Property:Glossary-DefinitionPDB
From Bodhicitta
This is a property of type Text.
K
See page 337: In Sanskrit, “the perfection of qualities,” referring to the four salutary qualities of the tathāgatagarbha: permanence, purity, bliss, and self, as described in the Śrīmālādevīsiṃhanādasūtra . These qualities are in distinction to the four perverted views (viparyāsa), where ignorant sentient beings regard the conditioned realm of saṃsāra as being permanent, pure, blissful, and self when in fact it is impermanent (anitya), impure (aśubha), suffering (duḥkha ), and not-self (anātman). +
See page 370: In Sanskrit, “incorrigibles”; a term used in the Mahāyāna tradition to refer to a class of beings who have lost all potential to achieve enlightenment or buddhahood. The term seems to derive from the present participle icchant (desiring), and may be rendered loosely into English as something like “hedonist” or “dissipated” (denotations suggested in theTibetan rendering 'dod chen (po), “subject to great desire”). (The Sinographs are simply a transcription of the Sanskrit.) +
(T. snying rje; C. bei; J. hi; K. pi 悲). In Sanskrit and Pāli, “compassion,” or “empathy”; the wish that others be free from suffering, as distinguished from loving-kindness (MAITRĪ; P. mettā), the wish that others be happy. Compassion is listed as the second of the four divine abidings (BRAHMAVIHĀRA) along with loving-kindness, empathetic joy (MUDITĀ), and equanimity (UPEKṢĀ). As one of the forty topics of meditation (P. KAMMAṬṬHĀNA), compassion is used only for the cultivation of tranquillity (ŚAMATHA), not insight (VIPAŚYANĀ). Compassion is to be developed in the following manner: filling one’s mind with compassion, one pervades the world with it, first in one direction, then in a second direction, then a third, a fourth, then above, below, and all around. Of the four divine abidings, compassion, along with loving-kindness and empathetic joy, is capable of producing the first three of the four stages of meditative absorption (DHYĀNA). This mainstream Buddhist notion of compassion is to be distinguished from the “great compassion” (MAHĀKARUṆĀ) of the BODHISATTVA, whose compassion inspires them to develop BODHICITTA, the aspiration to achieve buddhahood in order to liberate all beings from suffering. This great compassion is distinguished both by its scope (all sentient beings) and its agency (one personally seeks to remove the suffering of others). Great compassion thus becomes the primary motivating force that enables the BODHISATTVA to endure the three infinite eons (ASAṂKHYEYAKALPA) necessary to consummate the path to buddhahood. In Mahāyāna literature, numerous techniques are set forth to develop compassion, including acknowledging the kindness one has received from other beings in past lifetimes. +
See page 438: In Sanskrit, “afflictions,” or “defilements”; mental factors that disturb the mind and incite unwholesome (akuśala) deeds of body, speech, and/or mind. In order to be liberated from rebirth, the kleśa and the actions they incite must be controlled and finally eliminated. A typical Standard list of kleśa includes the so-called three poisons (trjviṣa) of greed or sensuality (rāga or lobha), hatred or aversion (dveṣa), and delusion (moha). +
kṣaṇasaṃpad. ( P. khaṇasampadā; T. dal ’byor; C. chana juzu; J. setsunagusoku; K. ch’alla kujok 刹那具足). In Sanskrit, lit. “fortunate moment,” or an “auspicious moment,” viz., “opportune birth” (see kṣaṇa), referring specifically to rebirth as a human being and under circumstances that permit access to the practice of the dharma. The Tibetan literally means “freedom and endowment” or “leisure and opportunity,” referring to an auspicious human birth. Indian texts enumerate eight conditions of “nonleisure” (such as rebirth as an animal) and ten conditions of opportunity (such as rebirth in a land where the dharma is present). +
