Property:Abstract
From Bodhicitta
This is a property of type Text.
T
No abstract given. Here are the first relevant paragraphs:
Relative bodhicitta is how we learn to love each other and ourselves, according to Chögyam Trungpa Rinpoche. The basic principle of ultimate bodhicitta is to rest in the fundamental state of consciousness, before it is divided into 'I' and 'other.'
Generosity is self-existing openness, complete openness. The ultimate principle of the awakened heart is based on developing transcendent generosity. You are no longer subject to cultivating your own scheme or project. And the best way to open yourself up is to make friends with yourself and others. +
The Bhikṣu-Prakīrṇaka of the Mahāsāṃghika-Lokottaravādins Quoted by Śāntideva in his Śikṣāsamuccaya +
In this paper I would like to make some philological remarks on a fragmentary citation in the ''Śikṣāsamuccaya'' by Śāntideva (around 700 CE).[1] It is a matter of great significance for the history of ideas in Indian Buddhism, for the celebrated Madhyamaka master has cited it.[2] It is also of great importance from the viewpoints of Buddhist Sanskrit textual transmission. This is not just for the recovery of the missing literature but for linguistic peculiarities of the extant texts belonging to the Mahāsāṃghika-Lokottaravādins (cf. infra §1.0.0-1.0.2). +
No abstract given. Here are the first relevant paragraphs:
In this paper, I consider how and why the BCA's monastic aspects had been largely neglected until recently and why its monastic characteristics tend to be underrepresented still today. In other words, I address the problem of cultural representation, which has been recently raised in Buddhist Studies—e.g. in Almond (1988), Tuck (1990), Schopen (1991), Lopez (1996)—reflecting the recent development of other fields, notably history and literary studies. Although there have been numerous translations of the BCA, there is no critical research on the interpretations of the BCA as cultural representation. This essay would be the first contribution that links the BCA to a broader discussion about the question of the production of knowledge in Buddhist Studies. +
No abstract given. Here are the first relevant paragraphs:
In this article I offer the initial findings from my research on translations in the West of the ''Bodhicaryāvatāra'', a 8th century Buddhist treatise by Śāntideva. The orientation of this study falls within the field of descriptive translation studies (Holmes, 1988) and presents a descriptive analysis of some of the translations from Sanskrit and Tibetan and their sociocultural function.<br> In contrast to the numerous scholarly studies on Buddhism itself in the West since the 19th century (Jong, 1987; Webb, 1974; Schwab, 1950; Takugai, 1942), studies on Western translations of Buddhist texts are scarce and have only appeared in very recent years. From those publications more directly related to my research which discuss the translation of Buddhist texts from Sanskrit and Tibetan, I would like to make particular mention of the following: the article by Ruegg (1992) "Some Reflections on Translating Buddhist Philosophical Texts from Sanskrit and Tibetan", published in an Asian studies specialist journal; and the book ''Buddhist Translation: Problems and Perspectives'' (Doboom Tulku, 1995), a collection of papers read at an international seminar on this theme in New Delhi in 1990.<br> My own particular interest in Western translations of the ''Bodhicaryāvatāra'' arose from a significant publishing event; this being the appearance of seven translations of this text in the space of just five years, between 1992 and 1997: two in French, two in Spanish, and three in English. This Buddhist treatise, which enjoys a privileged position in Mahāyāna Buddhism, particularly in the Tibetan tradition, has never awoken such curiosity in the West since it was first translated by La Vallée-Poussin (1907).[1]
<h5>Notes</h5>
