Introduction

The First Turning the Wheel of Dharma
The Second Turning the Wheel of Dharma
The Third Turning the Wheel of Dharma
The Fourth Turning the Wheel of Dharma
The Unique Buddhadharma
The Necessity to Accumulate Merit
The Illusion of Inherent Existence
Western Criticism & Process Philosophy

The Mahâyâna Mind-Only School introduced the pedagogic scheme of the "Three Turnings". When Buddhist Tantra became academic (in the 7th century CE), a "Fourth Turning" was added ... These Turnings organized the various teachings, some of which were considered "definitive" (directly revealing the Moon) and others "provisional" (a finger indirectly pointing at the Moon). The different "turnings" are said to represent various levels of the teachings, and therefore call for different audiences. Together, they constitute the "84.000 Dharma Doors". For all schools, the First Turning is provisional. In the Middle Way Consequence School, the Second Turning is definitive and the Third Turning provisional. For the Nyingmapas, Kagyus & Jonangpas (Other-Emptiness), both Second & Third Turnings are definitive.

 The First Turning of the Wheel of Dharma

In the traditional accounts, Śâkyamuni was welcomed in the royal deer park near Vârânasî by the group of five ascetics who earlier had turned their backs on him for having rejected the path of austerities. He proclaimed himself a "Tathâgata", a word etymologically meaning "a speaker of the Truth", but also "one who has attained what is really so" or "one who is thus gone" etc. He gave his First Sermon, called "Setting in Motion the Wheel of the Dharma".

This First Turning of the Wheel of Dharma contained his core teachings : the Four Noble Truths, the Eightfold Path & the Two Truths. These are the foundation of the entire Buddhadharma, the Hînayâna (Tripitaka), as well as the Mâhayâna, both Sûtras & Tantras.

 The Second Turning of the Wheel of Dharma

In his Second Turning of the Wheel of Dharma, Buddha introduced his famous "anâtman" or "no-self" as well as the importance of compassion.

Selflessness is empty of "self", absence of "own-form" ("svabhâva"). It negates the idea objects possess a core essence or "nature" from their own side, inherently, substantially. It affirms process and by doing so brings the absence of substance to bare. The true self is therefore the non-self. The core of the self is selflessness.

To understand these teaching on "śûnyatâ", emptiness, the ultimate reality, numerous tenet-systems developed, differing on the definition of emptiness, the ultimate truth.

Emptiness has two sides : philosophical & yogic :

• philosophy affirms reason, uses concepts to eliminate reified concepts, and finally tries to nullify the cognitive act of designating or labeling inherent existence itself. This is like approaching enlightenment from "the outside", objectively and in accord with epistemology. It is preparing the vision without spoiling it by trying to describe it. The philosophers gave rise to "Sûtra Mâdhyamaka" and its two branches : the Autonomy School & the Consequence School ;

• yoga transcends reason, develops direct, non-conceptual experience of emptiness from "the inside" and so manifests the transcendent or supramundane. Middle Way yogis are "Yogâcâra Mâdhayamikas", accepting self-emptiness, except for a consciousness  lacking apprehended-object & apprehended-subject. They come close to "Tantra Mâdhyamaka", stressing primordial wisdom as the union of clarity-emptiness & bliss-emptiness. They are also found in the Other-Emptiness School and in Mahâsandhi (Dzogchen).

The conceptual (logical, reasonable) and the non-conceptual (para-logical, experiential) are the two fundamental answers to the questions addressed by the emptiness-teachings of the Second Turning : What is the ultimate nature of reality ? What is truly establised ? How to think the Two Truths ? However, before engaging the poetry of direct experience, the ways of reason first need to be exhausted.

"Emptiness" is understood in terms of the Middle Way Consequence School, the Prâsangika-Mâdhyamaka, in casu :

• Nâgârjuna (2th CE) in Mûlamadhyamakakârikâ (A Fundamental Treatise on the Middle Way) & Shûnyatâsaptatikârikânâma (Seventy Stanzas on Emptiness) ;

• Chandrakîrti (ca. 600 – 650) in his Mâdhyamakâvatâra (Entering the Middle Way) &

• Śântideva (8th CE) in his Bodhicharyâvatâra (A Guide to the Bodhisattva's Way of Life) ;

• Atiśa (ca. 982 - 1054) in his Bodhipathapradîpa ;

• Tsongkhapa (1357 - 1419) in his The Great Treatise on the Stages of the Path to Enlightenment, The Ocean of Reasoning and The Essence of Eloquence.

