Topic: Critical Buddhism
Books
Critical Buddhism
In the late 1980s and early 1990s, the relative calm world of Japanese Buddhist scholarship was thrown into chaos with the publication of several works by Buddhist scholars Hakamaya Noriaki and Matsumoto Shiro, dedicated to the promotion of something they called Critical Buddhism (hihan bukkyo). In their quest to re-establish a "true" - rational, ethical and humanist - form of East Asian Buddhism, the Critical Buddhists undertook a radical deconstruction of historical and contemporary East Asian Buddhism, particularly Zen. While their controversial work has received some attention in English-language scholarship, this is the first book-length treatment of Critical Buddhism as both a philosophical and religious movement, where the lines between scholarship and practice blur. Providing a critical and constructive analysis of Critical Buddhism, particularly the epistemological categories of critica and topica, this book examines contemporary theories of knowledge and ethics in order to situate Critical Buddhism within modern Japanese and Buddhist thought as well as in relation to current trends in contemporary Western thought. (Source: Taylor & Francis)
Shields, James M. Critical Buddhism: Engaging with Modern Japanese Buddhist Thought. Burlington, VT: Ashgate Publishing, 2011. https://archive.org/details/criticalbuddhismengagingwithmodernjapanesebuddhistthoughtjamesmarkshields_202003_771_Y/mode/2up.
Shields, James M. Critical Buddhism: Engaging with Modern Japanese Buddhist Thought. Burlington, VT: Ashgate Publishing, 2011. https://archive.org/details/criticalbuddhismengagingwithmodernjapanesebuddhistthoughtjamesmarkshields_202003_771_Y/mode/2up.;Critical Buddhism;Critical Buddhism;The doctrine of buddha-nature in Japanese Buddhism;Zen - Chan;Hakamaya, N.;Matsumoto, S.;James Mark Shields; Critical Buddhism: Engaging with Modern Japanese Buddhist Thought
Mahāyāna Buddhism: The Doctrinal Foundations
Originating in India, Mahayana Buddhism spread across Asia, becoming the prevalent form of Buddhism in Tibet and East Asia. Over the last twenty-five years Western interest in Mahayana has increased considerably, reflected both in the quantity of scholarly material produced and in the attraction of Westerners towards Tibetan Buddhism and Zen.
Paul Williams’ Mahayana Buddhism is widely regarded as the standard introduction to the field, used internationally for teaching and research and has been translated into several European and Asian languages. This new edition has been fully revised throughout in the light of the wealth of new studies and focuses on the religion’s diversity and richness. It includes much more material on China and Japan, with appropriate reference to Nepal, and for students who wish to carry their study further there is a much-expanded bibliography and extensive footnotes and cross-referencing. Everyone studying this important tradition will find Williams’ book the ideal companion to their studies. (Source: Routledge)
Williams, Paul. Mahayana Buddhism: The Doctrinal Foundations. 2nd ed. The Library of Religious Beliefs and Practices. New York: Routledge, 2009. https://archive.org/details/mahayanabuddhismthedoctrinalfoundationspaulwilliamsroutledgeseealtruismandreality_202003_445_W/mode/2up.
Williams, Paul. Mahayana Buddhism: The Doctrinal Foundations. 2nd ed. The Library of Religious Beliefs and Practices. New York: Routledge, 2009. https://archive.org/details/mahayanabuddhismthedoctrinalfoundationspaulwilliamsroutledgeseealtruismandreality_202003_445_W/mode/2up.;Mahāyāna Buddhism: The Doctrinal Foundations;tathāgatagarbha;Ratnagotravibhāga Mahāyānottaratantraśāstra;gzhan stong;rang stong;The doctrine of buddha-nature in Chinese Buddhism;The doctrine of buddha-nature in Japanese Buddhism;Dasheng qixin lun;Critical Buddhism;anātman;Contemporary;prajñā;Madhyamaka;śūnyatā;Two Truths;Yogācāra;trisvabhāva;ālayavijñāna;The doctrine of buddha-nature in Tibetan Buddhism;Saddharmapuṇḍarīkasūtra;Nāgārjuna;Dōgen;Buddhāvataṃsakasūtra;Fazang;Tien Tai;Hōnen;Shinran;Paul Williams;Mahāyāna Buddhism: The Doctrinal Foundations
Pruning the Bodhi Tree
A collection of essays on the "critical Buddhism" (hihan bukkyō) movement started by Hakamaya Noriaki and Matsumoto Shirō that swept Japanese academia from the late 1980's onward.