#The Mahāyāna, or "great vehicle", reform movement which was born out of a reaction to the first Indian schools (called Hinayāna, or "small vehicle"), is the path of the bodhisattvas (see note 8). It consists of the practice of universal compassion and cultivation of the wisdom of emptiness, the ultimate nature of self and all the phenomena. Based on the motivation and wish to deliver all beings without exception from the sufferings of the unenlightened state, it leads to the attainment of buddhahood for the sake of others. (Shāntideva, 1997: 200)
No abstract given. Here are the first relevant paragraphs:
The classics of Indian literature are not readily available in English translation-one thinks of the principal Upanishads and ''Bhagavadgīta'' as the exceptions that prove the rule. It is therefore good to see Oxford University Press trying to broaden the range of its 'World's Classics' series by including a number of fresh, scholarly translations from Sanskrit. Kate Crosby and Andrew Skilton's translation of Śāntideva's ''Bodhicaryāvatāra''.<br> The translation is presented here with a considerable explanatory apparatus: a general introduction, 'Śāntideva and his world' (pp. vii xxvi) by Paul Williams; a translators' introduction (pp. xxvii-xlii); short-and sometimes, at over ten pages, not so short-introductions to each of the ten chapters of the text; and finally 46 pages of endnotes commenting on individual verses (pp. 145-91). Indeed, the translators comment that they 'have been surprised by how much explanatory material seemed appropriate' (p. xxv), and for the most part one must conclude that the explanatory material they provide is both helpful to the general reader and informative for the specialist. [https://www.jstor.org/stable/3107424 Read more here] +
The Bodhisattva Ideal in Theravāda Buddhist Theory and Practice: A Reevaluation of the Bodhisattva-Śrāvaka Opposition +
By illustrating the presence and scope of the bodhisattva ideal in Theravāda Buddhist theory and practice, this article shows that some of the distinctions used to separate Mahāyāna Buddhism from Hīnayāna Buddhism are problematic, and, in particular, calls into question the commonly held theoretical model that postulates that the goal of Mahāyāna practitioners is to become buddhas by following the path of the bodhisattva (bodhisattva-yāna), whereas the goal of Hīnayāna practitioners is to become arahants by following the path of the hearers of Buddha's disciples (śrāvaka-yāna).
Download this article [https://digitalcommons.wku.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1011&context=phil_rel_fac_pub here]. +
Śāntideva (c. seventh/eighth century) taught at Nālandā, the Buddhist university near present-day Patna, India, which, with 10,000 students and an eleven-story library, was for centuries one of the world’s principal institutions of higher learning. The ''Bodhicaryāvatāra'' (Introduction to the practice of the Bodhisattva) is said to have first been presented as a teaching by Śāntideva to his fellow monks. It is a study of the cultivation of bodhicitta, the awakened—or awakening—mind. The ''Bodhicaryāvatāra'' functions as a guidebook to the bodhisattva path, the path to liberation from emotional and cognitive defilements that is motivated by great compassion (''mahākaruṇā''), the altruistic aspiration to liberate all sentient beings from suffering, and facilitated by the perfection of wisdom (''prajñāpāramitā''). (Edelglass, "The Bodhisattva Path: Śāntideva's ''Bodhicaryāvatāra''," 388) +
An abridged version of this contribution was published in 2018
online in the Oxford Bibliographies in Buddhism (https://www.oxfordbibliographies.com/view/document/obo-9780195393521/obo-9780195393521-0254.xml) as the entry dedicated to the ‘Bodhisattvabhūmi’ bibliographical survey. This version represents the preprint initially submitted to the editors, and later abridged due to exceeding the allowed length. Posting this complete version on such platforms as the Academia and ResearchGate
