The First Meeting of Catholic Scholasticism with dGe lugs pa Scholasticism Robert E.

Goss
The neo-scholastic revival of Catholic scholasticism in die nineteenth and twentieth centuries by philosophers such as M. De ulf allowed for the possibility of scholasticism as a social phenomenon e!isting in other religious traditions "#$%&'%()(&*. +f method becomes the sole constituent structure for identifying a particular discourse or pedagogy as scholastic) then scholastic discourse can be considered to e!ist in a variety of cross-cultural settings and in a wide range of disciplines such as ,urisprudence) philosophy) literary criticism) and theology. De ulf insists) however) that scholasticism can be comprehended only by its methodological features together with its particular doctrines. -e restricts scholasticism to a specific set of methods and doctrines identified with particular religious systems "#$%&'#$-#..*. De ulf/s adamant refusal to isolate methodological features from doctrine in his definition of scholasticism emerges from his own Catholic scholastic paradigm) including specific dialectical and systematic e!igencies in the service of faith. -e is correct to consider aspects of method and doctrine as definitional features of scholasticism) but his restricting definition to theistic doctrine while recogni0ing 1ewish) +slamic) or -indu intellectual movements as scholastic yet e!cludes the nontheistic 2uddhist doctrinal system as scholastic. # hile + agree with 3%
33 45264T 6. G5SS the general direction of De ulf/s definition of scholasticism as including specific methodological and doctrinal features) + disagree with his move to restrict the doctrinal content to theistic 7uestions that emerge from Catholic scholasticism. 4ecently) 8ani99ar) :dshead) Cabe0on) and others have given serious consideration in identifying particular features of intellectual movements within the ma,or world religious traditions that might be heuristically useful in characteri0ing these as scholastic. :dshead compared 2uddhism to transcendental Thomism while Cabe0on has made a strong case for applying scholasticism as a cross-cultural category to +ndo-Tibetan philosophical tradition. This chapter e!plores the particular encounter of Catholic second scholasticism as it briefly engaged Tibetan dGe lugs pa scholasticism in the wor9 of the early eighteenthcentury 1esuit priest) +ppolito Desideri "#3;.-#(&.*. Desideri) residing in Tibet from #(#3 to #(<#) studied 2uddhist scholasticism in its Tibetan dGe lugs pa formulation and engaged it from his own Catholic scholastic point of view. Desideri recogni0ed a resemblance of the Tibetan scholastic method to his own scholastic training and attempted to bring dGe lugs pa scholastics to an awareness of his own doctrinal tenets by a 1esuit pedagogy rooted in a revitali0ed Catholic scholasticism. Desideri ac9nowledged some foundational resemblances of Catholic and dGe lugs pa scholasticism on the levels of method and doctrine) though the two traditions diverge on the 7uestion of a creator God. For the 1esuit missionary) these resemblances in method and doctrine form a preamble for engaging in a scholastic disputation and a full e!position of Catholic faith. This first historical) albeit brief) encounter between the Catholic and dGe lugs pa scholastic traditions illustrates the limits of De ulf/s definition and points to the need for a revision of his particular understanding to include the case of 2uddhist scholasticism.

First this chapter will e!amine Catholic medieval scholasticism as an investigative pedagogy and its apologetical engagement with other religious traditions. Then it will turn to second scholasticism and the 1esuit contribution to scholastic pedagogy) positioning us to assess Desideri/s apologetic interaction with dGe lugs pa scholasticism.

Catholic Medieval Scholasticism: An Investigative Pedagogy

2ernard =onergan) a twentieth-century) neo-scholastic Catholic philosopher and theologian) defines scholasticism as a >thoroughgoing effort to attain a coherent and orderly assimilation of Christian theology> "#$(.'&?$*. Catholic scholasticism) a monumental achieve C:T-5=+C
:@D DG6 =AGS 8: SC-5=:ST+C+SM 3( ment of the 6uropean Middle :ges) sought to reconcile the elements of faith and reason in a coherent intellectual system. :s an intellectual movement) it is divided into three ma,or developmental periods' medieval scholasticism "#?%?-#%??*) second or baro7ue scholasticism "#%??-#;&?*) and neo-scholastidsm "#;&?-present*. Medieval scholasticism created a conceptual system) giving coherent answers to all die possible 7uestions concerning the te!tual traditions of Christianity and the ancient world. Scholasticism widened the authority (auctoritas of Scripture and patristic teaching to include reason (ratio . 4eason became authoritative because of its epistemological function in analy0ing the content of faith and demonstrating its meaningfulness. The role of reason was e!tended to all philosophical and doctrinal 7uestions and allowed for analytical and systematic thoroughness. 1. :. eisheipl "#$3('##.%-.3* describes the Catholic scholastic method as >essentially a rational investigation of every relevant problem in the liberal arts) philosophy) theology) medieval law e!amined from opposing points of view) in order to reach an intelligent) scientific scholastic solution that would be consistent with accepted authorities) 9nown facts) human reason) and Christian faithB/ The scholastic method employed a particular form of reading (lectio of Scripture and classical Christian te!ts. +t differed from monastic theology in its use of logic in reading strategies of the Scriptures and classical Christian te!ts and by introducing new pedagogical methods for learning and research. Monastic reading of the Scriptures (lectio divina was oriented toward meditation (meditatio and prayer (oratio ! while the scholastic reading of Christian te!ts culminated in scientific 9nowledge (scientia "=ederc7) #$3?';$*. Monastic reading united an imaginative reading of the Scriptures with meditative prayer) and its ob,ective was wisdom and appreciation "=eclerc7) #$3?'$#ff.*. Monastic reading was a contemplative activity centered directly on God "Calet #$;;*. -ie scholastic strategy of reading differed in that it attempted to grasp the te!t rationally) to interrogate it) and to determine the e!act meaning of die word of God. Scholastic reading developed the oral form of 7uestion ("itaestio and disputation (dis#utatio$ forming a pedagogical strategy for investigation and learning.< The scholastic method introduced 7uestions to iuterrogate a particular te!t) to surface and to define cleaniy the profctfeuarobscuring understanding of that te!t. Study and interpretation maintained a dialectical form of 7uestion) provisional answer) ob,ection)) ami final definition. This pedagogical strategy created >active DietEtoc9v mindful to 9eep open) even under the dead-weight of school wor9.) %h& curiosity of botih the student and the master> "Ghenu #$3.'$3* This/rigorous structure of 7uestioning) answering) and ob,ecting "sic et non did not restrict the creativity of research but forced ttt-F 3; 45264T 6. G5SS scholastic to clarify those 7uestions otherwise remaining hidden and unanswered) generating new approaches to solving the problem of understanding. The teacher (magister ! or regent master in theology) would organi0e 7uestions into a set of propositions for consideration and disputation'