Hubbard, Jamie, and Paul L. Swanson, eds. Pruning the Bodhi Tree: The Storm Over Critical Buddhism. Nanzan Library of Asian Religion and Culture. Honolulu: University of Hawai’i Press, 1997.
Hubbard, Jamie, and Paul L. Swanson, eds. Pruning the Bodhi Tree: The Storm Over Critical Buddhism. Nanzan Library of Asian Religion and Culture. Honolulu: University of Hawai’i Press, 1997.;Pruning the Bodhi Tree;Defining buddha-nature;The doctrine of buddha-nature in Early Buddhism;The doctrine of buddha-nature in Japanese Buddhism;Saddharmapuṇḍarīkasūtra;Against Buddha-Nature;Critical Buddhism;Zen - Chan;Jamie Hubbard; Paul Swanson;Pruning the Bodhi Tree: The Storm Over Critical Buddhism
Articles
"Zen is Not Buddhism": Recent Japanese Critiques of Buddha-Nature
Hongaku shisō, the idea that all beings are "inherently" enlightened, is an almost universal assumption in the Japanese Buddhist tradition. This idea also played an important role in the indigenization of Buddhism in Japan and in the development of the syncretistic religious ethos that underlies Japanese society. Through most of Japanese history, the idea of the inherent enlightenment (including non-sentient beings such as plants and rocks—which expanded to include assumptions such as the non-differentiation between "indigenous" kami and the Buddhas and bodhisattvas, and the transcendence of all dualities (including good and evil) as an ideal—was pervasive and unquestioned in much of Japanese religious activity and thought. Recently some Japanese Buddhist scholars, notably Hakamaya Noriaki and Matsumoto Shirō of the Sōtō Zen sect [at] Komazawa University, have questioned the legitimacy of this ethos, claiming that it is antithetical to basic Buddhist ideas such as anātman ("no-self"), and that it is the source of many social problems in Japan. They call for a conscious recognition and rejection of this ethos, and a return to "true Buddhism." After presenting a brief outline of the history and significance of these ideas in Japan, Hakamaya and Matsumoto's critique is explained and examined. Some of the academic and social reactions to this critique are also explored.
Swanson, Paul L. "'Zen is Not Buddhism': Recent Japanese Critiques of Buddha-Nature." Numen 40, no. 2 (1993): 115–49. http://www.thezensite.com/ZenEssays/HistoricalZen/zen-is-not-BUDDHISM.pdf.
Swanson, Paul L. "'Zen is Not Buddhism': Recent Japanese Critiques of Buddha-Nature." Numen 40, no. 2 (1993): 115–49. http://www.thezensite.com/ZenEssays/HistoricalZen/zen-is-not-BUDDHISM.pdf.;"Zen is Not Buddhism": Recent Japanese Critiques of Buddha-Nature;Zen - Chan;Critical Buddhism;The doctrine of buddha-nature in Japanese Buddhism;Hakamaya, N.;Matsumoto, S.;Paul Swanson;  
Buddha-nature, Critical Buddhism, and Early Chan
This article begins with a reflection on why medieval Chinese Buddhist thought has not been more conspicuous in recent comparative work on Buddhism and Western philosophy. The Japanese proponents of "Critical Buddhism" (hihan bukkyō 批判仏教), Matsumoto Shirō 松本史朗 and Hakamaya Noriaki 袴谷憲昭, would see this neglect as merited since, in their view, East Asian Buddhism in general, and Chinese Chan in particular, is philosophically crippled owing to its embrace of tathāgatagarbha and buddha-nature thought. Indeed, Matsumoto singles out Shenhui 荷澤神會 (670-762), one of the architects of the Southern School of Chan, as an example of the early Chan advocacy of buddha-nature doctrine.
This article is not concerned with whether buddha-nature and tathāgatagarbha thought is actually deleterious to critical philosophical work. Rather, the concern is to demonstrate that, far from embracing buddha-nature doctrine, the eighth-century founders of Southern Chan had serious concerns with it. Evidence for this is found in: (1) the writings of Shenhui, notably in his opposition to the doctrine of the "buddha-nature of insentient objects" (wuqing foxing 無情佛性); and (2) the Platform Scripture of the Sixth Patriarch (Liuzu tanjing 六祖壇經), particularly in the variant versions of Huineng's famous "enlightenment verse." Thus the Southern School may be viewed as a forerunner of the Critical Buddhist anti-dhātuvāda polemics. The article closes with comments on the ongoing problems Chinese Buddhist exegetes had in marrying the metaphysical monism of Yogācāra and tathāgatagarbha teachings with the anti-foundationalist thrust of Madhyamaka and Prajñāpāramitā literature.
