The Uttaratantra in the Land of Snows

Revision as of 07:38, 20 July 2018

Book

With its emphasis on the concept of buddha-nature, or the ultimate nature of mind, the Uttaratantra is a classical Buddhist treatise that lays out an early map of the Mahāyāna path to enlightenment. Tsering Wangchuk unravels the history of this important Indic text in Tibet by examining numerous Tibetan commentaries and other exegetical texts on the treatise that emerged between the eleventh and fifteenth centuries. These commentaries explored such questions as: Is the buddha-nature teaching found in the Uttaratantra literally true, or does it have to be interpreted differently to understand its ultimate meaning? Does it explicate ultimate truth that is inherently enlightened or ultimate truth that is empty only of independent existence? Does the treatise teach ultimate nature of mind according to the Cittamātra or the Madhyamaka School of Mahāyāna? By focusing on the diverse interpretations that different textual communities employed to make sense of the Uttaratantra, Wangchuk provides a necessary historical context for the development of the text in Tibet. (Source: SUNY Press)

Citation	Wangchuk, Tsering. The Uttaratantra in the Land of Snows: Tibetan Thinkers Debate the Centrality of the Buddha-Nature Treatise. Albany: State University of New York Press, 2017.

Tsering Wangchuk's The Uttaratantra in the Land of Snows is a clear and concise introduction to the history of the Uttaratantra and buddha-nature theory in pre-modern Tibet. It is an ideal introduction for anyone not yet familiar with the buddha-nature debate in Tibet. Wangchuk summarizes the writings and views of several of the most important Tibetan philosophers who weighed in on buddha-nature between the eleventh and fifteenth centuries from Ngok Lotsāwa through Sakya Paṇḍita to Dolpopa and Gyeltsabje.

The book is divided into three main sections: early Kadam thinkers who attempted to fold the Uttaratantra's positive-language teaching on buddha-nature into mainstream Madhyamaka doctrine of non-affirming negation. They did so by asserting that buddha-nature was in fact a synonym of emptiness, and was therefore a definitive teaching. The second stage was reactions during the thirteenth century. Sakya Paṇḍita, for example, rejected the conflation of buddha-nature and emptiness and declared the teaching to be provisional; early Kagyu thinkers revived the positive-language teachings and asserted that such statements were definitive; and Dolpopa taught "other-emptiness," the strongest expression of positive-language doctrine ever advocated in Tibet. Finally, in the fourteenth century a number of mainly Geluk thinkers such as Gyeltsabje reacted against Dolpopa and all synthesis of Yogacāra and Madhyamaka thought, relegating the Uttaratantra again to provisional status.

The advantage of Wangchuk's historical frame is that all assertions are placed in easy context of an opponent or supporter's writing, thus reminding the reader that buddha-nature theory in Tibet is an ongoing conversation, a debate between the two fundamental doctrinal poles of positive and negative descriptions of the ultimate.

Brief selections from a number of texts including:

Rngog blo ldan shes rab. theg chen rgyud bla'i don bsdus pa (Condensed Meaning of the Uttaratantra). Dharamsala: Library of Tibetan Works and Archives, 1993.
phywa pa chos kyi seng+ge. theg pa chen po rgyud bla ma'i bstan bcos kyi tshig dang don gyi cha rgya cher bsnyad pa phra ba'i don gsal ba (Illumination of the Meaning of the Uttaratantra). Collected Works of Kadam Masters, vol. 7. Chengdu: si khron mi rigs dpe skrun khang, 2006.
blo gros mtshungs med. theg pa chen po rgyud bla ma'i bstan bcos kyi nges don gsal bar byed pa'i rin po che'i sgron me (The Precious Lamp That Illuminates Definitive Meaning). Arunachal Pradesh: Tibetan Nyingma Monastery, 1974.
sgra tshad pa rin chen rnam rgyal. de bzhin gshegs pa'i snying po mdzes rgyan gyi rgyan mkhas pa'i yid 'phrong (Ornament to the Ornament). Collected Works of Bu-Ston, part 28 (SA). Lhasa: Zhol par khang, 2000.
Red mda' ba gzhon nu blo gros. dbu ma la 'jug pa'i rnam bshad de kho na nyid gsal ba'i sgron ma (The Lamp That Illuminates Suchness). dpal ldan sa skya pa'i gsung rab, vol. 13. Beijing: mi rigs dpe skrun khang, 2003.
tsong kha pa. legs bshad gser phreng (Golden Rosary of Excellent Exposition). Taipei: The Corporate Body of the Buddha Educational Foundation, 2000. See
Rgyal tshab rje dar ma rin chen. theg pa chen po rgyud bla ma'i ti ka (Uttaratantra Commentary). Collected Works of Gyeltsep, vol. 3. Kubum Monastery: sku 'bum byas pa gling par khang, n.d.

@@ Line 2: / Line 2: @@
 |BookParentPage=Research/Secondary Sources
 |FullTextRead=No
+|BookEssay=Tsering Wangchuk's The Uttaratantra in the Land of Snows is a clear and concise introduction to the history of the Uttaratantra and buddha-nature theory in pre-modern Tibet. It is an ideal introduction for anyone not yet familiar with the buddha-nature debate in Tibet. Wangchuk summarizes the writings and views of several of the most important Tibetan philosophers who weighed in on buddha-nature between the eleventh and fifteenth centuries from Ngok Lotsāwa through Sakya Paṇḍita to Dolpopa and Gyeltsabje.
+The book is divided into three main sections: early Kadam thinkers who attempted to fold the Uttaratantra's positive-language teaching on buddha-nature into mainstream Madhyamaka doctrine of non-affirming negation. They did so by asserting that buddha-nature was in fact a synonym of emptiness, and was therefore a definitive teaching. The second stage was reactions during the thirteenth century. Sakya Paṇḍita, for example, rejected the conflation of buddha-nature and emptiness and declared the teaching to be provisional; early Kagyu thinkers revived the positive-language teachings and asserted that such statements were definitive; and Dolpopa taught "other-emptiness," the strongest expression of positive-language doctrine ever advocated in Tibet. Finally, in the fourteenth century a number of mainly Geluk thinkers such as Gyeltsabje reacted against Dolpopa and all synthesis of Yogacāra and Madhyamaka thought, relegating the Uttaratantra again to provisional status.
+The advantage of Wangchuk's historical frame is that all assertions are placed in easy context of an opponent or supporter's writing, thus reminding the reader that buddha-nature theory in Tibet is an ongoing conversation, a debate between the two fundamental doctrinal poles of positive and negative descriptions of the ultimate.
 |AddRelatedTab=Yes
 }}