Difference between revisions of "Phywa pa chos kyi seng+ge"
Line 19: | Line 19: | ||
|TibDateAnimal=Ox | |TibDateAnimal=Ox | ||
|TibDateRabjung=2 | |TibDateRabjung=2 | ||
− | |ReligiousAffiliation= | + | |ReligiousAffiliation=Kadam |
|StudentOf=gro lung pa blo gros 'byung gnas; byang chub grags; zhang tshe spong chos kyi bla ma | |StudentOf=gro lung pa blo gros 'byung gnas; byang chub grags; zhang tshe spong chos kyi bla ma | ||
|TeacherOf=Karmapa, 1st; phag mo gru pa rdo rje rgyal po; bsod nams rtse mo; rma bya byang chub brtson 'grus; | |TeacherOf=Karmapa, 1st; phag mo gru pa rdo rje rgyal po; bsod nams rtse mo; rma bya byang chub brtson 'grus; | ||
Line 53: | Line 53: | ||
*"While Chapa shows that the ''Uttaratantra'' is definitive, he demonstrates that certain phrases in the ''Uttaratantra'' are not necessarily definitive—such as the passage teaching the buddha-element as cause. This is because for Chapa being a cause in this context entails being conditioned and conventional and something that exists only on the causal state of enlightenment, whereas the buddha-element is unconditioned and ultimate and something that exists pervasively as the ultimate nature on both the causal and resultant levels of enlightenment." [[Wangchuk, Tsering]].''[[The Uttaratantra in the Land of Snows]]'', p. 19. | *"While Chapa shows that the ''Uttaratantra'' is definitive, he demonstrates that certain phrases in the ''Uttaratantra'' are not necessarily definitive—such as the passage teaching the buddha-element as cause. This is because for Chapa being a cause in this context entails being conditioned and conventional and something that exists only on the causal state of enlightenment, whereas the buddha-element is unconditioned and ultimate and something that exists pervasively as the ultimate nature on both the causal and resultant levels of enlightenment." [[Wangchuk, Tsering]].''[[The Uttaratantra in the Land of Snows]]'', p. 19. | ||
|PosAllBuddha=Qualified Yes | |PosAllBuddha=Qualified Yes | ||
− | |PosAllBuddhaNote="...both Ngok and Chapa argue that sentient beings do not have | + | |PosAllBuddhaNote="...both Ngok and Chapa argue that sentient beings do not have tathāgata-essence on the basis of the first reason because they do not have the purified enlightened body of a buddha, rather they have the potential to achieve an enlightened state. However, they agree that sentient beings have the tathāgata-essence from the perspective of the second reason, which is that such-ness is indivisible or nondual. As Ngok states, 'That both a tathāgata and ordinary beings have [tathāgata] 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 tathāgata-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 tathāgatas 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." |
− | for establishing the link between enlightenment and sentient beings. It is the middle reason that shows that sentient beings and | + | |PosAllBuddhaMoreNotes=[[Wangchuk, Tsering]]. ''[[The Uttaratantra in the Land of Snows]]'', pp. 17-18. |
− | |PosAllBuddhaMoreNotes=[[Wangchuk, Tsering]] | ||
|PosWheelTurn=Third Turning | |PosWheelTurn=Third Turning | ||