This article is not concerned with whether buddha-nature and tathāgatagarbha thought is actually deleterious to critical philosophical work. Rather, the concern is to demonstrate that, far from embracing buddha-nature doctrine, the eighth-century founders of Southern Chan had serious concerns with it. Evidence for this is found in: (1) the writings of Shenhui, notably in his opposition to the doctrine of the "buddha-nature of insentient objects" (wuqing foxing 無情佛性); and (2) the Platform Scripture of the Sixth Patriarch (Liuzu tanjing 六祖壇經), particularly in the variant versions of Huineng's famous "enlightenment verse." Thus the Southern School may be viewed as a forerunner of the Critical Buddhist anti-dhātuvāda polemics. The article closes with comments on the ongoing problems Chinese Buddhist exegetes had in marrying the metaphysical monism of Yogācāra and tathāgatagarbha teachings with the anti-foundationalist thrust of Madhyamaka and Prajñāpāramitā literature.
Sharf, Robert. "Buddha-nature, Critical Buddhism, and Early Chan." Critical Review for Buddhist Studies 22 (2017): 105–50.
Sharf, Robert. "Buddha-nature, Critical Buddhism, and Early Chan." Critical Review for Buddhist Studies 22 (2017): 105–50.;Buddha-nature, Critical Buddhism, and Early Chan;Critical Buddhism;Zen - Chan;The doctrine of buddha-nature in Japanese Buddhism;Heze Shenhui;Robert Sharf; 
Critical Buddhism and Returning to the Sources
No abstract given. Here are the first relevant paragraphs:
Critical Buddhism was inevitable. That it was given voice by prominent Japanese scholars noted for their work in non-East Asian Buddhism was also inevitable. That it has provoked strong, even hostile, reactions was inevitable as well. Inevitable means that the causes and conditions that gave rise to Critical Buddhism can be analyzed and understood to show that it has a context, a history, and a necessity. Critical Buddhism is necessary. Thinking about what arises through causes and conditions, especially in terms of how that impacts on cultural and social realities, is a principal component of both Critical Buddhism and Buddhism properly practiced.
This essay will examine some—but certainly not all—of the factors that have contributed to Critical Buddhism. Some arguments and observations will be offered that, while not retellings from the writings of the Critical Buddhists, run parallel to them. These parallels, which I offer as supplements, recast some of their arguments and focus on issues and areas germane to their undertaking. After discussing the inevitability of Critical Buddhism in the context of twentieth-century Japanese Buddhist scholarship, I will turn to some of the events that took place in China during the seventh and eighth centuries that were decisive for the prevalence in East Asia of the type(s) of Buddhism they criticize. This will be followed by a critique of what has happened to the notion of enlightenment in East Asian Buddhism, particularly in the Ch’an and Zen traditions, with reference to the problem of hongaku (original enlightenment) and the authority of lineage transmission. Then, stepping back into a wider context, I will suggest that, far from being the idiosyncratic, misguided departure depicted by its detractors, Critical Buddhism is the inevitable revisiting of a theme that has been central to Buddhism since its onset. All the above points concern inevitabilities: the trajectory and accomplishments of Japanese scholarship in this century coupled with the crisis of Buddhism in the modern world; the decisive historical events that have established a pervasive ideological underpinning in East Asian Buddhism that Matsumoto and Hakamaya have labeled dhātu-vāda, combined with the exclusion of other, counteracting Buddhist tendencies found elsewhere in the Buddhist world, such as Buddhist logic; the undermining of certain foundational Buddhist notions, such as enlightenment, as a result of or in tandem with the growth of dhātu-vāda ideology; the persistent self-criticism and self-reevaluation that Buddhism has subjected itself to, often glorifying the critique and the critics (Nāgārjuna being the most famous example)—all these points have made it inevitable that Critical Buddhism appear today in Japan (and elsewhere). Finally, while examining an aspect of Matsumoto’s critique of The Record of Lin-chi, I will suggest some tactical distinctions that should be considered by those critical of Critical Buddhism (Lusthaus, "Critical Buddhism and Returning to the Sources," 30–31)
Critical Buddhism was inevitable. That it was given voice by prominent Japanese scholars noted for their work in non-East Asian Buddhism was also inevitable. That it has provoked strong, even hostile, reactions was inevitable as well. Inevitable means that the causes and conditions that gave rise to Critical Buddhism can be analyzed and understood to show that it has a context, a history, and a necessity. Critical Buddhism is necessary. Thinking about what arises through causes and conditions, especially in terms of how that impacts on cultural and social realities, is a principal component of both Critical Buddhism and Buddhism properly practiced.