To characterize scientific knowledge, Western Criticism will also be taken into account, in casu Kant (1724 - 1804) of the Critique of Pure Reason as well as process metaphysics.

My studies set off by endorsing the view on emptiness of the Prâsangika-Mâdhyamika or "Rangtong" Mâdhyamikas, the rationalists & strict nominalists found in the Sakya & Gelug schools of Tibetan Buddhism. They back the philosophical approach, stressing study & reflection based on logic & debate. Here, emptiness, the ultimate nature of phenomena, is defined as absence of inherent existence. This is the exclusion negation, or non-affirmative negation.

For Rangtong, ultimate analysis affirms all phenomena, including the "noumenon" of Buddhahood, or wisdom-mind apprehending its object, to be "empty of self", i.e. empty of inherent existence. Hence, Buddhas do not exist "from their own side", nor does their Truth Body or "Dharmakâya" ! As all phenomena (the ultimate included) are of the same ultimate nature, there is nowhere any ontological "split". To clarify its view, the Rangtong often debates with the Mind-Only School, the so-called "Yogâcârin School", "the practice of yoga school", with idealist Mâdhyamikas like Gorampa and at times with Dzogchen & Jonang masters (cf. other-emptiness). These operate on the basis of a choice negation, eliminating the defilements of the mind to bring inherent Buddha-qualities to the fore.

In ultimate analysis, the moment of consciousness following the last ultimate nullification of false ideations cannot be conceptually or linguistically characterized. The difficulty of appreciating the mind of Clear Light is related to the structure of our language, not permitting a transitive verb without a subject and a predicate. There is no "knowing" without a knower and a known. But this is merely grammatical convention. In the expression "the Sun rose" on may realize that it is the Sun that is rising ...

When concepts have cleared all reified concepts, silenced the mind and brought awareness to what is at hand, nothing remains to be said. What happens next is sheer un-saying, ineffable for ever. This can only be approached with poetry. The transcendent state of enlightenment (awakening) can be personally experienced, but not conceptually known or linguistically described from the outside, while the person actually experiencing it from the inside cannot describe it in empirico-formal propositions, but only point to it. He or she can transform this inner experience into living compassion. As art, this knowledge is excellent, exemplaric & sublime.

Because of this critical barrier, strict nominalism affirms nothing about the absolute, except it too lacks inherent existence, own-form ("svabhâva") or "self" ("âtman"). Buddhahood too is a dependent-arising, albeit one continuing for ever, a permanent dynamic or "perpetuum mobile" !

 The Third Turning of the Wheel of Dharma

Once the compassionate mind conceptually understands the logic, rationality & philosophy of emptiness, the Third Turning of the Wheel of Dharma presents the yogic generation of the qualities of the Buddha-potential or Buddha-nature ("tathâgatagarbha") of sentient beings. For the philosophers, bound to the Second Turning, the potential cannot be a full-blown nature, while for yogis, all enlightened qualities are found to be already present but merely covered by adventitious, accidental material. The fact this Fourth Turning comes after the Second Turning, indicates the failure of a mere conceptual analysis at this level.

Several yogic traditions emerged as a result of the Third Turning : Yogâcâra Mâdhayamikas posit a consciousness lacking apprehended-object as well as apprehended-subject. Tantric Mâdhyamikas affirm the unity of clarity(bliss)-emptiness.  Shentong or other-emptiness, affirms primordial, ever existing Buddha-qualities of enlightened mind, speech, mind & action. In Dzogchen, the inseparability of clarity & the empty primordial base is affirmed.

In the yogic tradition of "Mahâ-Mâdhyamaka", "Great Mâdhyamaka", "Shentong" (actually "Zhentong") Mâdhyamaka or "other-emptiness", found in the Nyingma, Kagyu & Jonang schools of Tibetan Buddhism, meditative experience or "yogic perceivers" are central. Shentong is explained in the Mountain Doctrine of Dolpopa (1292 - 1391), in the The Essence of Other-Emptiness & Twenty-one Differences Regarding the Profound Meaning of Târanâtha (1576 - 1634).

