The Reason Sixty: Second Edition

TREASURY OF THE BUDDHIST SCIENCES SERIES

Editor-in-Chief: Robert A.F. Thurman, Jey Tsong Khapa Professor Emeritus of Indo-Tibetan Buddhist Studies, Columbia University

Executive Editor: Thomas F. Yarnall, Columbia University

Series Committee: Daniel Aitken, David Kittelstrom, Tim McNeill, Robert A.F. Thurman, Christian K. Wedemeyer, Thomas F. Yarnall

Editorial Board: Ryūichi Abé, Jay Garfield, David Gray, Laura Harrington, Thubten Jinpa, Joseph Loizzo, Gary Tubb, Vesna Wallace, Christian Wedemeyer, Chun-fang Yu

The Treasury of the Buddhist Sciences series is copublished by the American Institute of Buddhist Studies and Wisdom Publications in association with the Columbia University Center for Buddhist Studies and Tibet House US.

The American Institute of Buddhist Studies (AIBS) established the Treasury of the Buddhist Sciences series to provide authoritative translations, studies, and editions of the texts of the Tibetan Tengyur (bstan ’gyur) and its associated literature. The Tibetan Tengyur is a vast collection of over 4,000 classical Indian Buddhist scientific treatises (śāstra) written in Sanskrit by over 700 authors from the first millennium ce, now preserved mainly in systematic 7th–12th century Tibetan translation. Its topics span all of India’s outer arts and sciences, including linguistics, medicine, astronomy, socio-political theory, ethics, art, and so on, as well as all of her inner arts and sciences such as philosophy, psychology (mind science), meditation, and yoga.

Volumes in this series are numbered with catalogue numbers corresponding to both the Comparative (dpe bsdur ma) Kangyur and Tengyur (CK and CT, respectively) and Derge (Tōhoku number) recensions of the Tibetan Tripiṭaka.

Message

The foremost scholars of the holy land of India were based for many centuries at Nālandā Monastic University. Their deep and vast study and practice explored the creative potential of the human mind with the aim of eliminating suffering and making life truly joyful and worthwhile. They composed numerous excellent and meaningful texts. I regularly recollect the kindness of these immaculate scholars and aspire to follow them with unflinching faith. At the present time, when there is great emphasis on scientific and technological progress, it is extremely important that those of us who follow the Buddha should rely on a sound understanding of his teaching, for which the great works of the renowned Nālandā scholars provide an indispensable basis.

In their outward conduct the great scholars of Nālandā observed ethical discipline that followed the Pāli tradition, in their internal practice they emphasized the awakening mind of bodhichitta, enlightened altruism, and in secret they practised tantra. The Buddhist culture that flourished in Tibet can rightly be seen to derive from the pure tradition of Nālandā, which comprises the most complete presentation of the Buddhist teachings. As for me personally, I consider myself a practitioner of the Nālandā tradition of wisdom. Masters of Nālandā such as Nāgārjuna, Āryadeva, Āryāsaṅga, Dharmakīrti, Chandrakīrti, and Śāntideva wrote the scriptures that we Tibetan Buddhists study and practice. They are all my gurus. When I read their books and reflect upon their names, I feel a connection with them.

The works of these Nālandā masters are presently preserved in the collection of their writings that in Tibetan translation we call the Tengyur (bstan ’gyur). It took teams of Indian masters and great Tibetan translators over four centuries to accomplish the historic task of translating them into Tibetan. Most of these books were later lost in their Sanskrit originals, and relatively few were translated into Chinese. Therefore, the Tengyur is truly one of Tibet’s most precious treasures, a mine of understanding that we have preserved in Tibet for the benefit of the whole world.

