Introduction to Emptiness (Guy Newland)
Buddhism for Empty Heads
[My 1-star Amazon review (NDA) of “Introduction to Emptiness: As Taught in Tsong-Kha-Pa’s Great Treatise on the Stages of the Path†by Guy Newland.]
I have been a student, practitioner, and teacher of Buddhism for forty years. I have practiced and taught Vipassana, Zen, Mahamudra, and Dzogchen meditation. I am also an expert in Raja Yoga, Advaita Vedanta, Kashmir Shaivism, Christian mysticism, Kabbalah, J. Krishnamurti's teachings, Adi Da's Daism, and Ayn Rand's Objectivist Epistemology. I am utterly eclectic and appreciate multiple Dharmas--but I do not like Prasanga-Madhyamika, the Tibetan brand of Madhyamika promulgated by a number of Western scholars, most notably Jeffrey Hopkins, Jay Garfield, and Guy Newland. In addition to this book by Newland, I have reviewed Jeffrey Hopkins' "Meditation on Emptiness," and those interested in a deeper consideration of Prasanga-Madhyamika might benefit from the comments that follow my review of that book.
In "Introduction to Emptiness," Professor Newland starts off on the wrong foot in the second sentence of his introduction when he says, "We know that Buddhism teaches that the ultimate reality is emptiness, so it must be important." First, original, or Pali, Buddhism, what the Buddha taught, does not teach that ultimate reality is emptiness. Second, no mystical tradition other than Madhyamika teaches that ultimate reality is emptiness, which informs us that emptiness is not axiomatic, is not essential in the realization of ultimate reality.
"Introduction to Emptiness" summarizes and explains the ideas and arguments of Ge-luk founder, Tsong-Kha-Pa (1357-1419). Tsong-Kha-Pa is considered by many as one of Tibet's greatest philosophers and exegetes--but I am not one of the "many." In short, I find Tsong-Kha-Pa unimpressive and deluded.
Because I disagree with virtually all of Tsong-Kha-Pa's arguments, I could write a book countering them. But since this is just a review, I will focus on just a few of his ideas.
Newland writes, "Nirvana, the actual experience of liberating insight, is a direct and nondualistic perception of emptiness." Wrong. The definition of Nirvana is "the end of becoming (the drying up of the outflows),"which, positively stated, means "Being." Being, Cit-Ananda (Consciouness-Bliss-Energy), or Siva-Shakti (Consciousness-Power), according to Hinduism-- is formless, or empty, but it is not emptiness; it is Self-Existent, Self-Radiant Self-Awareness. The term "Buddha" means awakened Awareness. Man's intrinsic nature is not emptiness; it is Awareness, or Mind. And realizing this en-Light-ened Mind, or Consciousness--Bodhicitta--is synonymous with attaining Nirvana, or Buddhahood. The Buddhist Trinity--Dharmakaya-Sambhogakaya-Nirmanakaya--mirrors the Hindu one (Siva-Shakti-Jiva); and in Yogacara and Dzogchen, it is the union of the Sambhogakaya (Clear Light energy, or "Dharma Cloud") in the Heart-center (the Tathagata-garba) of the Nirmanakaya (the Bodhisattva) that allows the Bodhisattva to attain Nirvana, permanent rest in Tathata ( Suchness, or Is-ness, or Being-ness).
Emptiness never en-Light-ened anyone. Only Light-energy--Shakti, the Holy Spirit, or Sambhogakaya--can do that. Gautama equates Nirvana with the Heart-release. Only Energy can cut the Heart-knot. The Buddha is called the Blessed One because Nirvana is the unconditioned "Condition" of being permanently Blessed/Blissed by the Sambhogakaya, the dynamic Energy of the Dharmakaya. Newland is a clueless, pointy-headed academic interpreting the nonsense of another un-en-Light-ened philosopher, Tson-Kha-Pa. Both of these philosophers are blind men attempting to describe an Elephant they can't see. Because they can't see "It," they call It "Emptiness."
Newland writes, "Even emptiness is itself empty; that is, when one searches for the ultimate essence of emptiness, it too is unfindable. One finds only the emptiness of emptiness." Not true. One finds, as the great Dzogchen Master Longchen Rabjam puts it, "Bhagavan contemplating Bhagavan." "Bhagavan" is another term for Buddha, or Blessed One. Etymologically, Bhagavan means "penis in the vagina"-- in other words, the penetrating penis, or diamond, of Awareness permanently united with the penetrated Clear Light-Energy. The 32 marks of a Buddha's body aren't produced by emptiness; they are produced by dynamic Light-Energy, which Prasanga-Madhyamika, an exclusive-reductive Dharma, doesn't account for.
