Property:Abstract
From Buddha-Nature
This is a property of type Text.
L
རིགས་ཁམས་བདེ་གཤེགས་སྙིང་པོའི་རྣམ་བཞག་པད་དཀར་དགྱེས་པའི་མཆོད་སྤྲིན།<br>
སློབ་དཔོན་དམ་ཆོས་རྡོ་རྗེའི་གཏམ་བཤད་བཅུད་དོན།
རིགས་ཁམས་བདེ་བཤེགས་སྙིང་པོའི་རྣམ་བཞག་རང་སྡེ་དངོས་སྨྲ་བ་རྣམས་ཀྱིས་འདོད་ཚུལ་མདོར་མཚོན་པ་སྤྱི་དང་། ཁྱད་པར་དབུ་མ་པས་བཞེད་ཚུལ་ལྟར་དུ་རྒྱལ་དང་དེའི་སྲས་རྣམས་ཀྱི་གསུང་རབ་རྣམས་དང་། བྱེ་བྲག་འབྲུག་ཆེན་ཐམས་ཅད་མཁྱེན་པ་པདྨ་དཀར་པོ་རྗེས་འབྲང་དང་བཅས་པའི་གསུང་འབུམ་ལ་ཁུངས་གཏུགས་ནས་རང་བློས་གང་འཇོན་ཞིག་ཞུ་རྒྱུ་ཡིན། དང་པོ་ལ་ཉན་ཐོས་སྡེ་གཉིས་ལས་ བྱེ་བྲག་སྨྲ་བས་སེམས་བྱུང་མ་ཆགས་པ་ལ་འཕགས་པའི་རིགས་སུ་འདོད་པ་དང་། མདོ་སྡེ་པས་རང་གི་འཐོབ་བྱར་གྱུར་པའི་དགྲ་བཅོམ་པའི་གོ་འཕང་འཐོབ་རུང་གི་རྒྱུའི་ཆ་ནས་བཞག་པའི་བག་ཆགས་ཀྱི་ངོ་བོར་གྱུར་པའི་སེམས་བྱུང་སེམས་པ་ལ་རིགས་སུའདོད་པའི་ཚུལ་དང་། སེམས་ཙམ་པས་རང་འབྲས་དགྲ་བཅོམ་པའི་གོ་འཕང་ཐོབ་རུང་གི་ཆ་ནས་བཞག་པའི་བག་ཆགས་སུ་གྱུར་པའི་དྲུག་པའི་ཡིད་ཀྱི་སྐྱེ་མཆེད་དེ་ལ་རིགས་སུ་འདོད་པའི་ཚུལ་དང་། དབུ་མ་པས་ཡིད་ཀྱི་རྣམ་པར་ཤེས་པའི་རབ་ཏུ་ཕྱེ་བའི་ཆོས་ཉིད་ལ་རིགས་སུ་བཞེད་པའི་ཚུལ་དང་། ཞར་བྱུང་རིགས་དང་འབྲེལ་ཡོད་ཀྱི་རྣམ་བཞག་གཞན་རྣམ་རྟོག་ཆོས་སྐུར་བཞེད་པའི་ཚུལ་སོགས་ཞུ་རྒྱུ་ཡིན།
Read full paper [https://buddhanature.tsadra.org/images/1/17/Lopon_Damcho_Dorje-2023-BNConferencePaper.pdf here]. +
[https://buddhanature.tsadra.org/images/f/f8/10._Lopon_Dawa_Zangpo_%E0%BD%82%E0%BD%8F%E0%BD%98%E0%BC%8B%E0%BD%96%E0%BD%A4%E0%BD%91%E0%BC%8B%E0%BD%96%E0%BD%85%E0%BD%B4%E0%BD%91%E0%BC%8B%E0%BD%91%E0%BD%BC%E0%BD%93%E0%BC%8D.pdf Download Abstract] +
M
Sgam po pa (1079-1153), whose way of teaching had such an impact on his disciples that the traditions evolving from them were all summed up under the umbrella Dwags po Bka’ brgyud, is well known for his ''Precious Ornament of Liberation'' (''Thar pa rin po che’i rgyan''). He begins this Mahāyāna manual by emphasizing that the very basis for the spiritual process culminating in awakening is *''sugatagarbha'' and proceeds to identify buddha-nature with emptiness. On a first glance this seems to resemble presentations of buddha-nature from a negating perspective. However, in a number of his other teachings recorded by his disciples and collected in his gSung ‘bum, he is very specific in his understanding of mind’s emptiness. In his ''Excellent Qualities, Teachings to the Assembly'' (''Tshogs chos yon tan phun tshogs''), he points out that mind is not mere essencelessness, but rather coemergent wisdom which he in turn equates with natural awareness (''tha mal gyi shes pa''), both key terms of Bka’ brgyud Mahāmudrā. While Sgam po pa rather uses this terminology and hardly ever the term buddha-nature, La yag pa (12 c.), one of his immediate disciples, explicitly equates nonarising, coemergent wisdom and natural awareness with buddha-nature imbued with inconceivable buddha qualities. A century later, during the time of the Third Karma pa (1284–1339), it had become standard that Bka’ brgyud masters equated natural awareness with buddha-nature endowed with qualities while simultaneously refraining from attributing any substantial quality to it. This paper’s intention is to take a closer look at the early masters and explore 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. +
