Property:TileDescription
From Buddha-Nature
This is a property of type Text.
A
The great Karma Kagyu master, the Twelfth Tai Situ Pema Donyo Nyinje, discusses Mahayana Buddhist thought, focusing first on buddha-nature and bodhicitta. +
The study of Buddhism has recently made gigantic strides, on this side of the Atlantic as well as on the other. Not only is the importance of the science of comparative religion making itself felt, but the advance of our Pali and Sanskrit knowledge has greatly contributed to a better understanding of things Oriental. Even Christians who were without sympathy for "heathen" religions have now taken up the study of Buddhism in earnest. Nevertheless, it appears to me that the teachings of Sakyamuni are not yet known in their full significance and that they do not yet command just appreciation. Though intolerant critics lose no chance of vigorously and often wrongly attacking the weak points of Buddhism, which are naturally seen at the surface, clear-sighted people have been very slow to perceive its innermost truth. This is especially the case with the Mahayana school.<br> The main reasons for this are, in my opinion, evident. While the canonical books of the Hinayana Buddhism have been systematically preserved in the Pali language, those of the Mahayana Buddhism are scattered promiscuously all over the fields and valleys of Asia and in half a dozen different languages. Further, while most of the Sanskrit originals have been destroyed, their translations in Tibetan, Mongolian, and Chinese have never been thoroughly studied. And, lastly, the Mahayana system is so intricate, so perplexingly abstruse, that scholars not accustomed to this form of thought and expression are entirely at a loss to find their way through it<br> Among the false charges which have been constantly poured upon the Mahayana Buddhism, we find the following : Some say, "It is a nihilism, denying God, the soul, the world and all"; some say, "It is a polytheism: Avalokiteçvāra, Tara, Vajrapani, Mañjuçri, Amitābha, and what not, are all worshipped by its followers"; still others declare, "It is nothing but sophistry, quibbling, hair-splitting subtlety, and a mocking of the innermost yearnings of humanity" ; while those who attack it from the historical side proclaim, "It is not the genuine teaching of Buddha; it is on the contrary the pure invention of Nāgārjuna, who devised the system by ingeniously mixing up his negative philosophy with the non-atman theory of his predecessor"; or, "The Mahayana is a queer mixture of the Indian mythology that grew most freely in the Tantric period, with a degenerated form of the noble ethical teachings of primitive Buddhism." Though no one who is familiar with Mahayanistic ideas will admit these one-sided and superficial judgments, the majority of people are so credulous as to lend their ear to these falsified reports and to believe them.<br> The present English translation of Açvaghosha's principal work is therefore dedicated to the Western public by a Buddhist from Japan, with a view to dispelling the denunciations so ungraciously heaped upon the Mahayana Buddhism. The name of Açvaghosha is not very well known to the readers of this country, but there is no doubt that he was the first champion, promulgator, and expounder of this doctrine, so far as we can judge from all our available historical records. Besides, in this book almost all the Mahayanistic thoughts, as distinguished from the other religious systems in India, are traceable, so that we can take it as the representative text of this school. If the reader will carefully and patiently go through the entire book, unmindful of its peculiar terminology and occasional obscureness, I believe he will be amply and satisfactorily repaid for his labor, and will find that the underlying ideas are quite simple, showing occasionally a strong resemblance to the Upanishad philosophy as well as to the Samkhya system, though of course retaining its own independent thought throughout.<br> In conclusion let me say a word about the difficulty of translating such an abstruse religio-philosophic discourse as the present text. It is comparatively easy to translate works of travels or of historical events or to make abstracts from philosophical works. But a translator of the Mahayanistic writings, which are full of specific phraseology and highly abstruse speculations, will find himself like a wanderer in some unknown region, not knowing how to obtain any communicable means to express what be perceives and feels. To reproduce the original as faithfully as possible and at the same time to make it intelligible enough to the outside reader, who has perhaps never come in contact with this form of thought, the translator must be perfectly acquainted with the Mahayanistic doctrine as it is understood in the East, while he must not be lacking in adequate knowledge of Western philosophy and mode of thinking. The present translator has done his best to make the Mahayanistic thoughts of Açvaghosha as clear and intelligible as his limited knowledge and lack of philosophic training allow him. He is confident, however, that he has interpreted the Chinese text correctly. In spite of this, some errors may have crept into the present translation, and the translator will gladly avail himself of the criticisms of the Mahayana scholars to make corrections in case a second edition of the work is needed. (Suzuki, translator's preface, x–xiv)<br><br>
[https://archive.org/details/avaghoshasdisc00asva/page/n5/mode/2up Read more here . . .]
