Book Reviews Of Mahayana Buddhist Meditation

Here is a comprehensive summary of the provided text, which is a book review of "Mahāyāna Buddhist Meditation: Theory and Practice" edited by Minoru Kiyota:

The review, written by J. W. De Jong, critically assesses a collection of essays on Mahāyāna Buddhist meditation, originally intended as a tribute to Richard Robinson. De Jong expresses that only a few of the nine articles in the volume can be recommended without reservation, highlighting significant shortcomings in many contributions.

Positive Assessments:

• Gadjin M. Nagao's "What Remains" in Sūnyatā: A Yogācāra Interpretation of Emptiness: De Jong finds this article important, examining the Yogācāra interpretation of a passage from the Cūļasuññatā-sutta concerning "emptiness." Nagao's research into Sanskrit and Tibetan versions of related texts is noted, and his article is described as an expanded and corrected version of his earlier work.
• Yuichi Kajiyama's "Later Madhyamikas on Epistemology and Meditation": This is considered a "likewise important" contribution. Kajiyama analyzes Śāntarakṣita's Madhyamakālaṃkāra and shows how its epistemological stages are present in the work of Śāntarakṣita's disciple, Kamalaśīla. De Jong praises Kajiyama's precise and lucid explanations of the differences between various Buddhist philosophical schools' epistemological theories, recognizing its value for understanding the influential Later Madhyamikas.
• Francis H. Cook's translation of Fa-tsang's commentary on the Prajñāpāramitāhṛdayasūtra: Cook's introduction is seen as analyzing Fa-tsang's understanding of emptiness and his teachings on meditation. De Jong agrees with Cook that the Hua-yen understanding of emptiness does not distort the Madhyamika meaning, noting the Chinese school's emphasis on the phenomenal and cosmic harmony. While Cook's translation is generally well-done, De Jong points out a few specific instances of mistranslation due to punctuation or misunderstanding of Chinese terms.

Critical Assessments and Concerns:

The review is largely critical of the remaining six articles, citing issues with methodology, understanding of source texts, and translation quality.

• Elvin W. Jones's "Buddhist Theories of Existents: The Systems of Two Truths": De Jong finds this long article problematic, particularly Jones's assertion that reconstructing Nāgārjuna's thought without Tsongkhapa is like reconstructing Aristotle without Aquinas. De Jong argues that Tibetan scholars were better informed about Indian Buddhist philosophy than Aquinas was about Aristotle's. He criticizes Jones for a preference for Tibetan commentaries that leads to obscuring the meaning of passages, citing a specific mistranslation of a passage from the Bhāvanākrama where the reliance on Tibetan interpretations seems to hinder accurate understanding of Sanskrit terms.
• Charlene McDermott's "Yogic Direct Awareness as Means of Valid Cognition in Dharmakīrti and Rgyal-tshab": McDermott's article, inspired by Richard Robinson, is deemed of little help in understanding Rgyal-tshab's commentary. De Jong details a mistranslation and misinterpretation of a passage from Dharmottara's commentary, highlighting how a lack of consultation with original Sanskrit and Tibetan texts can lead to "fatal consequences."
• Stefan Anacker's "The Meditational Therapy of the Madhyāntavibhāgabhāṣya": De Jong is highly critical of Anacker's translations from the Madhyāntavibhāgabhāṣya, calling them "nonsensical" and demonstrating a lack of preparation. He refers readers to Nagao's superior translation.
• Geshe Sopa's "Samathavipaśyanāyuganaddha: The Two Leading Principles of Buddhist Meditation": While offering a general overview, De Jong finds the understanding of meditative practices not promoted by the translation of technical terms based on Tibetan renderings. He notes the creation of new terms and potentially inaccurate translations of existing ones (e.g., nirvedhabhāgīya).
• Minoru Kiyota's "Buddhist Devotional Meditation: A Study of the Sukhāvativyūhôpadeśa": Kiyota's analysis and translation of the Sukhāvativyūhôpadeśa are considered adequate but too loose and imprecise. De Jong questions Kiyota's dismissal of the text's attribution as unimportant for historical understanding and points out the omission of a crucial term ("sameness dharma-body") and elementary, sometimes curiously worded, explanations in the notes.
• Leon Hurvitz's "Fa-sheng's Observations on the Four Stations of Mindfulness": This article receives the most extensive and scathing criticism. De Jong questions the selection of the passage for detailed treatment and points out numerous errors in Hurvitz's translation of Sanskrit and Chinese Buddhist texts, especially from the Abhidharmakośa and its commentary. He criticizes Hurvitz's poor knowledge of Sanskrit, his misinterpretations of technical terms, and his failure to account for differences between Chinese versions of texts. De Jong contrasts Hurvitz's work unfavorably with Charles Willemen's earlier translation of the Abhidharmahrdaya, calling Willemen's work an example of how such texts should be translated, while Hurvitz's shows how they should not be.

Overall Conclusion:

De Jong concludes by noting the presence of numerous misprints, particularly in Sanskrit and Tibetan transcriptions, despite the volume's delay. He expresses disappointment with the overall quality of the scholarship, stating that the essays are not representative of modern Buddhist scholarship, nor even of Buddhist scholarship in the United States. The review underscores the crucial importance of a thorough grounding in original Sanskrit and Tibetan texts when studying Buddhist philosophy and practice, warning against over-reliance on secondary commentaries without proper linguistic and textual foundation.