This paper investigates the concept of śūnyatā-bimba (''stong gzugs''), “images of emptiness” or expressions of emptiness in the Kālacakra Tantra, and gives attention to how this phenomenon was interpreted by the Tibetan Kālacakra master Dol po pa Shes rab rgyal mtshan (1292-1361) and his immediate disciples to be direct expressions of tathāgatagarbha. We are interested in the tantric epistemology of these “images of emptiness,” textual connections to tathāgatagarbha, and correlative contemplative experiences that are described within Tibetan meditation manuals on the Kālacakra sixfold yoga. As we find in Dol po pa’s writings, as well as by later Jonang authors, these expressions of tathāgatagarbha are observable and experiential, and come about through the careful execution of the yogic procedures explicated in the vajrayoga practice of the Kālacakra. We explore the process of how these expressions are said to be experienced through the precise process of withdrawing one’s sense faculties from mundane stimuli, hence rescinding one’s involvement with objectification through a threefold practice of isolating the body, voice, and mind (''dben pa gsum''), and how this results in the philosophical and contemplative visions of tantric zhentong (''sngags gi gzhan stong''). To contextualize Dol po pa’s claims, we analyze passages from early meditation procedural manuals on the sixfold yoga practices composed by two of his closest disciples, Phyogs las rnam rgyal (1306-1386) and Lo tsā ba Blo gros dpal (1313-1391), interlinear commentarial writings on the Kālacakra Tantra, prescriptive guidebooks about remedying blockages to meditative realization, and autobiographical accounts of yogins to better understand the phenomenon of these expressions of tathāgatagarbha and their categorical construction as contemplative experience within Tibetan literature. In so doing, we analyze Buddhist doctrinal relationships of emptiness and tathāgatagarbha, and probe the epistemological nature of these expressions to be nature-born experiences, external referents, visionary “images of buddhas,” and/or intentional objects of meditation.
The idea that all living beings carry a buddha embryo within themselves or already have full-fledged buddha-nature is one of the most pervasive ideas in the history of Buddhist thought. Buddhist thinkers have been struggling with the different concepts based on such a thought and its meanings for soteriology and spiritual training. In the 1990s the traditions that promote the idea of buddha-nature were heavily criticized and denounced as being non-Buddhist by a Japanese group of scholars who thought of themselves as “true” followers of Buddhism which, so they claimed, always must be “critical” with regard to its underlying philosophical structure. Such normative claims have lost their pervasive power nowadays. During the last decade, research on the earliest history of buddha-nature thought in India has gained a new momentum. Early texts promoting buddha-nature thought in India have been reconsidered and new theories with regard to the origins of the theory of buddha-nature were formulated.