B
''Kano, Kazuo. "bCom ldan rig ral cho Daijō kukyōron sōgonka: Wayaku oyobi kōtei tekusuto (1)" (A Critical Edition and Translation of bCom ldan rig ral's ''rGyud bla ma'i ṭī ka rgyan gyi me tog'' (1)). ''Kōyasan Daigaku Ronsō'' (Journal of Kōyasan University) 45 (2010): 13–55.'' +
Articles/BCom ldan rig ral cho Daijō kukyōron sōgonka: Wayaku oyobi kōtei tekusuto (2): Hōshōron I.4–22 no chūkai +
''Kano, Kazuo. "bCom ldan rig ral cho Daijō kukyōron sōgonka: Wayaku oyobi kōtei tekusuto (2): Hōshōron I.4–22 no chūkai" (A Critical Edition and Annotated Translation of bCom ldan rig ral's ''rGyud bla ma'i ṭī ka rgyan gyi me tog'' (2): Commentary on ''Ratnagotravibhāga'' I.4–22). ''Kōyasan Daigaku Ronsō'' (Journal of Kōyasan University) 48 (2013): 1–14.'' +
''Handrick, Don. "Basic Program: Buddha Nature, Essence of Enlightenment." Recorded at Thubten Norbu Ling Tibetan Buddhist Center, Santa Fe, NM, May 28, 2014–July 29, 2015. Audio. https://archive.org/details/BuddhaNatureEssenceOfEnlightenment2014/Essence_of_Enlightenment_01_2014-05-28.mp3.'' +
Dr. Pettit speaks about the basics of Buddha-Nature (''bde gshegs snying po’i rigs'' = ''sugatagarbhagotra'') according to Mipham Rinpoche, with additional reference to some Pāli Suttas, Nāgārjuna’s ''Praise of Dharmadhatu'', and the ''Uttaratantra''. He bases his remarks on Mipham’s text, ''The Lion’s Roar: Exposition on Buddha Nature'' (''bde gshegs snying po stong thun chen mo seng ge nga ro''). John Whitney Pettit holds graduate degrees from Harvard University and Columbia University in the study of World Religions and Buddhist Studies. He has been the student of the previous Dilgo Khyentse Rinpoche and also heard or translated teachings from prominent masters representing the Nyingma tradition and the other schools of Tibetan Buddhism. He is the translator and author of ''Mipham’s Beacon of Certainty'' (1999) and of a forthcoming anthology volume on the subject of Buddha-nature. Since 1998 he has lived in or near New York’s Hudson Valley, working on occasional translations, carving mani stones and communing with the genius loci. He spoke with students at RYI on the 27th of March, 2019. ([https://soundcloud.com/rangjung-yeshe-institute/basics-of-buddha-nature-miphams-roaring-lions-public Adapted from Source Aug 13, 2020]) +
This collection includes a history of buddha-nature theory in Tibet by Thupten Jinpa and seven texts influential in the development of buddha-nature teachings in Tibet. The texts included represent many lineages and historical periods. Along with the root text the following texts appear: 1) Butön's commentary to the Uttaratantrashastra (བདེ་གཤེགས་སྙིང་པོ་གསལ་བར་བྱེད་པ་མཛེས་བྱེད་ཀྱི་རྒྱན། pp 3-63). 2) The Third Karmapa Rangjung Dorje's commentary (བདེ་གཤེགས་སྙིང་པོ་བསྟན་པ། pp 65-69). 3) The Fifteenth Karmapa Khakyap Dorje's commentary (དེ་བཞིན་གཤེགས་པའི་སྙིང་པོ་བསྟན་པའི་བསྟན་བཅོས་ཀྱི་མཆན་འགྲེལ། pp 71-88). 4) Rongton's commentary (ཐེག་པ་ཆེན་པོ་རྒྱུད་བླ་མའི་བསྟན་བཅོས་ལེགས་པར་བཤད་པ། pp 89-206). 5) Shakya Chokden's commentary (ཆོས་དབྱིངས་བསྟོད་པའི་འགྲེལ་པ་ཆོས་ཀྱི་དབྱིངས་རྣམ་པར་ངེས་པ། pp 207-238). 6) Jetsun Chokyi Gyaltsen's text on the disposition (''gotra, rigs'') (རིགས་ཀྱི་སྤྱི་དོན། pp 239-287) 7) Mipham Gyatso's Lion's Roar (བདེ་གཤེགས་སྙིང་པོའི་སྟོང་ཐུན་ཆེན་མོ་སེངྒེའི་ང་རོ། pp 289-316). +
Articles/Beings, Non-Beings, and Buddhas: Contrasting Notions of Tathāgatagarbha in the Anūnatvāpūrṇatvanirdeśaparivarta and *Mahābherī Sūtra +
This article concerns a little studied text of the Mahāyānist ''tathāgatagarbha'' literature, namely the *''Mahābherī Sūtra'', and its relation to other Indian texts which advance forms of ''tathāgatagarbha'' doctrine. Its focus will be the contrast between the content of this ''sūtra'' and the only other text of the ''tathāgatagarbha'' tradition which discusses a particular issue: the unchanging mass of existing sentient beings, without the possibility of any decrease or increase in their number. This is an issue addressed also by the ''Anūnatvāpūrṇatvanirdeśaparivarta'', which I shall argue presents a more sophisticated and likely later consideration, both of this matter and of ''tathāgatagarbha'' doctrine, than that exhibited by the *''Mahābherī Sūtra''. Though it is not clear that either text knew of the other, their different treatments of how one should understand the nature and number of existing sentient beings casts light on their respective places in two distinct strains—one very likely older than the other—of Indian ''tathāgatagarbha'' thought. +
