Bhāvaviveka

From Buddha-Nature

< People

PeopleBhāvaviveka


ལེགས་ལྡན་འབྱེད་
Bhāvaviveka(500 - 578)
Buddhist Digital Resource Center

Also known as Bhāviveka and Bhavya, an important Indian master of the Madhyamaka school, identified in Tibet as a proponent of Svātantrika Madhyamaka and, within that, of Sautrāntika-Svātantrika-Madhyamaka. He is best known for two works. The first is the Prajñāpradīpa, his commentary on Nāgārjuna’s Mūlamadhyam- akakārikā; this work has an extensive subcommentary by Avalokitavrata. Although important in its own right as one of the major commentaries on the central text of the Madhyamaka school, the work is most often mentioned for its criticism of the commentary of Buddhapālita on the first chapter of Nāgārjuna’s text, where Bhāvaviveka argues that it is insufficient for the Madhyamaka only to state the absurd consequences (prasaṅga) that follow from the position of the opponent . . . The other major work of Bhāvaviveka is his Madhyamakahṛdaya, written in verse, and its prose autocommentary, the Tarkajvālā. The Madhyamakahṛdaya is preserved in both Sanskrit and Tibetan, the Tarkajvālā only in Tibetan. It is a work of eleven chapters, the first three and the last two of which set forth the main points in Bhāvaviveka’s view of the nature of reality and the Buddhist path, dealing with such topics as bodhicitta, the knowledge of reality (tattvajñāna), and omniscience (sarvajñātā). The intervening chapters set forth the positions (and Bhāvaviveka’s refutations) of various Buddhist and non-Buddhist schools, including the śrāvaka, Yogācāra, Sāṃkhya, Vaiśeṣika, Vedānta, and Mīmāṃsā. These chapters (along with Śāntarakṣita’s Tattvasaṃgraha) are an invaluable source of insight into the relations between Madhyamaka and other contemporary Indian philosophical schools, both Buddhist and non-Buddhist. (Source: "Bhāvaviveka." In The Princeton Dictionary of Buddhism, 114. Princeton University Press, 2014. http://www.jstor.org/stable/j.ctt46n41q.27.)


On the topic of this person

Video
Donald S. Lopez, Jr. - Keynote of the 2019 Tathāgatagarbha Symposium
In his keynote lecture to the Vienna Tathāgatagarbha Symposium, Donald Lopez provides an overview of the history and influence of tathāgatagarbha doctrine as well as its various interpretations across the Mahāyāna world.
Lopez, Donald S., Jr. “Tathāgatagarbha: A Brief History.” Keynote lecture at the University of Vienna Symposium, Tathāgatagarbha Across Asia, Vienna, Austria, July 2019. Video, 40:17. https://youtu.be/0SSSdNNbeu8.
PhD Diss
Khosla, U.: Study of the Tathāgatagarbha as True Self and the True Selves of the Brahmanic, Sāṅkhya and Jaina Traditions
Abstract:

The tathāgatagarbha is an intrinsically luminous consciousness naturally inscribed with the complete knowledge of the Buddha along with infinite Buddha-virtues and the potential to attain them. Studies in the past have focused on its potential aspect and negated it as an ontological entity. In this dissertation I examine it as a true self of sentient beings arguing that being beginningless, unborn, unconditioned, eternally unchanging, enduring and imperishable, it qualifies as true self. Also, the Mahāyāna-Mahāparinirvāṇasūtra unhesitatingly acknowledges it as true self, and its features conform to the definition of the true self of this sūtra and of Bhāvaviveka. I find ample support for its interpretation as true self in the sūtras on this doctrine. Besides, its features correspond with the features of the Brahmanic, Sāṅkhya and Jaina true selves. The Tathāgatagarbha Doctrine is recognized as a provisional teaching. The centrality of the doctrines of śūnyatā, tathatā, darmadhātu, dharmakāya and nirvāṇa suggest that it is truly Mahāyāna in spirit. According to the Ratnagotravibhāga, without realizing the emptiness of own being, nirvāṇa is not attained. This “Ultimate Doctrine”, it adds, is taught to remove the five defects. The defects, I find, are connected with not knowing emptiness or understanding the dharmakāya of the Tathāgata nihilistically. As a corrective to the nihilistic understanding of the Mahāyāna Doctrine, it qualifies as an ultimate teaching. I study the Tathāgatagarbha Doctrine from the following perspectives: the tathāgatagarbha as true self; the all-pervading, undifferentiated Essence of Buddhahood as Cosmic Self; and the concept of liberation. I also compare this doctrine to the doctrines of the above-mentioned three traditions and study their concepts of true self, the concepts of Cosmic Self of the Brahmanic and Early Sāṅkhya doctrines; and the concepts of liberation of these three doctrines. I follow the trajectory of thought of the Ratnagotravibhāga and the Tathāgatagarbha group of texts.
Khosla, Usha. "Study of the Tathāgatagarbha as True Self and the True Selves of the Brahmanic, Sāṅkhya and Jaina Traditions." PhD diss., University of Toronto, 2015. https://tspace.library.utoronto.ca/bitstream/1807/77747/3/Khosla_Usha_201506_PhD_thesis.pdf
Book
The Buddhist Philosophy of the Middle
Madhyamaka, the "philosophy of the middle," systematized the Buddha's fundamental teaching on no-self with its profound non-essentialist reading of reality. Founded in India by Nāgārjuna in about the second century C.E., Madhyamaka philosophy went on to become the dominant strain of Buddhist thought in Tibet and exerted a profound influence on all the cultures of East Asia. Within the extensive Western scholarship inspired by this school of thought, David Seyfort Ruegg's work is unparalleled in its incisiveness, diligence, and scope. The Buddhist Philosophy of the Middle brings together Ruegg’s greatest essays on Madhyamaka, expert writings which have and will continue to contribute to our progressing understanding of this rich tradition. (Source: Wisdom Publications)
Ruegg, David Seyfort. The Buddhist Philosophy of the Middle: Essays on Indian and Tibetan Madhyamaka. Studies in Indian and Tibetan Buddhism. Boston: Wisdom Publications, 2010.
Book
The Philosophy of Buddhism
The translation of Erich Frauwallner's Die Philosophie des Buddhismus, first published in 1956, opens up a classic introduction to Buddhist thought to a broader English language readership. The book covers the period of early canonical literature with examples of its philosophically relevant ideas, followed by the principal philosophical concepts of systematic Sravakayana Buddhism. In the main part of the book, Frauwallner presents the first survey of the development of the philosophical systems of Mahayana Buddhism. He was well aware of the limitations in presenting only the Buddhist philosophy of the "classical", i.e., the systematic period, and does not seem to have been ready to add the philosophically creative new postsystematic tradition of Buddhist epistemology and logic, a major subject of his subsequent years of research.