Keeping all this in mind I am very happy to encourage a long-term project of the American Institute of Buddhist Studies, originally established by the late Venerable Mongolian Geshe Wangyal and now at the Columbia University Center for Buddhist Studies, and Tibet House US, in collaboration with Wisdom Publications, to translate the Tengyur into English and other modern languages, and to publish the many works in a collection called The Treasury of the Buddhist Sciences. When I recently visited Columbia University, I joked that it would take those currently working at the Institute at least three reincarnations to complete the task; it surely will require the intelligent and creative efforts of generations of translators from every tradition of Tibetan Buddhism, in the spirit of the scholars of Nālandā, although we may hope that using computers may help complete the work more quickly. As it grows, the Treasury series will serve as an invaluable reference library of the Buddhist Sciences and Arts. This collection of literature has been of immeasurable benefit to us Tibetans over the centuries, so we are very happy to share it with all the people of the world. As someone who has been personally inspired by the works it contains, I firmly believe that the methods for cultivating wisdom and compassion originally developed in India and described in these books preserved in Tibetan translation will be of great benefit to many scholars, philosophers, and scientists, as well as ordinary people.

I wish the American Institute of Buddhist Studies at the Columbia Center for Buddhist Studies, Tibet House US, and Wisdom Publications every success and pray that this ambitious and far-reaching project to create The Treasury of the Buddhist Sciences will be accomplished according to plan. I also request others, who may be interested, to extend whatever assistance they can, financial or otherwise, to help ensure the success of this historic project.

May 15, 2007

"This is a wonderful gift from Joseph J. Loizzo and the AIBS Translation Team, impressively precise and easy to understand, a true masterpiece that brings together the deepest philosophic insights of the two greatest Indian masters — Nāgārjuna and Candrakīrti. The Yuktiṣaṣṭikā acts as a bridge connecting Nāgārjuna’s two renowned works, Mūlamadhyamakārikā and Ratnāvalī. It brings together the rigorous rational critiques of the former and the problems of normativity of ethics and the soteriology of reason and compassion found in the latter. Similarly, the Yuktiṣaṣṭikāvṛtti links Candrakīrti’s two masterpieces, Prasannapadā and Madhyamakāvatārabhāṣya, by integrating the rigorous critical philosophy of the former with the ethical and soteriological normativity of the latter. This book offers a fresh perspective on complex problems that the Western academic community is currently grappling with, such as the connection between knowledge and action, self and language, body and mind, reason and emotion, and ethics, reason, and soteriology. It also explores the intersection between reasoning and emotion in moral philosophy, emphasizing the importance of self-critical analysis and philosophical analysis in driving the ethics of care and Buddhist soteriology."

— SONAM THAKCHOE, University of Tasmania

One of Nāgārjuna’s central philosophical works is presented here in a clear English translation, together with Candrakīrti’s commentary, a substantial philosophical introduction, and copious supplementary materials that aid the historical and analytical contextualization of the Madhyamaka theory of emptiness. This is an indispensable resource, accessible to scholars, philosophers, and Buddhist practitioners alike.

— JAN WESTERHOFF, University of Oxford

This excellent translation enhances our understanding of this important but relatively unknown work, rich in its philosophical and psychological insight. Loizzo argues for a cross-cultural comparison of Nāgārjuna and Chandrakīrti with Nietzsche, Wittgenstein, and their postmodern heirs. The careful annotation takes into account the Indian background of the texts but also uses the writings of Geluk scholars, Gyaltsap and Tsong Khapa, to help resolve interpretative problems.

— KAREN LANG, University of Virginia, emerita

Dedication

In Memoriam

Marius Jerome Loizzo (1919–2001)

Scholar, Teacher, Officer, Physician

Kennst du das Land, wo die Zitronen blühn?

. . . O Vater, laß uns ziehn!

—Goethe

Contents

Prefaces to the First Edition

Series’ Editor-in-Chief

Series’ Executive Editor

Associate Editor (especially of the online Tibetan Critical Edition)

Author’s Preface to the Second Edition

Editor-in-Chief’s Preface to the Second Edition

Acknowledgments

Editors’ Acknowledgments

Author’s Acknowledgments

Abbreviations and Typographical Conventions

PART ONE: INTRODUCTION

The Other Chandrakīrti: A Corrective, Contextual, Textual Study

1.Overview

2.Previous Studies of The Reason Sixty

Materials for the Study of The Reason Sixty and Its Commentary

1.Nāgārjuna’s Reason Sixty (Yuktiṣaṣṭikākārikā)

