ShAkya mchog ldan: Difference between revisions

From Tsadra Commons
ShAkya mchog ldan
No edit summary
No edit summary
Line 44: Line 44:


As in a lot of other areas, the details of the position of Śākya Chogden<ref>269. Tib. Śākya mchog ldan.</ref>(1428–1507) on the tathāgata heart differ from Gorampa’s view, as well as from virtually all other Tibetan presentations of buddha nature.<ref>270. The following summary is largely based on Komarovski 2006 and 2010.</ref> According to Śākya Chogden, the pāramitāyāna teaches two types of tathāgata heart, as described in the second and third dharma wheels, respectively. The first type is the nonimplicative negation of all extremes of reference points. This tathāgata heart pervades all beings up through buddhas. However, this type of tathāgata heart is not the actual one but only the nominal tathāgata heart. Śākya Chogden says that neither the temporary position on the tathāgata heart (its being a nonimplicative negation) nor the final position (its being inexpressible) of the Niḥsvabhāvavādins provide a correct identification of the tathāgata heart. The third dharma wheel teaches the actual tathāgata heart, which is said to be of two kinds. Some of its sūtras explain that the tathāgata heart endowed with all buddha qualities is present in all sentient beings. Other sūtras take this statement as bear- ing an intention. Following these latter sūtras, Śākya Chogden argues that the basis of the intention of the third dharma wheel’s teachings on the tathāgata heart is mind’s natural luminosity free from all extremes of refer- ence points, which is the sphere of personally experienced wisdom and an implicative negation. According to him, this is also what the Uttaratantra says—that the statement of the tathāgata heart’s pervading all sentient beings bears an intention and is to be interpreted correctly. He further argues that the Uttaratantra’s explanation of the basis of intention in teaching the tathāgata heart was misunderstood by Tibetan thinkers as an explanation of the actual tathāgata heart.<ref>271. For example, Śākya Chogden says that the Mahāparinirvāṇasūtra ’s presentation of tathāgatagarbha is not of definitive meaning but of expedient meaning. That the Uttaratantra explains the teaching of the tathāgata heart’s pervading all sentient beings as being interpretive and as having a veiled intent (mind’s natural luminosity) is regarded by him as an authoritative view of Alīkākāravāda ("False Aspectarian"). At least in his later works after 1477, Śākya Chogden classifies Alīkākāra Yogācāra as a subcategory of Madhyamaka, while he treats Satyākāra ("Real Aspectarian") Yogācāra as Mere Mentalism. Therefore, it seems safe to argue that whenever a sūtra states that tathāgatagarbha pervades all beings, that sūtra (or at least that passage in it) should be taken as interpretive or expedient according to Śākya Chogden’s interpretation of Alīkākāravāda. Note though that his writings do not provide any lists of sūtras of definitive meaning and expedient meaning in general or within the third dharma wheel (personal communication from Yaroslav Komarovski, October 20, 2013).</ref>
As in a lot of other areas, the details of the position of Śākya Chogden<ref>269. Tib. Śākya mchog ldan.</ref>(1428–1507) on the tathāgata heart differ from Gorampa’s view, as well as from virtually all other Tibetan presentations of buddha nature.<ref>270. The following summary is largely based on Komarovski 2006 and 2010.</ref> According to Śākya Chogden, the pāramitāyāna teaches two types of tathāgata heart, as described in the second and third dharma wheels, respectively. The first type is the nonimplicative negation of all extremes of reference points. This tathāgata heart pervades all beings up through buddhas. However, this type of tathāgata heart is not the actual one but only the nominal tathāgata heart. Śākya Chogden says that neither the temporary position on the tathāgata heart (its being a nonimplicative negation) nor the final position (its being inexpressible) of the Niḥsvabhāvavādins provide a correct identification of the tathāgata heart. The third dharma wheel teaches the actual tathāgata heart, which is said to be of two kinds. Some of its sūtras explain that the tathāgata heart endowed with all buddha qualities is present in all sentient beings. Other sūtras take this statement as bear- ing an intention. Following these latter sūtras, Śākya Chogden argues that the basis of the intention of the third dharma wheel’s teachings on the tathāgata heart is mind’s natural luminosity free from all extremes of refer- ence points, which is the sphere of personally experienced wisdom and an implicative negation. According to him, this is also what the Uttaratantra says—that the statement of the tathāgata heart’s pervading all sentient beings bears an intention and is to be interpreted correctly. He further argues that the Uttaratantra’s explanation of the basis of intention in teaching the tathāgata heart was misunderstood by Tibetan thinkers as an explanation of the actual tathāgata heart.<ref>271. For example, Śākya Chogden says that the Mahāparinirvāṇasūtra ’s presentation of tathāgatagarbha is not of definitive meaning but of expedient meaning. That the Uttaratantra explains the teaching of the tathāgata heart’s pervading all sentient beings as being interpretive and as having a veiled intent (mind’s natural luminosity) is regarded by him as an authoritative view of Alīkākāravāda ("False Aspectarian"). At least in his later works after 1477, Śākya Chogden classifies Alīkākāra Yogācāra as a subcategory of Madhyamaka, while he treats Satyākāra ("Real Aspectarian") Yogācāra as Mere Mentalism. Therefore, it seems safe to argue that whenever a sūtra states that tathāgatagarbha pervades all beings, that sūtra (or at least that passage in it) should be taken as interpretive or expedient according to Śākya Chogden’s interpretation of Alīkākāravāda. Note though that his writings do not provide any lists of sūtras of definitive meaning and expedient meaning in general or within the third dharma wheel (personal communication from Yaroslav Komarovski, October 20, 2013).</ref>
===Footnotes===
<references/>

