Btsan kha bo che

From Buddha-Nature

< People(Redirected from Tsen Kawoche)

PeopleBtsan kha bo che


བཙན་ཁ་བོ་ཆེ་
Tsen Khawoche(b. 1021 - ) 
Buddhist Digital Resource Center

Tsen Khawoche was an eleventh-century disciple of the Kashmiri paṇḍita Sajjana. He is credited by Tibetan historians for giving rise to the "meditative" tradition of exegesis of the Ratnagotravibhāga, a main source of buddha-nature theory in Tibet, which heavily influenced Mahāmudrā and the "other-emptiness" philosophical position.

... read more at The Treasury of Lives

Library Items

Article
Elucidating the Zhentong View: A Condensation of the Threefold Nature of Reality
Sheehy, Michael R., trans. "Elucidating the Zhentong View: A Condensation of the Threefold Nature of Reality." By Tsen Kawoche (btsan kha bo che). JonangFoundation.org, n.d. https://jonangfoundation.org/sites/default/files/translation-elucidatingzhentong.pdf.
Sheehy, Michael R., trans. "Elucidating the Zhentong View: A Condensation of the Threefold Nature of Reality." By Tsen Kawoche (btsan kha bo che). JonangFoundation.org, n.d. https://jonangfoundation.org/sites/default/files/translation-elucidatingzhentong.pdf.
Text
Tsen Khawoche: Instructions on the View of Other-Emptiness
A brief summary of the three natures (trisvabhāva / rang bzhin gsum) of the Yogācāra school that was reportedly reproduced from a manuscript of the writings of Tsen Khawoche and included in the One Hundred and Eight Instructions of the Jonang (Jo nang khrid brgya), that was edited together by Kunga Drolchok. If reports of its provenance are correct, then it would likely be the earliest appearance in a Tibetan work of the terms other-emptiness (gzhan stong) and Great Madhyamaka (dbu ma chen po).

On the topic of this person

Book
Contributions to the Development of Tibetan Buddhist Epistemology
The present paper is a considerably revised version of my doctoral dissertation entitled "Contributions to the Development of Tibetan Buddhist Logic - from the eleventh to the fifteenth century." This dissertation was submitted to the Faculty of Oriental Studies, University of Hamburg, in January of 1979. The title has been changed for two reasons. The first of these is a conceptual one. Namely, in the course of my subsequent studies of Buddhist tshad-ma (pramāṇa), I have decided to translate this fundamentally untranslatable term by 'epistemology'. While this rendition does also not do justice to its semantic range, I feel that it has at least the merit of being less misleading than the more widely used 'logic', especially for those who have no background in Indian or Tibetan studies, and who may chance to come across this title. It is and remains an untranslatable term.
      The second reason for my changing the original title of my dissertation, is that I felt obliged to change its scope. The vast literature on Tibetan Buddhist epistemology, which has become available during the last few years, necessitated such a curtailment. Especially the presently available Dga'-ldan-pa contributions by Rgyal-tshab-rje and Mkhas-grubrje, in particular, need to be properly assessed, and this takes time. Moreover, much but not all of the subsequent Sa-skya-pa literature in this area by Go-ram-pa and Gser-mdog Pan-chen must be read with the particular theories of these Dga'-ldan-pa philosophers in mind. To undertake such a comparative study cannot be done in a hurried fashion. Some references to the Dga'-ldan-pa contributions have, however, been made in the course of this paper on the basis of my original access to but a limited number of their writings. Nonetheless, a significant portion of my dissertation that deals with the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries, has been included in the footnotes of the present paper where I was concerned with historical or bio-bibliographical details. (van der Kuijp, preface, vii)

