Search by property

This page provides a simple browsing interface for finding entities described by a property and a named value. Other available search interfaces include the page property search, and the ask query builder.

List of results

Articles/The Example of the Buddha + (A teaching on buddha-nature by a prominent American Buddhist teacher.)

Articles/The Tathagata Essence + (According to Don Handrick, who uses this t … According to Don Handrick, who uses this translation in [[Maitreya's Sublime Continuum on Buddha Nature by Don Handrick|his teachings on the ''Uttaratantra'']], this is a "rather wordy" translation of the first chapter of the ''Uttaratantraśāstra'', made so due to the heavy use of parenthetical information derived from various commentaries on the text that the translators use to explicate the root verses. The work is a draft compilation and is not for general distribution. Permission has been granted for use in FPMT (Foundation for the Preservation of the Mahayana Tradition) Basic Programs.of the Mahayana Tradition) Basic Programs.)
Articles/The Sublime Science of the Great Vehicle to Salvation, Being a Manual of Buddhist Monism: The Work of Ārya Maitreya with a Commentary by Āryāsanga + (According to the Tibetan tradition, the fo … According to the Tibetan tradition, the foundation of all the exegetical literature connected with the Buddhist Scripture of the latest and, partly, of the intermediate period'"`UNIQ--ref-00000465-QINU`"' is contained in the 5 treatises ascribed to the Bodhisattva Maitreya. These are:— 1) The ''Sūtrālaṁkāra'','"`UNIQ--ref-00000466-QINU`"' 2) " ''Madhyānta-vibhanga'','"`UNIQ--ref-00000467-QINU`"' 3) " ''Dharma-dharmatā-vibhanga'''"`UNIQ--ref-00000468-QINU`"' 4) " ''Abhisamayālaṁkāra'','"`UNIQ--ref-00000469-QINU`"' and 5) " ''Uttaratantra''.'"`UNIQ--ref-0000046A-QINU`"' Of these 5 treatises the original Sanskrit text of the ''Sutrālaṁkāra'' has been edited by Prof. [[Sylvain Levi]], who has likewise given a French translation of it. The Sanskrit text of the ''Abhisamayālaṁkāra'' and its Tibetan translation have been recently edited by Prof. Th. Stcherbatsky and by myself in the Bibliotheca Buddhica and will be followed by an analysis of the 8 subjects and the 70 topics which form its contents. The 3 other works have not, till now, met with the full appreciation of European scholars. The reason perhaps is that we possess only their Tibetan translations in the Tangyur (MDO XLIV), the original Sanskrit texts having not, up to this time, been discovered. An investigation of this branch of Buddhist literature according to the Tibetan sources enables us to ascertain the exclusive importance of the said 3 treatises as containing, in a very pregnant form, the idealistic and monistic teachings of later Buddhism. In particular the Tibetan works draw our attention to the ''Uttaratantra'', the translation and analysis of which forms the subject-matter of the present work. It is indeed the most interesting of the three, if not of all the five, being the exposition of the most developed monistic and pantheistic teachings of the later Buddhists and of the special theory of the Essence of Buddhahood,'"`UNIQ--ref-0000046B-QINU`"' the fundamental element'"`UNIQ--ref-0000046C-QINU`"' of the Absolute, as existing in all living beings. (Obermiller, introduction, 81–82) [http://prajnaquest.fr/downloads/BookofDzyan/ReferenceBooks/Obermiller/ratnagotravibhaga_or_uttaratantra_obermiller_1931.pdf Read more here . . .]/ReferenceBooks/Obermiller/ratnagotravibhaga_or_uttaratantra_obermiller_1931.pdf Read more here . . .])
Articles/The Mind as the Buddha-Nature: The Concept of the Absolute in Ch'an Buddhism + (Although Ch'an Buddhism has a long history … Although Ch'an Buddhism has a long history, the name of the Ch'an School (''ch'an-men''a or ''ch'an-rsung''b)'"`UNIQ--ref-00000001-QINU`"' was a relatively late development. It was Tsung-mic (780-841),'"`UNIQ--ref-00000002-QINU`"' the great Master of Kuei-fung who, for the first time, adopted the term in the ninth century A.D. It is interesting to note that it was the same monk-scholar who used the School of Mind (''hsin-tsung''d)'"`UNIQ--ref-00000003-QINU`"' as a synonym of the Ch'an school. Tsung-mi was a scholar of buddhist thought who had personal experience in the broad-ranging knowledge of Ch'an traditions. He collected relevant materials and wrote extensively in an effort to analyze the doctrine and practices of the tradition. His identification of the Mind with the Ch'an indicates that, in his opinion, the Mind was the central focus of the school. Although Tsung-mi contributed a good deal to the understanding of Ch'an Buddhism, his contributions remained almost unknown for a thousand years; it is only during the last two decades that scholars have gradually come to recognize his contribution. with considerable astonishment and admiration. This article is an attempt to describe, analyze and assess Tsung-mi's thesis that the doctrine of Mind is the central focus of Ch'an Buddhism and that the Mind itself is the absolute. (Jan, "The Mind as the Buddha-Nature," 467)hism and that the Mind itself is the absolute. (Jan, "The Mind as the Buddha-Nature," 467))
Articles/Gyaltsap Je's Interpretation and the Trichiliocosmic Painting + (Although Tsongkhapa did not author a comme … Although Tsongkhapa did not author a commentary on the ''Ultimate Continuum'', his main student and successor at his main seat of Ganden, Gyaltsap Je Darma Rinchen, composed an elaborate commentary on the ''Ultimate Continuum''. The commentary, filling 230 folios, was composed at Nenying temple at the request of Gungru Gyaltsen Zangpo and others after Gyaltsap had received teachings on it from both Rendawa and Tsongkha. One Tagtsel Kharkhap Dhondup Kunga served as the scribe for this voluminous and meticulous commentary, in which Gyaltsap carries out a relentless critique of the theory that buddha-nature is inherently endowed with qualities of the Buddha or that it is an absolute eternal reality empty only of other adventitious conventional phenomena.other adventitious conventional phenomena.)
Articles/Reification and Deconstruction of Buddha Nature in Chinese Chan + (Although much has been said about deconstr … Although much has been said about deconstruction in Madhyamika Buddhism, very little has been done in the study of deconstructive strategy in Chan Buddhism. In his study of deconstruction in Nāgārjuna's thought, Robert Magliola adds several passages that discuss the same topic in Chan/Zen Buddhism. Magliola's major contribution is his distinction between logocentric and differential trends in Chan/Zen Buddhism (Magliola: 96-7). This distinction allows us to take a fresh look at, and to re-examine, those inner struggles in the evolution of Chan Buddhist thought. However, Magliola's study of deconstruction in Chan is not systematic, despite its insights. He uses only a few cases to show the deconstructive tendency in Chan, without applying his distinction to a closer examination of the different schools of Chan thought. Thus, his study leaves only the impression that the deconstructive or differential trend is connected with the Southern School of Chan. He does not justify this thesis through a closer doctrinal and textual-contextual investigation. Bernard Faure, on the other hand, touches upon the same issue of logocentric and differential trends in Chan in his comprehensive critique of the Chan tradition. Faure's study of this issue has two main problems. First, since his study is a criticism, he shows only what he thinks is the logocentric side of Chan, without providing a constructive study of deconstruction in Chan. Second, he criticizes Magliola for relating his logocentric/differential distinction to the historically well-defined distinction between Northern and Southern Chan. Faure believes that this hasty connection is "counterproductive" (Faure 1993: 225). His own approach, as opposed to Magliola's, is to suggest that it is impossible to identify one school or one figure in the Chan tradition as either logocentric or deconstructive. He asserts that there are "only combinations" of these two types in the Chan tradition (Faure 1993: 225). It appears that this position of "combination only" avoids a one-sided view and the error of jumping to a conclusion. However, by concluding that there are only combinations, Faure turns away from the necessity and possibility of analyzing and identifying individual deconstructive trends in Chan Buddhism, and from the necessity and even the possibility of a coherent reinterpretation and reconstruction of Chan thought. The coherent reinterpretation and reconstruction of Chan thought obviously demands more than a mere criticism. It is true that the thought of one school or one figure may involve elements of two trends; but this fact does not preclude the possibility of its being coherently interpreted as representative of one trend. This paper, therefore, will attempt to investigate a major deconstructive trend in Chan Buddhism, namely, that of the Huineng 惠能 and the Hongzhou 洪州 Chan, and its target—certain reifying tendencies in Chan. (Wang, preliminary remarks, 63–64))
Articles/Lhodrak Dharma Senge's Commentary on the Ultimate Continuum + (Among the numerous texts discovered at Dre … Among the numerous texts discovered at Drepung monastery’s library through the efforts of [[Alak Zenkar Rinpoche]] and his team is a hitherto unknown commentary by one [[Lhodrak Dharma Senge]]. Although the manuscript is incomplete and missing the final pages which may have contained the colophon, the title on the first page and a note at the start of the commentary explicitly mention Lhodrakpa Dharma Senge as the author. Yet, apart from the obvious association of the author with the southern Lhodrak region of Central Tibet, we have no information on when and where he lived.no information on when and where he lived.)
Articles/The Logic of Liberation: Epistemology as a Path to the Realization of Mahāmudrā + (Anne Burchardi'"`UNIQ--ref-00000BDA-QINU`" … Anne Burchardi'"`UNIQ--ref-00000BDA-QINU`"' The present article is a contribution to the discussion on the place of epistemology in Tibetan Buddhism in relation to the doctrine of Mahāmudrā, drawing on a selection of Tibetan sources from the 16th century as well as Bhutanese sources from the 19th century. While Buddhist epistemology may seem dry and cerebral, it plays a special role as a gateway to Mahāmudrā according to certain masters associated with the ''gzhan stong'' philosophy'"`UNIQ--ref-00000BDB-QINU`"'. For them, not only can direct valid cognition (''mngon sum tshad ma'') in general be linked to the non-conceptual states associated with Mahāmudrā meditation, but the basic epistemological definition of mind as luminous and cognisant (''gsal zhing rig pa'') is a precursor to the pointing-out instructions for recognising the nature of mind. According to some interpretations, it is the direct valid cognition of apperception'"`UNIQ--ref-00000BDC-QINU`"' (''rang rig mngon sum tshad mo''), which experiences this true nature, and the direct yogic valid cognition (''mal 'byor mngon sum tshad ma''), which realises it.a''), which realises it.)
