made by one's deluded mind. Things are certainly
empty of the permanence and reliability which one's mind tends to impose upon them.

Furthermore, there is a serious epistemological problem in establishing how the world exists independently of our
interpretation-laden perceptions of it, for one's apprehension of the world is necessarily of the world as perceived, not as it is
in itself. One can never step outside one's perceptions, so to speak, in order to see the world as it really is in itself, for this
very seeing would itself be a perception.

Thus, when the Madhyamika says that entities lack inherent existence, perhaps he means that entities as perceived lack
inherent existence, because much of the perception of the entity is actually a contribution of the perceiving mind. Entities
are empty of inherent existence — i.e. are conceptual constructs or mere conventions — in so far as entities as perceived are
always subject to the interpretative framework of the perceiver.

This claim that the world, as it exits independently of our perceptions, is inaccessible to us is quite different from the
nihilistic position that everything is fabricated. It is saying that the apprehension of things necessarily involves fabrication,
because of the interpretative contributions of the apprehender, rather than that the things themselves, independent of the
apprehension of them, do not exist.

One might, however, feel quite suspicious of this interpretation of Madhyamika because it seems to turn Madhyamika
philosophy into a species of Kantianism. Thus, the charge of anachronism might be made. Nevertheless, it is surely not
impossible that philosophical traditions from distinct times and cultures might have developed similar insights and there is
perhaps some textual evidence in support of such a reading of Madhyamika.

Most notably, there is an extensive critique in the Refutation of Objections ( and its commentary ) of the means of
knowledge ( pramana ) and objects of knowledge ( prameya ). Nagarjuna attempts to demonstrate that there is no way of
proving that the means of knowledge — identified as perception, inferential reasoning, analogy and verbal testimony — do
actually apprehend objects of knowledge as they exist mind-independently. It seems, then, that Nagarjuna's intention in this
critique is not to prove that there are no mind-independent entities, but rather that we cannot establish that our means of
knowing these objects are able to apprehend them as they actually are, without distortion or superimposition.
In addition, the Treatise of Pulverisation ( and its commentary ) stresses the mutual dependence of the means of knowledge
and the object of knowledge. Perhaps the point is that knowledge requires an object ( in order to be knowledge of
something) yet the object as known (as opposed to how it is in itself ) is altered by the very act of knowing it. Objects as
they are in themselves are inaccessible to the mind. Objects as known are conventions and lack inherent existence in so far
as the entity as it is in itself remains concealed behind the veil of the mind's own interpretative activity.

In this reading of Madhyamika, nihilism is replaced by scepticism. The ontological claim that all entities are mere
fabrications is supplanted by the epistemological notion that entities as they exist in themselves are unknowable, obscured
by the fabricating activity of the mind. The Madhyamika philosophy of emptiness treads the Middle Way between the
nihilistic claim that everything is totally a fabrication and the naive realists' contention that one has access to the
unfabricated world as it actually is. However, there might be an objection that this scepticism makes too severe a break
between mind-independent things and one's efforts to apprehend them. Perhaps, it is more accurate to say that things in
themselves are known to us — they are present to us when we apprehend them — but this knowledge is nevertheless always
a negotiation between the known entity and the knower.

Unlike the scepticism I have described, this position — which might be called 'perspectival realism' — would claim that the
mind-independent entity is not inaccessible. Yet, unlike naive realism, it acknowledges that the limitations and contributions
of the apprehender entail that the apprehended entity is never fully available to us. One's apprehension of the entity is
always mediated by the knowing mind and its perceptual apparatus. However, this mediation does not cut one off from
mind-independent things. On the contrary, it is our only means of access to them. But it does entail that our access is always
incomplete, imperfect.

This perspectival realism seems to be compatible with the Madhyamika statements that prameya and pramana are mutually
dependent and that pramanas cannot be established to apprehend prameyas as they are mind-independent. Entities as known
are empty in the sense that they originate in dependence upon both the mind-independent entity and the knowing mind. But
this does not mean that the mind-independent entity remains entirely concealed from us. The Middle Way is here between
scepticism and naive realism, for the Madhyamika acknowledges that mind-independent things can be apprehended — there
is no unbridgeable gulf between the mind and reality — but that the apprehension of these things is always from a particular
vantage point.

A radical indeterminacy underpins and permeates human existence. Things happen that we do not want; things that we do
not want happen. To bravely work out our way through to emancipation, to bring order in place of chaos, to face life with
fortitude requires immense Enlightened courage. In this context, Buddhism enables us to reach salvation. That is the raison
d'être of Buddhism. The essence of Buddhism, as summed up by Lord Buddha Himself, is:
To cease from all error,
To get virtue,
And to purify the heart.

With Anuttara Samyak Sambodhi ( supreme and perfect Enlightenment, Anuttara Samma Sambodhi - in Pali ) of a man, he
realises that death can be defeated only if it can be made unreal. His false self, or nothingness, dissolves into a vibrant
awakened being.