In Sanskrit, "patience," "steadfastness," or "endurance"; alt. "forbearance," "acceptance," or "receptivity." Kṣānti is the third of the six (or ten) perfections (pāramitā) mastered on the bodhisattva path; it also constitutes the third of the "aids to penetration (nirvedhabhāgīya), which are developed during the "path of preparation" (prayogamārga) and mark the transition from the mundane sphere of cultivation (laukika-bhāvanāmārga) to the supramundane vision (darśana) of the four noble truths (catvāry āryasatyāni). The term has several discrete denotations in Buddhist literature. The term often refers to various aspects of the patience and endurance displayed by the bodhisattva in the course of his career: for example, his ability to bear all manner of abuse from sentient beings; to bear all manner of hardship over the course of the path to buddhahood without ever losing his commitment to liberate all beings from saṃsāra; and not to be overwhelmed by the profound nature of reality but instead to be receptive or acquiescent to it. This last denotation of kṣānti is also found, for example, in the "receptivity to the fact of suffering" (duḥkhe dharmajñānakṣānti; see dharmakṣānti), the first of the sixteen moments of realization of the four noble truths, in which the adept realizes the reality of impermanence, suffering, emptiness, and nonself and thus overcomes all doubts about the truth of suffering; this acceptance marks the inception of the darśanamārga and the entrance into sanctity (ārya). Kṣānti as the third of the aids to penetration (nirvedhabhagīya) is distinguished from the fourth, highest worldly dharmas (laukikāgradharma), only by the degree to which the validity of the four noble truths is understood: this understanding is still somewhat cursory at the stage of kṣānti but is fully formed with laukikāgradharma. +
In Tibetan, “stages of the path”; a common abbreviation for byang chub lam gyi rim pa (jangchup lamkyi rimpa), or “stages of the path to enlightenment,” a broad methodological framework for the study and practice of the complete Buddhist path to awakening, as well as the name for a major genre of Tibetan literature describing that path. It is closely allied to the genre known as bstan rim, or “stages of the doctrine.” The initial inspiration for the instructions of this System is usually attributed to the Bengali master Atiśa Dīpamkaraśrījñāna, whose Bodhipathapradīpa (“Lamp for the Path to Enlightenment”) became a model for numerous later stages of the path texts. The system presents a graduated and comprehensive approach to studying the central tenets of Mahāyāna Buddhist thought and is often organized around a presentation of the three levels of spiritual predilection, personified as “three individuals” (skyes bu
gsum): lesser, intermediate, and superior. The stages gradually lead the Student from the lowest level of seeking to obtain a better rebirth, through the intermediate level of wishing for one’s own individual liberation, and finally to adopting the Mahāyāna outlook of the “superior individual,” viz., aspiring to attain buddhahood in order to benefit all living beings. The approach is most often grounded in the teachings of the sütra and usually concludes with a brief overview of tantra. +
See p. 487: In Sanskrit, “Middle Way (school)”; a proponent or follower of the middle way” (madhyamapratipad); Buddhism is renowned as the middle way between extremes, a term that appears in the Buddha’s first sermon (see P. ''Dhammacakkappavattanasutta'') in which he prescribed a middle path between the extremes of self-indulgence and self-mortification. Thus, all proponents of Buddhism are in a sense proponents of the middle way, for each school of Buddhist philosophy identifies different versions of the two extremes and charts a middle way between them. The term Madhyamaka has however come to refer more specifically to the school of Buddhist philosophy that sets forth a middle way between the extreme of eternalism (śāśvataḍṛṣṭi) and the extreme of annihilationism (ucchedaḍṛṣṭi)- The Madhyamaka school derives from the works of Nāgārjuna, the