LTF 1: Nagarjuna, the Text, Introductory Verses

The author of this text is Nagarjuna. Nagarjuna was born into a Brahmin family, probably around the mid-second century of the Common Era in South India, in a land called Vidarbha, which is present-day Maharashtra and Andhra Pradesh. This is an area that makes a sort of band going across the southern part of Central India. Of course, it's not very easy to gain confidence in the accuracy of Nagarjuna's biography. Obviously, it's very difficult to know what he actually did. 

When we look at the genre of biographies in Tibetan, they are known by the term “namthar” (rnam-thar). “Namthar” means “liberating text.” In other words, when we read these texts, we gain inspiration to gain liberation ourselves by seeing the wonderful deeds of the masters. Now, whether we take these biographies in literal fashion, or whether we look at them as just myths, or perhaps as representing something on a deeper psychological level, is really is up to us. Undoubtedly, they can be taken on all of these levels to the benefit of the reader. Also, these biographies often illustrate various points from the Dharma, which also can help us gain liberation. 

Nagarjuna was predicted in several sutras by the Buddha. The most well-known of these is the Lankaratara Sutra, or the Sutra of the Journey to Lanka (Sri Lanka). When Nagarjuna was born, a soothsayer (somebody that tells fortunes) predicted that he would live only for seven days, but that if his parents made offerings to a hundred monks, he could live to be seven years old. When the boy reached seven years of age, the parents became very frightened for his life, about what would happen, so they sent him along with some attendants to Nalanda Monastic University, the great monastic university that existed then in North India. It was there that Nagarjuna met the great Buddhist master, Saraha. Saraha told him that if he became a renunciate (in other words, joined the monastery,) and if he recited the Amitabha mantra for long life, this would be successful: he would be able to overcome this obstacle and live a very long life. Nagarjuna did as suggested and the obstacle was overcome. Upon joining the monastery, he received the name Shrimata.

Now, I won't go into all the possible symbolisms that can be found in the various facets of this story. That would take much too long. We’ll go, then, through the bare facts as are reported in the biographies. 

At Nalanda Monastic University, Nagarjuna studied both sutra and tantra with another master called Ratnamati. Ratnamati was an emanation of Manjushri. So, when we hear about how the lineages of the profound teachings of the Buddha went from the Buddha, to Manjushri, to Nagarjuna, it was probably often through this emanation of Manjushri, Ratnamati, that the allusion is made. I haven't seen in the biography that Nagarjuna actually had visions of Manjushri the way Tsongkhapa had. Maybe he did. I just looked at a very brief biography where it says that he was “taken care of” by Manjushri throughout his life, but it gives no great detail. Again, what this could possibly mean may be something else. 

Participant: Didn’t Nagarjuna also study the Guhyasamaja Tantra with Saraha?

Dr Berzin: Yes, it was also with Saraha that Nagarjuna studied the Guhyasamaja Tantra. The Guhyasamaja Tantra is known as the “king of tantras.” If we look at it from the Western point of view, it is undoubtedly the earliest tantra to appear in India. It appeared in the same area of South India where Nagarjuna came from, so the relationship between Nagarjuna and Guhyasamaja could possibly have some historical basis. 

Participant: But it says in the biography that he studied it at Nalanda…

Dr Berzin: That could be. 

Participant: Didn’t Nagarjuna have another teacher?

Dr Berzin: The other famous teacher of Nagarjuna was Rahulabhadra. Various lineages come through these figures. 

Nagarjuna also learned alchemy from a brahmin, and from that he gained the ability to transmute iron into gold. With this power he was able to come up with gold and money to buy food and feed the monks at Nalanda during a famine. Just to give you an example of what this could represent – it could represent that the monks' understanding of voidness at that time was very weak, like iron, and that Nagarjuna was able to transmute it into gold. So, instead of the spiritual famine that the monks had at that time – of not really understanding voidness – they were able to flourish. This is what I mean when I say that we can look at the biography on many levels of what it could represent. 

