Difference between revisions of "Primary Sources"

From Buddha-Nature
Line 2: Line 2:
 
In relation to source literature, on this site, we generally divide these into the two broad categories of sūtras and commentaries. While traditionally both of these categories entail a wide range of internal divisions and classifications, here these two can be simply understood to demarcate the difference between scriptures orated by the Buddha, or his attendant Bodhisattvas, and authored works, which draw upon those discourses in order to elucidate a particular aspect of the Buddhist teachings.  In terms of the former, these texts are traditionally referred to as “buddhavacana,’’, literally “the speech of the Buddha,’’ and are considered to represent actual discourses that were recalled and passed down through oral lineages until they were eventually set into writing in the ensuing centuries. And though much has been written about these works in academic literature, especially in terms of the potential dates and locals of their composition, little is known of the actual authorship of these works and thus they are generally considered to be anonymous compositions. On the other hand, what we are referring to here as commentaries are generally signed by their authors, even if the contents of these compositions are credited to earlier figures. Though again, exact authorship of a particular text might still be uncertain or contested, in either traditional or academic circles, these types of texts, as opposed to sūtras, are universally considered to have been intentionally composed.
 
In relation to source literature, on this site, we generally divide these into the two broad categories of sūtras and commentaries. While traditionally both of these categories entail a wide range of internal divisions and classifications, here these two can be simply understood to demarcate the difference between scriptures orated by the Buddha, or his attendant Bodhisattvas, and authored works, which draw upon those discourses in order to elucidate a particular aspect of the Buddhist teachings.  In terms of the former, these texts are traditionally referred to as “buddhavacana,’’, literally “the speech of the Buddha,’’ and are considered to represent actual discourses that were recalled and passed down through oral lineages until they were eventually set into writing in the ensuing centuries. And though much has been written about these works in academic literature, especially in terms of the potential dates and locals of their composition, little is known of the actual authorship of these works and thus they are generally considered to be anonymous compositions. On the other hand, what we are referring to here as commentaries are generally signed by their authors, even if the contents of these compositions are credited to earlier figures. Though again, exact authorship of a particular text might still be uncertain or contested, in either traditional or academic circles, these types of texts, as opposed to sūtras, are universally considered to have been intentionally composed.
  
*Our essay [[On the Ratnagotravibhāga]]:
+
===The titles of the [[On the Ratnagotravibhāga|Gyu Lama]]===
The title ''Ratnagotravibhāga Mahāyānottaratantraśāstra''<ref>According to the Sanskrit grammatical rules associated with ''sandhi'', the word boundaries of the “a” of Mahāyāna and the “u” of Uttaratantra combine as “o.” The title could just as easily be rendered “''Mahāyāna Uttaratantra Śāstra''.”</ref> is attested in the surviving Sanskrit manuscripts. It roughly translates as “The Superior Continuum (''uttaratantra'') of the Mahāyāna, A Treatise (''śāstra'') Analyzing (''vibhāga'') the Source (''gotra'') of the Three Jewels (''ratna'').” One surviving Sanskrit reference, Abhayākaragupta’s ''Munimatālaṃkāra'', gives the name as ''Mahāyānottara: [Treatise] on the Superior Mahāyāna [Doctrine]''.<ref>[[Kano]], ''[[Buddha-Nature and Emptiness]]'', 27, note #41.</ref> Western scholars only became aware of Sanskrit versions in the 1930s (see below); prior to this, they knew the text only in Chinese or Tibetan translation, and this was complicated by the fact that both the Chinese and the Tibetan traditions divide the text into two. Where in India the ''Ratnagotravibhāga'' was a single work comprised of root verses, explanatory verses, and prose commentary, the Chinese and Tibetan translators and commentators considered the root and explanatory verses to be one text and the complete text, including the prose commentary, to be a second. Thus not only do we have multiple names in multiple languages for the treatise, but multiple names in Chinese and Tibetan for its different parts.  
+
The title ''Ratnagotravibhāga Mahāyānottaratantraśāstra''<ref>According to the Sanskrit grammatical rules associated with ''sandhi'', the word boundaries of the “a” of Mahāyāna and the “u” of Uttaratantra combine as “o.” The title could just as easily be rendered “''Mahāyāna Uttaratantra Śāstra''.”</ref> is attested in the surviving Sanskrit manuscripts. It roughly translates as “The Superior Continuum (''uttaratantra'') of the Mahāyāna, A Treatise (''śāstra'') Analyzing (''vibhāga'') the Source (''gotra'') of the Three Jewels (''ratna'').” One surviving Sanskrit reference, Abhayākaragupta’s ''Munimatālaṃkāra'', gives the name as ''Mahāyānottara: [Treatise] on the Superior Mahāyāna [Doctrine]''.<ref>[[Kano]], ''[[Buddha-Nature and Emptiness]]'', 27, note #41.</ref> Western scholars only became aware of Sanskrit versions in the 1930s (see below); prior to this, they knew the text only in Chinese or Tibetan translation, and this was complicated by the fact that both the Chinese and the Tibetan traditions divide the text into two. Where in India the ''Ratnagotravibhāga'' was a single work comprised of root verses, explanatory verses, and prose commentary, the Chinese and Tibetan translators and commentators considered the root and explanatory verses to be one text and the complete text, including the prose commentary, to be a second. Thus not only do we have multiple names in multiple languages for the treatise, but multiple names in Chinese and Tibetan for its different parts.... [[On the Ratnagotravibhāga|Read the whole essay here]]
**[[On the Ratnagotravibhāga|Read more...]]
 