Read more here . . .
Kuijp, Leonard W. J. van der. Contributions to the Development of Tibetan Buddhist Epistemology: From the Eleventh to the Thirteenth Century. Alt- und Neu-Indische Studien 26. Wiesbaden: Franz Steiner Verlag, 1983. https://www.scribd.com/document/255465514/Contributions-to-the-Development-of-Tibetan-Buddhist-Epistemology.
Article
Elucidating the Zhentong View: A Condensation of the Threefold Nature of Reality
Sheehy, Michael R., trans. "Elucidating the Zhentong View: A Condensation of the Threefold Nature of Reality." By Tsen Kawoche (btsan kha bo che). JonangFoundation.org, n.d. https://jonangfoundation.org/sites/default/files/translation-elucidatingzhentong.pdf.
Sheehy, Michael R., trans. "Elucidating the Zhentong View: A Condensation of the Threefold Nature of Reality." By Tsen Kawoche (btsan kha bo che). JonangFoundation.org, n.d. https://jonangfoundation.org/sites/default/files/translation-elucidatingzhentong.pdf.
Article
Introduction to the Traditions of Ngok and Tsen
Ostensen, Morten. "Introduction to the Traditions of Ngok and Tsen." Buddha-Nature: A Tsadra Foundation Initiative, February 28, 2020. https://buddhanature.tsadra.org/index.php/Articles/Introduction_to_the_Traditions_of_Ngok_and_Tsen.
Ostensen, Morten. "Introduction to the Traditions of Ngok and Tsen." Buddha-Nature: A Tsadra Foundation Initiative, February 28, 2020. https://buddhanature.tsadra.org/index.php/Articles/Introduction_to_the_Traditions_of_Ngok_and_Tsen.
Video
Martina Draszczyk at the 2019 Tathāgatagarbha Symposium
Martina Draszczyk discusses the early Kagyu masters and explores how their meditation-oriented approach is based in both affirming buddha-nature as the ground and goal of Buddhist soteriology and avoiding its reification into an entity with real properties.
Draszczyk, Martina. "Buddha Nature as Seen by Early Bka’ brgyud Masters." Paper presented at the University of Vienna Symposium, Tathāgatagarbha Across Asia, Vienna, Austria, July 2019. Video, 37:27. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MoMUdg40Qv8.
Book
Perfect or Perfected? Rongtön on Buddha-Nature
As the most important canonical treatise on Buddha-nature, the Ratnagotravibhaga (also known as Uttaratantrasastra, Tib. rgyud bla ma) established the doctrinal foundations for the Mahayana philosophy of tathāgatagarbha, the doctrine according to which all sentient beings are either inherently buddhas or endowed with the potential for awakening. Among the most prominent Tibetan commentaries on this text figures that of the Sakya master Rongtön Sheja Künrig, a prolific writer who was active during the golden age of Tibetan Buddhist philosophy. Refuting, on one hand, the notion that Buddha-nature is synonymous with mere emptiness, and on the other that the mind is inherently endowed with the Buddha qualities, Rongtön argues for an understanding of Buddha-nature that embraces both aspects of the nature of mind: cognizance and emptiness.