Revision as of 17:33, 13 March 2018

PersonType Category:Author
MainNameTib ཤཱཀྱ་མཆོག་ལྡན་
MainNameWylie shAkya mchog ldan
YearBirth 1428
YearDeath 1507
BornIn gsang mda' bang rim
TibDateGender Male
TibDateElement Earth
TibDateAnimal Monkey
TibDateRabjung 7
ReligiousAffiliation sa skya
StudentOf rong ston shes bya kun rig  ·  don yod dpal ba  ·  Ngorchen Kunga Zangpo  ·  spyang lung chos sdings gzhon nu blo gros
BDRC https://www.tbrc.org/#!rid=P396
Treasury of Lives https://treasuryoflives.org/biographies/view/%C5%9A%C4%81kya-Chokden/6351
IsInGyatsa No
PosBuNayDefProv Definitive
PosBuNayDefProvNotes Both
PosAllBuddha Qualified No
PosAllBuddhaNote All beings possess a "nominal" buddha-nature as is taught in the second-wheel teachings, while only bodhisattvas on the first bhumi and up (i.e. Noble Bodhisattvas) possess the "actual" buddha-nature as it was taught in the third-wheel teachings. (see note from Karl below)
PosAllBuddhaMoreNotes
  1. "Though everyone including ordinary beings possesses wisdom in a nonmanifest manner, only bodhisattvas on the first bhūmi onward manifest this wisdom as the direct realization of ultimate reality. This means that only such bodhisattvas possess the actual tathāgata heart in that they see at least certain degrees of purification of the stains that cover the tathāgata heart as well as its inseparability from certain degrees of buddha qualities. Ordinary beings thus do not possess this actual tathāgata heart at all, while buddhas possess it in its completeness. In other words, the close connection between seeing the tathāgata heart free from adventitious stains and possessing it, as well as between becoming free from adventitious stains and “attaining” the qualities of a buddha, is a prominent feature of Śākya Chogden’s interpretation of tathāgatagarbha." Karl Brunnhölzl, When the Clouds Part, p. 78.
  2. See also Wangchuk, Tsering, The Uttaratantra in the Land of Snows, p. 114.
PosWheelTurnNotes He distinguishes between different types of buddha-nature taught in the second and third wheels, though the third is the more definitive.
PosYogaMadhya Madhyamaka
PosEmptyLuminNotes
  1. "In sum, Śākya Chogden distinguishes three kinds of tathāgata hearts: (1) the nominal tathāgata heart that is the mere natural purity (as taught in the second dharma wheel and its Madhyamaka commentaries), (2) the actual tathāgata heart that is the purity of adventitious stains and represents the relative tathāgata heart (as taught in the third dharma wheel and the Nonaspectarian system of Maitreya and Asaṅga, as well as in the teachings of expedient meaning in the second dharma wheel as these are interpreted by the third dharma wheel), and (3) the actual tathāgata heart that is the natural purity that is inseparable from all buddha qualities and represents the ultimate tathāgata heart (as taught in the system of Maitreya and Asaṅga and in the third dharma wheel)." Karl Brunnhölzl, When the Clouds Part, p. 78.
  2. See also Wangchuk, Tsering, The Uttaratantra in the Land of Snows, p. 115.
Other wikis

If the page does not yet exist on the remote wiki, you can paste the tag {{PersonCall}} inside the destination page. But please first make sure you are on the right page. Some wikis have the person page on Person/<COMMONS PERSON PAGENAME>, in which case the page <COMMONS PERSON PAGENAME> needs to be redirected. Ask if you need clarification.