One could almost forgive Tsong-Kha-Pa, who lived before the advent of modern physics, for reducing everything to emptiness--but not Newland, who should know better. Everything is reducible to energy, not to emptiness--and when an initiated yogi's mind becomes a quasi-vacuum, then, spontaneously, it is filled with Light-energy, the Plenum. In other words, the "emptiness" of emptiness is Fullness, the continuum of the radiant Force-flow of the unobstructed Dharmakaya.
The primacy-of-consciousness epistemology proffered by Tsong-Kha-Pa is nonsense. According to Newland, "Tsong-Kha-Pa argues that ordinary objects exist because they are perceived by unimpaired sense consciousness." Whether an object is perceived by unimpaired or impared sense consciousness [really percepts, which integrate raw sense data], its existence isn't altered. And the object continues to exist if it's not perceived at all. For example, if a tree falls in a forest and no one hears it, it still falls. If you believe what Newland asserts: "that things have no way of existing apart from minds that impute them" you have evicted yourself from reality.
Newland writes,"Emptiness -the ultimate reality--is the absence or lack of intrinsic nature." Contrary to what Newman says, ultimate reality is awakened Awareness--the Self, Buddha-nature, or Christ Consciousness. The great Zen masters (such as Huang Po) and Tibetan adepts (such as Lonchen Rabjam) identify It as timeless, radiant Awareness: the One Mind, or Dharmakaya. The worlds are built on Mind, or Consciousness, whose intrinsic Nature is uncreated, timeless, spaceless Clear Light-Energy, the Sambhogakaya.
The next to last chapter in Newland's book is titled "Who Am I, Really?" Newland, unfortunately, doesn't have a clue regarding the answer. He thinks the irreducible root of an individual's identity is emptiness; it's not. Emptiness can only be an object to consciousness. The perfectly "Subjective" Seer of both emptiness and form is one's true Identity. This Seer, when utterly disentangled from defiling obscurations, shines as the radiant, transcendental Self: the Buddha, awakened Buddhi, or Awareness. When all the false, conceptual 'I's,' or `I' thoughts, are enquired into and obviated by Self-enquiry, then the true, transcendental `I,' the Self, or Buddha, shines forth. If you want to find out who you truly, transcendentally are, find out who sees emptiness, the void. Gautama Buddha said to take refuge in the Self, not in emptiness.
[My 1-star Amazon review (NDA) of “Introduction to Emptiness: As Taught in Tsong-Kha-Pa’s Great Treatise on the Stages of the Path†by Guy Newland.]
I have been a student, practitioner, and teacher of Buddhism for forty years. I have practiced and taught Vipassana, Zen, Mahamudra, and Dzogchen meditation. I am also an expert in Raja Yoga, Advaita Vedanta, Kashmir Shaivism, Christian mysticism, Kabbalah, J. Krishnamurti's teachings, Adi Da's Daism, and Ayn Rand's Objectivist Epistemology. I am utterly eclectic and appreciate multiple Dharmas--but I do not like Prasanga-Madhyamika, the Tibetan brand of Madhyamika promulgated by a number of Western scholars, most notably Jeffrey Hopkins, Jay Garfield, and Guy Newland. In addition to this book by Newland, I have reviewed Jeffrey Hopkins' "Meditation on Emptiness," and those interested in a deeper consideration of Prasanga-Madhyamika might benefit from the comments that follow my review of that book.
In "Introduction to Emptiness," Professor Newland starts off on the wrong foot in the second sentence of his introduction when he says, "We know that Buddhism teaches that the ultimate reality is emptiness, so it must be important." First, original, or Pali, Buddhism, what the Buddha taught, does not teach that ultimate reality is emptiness. Second, no mystical tradition other than Madhyamika teaches that ultimate reality is emptiness, which informs us that emptiness is not axiomatic, is not essential in the realization of ultimate reality.
"Introduction to Emptiness" summarizes and explains the ideas and arguments of Ge-luk founder, Tsong-Kha-Pa (1357-1419). Tsong-Kha-Pa is considered by many as one of Tibet's greatest philosophers and exegetes--but I am not one of the "many." In short, I find Tsong-Kha-Pa unimpressive and deluded.
Because I disagree with virtually all of Tsong-Kha-Pa's arguments, I could write a book countering them. But since this is just a review, I will focus on just a few of his ideas.
