།དེ་ཉིད་ཀྱི་ཕྱིར་བཅོམ་ལྡན་འདས་ཀྱིས། དངོས་རྣམས་སྐྱེ་བ་ཀུན་རྫོབ་ཏུ། །ཞེས་གསུངས་སོ། Has Tsong-kha-pa found the key for unlocking the meaning of this passage? According to his reading, one type of obscurative saṃvṛti, ignorance, displays phenomena as if ultimately produced, but another type of conceptual consciousnesses and nonconceptual saṃvṛti, consciousnesses, are the valid means of positing the conventional existence of phenomena. Or is it that Tsong-kha-pa’s identification of the meaning of (saṃvṛtyā) in the first line of the passage in the kun rdzob tu as meaning based on Descent into Laṅkā Sūtra “conventionally” Kamalashīla’s mention of differs from Kamalashīla’s “mentations” thought in this presentation of the meaning of the same with the result that the passage from the should read: Descent into Laṅkā Sūtra The production of things [exists] obscurationally (kun rdzob tu, saṃvṛtyā); Ultimately it lacks inherent existence. That [consciousness] mistaken with regard to the lack of inherent existence Is asserted as the obscurer of reality (yang dag kun rdzob, satyaṃ saṃvṛti). If read this way, Kamalashīla be saying that things exist and are produced only in the face of the ignorance superimposing true existence. Evidence suggesting this very reading is found in Kamalashīla’s where Difficult Points in (Shāntarakṣhita’s) for the Middle” “Ornament he comments on stanza 63ab in Shāntarakṣhita’s text:
།དེ་ཉིད་ཀྱི་ཕྱིར་བཅོམ་ལྡན་འདས་ཀྱིས། དངོས་རྣམས་སྐྱེ་བ་ཀུན་རྫོབ་ཏུ། །ཞེས་གསུངས་སོ། Has Tsong-kha-pa found the key for unlocking the meaning of this passage? According to his reading, one type of saṃvṛti, obscurative ignorance, displays phenomena as if ultimately produced, but another type of saṃvṛti, conceptual consciousnesses and nonconceptual consciousnesses, are the valid means of positing the conventional existence of phenomena. Or is it that Tsong-kha-pa’s identification of the meaning of kun rdzob tu (saṃvṛtyā) in the first line of the passage in the Descent into Laṅkā Sūtra as meaning “conventionally” based on Kamalashīla’s mention of “mentations” differs from Kamalashīla’s thought in this presentation of the meaning of the same with the result that the passage from the Descent into Laṅkā Sūtra should read: The production of things [exists] obscurationally (kun rdzob tu, saṃvṛtyā); Ultimately it lacks inherent existence. That [consciousness] mistaken with regard to the lack of inherent existence Is asserted as the obscurer of reality (yang dag kun rdzob, satyaṃ saṃvṛti). If read this way, Kamalashīla be saying that things exist and are produced only in the face of the ignorance superimposing true existence. Evidence suggesting this very reading is found in Kamalashīla’s Difficult Points in (Shāntarakṣhita’s) “Ornament for the Middle” where he comments on stanza 63ab in Shāntarakṣhita’s text:
opposite_of_emptiness_SEPT2014.docx