The talk will summarize some of these new findings and discuss possible reasons for why the idea that all sentient beings have buddha-nature possibly made its appearance. It will be argued that the idea is an integral part of Buddhist intellectual history and that it can be linked to other concepts found in older Buddhist writings. +
S
Japan is one of the most prominent Buddhist countries. Located in the Far East, this country’s Buddhism has developed many peculiar characteristics and concepts. One of these specific ideas is the theory of “innate enlightenment” (''hongaku''), which is closely related in meaning to the term “buddha-nature” (''tathāgatagarbha'').
The theory of “buddha-nature” insists that since all sentient beings possess the essence of Buddha, they are all capable of becoming enlightened in the future. On the other hand, the theory of “innate enlightenment” admits as a fact that all sentient beings are innately enlightened, or that all phenomena are a manifestation of Buddha. The extended interpretation of the theory of “buddha-nature” was highly developed in the Japanese Tendai school.
The unique theory of “innate enlightenment” was actually criticized by Japanese Buddhist monks both inside and outside the Tendai school. For example, the theory does not appear in any of the attested treatises of Genshin (942-1017), a highly influential representative of Japanese Pure Land Buddhism (although it does appear in forged works attributed to him). Honen (1133-1212), the founder of the Jōdo-Shū school, took a contrary position against the idea of “innate enlightenment” as admitted by modern Buddhologists.
However, Yoshiro Tamura insists that Honen’s disciples, including Shinran (1173-1263), the founder of Jōdo-Shin-Shū school, embraced the theory of “innate enlightenment” against their master’s position. Japanese Buddhologists after Tamura have also defended that Shinran was influenced by such a theory to a greater or lesser extent.
However, the current speaker has been able to prove that Shinran, as well as his master Honen, clearly showed a negative attitude against the theory of “innate enlightenment,” although he used terms which are often regarded to be associated with the theory. This presentation will overview Shinran’s position concerning the theories of “buddha-nature” and “innate enlightenment.”
This paper briefly contrasts a Rangtong (''rang stong'') and Shentong (''gzhan stong'') interpretation of Buddhism and looks at how the Shentong interpretation of Tathāgatagarbha doctrine impacts on the understanding and practice of westerners, taking into account the way the translation of key terms into English is affecting the way they are understood and used. Some consideration is given to how Tathāgatagarbha doctrine relates to the earliest accounts of what the Buddha taught and how the seeds of the controversy around Tathāgatagarbha and the Shentong interpretation of Buddhism was present even at the time of the Buddha. This relates to how the tradition has interpreted the Buddha’s teaching on not-self over the millennia up until today. We have ended up with two very different versions of what Buddhism is about and what Tathāgatagarbha means and this relates to the impact Buddhism as a whole is likely to have on modern thought in general. +
Media/Shenpen Hookham: Trungpa Rinpoche's Teaching on Maṇḍala Principle in "Orderly Chaos" and the Innumerable, Inseparable Qualities in the RGV +
''Transcript of video of IATS Prague Talk by Shenpen Hookham: Trungpa Rinpoche's teaching on Maṇḍala Principle in ''Orderly Chaos'' and the Innumerable, Inseparable Qualities in the ''RGV''.''
I'd like to start by thanking the organizers of this event, inviting me to make a presentation. When Karma Phuntsho first invited me to attend the conference and to make a contribution. I felt I didn't have time to do that, because I'm working on a book on Mandala principle. But then it occurred to me that I could actually offer a presentation on that topic, which Karma Phuntsho immediately took me up on. I haven't been able to attend in person, unfortunately, which I regret. But at least we have the opportunity to do for me to give my talk online and to answer questions at the end, I hope.
The book I was planning wasn't particularly academic in approach. It's very much based on principles that were laid out by Rigdzin Shikpo (RS), of the Longchen Foundation with whom I worked for many years and developed a course of study in which we focus quite a lot on the idea of Mandala principle, with nine principles that RS drew out from the teachings of Trungpa Rinpoche. And these turned out to be very useful for teaching students at every level, a very unifying concept. But Trungpa insists this isn't a conceptual principle at all. It's purely experiential.
