You are on page 1of 12

Bhokttva and Causation in Kemarjas

Response to Dharmakrtis Critique of


Liberation through Initiation

Somadeva Vasudeva
August 28, 2014

bhokttva and causation

Sigla
B1 Tantrloka with the Viveka commentary of Jayaratha. Staatsbibliothek zu Berlin HS or 12 434, rad, only
the Tantrloka.
Edpra Pramavrtikabham. Sktyyana, Rhula. 1953. Pramavrtikabhshyam or Vrtiklakra of Prajkaragupta: Being a Commentary on Dharmakrtis Pramavrtikam. Tibetan Sanskrit Works Series 1. Patna:
K. P. Jayaswal Research Institute.
Edmi Pramavrttika-Krik of Dharmakrti.Sanskrit and Tibetan, ed. by Ysho Miyasaka. Acta Indologica 2
(1971/72).
Edma Pramavrtika Sktyyana, Rhula. 1938. Dharmakrtis Pramavrttika with a Commentary by
Manorathanandin. Journal of the Bihar and Orissa Reseach Society: New Series 24-26: 34984.
K2 Tantrloka. rnagar acc. no. 1054-iii, 190 fol., rad, only the Tantrloka.
K4 Tantrloka. rnagar acc. no. 1792, rad, the Tantrloka with the Viveka or Vivecana commentary of Jayaratha.
K5 Tantrloka. rnagar acc. no. 2081, rad, the Tantrloka with the Viveka or Vivecana commentary of Jayaratha.
K7 Tantrloka. rnagar acc. no. 2201, rad, only the Tantrloka.
K8 Tantrloka. rnagar acc. no. 7771 & 7772.
1 Svacchandatantroddyota. rnagar acc. no. 1054-ii. rad. 411 fol.
be Svacchandatantroddyota. Berlin Hs Or 11 255, rad. Accessed on microlm dated 27.10.99.

Abbreviations
conj.
corr.
em.
om.
{}
<no.>

[]

xy
...

conjecture
correction
emendation
omitted
deleted akaras
supplies no. of akaras missing
illegible akaras
parentheses indicate partly legible akaras
tops of akaras illegible or only partly legible
citation ranges from x to y
directional obeli enclose corrupt passages that the present editor
cannot improve upon

bhokttva and causation

Dharmakrti and the Saiddhntikas


1. PV Pramasiddhi (257cd267), verses 258cd260ab:
nla bjdisasiddho vidhi pusm ajanmane ||258||
tailbhyaggnidhder api muktiprasagata |
3 prg guror lghavt pacn na ppaharaa ktam ||259||
m bhd gauravam evsya na ppa gurv amrtita |
These two refutations help us determine which aiva school Dharmakrti is engaging. The rst refutes the Saiddhntika claim that the power of mantras to liberate can be experientially veried. The second ridicules the claim that weighing the initiate before and aer initiation, and seeing that he weighs less aerwards, demonstrates that mantras have removed his ptakas.
2. PV 1.258cd-259ab: Kiraatantra (ed. Goodall) 6.19: anekabhavika karma dagdhabjam ivubhi | bhaviad api saruddha yeneda tad dhi bhogata ||, The action of
many existences has its seeds burnt, so to speak (iva), by mantras [in initiation] Future [action] too is blocked; [but] that by which this [body is sustained can be destroyed only] by experience. (transl. Goodall). For the cpd. dagdhabjam see Svyambhuvastrasagraha 3.15a and Rauravastrasagraha 4.51c.
3. PV 1.259cd-260ab: Initiation with the scales (tuldk, dhaadk). Tattvasagraha of
Sadyojyotis (ed. Filliozat) 38: uddhi vrajati tuly dkto brahmahatyato mukhyt |
pratyayato jnyd bandhanavigama viakayavat ||, [By initiation] on the scales, he is
puried of [such] great sins as brahminicide. One may know that his bonds have been
destroyed through the evidence of ones senses, just as the destruction of poison [by
Grua-mantras is proved by the senses].
4. Maangapramevara Yogapda 2.48-9: tulrohavidhne ca prayogrthe balotka | vegavadbhi karlsrair maykhai saprayojit ||2.48|| karoti vigataklea dagdhappatanu naram |, [The re concentration (gney dhra)], intense with a raging conagration of
ames, deployed [through visualisation] in the ritual of mounting the scales, can render a person free from delement, [because he is now (read as a hetugarbhavieaa)] possessed of a body from which sin has been burnt away.
5. Skhyakrik 13c: guru varaaka tama | Yuktidpik: tatra gurutva kryasydhogamahetur dharma, karaasya vttimandat | varaam api kryagata ca dravyntaratirodhnam | karaagat cuddhi prakapratidvand[v]bht |

