Rngog blo ldan shes rab

{{Person |pagename=Rngog blo ldan shes rab |PersonType=Lotsawas; Classical Tibetan Authors; Authors of Tibetan Works |HasDrlPage=Yes |HasLibPage=No |HasRtzPage=No |HasDnzPage=No |HasBnwPage=Yes |MainNameWylie=rngog blo ldan shes rab |MainNameTib=རྔོག་བློ་ལྡན་ཤེས་རབ་ |MainNamePhon=Ngok Lotsāwa Loden Sherab |AltNamesWylie=rngog lo tsA ba; lo chen blo ldan shes rab; blo ldan shes rab; |AltNamesTib=རྔོག་ལོ་ཙཱ་བ་; ལོ་ཆེན་བློ་ལྡན་ཤེས་རབ་ |AltNamesOther=Ngok Lotsāwa; Ngok Loden Sherab; Lochen Loden Sherab; Loden Sherab |YearBirth=1059 |YearDeath=1109 |BornIn=yar 'brog (lho ka) |TibDateGender=Female |TibDateElement=Earth |TibDateAnimal=Pig |TibDateRabjung=1 |ReligiousAffiliation=Kadam |PersonalAffiliation=rngog lo tsA ba legs pa'i shes rab |StudentOf=Rin chen bzang po |TeacherOf=shes rab 'bar; gro lung pa blo gros 'byung gnas; Zhang tshe spong chos kyi bla ma; rin chen nam mkha' rdo rje; rin chen grags |BdrcLink=https://www.tbrc.org/#!rid=P2551 |TolLink=https://treasuryoflives.org/biographies/view/Ngok-Loden-Sherab/4261 |tolExcerpt=Ngok Lotsāwa was nephew of Ngok Lekpai Sherab, the founder of Sangpu Neutok, and not only carried on the teaching activities of his uncle but raised the fame and prestige of Sangpu to new heights. He was important not only to his own Kadam lineage, but to the development of Tibetan education in general. |images=File:Ngok Lotsawa.jpg |PosBuNayDefProv=Definitive |PosBuNayDefProvNotes=* "He is also said to have held that among the five Teachings of Maitreya only the Ratnagotrivibhaga is of definitive meaning (nītārtha)." David Seyfort Ruegg, Studies in Indian and Tibetan Madhyamaka Thought Part 1, p. 30;

• "rNgog considers the RGV to be a Madhamaka work, and hence its teaching to be definitive. His position is made clear in the introductory passage of the rGyud blam don bsdus, where RGV is identified as a treatise that explains sutras of definitive meaning (nitartha), whereas the other four treatises of Maitreya (i.e., Abhisamayalamkara, Mahayanasutralamkara, Madhyantavibhaga, and Dharmadharmatavibhaga) are listed as treatises that explain sutras of provisional meaning (neyartha)." Kano. K., Buddha-Nature and Emptiness, p. 249.

|PosAllBuddha=Qualified Yes |PosAllBuddhaNote="...both Ngok and Chapa argue that sentient beings do not have tathägata-essence on the basis of the first reason because they do not have the purified enlightened body of a buddha, rather they have thepotential to achieve an enlightened state. However, they agree that sentient beings have the tathägata-essence from the perspective of the second reason, which is that such-ness is indivisible or nondual. As Ngok states, 'That both a tathägata and ordinary beings have [tathägata] essence is actually the case.' The first reason is true only for enlightened beings, but only designated for ordinary beings; the second reason applies to both enlightened beings and sentient beings. Therefore, the two Kadam masters argue that sentient beings do not have the tathägata-essence from the perspective of either the first reason of the resultant essence or the third reason of the causal essence. Rather it is the second reason that becomes the central point for establishing the link between enlightenment and sentient beings. It is the middle reason that shows that sentient beings and tathâgatas are the same in their ultimate nature. In other words, the only thing that sentient beings have in common with enlightened beings is the ultimate nature of their minds." |PosAllBuddhaMoreNotes=Wangchuk, Tsering, The Uttaratantra in the Land of Snows, pp. 17-18 |PosWheelTurn=Third Turning |PosYogaMadhya=Madhyamaka |PosYogaMadhyaNotes="rNgog considers the RGV to be a Madhamaka work, and hence its teaching to be definitive. His position is made clear in the introductory passage of the rGyud blam don bsdus, where RGV is identified as a treatise that explains sutras of definitive meaning (nitartha), whereas the other four treatises of Maitreya (i.e., Abhisamayalamkara, Mahayanasutralamkara, Madhyantavibhaga, and Dharmadharmatavibhaga) are listed as treatises that explain sutras of provisional meaning (neyartha)." Kano. K., Buddha-Nature and Emptiness, p. 249. |PosAnalyticMedit=Analytic Tradition |PosAnalyticMeditNotes="These two traditions of rngog and btsan were respectively called the "analytical tradition" (thos bsam gyi lugs) and "meditative tradtion" (sgom lugs)."Kano. K., [[Buddha-Nature and Emptiness]'], p. 242 |PosEmptyLumin=Tathagatagarbha as the Emptiness That is a Nonimplicative Negation |PosEmptyLuminNotes=* "As to the interpretation of Buddha-nature, on the other hand, Sajjana and rNgog hold different views, for Sajjana equates Buddha-nature with the luminous mind, which is not empty, while rNgog equates it with emptiness." Kano. K., Buddha-Nature and Emptiness, p. 239