 
*[[Ratnagotravibhāga Mahāyānottaratantraśāstra|Read the root text of the Ratnagotravibhāga Mahāyānottaratantraśāstra here]]  
 
*[[Ratnagotravibhāga Mahāyānottaratantraśāstra|Read the root text of the Ratnagotravibhāga Mahāyānottaratantraśāstra here]]  
 
**[[Texts/Ratnagotravibhāga_Mahāyānottaratantraśāstra/Root_Verses|Root Verses - Comparative multilingual edition of the root verses only]]
 
**[[Texts/Ratnagotravibhāga_Mahāyānottaratantraśāstra/Root_Verses|Root Verses - Comparative multilingual edition of the root verses only]]

Revision as of 17:08, 27 September 2018

Source Texts[edit]

In relation to source literature, on this site, we generally divide these into the two broad categories of sūtras and commentaries. While traditionally both of these categories entail a wide range of internal divisions and classifications, here these two can be simply understood to demarcate the difference between scriptures orated by the Buddha, or his attendant Bodhisattvas, and authored works, which draw upon those discourses in order to elucidate a particular aspect of the Buddhist teachings. In terms of the former, these texts are traditionally referred to as “buddhavacana,’’, literally “the speech of the Buddha,’’ and are considered to represent actual discourses that were recalled and passed down through oral lineages until they were eventually set into writing in the ensuing centuries. And though much has been written about these works in academic literature, especially in terms of the potential dates and locals of their composition, little is known of the actual authorship of these works and thus they are generally considered to be anonymous compositions. On the other hand, what we are referring to here as commentaries are generally signed by their authors, even if the contents of these compositions are credited to earlier figures. Though again, exact authorship of a particular text might still be uncertain or contested, in either traditional or academic circles, these types of texts, as opposed to sūtras, are universally considered to have been intentionally composed.

The titles of the Gyu Lama[edit]

The title Ratnagotravibhāga Mahāyānottaratantraśāstra[1] is attested in the surviving Sanskrit manuscripts. It roughly translates as “The Superior Continuum (uttaratantra) of the Mahāyāna, A Treatise (śāstra) Analyzing (vibhāga) the Source (gotra) of the Three Jewels (ratna).” One surviving Sanskrit reference, Abhayākaragupta’s Munimatālaṃkāra, gives the name as Mahāyānottara: [Treatise] on the Superior Mahāyāna [Doctrine].[2] Western scholars only became aware of Sanskrit versions in the 1930s (see below); prior to this, they knew the text only in Chinese or Tibetan translation, and this was complicated by the fact that both the Chinese and the Tibetan traditions divide the text into two. Where in India the Ratnagotravibhāga was a single work comprised of root verses, explanatory verses, and prose commentary, the Chinese and Tibetan translators and commentators considered the root and explanatory verses to be one text and the complete text, including the prose commentary, to be a second. Thus not only do we have multiple names in multiple languages for the treatise, but multiple names in Chinese and Tibetan for its different parts.... Read the whole essay here