makes, I believe, more sense since the deleted materials (see mainly end of the paper)
can hopefully provide ampler information to the interested readers. +
No abstract given. Here are the first relevant paragraphs:
In this paper, I intend to present a series of observations concerning the relationship
between the ''Bodhisattvapiṭaka'' and ''Akṣayamatinirdeśa''.[1] Analysis of these sūtras has shown that the ''Akṣayamatinirdeśa'' is greatly indebted to the ''Bodhisattvapiṭaka'' for its material, often to the extent of reproducing entire passages from the ''Bodhisattvapiṭaka'' verbatim. Presumably in response to changes in current Buddhist thinking, the ''Akṣayamatinirdeśa'' deliberately introduced also a number of unambiguous doctrinal and editorial adjustments. On the whole, they are rather minor and are well blended into the wider context of the exposition, affecting only selected aspects of the Bodhisattva career. In several instances, modifications indicate doctrinal development and allow us to establish the chronology of the two works beyond reasonable doubt.[2] The main body of the ''Akṣayamatinirdeśa'' consists of an exposition of eighty inexhaustible (''akṣaya'') faculties and attributes of a Bodhisattva. Here, many of the more important practices of the Bodhisattva-training are discussed and set into an early Mahāyāna context.[3] Significantly, only the first ten of the eighty ''akṣayas'' bear unmistakable marks of Mahāyāna thought. Virtually all other practices fall within the scope of pre-Mahāyāna Buddhism and figured, in one way or another, already in the ''sūtras'' of early Buddhism. (Pagel, introductory remarks, 333–34)
<h5>Notes</h5>
#All references, unless stated otherwise, refer to the Peking Edition of the Tibetan ''Tripiṭaka'' (ed., D.T. Suzuki, Kyoto, 1958); vols. 22/23 for the ''Bodhisattvapiṭaka'', vol. 34 for the ''Akṣayamatinirdeśa'' and vol. 104 for the ''Akṣayamatinirdeśaṭīkā''. However, since I have produced elsewhere a critical edition of chapter eleven of the ''Bodhisattvapiṭaka'', utilising the sNar-thang, sDe-dge, Peking and sTog-Palace editions as well as two manuscript fragments from Tun-huang, I have occasionally incorporated data from this critical edition included in my doctoral dissertation "The ''Bodhisattvapiṭaka'': Its Doctrines and Practices and their Position in Mahāyāna Literature”, London, SOAS, 1992. When translating quotations from the ''Akṣayamatinirdeśa'' and ''Bodhisattvapiṭaka'', I follow as a rule the Peking reading. Only where the Peking text deviates considerably from the other four editions I adopt the reading of my own edition. In these instances I provide the Peking reading in round brackets. Square brackets in the Tibetan text point to those passages in my quotations that I left untranslated because of the need for brevity. In my translations, they are indicated by the insertion of three ellipsis points in the appropriate lacuna.
#Except for a few Sanskrit quotations of the ''Akṣayamatinirdeśa'' that are extant in the ''Śikṣāsamuccaya'', ''Mūlamadhyamakavṛtti'' and ''Arthaviniścayasūtra'', my comparison is wholly based on Tibetan sources. For an array of references to Sanskrit quotations from the ''Akṣayamatinirdeśa'', see Jens Braarvig, "The ''Akṣayamatinirdeśasūtra'' and the Tradition of Imperishability in Buddhist Thought", Ph.D. dissertation, University of Oslo, 1989, Ivi-lxi. Confirmed ''Bodhisattvapitaka'' quotations are much rarer and do not appear in surviving Sanskrit works. But compare the following sections: ''Śiks'', 316.13–317.13, ''Akn'', TTP, 69.4.2-5.6, ''Bdp'', TTP, 86.3.2-4.5; ''Śiks'', 233.6-8, ''Akn'', TTP, 67.2.3-3.3, ''Bdp'', TTP, 83.1.4-2.3; ''Śikṣ'', 278.4-14, ''Akn'', TTP, 72.2.2-3.2, ''Bdp'', TTP, 87.1.4-2.3; ''Śikṣ'', 117.13-16, ''Akn'', TTP, 69.1.1-2, ''Bdp'', TTP, 86.1.4-5; ''Śiks'', 236.6-13, ''Akn'', TTP, 68.3.5-4.1, ''Bdp'', TTP, 84.2.1-5; ''Arthav'', 320-322, ''Akn'', TTP, 70.4.4-71.2.1, ''Bdp'', TTP, 85.1.1-3.4.
