The Role of the Bodhicittavivaraṇa in the Mahāmudrā Tradition of ...

Mathes: The Role of the Bodhicittavivaraṇa
As far as I can see, Zhwa dmar pa chos grags ye shes’s commentary on the
Commentary on Enlightened Attitude is in line with the position of his teacher
’Gos lo tsā ba gzhon nu dpal. This is particularly clear in Zhwa dmar pa chos grags
ye shes’s explanation of the Commentary on Enlightened Attitude 54. The root
text and the corresponding commentary by Zhwa dmar pa chos grags ye shes are
as follows:
When the Buddhas take the mind to be impermanent, why should they
not take the mind to be empty? (Commentary on Enlightened Attitude
54).
Once mind is established as being impermanent, and given that impermanence
and emptiness have the same meaning, how could it be inconsistent to call all
phenomena, which are only [one’s] mind, emptiness? [This is also] because [Mind
Only and emptiness] are the same in terms of not apprehending anything as having
an own-being. The illustrious perfect Buddhas have taken mind, the intellect, and
consciousness to be impermanent in the sense of consisting of moments, and since
this is a tenet shared by all of us, they (that is, the mind and so forth) [can] be
taken to be impermanent. This being the case, why should the mind then not be
taken to be emptiness? Even “Perception Only” is taught to be empty only. 18
Zhwa dmar pa chos grags ye shes does not say anything about the status of the
Third Wheel of the Doctrine, but it is clear that by taking Mind Only as implying
emptiness and the non-apprehension of the own-being of external objects (in the
same way as ’Gos lo tsā ba gzhon nu dpal explains Perception Only in the first
meditation practice of the Distinction of Phenomena from their True Nature), he
would not have had any problem accepting The Sūtra on Revealing the Intention
as a Centrist. It should be noted that Zhwa dmar pa chos grags ye shes also inherited
from his teacher the favored use of the notion of momentariness, a predicate which
’Gos lo tsā ba gzhon nu dpal even assigns to Buddha-nature and space. 19 In his
commentary on the Commentary on Enlightened Attitude 55, Zhwa dmar pa chos
grags ye shes thus claims:
The proponents of none of the four tenets differ insofar as they take mind to be
momentary. Therefore, it is established on the basis of reasoning and scripture
that throughout beginningless time mind has never had an own-being. 20
18 Zhwa dmar pa chos grags ye shes, Byang chub sems ’grel gyi rnam par bshad pa, 97.10-98.3:
mdor na sangs rgyas rnams kyis ni/ sems ni mi rtag nyid bzhed na/ /de dag sems ni stong nyid du/ ci
yi phyir na bzhed mi ’gyur/ …sems ni mi rtag pa nyid yin par grub na/ mi rtag pa dang stong pa nyid
don gcig pas/ /sems tsam gyi chos thams cad stong pa nyid du brjod pa ji ltar ’gal te/ thams cad kyang
rang bzhin mi dmigs par mtshungs pas so/ don mdor bsdu na/ yang dag par rdzogs pa’i sangs rgyas
bcom ldan ’das rnams kyis ni/ sems yid rnam shes rnams ni skad cig ma’i mi rtag pa nyid du bzhed
par/ bdag cag thmas cad kyis ’dod pa ’thun na de dag mi rtag par bzhed pas sems ni stong pa nyid du
rgyu ci’i phyir na bzhed par mi ’gyur te/ rnam rig tsam de yang stong pa kho nar ston par ’gyur ro/.
19 See Mathes, Direct Path, 339 and 349.
20 Zhwa dmar pa chos grags ye shes, Byang chub sems ’grel gyi rnam par bshad pa, 98, lines 13-15:
grub mtha’ smra ba bzhi gas sems skad cig mar ’dod pa la mi ’thun pa med pas/ dus thog ma med pa’i
tshe nyid nas sems kyi ni/ rang bzhin dus rtag tu med par ’gyur ba rigs dang lung gi grub kyi…
6