2.Chandrakīrti’s Reason Sixty Commentary (Yuktiṣaṣṭikāvṛtti)

3.Central Philosophy as a Method of Self-Correction

4.A Nondualistic Hermeneutic for The Reason Sixty Commentary

Self-Correction in The Reason Sixty Commentary

1.A Comparative Philosophical Framework for Therapeutic Self-Correction

2.Dereification and Self-Correction in Chandrakīrti and Wittgenstein

3.The Language of Objective Self-Correction: Mapping the Four Keys onto The Reason Sixty

A.Targeting the False Self

B.Committing to Common Sense

C.Dereifying Reductive Usage

D.Dereifying Abstractive Usage

4.The Social Epistemology of Self-Correction: Virtual Insight and Agency

5.The Anthropology of Self-Correction: Objectivity and Altruism

6.The Self-Corrective Anthropology of Nāgārjuna and Chandrakīrti

PART TWO: TRANSLATION

The Reason Sixty

The Reason Sixty Commentary

GLOSSARY, APPENDIXES, BIBLIOGRAPHIES, AND INDEXES

English-Tibetan-Sanskrit Glossary

Appendix 1. Critical Tibetan Editions (Online)

Appendix 2. Gyaltsap’s Topical Outline of The Reason Sixty (English)

Appendix 3. Intellectual-Historical Timeline of Indian Buddhism

Appendix 4. Speculative Reconstruction of Chandrakīrti’s Biography

Appendix 5. Tibetan Names (Phonetic-Transliterated Equivalents)

Bibliographies

Reference Works

Canonical Sources

Scriptures

Other Sanskrit and Tibetan Works

General Bibliography

Index of Canonical Texts Cited

Index of Canonical Authors Cited

General Index

Prefaces to the First Edition

SERIES’ EDITOR-IN-CHIEF

Nāgārjuna’s and Chandrakīrti’s works have been more and better studied recently, and it is now possible perhaps for a dedicated student of Buddhist Centrist Mādhyamika philosophy more or less to understand it through translations available in the English language. But, it is perhaps still not possible for a philosopher conversant with the history of Western philosophy and even professionally competent in current philosophical practice to use the critical genius of these great authors as still relevant to their own thought and writings—at least not without the kind of linguistic and comparative philosophical effort for which it is realistically hard for a busy person to have time. So Dr. Joseph Loizzo, PhD, in this innovative, philosophically and psychologically sophisticated study and translation, has done a great service in presenting this fine work on Nāgārjuna’s Reason Sixty and Chandrakīrti’s Commentary thereon.

As the author mentions below, the translation was done over a long period of years, with the help of many people, all duly acknowledged by him. It was eventually presented as the translation appendix to a doctoral dissertation, a study of the life and works of Chandrakīrti in the context of Nālandā monastic university. Subsequently it has been highly reworked by the author with the help of an assiduous and meticulous team of scholarly editors, with Thomas Yarnall researching and improving numerous fine points in both study and translations and Paul Hackett taking the lead in refining and further developing the critical edition of the Tibetan translation text. It is for this reason that Dr. Loizzo and we together decided to include the AIBS team in the authorial credit.

With all the diligent help received in this manner, Dr. Loizzo remains responsible for the primary research in five languages, the introductory study—with its insightful analysis of currents in traditional Chandrakīrti scholarship, its innovative and important delving into the translator’s philosophical reference frame, and its courageous entry into domains of contemporary psychology and philosophy, which are part of the necessary process of broadening the usefulness of the Centrist works of these authors and the final translation itself. For any errors that may have worked their way into the work from the efforts of the editors, we beg the reader’s indulgence.

Finally, we welcome the reader to the delightful subtlety and clarity of these works of the Second Buddha, Nāgārjuna, and of Chandrakīrti, whom we could perhaps call the Second Mañjushrī, as revealed in English translation from the Tibetan, the former in a serious upgrade of previous versions and the latter now for the first time.

