Yes, the Ornament of Reason is the best early Tibetan commentary.Will wrote:Another excellent, simpler (but not simple) commentary, much earlier than Je Rinpoche's 'Ocean', is the Ornament of Reason by Mabja Bodhisattva. Snow Lion published it some time back.
http://www.shambhala.com/the-ornament-of-reason.html
Nagarjuna's Mūlamadhyamakakārikā: Questions and Comments
Re: Nagarjuna's Mūlamadhyamakakārikā: Questions and Comments
Re: Nagarjuna's Mūlamadhyamakakārikā: Questions and Comments
The earliest commentaries on the MMK by Indian authors (besides the Akutobhayā) are the following:
An Annotated Translation of the Chung-Lun With Nāgārjuna's Middle Stanzas Vol.1 by Brian Bocking.
An Annotated Translation of the Chung-Lun With Nāgārjuna's Middle Stanzas Vol.2 by Brian Bocking.
A Study of the Buddhapālita-Mūlamadhyamaka-vṛtti by Akira Saito.
An Annotated Translation of the Chung-Lun With Nāgārjuna's Middle Stanzas Vol.1 by Brian Bocking.
An Annotated Translation of the Chung-Lun With Nāgārjuna's Middle Stanzas Vol.2 by Brian Bocking.
A Study of the Buddhapālita-Mūlamadhyamaka-vṛtti by Akira Saito.
- dzogchungpa
- Posts: 6333
- Joined: Sat May 28, 2011 10:50 pm
Re: Nagarjuna's Mūlamadhyamakakārikā: Questions and Comments
I was just looking at an article by William L. Ames, and in one of the footnotes he says that the clearest introduction to Madhyamaka that he knows of is the translators’ introduction to this:
http://www.amazon.com/Introduction-Midd ... 1590300092
and that another excellent introduction to the basic ideas of Madhyamaka,
with an emphasis on their significance for the Buddhist path is this:
http://www.amazon.com/Sun-Wisdom-Teachi ... 1570629994.
I haven't read either, but I thought I would pass that along, since he seems to be a pretty good scholar, whose thesis, btw, is here:
http://www.scribd.com/doc/120037318/Bha ... 5-17-23-26.
http://www.amazon.com/Introduction-Midd ... 1590300092
and that another excellent introduction to the basic ideas of Madhyamaka,
with an emphasis on their significance for the Buddhist path is this:
http://www.amazon.com/Sun-Wisdom-Teachi ... 1570629994.
I haven't read either, but I thought I would pass that along, since he seems to be a pretty good scholar, whose thesis, btw, is here:
http://www.scribd.com/doc/120037318/Bha ... 5-17-23-26.
There is not only nothingness because there is always, and always can manifest. - Thinley Norbu Rinpoche
Re: Nagarjuna's Mūlamadhyamakakārikā: Questions and Comments
From the Acknowledgments to Ames's thesis:
"This dissertation has no intrinsic nature of its own ..."
!
"This dissertation has no intrinsic nature of its own ..."
!
Merrily, merrily, merrily, merrily ...
Re: Nagarjuna's Mūlamadhyamakakārikā: Questions and Comments
that's right! It is one of the implications of the 'emptiness of emptiness'. Nagarjuna says he has no thesis to defend. All he does is show how everyone else's theses basically contradict themselves. Whatever view you have is bound to be self-defeating in some respect.
Madhyamaka is an essentially skeptical philosophy. There are historical links between the ancient Greek Pyrrhonism - the original form of skepticism - and Madhyamaka - see for instance Flintof's Pyrrho and India, Adrian Kuzminski Pyrrhonism: How the Ancient Greeks Reinvented Buddhism and Jay Garfield's Epoche and Sunyata
Madhyamaka is an essentially skeptical philosophy. There are historical links between the ancient Greek Pyrrhonism - the original form of skepticism - and Madhyamaka - see for instance Flintof's Pyrrho and India, Adrian Kuzminski Pyrrhonism: How the Ancient Greeks Reinvented Buddhism and Jay Garfield's Epoche and Sunyata
'Only practice with no gaining idea' ~ Suzuki Roshi
- dzogchungpa
- Posts: 6333
- Joined: Sat May 28, 2011 10:50 pm
Re: Nagarjuna's Mūlamadhyamakakārikā: Questions and Comments
Also, "The Shape of Ancient Thought" by McEvilley.