#As Wayman has demonstrated in his article on the ''samādhi''-list in the ''Akṣayamatinirdeśa'' ("The Samādhi Lists of the ''Aksayamatinirdeśasūtra'' and the ''Mahāvyutpatti''", ''AOH'', 34, 1980, 305-12), it is this enumeration of eighty ''akṣayas'' that was taken as a basis in the ''Sūtrālaṃkāra'' where the ''Aksayamatinirdeśa'' is cited as authority for the twenty-two forms of generating the thought of enlightenment (S. Lévi, ed., ''Mahāyānasūtrālaṃkāra'', Paris, 1907, iv.15-20). Cast into twenty-two similes in the ''Sūtrālaṃkāra'', they correspond in content and sequence to the eighty ''aksayas'' listed in the ''Aksayamatinirdeśa''. The similes themselves, however, did not originate in the ''Aksayamatinirdeśa'', but appear to have been derived from a number of sources, including passages in the early ''Prajñāpāramitā'' literature. The list of the similes is, for instance, contained in three ''Kārikās'' of the ''Abhisamayālaṃkāra'' (Th. Stcherbatsky, ed., ''Abhisamayālaṃkāra'', St. Petersburg, 1929, 4, vv.18-20).
The present dissertation identifies the ontological presuppositions and the corresponding soteriological-epistemological principles that sustain and define the Mahāyāna Buddhist belief in the inherent potentiality of all animate beings to attain the supreme and perfect enlightenment of Buddhahood. More specifically, the study establishes a coherent metaphysic of Absolute Suchness (''Tathatā''), synthesizing the variant traditions of the Tathāgata-embryo (''Tathāgatagarbha'') and the Storehouse Consciousness (''Ālayavijñāna'').<br> The dissertation interprets the Buddhist enlightenment as the salvific-transformational moment in which ''Tathatā'' "awakens" to itself,
comes to perfect self-realization as the Absolute Suchness of reality, in and through phenomenal human consciousness. It is an interpretation of the Buddhist Path as the spontaneous self-emergence of "embryonic" absolute knowledge as it comes to free itself from the concealments of adventitious defilements, and possess itself in fully self-explicitated self-consciousness as the "Highest Truth" and unconditional nature of all existence; it does so only in the form of omniscient wisdom.<br> Aside from Ruegg's ''La Theorie du Tathāgatagarbha et du Gotra'' and Verdu's study of the ''Ālayavijñāna'' in ''Dialectical Aspects in Buddhist Thought'', Western scholarship treating of the subject is negligible. And while both sources are excellent technical treatises, they fail to integrate in any detailed analysis the dual concepts as complementary modes of each other. Thus, the dissertation, while adopting the
methodology of textual analysis, has as its emphasis a thematic-interpretive study of its sources. Conducting a detailed analysis into the structure of the texts, the dissertation delineates and appropriates the inherent ontological, soteriological and epistemological foci which they themselves assume as their natural form.<br> Structurally, the dissertation is divided into three major parts. The first focuses on the ''Tathāgatagarbha'', the second on the ''Ālayavijñāna'', the third on their relation and deeper significance in the human thought tradition. The first two parts are sub-divided into seven and four chapters respectively. The former seven chapters establish the ontological identity of the Tathāgata-embryo (''Tathagātagarbha'') through a critical examination of the major sūtral authority for the concept, i.e., the ''Śrī-Mālā-Sūtra'', and the primary śāstral elaboration inspired by it, viz., the ''Ratnagotravlbhāga''.<br> Following the same pattern, the four chapters of part 2 note the role of the ''Laṅk¯āvatāra Sūtra'' as a principal scriptural advocate for the theory of the Storehouse Consciousness (''Ālayavijñāna''), while detailing the scholastic amplification of it in Hsüan Tsang's ''Ch'eng Wei-Shih Lun''. Part 3 concludes the study by recapitulating the principal developments in the emergent complementarity of the two concepts, arguing that any adequate
discussion of the Buddha Nature must be informed on the one hand by the theory of the ''Tathāgatagarbha'' which grounds and authenticates its ontological status, and on the other by the ''Ālayavijñāna'', its noetic-cognitive determination. While the former tends to elucidate the
process towards, and experience of enlightenment as a function of Absolute Suchness (''Tathatā''), the latter adopts the reciprocal perspective and examines the subject in the light and function of phenomenal consciousness.<br> By way of comparison with Western thought, the chapter likewise demonstrates the analogous dynamic in the bilateral theory of the ''Tathāgatagarbha-Ālayavijñāna'' and the Hegelian Absolute Spirit in-and-for-itself. Focusing upon ''The Phenomenology of Spirit'', the chapter notes that the self-becoming process in and through which consciousness realizes its own plenitude is strikingly homologous to the theory of Buddhist enlightenment presented through the concept of the ''Tathāgatagarbha-Ālayavijñāna''. It suggests that these two representative thought systems
mutually illumine each other, and together illustrate a correspondent framework within which the relationship of the Absolute and relative may gain a more universal conception and therefore, a more comprehensive resolution.