bhokttva and causation

6. The aivas that Dharmakrti is debating are therefore clearly identiable as the
early, dualist aivasaiddhntikas, that is groups who accepted scriptures like the Kiragama, the Matagapramevara (sixth cent., post-Dignga: Yogapda 4.15cd16a: anirdeyam asadigdha kalpanpohagocaram | pratyakam), the Pauakarapramevara, and
the works of the early exegetes such as Sadyojyotis (ca. 675725, knows Kumrila but not Dharmakrti) and Bhaspati (ca. 650750).
7. Early evidence for a Saiddhntika karmanirapekavda. Tantrloka 13.293cd295ab: rmatpy Aniruddhena aktim unmlin vibho || vycakena mtage varit nirapekat | sthvarnte pi devasya svarponmlantmik || akti patant spek na kvpti suvistart. The venerable Aniruddha too has taught that [ivas liberating power] is autonomous when commenting on the Lords power that awakens in the Tantra of Mataga [the Matagapramevara, Vidypda 4.44], explaining at great length that when the power of the
Lord descends it is beholden to nothing, being an unfolding of the nature of the self
that can take place even in the extreme case of immobile life-forms. (transl. Sanderson)
8. Tantrloka 20.1cd: atha dk bruve mhajanvsapradyinm ||
9. Matagapramevaravtti of Ramakaha to Vidypda 7.40cd42ab: abdtirikt tmavie eva mantr syu, Mantras are specic souls, dierent from sounds.
10. Matagapramevara Vidypda 7.42cd43: vcyavcakabhedo ya suprasiddho mahmune
| mokrtha suniyuktn vcyn kraecchay | niyukt vcakatvena var stre ivodaye, O great sage, this dichotomy of denoted and denoter is well-known. In aiva
scripture, [certain] phonemes have, by the will of the cause-deity (iva = kraa-), been
prescribed as denoters of commissioned mantra[-souls], for the purpose of liberation.
Scil. Both the mantra souls that are the vcyas, and the phonemes used that are the
vcakas (sometimes also: abdas), are considered to be mantras.
11. The final sagraha verse of Kemarjas refutation:
yuktyastrair dhrmakrta dalitam iha mata daodgri samyag
vidhvasta kheaplai kathitam api mala bhedasadhnadakam |
prokta dksatattva pravigalitamalapronmiaccinmayaikyasvacchasvacchandadhmaprathanavaabhavatsarvasarvtmarpam ||10||
12. Mantravrya, the virility of mantras. ivastravrttika 1.20.17: mantravryam iti prokta
prhatvimaranam ||. Tantrlokaviveka 5.137: mantrayati svbhedena viva parmatti
mantra, para pramt.

bhokttva and causation

T+2

T+3

aktisabandha

mantravrya

dehapta

T+0
Liberation through Dk
According to Abhinavaguptas
Explanation of Mlinvijayottara
1.4245
ba = baddha, sakala
d = dkita
mu1 = tvratvraaktipta
mu2 = sadyonirvadk
mu2 = asadyonirvadk

T+1

ajna
d
ba

mu3

d
mu2

ba

yo$at &
klaviea

yiys

dk

ajna

Figure 1.1: Liberation through Initiation: The Gradualist Model

death

dk

birth

TL

. .

P.J

PA
.