In Shentong, teaching extrinsic emptiness, emptiness is affirmed as the non-conceptual, primordially existent wisdom-mind, empty of contingent stains, endowed with the full spectrum of Buddhahood, i.e. non-empty of the vast Buddha qualities of enlightened body, speech, mind & actions. This is a choice negation, nullifying the accidents and affirming enlightened qualities. Shentong posits the power, energy & wisdom of our Buddha-nature, ever-discovering the full array of the natural, fundamental (most subtle) qualities of mind ; the Clear Light shining forth unobstructedly after the temporary defilements and obscurations have been removed through practice. Our Buddha-nature or "matrix-of-One-Gone-Thus" is naturally & inherently radiant & pure. It possesses the thirty-two marks of a Buddha and abides in all sentient beings. "Empty of others" ("zhentong"), it just exists ! Shentong seems to take position from the side of Buddhahood, defining all the rest as sheer illusion. This existence is a continuous symmetry-transformation or unique & perfect enlightened wisdom-stream, dance or kinetography.

According to Dolpopa, the view of other-emptiness is the ultimate tenet, surpassing all others, including the self-emptiness of the Consequence School. The latter is deemed the "Ordinary Middle Way". But for Rangtong, this other-emptiness is the worse kind of heresy, causing a fundamental hierarchy to arise between conventional and ultimate truth (akin to the Platonic divide between the true word of being and the illusionary world of becoming). For Rangtong, there is no tenet higher than the Consequence School, in particular Tsongkhapa's Critical Mâdhyamaka. They invite all arguments to the contrary. They claim Shentong affirms Buddha-nature to be substantial.

Rangtong, Shentong & Dzogchen entertain different views on the Two Truths. For Tsongkhapa, duality is not seen as a problem, for to realize Buddhahood there must be a cognitive act directly knowing emptiness. Buddha-qualities are deemed generated by a such a mind. The target here is reification, not the distinction between a subject & an object of experience. In Dzogchen, ultimate truth is non-conceptual and duality is done away with. For Tsongkhapa, the mind of a Buddha has knowledge of both relative & ultimate objects simultaneously, while in the Great Perfection all virtuous qualities & powers of Buddhahood are contained within the One Truth from the very beginning. As Dzogchen does not, as in other-emptiness, deny self-emptiness, nor conceptually designates anything to be inherently existent, it should not be equated with Shentong with which it nevertheless can be confused. Once the idea of emptiness as absence of inherent existence is firmly established, these subtle distinctions will become clearer.

Can it be shown how these Second (Negating) & Third (Affirming) Turnings can be made of "one taste", i.e. compatible & harmonious ? The differences between Rangtong & Shentong will assist in doing so.

What is primordially & spontaneously established (our Buddha-potential) lacks inherent existence, is "empty" of "self" ("own-form") and so is ultimately self-void (as the Prâsangika-Mâdhyamaka rightly claims). This is its ultimate base, its "body of truth" or "Dharmakâya". Attributing Buddha-qualities to a mere potential is like trying to eat an appel by swallowing the seed of the tree. Clearing the mind from substantial instantiation generates Buddha-qualities. A mere potential needs effort to actualize. Emptiness yoga is the spiritual exercise doing so. What is primordial (Buddha-potential) is devoid of existing truly and inherently (as a substance), but at the same time is devoid of what is coarse and fleeting and devoid of being itself coarse and fleeting (as Shentong affirms). This is combining self-void and other-void. This combines the best of both views.

Absence of inherent existence is indeed "all the way up" !

In Shentong, Buddha-nature, like anything else, does not exist from its own side. But lacking stains, this ultimate truth and absolute reality is "empty" of "other" fleeting, evanescent phenomena or other-void. When, thanks to yoga, the contaminations are voided, nullified or annihilated, the stainless Clear Light, the natural light of the mind shines forth. Although in strict Mâdhyamaka logic, this cannot be conceptually affirmed (for only a non-affirming nullification of "own-form" will do), Shentong designates, contrary to consequent rational thinking, the radiant, inherent qualities or "own-form" of our Buddha-nature, overriding the classical logic of the Prâsangika-Mâdhyamaka with the testimony of direct yogic perceivers ! This reminds me of the difference between rational knowledge and intuitive knowledge in the system of Spinoza (1632 - 1677). The former works with logic (syllogism and/or the reductio ad absurdum), while the latter is its own standard (cf. "veritas index sui").

Rangtong, being a spiritual discipline, should not negate the data from direct yogic experience. Shentong has to accept there is no way around classical logic.

