Enter a player name to begin or load your saved progress.
The concept of 'emptiness' (śūnyatā) in Madhyamaka philosophy refers to the complete annihilation of phenomena.
Answer: False
Explanation: In Madhyamaka, 'emptiness' signifies the lack of inherent, independent existence in all phenomena, not their absolute annihilation or non-existence.
What is the primary meaning of 'emptiness' (śūnyatā) within the context of Madhyamaka philosophy as discussed?
Answer: Lack of inherent existence in all phenomena
Explanation: Śūnyatā, or emptiness, in Madhyamaka signifies the absence of intrinsic, independent existence in all phenomena, a concept central to understanding reality.
According to the source, what was the predominant philosophical viewpoint established in Tibet prior to the significant influence of Candrakīrti's works?
Answer: Śāntarakṣita's Yogācāra-Mādhyamaka synthesis
Explanation: Before Candrakīrti's influence became widespread in Tibet, Śāntarakṣita's synthesis of Yogācāra and Madhyamaka, employing syllogistic reasoning, represented the dominant Madhyamaka framework.
Bhāviveka is principally associated with the Prasaṅgika viewpoint.
Answer: False
Explanation: Bhāviveka is the foundational figure for the Svatantrika school, characterized by its use of autonomous syllogistic reasoning, whereas the Prasaṅgika school is primarily associated with Candrakīrti.
Bhāviveka critiqued Buddhapālita for *not* employing autonomous syllogistic reasoning in his Madhyamaka exegesis.
Answer: True
Explanation: Bhāviveka contended that Buddhapālita's commentary on Nāgārjuna's work was deficient due to its exclusive reliance on reductio ad absurdum and its omission of autonomous syllogisms, which Bhāviveka considered essential for dialectical engagement.
Bhāviveka's concept of 'existence according to characteristics' implies inherent existence.
Answer: False
Explanation: Bhāviveka's concept of 'existence according to characteristics' refers to conventional existence, which possesses distinguishing features allowing for identification and discourse, but it does not imply ultimate, inherent existence.
Who is principally credited with developing the Svatantrika viewpoint within Madhyamaka philosophy?
Answer: Bhāviveka
Explanation: Bhāviveka is recognized as the primary architect of the Svatantrika school, distinguished by its systematic use of autonomous syllogistic reasoning.
What does the term 'svatantra' signify in the context of Bhāviveka's philosophical approach?
Answer: Autonomous or independent reasoning
Explanation: 'Svatantra' translates to 'autonomous' or 'independent,' referring to the syllogistic reasoning that Bhāviveka employed to establish Madhyamaka tenets.
Bhāviveka's concept of 'existence according to characteristics' was intended to serve what purpose?
Answer: To establish a basis for conventional understanding and logical discourse
Explanation: This concept was employed by Bhāviveka to articulate how phenomena, while ultimately empty, possess conventional characteristics that allow for identification and serve as a foundation for logical analysis and discourse.
Bhāviveka advocated for Madhyamaka to adapt by incorporating developments in which area?
Answer: Buddhist logic and syllogistic reasoning
Explanation: Bhāviveka believed that Madhyamaka should integrate advancements in Buddhist logic, particularly syllogistic reasoning, to enhance clarity and engagement with philosophical discourse.
Candrakīrti's Prasaṅgika methodology relies exclusively on autonomous syllogistic reasoning.
Answer: False
Explanation: Candrakīrti's Prasaṅgika methodology is characterized by its exclusive reliance on the method of reductio ad absurdum (prasanga), deliberately eschewing autonomous syllogisms.
Candrakīrti posited that autonomous syllogistic reasoning is suitable for debating ultimate truth because opponents share common perceptions.
Answer: False
Explanation: Candrakīrti argued precisely the opposite: autonomous syllogistic reasoning is *unsuitable* for debating ultimate truth due to the fundamental divergence in perceptions between those who understand emptiness and those who do not, thereby precluding a shared basis for syllogistic argument.
The term 'prasanga' denotes the use of autonomous syllogisms in debate.
Answer: False
Explanation: 'Prasanga' refers to the method of reductio ad absurdum, a core technique of the Prasaṅgika school, distinct from the autonomous syllogistic reasoning favored by the Svatantrika school.
The Prasaṅgika method of reductio ad absurdum aims to establish a positive thesis about ultimate reality.
Answer: False
Explanation: The primary function of the Prasaṅgika method is deconstructive; it aims to dismantle opposing essentialist views by demonstrating their logical absurdities, rather than constructing a positive, assertive thesis about ultimate reality.
What is the core methodology employed by the Prasaṅgika school, according to Candrakīrti's formulation?