Newland writes, "Nirvana, the actual experience of liberating insight, is a direct and nondualistic perception of emptiness." Wrong. The definition of Nirvana is "the end of becoming (the drying up of the outflows),"which, positively stated, means "Being." Being, Cit-Ananda (Consciouness-Bliss-Energy), or Siva-Shakti (Consciousness-Power), according to Hinduism-- is formless, or empty, but it is not emptiness; it is Self-Existent, Self-Radiant Self-Awareness. The term "Buddha" means awakened Awareness. Man's intrinsic nature is not emptiness; it is Awareness, or Mind. And realizing this en-Light-ened Mind, or Consciousness--Bodhicitta--is synonymous with attaining Nirvana, or Buddhahood. The Buddhist Trinity--Dharmakaya-Sambhogakaya-Nirmanakaya--mirrors the Hindu one (Siva-Shakti-Jiva); and in Yogacara and Dzogchen, it is the union of the Sambhogakaya (Clear Light energy, or "Dharma Cloud") in the Heart-center (the Tathagata-garba) of the Nirmanakaya (the Bodhisattva) that allows the Bodhisattva to attain Nirvana, permanent rest in Tathata ( Suchness, or Is-ness, or Being-ness).
Emptiness never en-Light-ened anyone. Only Light-energy--Shakti, the Holy Spirit, or Sambhogakaya--can do that. Gautama equates Nirvana with the Heart-release. Only Energy can cut the Heart-knot. The Buddha is called the Blessed One because Nirvana is the unconditioned "Condition" of being permanently Blessed/Blissed by the Sambhogakaya, the dynamic Energy of the Dharmakaya. Newland is a clueless, pointy-headed academic interpreting the nonsense of another un-en-Light-ened philosopher, Tson-Kha-Pa. Both of these philosophers are blind men attempting to describe an Elephant they can't see. Because they can't see "It," they call It "Emptiness."
Newland writes, "Even emptiness is itself empty; that is, when one searches for the ultimate essence of emptiness, it too is unfindable. One finds only the emptiness of emptiness." Not true. One finds, as the great Dzogchen Master Longchen Rabjam puts it, "Bhagavan contemplating Bhagavan." "Bhagavan" is another term for Buddha, or Blessed One. Etymologically, Bhagavan means "penis in the vagina"-- in other words, the penetrating penis, or diamond, of Awareness permanently united with the penetrated Clear Light-Energy. The 32 marks of a Buddha's body aren't produced by emptiness; they are produced by dynamic Light-Energy, which Prasanga-Madhyamika, an exclusive-reductive Dharma, doesn't account for.
One could almost forgive Tsong-Kha-Pa, who lived before the advent of modern physics, for reducing everything to emptiness--but not Newland, who should know better. Everything is reducible to energy, not to emptiness--and when an initiated yogi's mind becomes a quasi-vacuum, then, spontaneously, it is filled with Light-energy, the Plenum. In other words, the "emptiness" of emptiness is Fullness, the continuum of the radiant Force-flow of the unobstructed Dharmakaya.
The primacy-of-consciousness epistemology proffered by Tsong-Kha-Pa is nonsense. According to Newland, "Tsong-Kha-Pa argues that ordinary objects exist because they are perceived by unimpaired sense consciousness." Whether an object is perceived by unimpaired or impared sense consciousness [really percepts, which integrate raw sense data], its existence isn't altered. And the object continues to exist if it's not perceived at all. For example, if a tree falls in a forest and no one hears it, it still falls. If you believe what Newland asserts: "that things have no way of existing apart from minds that impute them" you have evicted yourself from reality.
Newland writes,"Emptiness -the ultimate reality--is the absence or lack of intrinsic nature." Contrary to what Newman says, ultimate reality is awakened Awareness--the Self, Buddha-nature, or Christ Consciousness. The great Zen masters (such as Huang Po) and Tibetan adepts (such as Lonchen Rabjam) identify It as timeless, radiant Awareness: the One Mind, or Dharmakaya. The worlds are built on Mind, or Consciousness, whose intrinsic Nature is uncreated, timeless, spaceless Clear Light-Energy, the Sambhogakaya.
The next to last chapter in Newland's book is titled "Who Am I, Really?" Newland, unfortunately, doesn't have a clue regarding the answer. He thinks the irreducible root of an individual's identity is emptiness; it's not. Emptiness can only be an object to consciousness. The perfectly "Subjective" Seer of both emptiness and form is one's true Identity. This Seer, when utterly disentangled from defiling obscurations, shines as the radiant, transcendental Self: the Buddha, awakened Buddhi, or Awareness. When all the false, conceptual 'I's,' or `I' thoughts, are enquired into and obviated by Self-enquiry, then the true, transcendental `I,' the Self, or Buddha, shines forth. If you want to find out who you truly, transcendentally are, find out who sees emptiness, the void. Gautama Buddha said to take refuge in the Self, not in emptiness.
