Buddhapalita (Skt. Buddhapālita; Tib. སངས་རྒྱས་བསྐྱངས་, Sangyé Kyang; Wyl. sangs rgyas bskyangs) - the great Indian scholar who is acknowledged as the founder of the Prasangika Madhyamika. He composed a commentary to Nagarjuna's Mulamadhyamaka-karika, known simply as the Mūlamadhyamakavṛtti, or the 'Buddhapalita' commentary.
- David Seyfort Ruegg, The Literature of the Madhyamaka School of Philosophy in India, Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz, 1981
- Lobsang N. Tsonawa, Indian Buddhist Pandits from The Jewel Garland of Buddhist History, Dharamsala: Library of Tibetan Works and Archives, 1985.
The founder of the Prasangika school of Madhyamika philosophy in India. In the sixth century, Buddhapalita and his contemporary, Bhavaviveka, wrote commentaries on Nagarjuna's Verses on the Middle Way (Skt Madhyamaka-karika ). Differences in their approach and explanation of the truth of nonsubstantiality resulted in the division of the Madhyamika school into the Prasangika school led by Buddhapalita and the Svatantrika school led by Bhavaviveka. The Prasangika school was continued by Chandrakirti. The Sanskrit original of Buddhapalita's commentary on Verses on the Middle Way is not extant, but a Tibetan translation exists.
See also; Bhavaviveka.
Buddhapālita (470–550) was a commentator on the works of Nāgārjuna and Aryadeva. His works were mildly criticised by his contemporary Bhavyaviveka, and then he was vigorously defended by the later Candrakīrti, whose terms differentiating the two scholars led to the rise of the Prasaṅgika and Svatantrika schools of Madhyamaka. In this sense, Buddhapālita can be said to have been the founder of the Prasaṅgika Madhyamaka School.
Buddhapalita was a great master and exponent of the Prasangika system of Mahayana Buddhism. It is said that he was born in Hamsakrida, South India and from an early age took a deep interest in the teaching of the Buddha. He received novice and full ordination and entered Nalanda monastery where he studied under acharya Sangharaksita, himself a disciple of Nagamitra. Buddhapalita quickly mastered the teachings of arya Nagarjuna and later while resident at Dantapuri monastery in South India he composed many commentaries to the works of Nagarjuna and Aryadeva.
In the sixth Century CE Buddhapalita composed his famous commentary to Nagarjuna’s Fundamental Wisdom (Mulasastra) called Buddhapalitavrtti, a work of great clarity and insight. As a true Prasangika treatise it extensively employed consequences to elaborate Madhyamaka view. His younger contemporary Bhavaviveka also composed a commentary to Nagarjuna’s work called Lamp of Wisdom (Prajñapradipa) in which he criticized Buddhapalita’s position.
It is the way that Bhavaviveka criticizes Buddhapalita that belies Bhavaviveka's belief in autonomous inference (svatantranumana; rang rgyud rjes dpag). Bhavaviveka asserted that stating consequences was insufficient. To generate a valid conception of emptiness, one must state autonomously established syllogisms. Candrakirti (Seventh Century CE) a great exponent of Madhyamaka and abbot of Nalanda, composed the treatise called Clear Words (Prasannpada) as a commentary to the Fundamental Wisdom based on Buddhapalita’s work. In his work Candrakirti defends Buddhapalita’s position and refutes Bhavaviveka’s assertion of autonomous syllogisms.
Since Bhavaviveka was the first person to clearly distinguish the Svatantrika view from the Prasangika view he is regarded as the founder of the Svatantrika system. Similarly since Candrakirti was the first person to clearly distinguish Prasañgika view from the Svatantrika he is regarded by Tibetan scholars as the founder or path breaker ([[shing rta rsol [byed]]) of the Prasangika system. But Tibetans recognize that Candrakirti’s explanation arises within the commentarial lineage of Buddhapalita, and for that [[reason] ] some assert Buddhapalita to be the founder of Prasangika. In general though Nagarjuna and Buddhapalita clearly taught the Prasangika view neither is regarded as the founder of the Prasangika system because historically they did not clearly set forth this view in contradistinction to the Svatantrika view.