c. second century CE philosopher who is traditionally regarded as its founder. His major philosophical works, especially his ''Mūlamadhyamakakārikā'' (a.k.a. ''Madhyamakaśāstra''), as well as the writings of his disciple Āryadeva, provide the locus classicus for the school (which only seems to have been designated the Madhyamaka school after Āryadeva’s time). Commentaries on their works (by such figures as Buddhapālita, Bhāvaviveka, and Candrakīrti) provide the primary medium for philosophical expression in the school. Madhyamaka was highly influential in Tibet, where it was traditionally considered the highest of the four schools of Indian Buddhist philosophy (Madhyamaka, Yogācāra, Sautrāntika, and Vaibhāṣika). Tibetan exegetes discerned two branches in the Madhyamaka, the Prāsaṅgika (associated with Buddhapālita and Candrakīrti) and the Svātantrika (associated with Bhāvaviveka and Śāntarakṣita). The works of Nāgārjuna and Āryadeva were also widely studied in East Asia, forming the basis of the “Three Treatises” school (C. San lun zong ; K. Sam non chong; J. Sanronshū), where the three treatises are the Zhong lun (the “Middle Treatise,” or ''Madhyamakaśāstra''), the Shi’ermen lun (“Twelve Gate Treatise,” or *''Dvādaśamukhaśāstra''), and the Bai Lun (“Hundred Verses Treatise,” *''Śataśāstra''), the latter two attributed to Āryadeva. The Madhyamaka school is most renowned for its exposition of the nature of reality, especially its deployment of the doctrines of emptiness (śūnyatā) and the two truths (satyadvaya).
In Sanskrit great yoga”; the seventh of the nine vehicles according to the Rnying ma sect of Tibetan Buddhism. Here, the system of practice described elsewhere as anuttarayogatantra is divided into three: mahäyoga, anuyoga, and atiyoga, with mahäyoga corresponding roughly to practices of the “stage of generation” (utpaitikrama), in which one visualizes oneself as a deity and one’s environment as a maņdala. Its root text is the Guhyagarbhatantra. +
In Sanskrit, "emanation body," or "transformation body"; according to the Mahāyāna descriptions, one of the three bodies (trikāya) of a buddha, together with the dharmakāya and the saṃbhogakāya. In accounts where a buddha is said to have two bodies, the dharmakāya constitutes one body and the rūpakāya constitutes the other, with the rūpakāya subsuming both the saṃbhogakāya and the nirmāṇakāya. The term nirmāṇakāya may have been employed originally to describe the doubles of himself that the Buddha is sometimes said to display in order to teach multiple audiences simultaneously. (Cf. mahāprātihārya.) In the Mahāyāna, however, the emanation body became the only body of a buddha to appear to ordinary beings, implying that the "historical Buddha" was in fact a display intended to inspire the world; in the debates about whether the Buddha felt hunger or suffered physical pain, the Mahāyāna schools as well as several of the mainstream Buddhist schools asserted that he did not, but rather appeared to do so in order to conform to worldly conventions. The nirmāṇakāya of a buddha is said to be able to appear in any form, including divinities, humans, animals, and inanimate objects; some texts even suggest that a buddha may appear as a bridge or a cooling breeze. The form of the nirmāṇakāya that appeared in India as Śākyamuni is called a "supreme emanation body"(uttamanirmāṇakāya). All such nirmāṇakāyas are said to perform twelve deeds, from waiting in Tuṣita heaven for their last rebirth to entering parinirvāṇa. Another type of nirmāṇakāya is the janmanirmāṇakāya, the "birth" or "created" emanation body, which is the form of a buddha when he appears as a divinity, human, or animal to benefit sentient beings, or as a beneficial inanimate object, such as a bridge. A third type is the śilpanirmāṇakāya, an "artisan emanation body," in which a buddha appears in the world as an artisan or as a work of art. The Sanskrit term nirmāṇakāya is translated into Tibetan as sprul sku, spelled in English as tulku.
