Jump to content

Buddha-nature

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Truthbody (talk | contribs) at 21:05, 5 May 2011 (→‎External links: adding a practical guide). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Part of a series on
Buddhism
History
Buddhist texts
Practices
Nirvāṇa
Traditions
Buddhism by country
Part of a series on
Mahāyāna Buddhism
A Lotus, one of the eight auspicious symbols in Mahāyāna
Teachings
Buddhas and Bodhisattvas
Mahayana sutras
Major schools
Key figures
Regional traditions

Buddha-nature or Buddha Principle (Buddha-dhātu), is taught, within Mahayana Buddhism, to be an intrinsic, immortal potential for reaching enlightenment that exists within the mind of every sentient being. Buddha-nature is not to be confused with the concept of Atman, or Self, but instead is viewed to be empty of defining characteristics (also see Sunyata and Nondualism). In some Tathagatagarbha scriptures, however, especially the Mahayana Mahaparinirvana Sutra, the Buddha-nature is defined as Self which is permanent, blissful and pure.[1]

The idea of the Buddha-nature may be traced to Abhidharmic thought, and ultimately to statements of the Buddha in the Nikāyas.

Buddha-nature is not held as doctrinal by Theravādin schools of thought because the idea comes from later Mahāyāna sutras. The idea is not explicitly denied in any form of Indian Mahāyāna, however some scholars, especially those associated with Madhyamaka, had no active interest in it. Nevertheless, the Buddha-nature doctrine became a cornerstone of East Asian Buddhist and Tibetan Buddhist soteriological thought and practice. Buddha-nature remains a widespread and important doctrine in much of Far Eastern Buddhism.[2]

Etymology

Often, Buddha-nature (Classical Chinese: 佛性, modern pinyin fó xìng) literally corresponds to the Sanskrit Buddha-dhātu - "Buddha Element", "Buddha-Principle", but seems to have been used most frequently to translate the Sanskrit "Tathāgatagarbha", meaning "the one thus gone"'s referring to the Buddha womb", which would be more directly translated into Chinese as 如来藏). Another term for the Buddha-nature is Sugatagarbha.

Luminous mind in the Nikāyas

There is a reference in the Anguttara Nikāya to a "luminous mind", present within all people, be they corrupt or pure, and whether or not it is itself stained or pure.[3] When it is "unstained," it is supremely poised for Arahantship, and so could be conceived as the "womb" of the Arahant, for which a synonym is tathāgata. The Laṅkāvatāra Sūtra describes the Arahant womb (tathāgatagarbha) as "by nature brightly shining and pure," and "originally pure," though "enveloped in the garments of the skandhas, dhātus and ayatanas, and soiled with the dirt of attachment, hatred, delusion and false imagining." It is said to be "naturally pure," according to this doctrine, but it appears impure as it is stained by adventitious defilements.[4] Thus the Laṅkāvatāra Sūtra identifies the luminous mind of the canon with the tathāgatagarbha.[5] It also equates the tathāgatagarbha (and ālaya-vijñāna) with nirvana, though this is concerned with the actual attainment of nirvana as opposed to nirvana as a timeless phenomenon.[5][6] The canon does not support the identification of the "luminous mind" with nirvanic consciousness, though it plays a role in the realization of nirvana.[7][8] Upon the destruction of the fetters, according to one scholar, "the shining nibbanic consciousness flashes out of the womb of arahantship, being without object or support, so transcending all limitations."[9]

Central tenets of Buddha-nature doctrine

The Buddha-nature doctrine centres on the possession by sentient beings of the innate, immaculate buddha-mind or buddha-element (Buddha-dhatu), which, prior to the attainment of complete buddhahood, is not yet blossomed into full buddhahood. Buddha-nature is not the same as Atman, or Self, which plays a role in Hindu philosophy. Buddha-nature is also considered to be the non-dual nature of all reality: something like perfection (also see Nondualism and Emptiness), which has no name[10] in that it cannot be described with dualistic logic, and is often described in negation (also see Apophatic theology).