Eventually, Nagarjuna became so learned and famous that he became the abbot of Nalanda. As abbot, he expelled 8,000 monks who were not keeping the Vinaya rules of discipline purely. He also engaged in many debates and was able to defeat 500 non-Buddhists in debate. 

One time, two youths came to Nalanda, who were actually emanations of the sons of the king of the nagas. They had about them a natural, beautiful fragrance of sandalwood. Nagarjuna asked them how this was so, and they confessed to him who they were: they were the sons of the naga king. Nagarjuna then asked them for some of the sandalwood scent, which he could use for the consecration of a Tara statue. Nagarjuna was into Tara very much. Also, he requested the nagas’ help in constructing some temples. They said, “Well, we’ll have to ask our father about that,” and went back to the naga realm beneath the sea to propose Nagarjuna’s request to their father. The father replied that he would only help if Nagarjuna came to teach the nagas, and so Nagarjuna went to the naga realm. 

Nagarjuna went to this naga realm beneath the sea, made many offerings, and taught the nagas there. Again, what this actually means could have many different levels of interpretation. You could take that literally – that Nagarjuna went beneath the sea and that from there he brought back the Prajnaparamita Sutras. Or you could take it in a Jungian sense – that Nagarjuna went into the deep unconscious and that from the clear light level of mind, he brought the Prajnaparamita Sutras. In any case, what’s very famous about Nagarjuna is that he went down to the naga realm beneath the sea. According to some legends, this naga realm was actually beneath a large lake that is now Kathmandu Valley. Below Swayambunath stupa, they say, is a staircase that goes down underneath it to the naga realm where Nagarjuna had descended. 

Participant: So, they just naturally had that smell of sandalwood? Just like that?

Dr Berzin: Just like that. And Nagarjuna asked, “Where did you get that from?” To which they replied, “Oh, we got this from our special naga realm.” “Oh, I’d like some of that for my Tara statue.” 

Nagas, by the way, are members of the animal realm who have snake bodies and human heads and arms. Again, some psychologists say that they are very similar to the whole idea of dragons that we have in the West. Nagas are very wealthy, and they guard their wealth. Here they’re guarding the Prajnaparamita Sutras, just like you might have dragons guarding a princess or something like that, and someone has to fight past the dragons in order to get the treasure. Likewise, one has to “fight past the dragons” in order to get to the clear light level of mind where one can gain the greatest wisdom.

The Prajnaparamita Sutras were taught by Buddha. Prajnaparamita means “far-reaching discriminating awareness of voidness,” and is usually translated as “perfection of wisdom.” When Buddha taught this at Vulture’s Peak, near Rajgir in North India, which is not too far from Bodhgaya, there was a huge, huge audience. Besides the humans who were present, there were three other main groups of beings who were entrusted with the Prajnaparamita Sutras – different versions of them, and different lengths. The nagas took one version of it back to their realm for safe keeping beneath the sea; the gods took another version of it up into their realm; and the yaksha lords of wealth took yet another. Nagarjuna brought back the version from the nagas. Another time, Asanga was taken to Tushita heaven by Maitreya from where he brought back Maitreya’s commentary, Abhisamayalamkara, A Filigree of Realizations, on the Prajnaparamita version that was kept by the gods. Again, that leaves a great deal to think about in terms of the sources of the Prajnaparamita Sutras and the Indian literature on it.

When Nagarjuna found out that the nagas had the 100,000-verse version of the Prajnaparamita Sutras, he requested a copy to bring back to the human realm. The king of the nagas agreed, but he didn't give the last two chapters of the sutra to Nagarjuna as a ransom to make sure that Nagarjuna would come back. Well, Nagarjuna didn't go back for the last two chapters. Later, they were filled in from The Eight Thousand Verse Prajnaparamita Sutra. That’s why the last two chapters of both the 8,000-verse version and the 100,000-verse version are the same. 