See page 653: In Sanskrit, “mind of clear light.” According to the Systems of Anuttarayogatantra, this state of mind is the most subtle form of consciousness, which must be used to perceive reality directly in order to achieve buddhahood. +
See page 653: In Sanskrit, “luminous,” “resplendent”; referring to an effulgence of light and often used as a metaphor for either deep states of meditation or, especially, the nature of the mind. +
See page 655: In Sanskrit, typically translated “wisdom,” but having connotations perhaps closer to “gnosis,” “awareness,” and in some contexts “cognition”; the term has the general sense of accurate and precise understanding, but is used most often to refer to an understanding of reality that transcends ordinary comprehension. It is one of the most important terms in Buddhist thought, occurring in a variety of contexts. In Buddhist epistemology, prajñā is listed as one of the five mental concomitants (caitta) that accompany all virtuous (kuśala) states of mind. It is associated with correct, analytical discrimination of the various factors (dharma) enumerated in the Buddhist teachings (dharmapravicaya). In this context, prajñā refers to the capacity to distinguish between the faults and virtues of objects in such a way as to overcome doubt. +
See page 656: In Sanskrit, “perfection of wisdom” or “perfect wisdom”; a polysemous term, which appears in Päli accounts of the Buddha’s prior training as a bodhisattva (P. bodhisatta), but is widely used in Mahāyāna Buddhism. Prajñāpāramitā refers to a level of understanding beyond that of ordinary wisdom, especially referring to the the wisdom associated with, or required to achieve, buddhahood. The term receives a variety of interpretations, but it is often said to be the wisdom that does not conceive of an agent, an object, or an action as being ultimately real. The perfection of wisdom is also sometimes defined as the knowledge of emptiness (śūnyatā). As the wisdom associated with buddhahood, prajñāpāramitā is the sixth of the six perfections (pāramitā) that are practiced on the bodhisattva path. +
See pages 667 - 668: In Sanskrit, lit., “opposite”; a “counteragent” or “antidote,” a factor which, when present, precludes the presence of its opposite. In Buddhist meditation theory, an antidote may be a virtuous (kuśala) mental state (caitta) that is applied as a counteragent against a nonvirtuous (akuśala) mental state. The Buddhist premise that two contrary mental states cannot exist simultaneously leads to the development of specific meditations to be used as such counteragents, sometimes called the five “inhibitory” contemplations: (1) lust (rāga) is countered by the contemplations on impurity (aśubhabhāvanā), e.g., the cemetery contemplations on the stages in the decomposition of a corpse; (2) hatred (dveśa) is countered by the divine abiding (brahmavihāra) of lovingkindness (maitrī); (3) delusion (moha) is countered by contemplating the twelvefold chain of dependent origination (pratītyasamutpāda); (4) ego-conceit (asmimāna) is countered by the contemplation on the eighteen sense-fields (dhātu); and (5) discursive thought (vitarka) is countered by mindfulness of breathing (ānāpānasmrti). Progress on the path to liberation is also described technically in terms of the abandonment of a specific afflictive state (kleśa) through the application of its specific antidote. Thus, afflictions and their antidotes are enumerated for the nine levels of samsāra (the sensuous realm, or kāmadhātu, the four levels of the subtle-materiality realm, or rūpadhātu, and the four levels of the immaterial realm, or arūpyadhātu). In each case, the antidote is an increasingly powerful level of wisdom (prajñā) that displaces increasingly subtle levels of the afflictions. Both the four types of noble persons (āryapudgala) and the ten stages (bhūmi) of the bodhisattva are defined by which antidotes have been successfully applied to eradicate specific afflictions. Thus, the accumulation and application of various antidotes is one of the practices that a bodhisattva must learn to perfect. The Buddha is said to have taught 84,000 antidotes for the 84,000 afflictions.
