Karl Brunnhölzl > Quotes

“Mind precedes phenomena, Mind is their chief, from mind they spring. Those who speak or act with a pure mind Happiness will follow like their shadow.”
― Karl Brunnholzl, When the Clouds Part: The Uttaratantra and Its Meditative Tradition as a Bridge between Sutra and Tantra

“In other words, in their own ways, both systems basically attempt to follow the Buddha in addressing the same fundamental problem of clinging to reference points or extremes. They just tackle this issue from different angles, with different terminologies and methods. As Harris says:
Nagarjuna and Asanga ... have set themselves the common task of rendering traditional Buddhist doctrine in such a way that it can be used to tackle particular problems. Furthermore it is pointless categorizing them as nihilists or idealists or anything else of the kind. They should be seen as expositors, adapting traditional doctrine to meet the needs of particular tasks while at the same time leaving the body of the doctrine fundamentally unchanged and unquestioned.”
― Karl Brunnholzl, The Center of the Sunlit Sky: Madhyamaka in the Kagyu Tradition

“The Blessed One.... in accordance with their thinking, has eliminated all reifications without exception through progressively teaching the aggregates, constituents, and sources; mere mind; and the identitylessness of all phenomena.”
― Karl Brunnholzl, The Center of the Sunlit Sky: Madhyamaka in the Kagyu Tradition

“Nagarjuna says:
For those for whom emptiness is possible, Everything is possible. For those for whom emptiness is not possible, Nothing is possible.”
― Karl Brunnholzl, The Center of the Sunlit Sky: Madhyamaka in the Kagyu Tradition

“In fact, in much the same way as the Centrists, Yogacaras like Asanga and Vasuhandhu introduce and employ expedient concepts, such as "mere mind," only for the sake of dissolving previous ones. Once these concepts on different levels have fulfilled their purpose of redressing specific misconceptions, they are replaced by more subtle ones, which are similarly removed later in the gradual process of letting go of all reference points.”
― Karl Brunnholzl, The Center of the Sunlit Sky: Madhyamaka in the Kagyu Tradition

“In summary, prior to Bhavaviveka, the Yogacaras sought to assimilate rather than to oppose Centrism. A particularly striking example of this is Kambala's (early sixth century) Garland ofLight,1212 which displays a most remarkable early synthesis of Yogacara and Madhyamaka. After Bhavaviveka's critique, however, though never rejecting Nagarjuna and Aryadeva, on certain points the later Yogacaras seemed to be at odds with the later Centrists,"" mainly accusing each other of reification or nihilism respectively. However, what often happened in these controversies was the general problem of one philosophical system attacking the other with its own terminology and systemic framework and not on the grounds of the terminology and the context of that other system. In particular, Bhavaviveka's interpretation of Yogacara is a perfect example of an extremely literal reading without considering the meaning in terms of the Yogacara system's own grounds, instead exclusively treating it on Centrist grounds. Thus, when abstracted from the obvious polemical elements and out-of-context misinterpretations of what the opponents actually meant by certain terms, not much is left in terms of fundamental differences between the later Centrists and Yogacaras,'''" which basically boil down to two issues: (i) whether there is an ultimately real mind (no matter whether this is called other-dependent nature, self-awareness, ground consciousness, or nondual wisdom) and (2) whether any epistemology is possible at all.”
― Karl Brunnholzl, The Center of the Sunlit Sky: Madhyamaka in the Kagyu Tradition

“However, despite their synthesis of Yogacara and Centrism, all Yogacara-Madhyamikas, such as Jnanagarbha, Santaraksita, Kamalasila, and Haribhadra, unanimously refute the notion of a really existent consciousness or self-awareness in both the versions of the Real Aspectarians and the False Aspectarians, without, however, mentioning specific persons."They also attack Dharmakirti's presentations of causality (one cause producing many results, many causes producing one result, and many causes producing many results). At the same time, on the conventional level, they strongly rely on his principles of epistemology and reasoning.”
― Karl Brunnholzl, The Center of the Sunlit Sky: Madhyamaka in the Kagyu Tradition

“In brief, the very quintessence of all meditative concentrations of both the sutras and the tantras of the great vehicle is to see, through supreme knowledge in a way that is without seeing, that no phenomenon whatsoever abides as anything, such as existence or nonexistence, and to undistractedly and nonconceptually rest in this very seeing.”
― Karl Brunnholzl, The Center of the Sunlit Sky: Madhyamaka in the Kagyu Tradition