>From this starting point) the pro and con are brought into play) not with the intention of finding an immediate answer) but in order that under the action of dubitatio) research be pushed to the limit. : satisfactory e!planation will be given only on the condition that one continue die search to the discovery of what caused the doubt> "Chenu #$3.'$.*. :ll arguments or points of view were e!amined in the disputation. The teacher resolved the doubts of the conflicting interpretations) authorities) or opinions. -is resolution of conflicting interpretations presented in the disputation of the 7uestion were aimed at dispelling doubt and establishing certitude. The regent master in theology applied the certitude established by the lectio and disputatio to preaching (#raedicatio " eisheipl #$3('##.%*. The communicative dimensions of this scholastic pedagogical strategy had a wider application than education in the university classroom. Catholic scholastics went beyond the difficulties of the te!t to understand the basic problems of the Christian life of faith. They investigated the meaning of the te!t and the meaning of Christian life by constructing a rational system of sacred doctrine. Their pedagogy had pastoral applications in establishing) constituting) and communicating the certitude of the Christian message through preaching and catechesis. The 7uestions and disputations detached themselves from the te!ts and were compiled into written collections. Monastic theology/s e!pository techni7ue of interlinear glosses on Scripture or classical Christian te!ts gave rise to the new literary genres of interlinear glosses of 7uestions and ob,ections in Catholic scholasticism. The glosses) interlinear 7uestions) and comments were collated into sentences (sententia ! or resumes) of diverse opinions on te!ts under interrogation and dispute. Collections of sentences were e!panded into systematic commentaries) and commentaries evolved into the more comprehensive systems of the summas with their articles "See 4oy in this volume*. The minutely 7uestioned) disputed) and defined 7uestions) ob,ections) and answers were organi0ed into an orderly system. From these dialectical and systematic methods) the comprehensive systems of sacred doctrine were constructed. The 8rotestant reformation and the humanism of the 4enaissance precipitated a transformational shift from medieval scholasticism into second scholasticism. +n turn) the 6nlightenment) eighteenth- and nineteenth-century philosophical) scientific) and historical discourse challenged die metaphysical coherence of scholastic philosophy and theG C:T-5=+C :@D DG6 =AGS 8: SC-5=:ST+C+SM 3$ ology. -owever) scholastic theology continued to provide the intellectual framewor9 of 4oman Catholic pontifical documents and condMar decrees until Catican ++. For neo-scholastics such as =onergan) scholasticism has been largely abandoned because of the inade7uacy of medieval aims' >The Scholastic aim of reconciling all the elements in the Christian inheritance had one grave defect. +t was content with a logically and metaphysically satisfying reconciliation. +t did not reali0e how much of the multiplicity in the inheritance constituted not a logical or metaphysical problem but basically a historical problem "=onergan) #$(<'<($-;?*.

Catholic Scholasticism and A#ologetics: 'ialogue (ith )ther Religions

Medieval scholasticism considered unbelievers or non-Christians from the view point of the intellectual difficulties that they possessed concerning the truths of Christianity. Scholastic theologians applied scholastic philosophy with its problem-solving methods to confrontation and conversion of nonbelievers. 4eason in scholastic philosophy demonstrated and validated the evidence of Christian revelation) but it also was e!tended to the defense of Christian faith against rival religious systems. Scholastic apologetics employed its philosophical method to search for a foothold of faith within non-Christian religious

traditions so as to engage them in dialogue. The basic structure of the dialogue too9 the form of the written te!t in which two or more persons engaged in rational argument. These apologetical te!ts were intended to establish a rational basis for communication between traditions and to enable opponents to learn about Christian doctrine and its superiority. From the scholastic perspective) apologetics created a rational language establishing the antecedences of faith in regard to issues such as the e!istence of God) the meaning of life) and morality. 4eason established the truth of a proposition) and a proposition was demonstrated to be true only if it e!pressed the conclusion of a valid reasoning process) all of whose premises previously had been established as true. The Catholic apologist created a rational medium of communication in which the antecedences of f aith could be uncovered rationally and from which the apologist could lead the dialogue partner through reasonable arguments to the truth of the revelation of the Triune God of faith. For e!ample) Thomas :7uinas understood that the purpose of dialogue with other religious traditions was to manifest the truth and refute the error of others (Summa *heologiae: <.<) 7.#?) a. 3-#?*. Dialogue consisted for :7uinas and other medieval Catholic scholastics of an
(? 45264T 6. G5SS apologetical engagement with another tradition. +t utili0ed a comparative method) first defining and refining the categories under consideration) and then demonstrating the relative superiority of one over the other. :s an active disputation) dialogue was intended to establish a preamble to faith (#raeambula +idei and to demonstrate the superiority of Christian doctrine against rival religious traditions. Such public discourse with nonbelievers was not meant for the less educated Christian. 5nly those Christians with a strong foundation in the doctrine and who were well instructed in faith and scholastic reasoning could enter into dialogue with nonbelievers. :7uinas/ Summa contra Gentiles! written for missionaries confronting +slam in Spain) began with :ristotelian philosophical principles which he 9new his opponents would ac9nowledge. -e recogni0ed that Gentile or Muslim philosophers did not accept the authority of the Christian Scriptures and that he had to establish mutually ac9nowledged principles prior to answering their ob,ections to the content of Christian faith. The medium for dialogue between religions had to be natural reason) to which all rational persons are forced to give their intellectual assent. :7uinas indicates the first principle of natural reason) the wise man/s tas9 of ordering things rightly and governing them well. The wise man sees everything in light of the first principles from which all realities derive (Summa contra Gentiles lib. #) c.<*. The wise man can 9now about the e!istence of a personal God but cannot 9now more of God/s internal life unless there is a revelation. :7uinas states his apologetic intention of showing what errors are e!cluded and how rationally demonstrable truth is in agreement with the principles of Christian religion (Summa contra Gentiles lib.' #) c. <*. There was limited dialogue between medieval scholastics and Muslims) 1ews) -indus) and other non-Christian traditions "-orvath) #$$?*. Scholastic writings about other religious traditions) mainly +slam and 1udaism) were un7uestionably polemical) and their ob,ective was the refutation of their particular doctrinal errors and the ac9nowledgment of Christian revelation as uni7ue and superior. =ittle fruit came from such attempts at dialogue in Spain when the +n7uisition forced a monologue of Christian truth. +n the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries) the influence of nonChristian religions was progressively felt as a result of increased contact between 6urope and :sia. Some Catholic missionariesHespecially

the 1esuit missionaries of the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries in :sia and the :mericasHbecame sensitive to the 7uestionings and reasonings of non-Christian believers. The 1esuits became open to the difficulties that nonbelievers faced when confronted with Christian doctrine and reali0ed that there was a need to create a preamble to C:T-5=+C :@D DG6 =AGS 8: SC-5=:ST+C+SM (# faith) a common language to rationally engage their dialogue partners on the 7uestion of the nature of God. 5ne of these 1esuit missionaries was +ppolito Desideri) S.1.) who traveled to =hasa) the capital of Tibet) and engaged dGe lugs pa scholasticism.

Second Scholasticism: *he ,esuits and the 4atio Studioram

The si!teenth century witnessed Catholic attempts to revive and reinvigorate earlier medieval scholasticism. Several religious ordersH the 2enedictines) Dominicans) Franciscans) and the 1esuitsHrevived medieval scholastic philosophy and theology) creating an intellectual movement often labeled as >baro7ue>/ or >second> scholasticism "#%&?-#;&?*. The focus of this chapter) however) will be on 1esuit scholasticism since it provides the bac9ground and the heuristic framewor9 for Desideri/s encounter with dGe lugs pa scholasticism in the early eighteenth century. +gnatius of =oyola "#.$#-#%%3* fused the pedagogy of medieval Catholic scholasticism with his own spirituality manifested in the Spiritual 6!ercises and the Constitutions. -e mandated that logic) natural and moral philosophy) metaphysics) and scholastic and positive theology be part of the curriculum of studies for 1esuit scholastics "+gnatius of =oyola #$(?'#;;*.& -e prescribed St. Thomas> Summa *heologiae rather than 8eter =ombard/s Sentences as the basis for lectures in theology at the 4oman College) a college established for the philosophical and theological education of 1esuits. +gnatius clearly set the direction for contemporary and future 1esuits in devoting themselves to the revival of medieval scholasticism. The fourth part of his Constitutions o+ the Society o+ ,esus is devoted to the sub,ect of education of 1esuits in seminaries) colleges) and universities. +gnatius spells out his Ratio Studiorum! his educational code for 1esuit scholastics and collegiates "+gnatius of =oyola #$(?'#(#-<<$*. 1esuit training would include a rigorous three-year philosophical curriculum covering logic) natural and moral philosophy) metaphysics) rational psychology) and scholastic and positive theology. ith a foundation in the study of classical languages) grammar) rhetoric) and =atin and Gree9 literature) the 1esuit student then pursued scholastic philosophy. -umanist classical studies was propaedeutic to the study of scholastic philosophy. 1esuit educators employed the scholastic pedagogical method of reading (lectio and disputation (dis#utatio in training their own scholastics and students. For +gnatius) the Ratio Stuiiorum was a wonderful pedagogy for appropriating Catholic scholasticism. Such a '-vhD,lastic
(< 45264T 6. G5SS pedagogy emerged primarily from the love and worship of God) which was die basis for all human learning) culture) and e!istence. The Ratio Studiorum enabled the 1esuit colleges and universities to become the most efficient educational institutions in 6urope for the ne!t two and a half centuries. 2y #(#?)3#< 1esuit colleges implemented the Ratio Studiorum educational code. +gnatius/ pedagogical code led to an e!plosion of 1esuit scholarship in philosophy) theology) the sciences) geography) ethnology) philology) and the literary arts.. +n this way) the 1esuits became leaders in education in the si!teenth and seventeenth centuries. +gnatius/ Ratio Studiorum also inaugurated and directed the 1esuit revival of Catholic scholasticism. The 1esuit e!pression of second