BA
.

Mu
.

PJ = paurua jnam (=svasvarpa)


PA = pauruam ajnam (=puruanihaptaka)
BA = bauddham ajnam (=bhedabuddhi)
Mu = mukti

Figure 1.2: The Default Case: Liberation aer Death

mu1

bhokttva and causation

death

gnosis

dk

P.J

PA
.

B.J

BA
.

Mu
.

birth

PJ = paurua jnam (=svasvarpa)


PA = pauruam ajnam (=puruanihaptaka)
BJ = bauddha jnam (=tattvajna)
BA = bauddham ajnam (=bhedabuddhi)
Mu = mukti

Figure 1.3: Jvanmukti Liberation through Gnosis aer Dk

The Experiencer (bhokt)


13. Svacchandatantroddyota 5.88 (Ked p. 76, 1 149rv ):
tath hy ayam tm [1.] sakocbhsasatattvprammanyattmanehbhilaabdoktenavena malena, [2.] ubhubhavsantman vividhajanmyurbhogadena krmea, [3.] tatprabhavena ca kacukapuryaakasthlabhttmannjtikatrividhadehatadrayavicitrabhuvanabhoktavyrthasrthaprattibhj mykhyena malena ca valita | yata sarvasyaiva [1.] sakucito bhivagdimayo [2.] ntarullekhaatkra [3.] kagaurdirpo mukatreda jnmtydiprattisiddha evyam artha |
2 satattv ] em. Sanderson, tattv Ked1
conj. Isaacson, mutreda Ked, muddheda 1

5 sakucito ] Ked, sakuciti 1

6 mukatreda ]

bhokttva and causation

To explain, the self is enveloped by [1.] the delement of individuation, designated here1 by the word yearning, which is the erroneous conviction that one is incomplete,2 which has as its essence an appearance of contraction, [2.] by the delement of karmic retribution, which is made up of positive and negative latent impressions, and which grants the enjoyment of various births and life-spans,3 [3.] and by the
delement called My4 , deriving from that [impurity of karmic retribution], which occasions the cognition of a plethora of objects to be experienced in the threefold body with its various genera of embodiment, [the threefold body] which is constituted by [a.] the [ve] cuirasses (kacuka-), [b.] the ogdoad of the subtle body,
and [c.] the body of the coarse elements, and in diverse worlds which are the substrates [of the body]. For this matter is established by everyones personal experience such as: I who am contracted, subject to yearning and so on, who am overcome with hundreds of internal impressions, who appear to be lean and pale and so
on, in such and such a place,5 know this.
14. Non-dualist aiva commentators use a standardised set of expansions for the three
delements (see e.g. Netratantroddyota 16.56): [1.] ava = apramanyat, erroneous
belief that one is incomplete, [2.] krma = ubhubhdisaskra, positive and negative
karmic latencies, [3.] myya = bhinnavedyaprath, manifestation of dierentiated objects
of cognition.
15. Svacchandatantroddyota ad 4.127cd (1 fol. 83v ): arrea yat kta arrair yad arjita kicit tatraiva y viayatvensakti kicin me syd ity abhivagas tad etan malakryam apramanyattmakavamalotthpita bhokttvam |
The state of being an experiencer (bhokttva) is a product of delement (mala), that is to
say, it arises from the limitation of individuation (avamala), which has as its nature
the belief that one is incompletea limited attachment to whatever is produced by
1 In

the SvaTa, the text being commented on. Cf. SvaTa 3.177a: nimittam abhilkhyam.
apramanyat ceya TalViv ad loc: apramanyatavamalalaka.
3 Or: various births, life-spans and experiences.
4 The Trikas exegetes also commonly use the PK 3.2.5ab denition of myyamala: bhinnavedyaprathtraiva mykhya.
5 K here reads amutra + ida. Amutra normally contrasts with iha, here, so that the meaning should be
ed
over there, or more commonly in the next world, an inappropriate sense for a description of direct personal
experience, the core formulation of which is usually: aham ida jnmi, I know this. This is also implied by the
evident correlations of the sequences 13 and ac. My initial emendation to this was amuko treda, I, who am
so and so, here. I have instead adopted a reading suggested by H. Isaacson (personal communication): amukatra, which eliminates the unncessary repetition of I, who am so and so.
2 Tal9.65a:

bhokttva and causation

ones body, or to whatever is accumulated by ones body, as objects of enjoyment


that takes the form of the hankering: May I have a little bit!
16. Tantrloka 9.98cd100ab (K1 fol. 65v , K2 fol. 367v368r , B1 fol. 237v , K4 fol. 98rv ):
ki ca karmpi na mald yata karma kriytmakam ||
kriy ca karttrpt svtantryn na punar malt |
y tv asya karmaa citraphaladatvena karmat ||
prasiddh s na sakoca vintmani mala ca sa |

4 karmat ] KedK1K2B1, karmat K4

Moreover, karma itself does not evolve from delement, because karma is essentially action, and action arises from autonomy that consists of agency, but not delement [which is neither an agent nor independent].6 Karmas [essential] nature of being activity, which is generally acknowledged to be the production of dierentiated effects,7 is not possible in the self without contraction, and that [contraction] is delement ([ava]mala).
.

ava
.

Bhairava
.

sakoca

au
.

.
bhoga

bhokt
.

krma
.

.
Figure 1.4: Contraction and the malas
6 Jayaratha
7 Taking

ad loc: mald ity akartttmaksvtantryarpd ity artha.


citraphaladatvena as a predicative instrumental rather than as a causal instrumental.

bhokttva and causation

17. Tantrloka 9.100cd101ab (K1 fol. 65v , K2 fol. 367v368r , B1 fol. 237v , K4 fol. 98v )
with avataraik: tena sakoca vinsya na tattatphaladne smarthya | sakoca eva
3 mala ity asya tatkraatvam upacarita, sakucito hi bhokt ubhubhdytmaka bhinna sat phalam tmani bhoatvenbhimanute yena devamanudivicitrarpataysyvasthnam |
6
vicitra hi phala bhinna bhoatvenbhimanyate ||
bhoktary tmani teneya bhedarp vyavasthiti |
2 vinsya na ] KedK4, vin n sya B1
3 ity asya ] Ked, iti yasya B1, iti asya K4
Ked, vasthna tad ha B1K4

2 tattat ] KedK4, tat B1 2 eva ] Ked, eva ca K4


4 sat phalam ] KedK4, saphalam B1 5 syvasthnam ]

Therefore, without contraction [of the self], it (i.e. karma) has no capacity to produce dierentiated eects. Delement is none other than contraction, therefore
its causality towards it (karma) is [intended] in a gurative sense, for the contracted experiencer (bhokt) misconstrues (abhi-man) the fruitiongiven as dierentiated, and as good and bad etc., to be an experience in himself, whereby he exists in various forms such as gods, humans etc. For the diverse fruit, dierentiated, is misconstrued to be what is experienceable (bhoatvena) in the experiencer who is [misconstrued to be] the self. From this derives this dierentiated existence.

Aniyatahetuvda
18. Tantrloka 9.36cd-37ab (B1 230r , K4 exp. 16):
kumbhakrasya y savic cakradadiyojane ||
iva eva hi s yasmt savida k viiat |
The potters awareness in applying the wheel and the stick etc. is [itself] nothing but
iva, for what superiority8 can there be from consciousness.
19. Tantrloka 9.37cd38ab (B1 230r , K4 exp. 16, 17):
kaumbhakr tu savittir avacchedvabhsant ||
bhinnakalp yadi, kepy daacakrdimadhyata |
But if the awareness of the potter should appear as distinct [from iva] by the apparent
Jayaratha explains in the TalViv ad loc (B1 230r , K4 exp. 16): na hi savida savidrpd aumtrepy adhika rpntara kicid bhaved iti bhva, The idea is that [in our system of Savidadvaya] there can be no other
thing that is even fractionally beyond consciousness.
8 As

bhokttva and causation

c, e

v.0

v.1

c, e

Figure 1.5: Jayantas common perceiver and the expert


manifestation of separation, then it must be relegated to the level of the stick and the
wheel.
20. Tantrloka 9.38cd39ab (B1 230r , K4 exp. 17):
tasmd ekaikanirme ivo vivaikavigraha ||
karteti pusa karttvbhimno pi vibho kti |
2 ekaika ] KedK4, ekatra B1