Articles/Indian Materials on the Doctrine of Sudden Enlightenment + (Any steps to be taken in the direction of … Any steps to be taken in the direction of investigating the Indian roots of Ch'an are hindered by the thicket of legends in which the tradition shrouded itself. The Ch'annists must also be blamed for the fact that the question of what was the original form of this peculiarly Chinese version of Buddhism remains open, still obscured by the fallacious assumption that Ch'an was a monolithic, clearly defined school or tradition. Progress in this area is further hampered by the fact that in both India and China the early history of the movements that gave rise to Ch'an belongs to mystical traditions existing on the margins of the scholarly establishment of Buddhism. On the other hand, the broader question of contacts, connections, agreements and disagreements between Ch'an and Indian Buddhism can now be the object of documented study thanks to the indefatigable efforts of Buddhist scholars in Russia, France and Japan, who have attempted to verify the facts and meaning of an incident known as the "Council of Lhasa." (Gómez, "Indian Materials," 393)f Lhasa." (Gómez, "Indian Materials," 393))
Articles/The Buddhist Notion of an 'Immanent Absolute' (tathāgatagarbha) as a Problem in Hermeneutics + (As a religious and philosophical tradition … As a religious and philosophical tradition works out its own stock of ideas and encounters fresh ones among its neighbours, it must very often generate responses to developing tensions and oppositions unless it is simply to turn in on itself, both ossifying and isolating itself from its intellectual and human environment. Buddhism has not ossified and isolated itself in this way, and it has met such challenges not only in its spread outside the Indian subcontinent—in Central, East and Southeast Asia, and now also in Europe and America—but also, and no less importantly, in the course of its development within historical India itself. One way in which Buddhism has responded to these intellectual and cultural encounters can be related to hermeneutics: that is, the modes by which a tradition explains its sources and thereby interprets (or reinterprets) itself in a continuing process of reactivation and renewal of its heritage.'"`UNIQ--ref-000005D0-QINU`"' In the case of Buddhism this process—perhaps comparable in part to what in another context is now frequently referred to as ''aggiornamento''—had both endogenous and exogenous causes. It was, in other words, set in train both by internal, systemically generated requirements and tensions within the Buddhist tradition as it evolved in geographical space and historical time, and by external impulses received from its intellectual and social environment, which could be, according to the case, either positive or negative in character. The purpose of this paper is to explore this process with respect to the Buddhist hermeneutics of the ideas of non-self (''anatman'') and of a spiritual matrix or germ (''gotra'', ''tathagatagarbha'' or Buddha-nature) and the relationship of this pair of ideas to Vedantic notions and Brahmanical social groups in classical India. Reference will be made also to certain exegetical developments that either originated in Tibet or were at least fully realized there for the first time. Our analysis will revolve around the fact that, however historically antithetical and structurally contrasting these two ideas are in Buddhism, they in fact have not invariably been treated by Buddhist hermeneuticians as contradictory or even as systematically exclusive of each other. Because of its philosophical and religious significance in the fields of soteriology and gnoseology, the Mahāyānist theory of the ''tathāgatagarbha''—the Germ of Buddhahood latent in all sentient beings—occupies a crucial position in Buddhist thought, and indeed in Indian thought as a whole. In virtue of both their extent and their contents, the sūtras treating the ''tathāgatagarbha''—and the systematically related doctrines of the natural luminosity (''prakṛtiprabhāsvaratā'') of mind (''citta'') and the spiritual germ existent by nature (''prakṛtistha-gotra'')'"`UNIQ--ref-000005D1-QINU`"'—are amongst the most important in the Mahāyāna. The idea that the doctrine of the ''tathāgatagarbha'' and Buddha-nature is one of the supreme teachings of the Mahāyāna is explicitly stated in the ''Mahāparinirvāṇa-sutra''.'"`UNIQ--ref-000005D2-QINU`"' Mahāyānist doctrine is in large part concerned with the path (''marga'') of the Bodhisattva and supreme and perfect awakening (''bodhi''), that is, the state of a Buddha. The terms ''tathāgatagarbha'' and ''gotra'' are used to denote the base or support for practice of the path, and hence the 'cause' (''hetu'': ''dhatu'') for attainment of the fruit (''phala'') of buddhahood. Even when the texts do not employ the term ''tathāgatagarbha'' to designate this factor as the one which makes it possible for all living beings ultimately to attain liberation and Buddhahood, the importance of the theme of the ''tathāgatagarbha'' is basic to the soteriology and gnoseology of the Mahāyāna. (Ruegg, "The Buddhist Notion of an 'Immanent Absolute'," 229–30))
Articles/Four Steps to Magical Powers + (Before you fully embark on the path of the bodhisattvas and buddhas, says Chan master Sheng Yen, you must first practice the four steps to magical powers. What are these steps and what are the magical powers you need?)
Articles/Buddha-Nature and the Logic of Pantheism + (Buddha-nature (''tathāgatagarbha'') is a c … Buddha-nature (''tathāgatagarbha'') is a central topic the in Mahāyāna Buddhist thought. As the pure nature of mind and reality, it conveys the nature of being and the relationship between the buddha(s) and sentient beings. Buddha-nature is that which allows for sentient beings to become buddhas. It is the living potential for awakening. In this chapter I will look into interpretations of buddha-nature starting with the ''Sublime Continuum'' (''Uttaratantra'', ca. fourth century), the first commentarial treatise focused on this subject. I will then present its role(s) in Mahāyāna Buddhism in general, and in the interpretations of Yogācāra and Madhyamaka in particular. Next I will discuss the role of buddha-nature as a key element in the theory and practice of Buddhist tantra, which will lead into a discussion of this doctrine in light of ''pantheism'' ("all is God"). Thinking of buddha-nature in terms of pantheism can help bring to light significant dimensions of this strand of Buddhist thought. (Duckworth, introduction, 235)introduction, 235))
Articles/Death, Sleep, and Orgasm: Gateways to the Mind of Clear Light + (Buddhism began gradually to be introduced … Buddhism began gradually to be introduced to Tibet in the seventh century C. E., more than a thousand years after Shākyamuni Buddha's passing away (''circa'' 483 B. C.).'"`UNIQ--ref-000037A3-QINU`"' The form Buddhism took in Tibet was greatly influenced by the highly developed systemization of the religion that was present in India through the twelfth century (and even later). The geographic proximity and relatively undeveloped culture of Tibet provided conditions for extensive transfer of scholastic commentaries and systems of practice, which came to have great influence throughout a vast region stretching from Kalmuck Mongolian areas in Europe where the Volga River empties into the Caspian Sea, Outer and Inner Mongolia, and the Buriat Republic of Siberia as well as Bhutan, Sikkim, Nepal, and Ladakh. The sources for my discussion are drawn primarily from two of the four major orders of Tibetan Buddhism: * the old order called Nying-ma-ba,'"`UNIQ--ref-000037A4-QINU`"' which reached its full development in the fourteenth century with the scholar-yogi Long-chen-rap-jam'"`UNIQ--ref-000037A5-QINU`"'* a highly scholastic order called Ge-luk-ba,'"`UNIQ--ref-000037A6-QINU`"' founded by the fourteenth century scholar-yogi Dzongka-ba.'"`UNIQ--ref-000037A7-QINU`"' Long-chen-rap-jam was born in 1308 Do-drong'"`UNIQ--ref-000037A8-QINU`"' in south central Tibet, received ordination at Samyay'"`UNIQ--ref-000037A9-QINU`"' Monastery, and studied the doctrines of both the old and new schools. A great scholar, he became abbot of Sam-yay Monastery early in his life but retired from that position to live in the mountains. Receiving the full corpus of the teachings of the Old Translation School of Nying-ma, he wrote prolifically, and even when he was exiled for a decade to Bhutan for his closeness with the opponents of the ruling power, he established and restored monasteries.'"`UNIQ--ref-000037AA-QINU`"' Dzong-ka-ba was born in 1357 in the northeastern province of Tibet called Am-do,'"`UNIQ--ref-000037AB-QINU`"' now included by the occupying Chinese Communists not in the Tibetan Autonomous Region but in Ch'ing-hai Province. He studied the new and old schools extensively, and developed his own tradition called Ge-luk-ba. Dzongka- ba and his followers established a system of education centered especially in large universities, eventually in three areas of Tibet but primarily in Hla-sa, the capital, which in some ways was for the Tibet cultural region what Rome is for the Catholic Church. For five centuries, young men came from all over the Tibetan cultural region to these large Tibetan universities to study (I say "men" because women were, for the most part, excluded from the scholastic culture). Until the Communist takeovers, these students usually returned to their own countries after completing their degrees. My presentation on the mind of clear light is largely from standard Nying-ma-ba and Ge-luk-ba perspectives on the two basic forms of what Tibetan tradition accepts as Shākyamuni Buddha's teaching—the Sūtra Vehicle and the Tantra Vehicle, also called the Vajra Vehicle.'"`UNIQ--ref-000037AC-QINU`"' (Hopkins, background, 245–46)45–46))
Articles/The Gzhan stong Model of Reality: Some More Material on Its Origin, Transmission, and Interpretation + (By the time Tibetans inherited Indian Budd … By the time Tibetans inherited Indian Buddhism, it had already witnessed two major doctrinal developments, namely the notion of the Prajñāpāramitāsūtras that all factors of existence (''dharmas'') lack an own-being (emptiness), and the Yogācāra interpretation of this emptiness based on the imagined (''parikalpita''-), dependent (''paratantra''-) and perfect natures (''pariniṣpanna svabhāva'').'"`UNIQ--ref-00000FFF-QINU`"' Closely related to this threefold distinction was the Tathāgatagarbha restriction of emptiness to adventitious stains which cover over an ultimate nature of buddha-qualities. There can be, of course, only one true reality towards which the Buddha awakened, so that exegetes were eventually forced to explain the canonical sources (i.e., Mahāyāna Sūtras) which contain mutually competing models of reality. This set the stage for the well-known hermeneutic strategies of the Tibetan schools. The main issue at stake was whether or not one needs to distinguish two modes of emptiness: being "empty of an own-being" (Tib. ''rang stong''), and being "empty of other" (Tib. ''gzhan stong''). (Mathes, introductory remarks, 187) [https://journals.ub.uni-heidelberg.de/index.php/jiabs/article/view/10602/4454 Read more here . . .]hp/jiabs/article/view/10602/4454 Read more here . . .])