It has recently been alleged by scholars of the Tibetan "Ancient" (rnying ma) tradition that although buddha-nature theory was well known in Tibet from as early as the eighth century, it played quite an insignificant role in early Nyingma exegesis.'"`UNIQ--ref-00000001-QINU`"' I intend in this chapter to challenge this assertion by demonstrating that buddha-nature concepts played a highly significant part in Dzokchen thought during the so-called early diffusion (''snga dar'') period, albeit mostly in the form of autochthonous *''bodhigarbha'' (''byang chub snying po'') or bodhi-nature concepts rather than their well-known Indian counterpart ''tathāgatagarbha'''"`UNIQ--ref-00000002-QINU`"' (''de bzhin gshegs pa'i snying po''), as well as the as yet unattested but virtually synonymous *''sugatagarbha'''"`UNIQ--ref-00000003-QINU`"' (''bde bar gshegs pa'i snying po''), which are both usually translated as buddha-nature. Although this family of terms is widespread in preclassical Dzokchen exegesis and therefore of inestimable importance for understanding the early development of buddha-nature theories in Tibet, it has hitherto received no attention in contemporary Buddhist studies. In determining the reasons for the obvious predilection for this indigenous family of buddha-nature concepts from the eighth to eleventh centuries, my aim is to clarify how bodhi-nature was understood by early Dzokchen authors, why it was distinguished from mainstream Mahāyāna-based buddha-nature concepts, and how it eventually became overshadowed by these latter during the classical period (13th–14th c.) as Indian non-tantric buddha-nature theories and controversies took center stage.'"`UNIQ--ref-00000004-QINU`"' It is hoped that this short survey of Dzokchen bodhi-nature ideas and their cultural milieu will fill some gaps in our still fragmentary understanding of the origins of Tathāgatagarbha theory in Tibet. At the very least, it will show that a decidedly affirmative indigenous current of buddha-nature teachings flourished in Tibet several centuries prior to the ascendancy of the New (''gsar ma'') traditions and their polemically heated debates over rangtong (''rang stong'') and zhentong (''gzhan stong'') interpretations of buddha-nature. (Higgins, "*Bodhigarbha," 29)
Articles/Book Launch: Revisiting Buddha-Nature in India and China by Dr. Christopher Jones and Dr. Li Zijie +
''Jones, Christopher, and Li Zijie. "Book Launch: Revisiting Buddha-Nature in India and China." Produced by SOAS (University of London), Centre of Buddhist Studies, February 18, 2021. Video, 1:47:49. https://youtu.be/8mKnUnmp4zw.'' +
Books/A Direct Path to the Buddha Within: Go Lotsāwa's Mahāmudrā Interpretation of the Ratnagotravibhāga/The Mahāmudrā Interpretation of the ''Ratnagotravibhāga'' +
At least two of the masters who are mentioned in the context of the meditation tradition of Tsen are known to have given mahāmudrā explanations on the basis of nontantric Mahāyāna works. Besides Zhönu Pal, this can be also confirmed now for the Third Karmapa Rangjung Dorjé, who in his newly discovered ''Dharmadhātustotra'' commentary equates ''prajñāpāramitā'' with mahāmudrā, both being for him a defining characteristic of the dharmadhātu. +
Brunnhölzl, Karl. "The Uttaratantra and Mahāmudrā." In ''When the Clouds Part: The Uttaratantra and Its Meditative Tradition as a Bridge between Sūtra and Tantra'', 151–282. Boston: Snow Lion Publications, 2014.