The Texts



Sutra Sources[edit]

Ratnagotravibhāga Mahāyānottaratantraśāstra[edit]

Sanskrit Texts[edit]

Tibetan Texts[edit]

Chinese Texts[edit]

  • Ratnamati 勒那摩提 (508 A.D.), 究竟一乘寶性論 (Chinese translation of Rgvbh), in T 1611. Attributed author is Sāramati.

Commentaries[edit]

Indian Commentaries[edit]

Tibetan Commentaries[edit]

Select Tibetan Texts[4][edit]

English Translations[edit]

French Translations[edit]

German Translations[edit]

About The Gyü Lama[edit]

The Gyü Lama (རྒྱུད་བླ་མ་), also called the Mahāyānottaratantra Śāstra (ཐེག་ཆེན་རྒྱུད་བླ་མའི་བསྟན་བཅོས་), the Ratnagotravibhāga (RGV), or simply the Uttaratantra, is one of the most important texts of the Yogācāra tradition that expounds the tathāgatagarbha (buddha nature) theory, the idea that all sentient beings possess the nature of a buddha.[5] The Tibetan Buddhist tradition holds the Ratnagotravibhāga to be one of the Five Treatises that Maitreya taught to Asaṅga (4th century?). According to Klaus-Dieter Mathes, the Ratnagotravibhāga was largely ignored until the eleventh century when Indian scholars and adepts attempted to bring the tantric teachings in line with mainstream Mahāyāna.[6] The Ratnagotravibhāga and buddha nature theory provided the necessary doctrinal support for this kind of work, paving the road for its entry and subsequent importance within the Tibetan Buddhist dialogue.

As a whole, the Ratnagotravibhāga consists of three parts: (1) basic verses, (2) commentarial verses and (3) prose commentary, the third being the vyākhyā, the commentary attributed to Asaṅga.[7] Issues with regards to authorship arise when comparing the Sanskrit, Chinese and Tibetan texts, as the only extant Sanskrit version[8] attributes no author, and the only Chinese version, translated by Ratnamati sometime after 508[9], attribues the entire text to Sāramati.[10] (You can see various interpretations of the RGV authorship here.)

The only extant Tibetan version of the Ratnagotravibhāga was translated by rNgog Blo-ldan-shes-rab (1059–1109) and Sajjana (late 11th cent.),[11] though according to gZhon-nu-dpal there were a total of six translations made, the first by Atiśa (982–1054) and Nag-tsho Tshul-khrims-rgyal-ba (1011–1064).[12] rNgog Blo-ldan-shes-rab wrote the first commentary on the RGV[13] officially bringing it into Tibetan discourse at the end of the 11th century, from which point, the various Tibetan interpretations of the buddha nature theory take off. Mathes points to the main issue in the various interpretations as being whether the teaching that all beings are buddhas is provisional or definitive in meaning.[14] Over the next nine centuries, 45 commentaries were written on the Ratnagotravibhāga alone[15], and the text was referenced in "different ways to doctrinally support disputed traditions, such as the zhentong (gzhan stong) ("empty of other") of the Jonangpas (Jo nang pa) or sūtra-based mahāmudrā."[16] The text also serves as an important basis for both the Dzogchen tradition of Longchenpa and the Mahamudra tradition of the Kagyüpas.[17]

The emphasis of this site is to provide information on the resources available in the study of the Ratnagotravibhāga and all of its interpretations within the Tibetan Buddhist milieu. The information presented here is far from complete and will continue to develop as new scholarship arises. We welcome any feedback, and if you see any omissions or errors, please let us know via email.

