dharmakāya

From Buddha-Nature

< Key Terms(Redirected from Dharmakāya)

Glossarydharmakāya

Sanskrit Noun

dharmakāya

true being
धर्मकाय
ཆོས་སྐུ་
法身

Basic Meaning

"Truth body" or "true being" — One of the three bodies of a buddha. In Mahāyāna Buddhism, it often refers to a kind of fundamental principle or the true nature of reality itself.

Has the Sense of

Although this term is sometimes rendered into English as “truth body,” dharmakāya seems to have originally been meant to refer to the entire corpus (kāya) of the Buddha’s transcendent qualities (dharma). (The Princeton Dictionary of Buddhism, p. 242)

On this topic
PhD Diss
Chen, Shu-hui: Affirmation in Negation: A Study of the Tathāgatagarbha Theory in the Light of the Bodhisattva Practices
The Tathāgatagarbha theory, also known as the Buddha-nature theory, is one of the most influential Mahāyāna doctrines in the East Asian Buddhism. In 1989, it was severely criticized by some Japanese scholars, namely, Shiro Matsumoto and Noriaki Hakamaya, for being contradictory to the Buddha's teaching of non-self (anātman) and accused of being a non-Buddhist theory in disguise. The purpose of this study is to refute such an accusation and to demonstrate the relationship between this theory and the Bodhisattva practices which are the very core of the Mahāyāna Buddhism.
      This dissertation begins with definitions of the term "tathāgatagarbha" and some of its synonyms which are followed by a brief review of the historical development of the Tathāgatagarbha theory from India to China. With these as the background knowledge, it is easier to point out the fallacies of the two Japanese scholars' criticism on this theory. A key issue in their criticism is that they viewed the Tathāgatagarbha theory as the ātman of the Upaniṣads in disguise. It is therefore necessary to discuss not only the distinction between the ātman mentioned in the Tathāgatagarbha theory and that in the Upaniṣads but also the controversy over the issue of ātman versus anātman among the Buddhist scholars.
      In the discussion to clarify the issue of ātman in the Tathāgatagarbha theory, it is demonstrated that the ātman in the Tathāgatagarbha theory is not only uncontradictory to the doctrine of anātman in Buddhism but very important to the Bodhisattva practices in the Mahāyāna Buddhism. It functions as a unity for the Bodhisattvas to voluntarily return to the world of saṃsāra again and again. Furthermore, the purport of the entire theory, that all sentient beings are endowed with the essence of the Buddha, supports various Bodhisattva practices such as the aspiration to save all beings in the world, the six perfections, etc. In a word, the Tathāgatagarbha theory is an excellent representative of the soteriology of the Mahāyāna Buddhism. Included in the end of this dissertation is an annotated translation of the Tathāgatagarbha-sūtra. (Source Accessed May 26, 2020)
Chen, Shu-hui Jennifer. "Affirmation in Negation: A Study of the Tathāgatagarbha Theory in the Light of the Bodhisattva Practices." PhD diss., University of Wisconsin-Madison, 1998.
Book
Buddha Nature (Sallie King)
This volume presents the first book-length study in English of the concept of Buddha nature as discussed in the Buddha Nature Treatise (Fo Xing Lun), attributed to Vasubandhu and translated into Chinese by Paramartha in the sixth century. The author provides a detailed discussion of one of the most important concepts in East Asian Buddhism, a topic little addressed in Western studies of Buddhism until now, and places the Buddha nature concept in the context of Buddhist intellectual history. King then carefully explains the traditional Buddhist language in the text, and embeds Buddha nature in a family of concepts and values which as a group are foundational to the development of the major indigenous schools of Chinese Buddhism.
      In addition, she refutes the accusations that the idea of Buddha nature introduces a crypto-Atman into Buddhist thought, and that it represents a form of monism akin to the Brahmanism of the Upanisads. In doing this, King defends Buddha nature in terms of purely Buddhist philosophical principles. Finally, the author engages the Buddha nature concept in dialogue with Western philosophy by asking what it teaches us about what a human being, or person, is. (Source: back cover)
King, Sallie B. Buddha Nature. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press, 1991.
Book
Buddha Nature (Shamar)
14th Shamar Rinpoche's teachings on the Uttaratantra using the 3rd Karmapa's text, Revealing Buddha Nature.
Draszczyk, Martina, trans. Buddha Nature: Our Potential for Wisdom, Compassion, and Happiness. By Shamar Rinpoche. Lexington, VA: Bird of Paradise Press, 2019.
Article
Buddha Nature and the Omniscient Mind
Zopa, Thubten. "Buddha Nature and the Omniscient Mind." Lecture 3, Section One of the Fourteenth Kopan Course at Kopan Monastery, Nepal, 1981. Lama Yeshe Wisdom Archive, 2020. https://www.lamayeshe.com/article/buddha-nature-and-omniscient-mind.
Zopa, Thubten. "Buddha Nature and the Omniscient Mind." Lecture 3, Section One of the Fourteenth Kopan Course at Kopan Monastery, Nepal, 1981. Lama Yeshe Wisdom Archive, 2020. https://www.lamayeshe.com/article/buddha-nature-and-omniscient-mind.
Video
Casey Kemp at the 2019 Tathāgatagarbha Symposium
Casey Kemp presents an overview and analysis of Jigten Gonpo’s explanation of luminosity as outlined in his text 'Od gsal rnam lnga gcig tu bsre ba'i man ngag, a pith instruction on merging (bsre ba).
Kemp, Casey. "The Luminous Basis for Buddhahood: ’Jig rten mgon po’s Pith Instructions for Merging the Nature of Mind with the Dharmakāya." Paper presented at the University of Vienna Symposium, Tathāgatagarbha Across Asia, Vienna, Austria, July 2019. Video, 41:36. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O7VQkhK1CE0.
Video
Christopher V. Jones at the 2019 Tathāgatagarbha Symposium
Christopher Jones discusses the development of the concept of buddha-nature in the first five hundred years of the Common Era. He postulates that the most likely trajectory of buddha-nature thought in India entailed a reimagining of the expression tathāgatagarbha away from its contentious "ātmavādin" origins.
Jones, Christopher V. "Selfhood, Secrecy, Singularity: Reassessing the Early Life of the Tathāgatagarbha in India." Paper presented at the University of Vienna Symposium, Tathāgatagarbha Across Asia, Vienna, Austria, July 2019. Video, 45:01. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ARzGpIOwFYc.
Book
Collected Papers on the Tathāgatagarbha Doctrine
The volume brings together a selection of the late author's previously published papers written in English (and one in German). Their subject matter relates by and large to the tathāgatagarbha theory or the idea of Buddhanature, which have been the main subjects of his research over the years.
      In part 1 he has singled out those scriptures that use the term tathāgatagarbha as their principal term and identified three scriptures—Tathāgatagarbha-sūtra, Anūnatvāpurṇatvanirdeśa, and Śrīmālādevīnirdeśa—as the basis for the formation of the tathāgatagarbha theory. Next, he has placed the Mahāyāna Mahāparinirvāṇa-sūtra, which uses the term buddhadhātu for the first time as a synonym of tathāgatagarbha, and associated scriptures in a second group, while in the third group we have the Laṅkāvatāra-sūtra and so on, in which the concept of tathāgatagarbha is identified with ālayavijñana, the basic concept of the Vijñānavāda.
      In part 2, he has dealt with the prehistory of the tathāgatagarbha theory in Mahāyāna scriptures that use terms synonymous with tathāgatagarbha, such as gotra and dhātu, tathāgatagotra, tathāgatotpattisambhava, āryavaṃsa, buddhaputra, dharmadhātu and dharmakāya, cittaprakṛti, and so on. The main points made in this work are discussed in the papers that have now been brought together in the present volume.
