Philosophical Differences among the Tibetan Schools

The main differences among the four traditions are in vocabulary and style of expression. Often the same term will be used by several traditions with completely different meanings. Logic and debate are known in Tibetan as “the study of definitions.”

For example, the word “permanent” can mean either lasting forever or static. In reference to the mind, Nyingma, Kagyu and some Sakya masters assert the mind is permanent, meaning that the subtlest mind has eternal continuity. Gelug and other Sakyas say that the mind is impermanent, meaning that it changes from moment to moment because it takes different objects. The first side asserts that the nature of the mind, as a mere clarity and awareness, is unaffected by anything. It has always been the case and does not have to be created anew each moment. The second side argues that it is affected, since from another point of view clarity and awareness do not exist in a vacuum. There must always be clarity and awareness of something, even if only a blank. The first side retorts that from the deepest point of view the mind itself cannot be differentiated into what knows and what is known. The second side replies that such a distinction is valid from the conventional point of view.

The first side, in describing the deepest nature of mind as mere clarity and awareness, says that the mind’s deepest nature has positive qualities. The other side asserts that mere clarity and awareness is only the conventional nature of the mind. Its deepest nature is that it is devoid of self-established and findable existence. As this type of absence has no positive attributes, they refute that the deepest nature has any qualities. But of course, on the conventional level, the mind has qualities. Basically, both sides agree with the content of each other’s assertions but express it differently.

A great many of the philosophical debates are intended to help one not fall into an extreme position. Each side points out the absurd conclusions that might follow if one takes the other’s position to its logical extreme. Also, the two sides might not acknowledge their differences in definitions of major terms. One side may examine the consequences of substituting their own definitions for the terms in their opponent’s position. This is helpful for pointing out dangers that might arise if one looks superficially at another’s position without taking care regarding their definitions.

Not only do definitions often differ among the Tibetan Buddhist schools, and even among the scholars within one particular school, but also the point of view may be different. Jamyang Khyentse Chokyi Lodro, the reincarnation of the nineteenth century Rime master Jamyang Khyentse Wangpo, has noted that Nyingma and Kagyu explain how things are apprehended from the point of view of the result, Sakya from that of the path and Gelug from the basis.

The resultant level is Buddhahood. According to Nyingma and Kagyu, all conventional phenomena, whether static or nonstatic, permanent or impermanent, are conceptual fabrications, expressible by words and cognizable only by gross levels of mind. Buddhas are totally rid of conceptual cognition and all gross levels of mind. Consequently, Buddhas’ non-conceptual, straightforward cognition with the subtlest mind is focused solely on deepest truth, voidness and, thus being beyond words and concepts, is inconceivable. Their minds are omniscient and complete with all good qualities.

Gelug speaks from the point of view of the basis – in other words, from the point of view of how ordinary beings cognize things. All conventional phenomena are false since they appear as if with self-established and findable existence. They can be apprehended both conceptually, designated with words, and non-conceptually, but they cannot be cognized simultaneously with voidness, the total absence of self-established and findable existence. 

Sakya speaks from the point of view of the path. Although the Sakya view of the inseparability of samsara and nirvana applies to all three – the basis, path and resultant – the emphasis is on the path. On the path, through the methods of highest tantra,  the factors ordinarily responsible for generating one’s samsaric experience can be transformed into methods for attaining nirvana.

The most significant variations among the Tibetan Buddhist schools appear in the advanced practices of the highest class of tantra. At this level, one works with the subtle energy system and subtlest level of mind. In anuttarayoga tantra, one aims to see reality with the subtlest mind. In the New Translation schools of Sakya, Kagyu and Gelug, in order to gain access to this subtlest level it is necessary to dissolve the grosser levels of mind by working with the subtle energy system. One must cause the subtle energy-winds to enter, abide and dissolve in the central channel. The major system followed by all three schools is the six teachings (yogas) of Naropa.

