Āryāṣṭasāhasrikāprajñāpāramitāpañjikāsārottamā
| 🤓 Admin Zone 🛠️ hidden to non-admins | |
Description
Prajñāpāramitā in his doxographical works and his Sāratamā. Based on extant Sanskrit and Tibetan primary sources, it argues that Ratnākaraśānti's main teacher was Dharmakīrtiśrī (late 10th C.E.) and that Ratnākaraśānti's Sāratamā sought to replace his teacher's Yogācāra-Mādhyamika framework with a causal explanation of Prajñāpāramitā through redefining the term Prajñāpāramitā as the path to awakening, rather than its goal. By unpacking that causal explanation in light of his broader system, the thesis demonstrates the way that Ratnākaraśānti's own version of Nirākāravādin-Yogācāra-Mādhyamika refutes cognitive images (ākāra) as unreal ultimately, but claims they are still perceived by buddhas out of compassion. This conclusion debunks the long-standing theory that Ratnākaraśānti was an Indian proponent of the controversial Tibetan gZhan-stong despite later gZhan-stong proponents' attempts to claim him as their own.
There are two parts to the study. The first part introduces Ratnākaraśānti's life, philosophy and doxography based upon evidence from a Tibetan colophon to his Mādhyamika commentary and the Tibetan hagiography of his student Adhīśa (a.k.a. Atiśa) and upon a comparative analysis of his doxographical works that are prerequisites for reading his Sāratamā. The second part consists of an annotated translation of the Sāratamā's introductory section, contrasted with the prior standard interpretation by Haribhadra's (9th century C.E.).
In the two appendices are included a Tibetan critical edition and a separate hybrid Sanskrit and Tibetan critical edition of the Sāratamā's first parivarta based on the extant 11th and 13th century incomplete MSS and on the Tibetan translations in the sDe dge, Peking and sNarthang editions. The hybrid edition also includes my
provisional critical edition of the root text—i.e. the first parivarta of the Āryāṣṭasāhasrikāprajñāpāramitāsūtra—and my own translation of two small sample sections of the Sāratamā, which are extant only in Tibetan, back into Sanskrit.
Prajñāpāramitā in his doxographical works and his Sāratamā. Based on extant Sanskrit and Tibetan primary sources, it argues that Ratnākaraśānti's main teacher was Dharmakīrtiśrī (late 10th C.E.) and that Ratnākaraśānti's Sāratamā sought to replace his teacher's Yogācāra-Mādhyamika framework with a causal explanation of Prajñāpāramitā through redefining the term Prajñāpāramitā as the path to awakening, rather than its goal. By unpacking that causal explanation in light of his broader system, the thesis demonstrates the way that Ratnākaraśānti's own version of Nirākāravādin-Yogācāra-Mādhyamika refutes cognitive images (ākāra) as unreal ultimately, but claims they are still perceived by buddhas out of compassion. This conclusion debunks the long-standing theory that Ratnākaraśānti was an Indian proponent of the controversial Tibetan gZhan-stong despite later gZhan-stong proponents' attempts to claim him as their own.
There are two parts to the study. The first part introduces Ratnākaraśānti's life, philosophy and doxography based upon evidence from a Tibetan colophon to his Mādhyamika commentary and the Tibetan hagiography of his student Adhīśa (a.k.a. Atiśa) and upon a comparative analysis of his doxographical works that are prerequisites for reading his Sāratamā. The second part consists of an annotated translation of the Sāratamā's introductory section, contrasted with the prior standard interpretation by Haribhadra's (9th century C.E.).