      This volume has for convenience' sake been divided into seven parts according to subject matter. Part 1 presents a textual study, namely, a critical edition of chapter 6 of the Laṅkāvatāra. Part 2 deals with subjects concerning scriptures such as the Laṅkāvatāra, part 3 with technical terms and basic concepts of the tathāgatagarbha theory, part 4 with tathāgatagarbha doctrine in general, and part 5 with Japanese Buddhism and Buddhism in East Asia (on the basis of scriptures translated into Chinese). Part 6 presents a historical survey of Japanese scholarship on Buddhism, and part 7 consists of several book reviews. (Source: Motilal Banarsidass)
Takasaki, Jikido. Collected Papers on the Tathāgatagarbha Doctrine. Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass, 2014.
Video
David Higgins at the 2019 Tathāgatagarbha Symposium
David Higgins explores the Eighth Karmapa Mikyö Dorje’s (1507–1554) prolific writings on tathāgatagarbha, which contain several extended discussions on the topic of how buddha-nature relates to different conceptions of selfhood.
Higgins, David. "Buddha-Nature and Selfhood." Paper presented at the University of Vienna Symposium, Tathāgatagarbha Across Asia, Vienna, Austria, July 2019. Video, 41:28. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LHzI1PxptpI.
Video
Douglas Duckworth at the 2019 Tathāgatagarbha Symposium
Douglas Duckworth presents how buddha-nature is interpreted by Mipam Gyatso (1846–1912). He shows that while Mipam accepts that the qualities of the buddha are primordially present, unconditioned, and not newly produced, they are also empty of inherent existence.
Duckworth, Douglas. "Sentient Beings Within: Buddha-Nature and the Great Perfection." Paper presented at the University of Vienna Symposium, Tathāgatagarbha Across Asia, Vienna, Austria, July 2019. Video, 42:46. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=slBWdnUfS8w.
Video
Essence of Buddha-Nature by B. Alan Wallace
In this video segment B. Alan Wallace talks about buddha-nature and the concept of tathāgatagarbha. This talk was part of a Spring 8-week retreat on Shamatha, Vipashyana, and Mahamudra, based upon two texts: Panchen Lozang Chökyi Gyaltsen’s Highway of the Jinas: A Root Text on the Precious Geluk-Kagyü Mahamudra Tradition, and Karma Chagmé’s Naked Awareness: Practical Teachings on the Union. (Source Accessed Nov 17, 2020)
Wallace, B. Alan. "Essence of Buddha-Nature." Produced by Jeffrey Khoo, Claudio Li Caizi, Brenton Palmer-Angell, and Diogo Rolo. Filmed during a Spring eight-week retreat on Shamatha, Vipashyana, and Mahamudra held April–May 2016 at Lama Tsongkhapa Institute, Pomaia, Italy. Video, 27:53. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vHMFbgfX6ys.
Article
Is the Dharma-kāya the Real "Phantom Body" of the Buddha?
The Trikāya doctrine of Buddhism, i.e., the doctrine that the Buddha has three "bodies," is notorious for its complexities. Attributed to the Yogācāra, but regarded as typical of the Mahāyāna in general, it is customarily cited in books on Buddhism in terms of the triad dharma-kāya, saṃbhoga-kāya (or saṃbhogika-kāya) and nirmāṇa-kāya (or nairmāṇika-kāya). Taking these in ascending order of abstraction, the nirmāṇa-kāya, usually translated "apparitional body," "phantom body," "transformation body," etc., is the physical manifestation of Buddhahood, the ordinary perishable human form, as exemplified by the "historical Buddha," Siddhartha Gautama. The saṃbhoga-kāya ("body of bliss," "reward body," "enjoyment body," etc.) is a more exalted and splendid manifestation of the enlightened personality, still in the realm of form, but visible only to bodhisattvas, those of advanced spiritual capabilities. By contrast, the dharma-kāya ("Dharma-body," "Body of Truth," "Cosmic Body," "Absolute Body," etc.) is both formless and imperishable, representing the identification of the Buddha with the truth which he revealed, or with reality itself. As such the dharma-kāya is often linked with various terms for reality, such as dharmatā, dharma-dhātu, and so on, and has even been regarded as a kind of Buddhist absolute, or at least at one with it.'"`UNIQ--ref-000016EE-QINU`"' In this light the dharma-kāya is understood as the primal "source" or "ground" from which the other two types of bodies emanate.'"`UNIQ--ref-000016EF-QINU`"' While many scholars are content to describe this in purely abstract terms, others impute personal characteristics to it;'"`UNIQ--ref-000016F0-QINU`"' and at least one writer has gone so far as to compare it to the Christian idea of Godhead.'"`UNIQ--ref-000016F1-QINU`"'
      As a summary of the Trikāya doctrine this is, of course, oversimplified. We are dealing here with a complex theory which underwent many accretions and refinements, as Buddhists continued down through the centuries to speculate on the nature of Buddhahood, on the nature of reality, and on the relationship between them.'"`UNIQ--ref-000016F2-QINU`"' It is hardly surprising, then, that attempts to plot the course of such arcane speculations have not always been entirely successful in reaching a clear consensus, although the arguments advanced, even in recent writing on the subject, do tend to follow similar lines. A good example of this is the authoritative treatment by Nagao, "On the Theory of Buddha-body (Buddha-kāya)," first published in English in 1973.'"`UNIQ--ref-000016F3-QINU`"' Generally Nagao distinguishes three phases: an initial one-body theory, a two-body theory, and the three-body theory elaborated by the Yogācāras. According to him (p. 104), the two-body theory (i.e., rūpa-kāya and dharma-kāya) "became stabilized in a variety of earlier sūtras,'"`UNIQ--ref-000016F4-QINU`"' and in early Mahāyāna sūtras, the Prajñāpāramitā, the Saddharmapuṇḍarīka, and so forth. The rūpa-kāya is the Buddha seen in a human body, while the dharma-kāya is the Buddha's personality seen in the dharma or dharma-nature." Elsewhere (pp. 106–7) Nagao states that the two-body theory was the one held "until the time of the Prajñāpāramitā Sūtra and the time of Nāgārjuna," even though the raw materials for the third body, the saṃbhoga-kāya, were also to hand before the time of Asaṅga and Vasubandhu, as a consequence of the bodhisattva-conccpt and the idea that a bodhisattva's performance of meritorious actions produced a body which was their manifest "reward." Nagao's article contains many valuable observations, but, as we shall see, some of its assertions are rather too imprecise, both chronologically and philosophically, to be of much use in unravelling the early development of the doctrine at issue. Another recent treatment of the subject by Makransky (1989) also describes certain features of the putative earlier two-body theory before the Yogācāras remodelled it (see esp. pp. 51–53), and distinguishes it sharply from the previous Mainstream'"`UNIQ--ref-000016F5-QINU`"' (in this case, Sarvāstivādin) formulations. This analysis, too, is open to question in certain respects, as I shall show. In these and other articles on the subject'"`UNIQ--ref-000016F6-QINU`"' there is a general tendency to postulate a one-body/two-body/three-body progression, in terms of which a single personality is divided into a physical and a "spiritual" body, and then the physical body is further split in two, yielding the final complement of three. Some writers, however, point to the existence of three bodies even in the Pali sources, what one scholar has called the "primitive triad," i.e., pūti- or cātur-mahābhūtika-kāya, mano-maya-kāya, and dhamma-kāya.'"`UNIQ--ref-000016F7-QINU`"' The first is the corruptible physical body formed out of the four elements, while the second is the mind-made body with which the Buddha visits the celestial realms (believed by some to be a forerunner of the saṃbhoga-kāya); the third is the so-called "Dhamma-body." Now, although both these ways of approaching the subject—the assumption of a linear process, and the belief that the Pāli Canon contains an embryonic Trikāya schema—raise certain difficulties, I do not propose in this paper to discuss the evolution of the Trikāya theory in its entirety, since that would be a mammoth undertaking. What I wish to do is address one aspect of it only, viz., the early development of the idea of dharma-kāya, in the hope that clarifying this will open the way to a better understanding of Mahāyāna buddhology as a whole. (Harrison, introduction, 44–46)