The Five Dharmas of Maitreya[edit]

The Ornament of Clear Realization
Skt. Abhisamayālaṃkāra
Tib. མངོན་རྟོགས་པའི་རྒྱན་
Wyl. mngon par rtogs pa'i rgyan
The Ornament of the Mahayana Sutras
Skt. Māhayānasūtrālaṃkāra
Tib. ཐེག་པ་ཆེན་པོའི་མདོ་སྡེ་རྒྱན་
Wyl. theg pa chen po'i mdo sde rgyan
Distinguishing the Middle from the Extremes
Skt. Madhyāntavibhāga
Tib. དབུས་དང་མཐའ་རྣམ་པར་འབྱེད་པ་
Wyl. dbus dang mtha' rnam par 'byed pa
Distinguishing Dharma and Dharmata
Skt. Dharma-dharmatā-vibhāga
Tib. ཆོས་དང་ཆོས་ཉིད་
Wyl. chos dang chos nyid rnam par 'byed pa
The Sublime Continuum
Skt. Uttaratantra Śāstra
Tib. རྒྱུད་བླ་མ་
Wyl. rgyud bla ma

Resources[edit]

BDRC Content[edit]

Bibliographical Title
theg pa chen po rgyud bla ma'i bstan bcos
Other Title
mahayanottaratantrasastra
Page Numbers
109-148 in Volume 123 of Work W23703
Location
ff. 54v-73r
Authorship
byams pa (author); sajjana (translator); blo ldan shes rab
Tohoku Catalog Num.
4024
Citation
tshul khrims rin chen. "theg pa chen po rgyud bla ma'i bstan bcos." In bstan 'gyur (sde dge). TBRC W23703. 123: 109 - 148. delhi: delhi karmapae choedhey, gyalwae sungrab partun khang, 1982-1985. http://tbrc.org/link?RID=O1GS6011%7CO1GS601137645$W23703
Bibliographical Title
theg pa chen po rgyud bla ma'i bstan bcos/
Title Page Title
mahayana uttara tantara sastra
Page Numbers
100-141 in Volume 132 of Work W22704
Location
vol.132,ff.48v-69r (pp.96-137)
Colophon
theg pa chen po rgyud bla ma'i bstan bcos/ mgon po byams pas mdzad pa rdzogs so/ /dpal grong khyer dpe med kyi mkhas pa chen po/ bram ze rin chen rdo rje'i dpon po paN+Di ta mkhas pa chen po sa dza na dang / lo tsA ba shAkya'i dge slong blo ldan shes rab kyis/ grong khyer dpe med de nyid du bsgyur pa'o//
gSer bris Catalog Num.
3528
Otani, Beijing Catalog Num.
5525
Citation
"theg pa chen po rgyud bla ma'i bstan bcos/." In bstan 'gyur (snar thang). TBRC W22704. 132: 100 - 141. [narthang]: [s.n.], [1800?]. http://tbrc.org/link?RID=O2DB75712%7CO2DB757122DB79425$W22704
Bibliographical Title
theg pa chen po rgyud bla ma'i bstan bcos/
Other Title
mahayanottaratantrasastra
Page Numbers
109-143 in Volume 123 of Work W1GS66030
Location
ff. 51r-68r
Authorship
byams pa (author); sajjana (translator); blo ldan shes rab
Tohoku Catalog Num.
4024
Citation
grags pa bshad sgrub . "theg pa chen po rgyud bla ma'i bstan bcos/." In bstan 'gyur (co ne). TBRC W1GS66030. 123: 109 - 143. [co ne dgon chen]: [co ne], [1926]. http://tbrc.org/link?RID=O2DB20796%7CO2DB207962DB24440$W1GS66030
Bibliographical Title
theg pa chen po rgyud bla ma'i bstan bcos/
Other Title
mahayanottaratantrasastra
Page Numbers
958-1009 in Volume 70 of Work W1PD95844
Location
pp. 935-986
Authorship
byams pa (author); sajjana (translator); blo ldan shes rab
Tohoku Catalog Num.
4024
Bibliographical Title
theg pa chen po rgyud bla ma'i bstan bcos
Title Page Title
mahayana uttara tantara sastra
Page Numbers
129-180 in Volume 132
Location
vol.132,ff.64r-89v(pp.127-178)
Colophon
theg pa chen po rgyud bla ma'i bstan bcos/ mgon po byams pas mdzad pa rdzogs so/ /dpal grong khyer dpe med kyi mkhas pa chen po/ bram ze rin chen rdo rje'i dpon po paN+Di ta mkhas pa chen po sa dza na dang / lo tsA ba shAkya'i dge slong blo ldan shes rab kyis/ grong khyer dpe med de nyid du bsgyur pa'o
gSer bris Catalog Num.
3528
Otani, Beijing Catalog Num.
5525
Citation
"theg pa chen po rgyud bla ma'i bstan bcos." In bstan 'gyur/?gser bris ma/?. TBRC W23702. 132: 129 - 180. tibet: [snar thang], [17-?]. http://tbrc.org/link?RID=O00CR0008%7CO00CR000800CR034422$W23702