The Buddha-nature is equated in the Mahāyāna Mahāparinirvāṇa Sūtra with the changeless and deathless true self of the Buddha.[11] In the Laṅkāvatāra Sūtra, however, it is said that the tathāgatagarbha might be mistaken for a self, which according to this sutra, it is not.[12] This Buddha-nature is described in the Mahāparinirvāṇa Sūtra to be incorruptible, uncreated, and indestructible. It is eternal awakeness (bodhi) indwelling samsara, and thus opens up the immanent possibility of liberation from all suffering and impermanence.[13]

No being of any kind is without Buddha-nature (Buddha-dhatu). It is indicated in the Angulimaliya Sūtra that if the Buddhas themselves were to try to find any sentient being who lacked the Buddha-nature, they would fail. In fact, it is stated in that sutra that it is impossible for Buddhas not to discern the presence of the everlasting Buddha-nature in every being:

Even though all Buddhas themselves were to search assiduously, they would not find a tathāgata-garbha (Buddha-nature) that is not eternal, for the eternal dhātu, the buddha-dhātu (Buddha Principle, Buddha Nature), the dhātu adorned with infinite major and minor attributes, is present in all beings.[14]

The eternality, unshakeability and changelessness of the Buddha-nature (often referred to as "tathagatagarbha") is also frequently stressed in the sutras which expound this Buddha element. The Śrīmālā Sūtra, for example, says:

The Tathagatagarbha is not born, does not die, does not transfer [Tib: ’pho-ba], does not arise. It is beyond the sphere of the characteristics of the compounded; it is permanent, stable and changeless.[15]

The development of the Buddha-nature doctrine is closely related to that of Buddha-matrix (Sanskrit: tathāgatagarbha). In the Anunatva-Apurnatva-Nirdeśa, the Buddha links the tathāgatagarbha to the Dharmadhātu (ultimate, all-equal, uncreated essence of all phenomena) and to essential being, stating:

What I call "be-ing" (sattva) is just a different name for this permanent, stable, pure and unchanging refuge that is free from arising and cessation, the inconceivable pure Dharmadhatu.[16]

This eternal refuge of the Dharmadhātu or Buddha-dhātu is transcendentally empty of all that is conditioned, afflicted, defective, and productive of suffering. It is equated in the Nirvāṇa Sūtra with Buddhic Knowledge (jñāna). Such Knowledge perceives both non-self and the self, emptiness (śūnyatā) and non-emptiness, wherein "the Empty is the totality of samsara [birth-and-death] and the non-Empty is Great Nirvana."[17]

It is a recurrent theme of the Mahāyāna Mahāparinirvāṇa Sūtra that the Buddha-nature is indestructible and forever untarnished. Professor Jeffrey Hopkins translates several passages from the sutra in which the Buddha speaks of this topic and defines the Buddha-nature as pure, eternal, truly real self:

... that which has permanence, bliss, Self, and thorough purity is called the "meaning of pure truth".

Permanent is the Self; the Self is thoroughly pure. The thoroughly pure is called "bliss". Permanent, blissful, Self, and thoroughly pure is the one-gone-thus [i.e. Buddha];

Self means the matrix-of-one-gone-thus [i.e. the tathagatagarbha/ Buddha-nature]. The existence of the buddha-nature in all sentient beings is the meaning of "Self".

The buddha-nature, by its own nature, cannot be made non-existent; it is not something that becomes non-existent. Just the inherent nature called "Self" is the secret matrix-of-one-gone-thus [i.e. tathagatagarbha / Buddha-nature]; in this way that secret matrix cannot be destroyed and made non-existent by anything.[18]

In explaining what is meant by sentient beings' having the Buddha-nature, the Mahāparinirvāṇa Sūtra distinguishes three ways of understanding the term "to have":

Good son, there are three ways of having: first, to have in the future, secondly, to have at present, and thirdly, to have in the past. All sentient beings will have in future ages the most perfect enlightenment, i.e., the Buddha nature. All sentient beings have at present bonds of defilements, and do not now possess the thirty-two marks and eighty noble characteristics of the Buddha. All sentient beings had in past ages deeds leading to the elimination of defilements and so can now perceive the Buddha nature as their future goal. For such reasons, I always proclaim that all sentient beings have the Buddha nature.[citation needed]

Thus according to Heng-Ching Shih, the teaching of the universal Buddha nature does not intend to assert the existence of substantial, entity-like self endowed with excellent features of a Buddha. Rather, Buddha-nature simply represents the potentiality to be realized in the future.[19]

This type of interpretation of the Buddha-nature is not, however, universally accepted by Buddhists or scholars. Shenpen Hookham, Oxford Buddhist scholar and Tibetan lama of the Shentong tradition, for example, writes of the Buddha-nature or "true self" as something real and permanent, and already present within the being as uncompounded enlightenment. She calls it "the Buddha within", and comments:

In scriptural terms, there can be no real objection to referring to Buddha, Buddhajnana [Buddha Awareness/ Buddha Knowledge], Nirvana and so forth as the True Self, unless the concept of Buddha and so forth being propounded can be shown to be impermanent, suffering, compounded, or imperfect in some way ... in Shentong terms, the non-self is about what is not the case, and the Self of the Third Dharmachakra [i.e. the Buddha-nature doctrine] is about what truly IS.[20]