In his book ''Orderly Chaos, Mandala Principle'', he doesn't actually spell out what the Mandala is - he says what it isn't. And at various times when he's asked what it is, he'll give different answers. Answers, like it's an organizational principle, like a gestallt, an organizational pattern - one time he said it was time (very interesting). One time, he says it's connections, or relationships and another it’s a society and so on. He says he is not talking about diagrams particularly at this point, or about deities, or geometric patterns. So what a mandala is becomes a question that's left hanging there.
Over the years, I've noticed that Tibetans just use the word ‘Mandala’ for center and the periphery, just in ordinary language. Many of the teachings in Buddhism actually can be expressed in terms of Mandala, especially when you have the principles drawn out in the way RS has done - where you've got a central principle that determines what the Mandala is about, and then a boundary, which marks what is in the mandala and what is not in the Mandala and the emotionality of that boundary. You're talking about an energy exchange with what's inside and what's outside and the different levels of hierarchy within the mandala as to what is near the center or further from the center, a dynamic of focus and spreading, and guardians and messengers and gates and so on.
These principles are found in everything in your life, you don't need to have any deep philosophical view, to be able to orientate yourself towards these principles. This is a point that Trungpa makes again and again in Orderly Chaos - that he's not talking about a theory, he's not talking about philosophy. Hes isn't talking particularly about an enlightened point of view. He's just talking about life and how this applies to our life.
The principles of the Mandala are in fact themselves an expression of awakening, even while we're confused. So that we need to look first at our confusion. We have to look at our suffering and our pain. And rather than thinking about how to escape it, thinking about how to discover its origin, which of course takes us straight back to the Buddha's teachings on suffering, the noble truth of suffering. First, you have to understand suffering. This is a point that Shrimaladevi in the Shrimaladevi sutra makes - - if you don't understand suffering, then you don't get to see the Dhatu - you don't get to see cessation, or you don't get to see the Dharma, or whatever kind of technical term you want to use. And Trungpa makes this point throughout his talks in ‘Orderly Chaos’.
What's interesting is, that on the very first page of the book he describes the obscuring process which are the 12 links of the pratityasamutpada as a mandala. This is a Mandala that we are creating ourselves. And an interesting theme throughout the book is what the ‘we ‘that creates this mandala is. what is the self? what is the ego? How he's using the language here is quite revealing. So you've got a mandala of suffering, or Dukkha (the 12 links of pratityasamutpada). Why call it a Mandala? He calls it a mandala because the 12 links are all- of- a- piece. They come together all- of- a- piece which Trungpa refers to as a totality. I tend to use the expression all -of- a- piece to get that sense you can't break it up - if you can break it up, then it becomes something relative, it becomes something that is impermanent and changing and unreliable and to be discarded. Reality is always all-of- a- piece so not impermanent etc. I think this is probably a way of translating the Tibetan term ‘hlundrub’ which is used a lot in the Mahamudra and Dzogchen teachings (often translated as spontaneous).
Trungpa is saying that there is this Mandala of confusion and there's a corresponding Mandala of Nirvana, or whatever you want to call it and that they both spring from the same base. And he talks a lot about this base or ground, which is a very Dzogchen way of talking, although he mostly refers back to the tantric view.
He talks about this base as solid - solid space, which is perhaps somewhat counter-intuitive, but it's quite challenging from the experiential point of view.
All this relates very much to what I say in my abstract. What's he talking about, really, in terms of reality (and he specifically announces that he's not talking about Madhyamaka) is what I would call post-Madhyamaka, where you're talking about what's real, what's really there. And this is quite unusual. He makes some quite striking statements, such as this one here, which jumped out at me.
On page 84, a student says ‘On the non dualistic level, can there be such things as Buddha families and Prajna and the world of distinctions’. Trungpa says, ‘That's exactly what we have been saying is the case in this talk. The level of non-dual reality is the realm of jnana, therefore, there is discriminating awareness wisdom happening all the time. On that level, there is in fact, a living world, a much more living one than we are experiencing’. And the student says, ‘It sounds like there would be a contradiction there, because to discriminate is to find duality’ and Trungpa just says,
‘There's no problem with finding duality.
