ShAkya mchog ldan
< People(Redirected from Śākya Chokden)
10 Library Items
གླང་རི་བ་ཐུབ་བསྟན་སྦྱིན་པ། བདེ་གཤེགས་སྙིང་པོ་རིགས་ཀྱི་ཆོས་སྐོར། བོད་ཀྱི་གཙུག་ལག་གཅེས་བཏུས།༡༧ བོད་ཀྱི་གཙུག་ལག་ཞིབ་དཔྱོད་ཁང་།
Jinpa, Thupten. Treatises on the Buddha Nature. Tibetan Classics Series 17. New Delhi: Institute of Tibetan Classics, 2007.གླང་རི་བ་ཐུབ་བསྟན་སྦྱིན་པ། བདེ་གཤེགས་སྙིང་པོ་རིགས་ཀྱི་ཆོས་སྐོར། བོད་ཀྱི་གཙུག་ལག་གཅེས་བཏུས།༡༧ བོད་ཀྱི་གཙུག་ལག་ཞིབ་དཔྱོད་ཁང་། Jinpa, Thupten. Treatises on the Buddha Nature. Tibetan Classics Series 17. New Delhi: Institute of Tibetan Classics, 2007.;Bde gshegs snying po rigs kyi chos skor;Buddha-nature as Luminosity;Buddha-nature as Emptiness;Doctrine;History;History of buddha-nature in Tibet;Sakya;Geluk;Kagyu;Nyingma;Butön Rinchen Drup;བུ་སྟོན་རིན་ཆེན་གྲུབ་;bu ston rin chen grub;bu ston kha che;bu ston thams cad mkhyen pa;Buton Khache;Butön Tamche Khyenpa;Rinchen Drub; Third Karmapa Rangjung Dorje;རང་བྱུང་རྡོ་རྗེ་;rang byung rdo rje;karma pa gsum pa;ཀརྨ་པ་གསུམ་པ་;Karmapa, 3rd;Fifteenth Karmapa Khakhyab Dorje;མཁའ་ཁྱབ་རྡོ་རྗེ་;mkha' khyab rdo rje;karma pa bco lnga pa;don grub rdo rje;ཀརྨ་པ་བཅོ་ལྔ་པ་;དོན་གྲུབ་རྡོ་རྗེ་;Karmapa, 15th;Rongtön Sheja Kunrik;རོང་སྟོན་ཤེས་བྱ་ཀུན་རིག་;rong ston shes bya kun rig;shAkya rgyal mtshan;smra ba'i seng+ge;shes bya kun gzigs;rong TI ka pa;shes rab 'od zer;ཤཱཀྱ་རྒྱལ་མཚན་;སྨྲ་བའི་སེངྒེ་;ཤེས་བྱ་ཀུན་གཟིགས་;རོང་ཊཱི་ཀ་པ་;ཤེས་རབ་འོད་ཟེར་;Rongtön Shéja Günsi;Rongton Sheja Kunrig;Śākya Chokden;ཤཱཀྱ་མཆོག་ལྡན་;shAkya mchog ldan;Sera Jetsun Chokyi Gyaltsen;སེ་ར་རྗེ་བཙུན་ཆོས་ཀྱི་རྒྱལ་མཚན་;se ra rje btsun chos kyi rgyal mtshan;chos kyi rgyal mtshan;se ra rje btsun pa chos kyi rgyal mtshan;se ra khri rabs 12;ser byes mkhan rabs 05;ཆོས་ཀྱི་རྒྱལ་མཚན་;སེ་ར་རྗེ་བཙུན་པ་ཆོས་ཀྱི་རྒྱལ་མཚན་;སེ་ར་ཁྲི་རབས་༡༢;སེར་བྱེས་མཁན་རབས་༠༥;Sera Jetsun Chokyi Gyal Tsan;Sera Jetsün Chökyi Gyäl Tsän;Mipam Gyatso;མི་ཕམ་རྒྱ་མཚོ་;mi pham rgya mtsho;mi pham 'jam dbyangs rnam rgyal rgya mtsho;'jam dpal dgyes pa'i rdo rje;'ju mi pham;མི་ཕམ་འཇམ་དབྱངས་རྣམ་རྒྱལ་རྒྱ་མཚོ་;འཇམ་དཔལ་དགྱེས་པའི་རྡོ་རྗེ་;འཇུ་མི་ཕམ་;mipham;bde gshegs snying po rigs kyi chos skor
This dissertation is a study of the process through which Tibetan Buddhist philosophy, by synthesizing doctrines and texts into consistent models, integrates views of reality within doctrinal and soteriological systems. It consists of an analysis of the most fundamental doctrinal tension found in the Tibetan tradition, namely the apparent inconsistency of doctrines belonging to the negative Mādhyamika and to the more affirmative Yogācāra trends of Mahāyāna Buddhism. As a case study aiming to provide a first systematic examination of that problematic, the dissertation surveys and analyzes Tibetan interpretation of the set of texts referred to as the Five Treatises of Maitreya (byams chos sde lnga), and at the way those interpretations deal with the doctrinal tensions found in that set of text. In addition to providing a recension of major interpretations of the Five Treatises developed between 1100 and 1500, a detailed account is given of the model of interpretation given by gSer mdog Paṇ chen Śākya mchog ldan, a famous teacher of the Sa skya school of Tibetan Buddhism. When confronted with the features of other interpretations, Śākya mchog ldan's interpretation of the Five Treatises, which proceeds primarily by allowing a plurality of views to be maintained even at the level of definitive meaning, provides us with a new insight in the Tibetan philosophical tradition: the most fundamental dimension of philosophical reconciliation of doctrinal views, especially of the kind found in the Five Treatises, can be described as pertaining to textual hermeneutics. Moreover, Śākya mchog ldan's contribution to that domain of Buddhist thought, by placing hermeneutics at the very centre of his system of Buddhist doctrine and practice, suggests that hermeneutics is a fundamental category of all Buddhist philosophical debates, and that it should be part of any attempt to understand the Tibetan philosophical tradition.