Once, when Nagarjuna was teaching the Prajnaparamita Sutra, which he did quite often, six nagas came. They formed an umbrella over Nagarjuna's head to protect him from the sun, and because of this, the iconographical representation of Nagarjuna has six nagas over his head forming a hood. From this event, it is said that he got the name Nagarjuna. The “Naga” part of his name is from this occurrence. Then, according to another account, because of his skill in teaching the Dharma, which went straight to the point like the arrows of the archer Arjuna, the hero of the Bhagavad Gita, he also got the name “Arjuna.” You put those names together: “Naga” and “Arjuna,” and you get Nagarjuna. 

Once, Nagarjuna travelled to the Northern Continent. Now, what in the world that means, I have no idea! In each world system, there are four continents. Continents are island worlds. We live on the Southern Continent. The Northern Continent is where the humanoids – this is the name for the type of human beings on each of these continents – have the longest lifespans, which is a fixed lifespan of 1,000 years. It is fairly wealthy there, but there is no private wealth. All wealth is shared in common, and all property is also shared in common. Now, what Nagarjuna actually did in the Northern Continent, I haven't come across. The only story I’ve ever heard about this trip is one that the Tibetans find hilarious: Nagarjuna once was bathing in a lake on the Northern Continent, and people took his clothes because it was common property. Being common property, anybody could take anything, and anybody could use it. So, then he had no clothing – ha, ha, ha. That's the type of thing that Tibetans find amusing. 

On his way to the Northern Continent, Nagarjuna met some children who were playing on the road. He prophesized that one of them, named Jetaka, would be become king in the future. When Nagarjuna returned from the Northern Continent, the boy had in fact grown up and become the king. Nagarjuna stayed with him for three years teaching him. This is the king for whom Nagarjuna wrote this Letter to a Friend. Nagarjuna also wrote for the king another very famous text called The Precious Garland. 

Some Western scholars identify this king, whose name we find in Tibetan as Dechoe-zangpo (bDe-spyodbzang-po), as corresponding to the Sanskrit name Udayibhadra. However, I find “udayi” a little strange as a translation for the Tibetan “dechoe” (bDe-spyod).” Udayi” means “ascending”, or “flourishing”, whereas “dechoe” means “to act or live in happiness,” and in the Lankavatara Sutra, it is the Tibetan translation of the Sanskrit term sukhavihara. In any case, the scholars then try to identify him among various kings of the Shatavahana Dynasty, which ruled in this southern part of India where Nagarjuna was born, Andhra Pradesh. The Shatavahana Dynasty lasted from 230 before our Common Era until 199 of the Common Era. However, I think it is almost impossible to identify this king exactly. These Shatavahana rulers were the patrons of the stupa at Amravati, the stupa where the Buddha first taught the Kalachakra Tantra, and also where His Holiness the Dalai Lama just recently gave the Kalachakra tantra initiation. So, there is a connection between Nagarjuna and this area where Kalachakra was taught in the grand stupa. There was actually a stupa there; the ruins are still there. It was also here that Nagarjuna taught the Guhyasamaja Tantra. This area of Andhra Pradesh was very central in producing some of the earliest Mahayana literature, both on sutra and tantra. 

This king, Udayibhadra, had a son called Kumara Shaktiman, who wanted to become the king. His mother told him that he could never become king until Nagarjuna died. This was because Nagarjuna and his father had a very special relationship; they were bonded so closely that they were to have the exact same life span. Kumara Shaktiman’s mother told her son to go ask Nagarjuna for his head. “Since Nagarjuna is so compassionate, he will definitely agree to give you his head,” advised the mother. The boy went and asked for his head, and Nagarjuna did in fact agree. But, when Kumara went to chop off Nagarjuna's head with a sword, he couldn't cut it off; the sword didn't have any effect! Nagarjuna told Kumara Shaktiman that in a previous lifetime he had killed an ant while cutting grass and that the only way that he could be killed would be with a blade of grass because that was the karmic result of having killed this ant. Kumara did this – he took a blade of grass across Nagarjuna's neck and was able to cut his head off. Nagarjuna died. The blood from the severed head that came out turned into milk, and the head spoke, saying, “Now I will go to Sukhavati Pure Land, but I will enter this body again.” Kumara was a bit frightened by this and took the head very far away from the body. According to the story, though, the head and the body are coming closer together each year. When they join, Nagarjuna will return and teach again. Now, whether or not we have here the prelude of a messiah, a second coming type of thing, I don't know. In any case, that's the account. It is also said that Nagarjuna lived a very long life of six hundred years.

