From An Explanation of the Shunyata Mantra and a Meditation on Emptiness
By Lama Thubten Yeshe
Abridged.
The main body of the yoga meditation begins with the shunyata mantra:
OM SVABHAVA SHUDDHO SARVA DHARMA SVABHAVA SHUDDHO HAM
This mantra contains a profound explanation of the pure, fundamental nature of both human beings and all other existent phenomena. It means that everything is spontaneously pure… in the absolute sense. From the absolute point of view, the fundamental quality of human beings and the nature of all things is purity.
“All existent phenomena in the universe and I are of one reality and that is me; I am that.”
Literal: “’All existent phenomena in the universe’ [sarva dharma] ‘and I (self essence)’ [svabhava] are ‘of one reality (pure, characteristic of space)’ [shuddho] and that is me; ‘I am that” [ham]
Alternative: ” Essence of all existent phenomena is spontaneously pure, like empty space. Self essence is spontaneously pure, like empty space.”
śūnyatā. (T. stong pa nyid). In Sanskrit, “emptiness”; the term has a number of denotations, but is most commonly associated with the perfection of wisdom (PRAJÑĀPĀRAMITĀ) sūtras and the MADHYAMAKA school of Mahāyāna philosophy. In its earlier usage, “emptiness” (as śūnya) is the third of the four aspects of the truth of suffering (DUḤKHASATYA), the first of the FOUR NOBLE TRUTHS: viz., the aggregates (SKANDHA) are (1) impermanent, (2) associated with the contaminants, (3) empty of cleanliness, and (4) nonself. There are a number of explanations of emptiness in this early usage, but most suggest the absence of cleanliness or attractiveness in the body that would lead to grasping at the body as “mine” (S. ātmīya, mama). This misapprehension is counteracted by the application of mindfulness with regard to the body (KĀYĀNUPAŚYANĀ), which demonstrates the absence or emptiness of an independent, perduring soul (ĀTMAN) inherent in the skandhas. In its developed usage in the Madhyamaka school, as set forth by NĀGĀRJUNA and his commentators, emptiness becomes an application of the classical doctrine of no-self (ANĀTMAN) beyond the person (PUDGALA) and the skandhas to subsume all phenomena (DHARMA) in the universe. Emptiness is the lack or absence of intrinsic nature (SVABHĀVA) in any and all phenomena, the final nature of all things (DHARMATĀ), and the ultimate truth (PARAMĀRTHASATYA). Despite its various interpretations among the various Madhyamaka authors, emptiness is clearly neither nothingness nor the absence of existence, but rather the absence of a falsely imagined type of existence, identified as svabhāva. Because all phenomena are dependently arisen, they lack, or are empty of, an intrinsic nature characterized by independence and autonomy. Nāgārjuna thus equates śūnyatā and the notion of conditionality (PRATĪTYASAMUTPĀDA). The YOGĀCĀRA school introduces the concept of the “three natures” (TRISVABHĀVA) to give individual meanings to the lack of intrinsic existence (NIḤSVABHĀVA) in the imaginary nature (PARIKALPITASVABHĀVA), the dependent nature (PARATANTRASVABHĀVA), and the consummate nature (PARINIṢPANNASVABHĀVA). Pariniṣpanna in this Yogācāra interpretation is emptiness in the sense of the absence of a difference of entity between object and subject; it is the emptiness of the parikalpitasvabhāva or imagined nature in a paratantra or dependent nature. In Tibet, the question of the true meaning of emptiness led to the RANG STONG GZHAN STONG debate.
svabhāva. (T. rang bzhin). In Sanskrit, “self-nature,” “intrinsic existence,” or “inherent existence,” the term has a general sense of “essence” or “nature,” but is used in philosophical literature. It has at least three important, and different, usages, in MAHĀYĀNA Buddhist doctrine. In the MADHYAMAKA school, it refers to a hypostatized and reified nature that is falsely attributed to phenomena by ignorance, such that phenomena are mistakenly conceived to exist in and of themselves. In this sense, it is used as a synonym for ĀTMAN. Therefore, there is no svabhāva, nothing possesses svabhāva, and all phenomena are said to lack, or be empty of, svabhāva. This doctrine is sufficiently central to Madhyamaka that the school is also called NIḤSVABHĀVAVĀDA, the “Proponents of No Svabhāva.” In YOGĀCĀRA, as represented in the SAṂDHINIRMOCANASŪTRA, all phenomena can be categorized into three natures (TRISVABHĀVA): the imaginary (PARIKALPITA), the dependent (PARATANTRA), and the consummate (PARINIṢPANNA). In the LAṄKĀVATĀRASŪTRA, seven forms of svabhāva or natures are enumerated to account for the functioning of phenomena: (1) samudayasvabhāva (C. jixing zixing), the nature of things that derives from the interaction between various conditions; (2) bhāvasvabhāva (C. xing zixing), the nature that is intrinsic to things themselves; (3) lakṣaṇasvabhāva (C. xiangxing zixing), the characteristics or marks (LAKṢAṆA) that distinguish one thing from another; (4) mahābhūtasvabhāva (C. dazhongxing zixing), the nature of things that derives from being constituted by the four physical elements (MAHĀBHŪTA); (5) hetusvabhāva (C. yinxing zixing), the nature of things that is derived from the “proximate causes” (HETU) that are necessary for their production; (6) pratyayasvabhāva (C. yuanxing zixing), the nature derived from the “facilitating conditions” (PRATYAYA); (7) niṣpattisvabhāva (C. chengxing zixing), the consummate, actualized buddha-nature that is the fundamental reality of things. See also NIḤSVABHĀVA.