The Nyingma school teaches the dzogchen technique of recognizing the subtlest mind underlying each moment of grosser mind. To identify and activate this subtlest “pure awareness” (rigpa), it is not necessary to purposely extinguish the grosser levels of mind by dissolving the energy-winds. In the manner of those for whom it happens at once, meditation in simply a non-conceptual manner, under the guidance of a fully qualified dzogchen master, will activate the subtlest mind. It does this by causing the energy-winds to dissolve without effort so that one is functioning solely on the level of pure awareness. Non-conceptual meditation will only cause this to happen, however, if one has previously built up the causes through preliminary practice.

Regardless of whether one follows the Old or New Translation school approach, the result is the same. In the end, one has activated the subtlest mind, and the grosser energy-winds and levels of mind have been dissolved.

Consciousness is a way of being aware of something. With subtlest consciousness, a Buddha is aware of everything, both the conventional and deepest level of truth about all phenomena. As a cause for this attainment, one must achieve a subtlest mind having a realization of voidness. This can be approached in two ways.

The Gelug and some of the Sakya lineages emphasize meditation on the absence of self-established and findable existence. All things conventionally exist as this or that dependent only on mental labeling with words and concepts. Having gained this realization with one of the grosser levels of mental consciousness, one transfers one’s understanding to the subtlest mind.

The Nyingma, Kagyu and other Sakya lineages focus primarily on attaining the subtlest clear light mind, or pure awareness. When one sees that all appearances are the play of that mind, one indirectly understands with the subtlest consciousness that all things lack self-established and findable existence. The result of both approaches is the same.

The difference in approach among the Tibetan Buddhist schools can be readily seen in the meditations on voidness that are part of the generation stage of highest tantra practice. On this stage, one uses one’s imagination to visualize processes that approximate higher attainments. Such practice acts as a cause for success on the complete stage, when all is complete for actually achieving these attainments through working with the subtle energy system. When one imagines oneself in the form of a Buddha-figure on the generation stage, one first dissolves ordinary appearances and focuses on voidness. One then arises in this pure form within the state of understanding voidness.

In the Gelug tradition, one focuses on the lack of self-established and findable existence of

• All phenomena in general
• The causes for enlightenment
• The enlightened state itself
• The meditator, meditation process and what is being meditated upon.

There are two styles. One imagines that the consciousness becomes very subtle either before or after focusing on this absence of self-established and findable existence.

In the Sakya tradition, imagining the mind to become the most subtle, one focuses first on all phenomena being the appearances of the subtlest mind, then on this mind being like an illusion and thirdly on the illusion-like mind being without self-nature. This sequence of insights can be interpreted in several ways. The mind’s being like an illusion and lacking a self-nature can mean that it lacks self-established and findable existence. Some Sakyas, however, take the mind’s being like an illusion to mean that the appearances of the mind lack self-established and findable existence and the mind’s lacking a self-nature to mean that it is beyond having the same self-nature as its appearances. This second interpretation will be elaborated in the next chapter with the discussion of the Jonang sub-school of Sakya and its theory of other-voidness.

In the Kagyu tradition, one uses the mahamudra technique of focusing on the clear and aware nature of the mind itself. In the process, one imagines the mind becomes the most subtle. One then focuses on the inseparability of this mind and appearances.

In Nyingma, one follows the dzogchen meditational procedures. Without imagining the grosser levels of mind dissolving, one simply focuses on pure awareness through such gateways as seeing the simultaneous arising and disappearing of thoughts, like writing on water. One then considers how all appearances are the play of this subtlest mind.

One of the most complex philosophical issues that arose in the history of Tibetan Buddhism is “other-voidness,” zhentong. In general, other-voidness entails meditation on the subtlest mind in either the mahamudra or dzogchen manner, and with a philosophical basis deriving from special commentaries on the Uttaratantra and Kalachakra. There are several interpretations, and the Tibetan schools are divided in their opinion. To understand the problems involved, we must first trace the introduction of certain ideas from India.

The Indian master Maitripa, from whom Marpa transmitted mahamudra to Tibet, was also a revealer of treasure texts. In the fifth century, Asanga had received the Five Texts of Maitreya as a consequence of his pure vision of Maitreya Buddha and his having been taken to Maitreya’s Pure Land. Two of these five, the Uttaratantra (The Furthest Everlasting Stream) and Dharma-dharmata-vibhanga (Differentiating Phenomena and Their Actual Nature), were soon hidden as treasure texts. The times in India were not conducive to their study and practice. The more famous of these two, the Uttaratantra, discusses Buddha-nature.

