Difference between revisions of "Sa skya paN+Di ta"
Line 31: | Line 31: | ||
|PosAllBuddha=Qualified No | |PosAllBuddha=Qualified No | ||
|PosAllBuddhaNote=There is some discrepancy between Sapen's use of the term tathagata-essence and buddha-nature and other thinkers that use these terms synonymously. In Sapen's view, sentient beings do not possess the former, but do possess a more general form of the latter. So while the answer is a qualified "no" in terms of the more general debate on this issue and the way others have addressed it, strictly speaking from Sapen's view the answer could more accurately be a qualified "yes" as he does state all beings have a basic "inherent" buddha-nature, which does not correspond to an essence that is endowed with enlightened qualities. The tricky issue being the equivalency of these terms tathagata-essence and buddha-nature. | |PosAllBuddhaNote=There is some discrepancy between Sapen's use of the term tathagata-essence and buddha-nature and other thinkers that use these terms synonymously. In Sapen's view, sentient beings do not possess the former, but do possess a more general form of the latter. So while the answer is a qualified "no" in terms of the more general debate on this issue and the way others have addressed it, strictly speaking from Sapen's view the answer could more accurately be a qualified "yes" as he does state all beings have a basic "inherent" buddha-nature, which does not correspond to an essence that is endowed with enlightened qualities. The tricky issue being the equivalency of these terms tathagata-essence and buddha-nature. | ||
− | |PosAllBuddhaMoreNotes=*"In verses 59-63 of Sapen's Distinguishing the Three Vows, he argues against the presentation of the existence of a tathâgata-essence or sugata-essence endowed with enlightened qualities in sentient beings. Sapen demonstrates that such a position would be tantamount to holding the view of the Sämkhya School, that the "result | + | |PosAllBuddhaMoreNotes=*"In verses 59-63 of Sapen's Distinguishing the Three Vows, he argues against the presentation of the existence of a tathâgata-essence or sugata-essence endowed with enlightened qualities in sentient beings. Sapen demonstrates that such a position would be tantamount to holding the view of the Sämkhya School, that the "result is present in its cause." [[Wangchuk, Tsering]], [[The Uttaratantra in the Land of Snows]], p. 27. |
− | is present in its cause." [[Wangchuk, Tsering]], [[The Uttaratantra in the Land of Snows]], p. 27. | ||
*"It is evident from Distinguishing the Three Vows that the tathâgataessence endowed with enlightened qualities does not exist in sentient beings. But does that mean that Sapen completely rejects the existence of tathägata-essence in sentient beings?" [[Wangchuk, Tsering]], [[The Uttaratantra in the Land of Snows]], pp. 27-28. | *"It is evident from Distinguishing the Three Vows that the tathâgataessence endowed with enlightened qualities does not exist in sentient beings. But does that mean that Sapen completely rejects the existence of tathägata-essence in sentient beings?" [[Wangchuk, Tsering]], [[The Uttaratantra in the Land of Snows]], pp. 27-28. | ||
*"In Distinguishing the Three Vows, Sapen argues that tathägata-essence, sugata-essence, buddha-essence, and buddha-element are synonyms, but, interestingly, he never mentions the associated term "buddha-nature" in this context. However, in his Illuminating the Thoughts of the Buddha (thub pa'i dgongs pa rab tu gsal ba), Sapen explains buddha-nature in this way: "The inherent [buddha-]nature exists in all sentient beings. The developmental [buddha-]nature exists [from the time that] one has developed bodhicitta. [The latter] does not exist in those who have not developed [bodhicitta]....So Sapen obviously has a problem accepting tathägata-essence teachings as definitive, whereas he has no issue asserting that buddha-nature exists in all beings." [[Wangchuk, Tsering]], [[The Uttaratantra in the Land of Snows]], p. 28. | *"In Distinguishing the Three Vows, Sapen argues that tathägata-essence, sugata-essence, buddha-essence, and buddha-element are synonyms, but, interestingly, he never mentions the associated term "buddha-nature" in this context. However, in his Illuminating the Thoughts of the Buddha (thub pa'i dgongs pa rab tu gsal ba), Sapen explains buddha-nature in this way: "The inherent [buddha-]nature exists in all sentient beings. The developmental [buddha-]nature exists [from the time that] one has developed bodhicitta. [The latter] does not exist in those who have not developed [bodhicitta]....So Sapen obviously has a problem accepting tathägata-essence teachings as definitive, whereas he has no issue asserting that buddha-nature exists in all beings." [[Wangchuk, Tsering]], [[The Uttaratantra in the Land of Snows]], p. 28. | ||
|PosEmptyLumin=Tathagatagarbha as the Emptiness That is a Nonimplicative Negation | |PosEmptyLumin=Tathagatagarbha as the Emptiness That is a Nonimplicative Negation | ||
− | |PosEmptyLuminNotes=[[Kano. K.]], [[Buddha-Nature and Emptiness]],p. 310: Sa-pan regards the intentional ground of Buddha-nature to be emptiness. | + | |PosEmptyLuminNotes=[[Kano. K.]], [[Buddha-Nature and Emptiness]], p. 310: Sa-pan regards the intentional ground of Buddha-nature to be emptiness. |
|PosSvataPrasa=Prāsaṅgika (ཐལ་འགྱུར་) | |PosSvataPrasa=Prāsaṅgika (ཐལ་འགྱུར་) | ||
|IsInGyatsa=No | |IsInGyatsa=No | ||
}} | }} |
Revision as of 10:50, 19 March 2018
Wylie | sa skya paN+Di ta |
---|---|
English Phonetics | Sakya Paṇḍita |
- ཀུན་དགའ་རྒྱལ་མཚན་
- ས་སྐྱ་པཎྜི་ཏ་ཀུན་དགའ་རྒྱལ་མཚན་
- kun dga' rgyal mtshan
- sa skya paN+Di ta kun dga' rgyal mtshan
- Sapaṇ
Birth: | 1182 |
---|---|
Death: | 1251 |
Tibetan calendar dates
Day | |
---|---|
Month | |
Gender | Male |
Element | Water |
Animal | Tiger |
Rab Jyung | 3 |
- Religious Affiliation
- Sakya
- Familial Relations
- Grandson of Sa chen kun dga' snying po and nephew of rje btsun grags pa rgyal mtshan and bsod nams rtse mo, and uncle of chos rgyal 'phags pa.