This essay will examine some—but certainly not all—of the factors that have contributed to Critical Buddhism. Some arguments and observations will be offered that, while not retellings from the writings of the Critical Buddhists, run parallel to them. These parallels, which I offer as supplements, recast some of their arguments and focus on issues and areas germane to their undertaking. After discussing the inevitability of Critical Buddhism in the context of twentieth-century Japanese Buddhist scholarship, I will turn to some of the events that took place in China during the seventh and eighth centuries that were decisive for the prevalence in East Asia of the type(s) of Buddhism they criticize. This will be followed by a critique of what has happened to the notion of enlightenment in East Asian Buddhism, particularly in the Ch’an and Zen traditions, with reference to the problem of hongaku (original enlightenment) and the authority of lineage transmission. Then, stepping back into a wider context, I will suggest that, far from being the idiosyncratic, misguided departure depicted by its detractors, Critical Buddhism is the inevitable revisiting of a theme that has been central to Buddhism since its onset. All the above points concern inevitabilities: the trajectory and accomplishments of Japanese scholarship in this century coupled with the crisis of Buddhism in the modern world; the decisive historical events that have established a pervasive ideological underpinning in East Asian Buddhism that Matsumoto and Hakamaya have labeled dhātu-vāda, combined with the exclusion of other, counteracting Buddhist tendencies found elsewhere in the Buddhist world, such as Buddhist logic; the undermining of certain foundational Buddhist notions, such as enlightenment, as a result of or in tandem with the growth of dhātu-vāda ideology; the persistent self-criticism and self-reevaluation that Buddhism has subjected itself to, often glorifying the critique and the critics (Nāgārjuna being the most famous example)—all these points have made it inevitable that Critical Buddhism appear today in Japan (and elsewhere). Finally, while examining an aspect of Matsumoto’s critique of The Record of Lin-chi, I will suggest some tactical distinctions that should be considered by those critical of Critical Buddhism (Lusthaus, "Critical Buddhism and Returning to the Sources," 30–31)
Lusthaus, Dan. "Critical Buddhism and Returning to the Sources." In Pruning the Bodhi Tree: The Storm over Critical Buddhism, edited by Jamie Hubbard and Paul L. Swanson, 56–80. Honolulu: University of Hawai'i Press, 1997.
Lusthaus, Dan. "Critical Buddhism and Returning to the Sources." In Pruning the Bodhi Tree: The Storm over Critical Buddhism, edited by Jamie Hubbard and Paul L. Swanson, 56–80. Honolulu: University of Hawai'i Press, 1997.;Critical Buddhism and Returning to the Sources;Critical Buddhism;The doctrine of buddha-nature in Japanese Buddhism;Original Enlightenment;Hakamaya, N.;Matsumoto, S.;Dan Lusthaus;  
Is Critical Buddhism Really Critical?
Peter Gregory’s essay, "Is Critical Buddhism Really Critical?," takes the thought of Tsung-mi as a
case study in order to ask whether the pursuit of "true Buddhism" is not in turn positing some sort of dhātu-vāda-like essence of Buddhism, hence mirroring the object of its own criticism. Preferring to see Buddhism as a "product of a complex set of interdependent and ever-changing conditions (pratītyasamutpāda),” he looks at Tsung-mi's thought not to determine whether or not it is "truly Buddhist" but in order to discover the causes and conditions that brought it into existence. In a manner similar to Sallie King's argument that Buddha-nature can be understood as a catalyst for positive social change, Gregory argues that for Tsung-mi the doctrine of original enlightenment was tied not to a linguistic transcendentalism but rather to an affirmation of language in response to the more radical critiques of the prajñā-pāramitā tradition. (Hubbard, introduction to Pruning the Bodhi Tree, xvii)
Gregory, Peter N. "Is Critical Buddhism Really Critical?" In Pruning the Bodhi Tree: The Storm over Critical Buddhism, edited by Jamie Hubbard and Paul L. Swanson, 286–97. Honolulu: University of Hawai'i Press, 1997.
