A Direct Path to the Buddha Within
No edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
| (5 intermediate revisions by 3 users not shown) | |||
| Line 4: | Line 4: | ||
|PersonPage=Mathes, K. | |PersonPage=Mathes, K. | ||
|PersonName=Mathes, Klaus-Dieter | |PersonName=Mathes, Klaus-Dieter | ||
}}{{Book-person | |||
|PersonPage='gos_lo_tsA_ba_gzhon_nu_dpal | |||
|PersonName=Gö Lotsāwa Zhönu Pal | |||
}} | }} | ||
|FullTextRead=No | |FullTextRead=No | ||
| Line 12: | Line 15: | ||
Gö rejected both of these positions, arguing that the ''Uttaratantra'' is consistent with other Third-Turning teachings of Yogācāra and that such teachings are definitive. This was a necessary move in order to conflate cataphatic Yogācāra doctrine with Mahāmudrā: buddha-nature for Gö is not a synonym for emptiness, but rather for "the unfabricated nature of mind" and "luminosity," core Mahāmudrā doctrine. But Gö differentiated his approach from other advocates of a Yogācāra interpretation. He argued against the notion that buddha-nature is fully formed in every sentient being (the "buddha qualities" discussion), advocating instead that buddha-nature is a potential that needs to be developed. We are not like golden statues hidden in mud, but rather like acorns that need water and sunlight to grow into oak trees. | Gö rejected both of these positions, arguing that the ''Uttaratantra'' is consistent with other Third-Turning teachings of Yogācāra and that such teachings are definitive. This was a necessary move in order to conflate cataphatic Yogācāra doctrine with Mahāmudrā: buddha-nature for Gö is not a synonym for emptiness, but rather for "the unfabricated nature of mind" and "luminosity," core Mahāmudrā doctrine. But Gö differentiated his approach from other advocates of a Yogācāra interpretation. He argued against the notion that buddha-nature is fully formed in every sentient being (the "buddha qualities" discussion), advocating instead that buddha-nature is a potential that needs to be developed. We are not like golden statues hidden in mud, but rather like acorns that need water and sunlight to grow into oak trees. | ||
|BookToc=* {{i|Abbreviations|viii}} | |BookToc=* {{i|Abbreviations|viii}} | ||
* {{i|Preface|ix}} | * {{i|Preface|ix}} | ||
* {{i| | * {{i|Introduction|1}} | ||
** {{i|General Remarks|1}} | ** {{i|General Remarks|1}} | ||
** {{i|Delimitation of the Subject and Methods Employed|3}} | ** {{i|Delimitation of the Subject and Methods Employed|3}} | ||
| Line 79: | Line 80: | ||
|QuotesTabContent={{GetBookQuotes}} | |QuotesTabContent={{GetBookQuotes}} | ||
|PublisherLogo=File:Wisdom logo.png | |PublisherLogo=File:Wisdom logo.png | ||
| | |StopPersonRedirects=No | ||
|BookParentPage=Library | |BookParentPage=Library | ||
}} | }} | ||
Latest revision as of 14:27, 23 February 2021
Maitreya’s Ratnagotravibhāga, also known as the Uttaratantra, is the main Indian treatise on buddha nature, a concept that is heavily debated in Tibetan Buddhist philosophy. In A Direct Path to the Buddha Within, Klaus-Dieter Mathes looks at a pivotal Tibetan commentary on this text by Gö Lotsāwa Zhönu Pal, best known as the author of the Blue Annals. Gö Lotsāwa, whose teachers spanned the spectrum of Tibetan schools, developed a highly nuanced understanding of buddha nature, tying it in with mainstream Mahāyāna thought while avoiding contested aspects of the so-called empty-of-other (zhentong) approach. In addition to translating key portions of Gö Lotsāwa's commentary, Mathes provides an in-depth historical context, evaluating Gö’s position against those of other Kagyü, Nyingma, and Jonang masters and examining how Gö Lotsāwa’s view affects his understanding of the buddha qualities, the concept of emptiness, and the practice of mahāmudrā. (Source: Wisdom Publications)
| Citation | Mathes, Klaus-Dieter. A Direct Path to the Buddha Within: Gö Lotsāwa's Mahāmudrā Interpretation of the Ratnagotravibhāga. Studies in Indian and Tibetan Buddhism. Boston: Wisdom Publications, 2008. |
|---|---|
