Remarks On Trantristic Hermeneutics

Author(s): Ernst Steinkellner
Publisher: Ernst Steinkellner

Page 10

The arrangement of these four terms is in accordance with the career of a tantristic vogi. The first term, however, refers to the secular level of understanding. It is therefore only an ornament of words (šabdālamkārah), while the others are ornaments of meaning (arthālamkörah).29 Thus we may refer only to the latter as categories of "tantric meaning" strictly speaking, although all four form a well-conceived and logically arranged set of tantristic hermeneutics.
Candrakirti's definitions 30 relate these four categories and their eight
remorse (kroukrtyarinirylli.) with those who adhere to the Sūtras and 2. the connecting with the stage of generation (utpattikramatyoga-) (cf. Prad. ubhis. prak. f. 108a7). Thus samastangn could be taken as it bahuvrihi: "with common inombers, parts" said of arthah, the whole expression being understood as "meaning, where both (rele. vant) inembers are commonly given". This bahuvrihi would then have been substantivized secondarily to si mistāngan with the same sense. That this meaning has both members, further, ineunis nothing else but that this meaning is of relevance for those who adhere to the Sutras as well as for those who practice the stage of generation. Therefore I translate the term as "common meaning".
garbhi is an attribute of arthuḥ, mostly used, however, by itself. Cancrakirti (Prad. 35) define's garbha. as the first three stages of the stage of perfection (simpronnakramni.) (cf. also Prull. abhis. prak. f. 108b6f.). garbhin., therefore, is that meaning which refers to these three stages.
kolikum is explained by Candrakirti himself (Pruul u. 36). He says the word kolnih. meant "encl, limit" (puryantavācaka-). The word is in other contexts not known to bear this meaning, apprars, however, among others in a list of coined words" (uruta.) given by Tson kha pa in his commentary on Prud v. 30 (cf. mChan 'grel f. 8a4), kolikam like garbhi is mostly used by itself as a substantivized attribute of arthaḥ. In Prad s. 36, however, it is clarly an attribute (kolika[h]proktah).
29 Cf. Bhavyakirti, Prad, abhis. prak. f. 108a3 and 109a2. This may be the reason for the conspicuous lacking of the akşurărthuḥ in the first part of the Vajrajñānasa. muccuyntaentrom, too (cf. P 84, f. 29052-293b8), which has already been noted by Matsunaga (lexe, cit., $39). If this cannot be accounted for by another reason, which I clo not se, upare entitled to take Candrakirti indeed for the one who has put together the complete list of the "fourfold explanation" by incorporating with the inclusion of
the "literal meaning" the realm external to the religious career, thus truly starting a • system of tantristic hermeneutics of enduring influence.
30 Prad vv. 33-36 (= f. 256-3a2):
bähyrsāstrarilo nike sblumatra parāyanah/ tadyut pretti prikāsāyrı akşırārtho nigadyrıtel/ “The many knowers of the non-Buddhist Sāstras (consider) the words alone as the last '''sort. In order to explain the analysis of the words) the literal meaniny is statel." süträntadau prapannūnām kaukrtyarinivšttitah/ ut pattikramıyogāc cu samastāngam prakāsitam// "In order to dispell the remorse with those who keep to the Sutras etc. and to connect with the stage of generation the common meaning is proclained."
151