As stated before, texts such as CMW, those by Mönlam Tsültrim, GC, the Eighth Karmapa’s ''Lamp'', and GISM all establish connections between the ''Uttaratantra'' and Mahāmudrā. Such connections are also found in a number of Indian and Tibetan Mahāmudrā works. Usually, these connections are made in the wider context of the Mahāmudrā approaches that came to be called "sūtra Mahāmudrā" or "essence Mahāmudrā" (the Mahāmudrā approach that is beyond "sūtra Mahāmudrā" and "tantra Mahāmudrā"). +
Do all living beings ultimately become enlightened? Do we have Buddha nature, the seed of enlightenment? These questions concerning an ordinary living being's potential to become a Buddha, the purest form of existence, are the main topic of this book. Based on the views of the three major Buddhist schools of Buddhist philosophy — Vaibhasika, Cittamatrin and Madhyamaka — Geshe Sonam Rinchen explains how our minds, though stained by temporary defilements, are innately pure, luminous and cognizant and how we can become aware of the mind's clear light nature. (Source: back cover) +
This volume presents the first book-length study in English of the concept of Buddha nature as discussed in the ''Buddha Nature Treatise'' (''Fo Xing Lun''), attributed to Vasubandhu and translated into Chinese by Paramartha in the sixth century. The author provides a detailed discussion of one of the most important concepts in East Asian Buddhism, a topic little addressed in Western studies of Buddhism until now, and places the Buddha nature concept in the context of Buddhist intellectual history. King then carefully explains the traditional Buddhist language in the text, and embeds Buddha nature in a family of concepts and values which as a group are foundational to the development of the major indigenous schools of Chinese Buddhism.<br> In addition, she refutes the accusations that the idea of Buddha nature introduces a crypto-Atman into Buddhist thought, and that it represents a form of monism akin to the Brahmanism of the ''Upanisads''. In doing this, King defends Buddha nature in terms of purely Buddhist philosophical principles. Finally, the author engages the Buddha nature concept in dialogue with Western philosophy by asking what it teaches us about what a human being, or person, is.
(Source: back cover) +
14th Shamar Rinpoche's teachings on the Uttaratantra using the 3rd Karmapa's text, Revealing Buddha Nature. +
The tathāgatagarbha or buddha nature doctrine is centered on sentient beings’ potential for buddhahood—sometimes understood in the sense that all beings already contain a “buddha within.” This notion is found through various strands of early Mahāyāna sources that, notwithstanding their complex and interwoven development, came to share enough common features to summarize them under the doxographical category of Tathāgatagarbha.