Rongtön Sheja Künrig (1376-1449) figures among the greatest teachers of the Sakya tradition. Particularly renowned for his commentaries on the Five Treatises of Maitreya, his vast erudition, and extensive teaching career made him one of the most influential masters for the scholastic lineages of all schools of Tibetan Buddhism. This volume contains an annotated translation of Rongtön Chenpo’s commentary on the central chapter of this treatise (including the relevant stanzas of the root text), along with an extensive introduction to the historical development of this doctrine and an analysis of Rongtön’s position. (Source: Vajra Publications)
Bernert, Christian, trans. Perfect or Perfected? Rongtön on Buddha-Nature: A Commentary on the Fourth Chapter of the Ratnagotravibhāga (vv.1.27-95[a]). By Rongtön Sheja Künrig (rong ston shes bya kun rig). Kathmandu: Vajra Books, 2018.
Bernert, C.: Rong-ston on Buddha-Nature: A Commentary on the Fourth Chapter of the Ratnagotravibhāga
Set within the broader framework of Buddhist world view, the fundamental concern of the Tathāgatagarbha literature is to show that all sentient beings, without exception, can attain freedom from every kind of suffering and unease, and, ultimately, actualise the state of a fully awakened buddha. According to these scriptures, all sentient beings are by their very nature either empowered to attain buddhahood, or essentially already buddhas (depending on the interpretation). This innate quality of all sentient beings is given the name “buddha-nature” (Skt. tathāgatagarbha; Tib. de bzhin gshegs pa’i snying po).
      This doctrine has played an important role in the history of Buddhism. Although rudimentary elements of this doctrine can be identified already within the Pāli canon,[1] those passages relating to the natural luminosity of the mind, which is said to be temporarily stained by adventitious mental afflictions, required the emergence of the Mahāyāna movement before developing into a fully fledged doctrine in its own right. Since it is supported by a number of sūtras[2] and śāstras (i.e. the Buddhist canon composed of the Buddha’s sermons and the Indian commentarial literature), it can be regarded as a third school of Indian Mahāyāna Buddhist thought, the other two being Madhyamaka and Yogācāra. However, the concept of buddha-nature reached its apogee not in India but in East Asia and Tibet where it became a cornerstone for Buddhist philosophy and religious practice. In Tibet, in particular, this concept was treated diversely by many scholars, all of whom were ambitious to fit it into the philosophical framework of their own respective schools. Rong-ston Shes-bya kun-rig (1367–1449) of the Sa-skya tradition of Tibetan Buddhism figures among the most influential of these scholars. In general, his commentary on the Ratnagotravibhāga, the main Indian śāstra on buddha-nature, and in particular, a translation of his exposition of the subject by means of ten categories, will be the focus of this work.
      In the first chapter I will introduce the doctrine of buddha-nature, giving a brief account of its sources and formation. The second chapter will deal with the main treatise on buddha-nature, the Ratnagotravibhāga. Here, I will present the text itself, discuss the question of its authorship, as well as its transmission in India and early reception in Tibet. This chapter will also include a brief overview of previous studies on the Ratnagotravibhāga and the doctrine of buddha-nature. The third chapter will be devoted to the author of our treatise and his presentation of the subject. The final and main part of the work will consist of an annotated translation of a selected passage of his abovementioned commentary.
      Throughout this work I have used the transliteration system of Turrell Wylie for the Tibetan. (Bernert, introduction, 5–6 )
Notes
  1. For example in AN I.v, 9: “This mind, O monks, is luminous! But it is defiled by adventitious defilements.” (After Mathes 2008: ix.) See also Takasaki 1966: 34–35.
  2. A prevalent doxographical classification of Buddhist sūtras distinguishes between the so called “three turnings of the Dharma-wheel” (a concept introduced in the Sandhinirmocanasūtra). Scriptures of the first turning fundamentally discuss the four noble truths as expounded in Nikāya Buddhism which represents the common ground for all traditions and the basic framework for all Buddhist teachings. Sūtras from second turning emphasise the doctrine of emptiness (śūnyatā) as expounded in the Prajñāpāramitā sūtras, and those of the third teach the about the three natures (trisvabhāva), the latter two being classified as belonging to the Mahāyāna corpus. The sūtras on buddha-nature are generally regarded as belonging to the third turning.
  3. As Seyfort Ruegg (1969: 2) remarks, the language used in the tathāgatagarbha treatises differs noticeably from that of the other two schools, and even comes suspiciously close to that of the Vedānta. Indeed, a number of modern scholars have accused this doctrine to be alien to Buddhist thought, an accusion refuted by others. For a collection of articles on this topic see Hubbard and Swanson 1997.
  4. Cf. Wylie 1959.
Bernert, Christian. "Rong-ston on Buddha-Nature: A Commentary on the Fourth Chapter of the Ratnagotravibhāga". MA thesis, University of Vienna, 2009.

Philosophical positions of this person

Is buddha-nature considered definitive or provisional?
Definitive 
Do all beings have buddha-nature?
  Yes


Karl Brunnhölzl cites ShAkya mchog ldan: "The sugata heart is the naturally pure wisdom, luminous by nature, that pervades everyone from buddhas to sentient beings." Brunnhölzl, K., When the Clouds Part, p. 124.