Secondary Sources and Further Studies[edit]

See the Selected Bibliography & Resources Page

Notes[edit]

  1. According to the Sanskrit grammatical rules associated with sandhi, the word boundaries of the “a” of Mahāyāna and the “u” of Uttaratantra combine as “o.” The title could just as easily be rendered “Mahāyāna Uttaratantra Śāstra.”
  2. Kano, Buddha-Nature and Emptiness, 27, note #41.
  3. Besides this text, the only other two known Indian “commentaries” on the Uttaratantra are Vairocanarakṣita’s (eleventh century) very brief ahāyānottaratantraṭippaṇī (eight folios) and Sajjana’s (eleventh/twelfth century) Mahāyānottaratantraśāstropadeśa (a summary in thirty-seven verses). Brunnholzl, K. Luminous Heart pg 403 note 24
  4. For an extensive list of Tibetan Commentaries, see A List of the Commentaries on the Ratnagotravibhāga
  5. Mathes, A Direct Path to the Buddha Within, 2
  6. Ibid.
  7. Kano, RNgog Blo‐ldan‐shes‐rabʹs Summary of the Ratnagotravibhāga: The First Tibetan Commentary on a Crucial Source for the Buddha‐nature Doctrine, 17
  8. critically edited by Johnston in Prasad, H. S., ed. The Uttaratantra of Maitreya. Containing E.H. Johnson's Sanskrit text and E. Obermiller's English translation. Bibliotheca Indo-Buddhica, 79. Delhi: Sri Satguru Publications, 1991.
  9. Kano, RNgog Blo‐ldan‐shes‐rabʹs Summary of the Ratnagotravibhāga, 17
  10. For a detailed discussion regarding the authorship of the verses and prose, see Kano, RNgog Blo‐ldan‐shes‐rabʹs Summary of the Ratnagotravibhāga; Takasaki, A study on the Ratnagotravibhāga (Uttaratantra), being a treatise on the Tathāgatagarbha theory of Mahayana Buddhism
  11. Kano, RNgog Blo‐ldan‐shes‐rabʹs Summary of the Ratnagotravibhāga, 89
  12. Ibid. 90
    (a) Atiśa (982–1054) and Nag-tsho Tshul-khrims-rgyal-ba (1011–1064)
    (b) rNgog Blo-ldan-shes-rab (1059–1109) and Sajjana (late 11th cent.)
    (c) sPa-tshab Nyi-ma-grags (b.1055)
    (d) Mar-pa Do-pa Chos-kyi-dbang-phyug (1042–1136)
    (e) Jo-nang Lo-tsā-ba Blo-gros-dpal (1299–1353 or 1300–1355)
    (f) Yar-klungs Lo-tsā-ba Grags-pa-rgyal-mtshan (1242–1346)
  13. Translated in Kazuo's Ph.D. dissertation, "rNgog Blo‐ldan‐shes‐rabʹs Summary of the Ratnagotravibhāga: The First Tibetan Commentary on a Crucial Source for the Buddha‐nature Doctrine
  14. Mathes, A Direct Path to the Buddha Within, 3
  15. Burchardi, A Provisional List of Tibetan Commentaries on the Ratnagotravibhāga; Kano, RNgog Blo‐ldan‐shes‐rabʹs Summary of the Ratnagotravibhāga (See Appendix G)
  16. Mathes, A Direct Path to the Buddha Within, 3
  17. Ibid., 1