 The Fourth Turning of the Wheel of Dharma

According to Tantra, the Buddha appeared to a great assembly of superior Bodhisattvas (those able to "see" emptiness, perfecting themselves in ten stages) as Vajradhara, the Holder of the Vajra, the thunderbold or diamond. As a diamond, it cuts any substance, but cannot be cut itself. As a thunderbolt the Vajra has irresistible force. Both were deemed necessary in the Dark Age of Kâlî, when evil rules. Kâlî is the black, horrible tongue of Agni, the god of fire, but also the grim consort of Śiva. This "Śakti" represents the radical dissolution & destruction of ignorance, underlining the clear, pristine, pure Divine awareness of her consort, the god of Hindu Tantras.

Appearing in this collective vision as the Holder of the Vajra, Buddha Śâkyamuni projected his final teachings directly in the minds of his most devoted disciples. These superior Bodhisattvas had already realized a pliant, compassionate mind, exclusively devoted to the benefit of all sentient beings. If they engaged in this "secret" and "hidden" practice, they did so because they needed a special technology or skillful means to realize Buddhahood faster than what the Sûtras offered (i.e. the first three Turnings) and this despite the vast presence of evil in the world (and therefore massive hinderances to spiritual emancipation). Indeed, only as Buddhas do they truly benefit all sentient beings.

To be able to realize these goals, these Bodhisattvas were taught to incorporate desire into the path and place the fruit (Buddhahood) in the present moment. This involves a radical change in the coarse, subtle & very subtle layers of the energy-system defined by the physical body. With this notion of the "Vajra-body" and its refinement, complex systems of tantric meditations emerge, emphasizing the unity ("eka") of emptiness ("e-") and bliss ("vam").

The Fourth Turning has been denied any historical significance and viewed as a buddhological recuperation or superstructuration (effectuated by early Mahayanists). Buddhist Tantra has been understood as the origin of Hindu Tantra, and vice versa, which is a more likely account. These studies want to make clear Indian Tantra (Hindu as well as Buddhist) has most likely been influenced by Taoism, in particular its Inner Alchemy. Can these traditions be merged into a coherent ensemble ? Is an operational system, a new, powerful method the outcome ?

 The Unique Buddhadharma

"Shambhu, Meghavahana, Hiranyagarbha
Anangapati, Damodara, and the other (gods),
All puffed up with self-infatuation,
They roar their Lordship o'er the worlds ;
And yet, before the vision of His Body,
They pale like fireflies in the Sun !
Then down they bow their sparkling diadems,
In reverence to the lotuses of His feet !
I pay homage to that Lord of Sages,
The God of all the gods !"
Tsongkhapa : The Essence of True Eloquence, prologue
(Shambhu = Śiva, Meghavahana = Indra, Hiranyagarbha = Brahmâ).

 The Illusion of Inherent Existence

"Śûnyatâ" is the most important, original, complex & far-reaching of Buddha's discoveries, identifying wisdom as a consciousness directly realizing emptiness, i.e. a mind understanding its object as it is, perceiving things as they truly are, devoid of delusions, distortions, hallucinations, superstitions, etc. caused by afflictive emotions and/or gross & subtle mental obscurations designating, positing, imputing, attributing, labeling, etc. objects as unchanging substances existing independently "out there" or "in here". The enlightened mind is non-conceptual and nondual, while being extraordinarily functional & effective, directly & simultaneously perceiving how all events are (a) non-substantial, but process-like, as well as (b) merely appearing as functional, conventional objects.

Conventional reality is an appearance concealing the truth of emptiness (and process) on two levels : subjectively, by positing a permanent self, ego, "I", "person", "soul" ("âtman"), etc. and/or objectively, by establishing a permanent "other", world or "God" ("Brahman").

Although everything appears to be inherently existent ("svabhâva"), no independent, substantial phenomena can be found. The mere appearance of the contrary is caused by a cognitive superimposition of "existence-by-way-of-its-own-entity" ("svarûpa"). This is an ingrained, innate misconception or false ideation operating from the side of the every sentient being within "samsâra". Take that away, and enlightenment ensues.

Not the appearance is binding, but the attachment to it is.

In truth, all conventional phenomena :

• are produced by determining factors like causes & conditions ;

• depend on another positor ;

• have a status changing into something else.