Read more here . . .
Harrison, Paul. "Is the Dharma-kāya the Real 'Phantom Body' of the Buddha?" Journal of the International Association of Buddhist Studies 15, no. 1 (1992): 44–94. https://journals.ub.uni-heidelberg.de/index.php/jiabs/article/view/8792/2699.
Video
Karmapa on the Nature of Mind
[START at 6 min 45 secs]. On the morning of January 3, 2013, the Gyalwang Karmapa gave an impromptu teaching on the nature of mind to a large group of international students gathered at the Root Institute for Wisdom Culture, Bodhgaya. Teaching in a mixture of Tibetan and English, he began the session by inviting questions from the students gathered. The first question was soon put forward: How do we experience Buddha-nature on a practical level? "I thought that if you asked me questions it would make it easier for me," he joked in English in response to the depth of the question, adding, "But this question makes it more complicated for me!"

As the laughter died down, the Gyalwang Karmapa delivered a profound and reasoned teaching on Buddha-nature and the nature of mind. "All sentient beings are endowed with the potential for complete Buddhahood," he began.

They are inherently Buddhas, and inherently that Buddha-nature is completely free of any stains -- it is stainless, and perfect. Yet, at the level of relative or immediate experience, our experience is not this way. Our experience is that this perfectly pure Buddha-nature is veiled by our confused outlook.

Shifting the teaching to a deeper level, the Gyalwang Karmapa then described the dharmakaya, or the Buddha's enlightened mind. "Lord Gampopa said that the nature of thoughts is dharmakaya," he explained.