We're speaking here of the relative world in purely psychological terms. We're talking about relative fixation, relative hangups, rather than
seeing things as two. That is not regarded as dualistic fixation, but still as discriminating awareness.
I mean, an enlightened person is able to go down the street and take his bus. As a matter of fact, he can do it much better than we can because he's always there’.
So there is the sense that there is a reality there in all its richness, depth, energy, complexity, aliveness, detail and so on.
To me this is what the Mahaparinirvana Sutra says and what Dolpopa is saying when he's talking about his ‘extreme shentong’ – in effect that the world really does exist. Although what we think of as real (which you might call relative) never did exist.
Although Trungpa Rinpoche is not particularly referring to the Jonangpas and Dolpopa, nonetheless, what he is describing pretty much conforms to that and is what I was looking for in the RGV in terms of Buddha Nature especially in the section on inseparable Buddha qualities. If you're looking for an extreme shentong interpretation of what the qualities are in the RGV - it’s not there. The qualities are inseparable, yes but in the RGV they're inseparable from awakening or the awakened state – inseparable from the Buddha - the Buddha has these qualities, but the extreme shentongpa would say, we have already all the qualities of a Buddha.
I'll leave it there as hope that you will come back to me with some questions.
Tā ra nā tha (1575-1635) is considered second in importance to Dol po pa Shes rab rgyal mtshan (1292-1361) regarding the proclamation of gzhan stong and the number of his authored works. He clarified and expanded Dol po pa’s exegesis of gzhan stong unlike anyone before him. Tā ra nā tha’s ''dBu ma theg mchog'' covers a variety of topics relevant to the gzhan stong view, including essential Mahāyāna concepts that range from Yogācāra to Madhyamaka and from the ''Laṅkāvatārasūtra'' to the ''Tathāgatagarbhasūtra''.
In the third chapter of the ''dBu ma theg mchog'', Tā ra nā tha gives a detailed presentation of buddha-nature, which he equates to the dharmadhātu and suchness. The ''Ratnagotravibhāga'' is quoted extensively and exclusively in this chapter, while the ''Mahāyānasūtrālaṁkāra'' is quoted throughout the ''dBu ma theg mchog''. This chapter is divided into nine main points, and the fourth point alone, referred to as “endowed with all aspects,” is illustrated by six verses from the ''Ratnagotravibhāga''. However, also most of the other points (permanence, pervasion, wakefulness, unmixed/untainted and union) are attested by direct quotes from the ''Ratnagotravibhāga''.
This study will examine the ways in which Tā ra nā tha utilizes the ''Ratnagotravibhāga'' in his ''dBu ma theg mchog'' to assert his understanding of buddha-nature as gzhan stong. It will be based on the root text as well as the commentary written by Tā ra nā tha’s disciple Ye shes rgya mtsho according to direct yearly instructions from Tā ra nā tha himself. As Tā ra nā tha is known to have expanded and systemized Dol po pa’s view, Tā ra nā tha’s position will also be compared to that of Dol po pa. +
T
Media/Towards a Textual Discourse Analysis of Longchenpa's Writings on Buddha Nature by Gregory Forgues +
Gregory Forgues presents his research on Longchenpa's writings on Buddha nature. This presentation offers a new perspective on the discourse of Longchenpa (Klong chen rab ’byams pa dri med ’od zer 1308–1363) regarding the central doctrinal concept of bde gshegs snying po (*sugatagarbha), a synonym for de gshegs snying po (tathāgatagarbha). Longchenpa lived in a time period during which leading figures belonging to distinct Tibetan Buddhist traditions produced systematic presentations of the Buddhist doctrines they inherited from India. Some of these doctrines could have been interpreted as contradictory in the absence of any hermeneutical project aiming at presenting them in a coherent way. The work of Longchenpa is in this way characteristic of this time period. It takes the form of a grand synthesis from the lowest vehicles up to the pinnacle of the path, the teaching of rDzogs chen.