scholasticism attempted to restore established doctrines and defend them against attac9. =eading 1esuit theologiansH4obert 2ellarmine) Francisco de Toledo) Francis Suare0) Gabriel Cas7ue0) and =uis de MolinaHreinvigorated scholasticism by employing the scholastic method to respond to 8rotestant reformers and to the study of the natural sciences in which there was renewed interest. 1esuit scholasticism produced several prolific writers) modifying the medieval scholastic method to include the form of theses) proofs) and answers to ob,ections that met contemporary catechetical and apologetic e!igencies. Furthermore) Suare0) in fact) wrote ample commentaries on Thomas/ Summa and treatises on diverse theological topics "Trentman #$;<*. Suare0 pioneered a new style of scholastic manuals that simplified the teaching of medieval scholasticism and incorporated the new sciences. -is 'is#utationes Meta#hysicae was a systematic treatment of science) not based on :ristotle but upon the latest scientific evidence. +t was read both by Catholic and by 8rotestant scholars. hat is apparent in second scholastic te!ts is a methodological shift from the medieval 7uaestio to thesis and proof. The openness of the 7uaestio in :7uinas is replaced by dogmatic theses and proof) and this shift resulted from the challenges of the 4eformation and the development of late 4enaissance humanism. This apologetic syllogistic method of second scholasticism later would come to influence the developments of the early neoschoiastic movement "Schiissler-Fioren0a #$$#'<$-&%*. 4obert 2ellarmine systemati0ed Catholic doctrine so as to respond to the 8rotestant reformers. -is three-volume wor9) 'is#uta.ones de Controversis Christianae /idei adversus huius tem#oris haereticos! was a critical wor9 on 4eformation theology) pointing out its strengths and wea9nesses. 2ellarmine/s scholasticism lac9ed the calm speculative scholarship of the apologetic treatises of earlier scholasticism. -e wrote two catechisms in +talian) 'ottrina cristiana breve and 'ichiara0ione #in co#iosa deila dottrina cristiana. These catechical manuals) practical vehicles for teaching Catholic scholastic doctrine) remained normative for C:T-5=+C :@D DG6 =AGS 8: SC-5=:ST+C+SM (& all catechisms until the Catican + Council in the late nineteenth century. The catechism was the ma,or pedagogical te!t for introducing Catholics and converts to the doctrines of Catholic Christianity. 2y 2ellarmine/s time) practically all the professors at the 4oman College were Spaniards) and the 4oman College had been firmly established as a center for a reinvigorated Catholic scholasticism " eisheipl #$;('##;I Colloslada #$%.'<#J-<<*. +t was at the 4oman College that +ppolito Desideri received his training in scholastic philosophy and theology. The practical dimensions of 1esuit scholasticism were e!pressed in implementing +gnatius/ educational code) the apologetic defense of Catholic Christianity) the writing of catechisms for teachers and the laity) preaching) administering the Spiritual 6!ercises as a retreat movement) and missionary activities to the @ew orld and :sia. 1. Gurr outlines the general characteristics of second scholasticism' "#* continuity with the past) "<* orientation of philosophy to the word of God) "&* systematic realism) ".* rational method) "%* ad,ustment to contemporary science and modern philosophy) "3* concern with ideology) and "(* the characteristic stresses of the different religious orders "Gurr #$3('##%;*. Second scholasticism modified and adapted medieval scholasticism to contemporary e!igencies' the confrontation with the 4eformation) the 6nlightenment and scientific investigation) the discovery of the :mericas) and a global world of diverse religious cultures. The 1esuits gave a rigorous articulation of second scholasticism) producing their te!ts in the defense of Catholic Christianity and the papacy. Many of these characteristics detailed by Gurr are found in +ppolito Desideri/s Tibetan writings and his interaction with dGe lugs pa scholasticism. Many of these characteristics of Catholic second scholasticism overlap with the characteristics of +ndo-Tibetan 2uddhist

scholasticism detailed in Cabe0on/s introduction to this volume.

'esideri1s Earlier Scholastic Method

The Khoshot Mongol ruler of Tibet) =ha b0ang Khan "#3%;-#(#(* summoned +ppolito Desideri) shortly after his arrival in =hasa in #(#3. The 1esuit missionary had mastered spo9en Tibetan in =ada9h and on Ms long trip to central Tibet. The Khan and the dGe lugs pa scholars at court 7uestioned him about his intentions to stay in =hasa and about the nature of his religion (chos : + was as9ed the difference between our law (chos and theirs. + did not venture to answer such delicate topics by word of mouth e! professo and in public) so long as + had not made a very perfect and prolonged study of the language) arid so + pledged myself to (. 45264T 6.G5SS e!plain the whole thing little by little in different boo9s) in which one can spea9 more . . . to distract myself from my uninterrupted application to the study of the language) + had 9ept composing every day for some hours two boo9lets in +talian. +n the first (*he Allegory ! + refute the widespread error that everyone can be saved in his law (chos ! and + show that there is but one road to salvation) all the rest leading to perdition.... 5n the ;th of September "#(#3* + started by myself to translate into his language the first of my two said boo9lets and to ma9e it still more attractive + did it in Tibetan verse. "Desideri #$&;'3.$*

-e presented his first e!position of Christianity to the Khan on the Feast of the 6piphany "1anuary 3)#(#(*. Desideri titles his first Tibetan
manuscript *he Allegory o+ Sunrise 'is#elling 'a(n1s 'ar2ness (*ho rangs

mun sel nyi ma shar ba1i brda . This Tibetan manuscript reflects Desideri/s Catholic scholastic method and training in its philosophical arguments and shows only a cursory understanding of Tibetan 2uddhist doctrines. *he Allegory provides) however) a significant mar9er for measuring and ,udging the maturation of Desideri/s understanding of Tibetan 2uddhism and its doctrines in his last manuscript. :ccording to Desideri) the te!t is written in Tibetan verse to stress the doctrinal content) since he thought Tibetan verse to be a more elegant style. Desideri eventually abandoned Tibetan verse for Tibetan philosophical prose. @onetheless) this first te!t is written in verse as a dialogue between the >wise and holy person see9ing truth> (mi m2has dag #as bden 1tshol ba and the >white-headed father (#adri who e!plains the dharma of pure truth> (mgo s2ar d#a1 1dri dag #ar bden #a1i chos 1chad #a . The form of the dialogue was a typical stylistic feature of apologetic te!ts of medieval and second scholasticism. The ob,ections raised by the >wise and holy person see9ing truth> are 6uropean) not Tibetan 2uddhist ob,ections. *he Allegory develops the genre of natural theology treatises) an apologetic form of scholastic philosophy demonstrating that the fundamental 7uestions about e!istence depended upon God.% Desideri uses the image of light as a metaphor for truth and compares the person to a house. =ight becomes the central metaphor of the te!t) and there are two forms of light reflecting in the world. There is the light of a lamp in the house that dispels a limited amount of dar9ness. This is compared to the truth that can be apprehended through natural reason. There is also the light of the sun which can dispel the dar9ness completely) and this type of truth can only be apprehended through revelation and reason. -owever) revealed truth does not contradict reasonI in fact) reason opens the individual to the highest revealed truth. +n *he Allegory! Desideri repeats the arguments of scholastic apologetics' that natural reason is insufficient for salvation) that humanity cannot be saved
C:T-5=+C :@D DG6 =AGS 8: SC-5=:ST+C+SM (%