No abstract given. Here are the first relevant paragraphs:
One cannot deny the importance and usefulness of the works of Śāntideva as summary statements of Mahāyāna Buddhism in its fully developed 7th- or 8th-century form.[2] His ''Bodhicaryāvatāra'' (or ''Bodhisattvacaryāvatara'') is especially well known, having exerted a strong influence on Tibetan formulations of the bodhisattva path, and has remained a favourite source of inspiration and instruction for followers of the Mahāyāna to this day. Not surprisingly, it spawned many commentaries — one survives in Sanskrit, 10 in Tibetan translation — and has continued to do so into the modem period, in which it has also been frequently translated.[3] Śāntideva's ''Śikṣā-samuccaya'', on the other hand, has generated a much smaller literature. As one might expect, there are translations into Tibetan[4] and Chinese,[5] but virtually nothing in the way of commentaries.[6] While the Sanskrit text is well served by C. Bendall's ''editio princeps'' (Bendall 1897- 1902), the work tends to be accessed by most readers through the English translation made by Bendall himself with the help of W. H. D. Rouse, published in 1922.[7] Although excerpts from the ''Śikṣā-samuccaya'' (hereafter Śikṣ) translated by others appear in various anthologies,[8] the Bendall and Rouse version remains the only complete translation into a Western language. Yet this translation is frequently problematic, presumably due to Rouse's inability to finish the work to an appropriate standard after the death of Bendall in 1906, an "insufficiency for the task" which he frankly confesses in the preface. Mindful of the inadequacies of the Bendall and Rouse translation, and convinced that the riches of Śāntideva's anthology deserve to be displayed to better effect, J.-U. Hartmann and I have recently embarked on a new English version of the Śikṣ, which we have set about by attacking the work in different places. The present paper grows out of an attempt on my part to produce a draft translation of Chap. XIX, the final chapter, and records the unexpected consequences of an almost random decision to start at the end of the text rather than the beginning. (Harrison, "The Case of the Vanishing Poet," 215–216)
<h5> Notes </h5>
#Note #1 is from the title. It reads: The research findings discussed in this article were first presented in public as part of a paper with a somewhat wider scope read at a conference held in Oxford in September 2004 to mark the retirement of R. Gombrich. This article, however, is the first publication in print of a discovery relating specifically to the verse portions of Śāntideva's ''Śikṣā-samuccaya''. I wish to thank my colleagues A. Saitō and J.-U. Hartmann for their critical comments on an earlier draft, and A. Saitō in particular for generously sharing his research on the work of Śāntideva with me and for sending me ''inter alia'' an unpublished transcription of Chap. IX of the Dunhuang mss of the ''Bodhisattvacaryāvatāra'' in Tibetan translation. Naturally, all errors, omissions and wild surmises remain my own responsibility. It is my pleasure to be able to dedicate this paper to M. Hahn, as a token of friendship and in recognition of his many contributions to the study of Buddhist verse.
#The date of Śāntideva is given variously as 7th or 8th cent. Saitō (1993: 13) , for example, puts him at ca. 650-700, but revises this in Saitō 2001: 1 to ca. 690-750. Pezzali (1968: 38-40) reasons that the productive period of his life must have fallen in the years 685-763. In his critical review of Pezzali's work, De Jong (1975: 179 f.) expresses reservations about the arguments used to arrive at this conclusion.
#See especially Crosby & Skilton 1996, and Wallace & Wallace 1997. For details of other versions and a comparative study of the merits of some of them, see Gómez 1999, which contains a useful bibliography.
