Author: Claude Arpi
Publication: The Pioneer
Date: August 9, 2010
URL: http://www.dailypioneer.com/274776/Mind-over-matter.html
The Tibetan Buddhist tradition draws its root
texts from the Nalanda masters and describes itself as a 'science of the mind'.
It is ironical, therefore, that an initiative to revive the Great Vihara of
northern India should plan not to include its greatest champion - the Dalai
Lama
It is perplexing to discover that an Indian
Nobel Laureate does not possess the insight to grasp what has been the hallmark
of the Indian mind for millennia. I am speaking of Mr Amartya Sen, the chairman
of the Mentor Group who is trying to revive the ancient Nalanda University.
Mr Sen recently made a statement showing he is out of tune with the spirit
of the ancient Indian viharas. This is rather worrying for the project. One
can always argue that he is just a modern economist and can't be expected
to understand the subtleties of the ancient Indian mind.
The facts: When asked about the omission of
the Dalai Lama's name from the international project, Mr Sen stated that "religious
studies could be imparted without involvement of religious leaders."
This is a flabbergasting statement. Does it mean that 'religious studies'
should be disconnected from the practitioners?
It reminded me of the 1960s in Europe when
the first Buddhist lamas were engaged as lecturers in universities, they were
told not to interpret Buddhism as an 'insider', but remain an 'outsider'.
It is probably what Mr Sen means when he spoke about the Dalai Lama: "Being
religiously active may not be the same as (being) an appropriate person for
religious studies."
These declarations from a supposedly eminent
intellectual proves that Mr Sen has no knowledge of what once made Nalanda
University the greatest knowledge center of the entire world. Does he know
why the great viharas of Northern India attracted scholars and students from
the Koreas, Japan, China, Tibet, Indonesia, Persia or Greece, at least till
the day it was looted by Bakhtiyar Khalji's Muslim troops in 1193?
Simply because the teachers, the gurus, the
pandits taught what they had practised and experienced. It is during the 8th
century that Trisong Detsen, the great Tibetan King invited Shantarakshita,
the Abbot of Nalanda to introduce the Dharma to the Land of Snows and ordain
the first monks. Since then, the lamas of Tibet have faithfully followed the
masters of Nalanda.
During a recent encounter, the Dalai Lama
explained: "I always describe Tibetan Buddhism as pure Buddhism from
the Nalanda tradition. Nalanda had great masters such as Nagarjuna or Arya
Asanga. During the 8th century, the Tibetan Emperor invited Shantarakshita.
He was a famous, well-known scholar and master of Nalanda. He went to Tibet
and spent the rest of his life there. He introduced Buddhism in Tibet. I myself
studied the Nalanda tradition of Buddhism; first I learned by heart and memorised
what we call the root texts. All these root texts have been written by Nalanda
masters. The Tibetan Buddhist tradition is the Nalanda tradition which combines
the Sanskrit and the Pali traditions as well Buddhist Tantrayana. Masters
like Nagarjuna, Aryadeva and Chandrakirti wrote tantric treatises in Sanskrit."
After the Muslim invasions, the monasteries
of Tibet became the last repositories of the ancient wisdom which had been
virtually destroyed in India, its land of origin.
Mr Sen does not seem to understand that the
Nalanda tradition is not a 'religion', but a 'science of the mind'. The Dalai
Lama recounted the story of Mr Raja Ramanna, the nuclear physicist, who told
him that he was surprised to find the concept of quantum physics and relativity
in a text of Nagarjuna. The Dalai Lama continued: "The West discovered
these concepts at the end of the 19th century or beginning of the 20th century,
when some Indian sages like Nagarjuna knew it nearly 2,000 years ago."
Nagarjuna's concept of madhyamaka (the Middle Path) was very much a part of
the Nalanda curriculum.
The Dalai Lama likes to speak about his contacts
with Western scientists. They started 27 years ago: "We have had some
serious discussions. We have been meeting annually; the interest is from both
sides. In Buddhism, there is a lot of explanation about the mind, many categories
of mind. Therefore, Buddhism should be considered as a 'science of mind'."
The Tibetan leader clearly differentiates
between this 'science of mind' originating from Nalanda, Buddhist philosophy
(like Buddhist relativity of things, he explains) and Buddhist religion. He
said: "When I contact modern scientists, I don't put them in contact
with Buddhist religion, but with Buddhist science and to some extent to Buddhist
philosophy." And he adds: "It is important to understand that when
we say 'Buddhist science', we mean science of the mind; it is something universal;
it is not a religion. Buddhist religion is not universal, it is only for Buddhists."
The Nalanda project should be based on the 'science of the mind', not on Buddhist
religion.
Unfortunately one has the feeling that Mr
Sen would like to recreate a new Shantiniketan, an academic institution without
its original spirit. How to lay the foundations of Nalanda International University
without the spirit of Nalanda?
Some analysts tell me, "You are wrong,
it is not a question of religion or science, but of politics. Mr Sen has to
take care of Chinese susceptibilities. China wants to participate and does
not want to hear about the Dalai Lama." This is terribly ironic. Mr Sen
is probably unaware of it, but the Chinese fought hard to impose their own
system of Buddhism in Tibet, but finally it is the Nalanda path which prevailed.
The decision was taken after a long debate,
the famous Samye debate which was held in Samye (Central Tibet) between the
Chinese and Nalanda schools of Buddhism. Shantarakshita before dying had predicted
that a dispute would arise between the two schools of Buddhism that had started
spreading in Tibet. The first one - the Chinese school, influenced by Taoism
- was of the opinion that enlightenment was an instantaneous revelation or
realisation. This system of thought had spread throughout China.The second
school, taught by the Indian pandits of Nalanda, known as the 'gradual school'
- asserted that enlightenment was a gradual process, not an 'instant one',
but requiring long study, practice and analysis. The Samye debate took two
years (792-794 CE) to reach its conclusion. Hoshang, a Chinese monk, representing
the 'instant school' was defeated by Kamalashila who defended the Indian view.
At the end of the debate, the King issued a proclamation naming the Indian
Path (from Nalanda) as the orthodox faith for Tibet.
Today, the Marxist rulers in Tibet seem to
have forgotten these details; they want to participate in rebuilding the Great
Vihara. Fine, but it is nonetheless strange that the main living proponent
of the Nalanda tradition is kept out of the project. I am sure that the Dalai
Lama does not mind, but it would certainly have been a blessing for the project
to have him as a mentor (or Chancellor), like Shantarakshita had done for
Tibet.
It is clear that it is the spirit of appeasement
and not the spirit of Nalanda which will prevail in South Block today. Very
sad.