through other religions) that God reveals the teachings of religion)

namely within Christianity) and gives humanity precepts for right views and right moral action) and die necessity of one true religion). *he Allegory reflects a number of the salient characteristics that Gurr "#$3(* underscores as prominent in the writings of second scholasticism' #. 5rientation of philosophy to the word of God. Desideri ma9es the philosophical distinction between two types of 9nowledge' natural and supernatural 9nowledge. @atural 9nowledge is derived from reason while supernatural 9nowledge remains above the natural comprehension of reason and must be revealed by angels) prophets) and God/s Son in the canonical scriptures. 4evealed truth does not contradict reason but becomes intelligible through rational appropriation. <. 4ational method. *he Allegory populari0es the 1esuit form of scholastic disputation) starting with a thesis and its defense) an e!planation of the terms of the thesis) a list of contrary opinions) a proof of the thesis) and answers to opponents of the thesis. 4eason provides the means for e!plaining the te!t and for reconciling the inconsistences between the canonical scriptures and classical Christian writers into a systematic whole) &. Concern with ideology and the particular characteristics of the religious order' Desideri intended to refute Tibetan 2uddhist errors and the false doctrine that any person could be saved through his or her religion. -is intention was to engage in interreligious apologetics. The particular ideological characteristics of the 1esuit order included its devotion to the papacy) the ta9ing of a fourth vow of obedience) and its service in the defense of the Church and Catholic doctrine.3 Desideri/s intellectual formation occurred in the culture of 6uropean Catholic Christianity where non-Christian religions were regarded as falsehood and the wor9 of Satan. -e understood that Ms mission in Tibet was to win souls for the standard of Christ. -ie only e!tant sources that we have describing the reticiiuiJ L)M'N>/ dGe lugs pa scholastics to the 1esuit/s Tibetan wor9s are Desidert/s iJvJt writings. The dGe lugs pa lamas accorded the 1esuit the resp h l :cg gp 6uropean lama) treating him as a professed religious and sclio9 cording to Desideri) *he Allegory was well received +lia bJang Kli the dGe lugs pa scholars at court remained open to his attempt to write a philosophical e!planation for the e!istence of a Supreme 2eing who created everything. Desideri describes their reactions' >Tlie9 (diy3 lugs
76 ROBERT E. GOSS pa scholastics/* opinion was that the maxims and principles contained therein were well set forth and seemed to be well reasoned but were entirely opposed to their dogmas and opinions !"esideri #$%&'#(#). *f "esideri+s words are an accurate account, then the dGge lugs pa scholars perceived structural affinities between the moral maxims outlined b- the white-headed lama and their own moral philosophical precepts. .erhaps what intrigued them about The Allegory was his scholastic method of presenting philosophical arguments for the existence of God. /is scholastic method) systematic organi0ation of tenets into a series of connected arguments to refute an opponent+s position, was in accord with their own dGe lugs pa scholastic method of 1uestion and answer in philosophical disputation. "8erdue #$$2'2&36(, 4abe0on, #$$&'5&356,#&236() Tibetan scholastics appreciated a well3reasoned philosophical argument. Their educational formation occurred in a Tibetan intellectual

climate where philosophical debate was an art and where scholastic reason was propaedeutic to religious practice !4abe0on, #$$&). "esideri+s argument for the existence of a creator God could be comprehended against the bac7ground of traditional Buddhist criti1ue of the -indu concepts of a +creator God+ and +metaph-sics8 and there

would have been other sections understandable to dGe lugs pa scholars' on love and compassion, aids to o9ercoming obstacles and e9ils, the unitity of the law) the need for faith, and how to achie9e the highest religious perfection. :fter reading The Allegory, ;ha b0ang <han, prompted by his dGe lugs pa ad9isors, encouraged "esideri to immerse himself in the scholastic writings and pedagogical training of the dGe lugs pa lamas at 4a mo che monaster-. =ha b0ang Khan gave Desideri the opportunity to stud- firsthand dGe lugs pa scholasticism, its arguments) and its doctrinal tenets. To m- 7nowledge, "esideri was the first 6uropean to stud- dGe lugs pa philosoph-.

'esideri Immerses .imsel+ in dGe lugs #a Scholasticism

:t Ra mo che) a small but renowned dGe lugs pa monastery in =hasa) Desideri studied the classical te!ts of dGe lugs pa scholasticism. -e hoped to further develop a heuristic strategy for entering the dGe lugs pa scholastic system) rationally engage it) and argue persuasively for the truths of Christianity. This meant that he had to study dGe lugs pa scholasticism and to appropriate it through the traditional curriculum of dGe lugs pa studies. Desideri learned the Tibetan language) its philosophical vocabulary) and the method of Madhyama9a dialectics and argument. The 1esuit missionary read many of the important
C:T-5=+C :@D DG6 =AGS 8: SC-5=:ST+C+SM 44

wor9s of the scriptures (b2a1 1gyur and their commentaries (bstan 1gyur found in the libetan 2uddhist canon in order to better understand their doctrines and religious culture. :t 4a mo che) he witnessed the fre7uent doctrinal debates of dGe lugs pa mon9s in the courtyard and even participated in some of these disputations. +n his ,ournals) Desideri notes that he began to ma9e a separate dictionary of terms used in the doctrinal language (chos s2ad of 2uddhist scholasticism as a preamble for comprehending dGe lugs pa scholasticism. :fter five months) Desideri moved to Se ra monastery) a dGe lugs pa monastic university of appro!imately eight thousand mon9s on the outs9irts of =hasa. The monastic university made available to him both a library and other scholarly resources. :t Se ra) the 1esuit studied Madhyama9a dialectics under dGe lugs pa scholars) attended lectures) and participated in philosophical disputes in the courtyard. Desideri studied the writings on emptiness (stong #a nyid ! particularly the relevant
sections of the Great E5#osition o+ the Stages o+ the Path to Enlightenment (6am rim chen mo of Tsong Kha pa "#&%$-#.#$*.( Tsong Kha pa/s Great E5#osition o+ the Stages o+ the Path to Enlightenment was one of the

central philosophical wor9s of dGe lugs pa scholasticism. -is classic wor9 presents a synthesis of +ndian 2uddhist doctrines and practices and had a status similar to Thomas :7uinas/ Summa *heologiae in Catholic scholastic theological education and practice. Desideri/s notes from his study of the Great E5#osition o+ the Stages o+ the Path to Enlightenment consist of a compilation of 7uotations from that wor9) te!ts on logic and philosophy) and MShaylna scriptures. These Tibetan 7uotes) interspersed with interlinear glosses in =atin and +talian) indicate the breadth and depth of Desideri/s study and his understanding of the classical dGe lugs pa curriculum in MahaySna 2uddhism. Tsong Kha pa/s Great E5#osition o+ the Stages provided Desideri with an outline of