#''bSlab pa kun las btus pa'' (Tōhoku 3940), translated in the early 9th cent. by Jinamitra, Dānaśīla and Ye shes sde. Hereafter referred to as ŚikṣTib. The version used is that of the Derge edition.
#T. 1636, ''Dasheng ji pusa xue lun 大聲疾菩薩學論, a title that could perhaps be turned into Sanskrit as *''Mahāyāna-bodhisattva-Śikṣāsamuccaya-sūstra''. The work is ascribed to Facheng 法藏 (= Dharmakīrti?), and the translation was made by Fahu 法護 (= Dharmapāla?) et al. in the first half of the 11th cent. Hereafter referred to as ŚikṣChin.
#See Bendall 1897-1902: viii-xiii for references.
#Cecil Bendall & W. H. D. Rouse, tr., ''Śikṣā-samuccaya: A Compendium of Buddhist Doctrine''. London 1922. Referred to in this paper as BR.
# For details see Pfandt 1986: 94 f., 140f.
No abstract given. Here are the first relevant paragraphs:
The term ''bodhisattva'' means literally a 'being for awakening' or an 'enlightenment being', and while the etymology is uncertain, it may originally stem from the word ''bodhisakta'', one 'bound for' or 'devoted to' awakening (Harvey 2007: 58; Apte s.v. 'sakta': 1600).[1] It refers to one who aims to achieve the supreme, perfect awakening (''anuttarā-samyaksaṃbodhi'') of a buddha. Such a being discovers the Dharma without benefit of a teacher and introduces it into a world where it has been lost. Though considered an optional path in the Theravāda tradition, as well as in some earlier texts propounding the 'great vehicle' of the Mahāyāna (Nattier 2003: 176), in later Mahāyāna texts this is upheld as the goal for all practitioners. Indeed, in this literature the term
''mahāyāna'' is equated with the ''bodhisattva-yāna'', the 'vehicle of the bodhisattvas', or those whose goal is full Buddhahood. This is contrasted with both the 'vehicle of the disciples' (''śrāvaka-yāna''), intended for those who use the teachings of a buddha to gain the liberation and the more limited knowledge of an arhat, and the vehicle of the solitary buddhas (''pratyeka-yāna''), for beings who become liberated on their own, without the benefit of a buddha’s teachings.<br> There are many variations in the nature of the bodhisattva path (''mārga'') and its duration, but in general it was understood to require an immense number of lifetimes and to entail the cultivation of various virtues or perfections (''pāramitās''), the accomplishment of which is often associated with different stages (''bhūmis'') of the path. Also called the conduct (''bodhisattva-cārika'') or course of conduct of the bodhisattva (''bhadracarya'') (Edgerton, s.v. '' 'bhadracarya' ''), this path includes vows (''praṇidhāna'', ''praṇidhi'', ''pratijñā'', or ''saṃvara''), precepts (''śīla''), virtues or perfections (''pāramitās''), and devotional practices, though not all descriptions of the bodhisattva path include all elements. While some of the earlier bodhisattva literature seems not to have done so (Nattier 2003: 145–149) many bodhisattva texts emphasize the importance of the 'mind of awakening' or ''bodhicitta'', the altruistic motivation to liberate all beings from suffering, as the foundation for this demanding spiritual career. This points to what became in later Indian Mahāyāna, and now the Mahāyāna tradition more broadly, the central association between the bodhisattva ideal and universal compassion. Such compassion is articulated in the characteristic resolve of the bodhisattva to liberate all beings from suffering. This is perhaps most eloquently expressed in a well-known verse by Śāntideva:
:As long as space abides and as long as the world abides, <br> so long may I abide, destroying the sufferings of the world
::(BCA 10:55)
In contemporary Buddhism, the altruism of the bodhisattva has been taken to entail active participation in the social and political world. Such 'socially engaged Buddhism' is identified as one of the notable features of modern Buddhism (McMahon 2008: 14), particularly beginning in the mid-twentieth century (King 2009; King 2005; Queen 1996). Thich Nhat Hanh coined the term 'Engaged Buddhism' in 1954 to articulate his understanding of 'the role of Buddhism in the realms of education, economics, politics, and so on' (Nhat Hanh 2008: 30).<br> While the precise definition of 'engaged Buddhism' is still under debate, the term generally is associated with a modern form of Buddhism that recognizes and responds to the collective causes of suffering: the social, political, and economic conditions that give rise to human ills. As Christopher Queen suggests, Engaged Buddhism recognizes that 'suffering and its quenching are not the sole responsibility of the sufferer'