Among the distinctive aspects of Shakya Chokden s oeuvre are his several contributions to the history of Buddhist thought. Historical writing in Tibet (chapter 11) was interested above all in important political or religious events, and the lives of the major actors. Doctrinal or intellectual history was generally ignored, no doubt in part be- cause the outlook fostered in the monastic colleges was one of perennialism: the truths revealed in the Buddha s teaching were eternal, and thus exempt from the process of historical change. Knowledgeable scholars were, of course, aware that commentarial and interpretive traditions did have a history of sorts, but this awareness tended to be expressed in their own commentarial notes, not in dedicated doctrinal histories. In Shakya Chokden's writings, however, we find sustained historical essays on Indian and Tibetan traditions of logic and epistemology, and of the Madhyamaka philosophy inspired by Nāgārjuna. The selections given here are drawn from his work on the latter, and may serve as an introductory guide to the philosophical writings included in the remainder of this chapter.
Shakya Chokden's discussion turns on the distinction made by Tibetan thinkers between two types of argument, termed in the present translation "autonomous reason” and "consequence.” The first refers to the method of using positive proof to demonstrate the truth or falsehood of a given proposition. The second, by contrast, only seeks to undermine the propositions advanced by a (real or presumed) opponent by drawing out their untenable consequences, and so is similar to reductio ad absurdum, or “indirect Proof,” in Western systems of logic. This distinction was often considered by Tibetans to he the basis for designating two distinct schools of Madhyamaka philosophy, Svātantrika (Autonomous Reasoning) and Prāsańgika (Consequentialist). MTK (Komarovski, Sources of Tibetan Tradition, 373)
On the topic of this person
This dissertation is a study of the process through which Tibetan Buddhist philosophy, by synthesizing doctrines and texts into consistent models, integrates views of reality within doctrinal and soteriological systems. It consists of an analysis of the most fundamental doctrinal tension found in the Tibetan tradition, namely the apparent inconsistency of doctrines belonging to the negative Mādhyamika and to the more affirmative Yogācāra trends of Mahāyāna Buddhism. As a case study aiming to provide a first systematic examination of that problematic, the dissertation surveys and analyzes Tibetan interpretation of the set of texts referred to as the Five Treatises of Maitreya (byams chos sde lnga), and at the way those interpretations deal with the doctrinal tensions found in that set of text. In addition to providing a recension of major interpretations of the Five Treatises developed between 1100 and 1500, a detailed account is given of the model of interpretation given by gSer mdog Paṇ chen Śākya mchog ldan, a famous teacher of the Sa skya school of Tibetan Buddhism. When confronted with the features of other interpretations, Śākya mchog ldan's interpretation of the Five Treatises, which proceeds primarily by allowing a plurality of views to be maintained even at the level of definitive meaning, provides us with a new insight in the Tibetan philosophical tradition: the most fundamental dimension of philosophical reconciliation of doctrinal views, especially of the kind found in the Five Treatises, can be described as pertaining to textual hermeneutics. Moreover, Śākya mchog ldan's contribution to that domain of Buddhist thought, by placing hermeneutics at the very centre of his system of Buddhist doctrine and practice, suggests that hermeneutics is a fundamental category of all Buddhist philosophical debates, and that it should be part of any attempt to understand the Tibetan philosophical tradition.