“This situation is then conventionally called "realizing emptiness." "Realizing" is just a conventional term, since here, there is nothing to be realized and nothing that realizes, just like water poured into water.”
― Karl Brunnholzl, The Center of the Sunlit Sky: Madhyamaka in the Kagyu Tradition

“In brief, if Centrism is explained as a consistent philosophical, ontological, or logical system, that may appeal to our wish for some well-organized, all-explanatory picture of the world and how we perceive it. Usually, we just want to have something that makes good sense, something on which we can build our belief systems or, in the case of Centrism, a belief system for why and how we should not have any belief system. However, all attempts to force Centrism into any kind of system at all must necessarily fail due to the very nature of what Centrism is: the radical deconstruction of any system and conceptualization whatsoever, including itself. Reintroducing into Centrism any notions of justification, validity, or making sense (with more subtle ones being more tricky here than gross ones) precisely reestablishes and fortifies the very traps that the Centrist approach wants us to let go of altogether. To this, Centrists could be tempted to say, "Talking heads, stop making sense!”
― Karl Brunnholzl, The Center of the Sunlit Sky: Madhyamaka in the Kagyu Tradition

“Suzuki:
We must keep one thing always before our minds, . . . which is, that Buddhist thought is always the outcome of Buddhist life; that is, its logic, or psychology, or metaphysics cannot be understood adequately unless we realize that facts of Buddhist experience are at its basis and, therefore, that pure logic is not the key to the understanding of Buddhist philosophy.144”
― Karl Brunnholzl, The Center of the Sunlit Sky: Madhyamaka in the Kagyu Tradition

“In brief, what Centrists refute is any notion of real or absolute existence or an intrinsic nature that is attributed to any phenomenon, whether it is material form, ordinary consciousness, omniscient wisdom, Buddhahood, the Dharma Body, or Buddha nature. Centrists make no difference in this respect between
refuting the positions of Buddhists and non-Buddhists. They do not even hesitate to apply such a critique to anything that is-correctly or incorrectly-understood as "Centrism." Thus, if the teachings on the three natures are explained so as to even slightly suggest real existence, be it on the seeming or the ultimate level, be it by the Proponents of Cognizance, so-called Mere Mentalists, or Shen- tong-Madhyamikas, Centrists will speak up against this. However, when the presentation of the three natures is understood as the Karmapa explained it above, it is not something that has to be discarded by Centrists but comes down to the same essential point of ultimate non referential 1 ry that is explained in the Centrist teachings.”
― Karl Brunnholzl, The Center of the Sunlit Sky: Madhyamaka in the Kagyu Tradition

“Again, it should be kept in mind that verbal or other indications are nothing but a pointing finger and not that to which this finger points. We cannot experience the taste of delicious food simply by talking or hearing about it. Still, we might become inspired to engage in preparing such food and then relish it. In the same way, we might become inspired to make some effort to experience the taste of enlightenment while not mistaking the words for their referents.”
― Karl Brunnholzl, The Center of the Sunlit Sky: Madhyamaka in the Kagyu Tradition

“it can only be repeated that all reasonings and negations work solely on the level of seeming reality. At best, as nonimplicative negations, they can refer to the nominal ultimate but never to the actual ultimate
free from all discursiveness and reference points, such as existence, nonexistence, affirmation, and negation.”
― Karl Brunnholzl, The Center of the Sunlit Sky: Madhyamaka in the Kagyu Tradition

“His Heart of Centrism agrees:
Its character is neither existent, nor nonexistent, Nor [both] existent and nonexistent, nor neither. Centrists should know true reality That is free from these four possibilities.”
― Karl Brunnholzl, The Center of the Sunlit Sky: Madhyamaka in the Kagyu Tradition

“No matter how many of these practices we may perform, none of them qualifies as Vajrayana or Mahamudra-even if outwardly they are performed in a technically perfect way-if they lack the three indispensable features of the renunciation of cyclic existence, the altruistic motivation of the mind of enlightenment, and the view of emptiness.”
― Karl Brunnholzl, The Center of the Sunlit Sky: Madhyamaka in the Kagyu Tradition

“This [system] that is known as "the glorious Tagbo Kagyu" is not a lineage of [mere] words. Rather, it is a lineage of the actuality [behind these words].”
― Karl Brunnholzl, The Center of the Sunlit Sky: Madhyamaka in the Kagyu Tradition