There is not only nothingness because there is always, and always can manifest. - Thinley Norbu Rinpoche
Re: Nagarjuna's Mūlamadhyamakakārikā: Questions and Comments
There are differences. Pyrrhonian skeptics likely wouldn't accept karma and rebirth. Whereas mādhyamikas do.jeeprs wrote:Madhyamaka is an essentially skeptical philosophy. There are historical links between the ancient Greek Pyrrhonism - the original form of skepticism - and Madhyamaka - see for instance Flintof's Pyrrho and India, Adrian Kuzminski Pyrrhonism: How the Ancient Greeks Reinvented Buddhism and Jay Garfield's Epoche and Sunyata
Re: Nagarjuna's Mūlamadhyamakakārikā: Questions and Comments
Of course, I quite agree. One ought not to over-state the resemblances. But I always find it interesting to consider the meaning of 'skepticism' in regards to both the ancient Greek and Indian schools. Nowadays we think of 'skeptics' as being kind of anti-spiritual or at least basically 'naturalist' in their outlook. But a really deep skepticism is actually a sadhana. The same for the original 'cynics'. They too were basically like renunciates. But the meaning of 'cynic' has also changed over time.
Anyway, I know that it is tangential to the main thread. Take it as a footnote.
Anyway, I know that it is tangential to the main thread. Take it as a footnote.
'Only practice with no gaining idea' ~ Suzuki Roshi
- dzogchungpa
- Posts: 6333
- Joined: Sat May 28, 2011 10:50 pm
Re: Nagarjuna's Mūlamadhyamakakārikā: Questions and Comments
Also, there is this:
http://www.dharmawheel.net/viewtopic.ph ... 282#p99497
http://www.dharmawheel.net/viewtopic.ph ... 282#p99497
There is not only nothingness because there is always, and always can manifest. - Thinley Norbu Rinpoche
Re: Nagarjuna's Mūlamadhyamakakārikā: Questions and Comments
Relative truth is an illusion, ultimate is free from any elaboration, thus there is no true existence in appearances.
Say what you think about me here.
- dzogchungpa
- Posts: 6333
- Joined: Sat May 28, 2011 10:50 pm
Re: Nagarjuna's Mūlamadhyamakakārikā: Questions and Comments
I know Trungpa is controversial, but maybe you will find this interesting:jeeprs wrote:But a really deep skepticism is actually a sadhana. The same for the original 'cynics'. They too were basically like renunciates. But the meaning of 'cynic' has also changed over time.
http://chronicleproject.com/CTRlibrary/ ... armth.html
There is not only nothingness because there is always, and always can manifest. - Thinley Norbu Rinpoche
Re: Nagarjuna's Mūlamadhyamakakārikā: Questions and Comments
dzogchungpa wrote:I know Trungpa is controversial, but maybe you will find this interesting:jeeprs wrote:But a really deep skepticism is actually a sadhana. The same for the original 'cynics'. They too were basically like renunciates. But the meaning of 'cynic' has also changed over time.
http://chronicleproject.com/CTRlibrary/ ... armth.html
Trungpa wrote:The whole approach here is that you have extremely adequate resources within yourself, whether you regard yourself as insane or sane. You have tremendous resources in any case. Whether you take advantage of your insanity or sanity is up to you.
Re: Nagarjuna's Mūlamadhyamakakārikā: Questions and Comments
Just cracking this one open. Ordered Fri. and surprisingly received it earlier today, considering the pub. date is tomorrow!
Yep, It is beginning to look invaluable.
Shaun