Wǒnch'ǔk

Wǒnch'ǔk on the DRL

Ordained (Monks and Nuns)

English Phonetics	Wǒnch'ǔk

Dates

Birth:	613
Death:	695

Tibetan calendar dates

Dates of birth

Day
Month
Gender
Element
Animal
Rab Jyung

Dates of passing

Day
Month
Gender
Element
Animal
Rab Jyung

About

Religious Affiliation

Ximing tradition

Teachers

Fachang · Xuanzang

Other Biographical info:

Links

Treasury of Lives Link

https://treasuryoflives.org/biographies/view/Woncheuk-%EC%9B%90%EC%B8%A1/13633

Wiki Pages

• Wǒnch'ǔk on the DRL
• Wǒnch'ǔk on the LIB
• Wǒnch'ǔk on the BNW

Buddha Nature Project

Person description or short bio

Wǒnch'ǔk. (T. Wen tsheg; C. Yuance; J. Enjiki 圓測) (613-695). In Korean, "Consummate Keenness"; Silla-dynasty monk renowned for his expertise in Sanskrit and Yogācāra doctrine, who was influential in Chinese and in later Tibetan Buddhism. Wǒnch'ǔk is said to have left for Tang-dynasty China at the age of fifteen, where he studied the writings of Paramārtha and the She lun, or Mahāyānasaṃgraha, under Fachang (567–645). Wǒnch'ǔk later became the disciple of the Chinese pilgrim-translator Xuanzang who, in accordance with the new Yogācāra teachings of Dharmapāla that he had brought back from India (see Faxiang zong), denounced the existence of the ninth "immaculate consciousness" (amalavijñāna), which Paramārtha had advocated, and taught instead the innate impurity of the eighth "storehouse consciousness" (ālayavijñāna). These crucial doctrinal issues are said to have caused a split between the major disciples of Xuanzang: Wǒnch'ǔk and his followers came to be known as the Ximing tradition in honor of Wǒnch'ǔk's residence, Ximingsi, and was said to have been more open to positions associated with the earlier She lun zong; and the lineage of his fellow student and major rival Kuiji (632–682), which came to be known as the Ci'en tradition after Kuiji's monastery, Da Ci'ensi, and honed more rigidly to Xuanzang and Dharmapāla’s positions. Wǒnch'ǔk's famed Haesimmilgyǔng so (C. Jieshenmi jing shu), his commentary on Xuanzang's translation of the Saṃdhinirmocanasūtra, includes traces of Wǒnch'ǔk's earlier training in She lun zong thought and Paramārtha's expositions on the controversial notion of amalavijñāna. Wǒnch'ǔk regarded the amalavijñāna as simply another name for the inherent purity of the ālayavijñāna, but, unlike Xuanzang, he considered the ālayavijñāna to be essentially pure in nature. He also disagreed with Xuanzang's contention that the icchantika could not attain buddhahood. Hence, his work seems to be an attempt to reconcile the divergences between the old Yogācāra of Paramārtha and the new Yogācāra of Xuanzang. Wǒnch'ǔk's commentary to the Saṃdhinirmocanasūtra was extremely popular in the Chinese outpost of Dunhuang, where Chos grub (Ch. Facheng; c. 755–849) translated it into Tibetan during the reign of King Ral pa can (r. 815–838). Only nine of the ten rolls of the commentary are still extant in Chinese; the full text is available only in its Tibetan translation, which the Tibetans know as the "Great Chinese Commentary" (Rgya nag gi 'grel chen) even though it was written by a Korean. Five centuries later, the renowned Tibetan scholar Tsong kha pa drew liberally on Wǒnch'ǔk's text in his major work on scriptural Interpretation, Legs bshad snying po. Wǒnch'ǔk's views were decisive in Tibetan formulations of such issues as the hermeneutical stratagem of the three turnings of the wheel of the dharma (Dharmacakrapravartana), the nine types of consciousness (vijñāna), and the quality and nature of the ninth "immaculate" consciousness (amalavijñāna). Exegetical styles subsequently used in all the major sects of Tibetan Buddhism, with their use of elaborate sections and subsections, may also derive from Wǒnch'ǔk's commentary. Consequently, Wǒnch'ǔk remains better known and more influential in Tibet than in either China or Korea. Wǒnch'ǔk also wrote a eulogy to the Prajñāpāramitāhṛdayasūtra, and commentaries to the Renwang jing and Dharmapāla's *Vijñaptimātratāsiddhi, the latter of which is no longer extant. (Source: "Wǒnch'ǔk." In The Princeton Dictionary of Buddhism, 996–97. Princeton University Press, 2014. http://www.jstor.org/stable/j.ctt46n41q.27.)

Expand to see this person's philosophical positions on Buddha-nature.

Is Buddha-nature considered definitive or provisional?
Position:
Notes:
All beings have Buddha-nature
Position:
If "Qualified", explain:
Notes:
Which Wheel Turning
Position:
Notes:
Yogācāra vs Madhyamaka
Position:
Notes:
Zhentong vs Rangtong
Position:
Notes:
Promotes how many vehicles?
Position:
Notes:
Analytic vs Meditative Tradition
Position:
Notes:
What is Buddha-nature?
Position:
Notes:
Svātantrika (རང་རྒྱུད་) vs Prāsaṅgika (ཐལ་འགྱུར་པ་)
Position:
Notes:
Causal nature of the vajrapāda
Position:

Along with Madhyamaka, it was one of the two major philosophical schools of Mahāyāna Buddhism. Founded by Asaṅga and Vasubandhu around the fourth century CE, many of its central tenets have roots in the Saṃdhinirmocanasūtra and the so-called third turning of the dharma wheel (see tridharmacakrapravartana).

The disciples of the Buddha who aspire to attain individual liberation or nirvāṇa. The final goal of the Hearers is to become an arhat, a state in which one has totally eliminated the inner problems of attachment, hatred and ignorance, the main causes for rebirth in this cycle of existence. There are four stages of a śrāvaka path including eight phases.

The ninth consciousness, the immaculate pure mind.

Three successive stages of the Buddhist teachings. Though they are traditionally attributed to the historical Buddha, modern scholarship tends to view them as developmental stages that occurred over the course of an extended period of time, with interludes of several centuries, in which we see major doctrinal shifts often based on seemingly newly emergent scriptural sources.

Refers to something that is taught for a specific reason, rather than because it is entirely true.

Along with Yogācāra, it is one of the two major philosophical schools of Mahāyāna Buddhism. Founded by Nāgārjuna around the second century CE, it is rooted in the Prajñāpāramitā Sūtras, though its initial exposition was presented in Nāgārjuna's Mūlamadhyamakakārikā.

The state of being devoid of that which is wholly different rather than being void of its own nature. The term is generally used to refer to the ultimate, or buddha-nature, being empty of other phenomena such as adventitious defiling emotions but not empty of its true nature.

The state of being empty of self, which references the lack of inherent existence in relative phenomena.

Tsen Khawoche's "meditative tradition" of exegesis of the Uttaratantra; it is one of two major Tibetan traditions of exegesis, both stemming from students of Sajjana.