Articles/Introduction: The History of the Rang stong-Gzhan stong Distinction from Its Beginning through the Ris-med Movement + (By the time Tibetans inherited Indian Budd … By the time Tibetans inherited Indian Buddhism, it had already witnessed two major doctrinal developments, namely, the notion elucidated in the "Discourses on the Perfection of Insight" (''Prajñāpāramitāsūtras'') that all factors of existence (''dharmas'') lack an own-being (emptiness), and the Yogācāra interpretation of this emptiness based on the imagined (''parikalpita''-), dependent (''paratantra''-) and perfect natures (''pariniṣpannasvabhāva''). Closely related to this threefold distinction was the Tathāgatagarbha restriction of emptiness to adventitious stains that cover an ultimate nature, that of buddha-qualities. Throughout Tibetan intellectual history it has been a controversial issue whether these teachings require a distinction between two modes of emptiness: being "empty of an own-being" (''rang stong''), and "empty of other" (''gzhan stong''). While a follower of the ''rang-stong'' view insists that everything (and that includes the Buddha and his qualities) shares the same mode of emptiness (i.e., the absence of an independent existence), some followers of ''gzhan stong'' claim that the ultimate nature of mind and its inherent buddha qualities do have an independent existence, since they are only empty of everything else ("the other") that does not belong to them. This must be distinguished from a more moderate form of ''gzhan stong'', which admits the ''rang stong'' mode of emptiness for both the adventitious stains of relative truth as well as the ultimate nature of mind, but insists that for a practitioner with an immediate experience of the ultimate nature, it is essential to distinguish the latter from the adventitious states of mind that do not reflect how the nature of mind truly is. While forerunners of ''rang stong/gzhan stong'' distinctions can be already identified in a variety of Indian texts and early bKa'-gdams-pa manuscripts,'"`UNIQ--ref-00000F91-QINU`"' their most influential proponents doubtlessly were Dol-po-pa Shes-rab rgyal-mtshan (1292–1361) and Gser-mdog paṇ-chen Shākya mchog-ldan (1427–1507). At the other end of our time frame, new insights into the development of ''gzhan stong'' at the very end of the ''ris-med'' movement can now be gained from the collected works of Zhe-chen Mkhan-chen Gang-shar dbang-po (1925–1958/59?). The contributions to this volume were presented at the ''gzhan stong'' panel organized by Klaus-Dieter Mathes (University of Vienna) at the Twelfth Seminar of the International Association for Tibetan Studies in Vancouver, Canada, in August 2010. Its full name was "The History of the ''Rang stong''/''Gzhan stong'' Distinction from its Beginning through the ''Ris-med'' Movement." The contributors were, besides the organizer, Karl Brunnhölzl (Tsadra Foundation), Anne Burchardi (The University of Copenhagen and The Royal Library of Denmark), Douglas Duckworth (Temple University), David Higgins (University of Vienna), Yaroslav Komarovski (University of Nebraska-Lincoln), and Tsering Wangchuk (University of San Francisco). It is regretted that Karl Brunnhölzl and Douglas Duckworth were unable to include their work in the present publication. (Mathes, introduction, 4–5)introduction, 4–5))
Articles/Impermanence is Buddha Nature + (Change isn’t just a fact of life we have t … Change isn’t just a fact of life we have to accept and work with, says Norman Fischer. Practitioners have always understood impermanence as the cornerstone of Buddhist teachings and practice. All that exists is impermanent; nothing lasts. Therefore nothing can be grasped or held onto. When we don’t fully appreciate this simple but profound truth we suffer, as did the monks who descended into misery and despair at the Buddha’s passing. When we do, we have real peace and understanding, as did the monks who remained fully mindful and calm...nks who remained fully mindful and calm...)
Articles/A Re-examination of the Relationship between the Awakening of Faith and Dilun School Thought, Focusing on the Works of Huiyuan + (Ching Keng’s paper challenges the prevalen … Ching Keng’s paper challenges the prevalent assumption that the ''Awakening of Faith'' was composed under the influence of the Dilun School. Keng aims to show that in the representative works of Huiyuan, arguably the most important Dilun master, we do not find the essential doctrinal feature of the ''Awakening of Faith'', namely, the compromise or even the total obliteration of the distinction between unconditioned (''asaṃskṛta'') and conditioned (''saṃskṛta'') dharmas. Keng observes that almost all available studies of Huiyuan focus on a small piece entitled "Bashi yi" (八識義, "On the Meaning of the Eight Consciousnesses"), which shows strong influence from the "Awakening of Faith"; but that other works of Huiyuan outline a very different conceptual scheme. Taking these other works as representing Huiyuan's earlier thought, and therefore Dilun thought, Keng argues that the hallmark of Huiyuan's thought is a dualist scheme, in which the inherently pure aspect is unambiguously unconditioned, with no blending with conditioned dharmas; this inherently pure aspect can adjust to falsity (''suiwang'' 隨妄) and give rise to misconception, but without compromising its unconditioned nature. Upon this basis, Keng contends that the compromise between unconditioned and conditioned in the ''Awakening of Faith'' should be regarded as an innovation, rather than a direct outgrowth from Dilun thought. An important broader implication of Keng's argument is that Huiyuan’s thought, Dilun thought, and even the thought of the ''Laṅkāvatāra-sūtra'' has been anachronistically misinterpreted through the later, typically Chinese lens of the ''Awakening of Faith''. This suggests the sobering possibility that typically "sinitic" (or even "sinified") developments became so pervasive in the later East Asian tradition that their stamp may still lie heavy upon parts of modern Buddhology itself, and that we might therefore overlook both evidence and products of "sinifying" processes, and even the actual features of Indic materials. (Radich and Lin, introduction to ''A Distant Mirror'', 25–26)troduction to ''A Distant Mirror'', 25–26))
Articles/Consciousness and Luminosity in Indian and Tibetan Buddhism + (Dr. Tadeusz Skorupski in ‘Consciousness an … Dr. Tadeusz Skorupski in ‘Consciousness and Luminosity in Indian and Tibetan Buddhism’ invokes the juxtaposition of the phenomenal world of ''saṃsāra'' and the perfected state of nirvana, noting that they reflect and essentially correspond to the dynamic operating in the Buddhist analysis of consciousness and the propensities of the human mind: the mind produces the factors contributing to rebirth, but is also the primary vehicle in the attainment of salvation. He identifies several key features that permeate early Buddhist doctrine: the pre-eminence of mind, the notion of inherent radiance, the alien nature of the defilements that contaminate the mind, and the interplay of the image of purification and corruption. Starting with a close reading of Buddhaghosa's interpretations of the nature of luminosity, the author extends his discussion to include the Mahāsaṅgikas, who emphasize the inherent radiance of a mind obscured by adventitious defilements, and the Sarvāstivāda Vaibhāṣikas, who aver that an inherently radiant mind could not be obscured, for to them it has a propensity, rather than an innate disposition, to luminosity. Delineating various attributes of the description of consciousness according to different schools, the author moves from Pāli ''Abhidhamma'' to Mahāyana and Vajrayāna sources and Bodhicitta doctrine. Alighting on subsequent Indian Tantric theories that posit a fourfold luminosity of consciousness as four kinds of emptiness, he notes that such an understanding of consciousness and luminosity was applied in the Tibetan understanding of the processes occurring during death, as described in the work known as ''The Tibetan Book of the Dead''. The author describes this account of death, as involving the transition through four kinds of luminosity, as unique to Tibet, in particular to the Nyingma and Kagyu traditions. He concludes that although varied schools often disagree in certain features, all concur in the possibility of and access to a purified mind. Tracing the continuity between early ''Abhidhamma'' through to the various Mahāyāna schools, the author avers, provides an insightful range of perspectives on luminosity and nature of the mind itself. (Editorial Committee, introduction, 10) [http://btmar.org/files/pdf/buddhist_philosophy_and_meditation_practice.pdf Read more here . . .]ophy_and_meditation_practice.pdf Read more here . . .])