the basic philosophical teachings of +ndian MShaySna 2uddhism and introduced him to the philosophical treatises of great figures of that tradition such as @SgSr,una) :ryadeva) Candar9irti) JSntideva) and others. *he Great Stages o+ the Path functioned as a sy6abus for studying the vast corpus of 2uddhist scriptures and commentaries. From his own training in Catiholic scholastic philosophy and theology) Desideri recogni0ed dGe lugs pa scholasticism as scholastic practice and appreciated its deep concern for authority and reason and its stress on logical argumentation. Much of dGe lugs pa scholastic philosophy was framed in syllogisms) and the respondent either challenges the reasons that support the syllogism or accepts the opponenf s syllogisms. This form of dGe lugs pa philosophical argumentation reminded the 1esuit of his own scholastic training in philosophy and theology at the 4oman College through the methods of lectio and dis#utatio.7 For e!am75
ROBERT E. GOSS pie, he describes Tsong <ha pa+s great exposition as a boo7 in which is expounded with admirable method and clarit- the dogmas of the Tibetan religion, and the treatises of emptiness (stong #a nyid)" !"esideri #$%&'#(7). *ppolito "esideri respected the dGe lugs pa scholasticism of Tsong <ha pa, and he understood the role that rational in1uir-, logic, and reasonable arguments pla-ed in dGe lugs pa pedagog- and philosophical in9estigation. Both the dGe lugs pa and the =esuit stress on reason !Tibetan' rigs pa; ;atin' ratio) pro9ided each participant in this nascent 4hristian3Buddhist encounter with the foundational tools to engage in the art of interreligious polemics, the t-pe of religious con9ersation to which both scholastic traditions were accustomed. >or each tradition, reasoning was the means for ascertaining the precise meaning of a scriptural passage or a classical text and criticall- in9estigated the ob?ections to doctrinal tenets. Reasoning and rational argumentation thus pro9ided the medium for demonstrating the 9alidit- of one+s own s-stem and the lac7 of 9alidit- of other religious s-stems. *n his ?ournals, "esideri reflects on his decision to engage dGe lugs pa scholasticism and fight for the Standard of 4hrist through rational argument' /a9ing b- m- aforesaid diligence disco9ered the site of the enemy/s camp) the 7uality of their arms and their artifices) and pro9ided m-self with arms and ammunition, towards the end of @o9ember, * resol9ed to challenge them and begin war. *n the name and b- the aid of God, * commenced to confute the errors of that sect and declare the truth of our hol- faith !"esideri #$%&'#(6). "esideri engaged dGe lugs pa scholasticism b- reading *ndo3 Tibetan Buddhist philosophical texts, stud-ing dGe lugs pa scholastic method, and appl-ing 4atholic scholastic method to de9elop an interreligious apologetic.

'esideri +s Scholastic Engagement (ith dGe lugs #a Scholasticism

*he Essence o+ the Christian 'octrine represents Desideri/s most mature engagement with and understanding of dGe lugs pa scholastic practice and doctrine. The manuscript is divided between the refutation of the 2uddhist notion of emptiness "folios l-#&a* and the e!position of the Christian doctrine "folios #%a36(a). The division follows a Catholic scholastic pattern of the criti7ue and refutation of the central truth claims of the adversary and presentation of the rational superiority of the truth claims of Christian revelation. The basic method of the te!t also follows a pattern similar to the rhetorical framewor9 of dGe lugs pa argumentation' "#* invalidating the opponent/s doctrines by C:T-5=+C :@D DG6 =AGS 8: SC-5=:ST+C+SM ($ demonstrating their logical fallacies and contradictions) "<* demonstrating the validity and consistency of one/s own doctrinal system) "&* demonstrating the uni7ueness and superiority of one/s own doctrinal system vis-a-vis other systems "See Cabe0on #$$?'#3ff*.

The first section) refuting emptiness) is patterned after the rhetorical strategy of the invalidation of the opponenf s doctrine. +t surfaces die logical fallacies or inconsistencies inherent in the opponent/s argument)

a method employed by Tsong Kha pa/s Great E5#osition o+ the Stages o+ the Path and by Thomas/ Summa *heologiae. The e!position of Christian doctrine in the second section is further divided into three subsections' >Faith> "folia #&a-<;a*) >-ope> "folia <;a-&.a*) and >Charity> "&.a-%?*. Desideri/s sections on Christian doctrine follow the typical catechetical content and method found in the +talian 1esuit 4obert Cardinal 2ellarmine/s catechism) 'ottrina Cristiana. 2ellarmine/s catechism became normative for +talian catechesisI it develops a catechical e!position of the doctrinal tenets of the creed) the 8ater @oster) and die seven deadly sins. +nstead of the dialogue between teacher (magister and disciple (disci#lina ! Desideri composes a dialogue between the teacher) using the transliterated Sans9rit term #andita! and the >see9er of further wisdom> (yang shes rob 2yi snying #o 0hu ba #o ! a term borrowed from the 8erfection of isdom corpus of literature. Desideri/s usage of >further wisdom> (yang shes rob is significant in that he ac9nowledges a wisdom already present within the 2uddhist tradition.$ 8art < of *he Essence reflects die literary genre of Catholic apologetics and catechesis. 8art # of *he Essence mar9s the first historical engagement of the Summa with the Great Stages! the interaction of scholastic method of Thomas :7uinas with the scholastic method of Tsong Kha pa. Desideri opposes Thomas/ philosophy of being (esse against Tsong Kha pa/s philosophy of emptiness "S' iunyata! T' stong #a nyid . +t is on the doctrinal level that the two scholastic traditions are most divergent. +n Ms Account o+ *ibet! Desideri notes the primary difference between the two religious traditions to be doctrinal' >+ e!plained that in every religion there were two principal facts' firstly) principles) ma!ims) or dogma to be believed) and secondly) precepts) counsels) or instructions as to what to do or not do. :s regards the first) our religion and theirs were absolutely different) but in the second) the difference was slight> "Desideri #$&.'$$-#??*. Since the truth claims of 2uddhist doctrines presented an obstacle to him) these had to be refuted prior to any acceptance of Christian truth claims by Tibetans. Desideri proposes to e!amine and compare the two doctrinal systems (chos lugs in order to show the logical fallacies of the dGe lugs pa tenets) the coherence and superiority of the truth of Christian reOelation. -e 7ualifies Christian doctrine as a faith system (dad lugs in addition to a doctrinal system)
;? 45264T 6. G5SS and this remains for the 1esuit an essential difference between the two forms of scholasticism. +n the opening folio of *he Essence! he states the general dGe lugs pa position on emptiness' +f one e!amines the scriptures and the philosophical systems of Tibet with a wisdom which remains honest) without partiality) and without hatred and attachment) they "their scripturesBsystems* assert that there is not even one substance established as inherently e!istent. They understand that all e!isting substances are viewed as empty) the emptiness of inherent e!istence itself. "Goss ++) folio #* Desideri claims to restate the primary thesis of dGe lugs pa scholasticism from a perspective of >wisdom which remains honest) without partialityB/ The 1esuit missionary understands that dGe lugs pa scholasticism e7uates its notion of emptiness with dependent origination) and this is apparent in the first section of *he Essence o+ Christian 'octrine! as well as in comments in +talian ,ournal writings and letters. #? Desideri does not consider the 2uddhist notion of emptiness to be nihilistic but rather radically relativist. 2oth emptiness and dependent origination

e!clude a self-e!istent creator as part of the more general deconstruction of any form of independent being or essence.## For the 1esuit) the truth claims of the 2uddhist notion of emptiness re7uire the falsity of the Christian doctrine of the self-e!istent God. There was no middle ground for him to reconcile the 2uddhist notion of emptiness and the Christian notion of God. Desideri rehearses the arguments for emptiness of all substances found in the Great E5#osition o+ the Stages! focusing on the following topics' causality) the relationship of the relative to the absolute) the natural 9nowledge of the absolute) the birth of a person) the origin of substances) contingency and necessity) and the aggregates "folios la-#<*. :ccording to his own ,ournals) he uses arguments and rational disputations that conform to the form and method of +ndo-Tibetan Madhyanta9a philosophy and their canonical writers. -e too9 seriously dGe lugs pa scholastic rhetoric) imitating its method and style of argumentation.. hen a flawed position has been advanced) the dGe lugs pa scholastic is ready to attac9 it by raising a series of logical fallacies to disprove the premise untenable. Desideri/s strategy is to bring out what lie perceives to be the contradictions within dGe lugs pa arguments for the notion of emptiness and then gives a common-sense e!ample to demonstrate how the tenet is contradictory. For the 1esuit) the contradictions arise from what is not proven in dGe lugs pa arguments' the cause of causes) or first cause) and the necessity of a Supreme 2eing "folio #<a*. C:T-5=+C :@D DG6 =AGS 8: SC-5=:ST+C+SM ;# +ppolito Desideri disagrees with the dGe lugs pa arguments for the emptiness of inherent e!istence due to his own scholastic doctrinal presuppositions that are based on the notion of a creator God. 4adical relativity without a first cause (#rima causa is the ma,or error to be overcome if an e!plicit notion of God is to be introduced. From a Thomistic perspective) God/s essence (essentia is a pure act of being (esse . +n other words) the >to-be> (esse is to be within God/s act of selfbeingI this means that everything) thus created) participates in God/s act of being ('e Ente et Essentia #) <I Summa *heologiae +-+) 7.&) a..I