• According to Karl, he also equates it with the Alaya Consciousness, "Moreover, Ngog equates “dhātu” not only with the tathāgata heart (as in RGVV) but also with the ālaya-consciousness (maybe influenced by the Laṅkāvatārasūtra). Obviously, this creates a considerable tension with his definition of the tathāgata heart as emptiness, but he does not resolve it..." Karl Brunnhölzl, When the Clouds Part, p. 66.

|PosSvataPrasa=Svātantrika (རང་རྒྱུད་) |PosSvataPrasaNotes=* "A number of later Tibetan works, and several modern scholars as well, define his position as Svatantrika-Madhyamaka... We cannot yet be sure whether rngog himself was conscious of this divide, even if later Tibetan traditions often presuppose rNgog's knowledge of it. Sakya-mchog-ldan, for instance, in assigning rNgog to a third position of Madhyamaka neither Svatantrika nor Prasangika, presumes that rNgog knew of both schools." Kano. K., Buddha-Nature and Emptiness, p. 228.

• "rNgog lo is known to have actively taught and commented on the “Three Svātantrika [Treatises] of Eastern [India]” (rang rgyud shar gsum), namely the Satyadvayavibhaṅga of Jñānagarbha, the Madhyamakālaṃ-kāra of Śāntarakṣita, and the Madhyamakāloka of Kamalaśīla, which formed

the textual foundation of the Svātantrika Yogācāra-Madhyamaka synthesis, among whose proponents rNgog lo may be counted. Ralf Kramer, The Great Tibetan Translator, p.?

• "rNgog's strategy here is to appeal to the destinction between the Two Truths..." Kano. K., Buddha-Nature and Emptiness, p. 271.

|PosVajrapada=First four are causes of the later three; also, the three jewels are the results of the latter four (which are substantive causes and attendant conditions) Kano. K., Buddha-Nature and Emptiness, pp. 252- |IsInGyatsa=No }}

Sangpu Neutok is an important monastery in central Tibet, just south of Lhasa, that was founded in 1072 by Ngok Lekpai Sherab, a disciple of Atiśa, and developed by his nephew, Ngok Lotsāwa Loden Sherab. Originally a Kadam monastery with two colleges, it evolved into a monastery that includes both Sakya and Geluk traditions. At its peak in the 11th to 14th centuries, it was one of the most highly esteemed centers for monastic education and the study of Buddhist philosophy in all of the Tibetan plateau. Many influential philosophers of the time studied there.

Refers to a teaching that is literally true.

Ratnagotravibhāga Mahāyānottaratantraśāstra

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

Literally, "without duality," it refers to that which is indivisible, in that it is not divided into two.

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.

Ngok Lotsāwa Loden Sherab's "analytic tradition" of exegesis of the Uttaratantra; one of two major Tibetan traditions of exegesis, both stemming from students of Sajjana.

Ngok Lotsāwa Loden Sherab's "analytic tradition" of exegesis of the Uttaratantra; one of two major Tibetan traditions of exegesis, both stemming from students of Sajjana.

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.

The luminous aspect of mind that is often contrasted with its empty aspect. It is often used figuratively to reference the cognizant, or knowing, aspect of mind and sometimes more literally as the natural luminosity of mind and luminous wisdom that is experienced in meditation.

The state of being empty of an innate nature due to a lack of independently existing characteristics.

A fundamental component or essential constituent.

This is the title of Asaṅga's commentary to the Gyü Lama that is given by Tibetan sources instead of the Ratnagotravibhāgavyākhyā.

Ratnagotravibhāgavyākhyā

A neutral base consciousness that is posited as the storehouse for the seeds of past karmic actions in which they remain in a latent state until the circumstances arise for them to ripen as karmic consequences.

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.

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).