“Since such realization is undeceiving, it is called "seeing what is true." As it is the opposite of worldly seeing, it may also be called "not seeing anything." Since it is the opposite of reification, it is expressed as "seeing emptiness." It is also referred to as "being released from empty and nonempty," because neither something empty nor something nonempty is observed. Since emptiness is nothing but a name, it is also described as "not seeing emptiness." Because it is the source of all positive qualities, it is designated as "seeing the emptiness endowed with the supreme of all aspects." It is called "seeing identitylessness," for it is the opposite of clinging to personal and phenomenal identities. Since it is the opposite of both clinging to a self and clinging to the lack of a self, it is said to be "seeing the genuine self." As any notion of a mind has vanished, it is labeled as "mind having vanished." It is also referred to as "realizing or seeing one's own mind," because the primordial basic nature of one's own mind is realized in just the primordial way it is. When "not seeing anything" is explained as "seeing what is true," this is to he understood just like our immediate certainty that we see space when we do not see anything. As the Buddha said:
Beings constantly use the words, "I see space." You should examine the point of how you see space. Those who see in this way see all phenomena. I am not able to explain seeing through another example.”
― Karl Brunnholzl, The Center of the Sunlit Sky: Madhyamaka in the Kagyu Tradition

“For Centrists, it is inappropriate to make any autonomous inferences on their own account, because they do not accept any other theses either. In other words, Centrists do not posit any unmistaken consciousness that realizes something to be inferred that is established through some valid cognition in their own system. For they also do not accept any other thesis different from such unmistakenness, that is, something established as mistaken through some valid cognition in their own system. Centrists do not find anything that they feel could be presented as an inference that is thoroughly grounded in their own system. Rather, instead of seeing a need to present some-anyway nonexistent-thoroughly established inferences of the systems of others merely in order to find something that they could present as an established inference, Centrists always say that presenting such is categorically to be avoided. As Aryadeva's Four Hundred Verses explains:
Against someone who has no thesis Of "existence, nonexistence, or [both] existence and nonexistence," It is not possible to level a charge, Even if [such is tried] for a long time.""
Nagarjuna's Rebuttal of Objections says:
If I had any position, I thereby would be at fault. Since I have no position, I am not at fault at all.
If there were anything to be observed 'T'hrough direct perception and the other instances [of valid cognition],
It would be something to be established or rejected. However, since no such thing exists, I cannot be criticized."'2
In other words, if Centrists had any position of the nature of an existing or nonexistent entity being established through valid cognition on either level of the two realities in their own system, they would thereby incur the two faults of (i) not formulating a reason and an example and (z) failing to eliminate the possible flaws that may be adduced by others against them. However, for Centrists, the ultimate means freedom from all discursiveness and the seeming means mere appearances that are presented in contingency. Apart from this, on any level of the two realities, they do not have any position that is established through valid cognition in their own system as such and such. Therefore they are not at fault in not formulating a reason and an example for entities not arising from themselves. If, through the four kinds of valid cognition, there were any phenomenal entity to be observed as being established, there would be something to be established or rejected in their own system. However, since no such thing exists, Centrists cannot be criticized for incurring the above flaws.”
― Karl Brunnholzl, The Center of the Sunlit Sky: Madhyamaka in the Kagyu Tradition

“As for the ontological status of mind, his Prajñāpāramitopadeśa says that it does not exist as apprehender and apprehended, but the existence of the sheer lucidity of experience cannot be denied.”
― Karl Brunnholzl, When the Clouds Part: The Uttaratantra and Its Meditative Tradition as a Bridge between Sutra and Tantra

“Other than stand and stare, there is nothing left to do-OM. We might wonder why our guidebook never said anything about it and want to check-it's GONE. We might want to look at ourselves who walked on the path and arrived now-GONE. We look around and cannot even see the slightest indication of how we got here-GONE BEYOND. But we know for sure now that there is no further path to be searched
for or to be avoided either-COMPLETELY GONE BEYOND. Without anybody looking anywhere, the view is astounding and the panorama enjoys itself- BODHI SVAHA.”
― Karl Brunnholzl, The Center of the Sunlit Sky: Madhyamaka in the Kagyu Tradition