The chapters contained in this volume represent the latest research into buddha nature theory that covers a range of topics across major Buddhist traditions. These contributions were originally presented as papers during the symposium “[[Tathāgatagarbha_Across_Asia|Tathāgatagarbha across Asia: The Reception of an Influential Mahāyāna Doctrine in Central and East Asia]],” held at the University of Vienna in 2019. This symposium brought together academic scholars focusing on religio-historical developments of buddha nature theory as well as traditional teachers and monastics who offered emic perspectives on the relevance of the concept within the context of their own tradition. The resulting volume, therefore, aims at contributing to the overall better understanding of tathāgatagarbha doxography, both historically and in living Buddhist communities. [https://wstb.univie.ac.at/product/wstb-103/ (Source: WSTB)] +
This is David Higgins and Martina Draszczyk's second book together and comes out of their first study, ''[[Mahāmudrā And The Middle Way]]''. In their follow up they have delivered another two volumes on the writings of the Eighth Karmapa Mikyö Dorje (1507-1554) and his nuanced approach to the intricacies of the buddha-nature debate. It is an approach that combines the yogic sensibilities of Mahāmudrā with the dialectic approach of the Madhyamaka, which, according to the authors, Mikyö Dorje characterizes as the Yuganaddha-Apratiṣṭhāna-Madhyamaka (''zung ’jug rab tu mi gnas pa’i dbu ma''), that is, as a “Nonfoundational (or Nonabiding) Middle Way consisting in Unity.” As the authors explain,
"This nomenclature tells us much about the central philosophical aims and presuppositions of the Eighth Karma pa and his Karma bka’ brgyud tradition. As a Mahāmudrā proponent, Mi bskyod rdo rje gives primacy to innate modes of being and awareness, such as coemergent wisdom or buddha nature naturally endowed with qualities, that are amenable only to direct yogic perception and revealed through the personal guidance of a qualified teacher. As an exponent of ''yuganaddha'' (''zung ’jug''), i.e., unity (literally, “yoking together”), he espouses the tantric goal of unity beyond extremes, a goal grounded in the inseparability of the two truths or realities (''bden gnyis dbyer med''), of appearance and emptiness (''snang stong dbyer med''). In his eyes, this unity is only fully realized when one understands that the conventional has no independent existence apart from the ultimate and that the latter is a condition of possibility of the former. As an advocate of ''apratiṣṭhāna'' (''rab tu mi gnas pa''), i.e., nonfoundationalism, he resolutely maintains that all outer and inner phenomena, including deep features of reality disclosed through meditation, lack any ontic or epistemic essence or foundation that the mind can lay hold of. Finally, as a champion of Madhyamaka, i.e., the Buddhist Middle Way, the author attempts to ply a middle course between the extremes of existence and nonexistence, eternalism and nihilism. These various doxographical strands are deftly interwoven in the Karma pa’s view of buddha nature, which affirms the innate presence of buddha nature and its qualities in all sentient beings as well as their soteriological efficacy while denying either any ontological status." (Higgins and Draszczyk, preface, 14)
The present compendium aims to give the Buddhist student an opportunity to come into direct contact with these very positive and cataphatic (Truth-affirmative) doctrines and therewith enrich his or her practice of the Dharma. The Nirvana Sutra gives us the Buddha's own direct teachings, and the Srimala Sutra communicates similar doctrines through the person of the great Buddhist queen, while speaking in the approving presence of the Buddha himself. (Tony Page, preface, 4) +
Sallie B. King, in her essay "Buddha Nature Thought and Mysticism", offers a characterization of the phenomenon of mysticism and analyzes three Buddha Nature texts to see whether and to what extent the thought of those texts may properly be called 'mystical'. All three of the texts she discusses are extant only in Chinese. Two of them—the ''Buddha Nature Treatise'' (''Fo hsing lun'') and the ''Supreme Basis Sūtra'' (''Fo shuo wu shang i ching'')—are translations made by Paramārtha in the sixth century CE; and there is some question as to whether he may have actually composed them rather than simply translated them. The third, the ''No Increase, No Decrease Sutra'', was also translated into Chinese in the sixth century CE (by Bodhiruci), and there almost certainly was an Indic original for this text. Each of these texts belongs, more or less, to the Tathāgatagarbha tradition, but King wishes to classify only the Buddha Nature Treatise and the ''No Increase, No Decrease Sūtra'' as properly mystical texts. The ''Supreme Basis Sūtra'', she argues, endorses devotionalism rather than direct mystical experience for the practitioner; it cannot therefore be classified as a mystical text. King therefore distinguishes different threads or emphases within the Buddha Nature thought of the period with which she deals. (Griffiths and Keenan, introduction to ''Buddha Nature'', 5–6) +
''Buddha Nature and Animality'' is about peaceful living. In discussions about the relation between humans and their animal relatives, a central theme is that Buddhism represents the most viable philosophical/religious alternative to the malaise surrounding us when we confront ecological problems. This recognition points to the notion of compassion. ''Karuna'' is given expression as an alternative to stewardship since stewardship too falls into the dualistic trap of privileging the human. Authors seek beyond the limits imposed by discourses of ethics and assume a more radical approach to seek the roots of the perspectives that allow the conceptual space for the problematic dialogues in the first place. Rather than viewing animals as distinct beings sharing our environs, authors attempt to give the animal soul back to spirituality. They argue for the naturally enlightened spontaneity arising in animal nature and that animal nature is Buddha-nature. This "animal-buddha" nature is fundamental to understanding Buddhism as a 21st century philosophy for living and dying. (Source: [https://www.jainpub.com/inc/sdetail/1229 Jain Publishing Company]) +