Buddhist scholar and chronicler, Merv Fowler, writes that the Buddha-nature really is present as an essence within each being. Fowler comments:

The teaching that Buddha-nature is the hidden essence within all sentient beings is the main message of the tathagatagarbha literature, the earliest of which is the Tathagatagarbha Sutra. This short sutra says that all living beings are in essence identical to the Buddha regardless of their defilements or their continuing transmigration from life to life... As in the earlier traditions, there is present the idea that enlightenment, or nirvana, is not something which has to be achieved, it is something which is already there... In a way, it means that everyone is really a Buddha now.[21]

Writer on Zen Buddhism, Peter Haskel, likewise indicates this idea of already and ever-present enlightenment (the Buddha-nature) within all beings. In his book, Bankei Zen, he explains how the Zen master, Bankei, taught that the Buddha-nature or Buddha mind is inherent in each being from birth, is uncreated, unborn, and is of the same "one substance" as past Buddhas and present beings, without any difference - just like the one water of the vast ocean.[22]

In the Tibetan Book of the Dead, it is taught that at death there is an encounter with this true inner nature, sugatagarbha or Dharmatā, when the veils of egocentricity tend briefly to drop away, and shining, unobstructed awareness is disclosed to us. In line with Tibetan Nyingma doctrine, Tibetan lama, Chökyi Nyima Rinpoche, equates this radiant essence with the Buddha Nature. He writes:

... all sentient beings already possess an enlightened essence, the sugatagarbha [i.e. the Buddha-nature]. This essence is present and permeates anyone who has mind, just as oil completely permeates any sesame seed ... The moment our ego-clinging falls apart, then our innate wisdom, the luminosity of dharmata, will vividly, nakedly appear. This ground luminosity is not just empty; it is also luminous - aware.[23]

An important Sanskrit treatise on the Buddha-nature, the Ratnagotravibhāga sees the Buddha-nature (tathāgatagarbha) as "suchness" or "thusness" - the abiding reality of all things - in a state of tarnished concealment within the being. The idea is that the ultimate consciousness of each being is spotless and pure, but surrounded by negative tendencies which are impure. Professor Paul Williams comments on how the impurity is actually not truly part of the Buddha-nature, but merely conceals the immanent true qualities of Buddha mind (i.e. the Buddha-nature) from manifesting openly:

The impurities that taint the mind and entail the state of unenlightenment (samsara) are completely adventitious ... On the other hand from the point of view of the mind's pure radiant intrinsic nature, because it is like this [i.e. pure and Buddhic], it is possessed of all the many qualities of a Buddha's mind. These do not need actually to be brought about but merely need to be allowed to shine forth. Because they are intrinsic to the very nature of consciousness itself they, and the very state of Buddhahood, will never cease.[24]

Development of Buddha-nature

The Buddha-nature doctrine may be traced back, in part, to the abhidharmic debate over metaphysics, which arose among the Nikāya schools as they attempted to reconcile various perceived problems, including how to integrate the doctrine of anatta, which stipulates that there is no underlying self, with Buddhist psychology (i.e., what is the subject of karma, suffering, etc.?; how do these processes occur?) and soteriology (what is the subject of enlightenment?; (how) does enlightenment occur?). Debates between different Nikāya schools at this time provided a context for the later origination of the Mahāyāna and Mahāyāna concepts. The concept of "seeds" espoused by the Sautrāntika in debate with the Sarvāstivādins over the metaphysical status of phenomena (dharmas) is a precursor to the store-consciousness of the Yogācāra school and the tathāgatagarbha,[25] the latter of which is closely related to Buddha-nature and the former of which is identified with it in Yogācāra.[26]

The Lotus Sutra

The development of the doctrine can also be associated with the Lotus Sutra and its influence on later sutras.[27] One of the unique themes in the Lotus Sutra, particularly in the tenth chapter titled "Teachers of the Dharma", is that everyone has the ability to become a buddha. In other words, this ability is not limited to monks, nuns, laypeople, shravakas, or bodhisattvas, but the chapter insists that other beings such as non-human creatures, dragon kings, centaurs, etc., also have this ability.[27] It also insists that all living being not only have the ability to become a buddha, but can be a 'teacher of the Dharma' here and now.