=aCugna #$$#'#%?ffI -an9ey #$;('%(-;?*. The difficulty that +ppolito Desideri has with the notion of emptiness is neither its radical contingency nor its corollary) the interdependency of phenomena. Catholic scholastic philosophy/s notions of potency and act allow for viewing reality as contingent) interdependent) and relational. 6mptiness) however) e!cludes a first cause (#rima causa and thus e!cludes the creator God of Catholic scholastic theology. Desideri demonstrates what he perceives to be the logical fallacies of the dGe lugs pa scholasticism from his own Thomistic perspective based on notions of being) essence) and potency. -e retains the method of Madhyama9a argumentation to refute the notion of relativity without a first cause) arguing that the relative re7uires the absolute. -e develops his scholastic argument for the need of natural 9nowledge of absolute truth as well as the necessity of a first cause (#rima causa to counter the pure relativity of the notion of emptiness. For dGe lugs pa scholastics) the relative does entail the absolute "emptiness*) but relative) contingent) or conventional e!istence does not entail absolute or inherent e!istence) which is precisely the notion being refuted (dgag bya in Madhyama9a arguments for emptiness. For Desideri) the arguments for the e!istence of God emerge from die Thomistic tradition of construing God as >subsistent self-e!istence> (i#sum esse subsistens . :7uinas/ metaphysical construal of God as >subsistent 2eing> provided the foundational basis for e!position of the 7uestion of the Trinity and other tenets of Christian doctrine. The 1esuit translates or mistranslates the Tibetan >,ewel> (d2on mchog for God. -e

misperceived the triadic significance of the 2uddhist Three 1ewels "2uddha) Dharma) and Sangha* that gave rise to the act of ta9ing refuge for an incipient trinitarianism. :s he read through the Tibetan scriptures and commentaries) Desideri reali0ed that the Three 1ewels was a not reference to the Christian triune God. -e) nevertheless) translates the notion of the >self-e!istent God> into the Tibetan phrase >the self-e!istent ,ewel> (rang grub d2on mchog ! attempting to create a triadic parallel of God and the >Three 1ewels> in the act of worship. -e lists the attributes of God as >independent) immutable) uncreated) non ;<
45264T 6. G5SS dependent) free from another) perfect) eternal) free from fault) without sin) unrivalled.> Desideri/s scholastic method not only includes hermeneutical appropriation of dGe lugs pa scholastic techni7ues but also hermeneutical appropriation of 2uddhist semantic terms. For e!ample) he appropriates the Mahayana 2uddhist notion of >immeasurable compassion> (thugs r8e tshad med #a ! often attributed to bodhisattvas and 2uddhas) to e!plain the Christian notion of grace and God/s salvific love. Desideri is not ,ust literally translating Christian concepts into a Tibetan cultural milieuI rather) he is modifying a pre-e!istent doctrinal language and scholastic method that is hermeneutically significant to his 2uddhist readers) so as to convey new meanings. +ppolito Desideri creates an interpretative medium) a rhetoric) for 2uddhistChristian communication and thus for polemical engagement of these two forms of scholasticism. Desideri describes how his threevolume wor9 created an interest among the learned lamas in =hasa. -e writes) >My house suddenly became the scene of incessant comings by all sorts of people) chiefly learned men and professors) who came from the monasteries and universities) those of Se ra and /2ras spungs) the principal ones to apply for permission to see and read the boo9> "Desideri #$&.'#?3*. Desideri notes that the learned lamas would read some of his statements) e!amine them with care) and specify further distinctions for consideration. The dGe lugs pa lamas provided corrections and refinements to his reasoned arguments. -owever) they would disregard the logical conse7uences of some of his arguments but would write their own corrections and solutions for e!plaining clearly the truth. The lamas were as much committed to the rational investigation and ascertainment of doctrinal truth as Desideri was. This interaction between dGe lugs pa scholars and Desideri proved to be a mutual learning process) forming a language for intercommunication and the preliminaries of the first Christian-2uddhist dialogue. -ow the dGe lugs pa lamas and dGe bshes) in fact) understood Desideri/s presentation of Christian doctrine is only speculation) yet their intellectual curiosity and openness brought them from their monastic universities to read the scholastic wor9 of the >white-headed lama.> 6ven if the dGe lugs pa scholastics would have disregarded Desideri/s conclusions because they contradicted their own 2uddhist tenets) they) nevertheless) would have found an appreciation for the rational philosophical argument and interreligious apologetics within *he Essence. :s for Desideri/s doctrinal e!position of Catholic Christianity) the dGe lugs pa scholastics would have heard some of the elements of the story of 1esus in terms of the bodhisattva path. e catch a glimpse of such a reading in Desideri/s ,ournal -e notes) >Many a time when telling them what the image of the Crucifi! meant they would prostrate themselves) 4:T/O;*4 :@" "GE ;AGS .: SC-5=:ST+C+SM ;& beat their breasts and beg to hold it in tiheir hands, when they would Mss and shed man- tears on hearing that =esus 4hrist had suffered for the redemption of their souls !"esideri #$%&'#77). This 2uddhist response of percei9ing =esus as a bodhisatt9a has been typical of even the current Buddhist34hristian dialogue !;ope0 and 4oc9efeller #$;(*.

Interreligous A#ologetics as Scholastic 'ialogue

:pologetics is a form of religious discourse, attempting to demonstrate that the truth claims of one particular religion are superior to the truth claims of another religion. *t is a systematic and argumentative form of scholastic discourse that aims at religious persuasion. +nitially) apologetics relin1uishes its primar- and secondar- sources of authority such as Scripture, re9elation, or tradition in order to engage an adversary that would not accept such sources of authorit-. :pologists use methods, arguments, and criteria of 7nowledge acceptable to their ad9ersar-. Bhen apologists present their own doctrinal truth claims as part of a coherent s-stem, the- necessaril- rely on those initially e!cluded sources of authority along with the use of reason. +n this fashion) apologists present their doctrinal s-stem as rationally and cognifively superior to those of others that ha9e, from their perspective) proven to be flawed. Recentl-, .aul Griffiths !#$$#) has argued for the necessity of interreligious apologetics as integral to interreligious dialogue. -is premise certainl- holds true in the particular case of "esideri+s rhetorical encounters with dGe lugs pa scholasticism, a case of Catholic second scholasticism interacting with dGe lugs pa scholatidsm. Both 4atholic and dGe lugs pa scholasticism considered the art of apologetics as integral to religious discourse. 2oth traditions understand that doctrine is based on intelligible principles and methods whose goal is to ma7e e9ident a higher "theological or 2uddhist philosophical) discourse. Both scholastic traditions strive to reproduce a s-stematic orderliness that is comparati9e, critical) consistent) and hierarchical. >or both, reason is soteriologicall- necessary to their religious goals. The dGe lugs pa tradition uses rhetoric) logical argumentation) and rational dispute in pursuit of enlightenment) while logic and reasoning were essential to "esideri+s pursuit of grace. 2oth traditions accept a rational method for critically analy0ing adversarial positions and arguments) comparing and e!posing them to logical principles) and arriving at a hierarchical system of doctrinal tenets. Desideri/s own 1esuit education prepared him in the tradition of scholastic philosophy) logic) metaphysics) and rhetoric. hen Desideri immersed himself in the study of the philosophy of the dGe lugs ;. 45264T 6. G5SS pa tradition) he studied the 2uddhist scholastic method of logic) dialectics) and the art of debate. The Catholic scholastic philosophy and theology at the 4oman College served him in his study of the arguments of dGe lugs pa scholasticism and Tibetan philosophical language. -e employed the method of lectio! reading) to understand Madhyama9a philosophy and method) and he utili0ed the method of dis#utatio to analy0e the truth claims of both doctrinal systems. 2oth lectio and dis#utatio formed the heart of his pedagogical method) but they were also at the heart of 2uddhist philosophical method. Desideri) therefore) learned the Tibetan language so as to learn the particular art of Tibetan philosophical dispute and argument. -e further proposed to e!amine the two doctrinal systems (chos lugs in comparison to each other to determine which doctrine is >pure and +mmaculateB/ or) that is) which is cognitively superior to the other. From the beginning of his interreligious apologetics) Desideri understood this to be Christian doctrine. Desideri chose to introduce Christian doctrine by traditional Tibetan and Catholic scholastic practices' "#* the use of reason and dialectic argument in invalidating the dGe lugs pa notion of emptiness) "<* a coherent e!position of the 2uddhist doctrinal system and the faith system of Christianity) "&* the demonstration of the uni7ueness and superiority of Catholic doctrinal truth. :rgumentation plays an important role in the learning process of both scholastic traditions) and it is e7ually vital for reaching consensus between two conversation partners. 5ne dialogue partner either ac9nowledges the force of the reasons of the other/s arguments or is forced to reply with critical counter-arguments)