Robert A.F. Thurman (Ari Genyen Tenzin Chotrag)

Jey Tsong Khapa Professor of Indo-Tibetan Buddhist Studies

Director, Columbia University Center for Buddhist Studies

President, American Institute of Buddhist Studies

President, Tibet House US

Gandendekyi Ling

Woodstock, New York

February 18, 2007 (amended June 4, 2023)

SERIES’ EXECUTIVE EDITOR

It is a great personal pleasure to present this marvelous study, translation, and edition of Nāgārjuna’s Reason Sixty (YṢ) and Chandrakīrti’s Commentary (YṢV) by my longtime friend and colleague Dr. Joseph Loizzo. Dr. Loizzo and I have known each other since the late 1970s and early 1980s when we were both privileged to have had Dr. Robert A.F. Thurman as our mutual mentor. Thus over two decades later, and after Dr. Loizzo’s many years of dedicated work on the YṢ and YṢV, it has been a very special joy for all three of us to have had the good fortune to come together again, this time to collaborate as colleagues to bring to final fruition the translation and publication of these essential Centrist (Mādhyamika) texts.

It was almost a quarter of a century ago that Dr. Thurman published his own important study and translation of a key Centrist text, the Essence of Eloquence (Legs bshad snying po), by the fourteenth–fifteenth-century Tibetan scholar Je Tsong Khapa. This text presented Tsong Khapa’s own highly influential and celebrated history, analysis, and resolution of key philosophical points central to the texts and traditions of Nāgārjuna and Chandrakīrti. In his introduction to that book, Thurman acknowledged his debt to the twentieth-century philosopher L. Wittgenstein for enabling his own understanding and translation of Tsong Khapa’s Centrist text (cf. especially 89–111), stating that the philosophical topics explored in the Tibetan original would not be intelligible and could not even have been translated without reference to the mature Wittgenstein (21). So, for example, with respect to his understanding and translation of the key Centrist topic of svatantra (Tib. rang rgyud), Thurman explains that "The precise philosophical translation of this term is extremely difficult in English, . . . [and] is only made possible by the work of L. Wittgenstein, who in the Philosophical Investigations refutes for the first time in Western philosophy the concept of a ‘private language,’ and a concept of a ‘private object,’ which ordinary people and philosophers have assumed and theorized, respectively, to be the basis of language and experiential reality (321–22n99). It was on this basis that Thurman developed and successfully employed the apt translation logical privacy for this complex Centrist concept, emphasizing that thus it was only with the help of Wittgenstein and his insight into this most subtle of subtleties, as Tsong Khapa calls it, that I myself was able to get clear these profound sections of the Essence, not to speak of translating them" (103).

Not surprisingly, Dr. Thurman’s pioneering reliance on Wittgenstein for understanding and translating Centrist texts exerted an evident and unmistakable influence on Dr. Loizzo’s translation style, terminology, methodology, and interpretation. Thus Dr. Loizzo’s own innovative study and translation of the Centrist texts presented herein continue this interpretive approach, while further developing and deepening the connection and debt to Wittgenstein. Loizzo acknowledges that in recent years (thanks in large part to works such as Thurman’s), comparisons of Centrist philosophers with Wittgenstein have been viewed by many as basic to a coherent postmodern reference frame for Centrist studies. . . . However, he is critical of the forms such comparisons have sometimes taken, highlighting various subtle forms of . . . [contemporary] dualistic biases that tend to obscure modern views of Nāgārjuna (14) that have emerged in more recent years. Moreover, he argues that such misreadings reflect the conflicting positions of objectivist and constructivist camps in the postmodern debate over the objectivity of scientific knowledge and method, a debate sparked by the relativistic turn in modern physics and the linguistic turn in Western philosophy. Thus in addition to carefully revisiting Wittgenstein’s thought in this comparative context, Loizzo explains that he has herein attempted to show the family resemblance between the nondualisms of Chandrakīrti and Wittgenstein by couching my discussion . . . in the more accessible language of the postmodern debate over objectivity (19). In particular, he argues that it is Nagel’s approach to objectivity that presents perhaps the most promising comparative framework for interpreting Buddhist Centrism, for it is Nagel who seems . . . to be clearly on the trail of a radical centrist theory of objective knowledge and responsible agency (analogous to Buddhist ‘omniscience’ and ‘omnicompassion’), insisting on a radical, nondualistic conclusion in striking sympathy with the program of Buddhist human science: not only is the scientific pursuit of objective knowledge inexorably relative to the philosophical pursuit of self-knowledge but at bottom the two are synergistic and inseparable (19).