A connotation to Buddha-nature is also found within the twelfth chapter of the Lotus Sutra titled "Devadatta". It gives no information about the historical Devadatta, but gives the encouragement to understand that just as Devadatta, known everywhere to be evil, has the potential to become a buddha, so too with everyone else.[28] The story of Devadatta is followed by another story about a dragon princess who is both a nāga and a female whom the bodhisattva Mañjuśrī proclaims will reach enlightenment immediately, despite her being what she is. This goes contrary to common prejudices and informed opinion.[29]

Varying interpretations of Buddha-nature

Schools and scholars of Buddhism have varying interpretations of what the Buddha-nature consists in. In Chinese Ch’an Buddhism the Buddha-nature tends to be seen as the essential nature of all beings. Writing from this tradition, Master Hsing Yun, forty-eighth patriarch of the Linji School of Ch’an Buddhism, equates the Buddha-nature with the Dharmakāya in line with pronouncements in key tathāgatagarbha sutras, defining these two as:

the inherent nature that exists in all beings. In Mahāyāna Buddhism, enlightenment is a process of uncovering this inherent nature … The Buddha nature [is] identical with transcendental reality. The unity of the Buddha with everything that exists.[30]

The 19th/20th-century Tibetan Buddhist scholar, Shechen Gyaltsap Gyurme Pema Namgyal, sees the Buddha nature as ultimate truth,[31] nirvana, which is constituted of profundity, primordial peace and radiance:

Buddha-nature is immaculate. It is profound, serene, unfabricated suchness, an uncompounded expanse of luminosity; nonarising, unceasing, primordial peace, spontaneously present nirvana.[32]

In the Tibetan Kagyu tradition, Thrangu Rinpoche sees the Buddha nature as the indivisible oneness of wisdom and emptiness:

The union of wisdom and emptiness is the essence of Buddha-hood or what is called Buddha-nature (Skt. Tathagata-garbha) because it contains the very seed, the potential of Buddhahood. It resides in each and every being and because of this essential nature, this heart nature, there is the possibility of reaching Buddhahood.[33]

The 14th Dalai Lama, representing the Gelukpa School of Tibetan Buddhism, and speaking from the Madhyamaka philosophical position, sees the Buddha-nature as the "original clear light of mind", but points out that it ultimately does not exist independently, because, like all other phenomena, it is of the nature of emptiness:

Once one pronounces the words "emptiness" and "absolute", one has the impression of speaking of the same thing, in fact of the absolute. If emptiness must be explained through the use of just one of these two terms, there will be confusion. I must say this; otherwise you might think that the innate original clear light as absolute truth really exists.[34]

In a similar vein, the Buddhist scholar, Sallie B King, sees the Buddha-nature (tathāgatagarbha) as merely a metaphor for the potential in all beings to attain Buddhahood, rather than as an ontological reality. She writes of the Tathāgatagarbha Sūtra in particular:

The tathagatagarbha [Buddha Nature] is here a metaphor for the ability of all sentient beings to attain Buddhahood, no more and no less.[35]

Paul Williams puts forward the Madhyamaka interpretation of the Buddha-nature as emptiness in the following terms:

… if one is a Madhyamika then that which enables sentient beings to become buddhas must be the very factor that enables the minds of sentient beings to change into the minds of Buddhas. That which enables things to change is their simple absence of inherent existence, their emptiness. Thus the tathagatagarbha becomes emptiness itself, but specifically emptiness when applied to the mental continuum.[36]

Speaking for the Tibetan Nyingma tradition, Tulku Urgyen Rinpoche sees an identity between the Buddha-nature, Dharmadhātu (essence of all phenomena and the noumenon) and the three vajras, saying:

Dharmadhatu is adorned with dharmakaya, which is endowed with dharmadhatu wisdom. This is a brief but very profound statement, because "dharmadhatu" also refers to sugata-garbha or buddha nature. Buddha nature is all-encompassing ... This buddha nature is present just as the shining sun is present in the sky. It is indivisible from the three vajras [i.e. the Buddha's Body, Speech and Mind] of the awakened state, which do not perish or change.[37]

The Nyingma meditation masters, Khenchen Palden Sherab and Khenpo Tsewang Dongyal, emphasise that the essential nature of the mind (the Buddha-nature) is not a blankness, but is characterised by wonderful qualities and a perfection that is already present and complete:

The nature of the mind is not hollow or blank; it is profound and blissful and full of wonderful qualities... meditation practice reveals our true nature as being totally perfect and complete.[38]

They add:

The true nature of mind is beyond conception, yet it is present in every object. The true nature is always there, but due to our temporary obscurations we do not recognize it ... The primordial nature is beyond conceptions; it cannot be explained ... cannot be encompassed by words. Although you can say it is clarity and vastness, you cannot see it or touch it; it is beyond expression.[39]

Dzogchen view of Buddha-nature

The independent lay yogi lineage of Dzogchen held by Chögyal Namkhai Norbu Rinpoche identifies primordial non-dual awareness itself as the Buddha-nature, the only non-fabricated and pristine element of our existence.