Frauwallner's way of translating was straightforward: to remain as close as possible to the original text while presenting it in a clear and readable way in order to convey an accurate impression of its meaning. For technical terms in the source materials he maintained a single translation even when various meanings were suggested. For clarity regarding such variations of meaning he relied on the context and his explanation.

The same approach was taken by the translator of the present book. Although his translation attempts to be faithful to the 1994 edition of Die Philosophie des Buddhismus, he inserted helpful additional headlines into the text and considerably enlarged the index. All other additions by the translator are given within square brackets. Besides this, he created an Appendix, which contains one of Frauwallner's more important articles "Amalavijnana and Alayavijnana" (1951) to complement the long Yogacara section of the book, a bibliography of selective publications after 1969. The URLs for many of the source materials were also conveniently provided. (Source: Motilal Banarsidass)
Frauwallner, Erich. The Philosophy of Buddhism (Die Philosophie des Buddhismus). Translated by Gelong Lodrö Sangpo with the assistance of Jigme Sheldrön, under the supervision of Ernst Steinkellner. Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass, 2010. Originally published 1956 by Akademie Verlag as Die Philosophie des Buddhismus (Berlin).
PhD Diss
Lee, S.: Toward a New Paradigm of East Asian Yogācāra Buddhism: Taehyŏn (ca. 8th Century CE), a Korean Yogācāra Monk, and His Predecessors
Abstract

This dissertation seeks to locate the place of Taehyŏn 大賢(ca. 8th century CE), a Silla Korean Yogācāra monk, within the broader East Asian Buddhist tradition. My task is not confined solely to a narrow study of Taehyŏn’s thought and career, but is principally concerned with understanding the wider contours of the East Asian Yogācāra tradition itself and how these contours are reflected in Taehyŏn’s extant oeuvre. There are problems in determining Taehyŏn's doctrinal position within the traditional paradigms of East Asian Yogācāra tradition, that is, the bifurcations of Tathāgatagarbha and Yogācāra; Old and New Yogācāra; the One Vehicle and Three Vehicles; and the Dharma Nature and Dharma Characteristics schools. Taehyŏn's extant works contain doctrines drawn from across these various divides, and his doctrinal positions therefore do not precisely fit any of these traditional paradigms. In order to address this issue, this dissertation examines how these bifurcations originated and evolved over time, across the geographical expanse of the East Asian Yogācāra tradition. The chapters of the dissertation discuss in largely chronological order the theoretical problems involved in these bifurcations within Yogācāra and proposes possible resolutions to these problems, by focusing on the works of such major Buddhist exegetes as Paramārtha (499-569), Ji 基 (632-682), Wŏnhyo 元曉 (617-686), Fazang 法藏(643-712), and, finally, Taehyŏn.
Lee, Sumi. "Toward a New Paradigm of East Asian Yogācāra Buddhism: Taehyŏn (ca. 8th Century CE), a Korean Yogācāra Monk, and His Predecessors." PhD diss., University of California, Los Angeles, 2014. https://escholarship.org/uc/item/74h5d0nv#main.

Philosophical positions of this person

Is buddha-nature considered definitive or provisional?
Provisional 
Do all beings have buddha-nature?
  Yes
To which "turning of the wheel" do the buddha-nature teachings belong?
 
Is buddha-nature equated with emptiness or alayavijnana?
 
Do buddha-nature teachings belong to the zhentong or rangtong view of emptiness?
 
Are there one or three vehicles on the path to buddhahood?
 
Do the author's writings belong to the analytic or meditative tradition of Uttaratantra exegesis?
 
What is Buddha-nature?
Tathāgatagarbha was Taught Merely to Encourage Sentient Beings to Enter the Path 
Does the author advocate the Svatantrika or Prasangika view of emptiness?
 

Other names

  • ལེགས་ལྡན་ · other names (Tibetan)
  • སྐལ་ལྡན་ · other names (Tibetan)
  • legs ldan · other names (Wylie)
  • skal ldan · other names (Wylie)
  • Bhāviveka · other names
  • Bhavya · other names

Affiliations & relations

  • Svātantrika Madhyamaka · religious affiliation
  • Klu grub · teacher
  • Dpal sbas · student
Retrieved from "https://buddhanature.tsadra.org/index.php?title=People/Bhāvaviveka&oldid=28385"