Moreover, in addition to developing and strengthening connections to Wittgenstein and updating the context to include the postmodern debate over objectivity, Loizzo necessarily widens the comparative framework to include other important language-therapeutic approaches from several other contemporary disciplines. In particular, Dr. Loizzo’s own years of experience as a physician and psychotherapist have clearly had an equally important influence on his understanding of Centrism; and it is this unique blend of sustained experience and expertise in both modern philosophical and psychological disciplines that seems to have uniquely shaped and specially qualified Dr. Loizzo to translate and present to a contemporary audience the particular Centrist texts considered herein. Thus, when examining the presentation of Centrist thought herein, the reader will encounter—in addition to the more familiar philosophical language of absolutism, reification, nihilism, and so forth—manifold uses of more intriguing psychological language such as projection and denial, the process of obsession and conflict, cognitive-affective-behavioral self-transcendence, emotional self-mastery, the empathic use of conventional constructs, and so forth. Likewise, drawing on yet other disciplines, Loizzo will explain, for example: I borrow the terms ‘evolutionary epistemology’ and ‘psychosocial construction’ from current exploration—in the fields of neurobiology, sociology, linguistics, and the philosophy of science—of the fact that human knowledge and perception is shaped by the constructive activity of the subject, in dependence on a psychosociobiological matrix of conditions (93n186). And so on.

Thus, just as Dr. Thurman before him argued for the indispensability of Wittgenstein for developing a deeper understanding of Buddhist Centrist philosophical thought in general, so Dr. Loizzo persuasively argues that his own widening of the comparative approach is essential to developing a proper understanding and translation of the particular Centrist texts presented herein. This is so, he argues, because Nāgārjuna’s Reason Sixty and Chandrakīrti’s Commentary fill a unique space bridging these authors’ more purely philosophical, critical texts (concerned primarily with wisdom) and their more practical, therapeutic texts (concerned primarily with ethics and the practice of compassion). Thus, in the case of Nāgārjuna’s text, Loizzo states, "The Reason Sixty . . . stands midway between . . . [his other] two masterpieces. . . . Bridging from the rigorous critiques of the Wisdom toward the elaboration of the ethos of compassion in the Jewel Rosary, it underlines the central thrust of Nāgārjuna’s therapeutic philosophy of language—namely, the elimination of cognitive and affective resistances to nondualistic wisdom and compassion (6); and thus, While Nāgārjuna’s opening and central focus in the Reason highlights the dereifying and illusion-like insights of Centrist analysis, his concluding focus is on preparing the practitioner to apply these twin contemplative modes to the final nondual performance of wisdom and compassion formulated in his Jewel Rosary (106). And in the case of Chandrakīrti’s text, the Commentary . . . serves a transitional role . . . , linking the critical hermeneutical pedagogy of his Lucid Exposition with the practical, therapeutic anthropology of his [Central Way] Introduction, just as Nāgārjuna’s Reason links his own Wisdom and Jewel Rosary (8); and: Chandrakīrti highlights the linkage between the dereifying mode of transcendent insight and its virtual or conventional mode. . . .[T]he two insight modes are mutually indispensable to liberative development, the critical and practical aspects of a single process (98); and thus, as the Reason clears the contemplative way to the final nondual practice of the Jewel Rosary, Chandrakīrti’s Commentary offers a transition from the critical hermeneutics of the Lucid Exposition to the altruistic anthropology . . . in . . . his Introduction . . . (41). In sum, Loizzo argues, The key point to be considered here is how the purely negative or ‘critical’ dereifying insight of voidness translates into the ‘practical,’ illusion-like, or virtual, relational insight, sustaining the enlightened cultivation of living individuals and their social consensus" (92).