− | |PosWheelTurnNotes="Therefore, for both Ngok and Chapa, the Uttaratantra is a definitive work, and it is also a treatise that explains the meaning of the last-wheel sutras such as the | + | |PosWheelTurnNotes="Therefore, for both Ngok and Chapa, the ''Uttaratantra'' is a definitive work, and it is also a treatise that explains the meaning of the last-wheel sutras such as the Tathāgatagarbhasūtra and the Śrīmālādevīsūtra." [[Wangchuk, Tsering]]. ''[[The Uttaratantra in the Land of Snows]]'', p. 20. |
|PosYogaMadhya=Madhyamaka | |PosYogaMadhya=Madhyamaka | ||
− | |PosYogaMadhyaNotes="For him, the fact that the Uttaratantra teaches all sentient beings as having the buddha-nature shows that the Uttaratantra is a Madhyamaka text, not | + | |PosYogaMadhyaNotes="For him, the fact that the ''Uttaratantra'' teaches all sentient beings as having the buddha-nature shows that the ''Uttaratantra'' is a Madhyamaka text, not Cittamātra. [[Wangchuk, Tsering]]. ''[[The Uttaratantra in the Land of Snows]]'', p. 23. |
|PosZhenRangNotes=He predates this debate. | |PosZhenRangNotes=He predates this debate. | ||
|PosAnalyticMedit=Analytic Tradition | |PosAnalyticMedit=Analytic Tradition | ||
− | |PosAnalyticMeditNotes=Chapa was clearly a participant in the rngog lugs. | + | |PosAnalyticMeditNotes=Chapa was clearly a participant in the ''rngog lugs''. |
− | *"These two traditions of rngog and btsan were respectively called the "analytical tradition" (thos bsam gyi lugs) and "meditative tradition" (sgom lugs)." [[Kano. K.]], [[Buddha-Nature and Emptiness]], p. 242. | + | *"These two traditions of ''rngog'' and ''btsan'' were respectively called the "analytical tradition" (''thos bsam gyi lugs'') and "meditative tradition" (''sgom lugs'')." [[Kano. K.]], ''[[Buddha-Nature and Emptiness]]'', p. 242. |
− | *"The lineage through Ngog Lotsāwa is often called "the exegetical tradition of the dharma works of Maitreya" (byams chos bshad lugs), while Dsen Kawoché’s transmissions represent "the meditative tradition of the dharma works of Maitreya" (byams chos sgom lugs)." [[Brunnhölzl, K.]], [[When the Clouds Part]], p. 123. | + | *"The lineage through Ngog Lotsāwa is often called "the exegetical tradition of the dharma works of Maitreya" (''byams chos bshad lugs''), while Dsen Kawoché’s transmissions represent "the meditative tradition of the dharma works of Maitreya" (''byams chos sgom lugs'')." [[Brunnhölzl, K.]], ''[[When the Clouds Part]]'', p. 123. |
− | *Wangchuk's wording of this is confusing or perhaps mistaken, see [[Wangchuk, Tsering]] | + | *Wangchuk's wording of this is confusing or perhaps mistaken, see [[Wangchuk, Tsering]]. ''[[The Uttaratantra in the Land of Snows]]'', p. 8. |
|PosEmptyLumin=Tathagatagarbha as Suchness | |PosEmptyLumin=Tathagatagarbha as Suchness | ||
− | |PosEmptyLuminNotes=" | + | |PosEmptyLuminNotes="Tathāgata-essence must not be connected to either the first reason—the notion that the resultant buddha-body pervades all beings—or the third reason which is that causal buddha-nature exists in all beings. Therefore, tathāgata-essence is neither the resultant buddha-body nor the causal buddha-nature, rather it is the ultimate nature of suchness." [[Wangchuk, Tsering]]. ''[[The Uttaratantra in the Land of Snows]]'', p. 16. |
|PosSvataPrasa=Svātantrika (རང་རྒྱུད་) | |PosSvataPrasa=Svātantrika (རང་རྒྱུད་) | ||
− | |PosSvataPrasaNotes=[[Wangchuk, Tsering]] | + | |PosSvataPrasaNotes=[[Wangchuk, Tsering]]. ''[[The Uttaratantra in the Land of Snows]]'', p. 14, quotes van der Kuijp. |
|IsInGyatsa=No | |IsInGyatsa=No | ||
|PosDefProv=Definitive | |PosDefProv=Definitive | ||
