Customer Reviews

The Gelug/Kagyu Tradition of Mahamudra

5 star:		(2)
4 star:		(1)
3 star:		(0)
2 star:		(0)
1 star:		(0)

 

 

These brilliant discourses by H.H. the Dalai Lama are among the clearest and most detailed teachings on Mahamudra available in English. They explain the complete path to realization of Mahamudra practice, from the preliminary practices on through the development of calm abiding and the methods for meditating on emptiness and the nature of the mind. This book would give anyone an excellent introduction to Mahamudra meditation and philosophy, but the detailed explanations would make it of particular interest to those who are actually doing the practices.

This is a rather imposing book, I have to say. It is certainly not for everyone, but will be of inestimable value to the right persons.

Its apparatus is divided into four sections: first an introductory section of 70+ pages written by the translator, Alexander Berzin. Second, the root text itself, entitled "A Root Text for the Precious Gelug/Kagyu Tradition of Mahamudra: The Main Road of the Triumphant Ones, by the First Panchen Lama, Lozang-choekyi-gyeltsen" (6 pages). Third, an oral commentary on the root text by H.H. the Dalai Lama (60+ pages). Fourth, an oral commentary on the First Panchen Lama's auto-commentary, again by H.H. the Dalai Lama (180+ pages). Lastly, prints of the root text in the Tibetan language.

Teachings on Mahamudra and Dzogchen are difficult to categorize. On the one hand, they are seen as the summit of Tibetan Buddhist practice. Dzogchen is the ultimate practice, the essence of the practices, in the Nyingma tradition; and similarly Mahamudra is here taught as a very high-level practice closely related to the completion stage of the anuttarayoga tantras. On the other hand, Mahamudra and Dzogchen are also taught to beginners as a way to quickly see into the nature of mind. This does _not_ mean that they are "easy" or "simple" practices, as Berzin stresses; he notes that to speak of them in such a way is to disparage them - a terrible thing to do.

The First Panchen Lama himself points out this tension in the root text, where he notes: "The great meditators of the snow mountains are practically of a single opinion in proclaiming that this is a guideline indicating how to forge a state of Buddhahood. Be that as it may, I, Choekyi-gyeltsen, say that this is a wondrous skillful means for beginners to accomplish the settling of their mind and is a way that leads you to recognize [merely] the conventional nature of mind that conceals something deeper."

In other words, one can engage in Mahamudra practice as a beginner to see the conventional nature of mind. Later, one can use the practice to see the ultimate (empty) nature of mind.

Berzin's excellent introduction will prepare practitioners somewhat for the root text and the commentaries by His Holiness. That being said, a few recommendations... (1) Repeated readings will be beneficial, since Berzin's introduction, although easy to read, can be a bit unclear at times. (2) Memorize the root text. It is only 6 pages. It is very important in practice to keep in mind the instructions of the teacher. To memorize the root text was the instruction of my teacher, and although it may seem laborious, it is of unquestionable value. Treat it as a preliminary practice, or to help you in the development of shamatha. (3) Study this text with an experienced practitioner/teacher. If you just pick up this book, but never receive any teachings on mahamudra from a teacher, your progress may be slow.

Good luck - don't give up!!!

My 10th & best so far Dalai Lama (DL) book includes Berzin's fine introduction (with context & background), the 1st Panchen Lama's (PL) root text "The Precious Gelug/Kagyu Tradition of Mahamudra" (MM), a DL discourse on it, DL discourses on the 1st PL's auto-commentary on the root text, Tibetan text, & an index. As usual the DL takes a non-sectarian stand--p. 191: "Thus, each Tibetan tradition presents a spiritual path that combines into the practice for one individual the essence of the three vehicles of Hinayana, Mahayana, and tantrayana. Thus, no matter who we are, we uphold the three-fold teachings of the complete path of Hinayana, Mahayana, and tantrayana" & extends his (p. 260) non-sectarianism beyond Buddhism. He describes the relationships between Gelug MM, Kagyu MM (p. 223)-e.g. Gelug MM is only gradual vs. Kagyu MM & p. 240 Dzogchen (Dz) which also include the instantaneous-& even (p. 227) Bön Dz, but, p. 129: does seem to imply that Gelug MM is superior to Dz. He also includes crisp/helpful descriptions of numerous Buddhist/Vajrayana concepts including: pp. 59-61: mind defined per MM [space-time], p. 67: mindfulness, alertness ("being the flashlight"), attentiveness & focus, pp. 192-4: 4 levels of mandala offering, pp. 200-2: common & individual karma, p. 205: common preliminaries to MM, pp. 210-4: practical advice on commitments, the guru, empowerments, etc., p. 212: fine points of guru yoga, p. 215: yidam/deity yoga-addressing gender (i.e. Avalokiteshwara/Tara for all practitioners), p. 270: the Pacifier Tradition of Padampa Sanggye, p. 309: the 3 "we's", & p. 348: Lojong mind training.