Furthermore, as implied above, Loizzo further explicitly links these two sets of three texts with the Buddhist three higher disciplines (adhiśikṣa) of wisdom/philosophy (prajñā), contemplation (samādhi), and ethics (śīla), respectively. In so doing, he helps to clarify links between these three disciplines that, while key throughout the Indo-Tibetan traditions, seem to have been less well explored in contemporary Western scholarship. Moreover, if the Wisdom and the Lucid Exposition are aligned with the discipline of philosophy, presenting an analysis of the nature of reality, and as such addressing objective matters, then by aligning the Reason and its Commentary with the discipline of contemplation, and by aligning the Rosary and the Introduction with the discipline of compassionate ethics, Loizzo helps to clarify the distinct ways in which these latter four texts address the subjective aspect of Centrist studies (which aspect of course then nondually links back to the objective side as well). It is these latter aspects and dimensions of Centrism in particular that Loizzo compellingly argues may have been systematically overlooked or distorted by Western scholarship (4). And it is the interrelated linkages between all these aspects and dimensions—as well as the unique intermediating functions performed by the Reason and its Commentary—that have informed and, in the end, necessitated and justified Loizzo’s multidisciplinary approach to the study and translation of these particular Centrist texts.

If most will readily agree with Loizzo’s observation that [t]he postmodern problems of understanding the relativity of knowledge and action, self and language, body and mind, are among the most critical in the Western academy, then we—as the editors of this series—would like to add our voices in strong support of his further conviction that with regard to addressing these critical problems, understanding the Central Philosophy promises to be invaluable to Indology, to modern philosophy of science, and to science of mind (23). We have every confidence that the present book can begin to fulfill this promise by making a significant contribution to such an understanding, offering, as Loizzo promises, a fresh look at Buddhism as a spiritual and scientific civilization committed to the pursuit of objective self-knowledge and self-regulation along the non-egocentrist lines Wittgenstein, Nagel, and others prescribe (23). We invite the reader to explore, critically assess, respond, and contribute to this updated, nuanced approach to Centrist studies, and to consider seriously what contributions these texts and the Indo-Tibetan spiritual and scientific civilization from which they spring may yet have to offer to the many interrelated discourses of our emerging global civilization.

Thomas F. Yarnall, PhD

Associate Research Scholar, Adjunct Assistant Professor

Columbia University, Department of Religion

(amended June 4, 2023)

ASSOCIATE EDITOR (ESPECIALLY OF THE ONLINE TIBETAN CRITICAL EDITION)

As one of the texts known collectively as the Sixfold Canon of Reasonings (Rigs tshogs drug), Nāgārjuna’s Reason Sixty (Yuktiṣaṣṭikā; Rigs pa drug cu pa) has been identified by later Tibetan scholars as serving a specific function in the context of Nāgārjuna’s overall exposition of the Centrist (mādhyamika; dbu ma pa) philosophy. Discussing the relationship of the different works to each other, the twentieth-century Tibetan scholar Losang Dorjey states that of the works of Nāgārjuna on the Central Way, there are two types: those establishing the object—subtle voidness—through reasoning, and those teaching that the subject—the view realizing that voidness—is the root of liberation and omniscience. Four of these six works—the Wisdom: Fundamental Verses of the Central Way, the Crushing the Categories, the Voidness Seventy, and the Rebuttal of Objections—fall into the first category, while the remaining two—The Reason Sixty and the Jewel Rosary—fall into the latter.¹

Although often quoted by scholars in works treating various points of Centrist philosophy, of the dozen or so explicit commentaries known to have been written on The Reason Sixty,² only the commentaries of Chandrakīrti, Tsong Khapa Losang Drakpa³ and Gyaltsap Darma Rinchen⁴ are readily accessible.⁵ In these commentaries, the structure of Nāgārjuna’s treatise is explicitly laid out along with discussions of the various points of contention addressed by the individual verses.