Gregory, Peter N. "Is Critical Buddhism Really Critical?" In Pruning the Bodhi Tree: The Storm over Critical Buddhism, edited by Jamie Hubbard and Paul L. Swanson, 286–97. Honolulu: University of Hawai'i Press, 1997.;Is Critical Buddhism Really Critical?;The doctrine of buddha-nature in Chinese Buddhism;Zen / Chan;Critical Buddhism;Zongmi;Peter Gregory; 
The Doctrine of Buddha-Nature Is Impeccably Buddhist
One of the most important arguments made by the exponents of Critical Buddhism is, as Matsumoto Shirõ asserts in the title of one of his papers, that "The Doctrine of Tathāgata-garbha Is Not Buddhist." In brief, the claim made by Matsumoto and Hakamaya Noriaki is that tathāgata-garbha or Buddha-nature thought is dhātu-vāda, an essentialist philosophy closely akin to the monism of the Upaniṣads. In Matsumoto and Hakamaya’s view, only thought that strictly adheres to the anti-essentialist principle of pratītyasamutpāda taught by Śākyamuni should be recognized as Buddhist. Buddha-nature thought, being a dhātu-vāda or essentialist philosophy, is in fundamental violation of this requirement and consequently should not be regarded as Buddhist. On the basis of this reading of Buddha-nature thought, Matsumoto and Hakamaya proceed to make the several subsequent claims documented in this volume. Since the assertion that Buddha-nature thought is dhātu-vāda is such a foundational claim, I will focus my remarks upon this one point in their corpus, though at the end of this chapter I will have a few words to say regarding their charge that Buddha-nature thought is to blame for the weakness of Japanese Buddhist social ethics.
I propose in this paper to challenge Matsumoto and Hakamaya’s reading of Buddha-nature thought. In my understanding, while Buddha-nature thought uses some of the terminology of essentialist and monistic philosophy, and thus may give the reader the impression that it is essentialist or monistic, a careful study of how those terms are used—how they actually function in the text—leads the reader to a very different conclusion. I will attempt to demonstrate that Buddha-nature thought is by no means dhātu-vāda as charged, but is instead an impeccably Buddhist variety of thought, based firmly on the idea of emptiness, which in turn is a development of the principle of pratītyasamutpāda
In making my remarks I draw upon the exposition of Buddha-nature thought given in the Buddha-Nature Treatise (Fo hsing lun), attributed to Vasubandhu and translated into Chinese by Paramārtha.'"`UNIQ--ref-00000D45-QINU`"' The Buddha-Nature Treatise is a particularly useful text to consult in this matter inasmuch as it constitutes a considered attempt, by an author of great philosophical sophistication, to articulate the Buddha-nature concept per se and to explain both its philosophical meaning and its soteriological function. Indeed, the author is savvy enough to have anticipated the criticisms that this concept would face, including the particular criticisms leveled in our time by Matsumoto and Hakamaya, and to have effectively countered them in the 6th century CE. In this chapter, then, I will consider some of these criticisms in turn and see how the author of the Buddha-Nature Treatise defends as Buddhist the concept of Buddha-nature and the language in which it is expressed.'"`UNIQ--ref-00000D46-QINU`"' (King, "The Doctrine of Buddha-Nature Is Impeccably Buddhist," 174–75)
I propose in this paper to challenge Matsumoto and Hakamaya’s reading of Buddha-nature thought. In my understanding, while Buddha-nature thought uses some of the terminology of essentialist and monistic philosophy, and thus may give the reader the impression that it is essentialist or monistic, a careful study of how those terms are used—how they actually function in the text—leads the reader to a very different conclusion. I will attempt to demonstrate that Buddha-nature thought is by no means dhātu-vāda as charged, but is instead an impeccably Buddhist variety of thought, based firmly on the idea of emptiness, which in turn is a development of the principle of pratītyasamutpāda
In making my remarks I draw upon the exposition of Buddha-nature thought given in the Buddha-Nature Treatise (Fo hsing lun), attributed to Vasubandhu and translated into Chinese by Paramārtha.'"`UNIQ--ref-00000D45-QINU`"' The Buddha-Nature Treatise is a particularly useful text to consult in this matter inasmuch as it constitutes a considered attempt, by an author of great philosophical sophistication, to articulate the Buddha-nature concept per se and to explain both its philosophical meaning and its soteriological function. Indeed, the author is savvy enough to have anticipated the criticisms that this concept would face, including the particular criticisms leveled in our time by Matsumoto and Hakamaya, and to have effectively countered them in the 6th century CE. In this chapter, then, I will consider some of these criticisms in turn and see how the author of the Buddha-Nature Treatise defends as Buddhist the concept of Buddha-nature and the language in which it is expressed.'"`UNIQ--ref-00000D46-QINU`"' (King, "The Doctrine of Buddha-Nature Is Impeccably Buddhist," 174–75)
King, Sallie B. "The Doctrine of Buddha-Nature Is Impeccably Buddhist." In Pruning the Bodhi Tree: The Storm over Critical Buddhism, edited by Jamie Hubbard and Paul L. Swanson, 174–92. Honolulu: University of Hawai’i Press, 1997.
