चंद्रकीर्ति
किसी वस्तु का अपना कोई स्थिर स्वभाव नहीं, उन रोज़मर्रा की वस्तुओं का भी नहीं जिनसे हम बरतते हैं – और इसे देखने का तरीक़ा हर विरोधी मत का उसके बेतुके निष्कर्षों तक अनुसरण करना है।
पृष्ठभूमि
नालंदा के माध्यमक टीकाकार (Candrakirti भी लिखा जाता है): शून्यता केवल प्रतिपक्षी के मत के बेतुके परिणामों को सामने लाकर दिखाई जा सकती है, स्वतंत्र प्रमाणों से कभी नहीं; लौकिक वस्तुओं में भी स्वभाव नहीं। तिब्बत ने बाद में नागार्जुन को उन्हीं के माध्यम से पढ़ा।
मुख्य विचार
- प्रासंगिक पद्धति (विरोध-खंडन)
- स्वभाव-रहित दो सत्य
- योगाचार और प्रमाण-सिद्धांत की आलोचना
प्रभाव
जिनसे प्रभावित 1
नागार्जुन
जिनसे प्रभावित ✓
Chandrakirti commented on Nagarjuna’s Root Verses in Clear Words (Prasannapada) and defended their method of reductio (prasanga) against Bhavaviveka. Candrakirti, Prasannapada; C. W. Huntington, The Emptiness of Emptiness (1989)
साक्ष्य: Wikidata में भी · Wikidata
नागार्जुन › लगभग 150–250
जिन्हें प्रभावित किया 2
अतीश दीपंकर
जिन्हें प्रभावित किया
Atisha helped bring Chandrakirti’s reading of Nagarjuna to Tibet; his Introduction to the Two Truths draws on Chandrakirti for the view of emptiness. Atisha, Satyadvayavatara, tr. C. Lindtner, “Atisa’s Introduction to the Two Truths, and Its Sources”, Journal of Indian Philosophy 9 (1981)
साक्ष्य: AI मसौदा
अतीश दीपंकर › लगभग 982–1054
त्सोंगखापा
जिन्हें प्रभावित किया
Tsongkhapa based his Prasangika reading of emptiness on Chandrakirti and commented on his Introduction to the Middle Way in Illumination of the Thought. Tsongkhapa, dGongs pa rab gsal; T. Jinpa, Self, Reality and Reason in Tibetan Philosophy (2002)
साक्ष्य: AI मसौदा
त्सोंगखापा › 1357–1419
आलोचना
जिनकी आलोचना की 2
वसुबन्धु
जिनकी आलोचना की
Chandrakirti rejected the Yogacara of Vasubandhu’s school: consciousness without external objects, and reflexive self-awareness, are as empty as the objects (Madhyamakavatara VI.45–97). Candrakīrti, Madhyamakāvatāra VI.45–97; C. W. Huntington, The Emptiness of Emptiness, 1989
साक्ष्य: AI मसौदा
वसुबन्धु › लगभग 350–430
दिङ्नाग
जिनकी आलोचना की
Chandrakirti rejected Dignaga’s epistemology – perception free of concepts and two kinds of object – accepting the means of knowledge only conventionally (Prasannapada I). Candrakīrti, Prasannapadā I; D. Arnold, Buddhists, Brahmins, and Belief, 2005
साक्ष्य: AI मसौदा
दिङ्नाग › लगभग 480–540
कृतियाँ
- लगभग 620मध्यमकावतार
दस भूमियों में बोधिसत्व-मार्ग, छठी में योगाचार “केवल-चित्त” की लंबी आलोचना सहित।
- लगभग 630प्रसन्नपदा
नागार्जुन की कारिकाओं पर टीका: स्वतंत्र प्रमाणों के विरुद्ध और दिङ्नाग के प्रमाण-सिद्धांत के विरुद्ध।
मत
Chandrakirti wrote commentaries on Nagarjuna’s Verses on the Middle Way and on Aryadeva’s Four Hundred Verses, and an independent Introduction to the Middle Way with his own commentary. In a dispute that later Tibetan scholars made the basis of their classification of schools, he defended the earlier commentator Buddhapalita against Bhaviveka. Bhaviveka had held that a Madhyamika should prove emptiness with independent syllogisms. Chandrakirti replied that such proofs presuppose that the terms refer to things with their own nature, which is exactly what is in question; the Madhyamika should rather show by reductio (prasanga) that the opponent’s own premises lead to absurd consequences. Tibetans therefore called his line “Prasangika”. For Chandrakirti even conventional truth, the world of ordinary transactions, is not made of things with intrinsic nature; it is simply what the world accepts, and philosophy should not try to improve on it. On this ground he rejected Dignaga’s theory of the means of valid knowledge as a foundation, and in the sixth chapter of the Introduction he criticised Yogacara’s claim that only consciousness is real: mind is as empty as its objects. His analysis of the self through the image of a chariot, which is neither identical with its parts nor different from them, became a standard argument. Atisha named him as the one who had understood Nagarjuna, and Tsongkhapa built the Gelug reading of emptiness on him.
जीवन और संदर्भ
Little is known of Chandrakirti’s life; scholars place him in the first half of the 7th century CE. Tibetan historians, writing centuries later, say that he was born in South India, became a monk and taught at the great monastery of Nalanda in Bihar, where he is said to have debated the Yogacara layman Chandragomin, and that he performed miracles such as milking a painted cow. His works were not translated into Chinese and had little influence in India for several centuries. From the late 11th century they were studied in Kashmir and translated into Tibetan, above all by Patsab Nyima Drak, and in Tibet he became the leading authority on Madhyamaka.
अन्य प्रमुख कृतियाँ
- Clear Words (Prasannapada), commentary on Nagarjuna’s Mulamadhyamakakarika
- Introduction to the Middle Way (Madhyamakavatara) with autocommentary
- Commentary on Aryadeva’s Four Hundred Verses (Catuhshatakatika)
- Commentary on Nagarjuna’s Sixty Verses on Reasoning (Yuktishashtikavritti)
नवंबर 2026 तक · स्रोत · इस पृष्ठ को बेहतर बनाएँ · Agora कैसे बना है