|PosDefProvNotes="While Chapa shows that the Uttaratantra is definitive, he demonstrates that certain phrases in the Uttaratantra are not necessarily definitive—such as the passage teaching the buddha-element as cause. This is because for Chapa being a cause in this context entails being conditioned and conventional and something that exists only on the causal state of enlightenment, whereas the buddha-element is unconditioned and ultimate and something that exists pervasively as the ultimate nature on both the causal and resultant levels of enlightenment." [[Wangchuk, Tsering]], [[The Uttaratantra in the Land of Snows]], p. 19. | |PosDefProvNotes="While Chapa shows that the Uttaratantra is definitive, he demonstrates that certain phrases in the Uttaratantra are not necessarily definitive—such as the passage teaching the buddha-element as cause. This is because for Chapa being a cause in this context entails being conditioned and conventional and something that exists only on the causal state of enlightenment, whereas the buddha-element is unconditioned and ultimate and something that exists pervasively as the ultimate nature on both the causal and resultant levels of enlightenment." [[Wangchuk, Tsering]], [[The Uttaratantra in the Land of Snows]], p. 19. | ||
}} | }} |
Revision as of 10:38, 24 July 2018
Phywa pa chos kyi seng+ge on the DRL
Wylie | phywa pa chos kyi seng+ge |
---|---|
English Phonetics | Chapa Chokyi Senge |
- ཆ་པ་ཆོས་ཀྱི་སེངྒེ་
- ཕྱ་པ་ཆོས་ཀྱི་སེངྒེ་
- གསང་ཕུ་ནེའུ་ཐོག་མཁན་རབས་༠༦་
- cha pa chos kyi seng+ge
- phya pa chos kyi seng+ge
- gsang phu ne'u thog mkhan rabs 06
Birth: | 1109 |
---|---|
Death: | 1169 |
Place of birth: | phywa yul (stag rtse khul) |
Tibetan calendar dates
Day | |
---|---|
Month | |
Gender | Female |
Element | Earth |
Animal | Ox |
Rab Jyung | 2 |
- Religious Affiliation
- Kadam
- Teachers
- gro lung pa blo gros 'byung gnas · byang chub grags · zhang tshe spong chos kyi bla ma
- Students
- Karmapa, 1st · phag mo gru pa rdo rje rgyal po · bsod nams rtse mo · rma bya byang chub brtson 'grus · gtsang nag pa brtson 'grus seng+ge · 'jad pa slob dpon ston skyabs · slob dpon gtsang pa 'jam seng · nyang bran pa chos kyi ye shes · ldan ma dkon mchog seng+ge · dan 'bag pa smra ba'i seng ge
Other Biographical info:
From shAkya mchog ldan a more detailed description of important students: དཔེ་འགྲེམས་ཀྱི་གྲྭ་པ་ལྔ་སྟོང་ཙམ་བྱུང་བར་གྲགས། དེའི་ནང་ནས་མཆོག་ཏུ་གྱུར་པ། གྲུབ་ཐོབ་མི་གསུམ། ཇོ་སྲས་མི་བཞི། ཤེས་རབ་ཅན་མི་གསུམ། སེང་ཆེན་བརྒྱད ་རྣམས་སོ། །དང་པོ་ནི། རྗེ་དུས་གསུམ་མཁྱེན་པ། ཕག་མོ་གྲུབ་པ། གསལ་སྟོ་ཤོ་སྒོམ་རྣམས་སོ། །ལ་ལ་ཞང་འཚལ་པ་ཡིན་ཞེས་ཟེར། གཉིས་པ་ནི། ས་ཇོ་སྲས་བསོད་ནམས་རྩེ་མོ། མཉོས་ཇོ་སྲས་དཔལ་ལེ། ཁུ་ཇོ་སྲས་ནེ་ཙོ། རྔོག་ཇོ་སྲས་ར་མོ་རྣམས་སོ། །གསུམ་པ་ནི། རྐོང་པོ་འཇག་ཆུང༌། ལྷོ་པ་སྒོག་གཟན། པར་བུ་བ་བློ་གྲོས་སེང་གེ་རྣམས་སོ། །སྒོག་གཟན་ནི་ལྷོ་པ་ཐམས་ཅད་མཁྱེན་པར་གྲགས་པ་སྟེ། ལྷོ་པ་དྷར་སེང་ངོ༌། །བཞི་པ་ནི། ཕྱྭ་པའི་རྗེས་སུ་གདན་ས་ལོ་ལྔ་མཛད་པའི་བརྩེགས་དབང་ཕྱུག་སེང་གེ་གཙང་ནག་པ་བརྩོན་འགྲུས་སེང་གེ་ རྨ་བྱ་རྩོད་པའི་སེང་གེ་ བྲུ་ཤ་བསོད་ནམས་སེང་གེ་ མྱང་བྲན་པ་ཆོས་ཀྱི་སེང་གེ་ དན་འབག་པ་སྨྲ་བའི་སེང་གེ་ འདམ་པ་དཀོན་མཆོག་སེང་གེ་ རྐྱང་དུར་བ་གཞོན་ནུ་སེང་གེ་ ལ་ལ་དག་འུ་ཡུག་པ་བསོད་ནམས་སེང་གེ ཞེས་ཟེར་ཡང་དུས་མི་འགྲིག་
Another list of the seng chen rgyad can be found in the Chos 'byung mkhas pa'i dga' ston, p. 729: སློབ་མ་ཐུགས་སྲས་སེང་ཆེན་བརྒྱད་ཅེས། གཙང་ནག་པ་བརྩོན་འགྲུས་སེང་གེ དན་འབག་སྨྲ་བའི་སེང་གེ བྲུ་ཤ་བསོད་ནམས་སེང་གེ རྨ་བྱ་རྩོད་པའི་སེང་གེ རྩགས་དབང་ཕྱུག་སེང་གེ ཉང་བྲན་ཆོས་ཀྱི་སེང་གེ འདན་མ་དཀོན་མཆོག་སེང་གེ གཉལ་པ་ཡོན་ཏན་སེང་གེ ཁ་ཅིག་གཙང་པ་འཇམ་དཔལ་སེང་གེ་ཡང་འདྲེན།