Germano (1992: pp.viii - ix) relates Dzogchen, via Buddha-nature to Madhyamaka, Yogachara and Abhinavagupta:

...the Great Perfection represents the most sophisticated interpretation of the so-called "Buddha nature" tradition within the context of Indo-Tibetan thought, and as such, is of extreme importance for research into classical exoteric philosophic systems such as Madhyamaka and Yogacara, while also providing fertile grounds for future explorations of the interconnections between Indo-Tibetan and East Asian forms of Buddhism, as well as between Indo-Tibetan Buddhism and contemporary Indian developments such as the tenth century non-dual Shaivism of Abhinavagupta.[40]

Buddha-nature vs. self (ātman)

The tathāgatagarbha/Buddha nature does not represent a substantial self (ātman); rather, it is a positive language expression of emptiness (śūnyatā) and is the potentiality to realize Buddhahood through Buddhist practices; the intention of the teaching of tathāgatagarbha/Buddha nature is soteriological rather than theoretical.[41]

Some scholars favor one interpretation of the Buddha-nature over others. However, other scholars take a more nuanced approach. Thus, in discussing the problems with and the inadequacy of much modern scholarship on Buddha-nature and the tathāgatagarbha, Sutton states, "one is impressed by the fact that these authors, as a rule, tend to opt for a single meaning disregarding all other possible meanings which are embraced in turn by other texts".[42] He goes on to point out that the term tathāgatagarbha has up to six possible connotations. Of these, the three most important are:

  1. an underlying ontological reality or essential nature (tathāgata-tathatā-'vyatireka) which is functionally equivalent to a self (ātman) in an Upanishadic sense,
  2. the dharma-kāya which penetrates all beings (sarva-sattveṣu dharma-kāya-parispharaṇa), which is functionally equivalent to brahman in an Upanishadic sense
  3. the womb or matrix of Buddhahood existing in all beings (tathāgata-gotra-saṃbhava), which provides beings with the possibility of awakening.[43][44]

Of these three, only the third connotation has any soteriological significance, while the other two posit Buddha-nature as an ontological reality and essential nature behind all phenomena.[45] According to Matsumoto Shiro and Hakamaya Noriaki, essentialist conceptions of Buddha-nature are un-Buddhist, being at odds with the fundamental Buddhist doctrine of dependent origination.[35]

The Jonangpa School of Tibetan Buddhism, whose foremost historical figure was Dolpopa, sees the Buddha-nature as the very ground of the Buddha himself, as the "permanent indwelling of the Buddha in the basal state".[46] Dolpopa comments that certain key tathāgatagarbha sutras indicate this truth, remarking:

These statements that the basis of purification itself, the matrix-of-one-gone-to-bliss [i.e. Buddha Nature], is Buddha, the ground of Buddha, and the pristine wisdom of a one-gone-thus [Tathagata] also clear away the assertion by certain [scholars] that the matrix-of-one-gone-to-bliss [Buddha Nature] is not Buddha.[47]

Other sutras which mention the self in a very affirmative manner include the Lankavatara Sutra,[48] the Śūraṅgama Sūtra, the Mahāvairocana Sūtra[49] and the Sutra of Perfect Wisdom called The Questions of Suvikrantavikramin:

...one who wisely knows himself (atmanam) as nondual, he wisely knows both Buddha and Dharma. And why? He develops a personality which consists of all dharmas ... His nondual comprehension comprehends all dharmas, for all dharmas are fixed on the Self in their own-being. One who wisely knows the nondual dharma wisely knows also the Buddhadharmas. From the comprehension of the nondual dharma follows the comprehension of the Buddhadharmas and from the comprehension of the Self the comprehension of everything that belongs to the triple world. "The comprehension of Self", that is the beyond of all dharmas.[50]

The Mahāparinirvāṇa Sūtra specifically contrasts its doctrine of the self with that of the Astikas in order to remove the reifying notion that the self was a little person or homunculus, the size of a grain of rice or of one's thumb, sitting in the heart of the being, thus: "mundane [philosophers] mistakenly imagine it to be a person (puruṣa) the size of a thumb, the size of a pea or a grain of rice that dwells shining in the heart." This, the Buddha says, is a misconception of the nature of self, for "that opinion of theirs is a mistaken opinion, one that is transmitted onwards from person to person, but it is neither beneficial nor conducive to happiness." The self of which the Buddha speaks is said by him to be the "essential intrinsic being" (svabhava) or even "life-essence" (jīvaka) of each person, and this essential being is none other than the Buddha himself - "radiantly luminous" and "as indestructible as a diamond".[51]