Answer: Relying solely on reductio ad absurdum (prasanga)
Explanation: Candrakīrti's Prasaṅgika system is defined by its exclusive utilization of the reductio ad absurdum method to refute opposing views, without recourse to establishing positive theses through autonomous syllogisms.
Why did Candrakīrti argue against the application of autonomous syllogistic reasoning in debates concerning ultimate truth?
Answer: It requires a shared perception of the object, which is absent in ultimate truth debates
Explanation: Candrakīrti contended that the prerequisite for syllogistic reasoning—a shared perception of the object of discussion—is absent when debating ultimate truth, as proponents and opponents operate from fundamentally different epistemological standpoints.
According to the Prasaṅgika perspective, why is a 'mere object' problematic as a common ground for syllogistic debate?
Answer: Because opponents hold irreconcilable perceptions, preventing shared understanding
Explanation: The Prasaṅgika school argues that differing perceptions of conventionally existing objects preclude the possibility of a truly shared ground necessary for establishing valid syllogistic arguments.
What is the primary method utilized in the Prasaṅgika approach to demonstrate the lack of inherent existence?
Answer: Using reductio ad absurdum to show logical absurdities in opposing views
Explanation: The Prasaṅgika method centers on reductio ad absurdum (prasanga), demonstrating the logical inconsistencies arising from essentialist assertions, thereby undermining them without proposing alternative positive assertions.
Which statement best describes the Prasaṅgika school's view on how conventional truth is established?
Answer: Solely by imputation or labeling
Explanation: The Prasaṅgika school posits that conventional truth is established merely through designation or imputation, rejecting the notion that it is grounded in findable characteristic marks that could imply inherent existence.
What does the term 'prasanga' signify in the philosophical context of Candrakīrti's work?
Answer: Method of reductio ad absurdum
Explanation: 'Prasanga' refers to the logical technique of reductio ad absurdum, which is the cornerstone of the Prasaṅgika methodology.
Candrakīrti viewed the use of autonomous arguments, even provisionally, as problematic due to its potential implication of:
Answer: A subtle grasping at the inherent existence of objects
Explanation: Candrakīrti argued that employing autonomous arguments, even provisionally, could subtly imply an acceptance of inherent existence, which contradicts the core Madhyamaka insight into emptiness.
Tsongkhapa, the founder of the Gelugpa school, was a principal proponent of the Prasaṅgika philosophical interpretation.
Answer: True
Explanation: Tsongkhapa is renowned for his rigorous defense and promotion of the Prasaṅgika view, which he considered the most accurate presentation of Madhyamaka philosophy, and for his detailed analysis of the Svatantrika–Prasaṅgika distinction.
Tsongkhapa contended that the Svatantrika and Prasaṅgika schools differed primarily in their preferred meditative techniques.
Answer: False
Explanation: Tsongkhapa's analysis emphasized fundamental philosophical and methodological differences, particularly concerning the use of reasoning and the interpretation of the two truths, rather than meditative practices.
The Gelugpa school's ascendancy in Tibet was predicated solely upon its philosophical superiority, independent of political considerations.
Answer: False
Explanation: The dominance of the Gelugpa school was significantly influenced by political factors, particularly the intervention of Gusri Khan and the subsequent establishment of the 5th Dalai Lama's government, which provided political power to promote Tsongkhapa's interpretations.
Tsongkhapa's 'Eight Difficult Points' included the refutation of the storehouse-consciousness at a conventional level.
Answer: True
Explanation: Among the points Tsongkhapa elaborated to distinguish the two schools, the refutation of the Ālaya-vijñāna (storehouse-consciousness) at a conventional level was indeed a significant element.
Tsongkhapa argued that autonomous syllogistic reasoning necessitates a shared perception of the object of discussion.
Answer: True
Explanation: Tsongkhapa's analysis indicated that the efficacy of autonomous syllogistic reasoning relies on a common ground or shared perception of the subject matter, a condition he found problematic for Madhyamaka discourse on ultimate reality.
Tsongkhapa considered reductio ad absurdum the least valid method for demonstrating emptiness.
Answer: False
Explanation: Conversely, Tsongkhapa considered reductio ad absurdum to be the most potent and valid method for demonstrating emptiness, as it directly exposes the logical inconsistencies inherent in essentialist viewpoints.
Following the Gelugpa school's consolidation of power, critical texts opposing Tsongkhapa's views became widely disseminated.
Answer: False
Explanation: Historical accounts suggest that following the Gelugpa ascendancy, texts critical of Tsongkhapa's interpretations faced suppression, leading to their diminished availability rather than widespread dissemination.