King, Sallie B. "The Doctrine of Buddha-Nature Is Impeccably Buddhist." In Pruning the Bodhi Tree: The Storm over Critical Buddhism, edited by Jamie Hubbard and Paul L. Swanson, 174–92. Honolulu: University of Hawai’i Press, 1997.;The Doctrine of Buddha-Nature Is Impeccably Buddhist;Critical Buddhism;The doctrine of buddha-nature in Japanese Buddhism;Paramārtha;Hakamaya, N.;Matsumoto, S.;Sallie King;  
The Doctrine of Buddha-Nature in Mahāyāna Buddhism
The doctrine of Buddha-Nature (Buddhadhātu) is one of the most important doctrines in Mahayana Buddhism. This doctrine can be found in a number of Mahayana texts that were composed at least by the 3rd to the 5th century C. E., and traces of this doctrine can be found in the development of Chinese, Korean and Japanese Buddhism. The doctrine of Buddha-nature basically teaches that all sentient beings have the Buddha-nature and that they can all attain Buddhahood. The Buddha-nature is described as pure and immaculate, free from emotional and conceptual defilements that plague sentient beings.
See, Tony Sin-Heng. "The Doctrine of Buddha-Nature in Mahāyāna Buddhism." Journal of the International Association of Buddhist Universities 9, no. 1 (2016): 47–56. http://www.ojs.mcu.ac.th/index.php/jiabu/article/view/863.
See, Tony Sin-Heng. "The Doctrine of Buddha-Nature in Mahāyāna Buddhism." Journal of the International Association of Buddhist Universities 9, no. 1 (2016): 47–56. http://www.ojs.mcu.ac.th/index.php/jiabu/article/view/863.;The Doctrine of Buddha-Nature in Mahāyāna Buddhism;The doctrine of buddha-nature in Indian Buddhism;buddhadhātu;Critical Buddhism;ālayavijñāna;tathāgatagarbha;Tony Sin-Heng See; 
The Idea of Dhātu-vāda in Yogācāra and Tathāgata-garbha Texts
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)
Read more here:
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)
Read more here:
Yamabe, Nobuyoshi. "The Idea of Dhātu-vāda in Yogācāra and Tathāgata-garbha Texts." In Pruning the Bodhi Tree: The Storm over Critical Buddhism, edited by Jamie Hubbard and Paul L. Swanson, 193–204. Honolulu: University of Hawai’i Press, 1997.
Yamabe, Nobuyoshi. "The Idea of Dhātu-vāda in Yogācāra and Tathāgata-garbha Texts." In Pruning the Bodhi Tree: The Storm over Critical Buddhism, edited by Jamie Hubbard and Paul L. Swanson, 193–204. Honolulu: University of Hawai’i Press, 1997.;The Idea of Dhātu-vāda in Yogācāra and Tathāgata-garbha Texts;Critical Buddhism;tathāgatagarbha;Yogācāra;pratītyasamutpāda;Original Enlightenment;Matsumoto, S.;Hakamaya, N.;Nobuyoshi Yamabe;  
The Structure of the Soteriology of Tathāgatagarbha Thought as Seen from the Perspective of Different Modes of Discourse: A Response to Critical Buddhism
Shimoda, Masahiro. "The Structure of the Soteriology of Tathāgatagarbha Thought as Seen from the Perspective of Different Modes of Discourse: A Response to Critical Buddhism." In "What is Tathāgatagarbha: Buddha-Nature or Buddha Within?" Edited by Akira Saitō. Special issue, Acta Asiatica 118 (2020): 79–97.
Shimoda, Masahiro. "The Structure of the Soteriology of Tathāgatagarbha Thought as Seen from the Perspective of Different Modes of Discourse: A Response to Critical Buddhism." In "What is Tathāgatagarbha: Buddha-Nature or Buddha Within?" Edited by Akira Saitō. Special issue, Acta Asiatica 118 (2020): 79–97.
Shimoda, Masahiro. "The Structure of the Soteriology of Tathāgatagarbha Thought as Seen from the Perspective of Different Modes of Discourse: A Response to Critical Buddhism." In "What is Tathāgatagarbha: Buddha-Nature or Buddha Within?" Edited by Akira Saitō. Special issue, Acta Asiatica 118 (2020): 79–97.;The Structure of the Soteriology of Tathāgatagarbha Thought as Seen from the Perspective of Different Modes of Discourse: A Response to Critical Buddhism;tathāgatagarbha;Critical Buddhism;Masahiro Shimoda; 
Multimedia
Critical Buddhism: An Overview by Jamie Hubbard and Paul Swanson
Jamie Hubbard and Paul Swanson discuss Critical Buddhism, a trend in Japanese Buddhist scholarship associated primarily with the work of Hakamaya Noriaki and Matsumoto Shiro.