Articles/Dōgen on Buddha Nature + (DŌGEN (1200–1253) is one of the most outst … DŌGEN (1200–1253) is one of the most outstanding and unique Buddhists in the history of Japanese Buddhism. He is unique in at least the following three senses.First, rejecting all existing forms of Buddhism in Japan as unauthentic, he attempted to introduce and establish what he believed to be the genuine Buddhism, based on his own realization which he attained in Sung China under the guidance of the Zen Master Ju-ching (Nyojō, 1163-1228). He called it "the Buddha Dharma directly transmitted from the Buddha and patriarchs." He emphasized ''zazen'''"`UNIQ--ref-00000001-QINU`"'(seated meditation) as being "the right entrance to the Buddha Dharma" in the tradition of the Zen schools in China since Bodhidharma, originating from Śākyamuni Buddha. Yet he strictly refused to speak of a "Zen sect," to say nothing of a "Sōtō sect," that he was later credited with founding. For Dōgen was concerned solely with the "right Dharma," and regarded ''zazen'' as its "right entrance." "Who has used the name 'Zen sect'? No buddha or patriarch spoke of a 'Zen sect.' You should realize it is a devil that speaks of 'Zen sect.' Those who pronounce a devil's appellation must be confederates of the devil, not children of the Buddha.",'"`UNIQ--ref-00000002-QINU`"'He called himself "the Dharma transmitter Shamon Dōgen who went to China"'"`UNIQ--ref-00000003-QINU`"'with strong conviction that he had attained the authentic Dharma that is directly transmitted from buddha to buddha, and that he should transplant it on Japanese soil. Thus he rejected the idea of ''mappo'''"`UNIQ--ref-00000004-QINU`"', i.e., the last or degenerate Dharma, an idea with wide acceptance in the Japanese Buddhism of his day. It may not be too much to say of Dōgen that just as Bodhidharma transmitted the Buddha Dharma to China, he intended to transmit it to Japan.Secondly, though Dōgen came to a realization of the right Dharma under the guidance of a Chinese Zen master whom he continued to revere throughout his life, the understanding of the right Dharma is unique to Dogen. With religious awakening and penetrating insight, Dōgen grasped the Buddha Dharma in its deepest and most authentic sense. In doing so, he dared to reinterpret the words of former patriarchs, and even the sutras themselves. As a result, his idea of the right Dharma presents one of the purest forms of Mahayana Buddhism, in which the Dharma that was realized in the Buddha's enlightenment reveals itself most profoundly. All of this, it is noteworthy, is rooted in Dōgen's own existential realization, which he attained in himself through long and intense seeking. Based on this idea of the right Dharma, he not only rejected, as stated above, all existing forms of Buddhism in Japan, but also severely criticized certain forms of Indian and Chinese Buddhism, though, it is true, he generally considered Buddhism in these two countries as more authentic than that in Japan.The third reason Dōgen is unique in the history of Japanese Buddhism, is because of his speculative and philosophical nature. He was a strict practicer of ''zazen'', who earnestly emphasized ''shikantaza'''"`UNIQ--ref-00000005-QINU`"', i.e., just sitting. His whole life was spent in rigorous discipline as a monk. He encouraged his disciples to do the same. Yet he was endowed with keen linguistic sensibility and a philosophical mind. His main work, entitled ''Shōbōgenzō'''"`UNIQ--ref-00000006-QINU`"', "A Treasury of the Right Dharma Eye," perhaps unsurpassable in its philosophical speculation, is a monumental document in Japanese intellectual history. In Dōgen, we find a rare combination of religious insight and philosophical ability. In this respect, he may be well compared with Thomas Aquinas, born twenty five years after him.He wrote his main work, ''Shōbōgenzō'', in Japanese, in spite of the fact that leading Japanese Buddhists until then had usually written their major works in Chinese. Dōgen made penetrating speculations and tried to express the world of the Buddha Dharma in his mother tongue by mixing Chinese Buddhist and colloquial terms freely in his composition. The difficult and unique style of his Japanese writing is derived from the fact that, in expressing his own awakening, he never used conventional terminology, but employed a vivid, personal style grounded in his subjective speculations. Even when he used traditional Buddhist phrases, passages, etc., he interpreted them in unusual ways in order to express the Truth as he understood it. In Dōgen, the process of the search for and realization of the Buddha Dharma and the speculation on and expression of that process are uniquely combined.'"`UNIQ--ref-00000007-QINU`"' In this paper I shall discuss Dōgen's idea of Buddha nature, which may be regarded as a characteristic example of his realization. (Abe, "Dōgen on Buddha Nature", 28–30)on. (Abe, "Dōgen on Buddha Nature", 28–30))
Articles/Impermanence Is Buddha-Nature: Dōgen's Understanding of Temporality-Review by Lusthaus + (Few premodern Japanese thinkers have recei … Few premodern Japanese thinkers have received as much attention from Western philosophical circles as the thirteenth century Sōtō Zen master Dōgen. This interest has been sparked and facilitated by insightful English translations of key portions of Dōgen's masterful collected work, the ''Shōbōgenzō'' (especially those by Norman Waddell and Masao Abe), and by several book-length studies of Dōgen's thought—most notably those by Hee-jin Kim, Steven Heine, and Carl Bielefeldt. Kim and Heine, in particular, have examined Dōgen from a cross-cultural philosophic perspective. Professor Stambaugh, whose background is primarily German Philosophy of the nineteenth and twentieth centuries, first turned to Dōgen in the climactic chapter of her book ''The Real in Not the Rational'' [Albany, NY, 1986]. Also the author of ''The Problem of Time in Nietzsche'' [Lewisburg, 1987], she has combined in her present work many of the concerns and issues raised in these previous works while embarking on several new avenues of investigation. She is genuinely impressed with Dōgen, and portrays him as a strong and critical voice capable of insights that frequently go beyond the formulations proffered by the Western philosophers whim whom she compares him, philosophers such as Aristotle, Hegel, Nietzsche, and Heidegger. Generally her method of argument in each chapter consists of setting out basic categories—such as transcendence-immanence, identity-difference, etc.— or sketching the view of a particular philosopher—such as Hegel's notion of dialectic—and then allowing Dōgen to either supplement or supplant what has been introduced. In the earlier chapter this method proves fruitful and she repeatedly zeroes in on crucial passages from Dōgen's seminal works: ''Uji'' ('"Being Time"), ''Genjokōan'' ("Actualizing the Kōan"), ''Busshō'' ("Buddha-nature"), ''Gyōji'' ("Ceaseless Practice"), and so on. She is a careful reader, sensitive to many of the philosophical subtleties of Dōgen's writings, and her insights are frequently illuminating and lucid. This is no mean task, given the difficult and unusual language Dōgen uses to express himself. She is particularly effective, I think, in her discussion of the Buddha-nature fascicle, clearly explaining why, for Dōgen, Buddha-nature is neither something that someone possesses nor a potentiality that someone develops or brings to fruition. (Lusthaus, Review of ''Impermanence Is Buddha-Nature'', 69-70))
Articles/Tāranātha's "Twenty-One Differences with Regard to the Profound Meaning" + (For a short but brilliant analysis of the … For a short but brilliant analysis of the positions of Dol po pa and Śākya mchog Idan we are very much indebted to the Jonang master Tāranātha, who is considered to be a follower and proponent of Dol po pa's doctrine. In each of the ''Twenty-one Differences with regard to the Profound Meaning'' a fictive initial statement of Śākya mchog Idan is followed by a similarly fictive reply of Dol po pa, Tāranātha being, of course, well aware of the fact that this is all ahistorical.'"`UNIQ--ref-00001029-QINU`"' To be sure, it is not possible to establish Śākya mchog ldan's or Dol po pa's views on the basis of this short text alone, but it does sharpen our awareness of the subtle aspects of ''gźan stoṅ'' when studying the bulky and often not very systematic works of these masters. Furthermore, critically evaluating these doctrinal differences against the background of pertinent Indian texts in such traditions as the Madhyamaka, Yogācāra and Tathāgatagarbha promises to be a second interesting task. Both are, however, beyond the scope of this paper. Such an evaluation will, however, be undertaken with regard to the different presentations of ''trisvabhāva'' as an example of how one might proceed. Tāranātha begins his somewhat delicate task of comparing the two masters Dol po pa and Śākya mchog ldan in a conciliating manner, by explaining that both supposedly see what is profound reality and hence should not have different thoughts about it. It is only in order to accommodate the different needs of their disciples that they enunciate variant views. Even though the essential ''gźan stoṅ'' view and meditation practices of both masters are the same, there are a lot of minor differences regarding tenets (''grub mtha''') that arise when formulating the view on the level of apparent truth.'"`UNIQ--ref-0000102A-QINU`"' The first four of the twenty-one points address differences in the exegesis of the Madhyamaka and Maitreya texts which are considered to be commentaries on the Buddha's intention underlying the second and third turnings of the "Wheel of the Dharma" (''dharmacakra'').'"`UNIQ--ref-0000102B-QINU`"' Points 5-8 embody Śākya mchog ldan's and Dol po pa's different understanding of non-dual wisdom. In points 9-16, their views on the ''trisvabhāva'' theory are distinguished. In a related topic, Tāranātha also elaborates the different understandings of self-awareness (point 11), entities and non-entities, and conditioned and unconditioned phenonema (all in point 13). Next, our attention is drawn to different ways of relating the four noble truths with the apparent and ultimate (point 17). The last four points deal with the two masters' views on the Buddha-nature. (Mathes, "Tāranātha's 'Twenty-One Differences with Regard to the Profound Meaning'," 294–95) [https://journals.ub.uni-heidelberg.de/index.php/jiabs/article/view/8952/2845 Read more here . . .]. . .])
