Tsong kha pa blo bzang grags pa (1357–1419) asserts that an understanding of the selflessness of persons (gang zag gi bdag med) should precede the realization of the selflessness of dharmas(chos kyi bdag med). This study examines the reason for Tsong kha pa’s emphasis on the significance of this sequence in terms of the structure of these two selflessness. In Mahayana Buddhism, selflessness is divided into the selflessness of persons and that of dharmas. Having an understanding of the selflessness of persons is important to eliminate the obstruction of afflictions (nyon sgrib) and attain liberation. In contrast, a realization of the selflessness of dharmas eliminates the obstruction to essential realization (shes sgrib). However, Candrakırti (ca. 7th century) disagrees with this traditional Mahayana view of selflessness. According to him, to eliminate the obstruction of afflictions, it is necessary to understand not only the selflessness of persons but also that of dharmas. In this case, the question arises as to which type of selflessness should be understood first to eliminate the obstruction of afflictions. Candrakırti does not provide a clear answer to this question. Tsong kha pa, following the thought of Candrakırti, discusses this topic in the Lam rim chen mo and the Lam rim chung ngu. According to previous studies, he asserts that one should consider the selflessness of persons before that of dharmas. Why does Tsong kha pa establish such a sequence for understanding these two types of selflessness? This question can be related to the method of defining such selflessness. According to Tsong kha pa, the selflessness of persons indicates that “a person is not what is established by one’s own nature (rang gi ngo bos grub pa),” whereas the selflessness of dharmas suggests that “the dharma is not what is established by its own nature.” In these expression, “persons” and “dharmas” are the basis of negation (dgag gzhi), and “what is established by own nature” refers to the object of negation (dgag bya). In other words, although both types of selflessness have the same object of negation, the basis of negation should be distinguished. As to the reason why one should understand in the sequence from the selflessness of persons to that of dharmas, the above two works of Tsong kha pa explain in a different way. However, what is common to both works is that the only difference between the selflessness of persons and dharmas is the basis of negation. Meanwhile, the object of negation is the same, which is deeply related to the question as to which of the two types of selflessness should be understood first.