He also makes enlightening/provocative statements: pp. 109-110: "We take refuge, or safe direction in life, in order to distinguish our practice from non-Buddhist paths," p. 207: "If we take the meaning and usage of technical terms that we have learned from the context of one text and try to apply them to another text-even, sometimes, to another book by the same author-we many see many contradictions and become very confused. Thus, it is important to understand the use of terminology within the context of each specific text we study,"" & points out that p. 266 "Hoshang" means monk in Tibetan such that the famous debate with the Chinese monk "Hoshang" is not a disparagement of Chinese Chan or Japanese Zen. He delves into Western psychology in describing "me" vs. ego (pp. 74-7) & says p. 75: "An inflated ego, then is the closest Western equivalent for what we call in Buddhism `apprehending me' as existing solidly...false me. A healthy ego is analogous to the conventional `me' discussed in Buddhism. The `me' that is the object of focus of an inflated ego is analogous to the Buddhist false `me.' He also provides a rarely described parallel with Sakya MM pp. 171-2: "Sakya transmits the meditational method of the view of clarity and voidness not apprehended apart. Also known as the causal everlasting stream of the alaya, the all-encompassing foundation, and the inseparability of samsara and nirvana," pp. 234-9: other voidness, & maha-madhyamaka. He provides cogent arguments for a middle way approach to scoping arguments: p. 307: "If we do not recognize the true and inherent identity at which we are aiming our refutation, then no matter how many logical reasons we cite, we cannot apply them accurately to hit the mark" and p. 308: "If...what we recognize as the object to be refuted is under-pervasive-in other words, too limited in scope-we consequently refute too little."

However, this work has a number of paradoxes from a Western scientific perspective. Regarding mind, p. 65: "Buddhism does not posit a universal or collective mind," but, p. 78: There is a surface and a deeper level about everything, including mind, and both actually exist. But neither exists on its own," & p. 251: "When yogis have realization of the straightforward non-conceptual experience of primordial mind, they see that all phenomena, in a cognitive sense, are emanations of that primordial mind." Furthermore, he speculates that p. 253: clear light mind = Holy Ghost = Buddha nature! The problem here may be the translation or differences in Eastern/Western psychologies/perspectives. My problem with this book, is the portion of the prasangika-madhyamaka (PM) philosophy such that naming causes existence--p. 128: "The existence of all phenomena is established by virtue simply of imputation or names," p. 129: "The existence of all phenomena is established by virtue simply of names or mental labeling, p. 150: "The PM school, however, uses dependent arising to mean that the existence of all phenomena-of samsara or nirvana, non-static or static-arises or is established dependently by virtue simply of mental labeling," p. 316: "All phenomena lack any existence other than one established simply in relation to names," p. 336: "the object being labeled dependently exists by virtue simply of names and mental labeling...On the basis of existence and identity by virtue simply of labeling with names..." etc. It's too repetitive to be a translation problem. It seems to imply that the platypus, dinosaurs, distant stars...didn't exist until named. Such naming in the West infers primitive magic or fantasy fiction (e.g. Ursula LeGuin's "Earthsea Trilogy"). More specifically, he belabors the non-existence of an inherent self. Admittedly, the self is an aggregate of numerous influences & thus, is not inherent/eternal/unchanging as some Westerners may assume-though Jung defined the ego as a complex-an amalgam/aggregate-not an eternalist view & not endemic in the West. Nevertheless, the map is not the territory and the name is not the thing itself. The author ignores set theory, statistics, & pattern recognition. There must be a defined pattern that represents an individual since one can recognize someone after an absence of 25 years & a computer programs can recognize faces, individuals by how they type, etc. It seems to me that labeling/naming is dependent upon the basis for naming (gestalt) not the other way around. The failed Vajrayana search for a solid mind/self (Vipashyana) proves nothing-one cannot see his/her face directly, only in reflection-but a pattern is statistically real. Indeed, IMHO, form is pattern & pattern is form. Since pattern is by nature an aggregate, it is (in Tibetan terms) empty. Therefore, the Prajnaparamita Sutras' statement: "form is emptiness and emptiness if form" is scientifically self-evident.