The point of the arguments is to convince the other dialogue partner to accept or refute the claims to truth of doctrinal statements. 4eachmg understanding or consensus between two dialogue partners depends on their mutual acceptance of the recogni0able claims to truth of their statements. :pologetic engagement was the only pedagogical method available to Desideri for carrying on a fruitful communication with the dGelugspa scholasticism) but it could ta9e place effectively only in his learning of the Tibetan language and through hermeneutical appropriation of the dGe lugs pa philosophical terminology and scholastic method) +ppolito Desideri created an e!panded language for argument and consensus between the two traditions and indicated the directions for .future apologetic interactions between the two scholastic practices. Anfortunately) a territorial dispute between the 1esuits and the CapuchinFranciscans forced Desideri to be recalled to 4ome "Snellgrove and 4ichardson) #$;3'<<.-<3* -e was) however) the most successful Christian to engage dGe lugs pa scholasticism until the modern era.
C:T-5=+C :@D DG6 =AGS 8: SC-5=:ST+C+SM ;%

@otes
#. The comparativist philosopher 8aul Masson-5ursel conceives of scholasticism as a cross-cultural philosophical category and stage within an evolutionary schema of human civili0ation that culminates in scientific and critical in7uiry "#$<?'#<&-.#*. For Masson-5ursel) scholasticisms emerge as a philosophical response to sophism. -e comprehends 2uddhism as sophism and as a forerunner to scholasticism and something that prevents him paying serious attention to the development of 2uddhist scholasticism. <. =ederc7 asserts that monastic theology perfected its writing in the obligations of silence. The literature of monastic schools was e!pressed in writing) whereas scholastic literature was created from the oral style of e!change between master and pupils. The 7uestion and disputation style of scholasticism emerged from the alteration of 7uestion and answer in dialogue. The scholastic oral style was more pedagogical than monastic writing. =ecler7) #$3?'#;;-#$?. eisheipl notes that both the lectio and disputatio employed three means' definition) division) and reasons. eisheipl) #$3('##.%. For a fuller e!position of scholastic method) see' eisheipl) #$(.'##%-#; and de ulf) #$%.'<3-&#. &. The term scholastic was applied to all 1esuits who had ta9en vows and prior to their change of status with ordination to the priesthood and final vows. .. See -arney/s "#$.#'#$<-<%;* discussion of 1esuit education and learning and their achievements in the missions) as well as Colloslada/s "#$%.'$3-##%* discussion of the Ratio Studiorum as implemented at the 4oman College. %. Sherbume calls *he Allegory a >catechism.> +t lac9s the typical catechical form of presenting the basic tenets of the Christian creed as Desideri does in the latter part of *he Essence o+ Christianity. +t is rather an apologetic te!t) more properly labeled as natural theology. See Sherburne #$;$'<$;. 3. +gnatius/ S#iritual E5ercises provides an ideological framewor9 for Desideri/s scholastic method of apologetics. +t divides the world into die standard of Christ and the standard of Satan) providing a combative spirituality. See >Two Standards> meditation in the S#iritual E5ercises "+gnatius of =oyola #$$<' 3%-3(*. See Ganss/ notes pp. 3$-(&)#3(-3$. The >Two Standards> meditation informs Desideri/s apologetic by placing his encounter with Tibetan 2uddhism as a form of spiritual warfare. (. Desideri was the first non-:sian to translate the 6am rim chen mo into a estern language) +talian. -is translation of this important Tibetan te!t has been lost. ;. Desideri/s heuristic framewor9 consists of more than the rational combativeness of the >Two Standards> of the Spiritual 6!ercises and Catholic apologetics in refuting the errors of Tibetan 2uddhism. +t also includes the positive valuation of created things in the +gnatian principle of >finding God in all things)> lac9ing in Tibetan culture. The positive valuation of created things is found in the >8rinciple and the Foundation> meditation of the +gnatian 6!er;3 45264T 6. G5SS

cises "+gnatius of =oyola #$$<'&<*. See Ganss/ note #( on the >8rinciple and Foundation> "#.3-.;*. Desideri states) >Their "Tibetans* morality agrees with our own> "Desideri #$&.'<%3*. There was much in Tibetan 2uddhist preceptual and moral practice that reminded Desideri of his own Catholic Christian practice of morality. 4esemblances in preceptual practices and scholastic method provo9ed the 1esuit into a deeper investigation of Tibetan 2uddhism) 9eeping him open to seeing its positive dimensions and resemblances. -is writings constantly reflect the tension of refuting philosophical error for the >greater glory of God)> while finding positive elements within Tibetan 2uddhism and scholasticism with strong resemblances to his Catholic Christianity. $. 5ne could easily argue that Desideri is ,ust adopting the >see9er of further wisdom> from the 8erfection of isdom literature that he read. The notion of >further wisdom> is also congruent with a Catholic scholastic recognition of a wisdom already present in human rational in7uiry. +n *he Allegory! Desideri uses the image of light of the lamp within a house that dispels limited dar9ness as a metaphor for natural reason. #?. +n his Account o+ *ibet! he summari0es his understanding of the 2uddhist notion of emptiness' >@othing e!ists because nothing has any essence by itself) and therefore) nothing e!ists which is not dependently originated (rten cing 1brel has 1byung or unconnected) unfettered) and without correlativity> "Desideri #$&.'<.$*. ##. Desideri calls dGe lugs pa atheists but 7ualifies their denial of the e!istence of God' >:lthough the Tibetans theoretically and speculatively deny the e!istence of a divinity and the e!istence of an immortal soul... + only wish to ma9e clear that these blind people unwittingly admit and confusedly recogni0e the Divinity which they persistently deny in words> "Desideri #$&.'<%#*. Desideri recogni0ed an implicit notion of God within Tibetan 2uddhism evident in Tibetan religious practices) faith) and morality. +n another instance) he noted that the real aim of Madhyama9a philosophical treatises was >to e!clude and absolutely deny the e!istence of any uncreated and independent 2eing and thus effectively to do away with any conception of God> "Desideri #$&.'#?.-%*.

4eferences
:dshead) S.:.M. #$(( >2uddhist Scholasticism and Transcendental Thomism)> 'o(nside Revie(! vol. $%'<$(-&?%. 2ec9with) Christopher +. #$;$ /The Medieval Scholastic Method in Tibet and the estB/ +n Re+lections on *ibetan Culture: Essays in Memory o+ *urret 9. :ylie! C:T-5=+C :@D DG6 =AGS 8: SC-5=:ST+C+SM ;( &?(-#&. 6d. 4ichard Sherburne and =awrence 6pstein. =ampeter) AK' The 6dwin Mellen 8ress. Cabe0on) 1ose +gnado. #$$. ;uddhism and 6anguage: A Study o+1Indo-*ibetan Scholasticism.