Articles/A Study on the Ratnagotravibhāga (Uttaratantra): Being a Treatise on the Tathāgatagarbha Theory of Mahāyāna Buddhism-Review by de Jong + (For several reasons the ''Ratnagotravibhāg … For several reasons the ''Ratnagotravibhāga'' deserves our attention. It is the only text on the ''tathāgatagarbha'' which has been preserved in Sanskrit. There are many problems connected with its place in the history of Mahāyāna philosophy and with its authorship. The Tibetan tradition attributes the verses to Maitreya and the prose commentary to Asaṅga. This text is held in high regard as one of the five treatises composed by Maitreya. However, the Chinese tradition attributes the whole work to Sāramati. This tradition is mentioned by Yüan-ts'e (613-696) in his commentary on the ''Saṃdhinirmocanasūtra'''"`UNIQ--ref-00001439-QINU`"' and by Fa-tsang (643-712) in his commentary on the ''Dharmadhātvaviśeṣaśāstra''.'"`UNIQ--ref-0000143A-QINU`"' Probably the earliest reference to Sāramati as author of the ''Ratnagotravibhāga'' is to be found in Chih-i's ''Mo-ho chih-kuan'' (''Taishō'', Vol. XLVI, Nr. 1911, p. 31b18-26) which has been dictated by him in 594 (cf. p. 125 of Tsukinowa's article mentioned in note 8). The identity of Sāramati raises many problems. Some scholars have identified him with Sthiramati,'"`UNIQ--ref-0000143B-QINU`"' others have distinguished two Sāramati's.'"`UNIQ--ref-0000143C-QINU`"' There are also many obscurities in the Chinese traditions concerning the translator of the Chinese version. Chinese catalogues mention two translations, one by Ratnamati and the other by Bodhiruci. In 1931 E. Obermiller published a translation of the ''Ratnagotravibhāga'' from the Tibetan: "The Sublime Science of the Great Vehicle to Salvation", ''Acta Orientalia'', Vol. IX, Part II.III, pp. 81-306.'"`UNIQ--ref-0000143D-QINU`"' His interpretation of the text is based upon a commentary by Tsoṅ-kha-pa's pupil and successor rGyal-tshab Dar-ma rin-chen (1364–1432)'"`UNIQ--ref-0000143E-QINU`"' The Sanskrit text has been edited by E. H. Johnston and published by T. Chowdhury: ''The Ratnagotravibhāga Mahāyānottaratantraśāstra'' (Patna, 1950). This edition is based upon two manuscripts found in Tibet by Rāhula Sāṁkṛtyāyana. The edition of the Sanskrit text has given a new impulse to the study of the ''Ratnagotravibhāga''. Several passages of the ''Ratnagotravibhāga'' have been translated by E. Conze (''Buddhist Texts through the Ages'', Oxford, 1954, pp. 130-131, 181-184 and 216-217). In ''Die Philosophie des Buddhismus'' (Berlin, 1956, pp. 255-264) E. Frauwallner has given a summary of the ideas contained in this text and a translation of several verses.'"`UNIQ--ref-0000143F-QINU`"' In 1959 Ui Hakuju published a detailed study on the ''Ratnagotravibhāga'' (''Hōshōron Kenkyū'') which contains a complete translation (pp. 471-648), together with a Sanskrit-Japanese glossary (pp. 1-60 with separate pagination).'"`UNIQ--ref-00001440-QINU`"' Professor Takasaki's translation was undertaken during his stay in India (1954-1957) and continued afterwards. Apart from this book he has published between 1958 and 1964 ten articles relating to the ''Ratnagotravibhāga'' (a list is given on pp. xii-xiii).'"`UNIQ--ref-00001441-QINU`"' . . . The translation of the ''Ratnagotravibhāga'' by Professor Takasaki is the first to be based on the Sanskrit text and the Chinese and Tibetan translations. Obermiller utilized only the Tibetan version and his translation, excellent as it is, contains a number of mistakes which are obvious in the light of the Sanskrit text. Ui utilized both the Sanskrit text and the Chinese translation, but he was unable to consult the Tibetan translation directly. His knowledge of it was based upon a Japanese translation, made for him by Tada Tōkan, and upon Obermiller's English translation. It is clear from many indications that the Chinese translation is closer to the original than both the Sanskrit text and the Tibetan translation. However, as concerns the interpretation of the text, the Chinese translation is now always a reliable guide. There are several places where Professor Takasaki has been too much influenced by it but in general he indicates very well the wrong interpretations which are to be found in the Chinese translation. For the Tibetan translation Professor Takasaki has consulted only the Derge edition. A comparison of the passages quoted in the notes with the corresponding passages in the Peking edition (the only one at my disposal) shows that the Derge edition does not always give a satisfactory text. An edition of the Tibetan translation based on the Derge, Peking and Narthang editions would be highly desirable. In view of the importance of the vocabulary of the ''Ratnagotravibhāga'' for both Buddhist Sanskrit and Mahāyāna terminology, it would also be very useful to have indexes, on the lines of those compiled by Professor Nagao for the ''Mahāyānasūtrālaṃkāra''. [https://www.jstor.org/stable/24650390?seq=1 Read more here . . .] .] )
Articles/The Mahāsāṃghika and the Tathāgatagarbha (Buddhist Doctrinal History, Study 1) + (For the origins of the Mahāyāna we must ag … For the origins of the Mahāyāna we must agree with Hirakawa'"`UNIQ--ref-000014AF-QINU`"' that while some Mahāyāna doctrines are derived from the Mahāsāṃghika school, some others are derived from the Sarvāstivādin school. I would add that unless some other source can be pointed to, we may conclude that Mahāyāna Buddhism in its various forms, at least leaving out the special development of Tantrism, can be traced to either the Mahāsāṃghika or the Sarvāstivādin schools. It is well recognized by Buddhologists that the Mahāsāṃghika sect arose by a schism from the previously undivided Buddhist ''saṃgha'' in the second century after the Buddha's Nirvāṇa (A.N.), leaving the other part of the ''saṃgha'' to be called Sthavira. As to precisely when the schism occurred, there was a difference of opinion as to whether it happened as a result of the Second Buddhist Council (about 110 A.N.) over a laxity of Vinaya rules by some monks, or happened later in the century (137 A.N.) over the five theses about Arhats and which occasioned a 'Third Buddhist Council' sponsored by the Kings Nanda and Mahāpadma. There were some other possibilities, as summarized by Nattier and Prebish,'"`UNIQ--ref-000014B0-QINU`"' who conclude that the schism occurred 116 A.N. over Vinaya rules, while the argument over Arhat attainment provoked a further split within the already existing Mahāsāṃghika sect. It is immaterial for our purposes whether the 'five theses of Mahādeva' downgrading the Arhat occasioned the schism between the Mahāsāṃghikas and the Sthaviras, or whether this downgrading was an internal argument within the Mahāsāṃghika. What is important here is that the downgrading of the Arhat continued into a Mahāyāna scripture called the ''Śrīmālā-sūtra'', and that the five theses are a characteristic of the Mahāsāṃghika, to wit: 1. Arhats are tempted by others, 2. they still have ignorance, 3. they still have doubt, 4. they are liberated by others; and 5. the path is accompanied by utterance. The fifth of these seems explainable by other Mahāsāṃghika tenets, in Bareau's listing:'"`UNIQ--ref-000014B1-QINU`"' No. 58 'morality is not mental'; No. 59 'morality does not follow upon thought'; No. 60 'virtue caused by a vow increases'; No. 61 'candor (''vijñapti'') is virtue'; No. 62 'reticence (''avijñapti'') is immoral.' Part I of this paper attempts to relate the ''Śrīmālā-sūtra'' and the Tathāgatagarbha doctrine to the Mahāsaṃnghika school. Part II discusses the terms ''dharmatā'' and ''svabhāva'' so as to expose an ancient quarrel. (Wayman, introduction, 35–36))
Articles/On the Eschatology of the Mahāparinirvāṇa Sūtra and Related Matters + (Given that the MPNS is such a complex text … Given that the MPNS is such a complex text, I should like to take up just one theme that runs through much of this sutra—the way the compilers of this sūtra seem to have perceived the causes and the implications of the decline of the Dharma, that is, what one might, as I have done here, term the "eschatology of the MPNS." I believe this may provide an important key tounderstanding the entire sūtra, though some of my conclusions are necessarily based on circumstantial evidence. One might also remark here, in passing, that the prominence of the concept in the MPNS that the scriptural Dharma is, as we shall see, decidedly impermanent stands out in stark contrast to the recurrent idea in the sūtra of the permanence of Buddha. (Hodge, introduction, 1)anence of Buddha. (Hodge, introduction, 1))
Articles/The Idea of Dhātu-vāda in Yogācāra and Tathāgata-garbha Texts + (Hakamaya Noriaki and Matsumoto Shirõ are c … Hakamaya Noriaki and Matsumoto Shirõ are convinced that ''tathāgatagarbha'' theory and the Yogācāra school share a common framework that they call ''dhātu-vāda'' or "locus theory." The word ''dhātu-vāda'' itself is a neologism introduced by Matsumoto'"`UNIQ--ref-0000112C-QINU`"' and adopted by Hakamaya.'"`UNIQ--ref-0000112D-QINU`"' They argue that the ''dhātu-vāda'' idea stands in direct contradiction to the authentic Buddhist theory of ''pratītyasamutpāda'' or "dependent origination," which in turn leads them to consider ''tathāgata-garbha'' and Yogācāra theories to be non-Buddhist. In their opinion, not only these Indian theories but also the whole of "original enlightenment thought" (''hongaku shisõ'') in East Asia fell under the shadow of the ''dhātu-vāda'' idea,'"`UNIQ--ref-0000112E-QINU`"' with the result that most of its Buddhism is dismissed as not Buddhist at all.'"`UNIQ--ref-0000112F-QINU`"' The idea of ''dhātu-vāda'' is thus an integral part of the Critical Buddhism critique and as such merits careful examination in any evaluation of the overall standpoint. Since Matsumoto first found the ''dhātu-vāda'' structure in Indian ''tathāgata-garbha'' and Yogācāra literature, we need to begin with a look at the texts in question. My approach here will be purely philological and will limit itself to the theoretical treatises (śāstras). (Yamabe, introductory remarks, 193) [https://www.academia.edu/33371726/The_Idea_of_Dh%C4%81tu-v%C4%81da_in_Yogacara_and_Tath%C4%81gata-garbha_Texts Read more here:]-garbha_Texts Read more here:])
