User:B9 hummingbird hovering/Blog/Learning Tibetan Weblog/Archive1/Rabbit's Horn

Rabbit's Horns
Given the Tibetan term "yos" for Rabbit with its semantic field of: hare, rabbit and antelope and therefore creatures with a bit of spring in their step, it is somewhat very interesting that the American folklore construction of Jackalope is a chimera of a rabbit with the horns of an antelope. It is also wonderful in that this is a traditional Indian Logic example of a non-existent but such a creature is evident. The Jaunty Jackalope release of Ubuntu was the whole reason why I felt at ease changing operating system and it is the best thing I have ever done in relation to technological change for some time. Ubuntu with its focus on community is more in line with my core values. That said, I must note for the record that I have now progressed to Karmic Koala and the rendering of Tibetan script is much better thank you very much!

Aside: 'Rabbit's Horn' (śaśa–vişāņa: note Itrans is 'shasha-viSANa'; Devanagari: शश विषाण), the 'Barren Woman's Son' (vandhyā-putra) and the 'Sky Flowers' (akāśa-kusuma) return to prominence, hen's teeth. This knowledge is as precious as hen's teeth. My work must seem ridiculous to many. But I know it isn't. Because it isn't just my work. I am the product of my Age. I see value in these ancient knowledges with contemporary relevance.

I have an intuition that I am going to finds that hen's teeth is an ancient metaphor in traditions of logic. Somewhat like McEvilley found the snake/rope metaphor in Greek logic traditions as well as Indian Logic which bled through into the sibling of Buddhadharma Logic. That magnum opus of McEvilley took him circa 30 years by memory... I should make time to read it more thoroughly.

शश ( శశ ) = rabbit शशः ( శశః ) = (m) rabbit शशाङ्क ( శశాఙ్క ) = moon शशाङ्कः ( శశాఙ్కః ) = the moon शशि ( శశి ) = moon

China has the tradition of the Rabbit in the Moon and I have heard this metaphor in Tibetan works as well. I wonder if that is also evident in Logic but it may be that these are also stock metaphors in poetry.

शश विषाण
Rabbit’s horns: Sasa-visana or sasa-srnga (skt).

Mipham uses རི་བོང་གི་རྭ་ (Wylie: ri bong gi rwa) in his exegesis of Shantarakshita's Madhyamakalamkara karika 62 (Doctor, 2004: p.414) and my eyes were drawn to the རྭ་ part of the construction because you don't often see this ligature. And I noted it as a result. The term རི་བོང་གི་རྭ་ "hare's horns" (with the non-standard Sanskrit transcription of 'zaza-viSANa') is in Jim Valby's dictionary. I wonder if this is Tibskrit or a phonemic rendering and there are other's similar? Anywaze, it most definitely is NOT the Tibetan Calendar term for Rabbit that is generally bantered around. This awareness will require more familiarity with other author's usages of this metaphor that will only come in time. What is sure is the metaphor is the important factor, the image beyond the words. རི་བོང = rabbit, hair (and similar creatures) and ་རྭ is: horn of yak or cow, mountain peak, sting; prong/ spoke [of a vajra], peak of mountain.

A Google search on "ri bong gi rwa" returned &.

शश (śaśa)
(śaśa). m. a hare, rabbit, or antelope (the markings on the moon are supposed to resemble a hare or rabbit)

Investigative art: I had the Adhishthana to search the Wikipedia article 'Tibetan Calendar' to find the Tibetan and Wylie for 'Rabbit' and found "mo yos". "Mo" is feminine. So I intuit that "Mo yos" is "feminine Rabbit" in relation to the yin cycle of the Rabbit year but I am not definitive in this. I searched for "mo yos" but with the Tibetan text of མོ་ཡོས and the Google search returned my own work *chuckle*. This: http://bo.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:B9_hummingbird_hovering Do you know what that text is? It is the inscription or dedication of the stone at Samye. These little reinforcements give me strength. The Female Rabbit Year must be important on the inscription because it is evident a number of times in the one paragraph or section of text. One Tibetan term for 'Rabbit' is ཡོས་ (Wylie: yos). I created this entry as well: ཡོས - but forgot *lol*. I am obviously not getting the siddhi of perfect retention *chuckle*. But I did work the intention that my goofiness is magically appropriate when programming the Wheel. And that I, through the grace of Goddess Serendipity, that may I find that which is appropriate and timely to my work. I prayed with such purity in this binding that I released all pride and would undergo whatever hardship necessary, even assuming the mantle of pride if required to yield Spirit's work in realizing the integrity of Dharma for our new digital generation and to seed scholarship for the years to come.