Thoughts and dharmakaya are inseparable. We have this dualistic approach of seeing dharmakaya as pure and thoughts as impure, but we need to understand the inseparability of thoughts and dharmakaya.

The Gyalwang Karmapa spoke directly in English as he continued:

Every moment that we have thought, every moment that thought arises, we have the opportunity to recognize the nature of thought as emptiness or dharmakaya, whatever you want to call it. Thought and the emptiness of its nature are inseparable. We can't make them separate; there's no separation. Because thought itself is emptiness that means actually in everyday life we have lots of opportunity to recognize and realize the nature of thought, or nature of emptiness, or dharmakaya. But we just follow the appearances, the illusions -- we don't look deeper.

The Gyalwang Karmapa then responded to several more questions from the audience, teaching briefly on the progressive views of emptiness within Tibetan Buddhism which culminate in the final Madhyamaka view. The final questioner echoed the thoughts of many gathered when she asked the Gyalwang Karmapa how his students could help and support him. "I feel energized and inspired by all the love and the support that I receive from all of you. That really is sufficient. I don't need anything more than your love and support," he replied, to resounding applause.

Continuing an annual tradition, the teaching took place at the request of the Root Institute for Wisdom Culture. The Gyalwang Karmapa taught to an overflowing gompa, with hundreds of students spilling out into the surrounding balconies and gardens. In addition to mostly international students, the audience also included local Indian children from the Root Institute's school.
Karmapa, 17th. "The Nature of Mind: A Teaching at the Root Institute." Filmed January 3, 2013 in Bodhgaya, India. Produced by Tsurphu Labrang Media. Video, 1:04:37. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x_uccsZNg5g.
Video
Khenpo Tamphel at the 2019 Tathāgatagarbha Symposium
Drawing on the text entitled A Mahāmudrā Investigation into Confusion: An Instruction for Identifying the Process of Confusion by Jikten Sumgon, Khenpo Tamphel explains how, according to this text, sentient beings and buddhas are related, how confusion arises that leads to saṃsāra, and how recognition of the true nature of sentient beings is the way to enlightenment.
Tamphel, Khenpo Könchok. "The Difference Between a Sentient Being and a Buddha: 'Jig rten gsum mgon’s Instruction on the Process of Confusion." Paper presented at the University of Vienna Symposium, Tathāgatagarbha Across Asia, Vienna, Austria, July 2019. Video, 47:23. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3GbYgx3ozDM.
Book
Mahāmudrā and the Middle Way
This two-volume publication explores the complex philosophy of Mahāmudrā that developed in Tibetan Dwags po Bka’ brgyud traditions between the 15th and 16th centuries CE. It examines the attempts to articulate and defend Bka’ brgyud views and practices by four leading post-classical thinkers: (1) Shākya mchog ldan (1423‒1507), a celebrated yet controversial Sa skya scholar who developed a strong affiliation with the Karma Bka’ brgyud Mahāmudrā tradition in the last half of his life, (2) Karma phrin las Phyogs las rnam rgyal (1456‒1539), a renowned Karma Bka’ brgyud scholar-yogin and tutor to the Eighth Karma pa, (3) the Eighth Karma pa himself, Mi bskyod rdo rje (1507‒1554), who was among the most erudite and influential scholar-hierarchs of his generation, (4) and Padma dkar po (1527‒1592), Fourth ’Brug chen of the ’Brug pa Bka’ brgyud lineage who is generally acknowledged as its greatest scholar and systematizer. It is an important academic work published in the Vienna series WSTB and is divided into two volumes: the first offers a detailed philosophical analysis of the authors’ principal views and justifications of Mahāmudrā against the background of Indian and Tibetan Buddhist doctrines on mind, emptiness and buddha nature; the second comprises an annotated anthology of their seminal writings on Mahāmudrā accompanied by critical editions and introductions. These two volumes are the result of research that was generously funded by the Austrian Science Fund (FWF) from 2012 to 2015 under the supervision of Prof. Klaus-Dieter Mathes. The project was entitled “‘Emptiness of Other’ (Gzhan stong) in the Tibetan ‘Great Seal’ (Mahāmudrā) Traditions of the 15th and 16th Centuries” (FWF Project number P23826-G15). (Source: WSTB Description)
Higgins, David, and Martina Draszczyk. Mahāmudrā and the Middle Way: Post-Classical Kagyü Discourses on Mind, Emptiness and Buddha-Nature. 2 vols. Vol. 1, Introduction, Views of Authors and Final Reflections. Vol. 2, Translations, Critical Texts, Bibliography and Index. Wiener Studien zur Tibetologie und Buddhismuskunde 90.1–90.2. Vienna: Arbeitskreis für Tibetische und Buddhistische Studien Universität Wien, 2016.
Video
Martina Draszczyk at the 2019 Tathāgatagarbha Symposium
Martina Draszczyk discusses the early Kagyu masters and explores how their meditation-oriented approach is based in both affirming buddha-nature as the ground and goal of Buddhist soteriology and avoiding its reification into an entity with real properties.
Draszczyk, Martina. "Buddha Nature as Seen by Early Bka’ brgyud Masters." Paper presented at the University of Vienna Symposium, Tathāgatagarbha Across Asia, Vienna, Austria, July 2019. Video, 37:27. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MoMUdg40Qv8.
Video
On Chapter 1 Verse 28 of the Uttaratantra by Karl Brunnhölzl
Karl Brunnhölzl, author of When the Clouds Part, discusses chapter 1 verse 28 of the Uttaratantrashastra, the famous verse in this text which talks about the three reasons all sentient beings have buddha-nature.
Brunnhölzl, Karl. “On Chapter 1 Verse 28 of the Uttaratantra.” Interview by Marcus Perman. Tsadra Foundation Research Department, December 3, 2018. Video, 5:50. https://youtu.be/6ZTHfbtX5Z8.
Video
On the Meaning of Chapter 1 Verse 28 of the Ratnagotravibhāga by Ringu Tulku
Ringu Tulku explains the three reasons that are posited for why sentient beings have buddha-nature in chapter 1, verse 28 of the Ratnagotravibhāga. He explains that the first verse is referring to the notion that all beings have the same consciousness, a consciousness that is, at its core, luminous and clear. The second verse is referring to the idea that all phenomena are the same; it is appearance and emptiness. There is no differentiation between phenomena; hence the notion that, in reality, saṃsāra and nirvāṇa are the same. It is only that a person experiencing nirvana is experiencing reality in an undeluded way, whereas a saṃsāric being sees reality in a deluded way. The difference is in perception. The third verse is referring the fact that everyone possesses some seed of wisdom that can develop. For these reasons all beings are said to have buddha-nature. In his concluding remarks he discusses the relationship between a sentient being and a buddha.
Ringu Tulku. “On the Meaning of Chapter 1 Verse 28 of the Ratnagotravibhāga.” Interview by Marcus Perman. Tsadra Foundation Research Department, October 10, 2019. Video, 13:26. https://youtu.be/pkd9S_V6Dlk.
Book
Perfect or Perfected? Rongtön on Buddha-Nature
As the most important canonical treatise on Buddha-nature, the Ratnagotravibhaga (also known as Uttaratantrasastra, Tib. rgyud bla ma) established the doctrinal foundations for the Mahayana philosophy of tathāgatagarbha, the doctrine according to which all sentient beings are either inherently buddhas or endowed with the potential for awakening. Among the most prominent Tibetan commentaries on this text figures that of the Sakya master Rongtön Sheja Künrig, a prolific writer who was active during the golden age of Tibetan Buddhist philosophy. Refuting, on one hand, the notion that Buddha-nature is synonymous with mere emptiness, and on the other that the mind is inherently endowed with the Buddha qualities, Rongtön argues for an understanding of Buddha-nature that embraces both aspects of the nature of mind: cognizance and emptiness.



