Is buddha-nature considered definitive or provisional?
Do all beings have buddha-nature?
Qualified Yes
"Gyeltsap thus shows that ultimately both buddhas and sentient beings share the same suchness of mind which is the ultimate nature of mind that is free from natural defilements. Because of this he argues that all sentient beings have tathāgata-essence, and it is through this that he establishes the connection between tathāgata-essence and the concept of one-vehicle, the notion that ultimately there is only the final goal of buddhahood."
Wangchuk, Tsering, The Uttaratantra in the Land of Snows, p. 99.
To which "turning of the wheel" do the buddha-nature teachings belong?
Second Turning
"So, Gyeltsap claims that both the Madhyamakāvatāra and the Uttaratantra explain the same meaning of ultimate truth. Hence, they are both definitive works that explicate the intention of the middle wheel." Wangchuk, Tsering, The Uttaratantra in the Land of Snows, p. 107.
Is buddha-nature equated with emptiness or alayavijnana?
Madhyamaka
- "In his Uttaratantra commentary, Gyeltsap shows the strong influence of Tsongkhapa's Illuminating the Thoughts of the Madhyamaka. He criticizes those who propose that the Uttaratantra is a Cittamātra text, arguing that it explicates the ultimate truth presented in the Prāsaṅgika-Madhyamaka." Wangchuk, Tsering, The Uttaratantra in the Land of Snows, p. 98.
- "Gyeltsap says, "It is not to be asserted that Ācārya Asaṅga is described as a proponent of Vijñāptimātratā; otherwise it would completely contradict his detailed explanation of the one final vehicle and the presentation of subtle emptiness in his Uttaratantra commentary." Gyeltsap argues that the emptiness explained in the Uttaratantra and its commentary by Asaṅga is subtle emptiness, and it does not differ from the emptiness that is delineated in the Prajñāpāramitāsūtras." Wangchuk, Tsering, The Uttaratantra in the Land of Snows, p. 100.
Do buddha-nature teachings belong to the zhentong or rangtong view of emptiness?
Are there one or three vehicles on the path to buddhahood?
1
"Gyeltsap thus shows that ultimately both buddhas and sentient beings share the same suchness of mind which is the ultimate nature of mind that is free from natural defilements. Because of this he argues that all sentient beings have tathāgata-essence, and it is through this that he establishes the connection between tathāgata-essence and the concept of one-vehicle, the notion that ultimately there is only the final goal of buddhahood." Wangchuk, Tsering, The Uttaratantra in the Land of Snows, p. 99.
Do the author's writings belong to the analytic or meditative tradition of Uttaratantra exegesis?
What is Buddha-nature?
Tathāgatagarbha as the Emptiness That is a Non-implicative Negation (without enlightened qualities)
"In brief, Gyeltsap argues that buddha-nature, or tathāgata-essence, does not refer to a fully enlightened entity covered by adventitious defilements. Rather it is the same as the emptiness of inherent existence that is explicated in texts such as the Prajñāpāramitāsūtras and Madhyamakāvatāra." Wangchuk, Tsering, The Uttaratantra in the Land of Snows, p. 106.
Does the author advocate the Svatantrika or Prasangika view of emptiness?
Prāsaṅgika (ཐལ་འགྱུར་)
- "In his Uttaratantra commentary, Gyeltsap shows the strong influence of Tsongkhapa's Illuminating the Thoughts of the Madhyamaka. He criticizes those who propose that the Uttaratantra is a Cittamātra text, arguing that it explicates the ultimate truth presented in the Prāsaṅgika-Madhyamaka." Wangchuk, Tsering, The Uttaratantra in the Land of Snows, p. 98.
- "In arguing that the emptiness expounded in the Prajñāpāramitāsūtras and the tathāgata-essence explicated in the Uttaratantra are the same, Gyeltsap accords the status to the Uttaratantra equal to that of Nāgārjuna's Mūlamadhyamakakārikā, Candrakīrti's Madhyamakāvatāra, and other Madhyamaka treatises which present the ultimate view of Prāsaṅgika-Madhyamaka." Wangchuk, Tsering, The Uttaratantra in the Land of Snows, p. 100.