In Sanskrit, “individually enlightened one” or “solitary buddha”; an arhat who becomes enlightened through his own efforts without receiving instruction from a buddha in his final lifetime. Unlike the “perfectly enlightened buddhas” (samyaksambuddha), the pratyekabuddha refrains from teaching others about his experience because he has neglected to develop the same degree of great compassion (mahäkarunä) that moti- vates the samyaksambuddhas. Even though he does not teach others, he may still guide by example, or through the use of gestures. Pratyekabuddhas are also distinguished from those who achieve the goal of arhat via the Śrãvaka (“disciple”) path, because śrāvakas are unable to achieve enlightenment on their own and must be instructed in the principles of Buddhism in order to succeed in their practice. A pratyekabuddha is also distinguished from the śrāvaka by the duration o f his path: the pratyekabuddha path is longer because he must accumulate the necessary amount of merit (puņya) to allow him to achieve liberation without relying on a teacher in his final lifetime. A pratyekabuddha is said to achieve liberation through contemplation of the principle of dependent origination (pratItyasamutpäda), which accounts for the Chinese translation of yuanjue (“awakening via conditional- ity”). Two types of pratyekabuddhas are commonly enumerated in the literature: those who wander alone “like a rhinoceros” (khadgavisänakalpa) and the “congregators” (vargacärin).
According to the M ahäyäna, the path of the pratyekabuddha, together with the path of the śrāvaka, constitutes the hInayäna, or “lesser vehicle”; these two categories are also often referred to as the “two vehicles” (C. ER sheng) and their followers as “two- vehicle adherents.” These lesser “two vehicles” contrast with the third and highest vehicle, the bodhisattvayäna. +
See page 667: In Sanskrit, “restraint proffered by the disciplinary code” (prātimokṣa); one of the three types of restraint (saṃvara) mentioned in the Vaibhāṣika school of Sarvāstivāda abhidharma, which are associated with “unmanifest material force” or “hidden imprints” (avijñaptirūpa)... The restraint inherent in the disciplinary code creates a special kind of “force field” that automatically protects and dissuades monks and nuns from unwholesome activity, even when they are not consciously aware that they are following the precepts or when they are asleep. This specific type of restraint is what makes a person a monk or a nun, since just wearing robes and following an ascetic way of life would not in themselves be enough to instill in him or her the protective power offered by the prātimokṣa. +
In Sanskrit, “perfection,” a virtue or quality developed and practiced by a bodhisattva on the path to becoming a buddha. The term is paranomastically glossed by some traditional commentators as “gone beyond” or “gone to the other side” (see pāra) , although it seems in fact to derive from Skt. parama, meaning “highest” or “supreme.” The best-known enumeration of the perfections is a group of six: giving (dāna), morality (śIla), patience or forbearance (kṣänti), effort (vIrya), concentration (dhyāna), and wisdom (prajnā). There are also lists of ten perfections. In the Mahāyāna (specifically in the Daśabhūmikasūtra), the list of ten includes the preceding six, to which are added method (upāya), vow (pranidhāna), power (bala), and knowledge (jnäna), with the explanation that the bodhisattva practices the perfections in this order on each of the ten bodhisattva stages or grounds (bhūmi). Thus, giving is perfected on the first bhümi, morality on the second, and so on. In Päli sources, where the perfections are called pãramī, the ten perfections are giving (dāna), morality (śIla), renunciation (nekkhamma; S. naiskramya) , wisdom (paññā), effort (viriya), patience (kṣänti), truthfulness (sacca; S. satya), determination (adhitthāna; S. adhisthāna), loving- kindness (mettā; S. maitri), and equanimity (upekkhā; S. upeksā). The practice of these perfections over the course of the many lifetimes of the bodhisattva’s path eventually fructifies in the achievement of buddhahood. The precise meaning of the perfections is discussed at length, as is the question of how the six (or ten) are to be divided between the categories of merit ( puņya ) and wisdom ( jnāna ) . For example, according to one interpretation of the six perfections, giving, morality, and patience contribute to the collection of merit (punyasambhāra); concentration and wisdom contribute to the collection of wisdom (jnänasam bhära), and effort contributes to both. Commentators also consider what distinguishes the practice o f these six from other instances of the practice of giving, etc. Some Madhyamaka exegetes, for example, argue that these virtues only become perfections when the bodhisattva engages in them with an understanding of emptiness (śūnyatā); for example, giving a gift without clinging to any conception of giver, gift, or recipient.