Rongtön Sheja Künrig (1376-1449) figures among the greatest teachers of the Sakya tradition. Particularly renowned for his commentaries on the Five Treatises of Maitreya, his vast erudition, and extensive teaching career made him one of the most influential masters for the scholastic lineages of all schools of Tibetan Buddhism. This volume contains an annotated translation of Rongtön Chenpo’s commentary on the central chapter of this treatise (including the relevant stanzas of the root text), along with an extensive introduction to the historical development of this doctrine and an analysis of Rongtön’s position. (Source: Vajra Publications)
Bernert, Christian, trans. Perfect or Perfected? Rongtön on Buddha-Nature: A Commentary on the Fourth Chapter of the Ratnagotravibhāga (vv.1.27-95[a]). By Rongtön Sheja Künrig (rong ston shes bya kun rig). Kathmandu: Vajra Books, 2018.
MA Thesis
Bernert, C.: Rong-ston on Buddha-Nature: A Commentary on the Fourth Chapter of the Ratnagotravibhāga
Set within the broader framework of Buddhist world view, the fundamental concern of the Tathāgatagarbha literature is to show that all sentient beings, without exception, can attain freedom from every kind of suffering and unease, and, ultimately, actualise the state of a fully awakened buddha. According to these scriptures, all sentient beings are by their very nature either empowered to attain buddhahood, or essentially already buddhas (depending on the interpretation). This innate quality of all sentient beings is given the name “buddha-nature” (Skt. tathāgatagarbha; Tib. de bzhin gshegs pa’i snying po).
      This doctrine has played an important role in the history of Buddhism. Although rudimentary elements of this doctrine can be identified already within the Pāli canon,[1] those passages relating to the natural luminosity of the mind, which is said to be temporarily stained by adventitious mental afflictions, required the emergence of the Mahāyāna movement before developing into a fully fledged doctrine in its own right. Since it is supported by a number of sūtras[2] and śāstras (i.e. the Buddhist canon composed of the Buddha’s sermons and the Indian commentarial literature), it can be regarded as a third school of Indian Mahāyāna Buddhist thought, the other two being Madhyamaka and Yogācāra. However, the concept of buddha-nature reached its apogee not in India but in East Asia and Tibet where it became a cornerstone for Buddhist philosophy and religious practice. In Tibet, in particular, this concept was treated diversely by many scholars, all of whom were ambitious to fit it into the philosophical framework of their own respective schools. Rong-ston Shes-bya kun-rig (1367–1449) of the Sa-skya tradition of Tibetan Buddhism figures among the most influential of these scholars. In general, his commentary on the Ratnagotravibhāga, the main Indian śāstra on buddha-nature, and in particular, a translation of his exposition of the subject by means of ten categories, will be the focus of this work.
      In the first chapter I will introduce the doctrine of buddha-nature, giving a brief account of its sources and formation. The second chapter will deal with the main treatise on buddha-nature, the Ratnagotravibhāga. Here, I will present the text itself, discuss the question of its authorship, as well as its transmission in India and early reception in Tibet. This chapter will also include a brief overview of previous studies on the Ratnagotravibhāga and the doctrine of buddha-nature. The third chapter will be devoted to the author of our treatise and his presentation of the subject. The final and main part of the work will consist of an annotated translation of a selected passage of his abovementioned commentary.
      Throughout this work I have used the transliteration system of Turrell Wylie for the Tibetan. (Bernert, introduction, 5–6 )