Nagarjuna wrote many texts. One set of his texts is known as the Six Texts on Logic. This set includes the Root Verses on Madhyamaka, called “Discriminating Awareness.” This is, I think, the most famous text of Nagarjuna’s on voidness. It is this text that His Holiness the Dalai Lama will teach several chapters from this year in Brussels and again in Rennes, France. Nagarjuna also wrote several texts of praise. One that is very famous is the Praise to the Sphere of Reality (Dharmadhatu). He also wrote several didactic texts, including A Commentary on (the Two) Bodhichittas.  For those of you who might have been there, it was these two texts, Praise to the Sphere of Reality (Dharmadhatu) and A Commentary on (the Two) Bodhichittas, that His Holiness the Dalai Lama taught in Paris a couple of years ago. Also, in the didactic text genre, Nagarjuna wrote An Anthology of Sutras. Shantideva also wrote a text called An Anthology of Sutras where he brought together quotations from other sutras that supported his writing. In that text, Shantideva said that one should also look at the text by Nagarjuna that has the same name. So, that’s clearly referring to this one. Also, it is in this last group of didactic texts that we find the two texts I mentioned that Nagarjuna wrote for the king: Letter to a Friend, and The Precious Garland. In addition to all of these mentioned, Nagarjuna wrote two very famous commentaries on the Guhyasamaja Tantra.

Participant: He ascribed to or…

Dr Berzin: Nagarjuna is the one who basically founded the Madhyamaka school. He would be considered a “general” Madhyamika, meaning that both the Svatantrika and Prasangika would take him as their source. In other words, his texts on voidness are root texts that you could interpret either way. Remember, Svantantrika and Prasangika are divisions of Madhyamaka that were made up by the Tibetans; they didn't have that division scheme in India. Actually, the Tibetans made up several division schemes of Madhyamaka – not just into Svatantrika and Prasangika. Each of the Tibetan schools and several authors within each of these schools have different interpretations of what it means to be Svatantrika, Prasangika, Yogacharya, Madhyamaka, or Maha-Madhyamaka. There are all sorts of divisions of Madhyamaka, but all of them would take Nagarjuna as a source. 

Nagarjuna's most famous disciple was Aryadeva. Aryadeva is the author of the Four Hundred Verses on the Yogic Deeds of Bodhisattvas. This is the text that His Holiness the Dalai Lama will teach next summer in Hamburg. Aryadeva, like Nagarjuna, also wrote a famous commentary on Guhyasamaja. It's quite interesting that Aryadeva’s disciple, Chandrakirti, is also very famous for having written commentaries both on Madhyamaka and Guhyasamaja. This the Tibetans take as a very important indication that the whole philosophical basis of tantra is Madhyamaka. 

Now, the original of the text that we are going to be studying, Letter to a Friend, has unfortunately been lost. This text, which is 123 verses long, survives only in Tibetan and Chinese translations. There was one Sanskrit commentary on it by an Indian author named Mahamati, and although it is not available anymore in Sanskrit, it’s been translated into Tibetan, although I haven't seen it. The Letter, itself, was translated into Tibetan in the old translation period of the ninth century by the Nyingma translator, Peltseg. As such, it’s one of the earliest texts that came into Tibet. 

There are three Tibetan commentaries on the Letter to a Friend. There is a Sakya one by Rendawa. Rendawa was one of Tsongkapa's teachers. There is also one from the Gelug tradition by GesheLozang-jinpa, but it's not clear at all when he lived. Obviously, he must have lived after Rendawa because Lo-zang-jinpa is Gelugpa. Then there is a Nyingma commentary by Mipam, who lived in the nineteenth century. Each of these commentaries has its own outline for the text. In addition, there was another outline written for it even earlier than the first commentary, and that was by the Sakya Pandita. All in all, then, we have three commentaries and four outlines. 

