Difference between revisions of "Kamalaśīla"
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{Person | {{Person | ||
+ | |HasDrlPage=Yes | ||
+ | |HasLibPage=Yes | ||
+ | |HasBnwPage=Yes | ||
|pagename=Kamalaśīla | |pagename=Kamalaśīla | ||
|PersonType=Classical Indian Authors | |PersonType=Classical Indian Authors | ||
|images=File:Kamalashila2 RigpaWiki.jpg | |images=File:Kamalashila2 RigpaWiki.jpg | ||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
|MainNameTib=པདྨའི་ངང་ཚུལ་ | |MainNameTib=པདྨའི་ངང་ཚུལ་ | ||
|MainNameWylie=pad+ma'i ngang tshul | |MainNameWylie=pad+ma'i ngang tshul | ||
Line 16: | Line 16: | ||
|BnwShortPersonBio=One of the most important Madhyamaka authors of late Indian Buddhism, a major representative of the Yogācāra-Madhyamaka synthesis, and a participant in the famous Bsam yas Debate. According to Tibetan doxographies, he was a proponent of the Yogācāra-Svātantrika-Madhyamaka. Although little is known about his life, according to Tibetan sources he was a monk and teacher at Nālandā. Tibetan sources also count him as one of three (together with Śāntarakṣita and Jñãnagarbha) “Eastern Svātantrikas” (rang rgyud shar gsum), suggesting that he was from Bengal. He was clearly a direct disciple of Śāntarakṣita, composing important commentaries on his teacher’s two major works, the ''Madhyamakālaṃkāra'' and the ''Tattvasaṃgraha''. The latter commentary, which is extant in Sanskrit, is an important source for both Hindu and Buddhist philosophical positions in the eighth century. (Source: "Kamalaśīla." In ''The Princeton Dictionary of Buddhism'', 411. Princeton University Press, 2014. http://www.jstor.org/stable/j.ctt46n41q.27.) | |BnwShortPersonBio=One of the most important Madhyamaka authors of late Indian Buddhism, a major representative of the Yogācāra-Madhyamaka synthesis, and a participant in the famous Bsam yas Debate. According to Tibetan doxographies, he was a proponent of the Yogācāra-Svātantrika-Madhyamaka. Although little is known about his life, according to Tibetan sources he was a monk and teacher at Nālandā. Tibetan sources also count him as one of three (together with Śāntarakṣita and Jñãnagarbha) “Eastern Svātantrikas” (rang rgyud shar gsum), suggesting that he was from Bengal. He was clearly a direct disciple of Śāntarakṣita, composing important commentaries on his teacher’s two major works, the ''Madhyamakālaṃkāra'' and the ''Tattvasaṃgraha''. The latter commentary, which is extant in Sanskrit, is an important source for both Hindu and Buddhist philosophical positions in the eighth century. (Source: "Kamalaśīla." In ''The Princeton Dictionary of Buddhism'', 411. Princeton University Press, 2014. http://www.jstor.org/stable/j.ctt46n41q.27.) | ||
|PosBuNayDefProv=Provisional | |PosBuNayDefProv=Provisional | ||
− | |PosBuNayDefProvNotes="In another context, Kamalaśīla quotes the passage from the ''Laṅkāvatārasūtra'' cited by Candrakīrti as scriptural authority for Buddha-nature being of provisional meaning. | + | |PosBuNayDefProvNotes="In another context, Kamalaśīla quotes the passage from the ''Laṅkāvatārasūtra'' cited by Candrakīrti as scriptural authority for Buddha-nature being of provisional meaning. Kamalaśīla himself, though, does not put it quite that way, stating only that, in accord with the various outlooks of sentient beings, the Buddhas taught what is a single dharmadhātu (or ''dharmanairātmya'' in the ''Laṅkāvatārasūtra'') by means of many different expressions (including the expression “Buddha-nature”), that is, in conventional terms." [[Kano, K.]], [[Buddha-Nature and Emptiness]], p.11. |
|PosAllBuddha=Qualified Yes | |PosAllBuddha=Qualified Yes | ||
|PosAllBuddhaNote=In the sense that all beings have the potential to achieve Buddhahood. | |PosAllBuddhaNote=In the sense that all beings have the potential to achieve Buddhahood. | ||
|PosAllBuddhaMoreNotes="The teaching “all sentient beings have Buddha-nature” is | |PosAllBuddhaMoreNotes="The teaching “all sentient beings have Buddha-nature” is | ||