Notes

1. For example in AN I.v, 9: “This mind, O monks, is luminous! But it is defiled by adventitious defilements.” (After Mathes 2008: ix.) See also Takasaki 1966: 34–35.
2. A prevalent doxographical classification of Buddhist sūtras distinguishes between the so called “three turnings of the Dharma-wheel” (a concept introduced in the Sandhinirmocanasūtra). Scriptures of the first turning fundamentally discuss the four noble truths as expounded in Nikāya Buddhism which represents the common ground for all traditions and the basic framework for all Buddhist teachings. Sūtras from second turning emphasise the doctrine of emptiness (śūnyatā) as expounded in the Prajñāpāramitā sūtras, and those of the third teach the about the three natures (trisvabhāva), the latter two being classified as belonging to the Mahāyāna corpus. The sūtras on buddha-nature are generally regarded as belonging to the third turning.
3. As Seyfort Ruegg (1969: 2) remarks, the language used in the tathāgatagarbha treatises differs noticeably from that of the other two schools, and even comes suspiciously close to that of the Vedānta. Indeed, a number of modern scholars have accused this doctrine to be alien to Buddhist thought, an accusion refuted by others. For a collection of articles on this topic see Hubbard and Swanson 1997.

4. Cf. Wylie 1959.
Bernert, Christian. "Rong-ston on Buddha-Nature: A Commentary on the Fourth Chapter of the Ratnagotravibhāga". MA thesis, University of Vienna, 2009.
Book
Saṃsāra, Nirvāṇa, and Buddha Nature
This is the third volume in the Dalai Lama’s definitive and comprehensive series on the stages of the Buddhist path.
Dalai Lama, 14th, and Thubten Chodron. Saṃsāra, Nirvāṇa, and Buddha Nature. Library of Wisdom and Compassion 3. Somerville, MA: Wisdom Publications, 2018.
Interview
Shakya Chokden's Unique Views on Buddha-Nature by Yaroslav Komarovski: Conversations on Buddha-Nature
Lopen Dr. Karma Phuntsho discusses Śākya Chokden's unique views on Buddha-Nature with one of the world's most knowledgeable scholars of Śākya Chokden, Yaroslav Komarovski.

Śākya Chokden (1428–1507) was one of the most important thinkers of the Sakya tradition and had many complex views on Buddhist philosophy and practice, especially Madhyamaka and theories related to buddha-nature teachings, some of which are quite unique in the history of Buddhism.

Yaroslav Komarovski is a full professor of Classics and Religious Studies at the University of Nebraska-Lincoln. His recent books include Radiant Emptiness: Three Seminal Works by the Golden Paṇḍita Shakya Chokden (Oxford 2020), Tibetan Buddhism and Mystical Experience (Oxford 2015), and Visions of Unity: The Golden Paṇḍita Shakya Chokden's New Interpretation of Yogācāra and Madhyamaka (SUNY 2011). If you would like to read some of his papers on Shakya Chokden, you can find them freely available online here: DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln

HANDOUT FOR EVENT: Media:Yaroslav Komarovski-2021-10-30-Tsadra Buddha Nature.pdf
Komarovski, Yaroslav. "Shakya Chokden's Unique Views on Buddha-Nature." Conversations on Buddha-Nature with Lopen Dr. Karma Phuntsho. Produced by the Tsadra Foundation Research Department, October 30, 2021. Video, 1:22:45. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d0aw9CIgaiE.
Video
Sina Joos at the 2019 Tathāgatagarbha Symposium
Sina Joos discusses the ways in which Tāranātha utilizes the famous nine examples from the Ratnagotravibhāga in his Dbu ma theg mchog to assert his understanding of buddha-nature as zhentong (other-emptiness). She also compares Tāranātha’s position on Buddha-nature to Dolpopa's own view.
Joos, Sina. "The Role of the Ratnagotravibhāga in Tā ra nā tha’s dBu ma theg mchog." Paper presented at the University of Vienna Symposium, Tathāgatagarbha Across Asia, Vienna, Austria, July 2019. Video, 40:46. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kxn5XgPGnSU.
PhD Diss
Kim, Young-ho: Tao-sheng's Commentary on the Saddharmapuṇḍarīka-Sūtra: A Study and Translation
Abstract

This dissertation provides a comprehensive study and complete translation of Tao-sheng's Commentary on the Saddharmapuṇḍarīka-sūtra (CSPS). This document occupies an important place in Chinese Buddhist literature. Its significance in the study of Chinese Buddhism can be described in two ways. Firstly, the CSPS was the first commentary ever written on the Lotus Sūtra, which was to become a scripture of fundamental importance on the Far Eastern Buddhist scene, especially for the later Chinese Buddhist schools. Furthermore, it was the first commentary on any Buddhist scripture that was written in Chinese and structured in fully developed commentarial form. The CSPS set a pattern in many ways for later Buddhists to follow in terms of both structure and ideology.
      Secondly, the CSPS is a rich source of Tao-sheng's seminal ideas. Tao-sheng (ca. 360-434) has been regarded, both in his time and subsequently, as a uniquely creative and prophetic thinker. The CSPS, the only writing of Tao-sheng preserved in complete form, is essential to any study of Tao-sheng's own original thought. Most of his theses and arguments, which were controversial in his day, were originally propounded in his other writings, but the commentary may provide at least the general structure of Tao-sheng's thought.
      The thesis is composed of two main portions: "Study" (Part I-IV) and "Translation" (Part V). Part I sets out and clarifies the problems involved in the study of Tao-sheng, the aims and method of the present study. Part II as the introductory step to the main task involving the CSPS extensively examines Tao-sheng as a whole as reflected in other sources, in terms of his background, historical and biographical, his works, his doctrines, and his influence. Part III is devoted to a critical examination of the CSPS proper. Here I undertake an in-depth analysis in several different ways in respect with both form and content, or language and ideology. The analysis focuses on how Tao-sheng renders, successfully or otherwise, the ancient Indian system of religious thought into the current Chinese language, which was already laden with indigenous philosophical connotations. Here I also trace and reconstruct Tao-sheng's thought incorporated in the commentary in accordance with his distinct themes. Part IV reviews the findings and significance of the study conducted. In brief, the thesis is the first full-scale study of Tao-sheng and the commentary.
      Finally, a complete translation of the text is presented along with detailed annotations including the classical sources of Chinese philosophical terms used and numerous corruptions of the text. In light of the significance of Tao-sheng and the CSPS, the translation answers the need for a complete translation of the text into a modern language and will serve as a basis for further study.
Kim, Young-ho. "Tao-sheng's Commentary on the Saddharmapuṇḍarīka-Sūtra: A Study and Translation." PhD diss., McMaster University, 1985.
Book
The Heart of the Matter
The perfect Buddha Shakyamuni gave us, his disciples, boundless Dharma Wheels each in accordance with our various capacities and inclinations. The quintessence of all these teachings is the third turning of the Dharma Wheel, called the 'final set of teachings on the complete and total uncovering.' This is the Vajrayana approach to the definitive meaning that takes the fruition as the path, wherin the crucial points of how to apply its view and meditation training are shown. This know-how for bringing this definitive meaning into our experience is found in a text entitled The Unchanging Convergence, which here, in English, is called The Heart of the Matter.