(Queen 2013: 328). In addressing the systemic and not just individual causes of suffering, Engaged Buddhism is characterized by activism to effect social change. (See Chapters 23 and 24 in this volume.)<br> Given these developments, this chapter explores the relationship between the altruism advocated and nurtured on the bodhisattva path and modern social engagement. In 'Do Bodhisattvas Alleviate Poverty?' (2003), Stephen Jenkins draws on a number of Indian Mahāyāna sutras (as well as mainstream sources) to persuasively argue that this literature does support an Engaged Buddhist agenda, at least with regard to the alleviation of poverty. A rejoinder by Amod Lele, however, uses evidence from the works of Śāntideva to argue that bodhisattvas are not directed to address the material causes of suffering (2013). I would like to extend this debate and offer a refined understanding of the question being addressed by taking into account recent critiques of the ways Engaged Buddhism has been defined and categorized. I will argue that it is legitimate to ask what kinds of social engagement are advocated in premodern texts, but that it may be anachronistic to seek for Engaged Buddhism in such literature, depending on how 'Engaged Buddhism' is understood. (Clayton, introduction, 135-37)
<h5>Notes</h5>
#I would like to thank Deborah Wills for comments on an early draft of this article, and in particular Steven Jenkins for his extensive and thoughtful critique. The limitations and errors that remain are my own.
No abstract given. Here are the first relevant paragraphs:
Whether our dharma practice will progress in the right direction depends on our attitude, our intention, our motivation. Motivation is extremely important: it is what everything stands or falls with. This is true not only in spiritual practice but in whatever we set out to do. Therefore, in Buddhist practice it is of utmost importance to continually correct and improve our attitude.
The attitude we need to cultivate is one that is suffused with ''bodhichitta'', or awakened heart and mind. This enlightened attitude has two aspects. The first aspect is the urge to purify our negativity: “I want to rid myself of all shortcomings, all ego-oriented emotions such as attachment, aggression, stupidity and all the rest.” The second aspect is the sincere desire to benefit all beings: “Having freed myself of all negative emotions, I will benefit all sentient beings. I will bring every sentient being to the state of complete enlightenment.” +
The Mahāyāna Buddhist thinker Śāntideva tells his audience to give out alcohol, weapons and sex for reasons of Buddhist compassion, though he repeatedly warns of the dangers of all these three. The article shows how Śāntideva resolves this issue: these gifts, and gifts in general, attract their recipients to the virtuous giver, in a way that helps the recipients to become more virtuous in the long run. As a consequence, Śāntideva does recommend the alleviation of poverty, but assigns it a much smaller significance than is usually supposed. His views run counter to many engaged Buddhist discussions of political action, and lend support to the "modernist" interpretation of engaged Buddhist practice. +
The compassionate treatment of animals has been the focal point of speeches and writings by one of the most influential Buddhist cleric-scholars on the Tibetan plateau today, Khenpo Tsultrim Lodrö of Larung Buddhist Academy. This essay surveys the Khenpo's broad-based advocacy for animal welfare and details his discrete appeals to nomads in eastern Tibet to forgo selling livestock for slaughter, to eat a vegetarian diet on religious holidays, to relinquish wearing animal fur, to protect wildlife habitat, and to liberate the lives of animals. I focus on the modernist "this worldly" dimension of his advocacy, calling attention to how Tsultrim Lodrö goes beyond traditional scare tactics that emphasize the karmic effects of negative deeds in future lives and instead invokes compassion by attending to the lived experience and suffering of animals. In doing so, the Khenpo positions Buddhism as a civilizing force in order to reform certain Tibetan customs and mitigate the influence of Chinese modernity and state marketization policies. I argue that his strategy of "reverse orientalism" appropriates state civilizational discourse and reverses its terms.