Moreover, the Buddhist tantric scripture entitled Chanting the Names of Mañjuśrī (Mañjuśrī-nāma-saṅgīti), as quoted by the great Tibetan Buddhist master, Dolpopa, repeatedly exalts not the non-self but the self and applies the following terms to this ultimate reality:[52]

  • "the pervasive Lord" (vibhu)
  • "Buddha-Self"
  • "the beginningless Self" (anādi-ātman)
  • "the Self of Thusness" (tathatā-ātman)
  • "the Self of primordial purity" (śuddha-ātman)
  • "the Source of all"
  • "the Self pervading all"
  • "the Single Self" (eka-ātman)
  • "the Diamond Self" (vajra-ātman)
  • "the Solid Self" (ghana-ātman)
  • "the Holy, Immovable Self"
  • "the Supreme Self"

In the Ghanavyuha Sutra (as quoted by Longchenpa) this immutable, universal and salvific Buddha essence (the true self of the Buddha) is said to be the ground of all things, but it is viewed by fools as something changeful and impermanent, whereas in fact it is stated by the Buddha to be the very opposite of such impermanence:

... the ultimate universal ground also has always been with the Buddha-Essence (Tathagatagarbha), and this essence in terms of the universal ground has been taught by the Tathagata. The fools who do not know it, because of their habits, see even the universal ground as (having) various happiness and suffering and actions and emotional defilements. Its nature is pure and immaculate, its qualities are as wishing-jewels; there are neither changes nor cessations. Whoever realizes it attains Liberation ...[53]

The Buddha in the Mahāyāna Mahāparinirvāṇa Sūtra insists that the self of the Buddha (the Buddha-nature which is present in all beings) is everlasting, pure and blissful and is most definitely not transitory and impermanent:

The Buddha-Nature is the Eternal, Bliss, the Self, and the Pure ... The Buddha-Nature is not non-Eternal, not non-Bliss, not non-Self, and not non-Purity.[54]

The Buddha-nature is, in fact, taught in such tathāgatagarbha sutras to be ultimate, conceptually inconceivable, immortal reality.

The Rimé movement of Tibet

Ringu Tulku says, "There has been a great deal of heated debate in Tibet between the exponents of Rangtong, (Wylie: Rang-stong) and Shentong, (Wylie: gZhan-stong) philosophies. The historic facts of these two philosophies are well known to the Tibetologists."

Jamgon Kongtrul says about the two systems:

Madhyamika philosophies have no differences in realising as 'Shunyata', all phenomena that we experience on a relative level. They have no differences also, in reaching the meditative state where all extremes (ideas) completely dissolve. Their difference lies in the words they use to describe the Dharmata. Shentong describes the Dharmata, the mind of Buddha, as 'ultimately real'; while Rangtong philosophers fear that if it is described that way, people might understand it as the concept of 'soul' or 'Atma'. The Shentong philosopher believes that there is a more serious possibility of misunderstanding in describing the Enlightened State as 'unreal' and 'void'. Kongtrul finds the Rangtong way of presentation the best to dissolve concepts and the Shentong way the best to describe the experience.[55]

In 2006, Khentrul Rinpoche Jamphal Lodro founded "The Tibetan Buddhist Rimé Institute" in Melbourne, Australia. It aims to propagate the Rimé view of harmony within all Buddhist traditions and to introduce the rare Jonang Kalachakra Tantra lineage teachings in the western world.[56]