:lbany' SA@P 8ress. #$$? >The Canoni0ation of 8hilosophy and the 4hetoric of Siddhanta in Tibetan 2uddhism.> +n ;uddha <ature: A /estschri+t in .onor o+Minoru =iyota! (-<3. 6d. 8aul 1. Griffiths Q 1ohn Keenan. To9yo' 2uddhist 2oo9s +nternational Chenu) M. D.
#$3. *o(ard >nderstanding Saint *homas. CMeago' -enry 4egency.

Clooney) Francis R. #$$? >4oberto de @obili) :daptation and the 4easonable +nterpretation of 4eligionB/ Missology !viiiB#'<%-&3. Desideri) +ppolito.
#$;$ )#ere *ibetane di I##olito 'esideri. Colume .. Trans. Q ed. G.

Toscano. 4oma' +nstitute +talianS per il medio ed estremo.

#$;( )#ere *ibetane di I##olito 'esideri. Colume &. Trans) and ed. G.

Toscano. 4oma' +nstitute +talianS per il medio ed estremo.

#$;. )#ere *ibetane di I##olito 'esideri Colume <) 6d. G. Toscano.

4oma' +nstitute +talianS per il medio ed estreino.

#$;# )#ere e*ibetane di I##olito 'esideri Colume #. Trans) and ed.

G. Toscano. 4oma' +nstitute +talianS per il medio ed estremo. #$%. >@oti0ie +storiche del Thibet.> inlMissionar> Itdiani nel *ibet e nel <e#al 6d. =uciano 8etech) Oolumes %-B. 4oma' +nstitute 8oligrafico Dello Strata. #$&; >=etters and 5ther 8apers of Fr. +ppolito Desideri S.1.) a Missionary in Tibet "#(#&-<#*. 6d. and trans. -. -olsteii. ,ournal o+ the
Royal Asiatic Society o+ ;engal .'%3(-(3(.
#$&. An Account o+ *ibet. TransT Felippo de Felippi/. =amubiU. GettlemanB @ancy Moore. #$;$ >Karma-bstan-s9ong and the 1esuitsTB/ +m =i8laibnu cBB 1i%? ?ii:?@

Culture: Essays in Memory o+ *urret 9. :ylie! 4AB-44! 6d. =avBiewe 6pstein and 4ichard Sherbume. =ewiston' The F/ivv %Ct :2Ahc?i F-ebf. Gispert-SauchJ G. #$$? >Desideri and TibetB> *he *ibet ,ournal V%B<'/D-&$. ;; 45264T 6. G5SS Goss) 4obert 6. Forthcoming + >+ppolito Desideri S1. and the 2eginnings of the Christian-2uddhist DialogueB/ Forthcoming ++ >The 6ssence of ChristianityB/ translation of =e ri sit an gyi chos lugs 2yi snying #o. Griffiths) 8aul 1. #$$# An A#ology +or A#ologetics: )n the 6ogic o+ Interreligious 'ialogue! Mary9noll) @.P.' 5rbis 2oo9s. GunJ1.2. #$3( >Middle Scholasticism) ##%;-##3%.> +n <e( Catholic Encyclo#edia. Colume #<. @ew Por9) McGraw -ill. -an9ey) . 1. #$;( God in .imsel+: A"uinas1'octrine o+ God as E5#ounded in the Summa *heologiae. @ew Por9' 5!ford Aniversity 8ress. -araey) Martin. #$.# *he ,esuits in .istory. @ew Por9' The :merica 8ress. -orvath) Tiber. #.$$? >:pologetics as Dialogue in the estern Church from the Classical 8eriod of Scholasticism to the 2eginning of the 4eformationB/ Asian ,ournal o+ *heology .'#&3-3#. +gnatius of =oyola. #$$< *he S#iritual E5ercises o+ St. Ignatious. Trans) and commentary George 6. Ganss. St. 6ouis: *he Institute o+ ,esuit Sources. #$(? *he Constitutions o+ the Society o+ ,esus. Trans George 6. Ganss. St. =ouis' The +nstitute of 1esuit Sources. =aCugna) Catherine M. #$$# God /or >s! San Francisco) -arperSanFrancisco. #$;% >The 4elational God' :7uinas and 2eyondB/ *heological Studies =eclerc7) 1ean. #$3? *he 6ove o+ 6earning and the 'esire +or God. Trans. Catherine 1Clisrashi. @ew Por9' Fordham Aniversity 8ress. =onergan) 2ernard. #$(< Method In *heology. @ew Por9' -erder and -erder. =ope0) Donald and Steven 4oc9efeller "eds.*. #$;( *he Christ and the ;odhisattva. :lbany) @ew Por9' State Aniversity of @ew Por9 8ress. C:T-5=+C :@D DG6 =AGS 8: SC-5=:ST+C+SM ;$ =ubac) -enri De. #$%< 6a Recontre du ;ouddhisme et de 9)ccident. 8aris' :ubier. =uca) :ugusta. #$;( <el *ibet ignoto: la straordinario viaggio de I##olito 'esideri. 2ologna' 6M+. Masson-5ursel) 8. #$<? >=a Scholasti7ue etude de philosophic comparee.> Revue

Philoso#hi"ue de la /rance et de 9ttranger $?'#<&-#.#. 8ani99ar) 4aimundo. #$(& >Common 8atterns of 6astern and estern Scholasticism.> 'iogenes ;&'#?&-#&. 8erdue) Daniel. #$$< 'ebate in *ibetan ;uddhism. +thaca) @ew Por9' Snow =ion 8ublications. Sauch) G. Gispert. #$$? >Desideri and Tibet.> *he *ibet ,ournal #%B<'<$-&$. Schussler-Fioren0a) Francis. #$$# >Systematic Theology' Tas9 and MethodsB/+n Systematic *heology: Roman Catholic Pers#ectives vol. #'#-;(. 6d. Francis Schiissler-Fioren0a and 1ohn Galvin. Minneapolis' Fortress 8ress. Sherbume) 4ichard. #$;$ >: Christian 2uddhist DialogueU Some @otes on Desiderfs Tibetan Manuscripts.> +n Re+lections on *ibetan Culture: Essays in Memory o+ *urrel 9! :ylie! <$;-$$. 6d. 4ichard Sherburne Q =awrence 6pstein. =ampeter) AK' The 6dwin Mellen 8ress. Snellgrove) David and -ugh 4ichardson. #$;3 A Cultural .istory o+ *ibet 2oston' Shambhala. Trentman) 1ohn :. #$;< >Scholasticism in the Seventeenth Century.> +n *he Cambridge .istory o+ 6ater Medieval Philoso#hy! ;<<-<(. 6d. @orman Kret0man) :nthony Kenny) Q 1an 8inboy. Cambridge' Cambridge Aniversity 8ress. Callet) Marie-4aphael. #$;; >=ectio according to 4anee.> 6iturgy! )rder Cistercian o+ Strict )bservance <<B<'<#-(%. $? 45264T 6.G5SS Colloslada) 4iccardo. #$%. Storia del Collegio romana dal suo ini0io (DEED all so##re(ssione della Com#agna di Gesu (D44F . 4oma' apud :edes Aniversitas Gregorianae. eisheipl) 1. :. #$;( >Scholasticism) ##;.> +n *he Encyclo#edia o+ Religion! vol. #&. 6d. Mircea 6liade. @ew Por9' Macmillan. #$(. /riar '1A"uino. Garden City) @ew Por9' Doubleday. #$3( >Scholastic Method) ##%.-##%;.> <e( Catholic Encyclo#edia! vol. #<. @ew Por9' McGraw -ill. essels) Cornelius. #$<. Early ,esuit *ravellers in Central Asia: DAGF-D4HD. The -ague' Martinus -i,hoff. ulf) M. de. #$%3 Scholastic Philoso#hy. Trans. 8. Coffey. @ew Por9' Dover 8ublications. #$%& Philoso#hy and Civili0ation o+ the Middle Ages. @ew Por9'

Dover 8ublications.