विषाण (viṣāṇa)
(viṣāṇa) 'Horn'
 * 1) n. a horn, the horn of any animal
 * 2) a horn (wind-instrument) BhP.
 * 3) the tusk (of an elephant or of a boar,
 * 4) the claws (of a crab)
 * 5) a peak, top, point, summit
 * 6) the horn-like tuft on Shiva's head
 * 7) the tip of the breast, nipple
 * 8) the chief or best of a class or kind

Nagarjuna
Nagarjuna (c. 150 - 250 CE)

Burton (1999: pp.149-150) in an annotation to his study on Nargarjuna's philosophy of Shunyata employs the Rabbit Horn metaphor but it is not clear whether or not this metaphorical arises from the work of Nagarjuna or is an explication specific to Burton: "Nargarjuna goes on to argue, at Vaid/VaidC4, that an entity which exists cannot possess dependence. I take Nagarjuna's point to be that an entity which exists with svabhava cannot be dependent. He gives the example of the pot (bum pa) which, if it exxisted (with svabhava), cold not be dependent on the clay ('jim pa) and so on for its existence. (Why not, I wonder? It seems quite plausible that a pot or whatever might exist with svabhava (i.e. as more than a conceptual construct) and yet depend for its existence on other entities such as clay). Nagarjuna then says that an entity which does not exist cannot be dependent. It is ridiculous to claim that a non-existent, like the hare's horn (ri bong gi rwa), can be dependent on anything! Finally, an entity which both exists (with svabhava) and does not exist could not be dependent because both faults (nyes pa gnyi ga) previously mentioned would apply to it. Presumably the purpose of this (very obscure and unconvincing) argument at Vaid/VaidC4 is to establish that dependently originating entities exist but they exist without svabhava. There is a pot, for example, which exists (it is not a non-existent like the hare's horn), and depends on the clay, etc, but this pot does not have svabhava."

Vaid/VaidC (where VaidC may be a Commentary on Vaid) are to do with Nyaya theory.


 * Emptiness appraised: a critical study of Nāgārjuna's philosophy By David F. Burton (1999)

Dharmakirti
Dharmakirti (ca. 7th century)

Tillemans (1999: p.13) holds that: "We see quite clearly in the Buddhist logicians' use of inferences like the so-called bAdhakapramANa (based on DharmakIrti's VAdanyAya) that the example can be a nonexistent thing, like a rabbit's horn or a flower in the sky, and that the scope of the vyApti must therefore range over nonexistents as well as existents. Nor is it particularly infrerquent or revolutionary for Buddhists to give such nonexistent items as examples--BhAvaviveka, who was well before DharmakIrti, used the example of the sky-flower in MadhyamakahRIdaya and TarkajvAlA too and even DignAga used the example 'space' (AkAsha) in his Hetucakra, an example which is not actually existent for a Buddhist."

There is a lot more in the Tillemans book on Rabbit's Horns to extract and this quote should also be placed in Sky Flower.

Shankaracharya
Shankaracharya (788 CE - 820 CE)

"Bhattacharya himself carefully adduces reasons for the prevalent mode of understanding the Vedanta of Samkara. He writes that Samkara’s frequent use of the terms ‘rabbit-horns’ (śaśa –vişāņa), ‘ barren woman’s son (vandhyā-putra), ‘sky-flower’ (akāśa-kusuma), etc., have created the impression that such is our world also. ……the critics…from the mere mention of the terms in the Bhasyas, like Śaśa-Vişaņa (rabbit-horn) maricika  (mirage)  etc., etc.,  jumped at once  at  the  conclusion  that the world is false in  the  Vedanta.  {Ibid., p. 93}."

Mipham
Mipham (1846 - 1912)


 * Root text of "Umajen" by Shanta Rakshita. Commentary ("Jamyang Gyepai Zhalung") by Mipham Rinpoche.

Sources to track

 * Journal of Indian philosophy, Volume 26 p.109 & p.118