See also

Notes

  1. ^ Hopkins, Jeffrey (2006). Mountain Doctrine: Tibet's Fundamental Treatise on Other-Emptiness and the Buddha-Matrix. New York: Snow Lion Publications: p. 129
  2. ^ Williams, Paul (2000). Buddhist Thought. London: Routledge: p. 161
  3. ^ Harvey, Peter (1989). Consciousness Mysticism in the Discourses of the Buddha. In Werner, Karel, ed., The Yogi and the Mystic. Curzon Press: p. 94. The reference is at A I, 8-10.
  4. ^ Harvey, Peter (1989). Consciousness Mysticism in the Discourses of the Buddha. In Werner, Karel, ed., The Yogi and the Mystic. Curzon Press: pp. 96-97.
  5. ^ a b Peter Harvey, Consciousness Mysticism in the Discourses of the Buddha. In Karel Werner, ed., The Yogi and the Mystic. Curzon Press 1989, page 97.
  6. ^ See page 36 of Henshall, Ron (2007), The Unborn and Emancipation from the Born[1], this thesis by a student of Peter Harvey.
  7. ^ Harvey, Peter (1989). Consciousness Mysticism in the Discourses of the Buddha. In Werner, Karel, ed., The Yogi and the Mystic. Curzon Press: pp. 94, 97.
  8. ^ Thanissaro Bhikkhu, [2].
  9. ^ Harvey, Peter (1989). Consciousness Mysticism in the Discourses of the Buddha. In Werner, Karel, ed., The Yogi and the Mystic. Curzon Press: p.99.
  10. ^ The Diamond Sutra
  11. ^ Yamamoto, Kosho, trans.; Page, Dr. Tony, ed. The Mahayana Mahaparinirvana Sutra in 12 Volumes. London: Nirvana: Volume 3, p.1
  12. ^ Harvey, Peter (1989). Consciousness Mysticism in the Discourses of the Buddha. In Werner, Karel, ed., The Yogi and the Mystic. Curzon Press: p. 98.
  13. ^ Yamamoto, Kosho, trans.; Page, Dr. Tony, ed. The Mahayana Mahaparinirvana Sutra in 12 Volumes. London: Nirvana: Volume 2, passim
  14. ^ "Tathagatagarbha Buddhism" http://www.webspawner.com/users/tathagatagarbha21/index.html)
  15. ^ The Shrimaladevi Sutra, p. 40
  16. ^ 言眾生者即是不生不滅常恒清涼不變歸依。不可思議清淨法界等異名。T668.477c08
  17. ^ Yamamoto, Kosho, trans.; Page, Dr. Tony, ed. The Mahayana Mahaparinirvana Sutra in 12 Volumes. London: Nirvana: Vol. 8, p. 22
  18. ^ Hopkins, Jeffrey (2006). Mountain Doctrine: Tibet's Fundamental Treatise on Other-Emptiness and the Buddha-Matrix. New York: Snow Lion Publications: p. 129
  19. ^ Shih, Heng-Ching. The Significance Of 'Tathagatagarbha' -- A Positive Expression Of 'Sunyata.
  20. ^ Hookham, Shenpen (1991). The Buddha Within. State University of New York Press: p. 104, p. 353
  21. ^ Fowler, Merv (1999). Buddhism: Beliefs and Practices. Sussex Academic Press: pp. 100–101
  22. ^ Haskel, Peter (1984). Bankei Zen. New York: Grove Weidenfeld: pp. 77–78
  23. ^ Chökyi Nyima Rinpoche (2004). The Bardo Guidebook. North Atlantic Books. pp. 116, 121. ISBN 9627341118. {{cite book}}: Unknown parameter |coauthors= ignored (|author= suggested) (help)
  24. ^ Williams, Paul (2000). Buddhist Thought. London: Routledge: p. 166
  25. ^ Gethin, p.222
  26. ^ Gethin, p. 252
  27. ^ a b Reeves 2008, pp. 15–16
  28. ^ Reeves 2008, p. 5
  29. ^ Reeves 2008, pp. 5–6
  30. ^ Hsing Yun, Master; tr. by Tom Graham (1999). Being Good: Buddhist Ethics for Everyday Life. New York: Weatherhill: pp. 152-153
  31. ^ Rabjam, Shechen (2007). The Great Medicine: Steps in Meditation on the Enlightened Mind. Boston: Shambhala: p. 21
  32. ^ Rabjam, Shechen (2007). The Great Medicine: Steps in Meditation on the Enlightened Mind. Boston: Shambhala: p. 4
  33. ^ Thrangu Rinpoche, Khenchen. Buddha Nature and Buddhahood: the Mahayana and Tantra Yana
  34. ^ Dalai Lama, the (1999). Buddha Heart, Buddha Mind. New York: Crossroad: p. 110
  35. ^ a b King, Sallie B. The Doctrine of Buddha Nature is Impeccably Buddhist
  36. ^ Williams, Paul (2000). Buddhist Thought. London: Routledge: pp. 164-165
  37. ^ Urgyen Rinpoche, Tulku (1999). As It Is. Hong Kong: Rangjung Yeshe Books: p. 32
  38. ^ Sherab, Khenchen Palden and Dongyal, Khenpo Tsewang (2006). Opening to Our Primordial Nature. New York: Snow Lion: pp. 3, 9
  39. ^ Sherab, Khenchen Palden and Dongyal, Khenpo Tsewang (2006). Opening to Our Primordial Nature. New York: Snow Lion: pp. 22 - 23
  40. ^ Germano, David Francis (1992). Poetic thought, the intelligent Universe, and the mystery of self: The Tantric synthesis of rDzogs Chen in fourteenth century Tibet. The University of Wisconsin, Madison. Doctoral thesis. Source: [3] (accessed: Friday December 18, 2009)
  41. ^ Shih, Heng-Ching. The Significance Of 'Tathagatagarbha' — A Positive Expression Of 'Sunyata.
  42. ^ Sutton, Florin Giripescu (1991). Existence and Enlightenment in the Laṅkāvatāra-sūtra. SUNY (ISBN 0-7914-0172-3): p.51
  43. ^ Takasaki, Jikido (1991). A Study on the Ratnagotravibhāga. ISMEO 1966: p.198
  44. ^ Florin Giripescu Sutton, Existence and Enlightenment in the Laṅkāvatāra-sūtra, SUNY(ISBN 0-7914-0172-3): p.53
  45. ^ Wayman, Alex (1981). The Title and Textual Affiliation of the Guhya-garbha Tantra. In: From Mahayana Buddhism to Tantra — Felicitation Volume for Dr Shunkyo Matsumata. Tokyo: p.4
  46. ^ Hopkins, Jeffrey, trans. (2006). Mountain Doctrine: Tibet's Fundamental Treatise on Other-Emptiness and the Buddha-Matrix. NY: Snow Lion: p. 196
  47. ^ Hopkins, Jeffrey, trans. (2006). Mountain Doctrine: Tibet's Fundamental Treatise on Other-Emptiness and the Buddha-Matrix. NY: Snow Lion: p. 193
  48. ^ in the Sagathakam chapter - e.g. "The Self characterised with purity is the state of self-realisation; this is the Tathagata-garbha, which does not belong to the realm of the theorisers"[citation needed]
  49. ^ "Those who have been initiated into the Mahayana Mandala Arising from Great Compassion, who are honest and pliant, and who always have great compassion ... They know their hearts to be the Great Self" — Hodge, Stephen, trans. (2003) The Maha-Vairocana-Abhisambodhi Tantra. London: Curzon: p.355
  50. ^ Conze, Edward, trans. (2002). Perfection of Wisdom: The Short Prajnaparamita Texts. Totnes, Devon: Buddhist Publishing Group: p.32
  51. ^ cf. Yamamoto, Kosho, trans.; Page, Dr. Tony, ed. The Mahayana Mahaparinirvana Sutra in 12 Volumes. London: Nirvana: Vol. 3, pp. 4-5
  52. ^ cf. Hopkins, Jeffrey, trans. (2006). Mountain Doctrine: Tibet's Fundamental Treatise on Other-Emptiness and the Buddha-Matrix. NY: Snow Lion: pp.279-294
  53. ^ Thondup Rinpoche, Tulku (1989). Buddha Mind. Ithaca, New York: Snow Lion: p.218
  54. ^ Yamamoto, Kosho, trans.; Page, Dr. Tony, ed. The Mahayana Mahaparinirvana Sutra in 12 Volumes. London: Nirvana: Vol, 8, p. 23
  55. ^ Ringu Tulku: The Rimé (Ris-med) movement of Jamgon Kongtrul the Great
  56. ^ Website of The Tibetan Buddhist Rime Institute of Australia