Tsongkhapa asserted that conventional existence is established by findable characteristic marks on objects.
Answer: False
Explanation: Tsongkhapa, aligning with the Prasaṅgika view, rejected the notion that conventional existence is established by findable characteristic marks, as this could imply a form of inherent existence. He favored the reductio ad absurdum method.
Tsongkhapa, the founder of the Gelugpa school, is recognized for strongly advocating which philosophical position?
Answer: Candrakīrti's Prasaṅgika view and the distinction between the two schools
Explanation: Tsongkhapa's philosophical legacy is deeply intertwined with his robust defense of Candrakīrti's Prasaṅgika interpretation and his detailed elaboration of the Svatantrika–Prasaṅgika distinction.
According to Tsongkhapa's analysis, what fundamental difference separated the Svatantrika and Prasaṅgika schools?
Answer: Their interpretation of the two truths doctrine and use of reasoning methods
Explanation: Tsongkhapa identified the core divergence between the schools as residing in their respective understandings of the two truths doctrine and, crucially, their methodologies: the Svatantrika reliance on autonomous syllogisms versus the Prasaṅgika exclusive use of reductio ad absurdum.
What factor was crucial in establishing the Gelugpa school's dominance and promoting Tsongkhapa's interpretations in Tibet?
Answer: The intervention of Gusri Khan and the establishment of the 5th Dalai Lama's government
Explanation: The political ascendancy of the Gelugpa school, facilitated by Gusri Khan's support and the subsequent establishment of the 5th Dalai Lama's government, was instrumental in solidifying its dominance and promoting Tsongkhapa's philosophical framework.
Which of the following is NOT among Tsongkhapa's 'Eight Difficult Points' differentiating Prasaṅgika from Svatantrika?
Answer: The acceptance of autonomous syllogisms for establishing ultimate views
Explanation: Tsongkhapa's 'Eight Difficult Points' specifically highlight the Prasaṅgika rejection of autonomous syllogisms for establishing ultimate views as a key differentiator from the Svatantrika approach.
How did the Gelugpa school's political ascendancy in the 17th century affect the availability of texts critical of Tsongkhapa's views?
Answer: They were suppressed and became nearly lost
Explanation: Historical accounts indicate that following the Gelugpa school's political consolidation, dissenting texts critical of Tsongkhapa's doctrines experienced suppression, leading to their scarcity.
The Svatantrika–Prasaṅgika distinction represents a critical doctrinal classification within Tibetan Buddhist scholasticism, delineating divergent philosophical approaches to the Madhyamaka tradition.
Answer: True
Explanation: This statement accurately defines the Svatantrika–Prasaṅgika distinction as a key analytical framework employed in Tibetan Buddhist philosophy to differentiate Madhyamaka interpretations.
Śāntarakṣita's synthesis, known as Yogācāra-Mādhyamaka, was subsequently categorized under the Svatantrika tradition by Tibetan doxographers.
Answer: True
Explanation: Tibetan scholastic traditions often placed Śāntarakṣita's influential synthesis, which integrated Yogācāra and Mādhyamaka with Indian logic, within the broader Svatantrika classification, primarily due to its employment of syllogistic reasoning.
Scholars from the Nyingma, Sakya, and Kagyu schools universally concurred with Tsongkhapa's emphasis on the Svatantrika–Prasaṅgika distinction.
Answer: False
Explanation: Many scholars within the Nyingma, Sakya, and Kagyu traditions often viewed the distinction as pedagogical or exaggerated, proposing alternative interpretations and downplaying its fundamental philosophical significance as emphasized by Tsongkhapa.
Gorampa, a prominent Sakya teacher, considered the Svatantrika–Prasaṅgika distinction to represent fundamental philosophical divergences.
Answer: False
Explanation: Gorampa, while offering critiques of the Svatantrika methodology, generally viewed the distinction as primarily pedagogical, asserting that both approaches ultimately lead to the same realization, rather than representing fundamental philosophical divides.
The Rimé movement aimed to reinforce the dominance of the Gelugpa school by promoting Tsongkhapa's interpretations.
Answer: False
Explanation: The Rimé movement, emerging in the 19th century, sought to preserve the diverse teachings of the Nyingma, Kagyu, and Sakya schools, often in response to the perceived dominance of the Gelugpa school, rather than reinforcing it.
The 'council of Lhasa' is traditionally interpreted as establishing Chinese Chan Buddhism as the normative form for Tibetan Buddhism.