Articles/T'ien-T'ai Chih-I's Theory of Buddha Nature—A Realistic and Humanistic Understanding of the Buddha + (Heng-ching Shih, in her contribution, expl … Heng-ching Shih, in her contribution, explores in some detail the T'ien-t'ai view of Buddha Nature, with a special focus on the question of evil. This is clearly a difficult issue for any philosophical school whose basic affirmation is that all living beings are naturally and originally pure and radiant: how, if this is true, can one account for the apparent existence of evil, the opposite or absence of this purity and radiance? Shih's chronological review of the development of the theory of "inherent evil" in T'ien-t'ai begins with the ''Ta ch'eng chih-kuan fa men'' which, in accord with the tradition, she judges to predate Chih-i himself, and then proceeds to an analysis of the ''Kuan-yin hsüan-i'', a work that, again following tradition, sheattributes to Chih-i. It is probably fair to say that the weight of contemporary historical-critical scholarship in both Japan and the West is against both this chronology and this attribution; Shih is, of course, aware of this, but judges the arguments against the traditional position to be inconclusive. The matter is complex, and the importance of Shih's paper lies not in this but rather in the substantive doctrinal analysis she provides of "inherent evil". (Griffiths and Keenan, introduction to ''Buddha Nature'', 6)nan, introduction to ''Buddha Nature'', 6))
Articles/On the Commentary on the Ratnagotravibhāga by Dol po pa + (I refer to the commentary on the ''Dharmad … I refer to the commentary on the ''Dharmadhātustava'' by Dol po pa Shes rab rgyal mtshan (l292-1361) in the last volume of this Journal'"`UNIQ--ref-00000001-QINU`"' and make it clear that this text is one of the important texts for him to establish the theory of other-emptiness (''gzhan stong'') or the great Madhyamaka (''dbu ma chen po'') in the Jo nang pa'"`UNIQ--ref-00000002-QINU`"' Though it is not so cited as the five ''Treatises of Maitreya'', he seems to acknowledge the reason why he must depend on it. Though the authorship of Nāgārjuna is doubted on the ground of reference to the tathāgatagarbha idea, this is convenient for Dol po pa who wants to establish the great Madhyamaka mixed the Madhyamaka idea with the Yogācāra idea or the tathāgatagarbha idea. That is to say, he uses it in order to prove that the idea of tathāgatagarbha is also taught in the Mādhyamika literature of Nāgārjuna. Then which text does he depend on to establish his original idea? As the ''Ratnagotravibhāga'' is cited most frequently in his ''bDen gnyis gsal ba'i nyi ma'''"`UNIQ--ref-00000003-QINU`"', it seems to be the most important text in his great Madhyamaka. I consider his commentary on the ''Ratnagotravibhāga'''"`UNIQ--ref-00000004-QINU`"' attributed to Maitreya here'"`UNIQ--ref-00000005-QINU`"'. (Mochizuki, introduction, 111)introduction, 111))
Articles/The Buddha Within: Tathagatagarbha Doctrine according to the Shentong Interpretation of the Ratnagotravibhāga-Review by Need + (In ''The Buddha Within'', Dr. S. K. Hookha … In ''The Buddha Within'', Dr. S. K. Hookham reworks her dissertation (Oxford, 1986) outlining the Shentong'"`UNIQ--ref-0000041D-QINU`"' tradition in Tibet and its view of ultimate reality. "Shentong" (''gzhan stong'', other-empty) is a term used in Tibet to refer to a view of ultimate reality as a wisdom consciousness empty or free of the illusory phenomena of conditioned existence. Such a view owes heavily to the description of ultimate reality in the Tathāgatagarbha Sūtras and in the tantras. One of the earliest proponents of this view was the Jo-nang-pa scholar, Dolpopa Sherab Gyaltsen (''dol-po-pa shes-rab rgyal-mtshan'', 1292-1361), whose massive study titled ''The Mountain Dharma: An Ocean of Definitive Meaning'' (''ri chos nges don rgya mtsho'') outlined this doctrine, extensively citing from sūtra and tantra in support of his position. The Shentong position advanced by Dolpopa and later by such figures as the seventh Karmapa (1454-1506), the Sakya scholar, Sakya Chogden (''gser-mdog paṇ-chen Śākya mchog-ldan'', 1428-1507), and most recently by one of the founders of the Rimay (''ris med'', nonsectarian) movement of the nineteenth and twentieth centuries,'"`UNIQ--ref-0000041E-QINU`"' Jamgon Kontrol Lodro Thayay ('''jam-mgon kong-sprul blo-gros mtha'-yas'', 1813-1899), was the object of sustained critique by scholars of other schools-notably those of the Geluk-pa tradition-who advanced what is called a "rangtong" (''rang stong'', self-empty) view of ultimate reality. These scholars held the ultimate truth to be an existent object of knowledge cognized by a wisdom consciousness. Such an object of a wisdom consciousness is held to be a nonaffirming negative—the absence of the inherent existence of any given phenomena, most importantly the self. Shentong advocates argue that this view of ultimate reality fails to account adequately for the qualities associated with a Buddha's wisdom, although it does account for the nature of illusory phenomena. (Need, "Review of ''The Buddha Within''," 585)d, "Review of ''The Buddha Within''," 585))
Articles/Presenting a Controversial Doctrine in a Conciliatory Way: Mkhan chen Gang shar dbang po's (1925–1958-59?) Inclusion of Gzhan stong ("Emptiness of Other") within Prāsaṅgika + (In . . . "Presenting a Controversial Doct … In . . . "Presenting a Controversial Doctrine in a Conciliatory Way: Mkhan-chen Gang-shar dbang-po’s (1925-1958/59?) Inclusion of ''Gzhan-stong'' ('Emptiness of Other') within Prāsaṅgika," I investigate the ''gzhan stong'' position of an influential rNying-ma-pa thinker, a learned master from Zhe-chen Monastery, who was among other things, a highly esteemed teacher of Thrangu Rinpoche, and thus influential in the latter's own understanding of ''gzhan stong''. Unlike Dol-po-pa or Shākya-mchog-ldan, mKhan-po Gang-shar does not present his ''gzhan stong'' against the backdrop of the three natures theory, but rather elucidates the distinction he makes between ''rang stong'' and ''gzhan stong'' within a Prāsaṅgika Madhyamaka framework. In a way similar to Klong-chen-pa, Gang-shar insists that everything from material form up to omniscience is ''rang stong'' only. This is when the two truths are presented asappearance and emptiness in terms of valid cognition that analyzes for the ultimate abiding nature. In the context of a conventional valid cognition, however, which analyzes for the mode of appearances (i.e., perception), the two truths are defined in terms of the way things appear versus the way they truly are. When the abiding nature is perceived as it truly is, there is still awareness, albeit in a form beyond the duality of ordinary perception. For Gang shar it is only in this phenomenological sense that the ''rang stong'' of samsara and ''gzhan stong'' of ''nirvāṇa'' need to be distinguished. [https://buddhanature.tsadra.org/index.php/Articles/Introduction:_The_History_of_the_Rang_stong-Gzhan_stong_Distinction_from_Its_Beginning_through_the_Ris-med_Movement (Mathes, "Introduction: The History of the ''Rang stong/Gzhan stong'' Distinction," 7)]Rang stong/Gzhan stong'' Distinction," 7)])
Articles/Image-likeness and the Tathāgatagarbha: A Reading of William of St. Thierry's Golden Epistle and the Ratnagotravibhāga + (In Book 10 of his ''Confessions'' Augustin … In Book 10 of his ''Confessions'' Augustine marvels as he meditates on the qualities of the ''memoria'' in human beings: '"`UNIQ--poem-00000136-QINU`"'This concern with the ''memoria'', and its function in the human mind, was to be one of the most important spiritual legacies Augustine would leave to the Latin, and especially monastic, Middle Ages. In fact, it would be possible to say without much exaggeration that the entire history of monastic spirituality in the Latin Middle Ages (at least until approximately A.D. 1200) is the record of the development of understanding of the power of ''memoria''.'"`UNIQ--ref-00000138-QINU`"' A central reason for this is that ''memoria'' was described as a faculty that worked by recalling the human person to the knowledge and intuition that they were created in the image and likeness of God. Thus the words of ''Genesis'' 1:26–27 stand at the beginning of an entire spiritual tradition: "God said let us make man in our own image, in the likeness of ourselves. . . . God created man in the image of himself, in the image of God he created him, male and female he created them." Augustine frequently exhorts himself, as in ''Confessions'' 7.10, to "return to myself" ''(redite ad memet ipsum)''. This was also the continual refrain of the Cistercian author of the twelfth century, William of St. Thierry, in his ''Golden Epistle'', and it serves as one of the themes on which he builds this work. William's treatise, folloing in the path of Augustine, is a call to discover the image and likeness of God in the individual person. In the presentation to follow I would like to set out two spiritual traditions for us to consider: the image-likeness tradition based on Genesis 1:26 and developed by the Latin and Greek Fathers of the Church until approximately A.D. 1200, and the ''tathāgatagarbha'' teachings on Buddha-nature in Mahayana Buddhism, which flourished in India and then spread to Tibet and other parts of the Far East in the first six centuries C.E. I shall do this bby presenting two texts: the ''Golden Epistle'' of William of St, Thierry, and the ''Ratnagotravibhāga'' (third to fifth centuries A.D.), variously attributed to Saramati or Maitreya. My thesis here is that while the language and concepts used in these two treatises are different, and the two worldviews of which they are representative also vary widely, we can find nonetheless underlying themes that express central concerns of each tradition, especially concerning the brith of a basic nature in the person, and the inability of either sin or defilements ''(kleśa)'' to cover over that nature that is coming to birth.'"`UNIQ--ref-00000139-QINU`"' (Groves, "Image-likeness and ''Tathāgatagarbha''," 97–98)thāgatagarbha''," 97–98))