Among the distinctive aspects of Shakya Chokden s oeuvre are his several contributions to the history of Buddhist thought. Historical writing in Tibet (chapter 11) was interested above all in important political or religious events, and the lives of the major actors. Doctrinal or intellectual history was generally ignored, no doubt in part be- cause the outlook fostered in the monastic colleges was one of perennialism: the truths revealed in the Buddha s teaching were eternal, and thus exempt from the process of historical change. Knowledgeable scholars were, of course, aware that commentarial and interpretive traditions did have a history of sorts, but this awareness tended to be expressed in their own commentarial notes, not in dedicated doctrinal histories. In Shakya Chokden's writings, however, we find sustained historical essays on Indian and Tibetan traditions of logic and epistemology, and of the Madhyamaka philosophy inspired by Nāgārjuna. The selections given here are drawn from his work on the latter, and may serve as an introductory guide to the philosophical writings included in the remainder of this chapter.
Shakya Chokden's discussion turns on the distinction made by Tibetan thinkers between two types of argument, termed in the present translation "autonomous reason” and "consequence.” The first refers to the method of using positive proof to demonstrate the truth or falsehood of a given proposition. The second, by contrast, only seeks to undermine the propositions advanced by a (real or presumed) opponent by drawing out their untenable consequences, and so is similar to reductio ad absurdum, or “indirect Proof,” in Western systems of logic. This distinction was often considered by Tibetans to he the basis for designating two distinct schools of Madhyamaka philosophy, Svātantrika (Autonomous Reasoning) and Prāsańgika (Consequentialist). MTK (Komarovski, Sources of Tibetan Tradition, 373)
i. The Wish-fulfilling Meru: A Discourse Explaining the Origination of Madhyamaka (dBu-ma'i byung-tshul rnam-par bshad-pa'i gtam yid-bzhin lhun-po),
ii. Drop of Nectar of Definitive Meaning: Entering the Gate to the Essential points of the Two Truth[s] (bDen-pa gnyis-kyi gnas-la 'jug-pa nges-don bdud-rtsi thigs-pa), and
iii. Great Ship of Discrimination that sails into the Ocean of definitive meaning: A Treatise Differentiating the Tenets of Prasañgika and Svatântrika Madhyamaka (sBu-ma thal-rang gi grub-mtha'i rnam-par dbye-ba'i bstan-bcos nges-don gyi rgya-mtshor 'jug-pa'i rnam-dpyod kyi gru-chen).