In the two appendices are included a Tibetan critical edition and a separate hybrid Sanskrit and Tibetan critical edition of the Sāratamā's first parivarta based on the extant 11th and 13th century incomplete MSS and on the Tibetan translations in the sDe dge, Peking and sNarthang editions. The hybrid edition also includes my
provisional critical edition of the root text—i.e. the first parivarta of the Āryāṣṭasāhasrikāprajñāpāramitāsūtra—and my own translation of two small sample sections of the Sāratamā, which are extant only in Tibetan, back into Sanskrit.Prajñāpāramitā in his doxographical works and his Sāratamā. Based on extant Sanskrit and Tibetan primary sources, it argues that Ratnākaraśānti's main teacher was Dharmakīrtiśrī (late 10th C.E.) and that Ratnākaraśānti's Sāratamā sought to replace his teacher's Yogācāra-Mādhyamika framework with a causal explanation of Prajñāpāramitā through redefining the term Prajñāpāramitā as the path to awakening, rather than its goal. By unpacking that causal explanation in light of his broader system, the thesis demonstrates the way that Ratnākaraśānti's own version of Nirākāravādin-Yogācāra-Mādhyamika refutes cognitive images (ākāra) as unreal ultimately, but claims they are still perceived by buddhas out of compassion. This conclusion debunks the long-standing theory that Ratnākaraśānti was an Indian proponent of the controversial Tibetan gZhan-stong despite later gZhan-stong proponents' attempts to claim him as their own.
There are two parts to the study. The first part introduces Ratnākaraśānti's life, philosophy and doxography based upon evidence from a Tibetan colophon to his Mādhyamika commentary and the Tibetan hagiography of his student Adhīśa (a.k.a. Atiśa) and upon a comparative analysis of his doxographical works that are prerequisites for reading his Sāratamā. The second part consists of an annotated translation of the Sāratamā's introductory section, contrasted with the prior standard interpretation by Haribhadra's (9th century C.E.).
In the two appendices are included a Tibetan critical edition and a separate hybrid Sanskrit and Tibetan critical edition of the Sāratamā's first parivarta based on the extant 11th and 13th century incomplete MSS and on the Tibetan translations in the sDe dge, Peking and sNarthang editions. The hybrid edition also includes my
provisional critical edition of the root text—i.e. the first parivarta of the Āryāṣṭasāhasrikāprajñāpāramitāsūtra—and my own translation of two small sample sections of the Sāratamā, which are extant only in Tibetan, back into Sanskrit.Prajñāpāramitā in his doxographical works and his Sāratamā. Based on extant Sanskrit and Tibetan primary sources, it argues that Ratnākaraśānti's main teacher was Dharmakīrtiśrī (late 10th C.E.) and that Ratnākaraśānti's Sāratamā sought to replace his teacher's Yogācāra-Mādhyamika framework with a causal explanation of Prajñāpāramitā through redefining the term Prajñāpāramitā as the path to awakening, rather than its goal. By unpacking that causal explanation in light of his broader system, the thesis demonstrates the way that Ratnākaraśānti's own version of Nirākāravādin-Yogācāra-Mādhyamika refutes cognitive images (ākāra) as unreal ultimately, but claims they are still perceived by buddhas out of compassion. This conclusion debunks the long-standing theory that Ratnākaraśānti was an Indian proponent of the controversial Tibetan gZhan-stong despite later gZhan-stong proponents' attempts to claim him as their own.
There are two parts to the study. The first part introduces Ratnākaraśānti's life, philosophy and doxography based upon evidence from a Tibetan colophon to his Mādhyamika commentary and the Tibetan hagiography of his student Adhīśa (a.k.a. Atiśa) and upon a comparative analysis of his doxographical works that are prerequisites for reading his Sāratamā. The second part consists of an annotated translation of the Sāratamā's introductory section, contrasted with the prior standard interpretation by Haribhadra's (9th century C.E.).
In the two appendices are included a Tibetan critical edition and a separate hybrid Sanskrit and Tibetan critical edition of the Sāratamā's first parivarta based on the extant 11th and 13th century incomplete MSS and on the Tibetan translations in the sDe dge, Peking and sNarthang editions. The hybrid edition also includes my
provisional critical edition of the root text—i.e. the first parivarta of the Āryāṣṭasāhasrikāprajñāpāramitāsūtra—and my own translation of two small sample sections of the Sāratamā, which are extant only in Tibetan, back into Sanskrit.
