East Asian Mādhyamaka

[5] The name Sānlùn derives from the fact that its doctrinal basis is formed by three principal Madhyamaka texts composed by the Indian Buddhist philosophers Nāgārjuna (Longshu, 龍樹), and Āryadeva, which were then translated into Chinese by the Kuchean monk Kumārajīva (pinyin: Jiūmóluóshí) and his team of Chinese translators in Chang'an's Xiaoyao garden.

[16] Sengrui was one of Kumārajīva's main disciples--he aided in the translation project of numerous texts, including the Middle Treatise and the Pañcaviṃśatisāhasrikā Prajñāpāramitā Sūtra.

[17] Six days after Kumārajīva arrived in Chang'an, Sengrui requested that he translate a meditation manual now understood to be the Zuochan sanmei jing (Sutra of sitting dhyāna samādhi, Taisho 15 no.

[20] Two of the essays in this work (Prajña Is Without Dichotomizing Knowledge and Nirvana Is Without Conceptualization) follow a similar debate format to Nagarjuna's MMK.

According to Sēngzhào, delusion arises through a dependent relationship between phenomenal things, naming, thought and reification and correct understanding lies outside of words and concepts.

He studied widely under various teachers, including the Madhyamaka master Seng-chuan (470–528) and eventually received an imperial decree to reside at Hsing Huang monastery in Ch'ien-k'ang, where he continued to give sermons on the Four Treatises for twenty five years.

[24] The most influential Sānlùn scholar of the Tang was Fa-lang's pupil Jízàng (549–623), a prolific writer who composed commentaries on these three treatises.

[26] In one passage of the Erdi Yi, Jizang cites Falang, and argues that the four treatises have the same goal, "to explain the two truths and manifest the doctrine of non-duality".

The cure of the disease lies not so much in developing a new metaphysical theory as in understanding the proper nature and function of human conceptualization and language.

Chi-tsang, following Nagarjuna, claims that the very language men create and use plays a trick on them and destroys their "eyes of wisdom."

He insisted that one must never settle on any particular viewpoint or perspective but constantly reexamine one's formulations to avoid rectification of thought and behavior.

While he was seen among his colleagues as a Sānlùn scholar, he himself did not claim such direct affiliation:[38]In Zhōngguān jīnlùn (中觀今論 Modern Discussion on the Madhyamaka) [pg.