Articles/The Canonization of Philosophy and the Rhetoric of Siddhānta in Tibetan Buddhism + (In a provocative essay entitled "Sacred Pe … In a provocative essay entitled "Sacred Persistence: Toward a Redescription of Canon"'"`UNIQ--ref-00003FC7-QINU`"' Jonathan Z. Smith describes the process of self-limitation that occurs when a tradition comes to define for itself (and to define itself in terms of) a canon. There he states that "the radical and arbitrary reduction represented by the notion of canon and the ingenuity represented by the rule-governed exegetical enterprise of applying the canon to every dimension of human life is that most characteristic, persistent, and obsessive religious activity."'"`UNIQ--ref-00003FC8-QINU`"' Perhaps the most important shortcoming of what is an otherwise masterful essay on the subject of religious canons and their interpretation is Smith's apparent lack of concern with the causal processes underlying the formation of canons and specifically with the social implications of the exclusion of texts or other religious elements from a canon. Contrary to Smith's claim, it has become quite clear, especially in the scholarship of the past decade, that the "reduction" involved in the process of canon-formation is never, as he suggests, "arbitrary". Instead, religious texts come to be considered canonical usually at the expense of other texts that are ''consciously'' excluded and thereby denied normative status. To say that the decision to exclude a particular work is conscious and not arbitrary is to point out that it is ideologically motivated (at times only implicitly so), that it arises within a specific historical and sociocultural context and, perhaps the most significant point, that it is an act of the religious hegemony.'"`UNIQ--ref-00003FC9-QINU`"'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-00003FCA-QINU`"' Secondly, I shall maintain that, despite the fact that Tibetan exegetes have arrived at only a tentative consensus'"`UNIQ--ref-00003FCB-QINU`"' as to the nature of the textual canons,'"`UNIQ--ref-00003FCC-QINU`"' the determination of whether or not a doctrine was normatively Buddhist (and if so either provisionally or unequivocally true)'"`UNIQ--ref-00003FCD-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-00003FCE-QINU`"' (Cabezón, "The Canonization of Philosophy," 7–9)ón, "The Canonization of Philosophy," 7–9))
Articles/Tathāgatagarbha from the Perspective of Karma pa Mi bskyod rdo rje as Presented in His Lamp that Eloquently Highlights the Tradition of the Gzhan stong Madhyamaka Proponents + (In his ''Lamp'', Karma pa Mi bskyod rdo rj … In his ''Lamp'', Karma pa Mi bskyod rdo rje equates ''tathāgatagarbha'' with the ''dharmadhātu'' which is realized through self-aware, self-luminous wisdom. He maintains that there is no dependency on extraneous factors; buddha nature, so to speak, is self-sufficient, bringing about its perfect awakening by means of personally experienced wisdom. ''Tathāgatagarbha'' is spontaneously endowed with qualities and activities and is permanent in the specific sense that it remains unchanging throughout the three phases and thus its beneficial activities never come to an end. Therefore, the absolute, ''tathāgatagarbha'', being effective, i.e. of benefit, for itself and for others, is empty of afflictions, but not empty of qualities. lt is from this point of view that the text—despite the fact that the term ''gzhan stong'' is nowhere to be found—can well be understood as a way of highlighting the intent of the proponents of ''gzhan stong'' Madhyamaka. Mi bskyod rdo rje, following the lead of Maitreya-Asaṅga with their cataphatic appraisal of the absolute, equates ''tathāgatagarbha'' with the ''dharmakāya'', with the expanse of ''nirvāṇa'', and with perfect awakening replete with qualities. To him this is the essential meaning of Madhyamaka, and it is for this reason that he frequently refers to Asaṅga as the Great Madhyamika. It is against this background that Mi bskyod rdo rje criticizes those Madhyamaka representatives who do not comprehend the meaning of the third dharma cycle and who therefore view ''tathāgatagarbha'' and its associated buddha qualities and activities exclusively from the perspective of a non-affirming negation. (Draszczyk, conclusion, 157)ing negation. (Draszczyk, conclusion, 157))
Articles/The Original Ratnagotravibhāga and Its Yogāçāra Interpretation as Possible Indian Precedents of Gzhan stong ("Empti-ness of Other") + (In his pioneering study of the ''Ratnagotr … In his pioneering study of the ''Ratnagotravibhāga'' (RGV) TAKASAKI Jikido showed that the standard Indian treatise on ''tathāgatagarbha'' consists of different layers and reduced it to what he considered to be the original ''Ratnagotravibhāga'' by excluding later strands of the text.'"`UNIQ--ref-00001041-QINU`"' Schmithausen continued this "textual archaeology," which left us with an original text of fifteen verses only.'"`UNIQ--ref-00001042-QINU`"' While these ''Ratnagotravibhāga'' verses (which in the following I shall refer to as "the original" version) support the idea of an already fully developed "buddha-element" ''(buddhadhātu}'''"`UNIQ--ref-00001043-QINU`"' in sentient beings, the final (standard) version of the ''Ratnagotravibhāga'' and its ''vyākhyā'' exhibit a systematic Yogāçāra interpretation of the original ''tathāgatagarbha'' theory. The original and final ''Ratnagotravibhāga'' represent the prototypes of at least two different ''gzhan stong'' interpretations, which mainly differ in whether they restrict or not the basis of emptiness to an unchanging perfect nature. (Mathes, "The Original ''Ratnagotravibhāga''," 119)"The Original ''Ratnagotravibhāga''," 119))
Articles/The Doctrine of the Buddha-Nature in the Mahāyāna Mahāparinirvāṇa-Sūtra + (In the Buddhist Canon, there are two main … In the Buddhist Canon, there are two main corpuses of texts which go by the name ''Mahāparinirvāṇa-sūtra'' (henceforth abbreviated to ''MNS'') and have as their main concern the recounting of the events and dialogues of the last days of the Buddha. The first, presumably of earlier origin, is a comprehensive compendium of Hīnayāna ideas and precepts. It exists today in its Pali, Sanskrit and Chinese versions, and for its attention to factual details has been resorted to as the principal source of reference in most standard studies of the Buddha's life. As for the second, only its Chinese and Tibetan translations are still extant.'"`UNIQ--ref-00000343-QINU`"' While it also relates some of the well-known episodes of the final months of the Buddha Śākyamuni, notably his illness and the last meal offered by Cunda, such narrations are treated in the work merely as convenient spring-boards for the expression of such standard Mahayana ideas as the eternal nature of Buddhahood and expedience as method of instruction. Both in style and content, this corpus exhibits the disregard of historical particulars and the fascination with the supernatural and the ideal which characterize Mahāyāna writings in general. As a Mahāyāna sūtra, it is of rather late date, for it mentions such influential "middle Mahāyāna" works as the ''Saddharmapuṇḍarīka-sūtra'' and the ''Śūraṃgamasaṃādhi-nirdeśa'' in its text, and so couldnot have been compiled before the second century A.D.'"`UNIQ--ref-00000344-QINU`"' It is this Mahāyāna version of the ''MNS'' which we are going to examine in our present study. (Liu, introduction, 63)our present study. (Liu, introduction, 63))
Articles/The Problem of the Icchantika in the Mahāyāna Mahāparinirvaṇa Sūtra + (In the Chinese Buddhist Canon, there are t … In the Chinese Buddhist Canon, there are two corpuses of texts which go by the name of the ''Mahāparinirvāṇa-sūtra'' (henceforth, ''MNS''). The first corresponds in main to the ''Mahāparinibbāna-suttanta'' in the ''Dīgha-nikāya'' of the Pāli Canon. Being essentially Hīnayāna in outlook, it has received little attention in China. The second, which exhibits all the features of a Mahāyāna text, generated immediate enthusiasm on its first introduction into China in the early fifth century, and has exerted enormous influence on the development of Chinese Buddhist thought. Especially worth mentioning in this connection is its teaching of Buddha-nature. It is well-known that the idea of Buddha-nature, one of the central concepts in Chinese Buddhism, was first made popular in the country by the Mahāyāna version of the ''MNS'', which remains the principal source of reference as well as the final authority in all subsequent discussions on the subject. Indeed, it is no exaggeration to assert that without a proper understanding of the Buddha-nature doctrine as appears in this Mahāyāna version of the ''MNS'', it would be impossible to grasp the significance of the subsequent evolution of the concept in the Chinese Buddhist tradition. It is the orthodox belief that the ''MNS'' teaches that all sentient beings possess the Buddha-nature. Since in the ''MNS'' "Buddha-nature" refers to "the nature of the Buddha" and "to possess" the Buddha-nature in the case of sentient beings usually indicates "to have in the future,"'"`UNIQ--ref-00002F2F-QINU`"' this belief amounts to the conviction that the MNS maintains that all sentient beings will achieve Buddhahood someday. This conviction is well attested by the text of the ''MNS''. Thus, we find it clearly expressed in the ''MNS'' that "all three vehicles will eventually share the same Buddha-nature":'"`UNIQ--poem-00002F31-QINU`"'Those who refuse to accept the tenet that all sentient beings without exception will possess the Buddha-nature are criticized by the ''MNS'' as wanting in faith.'"`UNIQ--ref-00002F33-QINU`"' In the sūtra, this idea of the universal presence of the Buddha-nature is presented as one of the distinctive themes of Mahāyāna writings'"`UNIQ--ref-00002F34-QINU`"' as well as among the principal claims to excellence of the ''MNS'' itself.'"`UNIQ--ref-00002F35-QINU`"' It is so highly esteemed that it is described as representing the "essential meaning" (''tzu-i'') of the Buddha's teaching;'"`UNIQ--ref-00002F36-QINU`"' and, together with the doctrine of the eternal nature of the Tathāgata, it is said to be definitive (''chüeh-ting'') and not open to future amendments.'"`UNIQ--ref-00002F37-QINU`"' If this thesis of the eventual enlightenment of all sentient beings does indeed constitute the central theme of the ''MNS'', it is strongly qualified by the presence in the sutra of the concept of the'' icchantika''. The term "''icchantika''" is derived from the Sanskrit root ''is'' meaning "to desire," "to wish" and "to long for." This explains the variant Chinese renderings of the term "''icchantika''" as "a being of many desires" (''to-yü''), "a being cherishing desires" (''lo-yü'') and "a being full of greed" (''ta-t'an'').'"`UNIQ--ref-00002F38-QINU`"' But in the ''MNS'', the failings attributed to the ''icchantikas'' far exceed those which are usually associated with people of such descriptions. In the sūtra, the ''icchantika'' is described as "devoid of good roots"'"`UNIQ--ref-00002F39-QINU`"' and as "the most wicked being."'"`UNIQ--ref-00002F3A-QINU`"' He is depicted as "having no capacity for the [true] Dharma"'"`UNIQ--ref-00002F3B-QINU`"' such that he can never be rehabilitated by the instruction of the Buddha and so will never attain supreme enlightenment. Taken at its face value, this picture of a being condemned forever to spiritual darkness appears to contradict the proposition of the ''MNS'' that all sentient beings possess the Buddha-nature and so are destined for Buddhahood, and commentators of the ''MNS'' have been hard pressed to find a viable way out of this apparent dilemma. The present article, which is the second of a two-part study on the problem of Buddha-nature in the ''MNS'','"`UNIQ--ref-00002F3C-QINU`"' is an attempt to unravel the various strands of thought present in the ''MNS'' regarding the character and fate of the ''icchantikas''. It is hoped that our discussion, brief and sketchy as it is, will be of help in throwing light on this highly intricate question. (Liu, "The Problem of the ''Icchantika''," 57–59))
