According to the three turnings schema, the Buddha's first sermons, as recorded in the Tripiṭaka of early Buddhist schools, constitute the "first turning" (which include all śrāvakayāna texts). The sūtras which focus on the doctrine of emptiness (śūnyatā) like the Prajñāpāramitā Sūtra corpus, are considered to comprise the "second turning" (which in this schema is considered provisional), and the sūtras which teach Yogācāra themes (especially the three natures doctrine), like the Saṃdhinirmocana Sūtra, comprise the final and ultimate "third turning".[2]
In East Asian Buddhism, this classification system was expanded and modified into different doctrinal classifications called "panjiào" (判教), which were developed by different Chinese Buddhist schools.[3][4]
The Abhidharma teachings of the various śrāvakayāna (i.e. non-Mahayana) traditions (such as Vaibhasika and Theravada) are generally also placed into this category.
Second Turning
The second turning is said to have taken place at Vulture Peak Mountain in Rajagriha, in Bihar, India. The second turning emphasizes the teachings of emptiness (Skt: śūnyatā) and the bodhisattva path.[8][5] The main sutras of this second turning are considered to be the Prajñāpāramitā sutras.[5] In East Asian Buddhism, the second turning is referred to as "the teaching that the original nature of all things is empty, that signs are not ultimately real" (無相法輪).[9]
The second turning is also associated with the bodhisattva Manjushri.[5] The analytical texts of the Madhyamaka school of Nagarjuna are generally included under the second turning.[10]
Third Turning
Yogācāra sources
The first sutra source which mentions the "three turnings" is the Ārya-saṃdhi-nirmocana-sūtra (Noble sūtra of the Explanation of the Profound Secrets), the foundational sutra of the Yogācāra school.[1] Major ideas in this text include the storehouse consciousness (ālayavijñāna), and the doctrine of cognition-only (vijñapti-mātra) and the "three natures" (trisvabhāva). The Saṃdhinirmocana affirms that the teachings of the earlier turnings authentic but are also incomplete and require further clarification and interpretation.[11] According to the Saṃdhinirmocana, the previous two turnings all had an "underlying intent" which refers to the three natures (and their threefold lack of essence), the central doctrine of the third turning.[12]
The Saṃdhinirmocana also claims that its teachings are the ultimate and most profound truth which cannot lead to a nihilistic interpretation of the Dharma which clings to non-existence (unlike the second wheel, which can be misinterpreted in a negative way) and is also incontrovertible and irrefutable (whereas the second wheel can be refuted).[13] As such, the third turning is also called "the wheel of good differentiation" (suvibhakta), and "the wheel for ascertaining the ultimate" (paramartha-viniscaya).[14] In East Asian Buddhism, the third turning is referred to as “ultimate turn of the Dharma wheel” (無上法輪).[9]
In his Commentary on Distinguishing the Middle from the Extremes (Madhyāntavibhāga-bhāṣya), Vasubandhu comments on the three turnings and how they relate to the three natures. According to Vasubandhu, the first turning teaches the non-existence of the self (atman) through an analysis of the five aggregates. The second turning then establishes how the very (false) appearance of a (non-existent) self comes about from its aggregate parts through dependent arising. The third turning then, explains the fundamental nature of emptiness itself, which is how the non-existence of the self exists, i.e. the existence of the non-existent as explained by the three natures. In this sense, the ultimate truth in the third turning is said to be both existent and non-existent.[19]
In his Commentary on theCheng weishi lun (成唯識 論述記; Taishō no. 1830), Kuiji (a student of Xuanzang), lists the following as the most important sutras for the Yogācāra school:[20][21]
The Indian Yogācāra tradition eventually developed various works which synthesized Yogācāra with the tathāgatagarbha thought found in various Mahayana sutras.[24] This synthesis merged the tathāgatagarbha teaching with the doctrine of the ālayavijñāna and the three natures doctrine. Some key sources of this Indian tendency are the Laṅkāvatāra Sūtra, Ghanavyūha Sūtra, and the Ratnagotravibhāga.[24][17]
This Yogācāra-Tathāgatagarbha tradition became influential in East Asian Buddhism and in Tibet. The translator Paramārtha (499-569 CE) was known for promoting this syncretic Yogācāra and for defending the theory of the "stainless consciousness" (amala-vijñāna), which is revealed once the ālaya-vijñāna is purified.[25]