− | interpreted in the sense that all sentient beings are pervaded by the ''dharmadhātu'', which is characterized by selflessness. In other words, the ''tathāgatagarbha'' is taken to be the ''dharmadhātugarbha''. Though the term ''dharmadhātugarbha'' appears in the RGVV, | + | interpreted in the sense that all sentient beings are pervaded by the ''dharmadhātu'', which is characterized by selflessness. In other words, the ''tathāgatagarbha'' is taken to be the ''dharmadhātugarbha''. Though the term ''dharmadhātugarbha'' appears in the RGVV, Kamalaśīla's interpretation seems to have been derived from a phrase in the ''Laṅkāvatārasūtra'', “the embryo of the ''tathāgata'', which is selflessness” (''tathāgatanairātmyagarbha''), reinforcing the notion that Buddha-nature does not refer to ''ātman'' but rather to selflessness (''nairātmya'')." [[Kano, K.]], [[Buddha-Nature and Emptiness]], p. 10. |
|PosYogaMadhya=Madhyamaka | |PosYogaMadhya=Madhyamaka | ||
|PosVehicles=1 | |PosVehicles=1 |
Latest revision as of 13:57, 7 October 2020
པདྨའི་ངང་ཚུལ་
Wylie | pad+ma'i ngang tshul |
---|---|
Romanized Sanskrit | Kamalaśīla |
Dates
Birth: | 713/740 |
---|---|
Death: | 763/795 |
Tibetan calendar dates
About
- Religious Affiliation
- Nalanda
- Teachers
- Śāntarakṣita
Other Biographical info:
Links
- Wiki Pages
Buddha Nature Project
- Person description or short bio
- One of the most important Madhyamaka authors of late Indian Buddhism, a major representative of the Yogācāra-Madhyamaka synthesis, and a participant in the famous Bsam yas Debate. According to Tibetan doxographies, he was a proponent of the Yogācāra-Svātantrika-Madhyamaka. Although little is known about his life, according to Tibetan sources he was a monk and teacher at Nālandā. Tibetan sources also count him as one of three (together with Śāntarakṣita and Jñãnagarbha) “Eastern Svātantrikas” (rang rgyud shar gsum), suggesting that he was from Bengal. He was clearly a direct disciple of Śāntarakṣita, composing important commentaries on his teacher’s two major works, the Madhyamakālaṃkāra and the Tattvasaṃgraha. The latter commentary, which is extant in Sanskrit, is an important source for both Hindu and Buddhist philosophical positions in the eighth century. (Source: "Kamalaśīla." In The Princeton Dictionary of Buddhism, 411. 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: | Provisional |
Notes: | "In another context, Kamalaśīla quotes the passage from the Laṅkāvatārasūtra cited by Candrakīrti as scriptural authority for Buddha-nature being of provisional meaning. Kamalaśīla himself, though, does not put it quite that way, stating only that, in accord with the various outlooks of sentient beings, the Buddhas taught what is a single dharmadhātu (or dharmanairātmya in the Laṅkāvatārasūtra) by means of many different expressions (including the expression “Buddha-nature”), that is, in conventional terms." Kano, K., Buddha-Nature and Emptiness, p.11. |
All beings have Buddha-nature | |
Position: | Qualified Yes |
If "Qualified", explain: | In the sense that all beings have the potential to achieve Buddhahood. |
Notes: | "The teaching “all sentient beings have Buddha-nature” is
interpreted in the sense that all sentient beings are pervaded by the dharmadhātu, which is characterized by selflessness. In other words, the tathāgatagarbha is taken to be the dharmadhātugarbha. Though the term dharmadhātugarbha appears in the RGVV, Kamalaśīla's interpretation seems to have been derived from a phrase in the Laṅkāvatārasūtra, “the embryo of the tathāgata, which is selflessness” (tathāgatanairātmyagarbha), reinforcing the notion that Buddha-nature does not refer to ātman but rather to selflessness (nairātmya)." Kano, K., Buddha-Nature and Emptiness, p. 10. |
Which Wheel Turning | |
Position: | |
Notes: | |
Yogācāra vs Madhyamaka | |
Position: | Madhyamaka |
Notes: | |
Zhentong vs Rangtong | |
Position: | |
Notes: | |
Promotes how many vehicles? | |
Position: | 1 |
Notes: | "In his Madhyamakāloka, Kamalaśīla presents the position of an opponent who takes the three-vehicle theory to be definitive. He refutes that position and makes the case for the single-vehicle theory being definitive by quoting a number of sutra passages." Kano, K., Buddha-Nature and Emptiness, p. 9. |
Analytic vs Meditative Tradition | |
Position: | |
Notes: | |
What is Buddha-nature? | |
Position: | Tathāgatagarbha as the Emptiness That is a Non-implicative Negation (without enlightened qualities) |
Notes: | Though he might be an early antecedent to the position that combines emptiness and luminosity, Brunnhölzl counts him among those that hold this position.
|
Svātantrika (རང་རྒྱུད་) vs Prāsaṅgika (ཐལ་འགྱུར་པ་) | |
Position: | |
Notes: | |
Causal nature of the vajrapāda | |
Position: |