The author, Tsele Natsok Randröl, was born in the snowy land of Tibet. It was through study and reflection that he first unraveled the key points of everything that there is to know. Having brought forth realization through meditation training, he became known as a great pandita and siddha, a learned and accomplished master.

Among his various instructions, The Heart of the Matter is both concise and comprehensible. Not only does it contain all the vital points of the Buddha's words but, in particular, it lucidly and precisely covers the definitive meaning of the view, meditation, conduct and fruition, in their entirety, so that their practice can take effect and mature in our minds. (Source: The Heart of the Matter, introduction, 7–8)
Kunsang, Erik Pema, trans. The Heart of the Matter. By Tsele Natsok Rangdröl (rtse le sna tshogs rang grol). Edited by Marcia Binder Schmidt and Michael Tweed. Buddhist Classics. Hong Kong: Rangjung Yeshe Publications, 1996.
Book
The Light of Wisdom, Vol. 1 (1999)
The Light of Wisdom Vol. 1 contains the root terma—hidden treasure text—of Padmasambhava, The Gradual Path of the Wisdom Essence and its commentary The Light of Wisdom by Jamgon Kongtrul the Great. Annotations on the commentary Entering the Path of Wisdom spoken by Jamyang Drakpa and recorded by Jokyab Rinpoche are included as well as clarifications from other masters. Volume I presents in-depth explanations of the Vajrayāna Buddhist perspective. It begins with the nature of the ground, the buddha nature present in all beings, continues with the teachings that are common to all vehicles, and concludes with the Mahāyāna and the link to Vajrayāna. (Source Accessed Feb 13, 2020)
Kunsang, Erik Pema, trans. The Light of Wisdom. Vol. 1. With the root text Lamrim Yeshe Nyingpo by Padmasambhava, the commentary The Light of Wisdom by Jamgön Kongtrül the First, and the notes Entering the Path of Wisdom by Jamyang Drakpa. Hong Kong: Rangjung Yeshe Publications, 1999. https://www.scribd.com/read/353095132/Light-of-Wisdom-Volume-I.
PhD Diss
Sy, N.: Thought of Buddha Nature as Depicted in the Laṅkāvatārasūtra
Abstract

Buddhism, as a religion arose in ancient India and developed in various parts of the world, aims at the unique goal that is providing welfare and happiness for human beings. The real happiness brought to mankind by Buddhism is not a satisfaction of self-requirement, but a spiritual benefit coming from enlightenment of the absolute truth, emancipation of the ego of things and persons, and free from the hindrances of passion and ignorance. Buddhism that is mainly based on teachings of the Buddha delivered at different places on different occasions continues to develop and adapt to the new challenges in the form of thought, different cultures, religions, customs and tradition of the people wherever it went. However, all the Buddha’s teachings originate in the enlightenment of the Buddha.
      All traditions of Buddhism accept that the Buddha attained enlightenment through stages of meditation that led to the Buddhahood endowed with transcendent wisdom and compassion. According to some Mahāyāna scriptures, the Buddhahood is nothing other than the Buddhanature which is the inherent essence within all beings. The doctrine of the Buddha-nature presented in several Mahāyāna scriptures of the so-called Tathāgatagarbha literature was formed in about the third century CE. There is no evidence that the doctrine of Buddha-nature formed a school in India like the Śūnyatā (Emptiness) of the Mādhyamika or the Vijñaptimātratā (Consciousness-only) of the Yogācāra School, but the Buddha-nature plays an important role in the religious life of Mahāyāna Buddhism in the East and Southeast Asian countries because it provides a faith of the permanence and immortality due to a declaration that all sentient beings possess the innate Buddha-nature and have a potentiality of becoming the Buddhas.
      Although most of the followers of Mahāyāna Buddhism believe the doctrine of the Buddha-nature and constantly try their best endeavor to attain the goal of Buddhahood, there were a lot of opinions that criticize the doctrine of the Buddha-nature by asserting that it is not Buddhist because this idea of the Buddha-nature seems to be akin to the permanent Self (ātman/brahman) presented in the Vedānta of Brahmanism. Conversely, according to some other scholars, the Buddha nature or Tathāgatagarbha referred in some Mahāyāna Sūtras does not represent a substantial self or ego; it is rather a positive language to express the thought of śūnyatā and to represent the potentiality of realizing the Buddhahood through Buddhist practices. Modern scholars today fall into an unending discussion about the similarity or difference between the Buddha-nature and Brahman but no one compares the date of these doctrines. Therefore, the purpose of this thesis is an attempt to clarify the Buddhist orthodoxy of the doctrine of the Buddha-nature through chronological comparison of the date of Buddha-nature with that of Brahman. Based on the Laṅkāvatārasūtra and other scriptures, the work attempt to elucidate that the Buddhist thought of the Buddha-nature had existed prior the Vedāntic thought of Brahman. Indeed, the thesis shows that while the doctrine of the Buddha-nature had come into existence in the third century CE in the Tathāgatagarbha literature, the Vedāntic doctrine of Brahman appeared for the first time in the sixth century CE. Consequently, although the Buddha-nature is closely akin to Brahman/ātman of the Vedānta, the doctrine of the Buddha-nature is originally a thought of Buddhism. For this reason, the writer chose the topic entitled “Thought of Buddha-nature as Depicted in the LaṅkāvatāraSūtra” for the Ph.D. thesis.
Study on the Buddha-nature is a task which cannot be carried out without the important texts, teachings, practices and historical movements of Buddhism. This study is mainly based upon the Laṅkāvatārasūtra, a Buddhist text of the later period of the Tathāgatagarbha literature, in which the thought of the Buddha-nature is depicted in relationship with most of the Mahāyāna concepts such as the Buddhatā, Tathāgatagarbha, Ālayavijñāna, Dharmakāya, Mind-only, etc. Especially, the Laṅkāvatārasūtra emphasizes the practice of self-realization and sudden enlightenment of the Buddha-nature. It is also said that the Sūtra was handed down by Bodhidharma to his heir disciple Hui-ke 慧可 as the proof of enlightenment in Chan (Zen) Buddhism.
      This thesis is an attempt to investigate and criticize the philosophical and religious thought of the Buddha-nature as depicted in the Laṅkāvatārasūtra. In so doing, we have taken into consideration the following principle themes:

      1. Evolution of the Buddha-nature Concept
      2. The Buddha-nature in the Tathāgatagarbha Literature
      3. The Laṅkāvatārasūtra and Hindu Philosophy
      4. The Thought of Buddha-nature in the Laṅkāvatārasūtra
      5. The Practice of Buddha-Nature in the Laṅkāvatārasūtra
      6. Further Development of the Concept of Buddha-nature in
          China

      Structurally, therefore, excluding the introduction and conclusion, the thesis consists of six major chapters in accordance with the above six main themes respectively.
Sy, Nguyen Dac. "Thought of Buddha Nature as Depicted in the Laṅkāvatārasūtra." PhD diss., University of Delhi, 2012. https://shodhganga.inflibnet.ac.in/handle/10603/28355.
Term Variations
Key Term dharmakāya
Topic Variation dharmakāya
Tibetan ཆོས་སྐུ་  ( chö ku)
Wylie Tibetan Transliteration chos sku  ( chö ku)
Devanagari Sanskrit धर्मकाय
Romanized Sanskrit dharmakāya
Chinese 法身
Chinese Pinyin fǎ shēn
Japanese Transliteration hosshin
Buddha-nature Site Standard English true being
Karl Brunnhölzl's English Term Dharma Body
Richard Barron's English Term dharmakaya, dimension/ stratum of authentic/ true being
Jeffrey Hopkin's English Term Truth Body, Actual Body
Dan Martin's English Term Dharmabody
Gyurme Dorje's English Term buddha body of reality, buddha body of actual reality
Ives Waldo's English Term body of enlightened qualities, Dharma-body
Alternate Spellings chos kyi sku
Term Information
Source Language Sanskrit
Basic Meaning "Truth body" or "true being" — One of the three bodies of a buddha. In Mahāyāna Buddhism, it often refers to a kind of fundamental principle or the true nature of reality itself.
Has the Sense of Although this term is sometimes rendered into English as “truth body,” dharmakāya seems to have originally been meant to refer to the entire corpus (kāya) of the Buddha’s transcendent qualities (dharma). (The Princeton Dictionary of Buddhism, p. 242)
Term Type Noun
Definitions
Princeton Dictionary of Buddhism See page 246: In Sanskrit, often translated as “truth body,” one of the two (along with the rūpakāya) or three (along with the saṃbhogakāya and nirmāṇakāya) bodies of a buddha. In early discussions of the true nature of the Buddha, especially regarding the person of the Buddha to whom one goes for refuge (saraņa), the term dharmakāya seems to have been coined to refer to the corpus or collection (kāya) of the auspicious qualities (dharma) of the Buddha, including his wisdom, his compassion, his various powers, etc.; it also referred to the entire corpus (kāya) of the Buddha’s teachings (dharma). In the Mahāyāna, the term evolved into a kind of cosmic principle that was regarded as the true nature of the Buddha and the source from which his various other forms derived....
Rangjung Yeshe Dictionary dharmakaya. Definition by Jamgön Kongtrül: sgrib gnyis bag chags dang bcas pa ma lus par spangs pa'i dbyings nam mkha' lta bu zhig la chos kyi sku zhes bya ste Dharma-body, dharmakaya, (body of enlightened qualities)
Muller's Digital Dictionary of Buddhism (DDB) Basic Meaning: Dharma-body

Senses: Translated as reality body, truth body, law body, etc. In general Mahāyāna teaching, the Dharma-body is a name for absolute existence, the manifestation of all existences—the true body of reality, or Buddha as eternal principle; the body of essence that is pure, possesses no marks of distinction, and is the same as emptiness (Skt. dharmakāya). The Dharma-body is one of the three bodies 三身 of the Buddha. The Buddhaʼs body of the universe—the body of truth that lacks form. The basis of all things. In texts such as the Awakening of Mahāyāna Faith the Dharma-body is seen as being equivalent to the tathāgatagarbha; it is also identified with the one mind.

Syn. with 實相身. [Charles Muller]

Works About this Term

Retrieved from "https://buddhanature.tsadra.org/index.php?title=Key_Terms/dharmakāya&oldid=18102"