One day, Maitripa saw a strange light emerging from the center of a stupa monument. Upon closer examination, he discovered these two texts of Maitreya had emerged from inside. Maitripa made sincere requests to Maitreya Buddha, who then appeared to him in a pure vision and imparted the oral transmission of the texts. Maitripa received his name undoubtedly because of this connection with Maitreya.

An Indian disciple of Maitripa brought the lineage of these Maitreya texts to Kashmir. There, the lineage eventually passed to the Pandit Sajjana. The Tibetan translator Ngog Lotsawa Loden Sherab (1059–1109) translated and brought these texts from Kashmir to Tibet and transmitted them to the Kadam tradition. Ngog Lotsawa had also introduced the debate tradition from India to Tibet. From the Kadam, this lineage of the Buddha-nature teachings of the Uttaratantra spread to the Sakya and later to the Gelug traditions.

Another young Tibetan, Zu Gawe Dorje, also went to Kashmir and studied Maitreya’s two texts with Sajjana. The Kashmiri master passed on to him a special meditation lineage of these texts. This “Maitreya meditation lineage” was transmitted in Tibet within the Kagyu line in connection with the mahamudra teachings.

The Third Karmapa, Rangjung Dorje (1284–1339), received the Uttaratantra lineages of both Loden Sherab and Gawe Dorje. Through his meditational practice and insight, the Third Karmapa realized Maitreya’s intentions and wrote his own commentary to the Uttaratantra. This is the origin of the Karma Kagyu approach to mahamudra meditation in conjunction with the Uttaratantra teachings on Buddha-nature. Its characteristic features can be understood by contrasting it with dzogchen.

According to Nyingma dzogchen, pure awareness, as Buddha-nature, is the foundation of everything. When it is not recognized, pure awareness acts as a foundation for differentiating consciousness, kunzhi namshe. Differentiating consciousness divides experience into seemingly truly existent subject and object. As such a foundation, pure awareness becomes the basis for the karmic propensities for the perception of the impure appearances of samsara. On the other hand, if pure awareness is aware of its own nature, it becomes a foundation for deep awareness, kunzhi yeshe. As this type of foundation, pure awareness is the source for the perception of the pure appearances of nirvana by the omniscient mind of a Buddha.

Pure awareness, then, is the singular source. How it functions and what it gives rise to depends on whether there is understanding or confusion. In dzogchen terminology, it depends on whether or not pure awareness sees its own face.

According to the mahamudra teachings of the Karma Kagyu tradition, differentiating consciousness, namshe, and deep awareness, yeshe, are mixed together inseparably like milk and water. Deep awareness is the support, and differentiating consciousness is what is supported by it. Viewed from the perspective of their inseparability within “ordinary consciousness,” this “ordinary consciousness” is itself Buddha-nature. The disturbing thoughts of differentiating consciousness are seen like waves of the ocean of deep awareness. They are inseparable from the ocean and have the same nature.

Karma Kagyu mahamudra meditation, then, whether on the sutra or tantra level, is to focus on the nature of clarity and awareness that is the nature of all states of mind. The sutra level deals with grosser levels of mind, while the tantra level treats the subtlest consciousness. Since the mahamudra insight pertains to both levels, many Karma Kagyu masters assert that mahamudra is beyond the division of sutra and tantra.

The inseparable mixture of differentiating consciousness and deep awareness, like the inseparable mixture of waves and the ocean, is identified with the Buddha-nature of the Uttaratantra. By focusing on the clear water-like nature of this mixture, the disturbing waves of differentiating consciousness will subside by themselves.

Dzogchen, on the other hand, is always on the highest tantra level, since it speaks about pure awareness, which is on an equivalent level with subtlest consciousness. The dzogchen technique is to see that thoughts arise and fall simultaneously like writing on water. In this way, one can come to recognize pure awareness, the Buddha-nature underlying each moment of mind.

To relate the Karma Kagyu mahamudra teachings and the Nyingma dzogchen with “other-voidness,” we must next introduce the Jonang tradition and outline the controversies that arose around it.