Answer: False
Explanation: The traditional account of the 'council of Lhasa' posits that it affirmed Indian Madhyamaka Buddhism, specifically through the victory of Kamalaśīla over the Chinese Chan proponent Moheyan, as the normative tradition for Tibet.
Pa tshab nyima drakpa is credited with potentially originating the Svatantrika–Prasaṅgika distinction in Tibet using indigenous Tibetan terminology.
Answer: True
Explanation: The Tibetan translator Pa tshab nyima drakpa is recognized for possibly introducing the conceptual framework for this distinction into Tibet, employing Tibetan terms that were later rendered into Sanskrit as Svatantrika and Prasaṅgika.
The Rimé movement sought to preserve the teachings of the Nyingma, Kagyu, and Sakya schools against the perceived dominance of the Gelugpa school.
Answer: True
Explanation: The Rimé movement was a significant non-sectarian initiative aimed at revitalizing and preserving the distinct traditions and teachings of the older Tibetan Buddhist schools, counterbalancing the influence of the Gelugpa school.
Bhāviveka and Candrakīrti agreed that autonomous syllogisms were essential for Madhyamaka discourse.
Answer: False
Explanation: Their primary point of contention lay precisely in the utility and validity of autonomous syllogistic reasoning; Bhāviveka advocated for it, while Candrakīrti rejected it in favor of reductio ad absurdum.
How did Tibetan doxographers typically categorize Śāntarakṣita's synthesis of Yogācāra-Mādhyamaka?
Answer: Under the Svatantrika category, primarily due to its use of syllogistic reasoning
Explanation: Tibetan scholastic classifications frequently grouped Śāntarakṣita's synthesis under the Svatantrika umbrella, largely because of its methodological reliance on syllogistic reasoning, akin to Bhāviveka's approach.
How did scholars in the Nyingma, Sakya, and Kagyu schools often perceive the Svatantrika–Prasaṅgika distinction emphasized by Tsongkhapa?
Answer: As primarily pedagogical, based on exaggerated differences
Explanation: Many scholars from these schools viewed the distinction as pedagogical or based on overstated differences, suggesting that both approaches ultimately converge on the same realization.
Ju Mipham's alternative interpretation of the distinction focused on the difference between:
Answer: Conventional truth and ultimate truth in itself
Explanation: Ju Mipham proposed an interpretation wherein the distinction relates to 'approximate ultimate truth' (associated with Svatantrika) and the 'ultimate truth in itself' (associated with Prasaṅgika).
Gorampa, a prominent Sakya teacher, criticized the Svatantrika approach primarily for its:
Answer: Over-reliance on logic, which he deemed inappropriate for ultimate truth
Explanation: Gorampa's critique focused on the Svatantrika's perceived overemphasis on syllogistic logic, which he argued was ill-suited for directly realizing ultimate truth.
The Rimé movement emerged in the 19th century with the objective of:
Answer: Preserving the teachings of the Nyingma, Kagyu, and Sakya schools against Gelugpa dominance
Explanation: The Rimé movement was dedicated to the preservation and revitalization of the diverse lineages and teachings of the Nyingma, Kagyu, and Sakya schools, acting as a counterbalance to the prevailing influence of the Gelugpa school.
The 'council of Lhasa' is traditionally significant for establishing which tradition as normative for Tibetan Buddhism?
Answer: Indian Buddhism, specifically Indian Madhyamaka
Explanation: The traditional narrative of the council asserts its role in confirming Indian Madhyamaka Buddhism, as represented by Kamalaśīla, as the authoritative tradition for Tibet.
Gorampa, a prominent Sakya teacher, criticized the Svatantrika approach primarily for its:
Answer: Over-reliance on logic, which he deemed inappropriate for ultimate truth
Explanation: Gorampa's critique centered on the Svatantrika's perceived excessive reliance on logical argumentation, which he considered unsuitable for the direct apprehension of ultimate reality.
Which statement best reflects the mainstream Sakya school's perspective on the Svatantrika–Prasaṅgika distinction, according to the provided material?
Answer: It is primarily a pedagogical distinction with no ultimate difference in realization
Explanation: Mainstream Sakya scholars, including Gorampa, generally viewed the Svatantrika–Prasaṅgika distinction as pedagogical, asserting that both methodologies ultimately lead to the same realization of emptiness.
What was the principal point of contention between Bhāviveka and Candrakīrti regarding Madhyamaka methodology?
Answer: The use of autonomous syllogistic reasoning versus reductio ad absurdum
Explanation: The central disagreement between Bhāviveka and Candrakīrti revolved around the appropriateness and efficacy of employing autonomous syllogistic reasoning versus the Prasaṅgika method of reductio ad absurdum in Madhyamaka discourse.