Click for more on this topic
To which "turning of the wheel" do the buddha-nature teachings belong?
  Third Turning

"Kunga Drölcho provides some context for Dsen Kawoché’s view and for the following excerpts from the latter’s teachings, which Kunga Drölcho compiled as Guiding Instructions on the View of Other-Emptiness: As for the Guiding Instructions on the View of Other-Emptiness, Dsen Kawoché said, "The Kashmiri paṇḍita Sajjana made the following very essential statement: ‘The victor turned the wheel of dharma three times—the first wheel teaches the four realities of the noble ones, the second one teaches the lack of characteristics, and the final one makes excellent distinctions. Among these, the first two do not distinguish between what is actual and what is nominal. The last one was spoken at the point of certainty about the ultimate by distinguishing between the middle and extremes and by distinguishing between phenomena and the nature of phenomena. " Brunnhölzl, K., When the Clouds Part, pp. 142-143.

Click for more on this topic
Is buddha-nature equated with emptiness or alayavijnana?
  Yogācāra

Karl cites Kongtrul stating, "TOK calls Ngog’s tradition of the Maitreya texts "the oral transmission of explanation" (bshad pa’i bka’ babs) and Dsen’s lineage, "the oral transmission of practice" (sgrub pa’i bka’ babs), saying that they are asserted to hold the views of Madhyamaka and Mere Mentalism, respectively." Brunnhölzl, K., When the Clouds Part, p. 124.

Click for more on this topic
Do buddha-nature teachings belong to the zhentong or rangtong view of emptiness?
  

He predates the category, but as Stearns remarks, "Tsen Kawoché . . . is often thought to be the first Tibetan to have taught what later came to be known as the Zhentong view." See Stearns, C., The Buddha from Dolpo, pp. 42–3 and pp. 88–9.

Click for more on this topic
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?
  Meditative Tradition
  • "These two traditions of rngog and btsan were respectively called the "analytical tradition" (thos bsam gyi lugs) and "meditative tradition" (sgom lugs)." Kano, K., Buddha-Nature and Emptiness, p. 242
  • "The lineage through Ngog Lotsāwa is often called "the exegetical tradition of the dharma works of Maitreya" (byams chos bshad lugs), while Dsen Kawoché’s transmissions represent "the meditative tradition of the dharma works of Maitreya" (byams chos sgom lugs)." Brunnhölzl, K., When the Clouds Part, p. 123.
Click for more on this topic
What is Buddha-nature?
  Tathāgatagarbha as Mind's Luminous Nature
  • Kano. K., Buddha-Nature and Emptiness, p. 242, footnote 4. Van der Kuijp via Shakya mchog ldan.
  • Mathes cites Gö Lotsāwa as stating, "The followers of the tradition of Tsen (Btsan) maintain that since the luminous nature of mind is the buddha nature, the cause of buddha[hood] is fertile" Mathes, K., A Direct Path to the Buddha Within, p. 33.
  • "According to BA, those who follow the tradition of Dsen Kawoché (Tib. Btsan Kha bo che) hold that since the tathāgata heart is the naturally luminous nature of the mind, it is the powerful vital cause of buddhahood. TOK agrees, saying that, according to the Eighth Situpa, the texts in Dsen Kawoché’s lineage accepted a really established, self-aware, self-luminous cognition empty of the duality of apprehender and apprehended to be the powerful vital cause of buddhahood." Brunnhölzl, K., When the Clouds Part, p. 65.
  • Karl Brunnhölzl cites ShAkya mchog ldan: "The sugata heart is the naturally pure wisdom, luminous by nature, that pervades everyone from buddhas to sentient beings." Brunnhölzl, K., When the Clouds Part, p. 124.
Click for more on this topic
Does the author advocate the Svatantrika or Prasangika view of emptiness?
 

Other names

  • དྲི་མེད་ཤེས་རབ་ · other names (Tibetan)
  • dri med shes rab · other names (Wylie)

Affiliations & relations

  • Kadam · religious affiliation
  • grwa pa mngon shes · teacher
  • Sajjana · teacher
Retrieved from "https://buddhanature.tsadra.org/index.php?title=People/Btsan_kha_bo_che&oldid=37999"