Jonang
Property "Glossary-Definition" (as page type) with input value "Jonang - The Jonang tradition was established by Dölpopa Sherab Gyaltsen, a thirteenth-century Sakya monk famous for his Zhentong teachings. The Jonang teachings and monasteries were suppressed in Tibet in the seventeenth century but survived in Amdo. Tib. ཇོ་ནང་" contains invalid characters or is incomplete and therefore can cause unexpected results during a query or annotation process.
Jonang
Basic Meaning
The Jonang tradition was established by Dölpopa Sherab Gyaltsen, a thirteenth-century Sakya monk famous for his Zhentong teachings. The Jonang teachings and monasteries were suppressed in Tibet in the seventeenth century but survived in Amdo.
Jonangpa Theory and Practice of Buddha-Nature
In order to discuss the Jonang understanding and practice of buddha-nature, Geshe Drime Ozer presents three main points, although he did not manage to discuss the second and third in any detail.
- 1. He briefly discusses how buddha-nature is explained in many sūtras and tantras and also quoted some important verses from these sūtras.
2. His second point concerns the method, path, and the techniques with which the ultimate truth of buddha-nature is actualized or revealed by getting rid of the adventitious obscurations.
3. The final point, which he planned to present, was the difference between sūtra and tantric presentations of buddha-nature and how they differ in profundity and effectiveness although they are dealing with the same point.
Quoting the verse which is said to be the declaration of the Buddha after he reached enlightenment, Geshe explains that the three sets of teachings of wheels of dharma are three phases of the Buddha's teachings to tame a person gradually or teachings to suit three different levels of spiritual caliber. In the Jonang tradition, the first two wheels of dharma are provisional and the last or final wheel of dharma is the definitive teaching dealing with the ultimate truth. Commenting on the emptiness taught in Nāgārjuna's scholastic writings, he states that the Jonang school considered that kind of emptiness to be only nominal emptiness and not the final one.
The Mādhyamika, in this respect, are divided into proponents of rangtong, or self-emptiness, and of zhentong, or other-emptiness. Both Prāsaṅgika and Śvātantrika fall within the rangtong group, while zhengtong is also known as Great Mādhymika and is the tradition promoted by the hymnic corpus of Nāgārjuna and the works of Maitreya. He goes on to explain how in the Jonang tradition, buddha-nature is equated with the alayajñāna and how this should be distinguished from alayavijñāna.
He says that in the Jonang tradition, buddha-nature is the ultimate buddha and that such buddha is endowed with all noble attributes and qualities, while the conventional buddha is one who has manifested such qualities having removed the obscuration. The sūtras did not teach a direct and effective path to reveal this ultimate buddha as the tantras did.
During the Q&A, a vibrant debate occurred among the presenters and attendees, primarily on the Jonang assertion that buddha-nature is a truly established eternal reality. Many scholars challenged the assertion that buddha-nature can be truly existing when analyzed by reductive reasoning presented in the Mādhyamika writings. Geshe Drime Ozer pointed out that buddha-nature is truly existent in the Jonang tradition as it is the truth and perceived by the pristine wisdom of the enlightened beings in their meditative equipoise. However, it is not a truly existing substance or entity which is nonexistent and what Nāgārjuna, Candrakīrti, and other Mādhyamika scholars negated.Explaining the Understanding of Buddha-Nature in the Jonang Tradition through Nine Characteristics
Starting his presentation with a prayer of homage to Dolpopa, Lopen Dawa Zangpo explains how the buddha-nature has been received via Nāgārjuna and Asaṅga and their followers, who interpreted the buddha-nature sūtras. In this context, he clarifies that in the Jonang tradition, which holds the buddha-nature teachings, the first turning of the wheel of dharma showed buddha-nature without any clarity, the second turning showed buddha-nature with partial clarity, and the third turning showed buddha-nature with full clarity. Thus, the Jonang tradition highlights how the third turning is the definitive teaching.
In continuation of the presentation of buddha-nature as an eternal, permanent, absolute, and innate nature which is endowed with all the sublime qualities of enlightenment, he clarifies the sūtras which teach this doctrine. Explaining the etymology of buddha-nature, he explains that the term garbha implies the possession of all qualities, the term hṛdaya indicates the supreme and ultimate true nature of buddha-nature while other phenomena are illusory and deceptive, and the term sāra refers to the stability, firmness, and immutability of buddha-nature.
Lopen Dawa went on to explain the Jonangpa understanding of buddha-nature with nine characteristics.
1. Buddha-nature is permanent as it involves no birth, abiding and ceasing. What exists as an object of conceptual thought is impermanent and what is a realm of non-conceptuality is permanent and eternal.
2. Buddha-nature is all pervasive or immanent. It permeates all phenomena as the ultimate true nature.
3. Buddha-nature is self-awareness as it is open and luminous awareness or the consciousness of the ultimate truth.
4. Buddha-nature is diverse in its aspects as the ultimate truth can manifest in myriad expressions.
5. Buddha-nature is free from all elaborations of existence, non-existence, etc. and transcends all points of fixation.
6. Buddha-nature is stainless and pristine as it is not stained or polluted by the adventitious impurities even at the stage of sentient beings.
7. Buddha-nature is a union of emptiness and non-emptiness, i.e. emptiness of what is imputed and dependent, and non-empty of the absolute truth.