Hubbard, Jamie, and Paul Swanson. "Critical Buddhism: An Overview." Interview by Marcus Perman, Alex Gardner, and José Cabezón. AAR Annual Meeting, Denver, CO, Nov. 2018. Video, 10:52. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UWbTA-L5I_w&t.
Hubbard, Jamie, and Paul Swanson. "Critical Buddhism: An Overview." Interview by Marcus Perman, Alex Gardner, and José Cabezón. AAR Annual Meeting, Denver, CO, Nov. 2018. Video, 10:52. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UWbTA-L5I_w&t.;Critical Buddhism: An Overview by Jamie Hubbard and Paul Swanson;Critical Buddhism;Matsumoto, S.;Hakamaya, N.; Critical Buddhism: An Overview
Dorji Wangchuk at the 2019 Tathāgatagarbha Symposium
Dorji Wangchuk discusses critiques of Buddha-nature theory as non-Buddhist and as opposed to the Buddha's teaching on dependent arising. In particular, he looks at how Rongzom Chökyi Zangpo interprets the tathāgatagarbha theory in relation to the pratītyasamutpāda theory.
Wangchuk, Dorji. "Rong-zom-pa on the Tathāgatagarbha and Pratītyasamutpāda Theories." Paper presented at the University of Vienna Symposium, Tathāgatagarbha Across Asia, Vienna, Austria, July 2019. Video, 45:33. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0slogomESI8.
Wangchuk, Dorji. "Rong-zom-pa on the Tathāgatagarbha and Pratītyasamutpāda Theories." Paper presented at the University of Vienna Symposium, Tathāgatagarbha Across Asia, Vienna, Austria, July 2019. Video, 45:33. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0slogomESI8.;Dorji Wangchuk at the 2019 Tathāgatagarbha Symposium;Rong zom chos kyi bzang po;Nyingma;History of buddha-nature in Tibet;The doctrine of buddha-nature in Tibetan Buddhism;tathāgatagarbha;pratītyasamutpāda;Nāgārjuna;śūnyatā;Two Truths;Dol po pa;Asaṅga;Ratnagotravibhāga Mahāyānottaratantraśāstra;Ratnagotravibhāgavyākhyā;Critical Buddhism;Avalokitavrata;Dorji Wangchuk;Rong-zom-pa on the Tathāgatagarbha and Pratītyasamutpāda Theories
Michael Zimmermann at the 2019 Tathāgatagarbha Symposium
In light of the argument that the theory of Buddha-nature is non-Buddhist, Michael Zimmerman summarizes more recent research on the earliest history of buddha-nature thought in India and discusses possible reasons for why the idea that all sentient beings have buddha-nature made its appearance.
Zimmermann, Michael. "New Research on the Concept of Buddha-Nature in India: The Beginnings." Paper presented at the University of Vienna Symposium, Tathāgatagarbha Across Asia, Vienna, Austria, July 2019. Video, 45:00. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bYkBSSAJ-zo.
Zimmermann, Michael. "New Research on the Concept of Buddha-Nature in India: The Beginnings." Paper presented at the University of Vienna Symposium, Tathāgatagarbha Across Asia, Vienna, Austria, July 2019. Video, 45:00. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bYkBSSAJ-zo.;Michael Zimmermann at the 2019 Tathāgatagarbha Symposium;The doctrine of buddha-nature in Indian Buddhism;History of buddha-nature in India;The doctrine of buddha-nature in Early Buddhism;Tathāgatagarbhasūtra;Mahāparinirvāṇasūtra;Saddharmapuṇḍarīkasūtra;Ratnagotravibhāga Mahāyānottaratantraśāstra;tathāgatagarbha;Defining buddha-nature;Radich, M.;Critical Buddhism;Terminology;Michael Zimmermann; New Research on the Concept of Buddha-Nature in India: The Beginnings
On Hakamaya Noriaki and Matsumoto Shiro's Criticism of Tathāgatagarbha by Jamie Hubbard and Paul Swanson
Jamie Hubbard and Paul Swanson discuss the criticisms laid out by Hakamaya Noriaki and Matsumoto Shiro with respect to the doctrine of buddha-nature, or Tathāgatagarbha.
Hubbard, Jamie, and Paul Swanson. "On Hakamaya Noriaki and Matsumoto Shiro's Criticism of Tathāgatagarbha." Interview by Marcus Perman, Alex Gardner, and José Cabezón. AAR Annual Meeting, Denver, CO, Nov. 2018. Video, 4:44. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8-ceLJnM8hM.