The Wish-fulfilling Meru attempts in presenting in a lucid and concise way the Madhyamaka view including the Tantrik-madhyamaka, and its spread in India and Tibet. Drop of Definitive Meaning, through its brief yet succinct explanation guides us in entering the spheres of definitive meaning by means of understanding the two truth[s]—the conventional truth and the ultimate truth. Great Ship of Discrimination that sails into the Ocean of definitive meaning extensively explains the divergence of Madhyamaka into Svatântrika and Prasañgika Madhyamaka, their philosophical views, and their interpretation of various concepts. In all, this anthology gives a general presentation of Madhyamaka schools and their views according to the great Sakyapa master. (Source: back cover)Tibet. Particularly, it relates to Tibetan commentary on Abhisamayālaṃkāra (AA) I:39, in which it is taught that the foundation (pratiṣṭhā) for religious practice is the dharmadhātu and that since the dharmadhātu is undifferentiated (asaṃbhedā), there are ultimately no distinct gotras corresponding to the three vehicles. This teaching is usually interpreted as a Mādhyamaka justification for one final vehicle, as opposed to the three-vehicle theory, attributed to Cittamātra/Vijñaptimātratā, and which is closely related to the doctrine of three gotras found in sutras such as Saṃdhinirmocana and Laṅkāvatāra and śāstras such as Mahāyānasūtrālaṃkāra. However, there are some Tibetan writers outside the influential Gelug tradition who see the equation of gotra with dharmadhātu as an essentially Yogācāra doctrine. This alternative viewpoint implies that Yogācāra and Cittamātra are not, as is commonly held to be the case, the same thing and brings to the fore the question of whether Yogācāra is better understood as a tradition that transcends traditional doxographic categories. Through an analysis of Śākya-mchog-ldan’s explanation of AA I:39, which includes a differentiation of two other terms that are also often held to be synonymous, namely gotra and buddha-essense (or tathāgatagarbha), I aim to highlight some of the ways in which his ‘reformulation’ of Yogācāra implies a reformulation of certain Cittamātra doctrines. Finally, I conclude the paper with a brief discussion on the extent to which doxographical discourse
both restricts and allows for the formulation of an individual point of view. (Gilks, introduction, 1)Philosophical positions of this person
Though his unique presentation allows for both definitive and provisional versions of buddha-nature. The distinction between the two depends on whether there is direct experience of the unstained buddha-nature and its corresponding qualities, or, alternatively whether this nature is latently present in an obscured form.
All beings possess a "nominal" buddha-nature as is taught in the second-wheel teachings, while only bodhisattvas on the first bhumi and up (i.e. Noble Bodhisattvas) possess the "actual" buddha-nature as it was taught in the third-wheel teachings. (see note from Brunnhölzl below)
- "Though everyone including ordinary beings possesses wisdom in a nonmanifest manner, only bodhisattvas on the first bhūmi onward manifest this wisdom as the direct realization of ultimate reality. This means that only such bodhisattvas possess the actual tathāgata heart in that they see at least certain degrees of purification of the stains that cover the tathāgata heart as well as its inseparability from certain degrees of buddha qualities. Ordinary beings thus do not possess this actual tathāgata heart at all, while buddhas possess it in its completeness. In other words, the close connection between seeing the tathāgata heart free from adventitious stains and possessing it, as well as between becoming free from adventitious stains and “attaining” the qualities of a buddha, is a prominent feature of Śākya Chogden’s interpretation of tathāgatagarbha." Brunnhölzl, K., When the Clouds Part, p. 78.
- See also Wangchuk, Tsering, The Uttaratantra in the Land of Snows, p. 114.
He distinguishes between different types of buddha-nature taught in the second and third wheels, though the third is the more definitive and represents the "actual" tathāgatagarbha.
- "In sum, Śākya Chogden distinguishes three kinds of tathāgata hearts: (1) the nominal tathāgata heart that is the mere natural purity (as taught in the second dharma wheel and its Madhyamaka commentaries), (2) the actual tathāgata heart that is the purity of adventitious stains and represents the relative tathāgata heart (as taught in the third dharma wheel and the Nonaspectarian system of Maitreya and Asaṅga, as well as in the teachings of expedient meaning in the second dharma wheel as these are interpreted by the third dharma wheel), and (3) the actual tathāgata heart that is the natural purity that is inseparable from all buddha qualities and represents the ultimate tathāgata heart (as taught in the system of Maitreya and Asaṅga and in the third dharma wheel)." Brunnhölzl, K., When the Clouds Part, p. 78.
- See also Wangchuk, Tsering, The Uttaratantra in the Land of Snows, p. 115.
Affiliations & relations
- Sakya · religious affiliation
- Sangpu Neutok · primary professional affiliation
- rong ston shes bya kun rig · teacher
- don yod dpal ba · teacher
- Ngor mkhan chen, 1st · teacher
- spyang lung chos sdings gzhon nu blo gros · teacher