Rngog blo ldan shes rab

Rngog blo ldan shes rab on the DRL

Authors of Tibetan Works • Classical Tibetan Authors • Lotsawas

རྔོག་བློ་ལྡན་ཤེས་རབ་

Wylie	rngog blo ldan shes rab
English Phonetics	Ngok Lotsāwa Loden Sherab
Sort Name	Ngok Lotsāwa

 

Other names

• རྔོག་ལོ་ཙཱ་བ་
• ལོ་ཆེན་བློ་ལྡན་ཤེས་རབ་

• rngog lo tsA ba
• lo chen blo ldan shes rab
• blo ldan shes rab

Alternate names

• Ngok Lotsāwa
• Ngok Loden Sherab
• Lochen Loden Sherab
• Loden Sherab

Dates

Birth:	1059
Death:	1109
Place of birth:	yar 'brog (lho ka)

Tibetan calendar dates

Dates of birth

Day
Month
Gender	Female
Element	Earth
Animal	Pig
Rab Jyung	1

Dates of passing

Day
Month
Gender
Element
Animal
Rab Jyung

About

Religious Affiliation

Kadam

Familial Relations

rngog legs pa'i shes rab

Teachers

Rin chen bzang po · Sajjana · Parahitabhadra

Students

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

Other Biographical info:

Links

BDRC Link (P2551)

https://www.tbrc.org/#!rid=P2551

Treasury of Lives Link

https://treasuryoflives.org/biographies/view/Ngok-Loden-Sherab/4261

Wiki Pages

• Rngog blo ldan shes rab on the DRL
• Rngog blo ldan shes rab on the LIB
• Rngog blo ldan shes rab on the BNW

Buddha Nature Project

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 is also said to have held that among the five Teachings of Maitreya only the Ratnagotravibhāga is of definitive meaning (nītārtha)." Ruegg, D., Studies in Indian and Tibetan Madhyamaka Thought Part 1, p. 30. "rNgog considers the RGV to be a Madhyamaka work, and hence its teaching to be definitive. His position is made clear in the introductory passage of the rGyud bla don bsdus, where RGV is identified as a treatise that explains sūtras of definitive meaning (nītārtha), whereas the other four treatises of Maitreya (i.e. Abhisamayālaṃkāra, Mahāyānasūtrālaṃkāra, Madhyāntavibhāga, and Dharmadharmatāvibhāga) are listed as treatises that explain sutras of provisional meaning (neyārtha)." Kano, K., Buddha-Nature and Emptiness, p. 249.
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:
Yogācāra vs Madhyamaka
Position:	Madhyamaka
Notes:	"rNgog considers the RGV to be a Madhyamaka work, and hence its teaching to be definitive. His position is made clear in the introductory passage of the rGyud bla don bsdus, where RGV is identified as a treatise that explains sūtras of definitive meaning (nītārtha), whereas the other four treatises of Maitreya (i.e. Abhisamayālaṃkāra, Mahāyānasūtrālaṃkāra, Madhyāntavibhāga, and Dharmadharmatāvibhāga) are listed as treatises that explain sutras of provisional meaning (neyārtha)." Kano, K., Buddha-Nature and Emptiness, p. 249.
Zhentong vs Rangtong
Position:
Notes:
Promotes how many vehicles?
Position:
Notes:
Analytic vs Meditative Tradition
Position:	Analytic Tradition
Notes:	"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.
What is Buddha-nature?
Position:	Tathāgatagarbha as the Emptiness That is a Non-implicative Negation (without enlightened qualities)
Notes:	* "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 Brunnhölzl, he also equates it with the ālaya-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..." Brunnhölzl, K., When the Clouds Part, p. 66.
Svātantrika (རང་རྒྱུད་) vs Prāsaṅgika (ཐལ་འགྱུར་པ་)
Position:	Svātantrika (རང་རྒྱུད་)
Notes:	* "A number of later Tibetan works, and several modern scholars as well, define his position as Svātantrika-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. Śākya-mchog-ldan, for instance, in assigning rNgog to a third position of Madhyamaka neither Svātantrika nor Prāsaṅgika, 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 Madhyamakālaṃkāra 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. Kramer, R., The Great Tibetan Translator, p.10. "rNgog's strategy here is to appeal to the destinction between the Two Truths..." Kano, K., Buddha-Nature and Emptiness, p. 271.
Causal nature of the vajrapāda
Position:	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, p. 252.

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

Refers to a teaching that is literally true.

Ratnagotravibhāga Mahāyānottaratantraśāstra

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.

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

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).

The state of being devoid of that which is wholly different rather than being void of its own nature. The term is generally used to refer to the ultimate, or buddha-nature, being empty of other phenomena such as adventitious defiling emotions but not empty of its true nature.

The state of being empty of self, which references the lack of inherent existence in relative phenomena.

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.

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.

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 qualities or attributes of an enlightened being.

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 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.

A fundamental component or essential constituent.

Ratnagotravibhāgavyākhyā

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