As noted by Jan Westerhoff, the identification of buddha-nature teachings with the Yogācāra's third turning happened not only because several sutras (like the Laṅkāvatāra) explicitly synthesized the two doctrines, but also because:
the notion of the tathāgatagarbha lines up more naturally with the characterization of ultimate reality we find in Yogācāra than with what we find in Madhyamaka. The latter's characterization of ultimate reality in terms of emptiness is primarily a negative one, it describes it in terms of what is not there (a substantially existent core, svabhava), while the former's is more positive, postulating a foundational consciousness that is the source of all appearance.[26]
Due to the influence of Yogācāra-Tathāgatagarbha thought, some Buddhist traditions also consider the tathāgatagarbha (also known as buddha-nature) teachings as part of the third turning. For example, the Jonang master Dölpopa Shérap Gyeltsen (1292-1361) held that the Tathāgatagarbha sutras contained the "final definitive statements on the nature of ultimate reality, the primordial ground or substratum beyond the chain of dependent origination."[27]
The schema of the three turnings found in Yogācāra texts identify Yogācāra teachings as the final and definitive interpretation of the Buddha's teaching. However, the schema was later adopted more widely, and different schools of Buddhism, as well as individual Buddhist thinkers, give different explanations as to whether the second or third turnings are "definitive" (Skt: nītārtha) or "provisional" or "implicit" (Skt: neyārtha, i.e. requiring interpretation). In the context of Buddhist hermeneutics, "definitive" refers to teachings which need no further explanation and are to be understood as is, while "implicit" or "provisional" refers to teachings which are expedient and useful but must be further interpreted and drawn out.[32]
In the Tibetan tradition, some schools like Nyingma hold that the second and third turnings are both definitive. Nyingma works tend to emphasize the complementarity of the second and third turning teachings.[33] Meanwhile, the Gelug school considers only the second turning as definitive. The Gelug founder Tsongkhapa rejected the definitive nature of the Yogācāra texts and instead argued that the definitive sutras are only those which teach emptiness as the ultimate meaning. On this, he relies on the Teachings of Akshayamati Sutra.[34] The Jonang school on the other hand, see only the third turning sutras as definitive, and hold the texts of the second turning as provisional.[8]
Similar ideas in other sūtras
Other Mahāyāna sutras also mention a similar idea of the Buddha teaching in different phases, some which are provisional and others which are considered final.
The Dhāraṇīśvararāja sūtra (also known as the Tathāgatamahākaruṇānirdeśa), mentions that it is part of the “irreversible turning” and uses the metaphor of the gradual process of refining beryl to describe the way the Buddha teaches in three phases of teaching: 1. "discourses on impermanence, suffering, no self, and unattractiveness, which provoke revulsion", 2. "discourses on emptiness, signlessness, and wishlessness" and finally 3. "discourses known as The Irreversible Wheel of the Dharma and The Purification of the Triple Sphere."[35] Tibetan exegesis has generally seen this passage as referring to the three turnings (though the sutra itself does not use this terminology).[35] The Dhāraṇīśvararāja is also important because it is a key source for the Ratnagotravibhāga, an influential buddha-nature focused treatise.[35]
The Mahāyāna Mahāparinirvāṇa Sūtra states that its teachings are the highest and ultimate Dharma.[36] It also states that teachings on not-self and emptiness are provisional skillful means.[37] The Mahāparinirvāṇa Sūtra considers the highest teachings to be those of the "vaitulya" ("well-balanced", or "extensive") Mahāyāna sūtras (such as the Mahāparinirvāṇa itself) which teach the eternal nature of the Tathagata, and how "all living beings possess buddha-nature."[38]
The wheel that contracts all branches so as to bring them back to the root, the Lotus sutra.
Tiantai
The Chinese Tiantai school developed a doctrinal classification schema (panjiào) which organized the Buddhas teachings into five periods (五時):[41]
Flower Ornament period 華嚴時, The sudden teaching is delivered as the Avatamsaka sutra, containing the direct content of the Buddha’s enlightenment experience. Few can understand it.
Deer Park period 鹿苑時 (represented by the Āgama sūtras 阿含經), represent a gradual and simpler teaching.
the Vaipulya period 方等時 (represented by the Vimalakīrti Sūtra 淨名經 and so forth); this and the next period represent gradually deeper teachings.