What’s really quite interesting here is that the four outlines divide the text completely differently. It looks almost arbitrary the way that they divide the text because, in fact, when you look at the text and the verses, it's not as well-organized as some of the later Indian literature is. So, I thought that as a way of introducing the text here, I’d just give the general, main divisions of these four outlines so that you see how diversely the text can be divided. However, when we actually study the text, I don't think it makes sense to follow any of these outlines because it seems almost arbitrary, or forced, shall we say.

Some of the outlines have one section of the outline for each verse. Sakya Pandita’s, the earliest outline, divides the text into a general explanation and a detailed explanation. By the way, I am leaving out the part of this outline that covers the introductory three verses. So, the detailed explanation is divided into the three higher trainings: ethical discipline, concentration, and discriminating awareness. The training in ethical discipline is divided into the training conducive for arhats and the training conducive for householders. The training in concentration speaks about the concentration needed for attaining one of the better rebirths and the concentration needed for attaining liberation and enlightenment. Lastly, the training in discriminating awareness includes discussions on the twelve links of dependent arising, the eight-fold noble path, the four noble truths, and these sorts of things. All of the verses are pretty much forced into this structure, and one can obviously explain the text this way. 

[In response to participant] The concentration needed for attaining a higher rebirth – that’s what you focus on with concentration in order to attain a higher rebirth?

Rendawa's outline, the Sakya one, is the next oldest. This commentary divides the text into general advice concerning constructive practices, developing aversion for samsara by thinking about its shortcomings, and following the path after having thought about the benefits of nirvana. That's his structure. General advice concerning constructive practices is divided into general advice for both householders and renunciates (renunciates are monastics), then instruction especially for householders, and then instructions for both householders and renunciates, specifically instructions for attaining a better rebirth, liberation, or enlightenment. So, Rendawa pushes it into this structure. 

Now, the Gelugpa outline, by Geshe Lozang-jinpa, divides the text into a brief indication of the paths of the three scopes of motivation (basically the lam-rim,) then an extensive indication of the three paths of the three scopes, and then a summary of the points. That's why it is very clear that this is the Gelugpa commentary: it divides the text into the three scopes of motivation of lam-rim. In the extensive explanation of these three scopes of motivation – initial, intermediate, and advanced – the initial scope is aiming for a better rebirth; the intermediate scope aims for liberation; and the advanced scope, for enlightenment. So, we're covering the same themes here. 

The way that Geshe Lozang-jinpa divides the extensive explanation of the path for those with the advanced motivation is to divide it into the way of developing the first four of the five Mahayana paths. The five Mahayana paths are: the path of accumulation (a building-up pathway mind), the path of applying (an applying pathway mind), the path of seeing (a seeing pathway mind), the path of meditation (an accustoming pathway mind and a pathway mind needing no further training).

The most recent outline, the Nyingma one by Mipam, divides the text into how confidence in the Dharma is the basis of the path and the nature of the path. The nature of the path has a summary, a detailed explanation, and an exposition on the joy of taking its significance to heart. The detailed explanation is divided into the six far-reaching attitudes, or the six perfections. This is a completely different way of dividing it. 

In the end, when one looks at these four outlines and sees the incredible diversity in the organization of the material, the only conclusion is that we can't really say that one is better than other. If we put all these outlines together, we can see what the subject matter of the text is: it speaks of general advice for both householders and monastics. The main aim of householders would be getting a better rebirth, which is, if you look at it in terms of lam-rim, the initial scope of motivation. The main the emphasis for monastics would be gaining liberation, which is the aim of the intermediate scope of lam-rim, or gaining enlightenment, which is the aim of the advanced scope of motivation. In this material, which, from the Gelug point of view, covers the whole lam-rim, we have the three higher trainings, the six far-reaching attitudes, or perfections, and the five paths to enlightenment – the path of accumulation and so on. This is basically what is in the text. In other words, it is really a basic survey of sutra. So, that covers the outstanding features of the text.

Whenever one teaches a text, according to the tradition of the Vikramashila monastery in India, one starts with the outstanding qualities of the author and then the outstanding qualities of the text. From here one can get into the discussion of the text. 