“However, one should be equally aware that, within the entirety of the Buddha's teachings of expedient and definitive meaning in his three progressive cycles of dharma, there is not a single one that does not serve as a skillful means for certain of the disciples of the three vehicles to attain the higher realms and liberation. The only reason teachings of expedient meaning are given is that, due to the different capacities of disciples, it is not possible to teach the definitive meaning to everyone immediately.”
― Karl Brunnholzl, The Center of the Sunlit Sky: Madhyamaka in the Kagyu Tradition

“No matter which progressive stages of meditation in the sutras, tantras, or pith instructions you look at, at first, when the [correct] view is searched for, discriminating knowledge is indispensable.... And yet, having analyzed through discrimination, finally the very [process on discrimation itself comes to rest, ushering in nonconceptual [wis- dom].24”
― Karl Brunnholzl, The Center of the Sunlit Sky: Madhyamaka in the Kagyu Tradition

“Therefore, emptiness is taught in order to completely pacify all discursiveness without exception. So if the purpose of emptiness is the complete peace of all discursiveness and you just increase the web of discursiveness by thinking that the meaning of emptiness is nonexistence, you do not realize the purpose of emptiness [at all].”
― Karl Brunnholzl, The Center of the Sunlit Sky: Madhyamaka in the Kagyu Tradition

“In order to reverse our clinging to things as being empty, we are taught in terms of the expanse of dharmas, the openness, spaciousness, and relaxedness of the dharmadhatu.”
― Karl Brunnholzl, The Center of the Sunlit Sky: Madhyamaka in the Kagyu Tradition

“The other common Tibetan classification scheme is to label streams z and 3 as Mere Mentalism and place them doxographically below Centrism, which is then called "the system of self-emptiness" (rangtong). The system of Maitreya, Asanga, and Vasubandhu is labeled "the Centrism of other-emptiness" (shentong) and categorized under Centrism. This approach is usually taken by the followers of Shentong-Madhyamaka, such as Jamgon Kongtrul Lodro Taye. Often then, this latter form of "Centrism" is considered to be superior to the former. In this approach too, the system of epistemology and reasoning of stream 3 is usually treated separately as the distinct topic of valid cognition.”
― Karl Brunnholzl, The Center of the Sunlit Sky: Madhyamaka in the Kagyu Tradition

“the Centrist approach of presenting mere conditionality without analysis is in clear opposition to any reifications of asserting arising from the four extremes. Hence, the Centrist way of presenting the two realities is highly superior to any such approach by realists, since it expresses the knowable objects of all persons from ordinary beings to Buddhas in a way that does not contradict common worldly consensus. As was said before, to abstain from reifying things such as karma, cause and effect, ethics, and the means to achieve liberation in no way makes these things lack their justification or functioning. To the contrary, it is precisely the fact of their emptiness-their lack of solid and independent existence-that allows for the unimpeded and dynamic flow of the dependent origination of conditioned phenomena.”
― Karl Brunnholzl, The Center of the Sunlit Sky: Madhyamaka in the Kagyu Tradition

“The Sutra of the Arrival in Lanka says:
In the future, those who cling to non-Buddhist thinking will conceive of the wisdom of the noble ones as existing as an object of personal experience and as having the nature of an entity.... How could such notions operate in the noble ones? If such [notions] were entertained, they would be nothing but the clinging to an identity.”
― Karl Brunnholzl, The Center of the Sunlit Sky: Madhyamaka in the Kagyu Tradition

“Object Conditions
Likewise, the object condition is not established either. In the context of perception, an object is regarded as a condition for the arising of the consciousness that perceives this object. But if they are placed on a time line, we can see that this cannot work. If the object existed before the specific consciousness that is supposedly caused by it, what would this later consciousness perceive? The same applies if the object existed after the consciousness that is its perceiver. And if the object existed simultaneously with it, it could not be the cause of this consciousness.”
― Karl Brunnholzl, The Center of the Sunlit Sky: Madhyamaka in the Kagyu Tradition

“Kamalasila's Illumination of Centrism explains:
Thus, those who cannot understand all at once that all phenomena lack a nature, for the time being, gradually engage in the lack of nature of outer objects on the basis of [them being] mere mind. Therefore, [ The Sutra of the Arrival in Lanka X.154ab] says:
Apprehender and apprehended cease In those who look with reasoning.
Following this, by gradually examining the nature of that mind, they understand that also the [mind] is without identity and thus engage in the profound way of being.”
― Karl Brunnholzl, The Center of the Sunlit Sky: Madhyamaka in the Kagyu Tradition