^Ronald S. Green, Chanju Mun, Gyōnen’s Transmission of the Buddha Dharma in Three Countries, BRILL, 2018, p. 28.
^Mun, Chanju (2006). The History of Doctrinal Classification in Chinese Buddhism: A Study of the Panjiao Systems. University Press of America.
^ abcdPadmakara Translation Group; Longchenpa (2020). Finding Rest in Illusion: The Trilogy of Rest, Volume 3, Translators' Introduction, p. xxv. Shambhala Publications.
^Dalai Lama, Thubten Chodron (2017). Approaching the Buddhist Path, pp. 99-100. Simon and Schuster.
^Ford, James L. (2006). Jōkei and Buddhist Devotion in Early Medieval Japan, p. 39. Oxford University Press.
^ abcdCarr, Brian; Mahalingam, Indira (2002). Companion Encyclopedia of Asian Philosophy, p. 349. Routledge.
^ abcMuller, A. Charles (2012). The Collected Works of Korean Buddhism: 諸敎學 Doctrinal treatises: selected works, p. 34. Volume 6 of The Collected Works of Korean Buddhism, Jogye Order of Korean Buddhism.
^Randall Collins, The Sociology of Philosophies: A Global Theory of Intellectual Change. Harvard University Press, 2000, pages 221-222.
^Williams, Paul (2004), Mahayana Buddhism, Bury St. Edmunds, England: Routledge, p. 79, ISBN0-415-02537-0
^Keenan, John (2000), Scripture on the Explication of the Underlying Meaning, pp. 47-49. Berkeley: Numata Center, ISBN1-886439-10-9.
^Keenan, John (2000), Scripture on the Explication of the Underlying Meaning, p. 43. Berkeley: Numata Center, ISBN1-886439-10-9.
^Westerhoff, Jan (2018). The Golden Age of Indian Buddhist Philosophy, p. 186. Oxford University Press.
^Harris, Ian Charles (1991). The Continuity of Madhyamaka and Yogācāra in Indian Mahāyāna Buddhism, p. 78. BRILL.
^Tzohar, Roy (2018). A Yogacara Buddhist Theory of Metaphor. p. 15. Oxford University Press.
^Lusthaus, Dan, Buddhist Phenomenology: A Philosophical Investigation of Yogacara Buddhism and the Ch'eng Wei-shih Lun, Routledge, 2014, p. 274.
^Westerhoff, Jan (2018). The Golden Age of Indian Buddhist Philosophy, p. 187. Oxford University Press.
^Cyrus Stearns, The Buddha from Dolpo: A Study of the Life and Thought of the Tibetan Master Dolpopa Sherab Gyaltsen, State University of New York Press, Albany, 1999, p. 87
^Brunnholzl, Karl (2014). When the Clouds Part, The Uttaratantra and Its Meditative Tradition as a Bridge between Sutra and Tantra, pp. 4-5. Boston & London: Snow Lion.
^Brunnholzl, Karl (2014). When the Clouds Part, The Uttaratantra and Its Meditative Tradition as a Bridge between Sutra and Tantra, pp. 6-9. Boston & London: Snow Lion.
^Brunnholzl, Karl (2014). When the Clouds Part, The Uttaratantra and Its Meditative Tradition as a Bridge between Sutra and Tantra, p. 881. Boston & London: Snow Lion.
^Ray, Reginald A. Secret of the Vajra World: The Tantric Buddhism of Tibet, 2002, p. 126.
^Lopez, Donald S. Buddhist Hermeneutics, 1993, Introduction.
^Padmakara Translation Group; Longchenpa (2020). Finding Rest in Illusion: The Trilogy of Rest, Volume 3, Translators' Introduction, p. xxvii. Shambhala Publications.
^Newland, Guy (2008–2009), Introduction to Emptiness: As Taught in Tsong-kha-pa's Great Treatise on the Stages of the Path, p. 20. Ithaca
^Buswell, Robert E. (1991), The "Short-cut" Approach of K'an-hua Meditation: The Evolution of a Practical Subitism in Chinese Ch'an Buddhism. In: Peter N. Gregory (editor)(1991), Sudden and Gradual. Approaches to Enlightenment in Chinese Thought, Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass Publishers Private Limited, p. 233