- Teachers
- Kha che paN chen shAkya shrI · rje btsun grags pa rgyal mtshan
- Students
- gu ru chos kyi dbang phyug · chos rgyal 'phags pa · yang dgon pa rgyal mtshan dpal
Other Biographical info:
- BDRC Link
- https://www.tbrc.org/#!rid=P1056
- Treasury of Lives Link
- http://treasuryoflives.org/biographies/view/Sakya-Pan%E1%B8%8Dita-Kunga-Gyeltsen/2137
- Treasury of Lives Excerpt
- Himalayan Art Resources Link or Other Art Resource
- https://www.himalayanart.org/search/set.cfm?setID=325
- Wiki Pages
- Sa skya paN+Di ta on the DRL
- Sa skya paN+Di ta on the LIB
- Sa skya paN+Di ta on the DNZ
- Sa skya paN+Di ta on the BNW
- Person description or short bio
Expand to see this person's philosophical positions on Buddha-nature.
Is Buddha-nature considered definitive or provisional? | |
---|---|
Position: | Provisional |
Notes: | #Kano. K., Buddha-Nature and Emptiness, p. 309.
|
All beings have Buddha-nature | |
Position: | Qualified No |
If "Qualified", explain: | There is some discrepancy between Sapen's use of the term tathagata-essence and buddha-nature and other thinkers that use these terms synonymously. In Sapen's view, sentient beings do not possess the former, but do possess a more general form of the latter. So while the answer is a qualified "no" in terms of the more general debate on this issue and the way others have addressed it, strictly speaking from Sapen's view the answer could more accurately be a qualified "yes" as he does state all beings have a basic "inherent" buddha-nature, which does not correspond to an essence that is endowed with enlightened qualities. The tricky issue being the equivalency of these terms tathagata-essence and buddha-nature. |
Notes: | *"In verses 59-63 of Sapen's Distinguishing the Three Vows, he argues against the presentation of the existence of a tathâgata-essence or sugata-essence endowed with enlightened qualities in sentient beings. Sapen demonstrates that such a position would be tantamount to holding the view of the Sämkhya School, that the "result is present in its cause." Wangchuk, Tsering, The Uttaratantra in the Land of Snows, p. 27.
|
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: | Tathagatagarbha as the Emptiness That is a Nonimplicative Negation |
Notes: | Kano. K., Buddha-Nature and Emptiness, p. 310: Sa-pan regards the intentional ground of Buddha-nature to be emptiness. |
Svātantrika (རང་རྒྱུད་) vs Prāsaṅgika (ཐལ་འགྱུར་པ་) | |
Position: | Prāsaṅgika (ཐལ་འགྱུར་) |
Notes: | |
Causal nature of the vajrapāda | |
Position: |
"Tathagatagarbha as the Emptiness That is a Nonimplicative Negation" is not in the list (Tathāgatagarbha as Mind's Luminous Nature, Tathāgatagarbha as the Unity of Emptiness and Luminosity, Tathāgatagarbha as a Causal Potential or Disposition (gotra), Tathāgatagarbha as the Resultant State of Buddhahood, There are several types of Tathāgatagarbha, Tathāgatagarbha as the Emptiness That is a Non-implicative Negation (without enlightened qualities), Tathāgatagarbha as the Emptiness That is an Implicative Negation (with enlightened qualities), Tathāgatagarbha as the Latent State of Buddhahood that is Obscured in Sentient Beings, Tathāgatagarbha was Taught Merely to Encourage Sentient Beings to Enter the Path) of allowed values for the "PosEmptyLumin" property.