Bibliography

• The Tripitaka ( Theravada )

( including the Dharmachakrapravartana Sutra, the Anatmalakshana Sutra, the Mahasatipatthana Sutra, the
Adityaparyaya Sutra, the Mangala Sutra, the Alagaddupama Sutra, the Prathama Akasha Sutra, the Indriya
Bhavana Sutra, the Brahmajala Sutra, the Kalama Sutra, the Malunkyaputra Sutra, the Katyayanagotra Sutra and
the Mahaparinirvana Sutra )
• The Taisho Tripitaka
• Milindapanha
• The Mahavastu
• The Saddharma Pundarika Sutra
• The Mahayana Brahmajala Sutra
• The Mahayana Mahaparinirvana Sutra
• The Lankavatara Sutra
• The Shurangama Samadhi Sutra
• The Sandhi Nirmochana Sutra
• The Shalistambha Sutra
• The Gandavyuha Sutra
• The Dashabhumika Sutra
• The Maharatnakuta Sutra
• The Amitabha-vyuha Sutra
• The Samadhiraja Sutra
• The Avatamsaka Sutra
• The Vimalakirti Nirdesha Sutra
• Abhidhammattha Sangaha. Anuruddhacharya
• Buddha Charita. Ashvaghosha
• Mula Madhyamaka Karika. Nagarjuna
• Pratityasamutpadahridaya. Nagarjuna
• Vigrahavyavartani. Nagarjuna
• Akutobhaya. Nagarjuna
• Chatuhshataka. Aryadeva
• Mula Madhyamika Vritti. Buddhapalita
• Madhyamikavatara. Chandrakirti
• Prasannapada. Chandrakirti
• Saddharma Pundarika Stava. Rahulabhadra
• Abhisamayalankara. Maitreyanatha
• Madhyanta Vibhaga. Asanga
• Mahayana Sutralankara. Asanga
• Abhidharmasamuchchaya. Asanga
• Mahayana Sutralankara Bhashya. Vasubandhu
• Tri-Swabhava Nirdesha. Vasubandhu
• Abhidharmakosha. Vasubandhu
• Abhidharmakosha with Bhashya. Vasubandhu
• Madhyanta Vibhaga Bhashya. Vasubandhu
• Vimshatika-karika. Vasubandhu
• Trimshatika-karika. Vasubandhu
• Karmasiddhiprakarana. Vasubandhu
• Yogacharabhumi Shastra
• Satyasiddhi Shastra. Harivarman
• Visuddhimagga. Buddhaghosa
• Vinaya Sutra. Gunaprabha
• Pramanasamuchchaya. Dignaga
• Pramanavarttika. Dharmakirti
• Pramanavinishchaya. Dharmakirti
• Bhavanakrama. Kamalashila
• Pramanavarttikalankara. Pragyakara Gupta
• Bodhicharyavatara. Shantideva
• Shikshasamuchchaya. Shantideva
• Nibandhavali. Gyanashri Mitra
• Kshanabhangasiddhi. Ratnakirti
• Fo-Hsing Lun ( Buddha-Nature Treatise ). Paramartha ( Translator From Sanskrit to Chinese )
• Ta Ch'eng Ch'i-hsin Lun ( The Awakening of Faith in the Mahayana ).
• Fa-hua Wen-chu ( Commentary on the Lotus Sutra ). Chi-i
• Jen-t'ien-yien-mu
• Shobogenzo. Dogen
• What the Buddha taught. W.S.Rahula
• Buddha : A Story of Enlightenment. D.Chopra
• The Art of Living. W.Hart
• Mindfulness of Breathing. Bhikkhu Nyanamoli
• The Manuals of Dhamma. L.Sayadaw
• Manual of Vipassana Meditation. U.K.Lay
• Discourses on Satipatthana Sutta. S.N.Goenka
• Bauddha Dharma Darshana. Acharya N.Deo
• Bauddha Darshana Mimamsa. B.Upadhyaya
• Studies in Lankavatara Sutra. D.T.Suzuki
• Meditation Now. S.N.Goenka
• For the Benefit of Many. S.N.Goenka
• Dharma – Its True Nature. Vipassana Research Institute
• Realising Change. Vipassana Research Institute
• The Gracious Flow of Dharma. S.N.Goenka
• Vipassana. D.C.Ahir
• The Path to Bliss. The Dalai Lama
• Healing Anger. The Dalai Lama
• Buddha Nature. S.B.King
• Epistemological Approach to Ch'an Enlightenment. H-c.Huang
• Ch'an and Zen Teachings. L.K.Yu
• Ethics in Early Budddism. D.J.Kalupahana
• The Holy Teaching of Vimalakirti : A Mahayana Scripture. R.A.Thurman
• The Platform Sutra of the Sixth Patriarch. P.B.Yampolsky
• Living by Zen. D.T.Suzuki
• Essential Zen. K.Tanahashi and T.D.Schneider
• The Bodhisattva Doctrine in Buddhist Sanskrit Literature. H.Dayal
• Bauddha Bharata ( Buddhist India ). B.C.Datta ( in Bengali )
• Philosophical Meditations on Zen Buddhism. D.S.Wright
• Tao Te Ching. Lao-tzu
• Wisdom of the Ages. W.W.Dyer
• A History of Buddhist Philosophy. D.J.Kalupahana
• Being Peace. T.N.Hanh
• Buddhist Faith and Sudden Enlightenment. S.B.Park
• Zen Mind, Beginner's Mind. S.Suzuki
• The Zen Teaching of Huang Po on the Transmission of Mind. J.Blofeld
• The Zen Teaching of Hui Hai on Sudden Illumination. J.Blofeld
• The Recorded Sayings of Lin-chi. R.F.Sasaki
• Buddhist Spirituality I. T.Yoshinori
• Buddhist Spirituality II. T.Yoshinori
• Buddhist Pali Recitals.
• The Life and Teachings of Buddha. Anagarika Dharmapala