3 pusa ] KedK4, pusa B1

Therefore in the creation of each and every thing, iva, who singly embodies the universe, is the agent, and the souls make-believe at agency is also the Lords doing.
21. Tantrloka 9.42cd43ab, B1, K4 exp. 17, 18:
loke ca gomayt kt sakalpt svapnata smte ||
yogcchto dravyamantraprabhvde ca vcika |
3 vcika ] KedK4, vcik B1

In the world, for its part, a scorpion [can come into existence] from [1.] cowdung, from [2.] another scorpion, from [3.] a solemn vow, from [4.] a dream, from
[5.] memory,9 from [6.] the will of a yogin, or from the power of [7.] magical substances or [8.] mantras [9.] etc.
22. Nyyamajar Mysore ed. pp. 353:
yatrpy aniyato hetur vcike gomaydika |
abhiyuktas tu tatrpi viea na na manvate ||
And where there is an indeterminate cause, as in the case of a scorpion born from
cowdung etc., an expert, even there, denitely perceives a unique characteristic.
9 Jayaratha (B

1, K4 exp. 18): iha bahir api parisphurato rthasybhsamtrasratvam eva maula rpam ity ukta sakalpt svapnata smter iti |

bhokttva and causation

10

23. Tantrloka 9.43cd44ab (B1 230v , K4 exp. 18):


anya eva sa cet, kma kuta cit svavieata ||
3 sa tu sarvatra tulyas tatparmaraikyam asti tu |
2 cit ] KedK4, cet B1

If you [claim] it is another [type of scorpion], then that is certainly the case due to
some characteristic singularity, and this is so equally for all [other types of scorpions];
nevertheless there is a unity in their apprehension.

Perceptual presence
24. varapratyabhijkrik 2.3.1011: Though the particular forms of the manifestation
of the objects may be dierentiated (bhinnvabhsacchynm)in that they are far or
near, directly or indirectly perceived by the senses, external or internal, faulty in what
is needed to make them known for other reasons, their unity is not aected by this
thanks to the main manifestation (mukhyvabhsata) consisting in a single reective
awareness (ekapratyavamarkhyt). (transl. Torella (1994:169170))10
25. Alva Nos (2004) enactive view of perception. Thomas (2010:154) formulates it as a
distinction of [phenomenologically present] properties that are represented as present in
perception even though they are not sensorily present:
This problem seems to me comparatively neglected in contemporary philosophy of perception. Here is a succinct description of the problem by
Alva No: Consider as an example a perceptual experience such as that
you might enjoy if you were to hold a bottle in your hand with eyes closed.
You have a sense of the presence of the whole bottle, even though you only make contact with the bottle at a few isolated points. Can we explain how your experience in this way outstrips what is actually given, or must we concede that
your sense of the bottle as a whole is a kind of confabulation? One way
we might try to explain this is by observing that you draw on your knowledge of what bottles are. You bring to bear your conceptual skills. This
is doubtless right. But it does not, I think, do justice to the phenomenology of the experience. For, crucially, your sense of the presence of the bot10 varapratyabhijkrik

2.3.1011: drntikatayrthn parokdhyakattman | bhyntaratay doair vyajakasynyathpi v || bhinnvabhsacchynm api mukhyvabhsata | ekapratyavamarkhyd ekatvam anivritam ||

bhokttva and causation

tle is a sense of its perceptual presence. That is, you do not merely think or infer that there is a bottle present, in the way, say, that you think or infer that there is a room next door. The presence of the bottle is not inferred or surmised. It is experienced. (No 2002b: 89, both emphases
added)

11