References

  • Gethin, Rupert (1998). Foundations of Buddhism. Oxford University Press.
  • Hookham, Dr. Shenpen (tr.) (1998). The Shrimaladevi Sutra. Oxford: Longchen Foundation.
  • Page, Dr. Tony, (2003). Buddha-Self: The 'Secret' Teachings of the Buddha in the Mahaparinirvana Sutra. London, Nirvana Publications.
  • Powers, J. A. (2000). Concise Encyclopaedia of Buddhism.
  • Rawson, Philip (1991). Sacred Tibet. London, Thames and Hudson. ISBN 050081032X.
  • Reeves, Gene (2008). The Lotus Sutra: A Contemporary Translation of a Buddhist Classic. Somerville: Wisdom Publications. ISBN 0-86171-571-3. {{cite book}}: Cite has empty unknown parameter: |coauthors= (help)
  • Suzuki, D.T., (1978). The Lankavatara Sutra, Prajna Press, Boulder.
  • Yamamoto, Kosho (tr.), Page, Dr. Tony (reviser and editor), (1999–2000) The Mahayana Mahaparinirvana Sutra in 12 volumes. London: Nirvana Publications.

Further reading

  • Zimmermann, Michael, A Buddha Within: The Tathāgatagarbhasūtra, Biblotheca Philologica et Philosophica Buddhica VI, The International Research Institute for Advanced Buddhology, Soka University (2002) [PDF can also be downloaded from the Institute's website]
  • The Buddha in the Robot: a Robot Engineer's Thoughts on Science and Religion, by Masahiro Mori, 1974
  • Brunnholzl, Karl. Luminous Heart: The Third Karmapa on Consciousness, Wisdom, and Buddha Nature. Snow Lion Publications, 2009. ISBN 9781559393188
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Buddha-nature&oldid=427647090"