Cross-Cultural Perspectives on Hagiographical Strategies by Rondolino Massimo A

Author:Rondolino, Massimo A.
Language: eng
Format: epub
Publisher: Taylor & Francis (CAM)
Published: 2017-01-15T00:00:00+00:00

Being human

As noted, claims to the exceptionality of Milarepa’s life were already present in the earlier sources, although, rather than resulting from genealogical considerations, whose treatment, instead, greatly downplayed the importance of Milarepa’s bloodline, they focused on his fundamentally superhuman nature. In particular, the early texts identify Milarepa as the emanation (“sprul pa”) of an already enlightened being and, consequently, present his teachings as the compassionate activity of a buddha who has come into this world in human form out of compassion for the suffering of living beings. Furthermore, as clearly attested by Gö Lotsāwa’s fifteenth-century identification of Milarepa as an emanation of Mañjuśrīmitra, this particular view of the Repa’s ontological nature was still common at the time of Tsangnyön Heruka’s writing.11

In stark contrast with this hagiographical tradition, Tsangnyön Heruka’s account is instead famously known for seemingly arguing an opposite understanding of Milarepa as a common human being. In particular, evidence of Tsangnyön Heruka’s revolutionary claim is commonly found in the narrative of the animated exchange between Milarepa and some of his most prominent disciples. Here, Ngendzong Repa (Ngan rdzong ras pa) questions his guru with regard to the hardships of Dharma practice and his exemplary life as its actual embodiment. In particular, in light of the super-human efforts required to master and realize Milarepa’s teachings, Ngendzong is described doubting that his guru’s example and instructions can actually be followed, for they are so extreme that “who could actually emulate them?,” and he begs Milarepa to say who he really is, “whether the emanation of Vajradhāra or a bodhisattva.”12 Milarepa’s reply to the pupil’s inquiry is clear and concise: “I am not sure whose emanation I am.”13

The narrative continues with Milarepa’s commenting on Ngendzong’s devotional attitude and on the erroneous nature of his approach: “Although this belief that I am an emanation comes from your pure perception of me, there is no greater misunderstanding of Dharma. This is because you do not recognise the greatness of perfectly practising pure Dharma.”14 In contrast, Milarepa advocates a whole-hearted embrace and dedicated practice of one’s secret instructions as the true practice of the non-deceiving Dharma, and is further made to say that if one were to practice as he himself has practiced there is no doubt that this will lead to buddhahood in a single lifetime and, once this has been achieved, that it is a sign of lack of faith in the true Dharma to suggest that such an accomplished being is the emanation of any buddha or bodhisattva.15

While this passage has been referred to as evidence that Tsangnyön Heruka upholds an understanding of Milarepa as a common human being in contrast with a pre-existing and spread belief that he is, in truth, an emanation, there is actually no clear denial in either of Tsangnyön Heruka’s works on Milarepa that he may be, after all, an emanation.16 There are, in fact, only three instances in the text of the Milarepa’i Namthar in which Tsangnyön Heruka apparently declares that Milarepa is, in fact,

Download

Copyright Disclaimer:
This site does not store any files on its server. We only index and link to content provided by other sites. Please contact the content providers to delete copyright contents if any and email us, we'll remove relevant links or contents immediately.