ratnatraya (alt. triratna) (P. ratanattaya/tiratana; T. dkon mchog gsum; C. sanbao; J. sanbō; K. sambo 三寶). In Sanskrit, the "three jewels," also translated into English as the "triple gem" or the "three treasures." In the Buddhist tradition, RATNATRAYA refers to the three principal objects of veneration: the Buddha, the DHARMA, and the SAṂGHA. One of the most common practices that define a Buddhist is "taking refuge" (see ŚARAṆA) in the three jewels. This formula, which accompanies many lay and monastic rituals, involves a formal declaration that the practitioner "goes to" each of the three jewels for refuge (śaraṇa) or protection. The Sanskrit formula is as follows: "Buddhaṃ śaraṇaṃ gacchāmi. Dharmaṃ śaraṇaṃ gacchāmi. Saṃghaṃ śaraṇaṃ gacchāmi." meaning "I go to the Buddha for refuge. I go to the dharma for refuge. I go to the saṃgha for refuge." By repeating this formula three times, one identifies oneself as a Buddhist. (See also TRIŚARAṆA.) The precise meanings of these three terms, how they relate to one another, and exactly how each one is to be venerated are all subjects of extensive commentary within the tradition. The term buddha refers first, and most obviously, to the historical Buddha, GAUTAMA or ŚĀKYAMUNI, the sage of ancient India who realized and then taught the way to end all suffering. But the Buddha may also refer to any number of buddhas found in the extensive MAHĀYĀNA pantheon. In some varieties of the Mahāyāna, buddha may even refer to the inherent state of buddhahood that is the fundamental characteristic of all sentient beings. The term dharma refers to the teachings of a buddha, which can take a variety of possible forms including specific beliefs, texts, or practices; the dharma is sometimes divided into the scriptural dharma (ĀGAMADHARMA) and the realized dharma (ADHIGAMADHARMA). In the context of the three jewels, one is said to go for refuge in the latter. However, dharma may also refer to the pervasive, universal truth that is realized by a buddha, particularly as enshrined in the teaching of the FOUR NOBLE TRUTHS (catvāry āryasatyāni). Some commentators specify that in the context of the three jewels, the dharma refers to the third and fourth of the four truths, the truth of cessation (NIRODHASATYA) and the truth of the path (MĀRGASATYA), and most specifically to the truth of cessation. The term saṃgha refers to the community that seeks to realize and enact the teachings of a buddha for the sake of its own liberation and the liberation of others. Saṃgha is usually understood to include only those followers who have renounced the life of a householder (PRAVRAJITA) and taken up the life of a monk (BHIKṢU) or nun (BHIKṢUNĪ). However, the saṃgha is also sometimes interpreted to include both laymen (UPĀSAKA) and laywomen (UPĀSIKĀ) as well. In the context of refuge, the Saṃgha is generally said to refer to those members of the community who are Āryapudgala.
See page 759–60: In the Yogācāra school, a distinction is made between the indestructible, inherent “naturally endowed lineage” (prakṛtisthagotra) and this changeable, continuously acquired “lineage conditioned by habits” (samudānītagotra). In contrast to the former, which predetermines a person’s orientation toward the two vehicles of either Mahāyāna or Hīnayāna, the latter allows for some leeway for personal adaptations and change through doctrinal study, practice, and exposure (these are what are meant by “habits”). According to this controversial Yogācāra tenet, whereas a person cannot effect change in terms of his highest spiritual potential and vehicular predisposition because of his “naturally endowed lineage,” he can nevertheless influence the speed with which he is able to attain enlightenment, and other extrinsic variations within his predetermined “lineage.” This flexibility is the lineage that is conditioned, and can be altered, by “habits.” Together and in contrast with the “naturally endowed lineage,” they are known as “the two lineages: intrinsic and acquired” (xingxi er[zhong]xing). +