Articles/Buddhadhātu, Tathāgatadhātu and Tathāgatagarbha in the Mahāparinirvāṇa-mahāsūtra + (In the original of its so-called Mahāyāna … In the original of its so-called Mahāyāna version the Mahāparinirvāṇa-sūtra bears the Sanskrit title Mahāparinirvāṇa-mahāsūtra.'"`UNIQ--ref-0000078B-QINU`"' The Sanskrit original of this text has come down to us only in fragments. For the reconstruction of the Sanskrit text from these fragments, it is essential to compare the text with the word-for-word Tibetan translation completed at the beginning of the 9th century by Jinamitra, Jñānagarbha and Devacandra. Fǎxiǎn 法顯 translated it into Chinese under the title ''Dà bānnihuán jīng'' 大般泥洹經 in 6 fascicles (''juàn'' 卷), and Dharmakṣema 曇無讖 translated it as ''Dà bānnièpán jīng'' 大般涅槃經 in 40 fascicles. Both translations were completed at the beginning of the 5th century. The Chinese translations of this sūtra played an important role in the history of Chinese and Japanese Buddhism. The sūtra is famous especially for the formula "切眾生西有佛性 ''yíqiè zhongshēng xī yǒu fóxìng''," "Every living being has the Buddha-nature." The skill of the Chinese translators is evident from their use of the word ''fóxing'' 佛性, which is commonly translated into English as "Buddha-nature." While the underlying Sanskrit term and its intended meaning poses difficulties, as will be shown below, the Chinese term ''fóxing'', although not resulting from a very literal translation, has been accepted in dogmatical and philosophical interpretations in China and Japan. Comparing the Sanskrit fragments and the ''Ratnagotravibhāga'', which quotes the ''Mahāparinirvāṇa-sūtra'' (that is the ''Mahāparinirvāṇa-mahāsūtra''), the original Sanskrit word ''fóxìng'' is ''buddhadhātu'', ''tathāgatadhātu'' or ''tathāgatagarbha''. Takasaki Jikidō's research on the tathāgatagarbha theory led him to conclude that the ''Mahāparinirvāṇa-mahāsūtra'' is the first known text in which the word ''buddhadhātu'' is used in this meaning.'"`UNIQ--ref-0000078C-QINU`"' I have been studying the original text of the ''Mahāparinirvāṇa-mahāsūtra'' for some time, analyzing the Sanskrit fragments in comparison with the Tibetan and Chinese translations. From the viewpoint of the original text, the meaning of the formula "Every living being has the Buddha-nature" reveals nuances slightly different from the interpretations adopted in Chinese and Japanese Buddhism. (Habata, introduction, 176–77))
Articles/The Role of Rang Rig in the Pramāṇa-Based Gzhan Stong of the Seventh Karma pa + (In the present chapter I will discuss how … In the present chapter I will discuss how the seventh Karma pa, Chos grags rgya mtsho (1454-1506), connects ''rang rig'','"`UNIQ--ref-00000BF4-QINU`"' in the sense of ''tshad ma'i 'bras bu'' (San: ''pramāṇaphala''),'"`UNIQ--ref-00000BF5-QINU`"' with tathāgatagarbha in his major work, the ''Rig gzhung rgya mtsho''.'"`UNIQ--ref-00000BF6-QINU`"' Si tu Paṇ chen Chos kyi 'byung gnas (1699-1776) has pointed out that "there were several different brands of ''gzhan stong'', among which he adhered most closely to that of the Seventh Lord and Zi lung pa, which was somewhat different than that of Dol po pa."'"`UNIQ--ref-00000BF7-QINU`"' This statement points to the fact that the kind of ''gzhan stong'' ("empty-of-other" doctrine) that Si tu Paṇ chen blended with mahāmudrā and spread throughout the Karma Bka' brgyud pa traditions of Khams was derived from the seventh Karma pa.'"`UNIQ--ref-00000BF8-QINU`"' The seventh Karma pa also influenced the great Sa skya scholar Shākya mchog Idan's later writings. While the seventh Karma pa is remembered as one of the most outstanding masters of the lineage and the founder of the Karma bka' brgyud ''bshad grwa'' at Mtshur phu, Shākya mchog Idan is described as "the most influential advocate of the ''gzhan stong'' in the fifteenth and early sixteenth centuries."'"`UNIQ--ref-00000BF9-QINU`"' Both masters are, in their own ways, still sources of the continued presence of an influential type of modified ''gzhan stong'' in the Bka' brgyud tradition,'"`UNIQ--ref-00000BFA-QINU`"' distinct from Dol po pa's position.'"`UNIQ--ref-00000BFB-QINU`"' The seventh Karma pa's ''Rigs gzhung rgya mtsho'' was studied at all the ''bshad grwas'' of the Karma Bka' brgyud tradition, with special emphasis on the first and the third part of the text,'"`UNIQ--ref-00000BFC-QINU`"' while Shākya mchog ldan's writings have played an important role in the 'Brug pa Bka' rgyud ''bshad grwa'' tradition of Bhutan.'"`UNIQ--ref-00000BFD-QINU`"'f-00000BFD-QINU`"')
Articles/A Preliminary Report on Newly Identified Text Fragments in Śāradā Script from Źwa lu Monastery in the Tucci Collection + (In the summer of 2007 I had the opportunit … In the summer of 2007 I had the opportunity to participate in Francesco Sferra’s course on Kamalaśīla’s First ''Bhāvanākrama'' at the University of Hamburg. For his lectures Sferra kindly provided us with digital images of Tucci’s photographs of the Sanskrit manuscript of this text. The 27 extant folios of the ''Bhāvanākrama'' (fols. 2–28), which were used by Tucci for the ''editio princeps'' of the text,'"`UNIQ--ref-00000C6A-QINU`"' have been photographed in three successive multi-folio images together with nine extra folios that appear in two photos only, namely those labelled MT 41 II/01 and MT 42 II/02. My attention was caught by these folios since while the ''Bhāvanākrama'' manuscript is written in Magadhi script, these nine folios are written in Śāradā script — a rather rare phenomenon among the corpus of Sanskrit manuscripts preserved in Tibet. They and the rest of the ''Bhāvanākrama'' manuscript were originally preserved at Zwa lu Ri phug.'"`UNIQ--ref-00000C6B-QINU`"' The manuscripts preserved there were probably taken to Beijing (The Cultural Palace of Nationalities) in the 1960s, but were returned to Lhasa sometime after 1990 (first to Nor bu gliṅ ka and then to the Tibetan Museum).'"`UNIQ--ref-00000C6C-QINU`"' Of the nine folios, Tucci photographed both sides of seven of them, while he photographed only one side of the remaining two (here labelled 7.2 and 9.2). The two sides not filmed were probably blank or contained title pages (unfortunately, Tucci did not photograph title pages). Some images are out of focus and barely legible, and thus a complete diplomatic transcription is almost impossible. If Rāhula Sāṅkṛtyāyana photographed the same folios, this would be very helpful in deciphering them; however, I have yet to find evidence that he did. Therefore, I have only been able to go through the folios haltingly, and so identify a limited number of them. (Kano, introductory remarks, 381–82) s, 381–82) )
Articles/The Collection of 'Indian Mahāmudrā Works' (Tib. phyag chen rgya gzhung) Compiled by the Seventh Karma pa Chos grags rgya mtsho + (In the thirteenth century certain aspects … In the thirteenth century certain aspects of the Bka’ brgyud teachings on mahāmudrā became highly controversial, such as the assertion of the possibility of a sudden liberating realisation or of a beginner’s attaining mahāmudrā even without tantric empowerment. Such teachings were propagated by Sgam po pa (1079–1153), but criticised by Sa skya Paṇḍita (1182–1251), who maintained that there is no conventional expression for mahāmudrā in the pāramitā tradition and that the wisdom of mahāmudrā can only be a wisdom that has arisen from empowerment. ’Gos Lo tsā ba Gzhon nu dpal (1392–1481) defended Sgam po pa’s notion of mahāmudrā, however, by pointing out its Indian origins in the persons of Jñānakīrti (tenth/eleventh century)'"`UNIQ--ref-00000FEC-QINU`"' and Maitrīpa (ca. 1007–ca. 1085), together with the latter’s disciple Sahajavajra (eleventh century).'"`UNIQ--ref-00000FED-QINU`"' The works of these masters belong to a genre of literature that was eventually called "Indian mahāmudrā works" (''phyag chen rgya gzhung''). (Mathes, introduction, 89–90) [https://www.academia.edu/5613403/Mathes2011_The_Collection_of_Indian_Mah%C4%81mudr%C4%81_Works_phyag_chen_rgya_gzhung_Compiled_by_the_Seventh_Karma_pa_Chos_grags_rgya_mtsho Read more here . . .]h_Karma_pa_Chos_grags_rgya_mtsho Read more here . . .])
Articles/Other-Emptiness in the Jonang School: The Theo-logic of Buddhist Dualism + (In this essay I aim to clarify the meaning … In this essay I aim to clarify the meaning of other-emptiness in the Jonang (''jo nang'') tradition of Buddhism of Tibet. It focuses on the writings of Dölpopa (''dol po pa shes rab rgyal mtshan'') (1292–1361), the renowned forefather of this tradition. Dölpopa famously differentiated two types of emptiness, or two ways of being empty—self-emptiness (''rang stong'') and other-emptiness (''gzhan stong'')—and proclaimed the superiority of the latter. (Duckworth, introduction, 485)the latter. (Duckworth, introduction, 485))
Articles/'Gos Lo tsā ba gZhon nu dpal's Extensive Commentary on and Study of the Ratnagotravibhāgavyākhyā + (In this paper I present some preliminary o … In this paper I present some preliminary observations on 'Gos Lo tsā ba Gzhon nu dpal's (1392-1481) commentary on the ''Ratnagotravibhāgavyākhyā'', which I am editing and evaluating as a part of my habilitation project. Three years ago I gained access to a photocopy of a 698-folio-long handwritten ''dbu med'' version of this text.'"`UNIQ--ref-00000F7E-QINU`"' Like the Indian ''vyākhyā'', the commentary is divided into five chapters. Their headings are listed together with the folio numbers on a cover page, which bears the seal of the Zhva dmar pa and assigns the letter ''ha'' to the volume containing Gzhon nu dpal's commentary. It is thus reasonable to assume that the original was kept in the library of the Shamarpas in Yangpacan, probably already from the time of the famous Fourth Shamarpa Chos kyi grags pa (1453-1524), who was a disciple of Gzhon nu dpal. After the war with Prithivi Narayan Shah in 1792, Yangpacan was seized by the Gelug government and the text found its way to Drepung, where many other Kagyu texts were kept. Recently I received a photocopy of a Yangpacan block-print from Tibet with the same text on 463 folios. This could be the text described by A khu ching Shes rab rgya mtsho as having 461 folios.'"`UNIQ--ref-00000F7F-QINU`"' The numbering starts anew with each chapter; thus a small calculation mistake could explain the difference of two folios. (Mathes, introductory remarks, 79)folios. (Mathes, introductory remarks, 79))
Articles/The Path of Gratitude + (In “The Path of Gratitude,” Jeff Wilson steers us away from the question of individual buddhahood and toward a path of embracing all beings.)