In this presentation, I will share the findings of my investigation of Longchenpa’s entire sub-corpus of texts in which the term bde gshegs snying po and its synonyms are found. This task has not yet been completed in a systematic way, although it is an important preliminary step to (1) better understand Longchenpa’s discourse on Buddha nature and (2) to assess any potential evolution of his position in the course of time.
Recent developments in the Digital Humanities have given rise to a number of tools ranging from time-tested corpus-linguistic methods to innovative text mining algorithms. From a practical perspective, I will show how corpus linguistics, text analytics, and text mining tools can be used to produce a textual discourse analysis of Longchenpa’s writings on Buddha nature. ([https://podcasts.ox.ac.uk/towards-textual-discourse-analysis-longchenpas-writings-buddha-nature Source Accessed Apr 17, 2023]) +
Y
Media/Yaroslav Komarovski: Shakya Chokden on Tathāgatagarbha in the Tantric Practice of the Two Stages +
As my contribution to the panel, I will focus on the ''tathāgatagarbha'' interpretation by Shakya Chokden (1428-1507) developed in his tantric writings, in particular ''Dpal dang po’i sangs rgyas rab tu grub pas bka’ ’khor lo gsum pa’i mdo dang rgyud sde kun gyi snying po bsdus pa''. As an advocate of both the self- and other-emptiness systems, Shakya Chokden presents them as effective means of achieving buddhahood. That said, he argues that they do not provide equally effective presentations of such important elements of Mahāyāna teachings as ''tathāgatagarbha''. The mainstream self-emptiness systems based on the second ''dharmacakra'' present ''tathāgatagarbha'' only as the mere natural purity, which is not the actual ''tathāgatagarbha''. It is only the tantric and non-tantric teachings affiliated with the third ''dharmacakra'' that teach the actual ''tathāgatagarbha''—the naturally luminous ''jñāna'' free from obscurations and imbued with positive buddha qualities, whether partial or complete.
This approach suggests that the category of ''tathāgatagarbha'' does not play an indispensable role in contemplative practice: at least on its initial stages, one can progress on the Mahāyāna path without accepting or putting into practice the actual ''tathāgatagarbha''. Yet, this is true only as long one deals with non-tantric systems; in the tantric context, Shakya Chokden argues for the absolute indispensability of correctly identifying ''tathāgatagarbha'' and putting it into practice from the very beginning of the path. Not only that—the Highest Yoga Tantra practice can be adequately understood and described only if one plugs in the concept of ''tathāgatagarbha'' as it is taught in its texts with their commentaries. In other words, the correct understanding of ''tathāgatagarbha'' is indispensable both as a part of tantric practice and as a means of adequately articulating that practice.
In the Highest Yoga Tantra context, Shakya Chokden argues that ''tathāgatagarbha'' is possessed not only by Mahāyāna ''āryas'' (as it is according to the non-tantric teachings as he understands them); it pervades all living beings and the inanimate universe as well. Furthermore, not only does it have all buddha qualities complete and is naturally free from all obscurations; it also has a "visual" dimension: all tantric deities and ''maṇḍalas'' arise from and are primordially contained within it. It is this state that one has to be initially introduced to and recognize at the beginning of tantric practice, cultivate and familiarize with during its generation and perfection stages, and finally fully manifest on the level of buddhahood.
My paper will focus on the relationship of this particular model of ''tathāgatagarbha'' with its practical application in the tantric practice of Hevajra, Cakrasaṃvara, and Guhyasamāja. It will also address such issues as the relationship between conceptual minds used in tantric practice and the primordially existent state of buddhahood; the issue of multitudes of divine forms arising from and appearing to the nonconceptual ''jñāna''; the reduction of all elements of tantric practice— including body ''maṇḍalas''—to exclusively mental states; and the need to engage in practices dealing with conventional reality while accepting that ''tathāgatagarbha'' is the only reality that exists.