Following Gyaltsap’s lead, the texts can be divided into the traditional three main sections: homage, body of the work, and the dedication of merits. The body of the work, verses 1 through 59, presents Nāgārjuna’s reasonings on four major points:

A.Teaching [the Centrists’ presentation of] Relativity as Free from the [Two] Extremes (vv. 1–29)

B.Establishing that the Teachings on the Aggregates are of Interpretable Meaning (vv. 30–39)

C.Perceiving the Faults of Adhering to the Aggregates (vv. 40–56)

D.The Benefits of Liberation (vv. 57–59)

Half of the body of the work is devoted to the first topic—eliminating the objections to Nāgārjuna’s presentation of relativity as if it were indicative of an extreme of either nihilism or absolutism—while the second half of the text (the second and third topics) is dedicated to demonstrating that just those same charges actually apply to his would-be detractors.

Throughout the text, Chandrakīrti takes the opportunity not only to explicate various points of Centrist philosophy in relation to Nāgārjuna’s verses but also to reveal his incisive analysis of the texts and tenets of both Buddhist and non-Buddhist critics of Nāgārjuna, from the Sarvāstivādins to the Sāṁkhya and Vaisheṣhika. Chandrakīrti combines his defense of the Centrist position with pointed attacks on the implications of others’ assertions, most notably the foundational concepts of Dignāga’s epistemology, and in particular the presentation of validating cognition (pramāṇa) and its grounding in the assumption of intrinsic identity in things. Moreover, Chandrakīrti repeatedly displays his familiarity and facility with Dignāga’s epistemological system and its various categories, such as direct perception (pratyakṣa, mngon sum) and specifically and generally characterized entities,⁶ being a valid source of knowledge,⁷ meaning-universals,⁸ aspectual perception,⁹ and others, all the while pointing out the flaws in the attacks of their proponents.

Thus, from a close reading of the terms of the different disputes in his Commentary, one can begin to paint a richer picture of the interreligious and intersectarian dialogues taking place in sixth-century India. Viewed in this light, the text itself is an invitation to revisit the other works attributed to Chandrakīrti in order to examine further the subtle contextual references contained therein and to more greatly appreciate the intellectual might of Chandrakīrti himself, that has rightly earned him a reputation as one of the greatest minds of the past two millennia.

Paul G. Hackett

Columbia University

1. Losang Dorjey, byang chub lam gyi rim pa’i mtha’ dpyod gsung rab rgya mtshor ’jug pa’i gru gzings (Ship for Entering into the Ocean of Textual Systems, the Decisive Analysis of [Tsong Khapa’s] Stages of the Path to Enlightenment).

2. E. Gene Smith, private communication.

3. Tsong Khapa Losang Drakpa (1357–1419), Rigs pa drug cu pa’i zin bris (Notes [of a lecture] on The Reason Sixty). Transcribed by Gyaltsap Darma Rinchen (rgyal tshab dar ma rin chen). D 5403 = 5444.

4. Gyaltsap Darma Rinchen, Rigs pa drug cu pa’i ṭikka (Commentary on [Nāgārjuna’s] The Reason Sixty). D 5443.

5. Although a commentary was also written by the late-nineteenth-century author Shenpen Chökyi Nangwa (1871–1926), since it merely restates the content of Chandrakīrti’s own commentary, it has not been used. Gyaltsap mentions also a certain Zhang Thang Sagpa Yeshe Jungne explicitly by name, as the author of a Rigs pa drug cu pa’i ṭikka, though this text does not appear to be extant; he would appear to be the same author referred to in Lokesh Chandra’s Materials for a History of Tibetan Literature, pt. 3 (New Delhi: International Academy of Indian Culture, 1963), 523 (no. 11346); and in E. Gene Smith’s Tibetan Buddhist Resource Center database (TBRC Resource Code, W16461).

6. Commentary to v. 8, where Chandrakīrti makes his argument for a Centrist understanding of the direct perception of negative phenomena (cessations).

7. Commentary to v. 28.

8. Commentary to v. 30.

9. Commentary to v. 34; Gyaltsap expands on this point at length in his ṭīkka, arguing against the validity of such a mediated perception and the existence of a self-knowing consciousness (rang rig, svasaṁvedana) required by such an aspectual model of perception.

Author’s Preface to the Second Edition

It is with a deep sense of gratitude that I welcome you to this second edition of Nāgārjuna’s Reason Sixty with Chandrakīrti’s Commentary. The fifteen years since the first edition came out have brought unimaginable changes in my life and work, in the global