I no longer remember how the Dalai Lama's commentary on a Tibetan translation of Kamalashila's Bhāvanākrama ended up in my to read list, but when I saw it at the cat bookstore it went on the pile. I vaguely remember that the idea was that this was deemed HH's most 'technical' writing about meditation, which I probably found intriguing. And it is indeed pretty technical. The basic idea of the original text is that there can, perhaps paradoxically, still be stages to the cultivation of awakening despite the Mahayana view that everything and everyone is already empty. So in a sense, it a meditation instruction manual. Meanwhile, the commentary from HH sticks pretty tightly to the original, without a lot of tangential attempts to modernize the text or discuss how he practices with it day to day.
The stages Kamalashila describes are pretty simple actually. First, cultivate compassion for all beings. Interestingly, the text suggests going about this in the opposite way from which it is often taught. Instead of beginning with metta, we are told to begin with an equanimity that regards all beings as equal. That is, we first cultivate an equalization of feeling towards ourselves, our friends, and our enemies -- ultimately, we are all in the same boat. Then, when we focus on wishing beings well in our metta, we are able to extend this loving-kindness to all beings equally. After this, a feeling of compassion for all beings will arise naturally anytime we discover that they are not doing well. Finally this mind of universal compassion for all beings inspires the Bodhisattva vow characteristic of the Mahayana. After establishing this base of compassion, the practitioner can then focus on developing samadhi and vipassana, here termed "calm-abiding" and "special insight" meditation. The latter of these is the specific Mahayana insight into the emptiness of all things. And that's basically it, both the text and the Lama emphasize that these two aspects of meditation need to be balanced to achieve awakening.
While it appears that these stages or components of the path are relatively familiar and straight-forward, I should acknowledge that I don't think I understand this text very well. I've come away with this summary high-level view partly because the material is coming from traditions that I am not that familiar with. It's 9th century Indian Mahayana practice reflected through a 20th century Tibetan lens. So what feels to me like needless repetition in the text regarding the balance of calm-abiding and special insight, and then later "method" and "wisdom", is probably a subtle distinction that I just don't understand. Like most of these older texts, the material is not meant to be read on a standalone basis, but under the guidance of competent teacher. The Dalai Lama's commentary certainly makes the original more accessible, but mainly to those already steeped in the Gelug tradition from which he teaches. So basically I was just not the intended audience for this one. Interesting nevertheless.
No comments:
Post a Comment