And again in the Chos rnam kun btus, p. 1853:
1. gtsang nag pa brtson 'grus seng ge
2. dan 'bag pa smra ba'i seng ge
3. bru sha bsod nams seng ge
4. rmya ba rtsod pa'i seng ge
5. rtsags dbang phyug seng ge
6. myang bran chos kyi seng ge
7. ldan ma dkon mchog seng ge
8. gnyal pa yon tan seng ge
- BDRC Link
- https://www.tbrc.org/#!rid=P1404
- Treasury of Lives Link
- https://treasuryoflives.org/biographies/view/Chapa-Chokyi-Sengge/TBRC_P1404
- Wiki Pages
- Phywa pa chos kyi seng+ge on the DRL
- Phywa pa chos kyi seng+ge on the LIB
- Phywa pa chos kyi seng+ge 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: | Definitive |
Notes: | He usually considers it to be definitive with some exceptions:
|
All beings have Buddha-nature | |
Position: | Qualified Yes |
If "Qualified", explain: | "...both Ngok and Chapa argue that sentient beings do not have tathāgata-essence on the basis of the first reason because they do not have the purified enlightened body of a buddha, rather they have the potential to achieve an enlightened state. However, they agree that sentient beings have the tathāgata-essence from the perspective of the second reason, which is that such-ness is indivisible or nondual. As Ngok states, 'That both a tathāgata and ordinary beings have [tathāgata] 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 tathāgata-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 tathāgatas 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." |
Notes: | Wangchuk, Tsering. The Uttaratantra in the Land of Snows, pp. 17-18. |
Which Wheel Turning | |
Position: | Third Turning |
Notes: | "Therefore, for both Ngok and Chapa, the Uttaratantra is a definitive work, and it is also a treatise that explains the meaning of the last-wheel sutras such as the Tathāgatagarbhasūtra and the Śrīmālādevīsūtra." Wangchuk, Tsering. The Uttaratantra in the Land of Snows, p. 20. |
Yogācāra vs Madhyamaka | |
Position: | Madhyamaka |
Notes: | "For him, the fact that the Uttaratantra teaches all sentient beings as having the buddha-nature shows that the Uttaratantra is a Madhyamaka text, not Cittamātra. Wangchuk, Tsering. The Uttaratantra in the Land of Snows, p. 23. |
Zhentong vs Rangtong | |
Position: | |
Notes: | He predates this debate. |
Promotes how many vehicles? | |
Position: | |
Notes: | |
Analytic vs Meditative Tradition | |
Position: | Analytic Tradition |
Notes: | Chapa was clearly a participant in the rngog lugs.
|
What is Buddha-nature? | |
Position: | Tathagatagarbha as Suchness |
Notes: | "Tathāgata-essence must not be connected to either the first reason—the notion that the resultant buddha-body pervades all beings—or the third reason which is that causal buddha-nature exists in all beings. Therefore, tathāgata-essence is neither the resultant buddha-body nor the causal buddha-nature, rather it is the ultimate nature of suchness." Wangchuk, Tsering. The Uttaratantra in the Land of Snows, p. 16. |
Svātantrika (རང་རྒྱུད་) vs Prāsaṅgika (ཐལ་འགྱུར་པ་) | |
Position: | Svātantrika (རང་རྒྱུད་) |
Notes: | Wangchuk, Tsering. The Uttaratantra in the Land of Snows, p. 14, quotes van der Kuijp. |
Causal nature of the vajrapāda | |
Position: |
"Tathagatagarbha as Suchness" 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.