So, let’s begin the text. The title in Sanskrit, Suhrllekha, is not very easy to translate, I must say. There are two possibilities. In Sanskrit: it could be either Letter to a Friend or Friendly Letter. It is not clear in the Sanskrit grammar, and the Sanskrit commentary that would explain the grammar is lost. In the Tibetan commentaries, it is quite interesting. The way the title was translated into Tibetan is Friendly Letter. However, in the Tibetan commentary that I have – the Gelugpa one of Lozang-jinpa – even though in Tibetan the title is translated as Friendly Letter, he explains the title as Letter to a Friend. So, thank you very much! This doesn’t make it clear how to translate the title. Perhaps we can say Friendly Letter to a Friend.

I'll be using my own translation for this. It's been quite interesting working through and translating this text because I only have the Tibetan for it and not the Sanskrit. It really makes me appreciate the value of having the Sanskrit because I used the Sanskrit original for the translation of Bodhisattvacharyavatara to clarify the Tibetan translation. Tibetan does not have anywhere near the grammatical complexity of Sanskrit. Sanskrit has many, many cases for nouns and an unbelievable number of verb tenses and verb forms, whereas Tibetan has almost none, or very few, I should say. Tibetan does not even have singular or plural – these sorts of things. When you have the verses in Tibetan alone, it's not so precise; it’s not always clear how to take them. When you rely on the commentaries – well, we have seen how the commentaries vary so much. In this aspect, again, one could understand the text in different ways. Anyway, I've tried to explain it and translate it following the text itself. 

Participant: Which commentary do you use right now?

Dr Berzin: Right now, I have in Tibetan the Gelug commentary by Lozang-jinpa. I also have, translated into English, the commentary by Rendawa, which was published by the Library. 

Participant: That’s this one?

Dr Berzin: I guess so. I have an older edition. The commentary by Mipam has also recently been translated and is being published by Snow Lion. They said that it should be available in January. I ordered it, but I still haven't received it. 

Participant: Amazon said that I’ll get it five days from now.

Dr Berzin: Right, so that will come. Sakya Pandita’s outline for it I have as well, translated into English. I forget where, though. I think it was in… what is his name, the Japanese disciple of Herbert Günther who translated the text horribly as Golden Zephyr?

Participant: Kawamura.

Dr Berzin: Kawamura, thank you. But there it has the outline of Sakya Pandita as well. Four outlines are available, then, at least in English. Well, Lozang-jinpa's is not available in English, but I have that one in Tibetan. I look at whatever is available and try to see what makes the most sense with the actual Tibetan. Also, looking at my notes from Geshe Dhargyey’s teachings on the text is helpful. I imagine he followed Lozang-jinpa's commentary. 

Let me add something here: the Tibetan is far clearer than the Chinese. I don't have the Chinese translation available to me, but Chinese translations of Buddhist texts are very, very loose. They translate mostly just the general meaning because classical Chinese has almost no grammar at all. Tibetan has far more than Chinese. The Tibetans try to at least translate each word, although they may not have the grammatical connections of the words very clear. The Chinese is even looser, though. Chinese aim for poetical beauty in their translations. 

Participant: It’s very temporary in a way, no? Because the cultural references go away, and the…

Dr Berzin: Well, it's not so much the “cultural references,” as just the beauty of language, the aesthetics of Chinese poetry itself. This is the way of classical Chinese poetry and composition. Also, the translation of the text into German that Oliver Peterson prepared has translated along with it Geshe Lozang-jinpa's outline. So, there are plenty of materials available in English and German. Let’s begin the text:

[1] O you, with the nature of good qualities, who've become worthy through constructive deeds, please listen to these (verses) in noble meter, which I’ve compiled in short for the sake of (instilling) an intention for the positive force that comes from (following) explanations of the Blissfully Gone (Buddha's) speech.