Karl Brunnhölzl, When the Clouds Part, p. 79. Śākya Chogden summarizes the main positions on buddha nature in the Tibetan schools as follows:

1. Asserting that all sentient beings possess buddha nature a) Asserting buddha nature from the point of view of a nonimplicative negation, which means that it thus is not specified by buddha qualities such as the powers (Ngog and his followers) b) Asserting buddha nature from the point of view of an implicative negation, which means that it thus is specified by the buddha qualities (Dölpopa and his followers) c) Asserting buddha nature as being sheer natural purity (Gelugpas) d) Asserting buddha nature as the compound of natural purity and buddha qualities’ being inseparable (1) Asserting those qualities to be the qualities of the fruitional dharmakāya of realization (many Kagyüpas such as Pamo Trupa) (2) Asserting those qualities to be the qualities of the natural dharmakāya (Bodong Choglé Namgyal, 1376–1451) 2. Asserting that sentient beings do not possess buddha nature (Sakya Paṇḍita, Butön, and others)


As in a lot of other areas, the details of the position of Śākya Chogden[1](1428–1507) on the tathāgata heart differ from Gorampa’s view, as well as from virtually all other Tibetan presentations of buddha nature.[2] According to Śākya Chogden, the pāramitāyāna teaches two types of tathāgata heart, as described in the second and third dharma wheels, respectively. The first type is the nonimplicative negation of all extremes of reference points. This tathāgata heart pervades all beings up through buddhas. However, this type of tathāgata heart is not the actual one but only the nominal tathāgata heart. Śākya Chogden says that neither the temporary position on the tathāgata heart (its being a nonimplicative negation) nor the final position (its being inexpressible) of the Niḥsvabhāvavādins provide a correct identification of the tathāgata heart. The third dharma wheel teaches the actual tathāgata heart, which is said to be of two kinds. Some of its sūtras explain that the tathāgata heart endowed with all buddha qualities is present in all sentient beings. Other sūtras take this statement as bear- ing an intention. Following these latter sūtras, Śākya Chogden argues that the basis of the intention of the third dharma wheel’s teachings on the tathāgata heart is mind’s natural luminosity free from all extremes of refer- ence points, which is the sphere of personally experienced wisdom and an implicative negation. According to him, this is also what the Uttaratantra says—that the statement of the tathāgata heart’s pervading all sentient beings bears an intention and is to be interpreted correctly. He further argues that the Uttaratantra’s explanation of the basis of intention in teaching the tathāgata heart was misunderstood by Tibetan thinkers as an explanation of the actual tathāgata heart.[3]

Footnotes[edit]

  1. ↑ 269. Tib. Śākya mchog ldan.
  2. ↑ 270. The following summary is largely based on Komarovski 2006 and 2010.
  3. ↑ 271. For example, Śākya Chogden says that the Mahāparinirvāṇasūtra ’s presentation of tathāgatagarbha is not of definitive meaning but of expedient meaning. That the Uttaratantra explains the teaching of the tathāgata heart’s pervading all sentient beings as being interpretive and as having a veiled intent (mind’s natural luminosity) is regarded by him as an authoritative view of Alīkākāravāda ("False Aspectarian"). At least in his later works after 1477, Śākya Chogden classifies Alīkākāra Yogācāra as a subcategory of Madhyamaka, while he treats Satyākāra ("Real Aspectarian") Yogācāra as Mere Mentalism. Therefore, it seems safe to argue that whenever a sūtra states that tathāgatagarbha pervades all beings, that sūtra (or at least that passage in it) should be taken as interpretive or expedient according to Śākya Chogden’s interpretation of Alīkākāravāda. Note though that his writings do not provide any lists of sūtras of definitive meaning and expedient meaning in general or within the third dharma wheel (personal communication from Yaroslav Komarovski, October 20, 2013).

A plateau of spiritual development.

"Ultimate truth" or "absolute truth"; the reality of things as they truly are.

Mental stains that are not inherent to the nature of the mind but are temporarily present as the residue of past actions or habitual tendencies. It is sometimes iterated as adventitious defilements (Skt. āgantukakleśa, Tib. glo bur gyi nyon mongs), which references the fickle and temporary nature of disturbing emotions that lack an ultimately established basis for existence.

Buddha-nature, literally the "womb/essence of those who have gone (to suchness)."

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.

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

A negation that merely denies the existence of something without implicitly suggesting an alternative.

A negation that denies one thing in such a way that it clearly implies another.

The Sakya tradition developed in the eleventh century in the Khön family of Tsang, which maintained an imperial-era lineage of Vajrakīla and which adopted a new teaching from India known as Lamdre.

In a general sense, that which clears away darkness, though it often appears in Buddhist literature in reference to the mind or its nature. It is a particularly salient feature of Tantric literature, especially in regard to the advanced meditation techniques of the completion-stage yogas.

The Ultimate Continuum, or Gyü Lama, is often used as a short title in the Tibetan tradition for the key source text of buddha-nature teachings called the Ratnagotravibhāga of Maitreya/Asaṅga, also known as the Mahāyānottaratantraśāstra.

Refers to a teaching that is literally true.

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).

Though it is sometimes used synonymously with Yogācāra, it is in fact one of the more prominent philosophical theories associated with this school. It asserts that the objects in the external world with which we interact are actually mentally created representations appearing as those objects. The character of these perceptions is predetermined by our own karmic conditioning that is stored in the ālayavijñāna.

Retrieved from "https://commons.tsadra.org/index.php?title=ShAkya_mchog_ldan&oldid=41432"