Hubbard, Jamie, and Paul Swanson. "On Hakamaya Noriaki and Matsumoto Shiro's Criticism of Tathāgatagarbha." Interview by Marcus Perman, Alex Gardner, and José Cabezón. AAR Annual Meeting, Denver, CO, Nov. 2018. Video, 4:44. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8-ceLJnM8hM.;On Hakamaya Noriaki and Matsumoto Shiro's Criticism of Tathāgatagarbha by Jamie Hubbard and Paul Swanson;Critical Buddhism;Hakamaya, N.;Matsumoto, S.;tathāgatagarbha; On Hakamaya Noriaki and Matsumoto Shiro's Criticism of Tathāgatagarbha
On Hakamaya Noriaki and Matsumoto Shiro's Doctrinal Positions, the Japanese Response, and the Legacy of Critical Buddhism by Jamie Hubbard and Paul Swanson
Jamie Hubbard and Paul Swanson discuss Hakamaya Noriaki and Matsumoto Shiro's doctrinal positions, the Japanese response, and the legacy of Critical Buddhism.
Hubbard, Jamie, and Paul Swanson. "On Hakamaya Noriaki and Matsumoto Shiro's Doctrinal Positions, the Japanese Response, and the Legacy of Critical Buddhism." Interview by Marcus Perman, Alex Gardner, and José Cabezón. AAR Annual Meeting, Denver, CO, Nov. 2018. Video, 12:20. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HmpBqnXso_s.
Hubbard, Jamie, and Paul Swanson. "On Hakamaya Noriaki and Matsumoto Shiro's Doctrinal Positions, the Japanese Response, and the Legacy of Critical Buddhism." Interview by Marcus Perman, Alex Gardner, and José Cabezón. AAR Annual Meeting, Denver, CO, Nov. 2018. Video, 12:20. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HmpBqnXso_s.;On Hakamaya Noriaki and Matsumoto Shiro's Doctrinal Positions, the Japanese Response, and the Legacy of Critical Buddhism by Jamie Hubbard and Paul Swanson;Critical Buddhism;The doctrine of buddha-nature in Japanese Buddhism;Hakamaya, N.;Matsumoto, S.; On Hakamaya Noriaki and Matsumoto Shiro's Doctrinal Positions, the Japanese Response, and the Legacy of Critical Buddhism
On Their Book Pruning the Bodhi Tree and Responses to Critical Buddhism by Jamie Hubbard and Paul Swanson
Jamie Hubbard and Paul Swanson discuss their book Pruning the Bodhi Tree and the scholarly responses to Critical Buddhism.
Hubbard, Jamie, and Paul Swanson. "On Their Book Pruning the Bodhi Tree and Responses to Critical Buddhism." Interview by Marcus Perman, Alex Gardner, and José Cabezón. AAR Annual Meeting, Denver, CO, Nov. 2018. Video, 6:56. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XPbu8N5Jr34.
Hubbard, Jamie, and Paul Swanson. "On Their Book Pruning the Bodhi Tree and Responses to Critical Buddhism." Interview by Marcus Perman, Alex Gardner, and José Cabezón. AAR Annual Meeting, Denver, CO, Nov. 2018. Video, 6:56. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XPbu8N5Jr34.;On Their Book Pruning the Bodhi Tree and Responses to Critical Buddhism by Jamie Hubbard and Paul Swanson;Critical Buddhism;On Their Book Pruning the Bodhi Tree and Responses to Critical Buddhism
On Their Own Position on the Critical Buddhism Debate by Jamie Hubbard and Paul Swanson
Jamie Hubbard and Paul Swanson discuss their own personal relationship to the material in their book Pruning the Bodhi Tree and Critical Buddhism.
Hubbard, Jamie, and Paul Swanson. "On Their Own Position on the Critical Buddhism Debate." Interview by Marcus Perman, Alex Gardner, and José Cabezón. AAR Annual Meeting, Denver, CO, Nov. 2018. Video, 5:31. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YBf4xyzdwSQ.
Hubbard, Jamie, and Paul Swanson. "On Their Own Position on the Critical Buddhism Debate." Interview by Marcus Perman, Alex Gardner, and José Cabezón. AAR Annual Meeting, Denver, CO, Nov. 2018. Video, 5:31. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YBf4xyzdwSQ.;On Their Own Position on the Critical Buddhism Debate by Jamie Hubbard and Paul Swanson;Critical Buddhism;On Their Own Position on the Critical Buddhism Debate