Here, Nagarjuna encourages the king, “Please listen to the verses of this letter.” He praises the king as a vessel who is worthy of the teachings. How has he become worthy of these teachings? He has become worthy as a result of his constructive actions in past lives, which have caused him to have the nature of somebody with many qualities. Nagarjuna describes the text as a short – so, not too long – a letter to read. It's written in noble meter, or arya meter. 

Now, we have to look at Sanskrit poetics. Sanskrit poetry is extraordinarily complex and has all sorts of various meters, many more than Latin or Greek poetry had. In fact, it has as much complexity as is found in the meters of Indian music. “Noble meter” is a poetic meter with each verse having four lines. The length of the verses is measured in syllabic units: a short syllable, or a syllable with a short vowel sound, counts as one unit. A long syllable counts as two units. In this meter, the first and third lines of each verse have twelve units, the second line has eighteen units, and the fourth line has fifteen. This is a very specific, very strict meter that Nagarjuna has used to compose this text in. 

Nagarjuna says that he has composed and sent this text so that by reading or listening to it being read (perhaps the king couldn't read, who knows,) the king and others will generate the intention to build up even more positive force, even more merit. Already, Nagarjuna praised the king as having quite a lot. This merit would be the “positive force” to gain the goals of either better rebirth, liberation, or enlightenment, which come from following the instructions given by the Blissfully Gone Buddha's enlightening speech. 

I must say, I have a doubt about this verse in Tibetan because of this last line, “an intention for the positive force that comes from…” Literally, it just says that the positive force comes from explanations of the Blissfully Gone Buddha’s speech. “Explanations” is a little bit weird here, I must say. My experience in comparing the Tibetan and Sanskrit of Shantideva’s Bodhisattvacharyavatara is that very often there are spelling mistakes the scribe has made in copying to Tibetan. If you change one letter of the word “explanations” in Tibetan, it's the word “to listen,” which makes far more sense here: “Instilling an intention for the positive force that comes from listening to the Blissfully Gone (Buddha's) speech.” However, the Tibetan commentaries follow the spelling that’s in the version included in the Tengyur, and it's the word for “explanations.” There's obviously no way to settle it unless one had the Sanskrit original. It would be interesting to look at the Chinese, too, but as I said, I don't have a copy of the Chinese. 

Participant: Then he also said future lives, not just past lives?

Dr Berzin: Past lives – he's become worthy as a result of the constructive actions he did in past lives and in his present life.

The introductory material continues with the second and third verses:

[2] Just as the wise venerate a statue of the Blissfully Gone, even out of wood, regardless of how it’s been made; likewise, although this poetry of mine may be deficient, please do not scorn it, since it’s based on expressions of the hallowed Dharma.

Here, Nagarjuna is being very humble, apologizing for the poor quality of his poetry. However, since it's based on the Buddha's words, he begs the king not to look down on it or ignore it. 

And then the third verse:

[3] Although a profusion of the resonant words of the Great Sage (Buddha) may already have entered your heart, isn’t something made of limestone made even whiter by the light of a winter's moon?

Here, he compliments the king saying, “King, you’ve heard many teachings already. I can’t really teach you so much more, but perhaps this teaching can make your understanding even better, like the winter's moonlight makes the white of limestone look even whiter.” 

This concludes the introductory material that Nagarjuna writes to begin his text.

Participant: Limestone?

Dr Berzin: Yeah, limestone is like the cliffs of Dover in England – white cliffs made of chalk. 

This completes the three introductory verses. Next time we'll get into the main part of the text. Almost all of the outlines speak first to the short presentation and then of the full presentation. In this short presentation, particularly in the first verse, the text speaks about continual mindfulness of the six objects. The first three of these are the Three Jewels of Refuge, or the Three Precious Gems. Nagarjuna encourages the king to have continual mindfulness of the good qualities of the Three Jewels. What I thought to do is to go through an explanation of the good qualities of the Three Jewels of Refuge, particularly of the Buddha Jewel – the various qualities of the Buddha's body, speech and mind – since perhaps you don't get explanations on this too often or too easily, and it might be of help. So, if you’d like to have that… Actually, I’ve already prepared the material. So, that’s what I propose, unless there are any objections!