8. Buddha-nature is the spiritual gene or seed which exists in all sentient beings and serves as the basis of enlightenment.
Dölpopa emphasized two contrasting definitions of the Buddhist theory of emptiness. He described relative phenomena as "empty of self-nature," but absolute reality as only "empty of other," i.e., relative phenomena. He further identified absolute reality as the buddha nature, or eternal essence, present in all living beings. This view of an "emptiness of other," know in Tibetan as shentong, is Dölpopa's enduring legacy.
The Buddha from Dölpo contains the only English translation of three of Dölpopa's crucial works. A General Commentary on the Doctrine is one of the earliest texts in which he systematically presented his view of the entire Buddhist path to enlightenment. The Fourth Council and its Autocommentary (which was not in the first edition of this book) were written at the end of his life and represent a final summation of his teachings. These translations are preceded by a detailed discussion of Dölpopa's life, his revolutionary ideas, earlier precedents for the shentongview, his unique use of language, and the influence of his theories. The fate of his Jonang tradition, which was censored by the central Tibetan government in the seventeenth century but still survives, is also examined. (Source: Shambhala Publications)This question aside, seeing the canon as a predicament, i.e., as a tradition's self-imposed limitation, and viewing the exegetical enterprise as the means whereby a tradition extricates itself from this predicament, is indeed a provocative way of formulating the problematic of religious canons. In this essay I intend to employ Smith's notion as a springboard for discussing the Indo-Tibetan concept of siddhānta (Tibetan grub mtha', literally 'tenet'), a concept that represents on the level of philosophical ideas this same process of self-limitation. I will maintain that the adoption of such a schema serves functionally to "canonize" philosophy in much the same way as the collection of accepted scriptural texts creates a norm for what is textually canonical. I shall also examine some of the rhetorical strategies involved in utilizing and upholding the validity of the siddhānta schema. In particular, in the latter part of the essay I will turn my attention to the exegesis of the Tibetan dGe lugs pa school and shall examine how this brand of Buddhist scholasticism deals with the problems that arise out of the self-limitation that occurs in the course of canonizing its philosophical tradition. As might be expected, the examples that best illustrate the unique dGe lugs pa exposition of siddhānta have to do with points of controversy, and among these some of the most controversial have to do with the theory of Buddha Nature. Hence, much of the material that we shall consider will in one way or another have to do with the notion of tathāgatagarbha.
In what follows I shall urge, first of all, that in the scholastic tradition of Tibetan Buddhism, especially in the literature of the dGe lugs pa sect, the siddhānta schematization served as a de facto canonization of Buddhist philosophy that came to defme what was philosophically normative.'"`UNIQ--ref-00001077-QINU`"' Secondly, I shall maintain that, despite the fact that Tibetan exegetes have arrived at only a tentative consensus'"`UNIQ--ref-00001078-QINU`"' as to the nature of the textual canons,'"`UNIQ--ref-00001079-QINU`"' the determination of whether or not a doctrine was normatively Buddhist (and if so either provisionally or unequivocally true)'"`UNIQ--ref-0000107A-QINU`"' involved to a great extent a rhetoric that had as its basic presupposition the validity of the siddhānta schema. Put in another way, philosophical discourse (and particularly polemics) was based as much on the siddhānta classification scheme as it was on the physical canons, the collection of the "Buddha's word" and the commentarial literature whose creation it spurred. In many instances the siddhānta schema that formed the doctrinal or philosophical canon came to supersede the physical canon as the standard by comparison with which new ideas or texts came to achieve legitimacy.'"`UNIQ--ref-0000107B-QINU`"' (Cabezón, "The Canonization of Philosophy," 7–9)Term Variations | |
---|---|
Key Term | Jonang |
Topic Variation | Jonang |
Tibetan | ཇོ་ནང་ ( jo nang) |
Wylie Tibetan Transliteration | jo nang ( jo nang) |
Buddha-nature Site Standard English | Jonang |
Term Information | |
Source Language | Tibetan |
Basic Meaning | The Jonang tradition was established by Dölpopa Sherab Gyaltsen, a thirteenth-century Sakya monk famous for his Zhentong teachings. The Jonang teachings and monasteries were suppressed in Tibet in the seventeenth century but survived in Amdo. |
Did you know? | The Jonang (jo nang) tradition was founded by Dolpopa Sherab Gyeltsen, who ascended to the throne of Jonang Monastery in 1326. Trained in the Sakya tradition, Dolpopa’s controversial teachings, especially his emphasis on the view known as Zhentong (gzhan stong) or emptiness of other, and the institutional independence of Jonang monastery, established the Jonang tradition apart as an independent tradition, although many members of the Sakya tradition continue to consider Jonang to be a subsect of that tradition. Dolpopa, like his predecessors at Jonang, particularly emphasized the teachings of the Kālacakra Tantra and its completion-stage practices known as the six-branch yoga, while also transmitting many other systems of Vajrayāna and Mahāyāna Buddhism. Following the death of the great Jonang scholar Tāranātha, the Jonang tradition was suppressed in the seventeenth century by the Fifth Dalai Lama; its monasteries were converted to the Geluk tradition and the teachings banned. The tradition has survived in the Dzamtang region of Amdo. (Source: Treasury of Lives) |
Term Type | School |
Definitions |