Suppose an entity, event or phenomenon named "A". A is posited by way of identity (A = A) & contradiction (A ≠ B). Here, B is not necessarily another entity, but everything A is not. This is the logical characterization of A. Next, we connect A to another entity, say C as follows : C = f(A) or C is a function of A. Given A, then C is possible (for example, if A is a cup, then C, pouring liquid into A, is possible). The last step is ontological. Turning A into a hypostasis or substance is attributing own-power to A, designating to A a "substantial", "essential", "eidetic" nature. This core remains self-identical and is deemed to represent the "true nature" or "ultimate existence" of A. The "essence" of A must always remain the "essence" of A, for otherwise A could not substantially remain A, but become A', while A' ≠ A. This crucial requisite of substantialism actually undermines the consistency of substantialist ontology. This reified A is an independent "monad" without "parts" and "openings" (cf. Leibniz in his Monadology). Hence, there is no interaction possible, for nothing can "come in or go out". So if A is functional, A cannot be a substance. If A is a substance, A cannot function ! Being ignorant, we think something functional must permanently exist. This is the fundamental error and cause of all our dissatisfactions.

• formal-logical designation : every object A is self-identical and object of an affirming negation (everything B which is not A) ;

• functional designation : every object A relates to other objects, say C, by performing functions or C = f(A) ;

• substantialist designation : every object A, because it functions, is self-identical, i.e. exists by way of its own characteristics. This last designation is false as shown by ultimate analysis, pointing out the absurd consequences of this substantialism, clarifying objects are other-powered and so cannot exist from their own side.

As soon as A is reified or grasped as possessing an essence "of its own", absurdities arise and our ideation of A is scattered. For example, if we accept an inherently existent A can cease to exist, then we must accept it to inherently exist (remain stable) and not exist (unstable). But if existing, A cannot cease. If not existing, there is nothing to cease. Likewise, if we say A exists from its "own side", then "in the core" A always remains A, i.e. unchanging. Hence, as activity is always a kind of change, A cannot act. Accepting an inherently existent A acts makes the action agentless, which is absurd, etc.

Ultimate analysis shows how no ultimately existing, essential A can be found.

Dependent arising is free from inherent existence and beyond substantial change, while retaining the capacity to perform functions. Conventional truth is functional, positing objects not appearing as they are, and therefore illusionary. The functional side of this truth depends on existing conditions & determinations, possessing their own functional & complex inter-connections to which humans constantly add their own. These are processes, not substances. As such, they are impermanent and so always change (cf. the metaphor of fire). Conventional reality, its truth & falsehood, are delusional, illusionary, truth-concealing & delirious because our thoughts, affects & actions intertwined with these conventional appearances misrepresent these sensate & mental objects as self-powered, while in fact they are other-powered, i.e. co-dependent on the thoughts, affects & actions of ourselves & other entities.

Renunciation is called in to train mindfulness and the grasping-aspect of the mind. Accepting each and every state, rejecting none & attracting none, pleasure & sobriety walk hand in hand. Compassion trains selflessness by generating the mind of enlightenment for the sake of all sentient beings (Bodhicitta). Both prepare the mind, giving is clear-cut sharpness as well as great suppleness. Generating Bodhicitta safeguards agains the great dangers of emptiness yoga. Nihilism, confirming nothing really exists or matters, is impossible when compassion is present, while eternalism, confirming things are self-powered, is ruled out due to compassion's universal intent, stressing other-powered interdependence instead of self-powered independence. With compassion, the emptiness yogi can take in, without becoming distracted, as much as she or he possibly can.

The most dangerous illusion at hand is the so-called "ontological illusion" (cf. Clearings, 2006), identifying an object and/or a subject of experience as something existing substantially "from its own side", grounding the possibility of knowledge. Idealism substantializes the subject, introducing an unchanging, essential, higher "self" or "own-self" behind or above the empirical ego of direct experience or the "ideal" language of an intersubjective community of sign-interpreters. Realism substantializes the object, positing a real continuum outside and independent of the mind, as it were "cut off" and essentially self-powered.

In the first stages of emptiness yoga (on the Paths of Accumulation & Preparation), a conceptual realization of emptiness is sought, understanding the impossibility of any substantial reality and/or ideality. These rational insights do not take away the illusion of inherent existence (of things and persons appearing as substances), but hinder this concealment of the true state of affairs from deceiving us, slowly bringing down the reifying edifice of the conventional mind. Just like some optical illusions do not vanish as soon as we understand why they appear as they do, the pervasive illusion of self-powered entities comes so natural and automatic that sentient beings become trapped by their own phantasies, fictions & hallucinations. Conceptually grasping why there are no self-powered entities, eroding the reifying mind, leads to directy experiencing the emptiness of functional, other-powered entities.

 Criticism & Process Philosophy