Read this article [https://www.academia.edu/35677927/The_Compassionate_Treatment_of_Animals_A_Contemporary_Buddhist_Approach_in_Eastern_Tibet here]. +
The Bible, Koran, Vedas, Avesta - not being literary works in the modern sense - served as sources of ideas, images, plots and inspiration for artists of subsequent eras, since these religious texts have enduring artistic value. They could not fulfill their task of persuading, preaching doctrine, if they did not have an emotional impact on their readers and listeners. The literature of Buddhism is no exception. The problem of the origin of religious texts is directly related to the problem of the origin of the religion itself, and hence to the personality of its founder. Buddha Shakyamuni is considered at the same time as a historical figure, the founder of Buddhism, who independently, without the help of any mentor or divine intervention, discovered for himself new, hitherto unknown spiritual truths and proclaimed them under the name of Dharma, or the Teachings of the Buddha, i.e. Buddha. e. Buddhism, and also as one of a number of Buddhas of a number of cosmic eras (Skt. kalpa). Therefore, the term "Word of the Buddha", and hence the expression "canonical literature" can be understood in two ways: in a broader and in a narrower sense, which is associated with the possibility of a dual understanding of the word "Buddha." If the word "Buddha" is understood as a designation of the state of Enlightenment experienced by any person, then the Word of the Buddha is any verbal characteristic or description of this state. If the Buddha is only the historical Buddha Shakyamuni, the founder of Buddhism, then the Word of the Buddha is limited to the limits of his sermons. Buddhism as a whole occupies an intermediate position between these two poles. (Source: [https://www.academia.edu/36243653/The_Compositional_and_Artistic_Characteristics_of_the_Samadhiraja_Sutra Academia]) +
This paper is a contribution to the study of the interpretation of the concept of ''Bodhicitta''. This concept is a technical term of frequent occurrence in Buddhist Sanskrit literature. Within the Mahayana Buddhist tradition, ''Bodhicitta'' is closely related to the spiritual practices of the Buddhist aspirant to enlightenment. The form of this study is as follows: first, the meaning of ''cittta'' in Therevada and Mahayana sutras, and the actual meaning if ''Bodhicitta''. Secondly, the meaning of ''Bodhicitta'' depicted in Mahāyāna Sūtras. Lastly, the Metaphors and Similes on ''Bodhicitta'' in the Mahāyāna Sūtras, and the types of ''Bodhicitta''. Such studies and practice could bring one to the realization that what is described by it is indeed the only possible reality. This means that ''Bodhicitta'' is the means to as well as the description of the goal to attain. +
No abstract given. Here are the first relevant paragraphs:
Śāntideva (eighth century C.E.) occupies a prominent position in the Indo-Tibetan pantheon of scholar-saints. This prominence is due primarily to the reception of his ''Bodhicaryāvatāra'' (''The way of the bodhisattva''). Citing traditional sources, the great fourteenth-century Tibetan historian Butön puts the number of Indian commentaries on the ''Bodhicaryāvatāra'' at one hundred.[1] In addition, every major school of Tibetan Buddhism produced its own commentarial literature. These commentaries, especially the material devoted to the penultimate chapter on the perfection of wisdom (''prajñā-pāramitā''), became sites of intense debate between the various Tibetan schools—each school defending an interpretation consistent with its own philosophical views. Śāntideva's exquisite descriptions of ''bodhicitta'', his psychological understanding, and his moral and meditative guidance also made his work of value to many whose practice did not include philosophical study. For these reasons the ''Bodhicaryāvatāra'' is thought to be "the most widely read, cited, and practiced text in the whole of the Indo-Tibetan Buddhist tradition."[2]<br> The continued significance of the ''Bodhicaryāvatāra'' is reflectcd in its many translations available in European languages; six English versions have been published since 1970. There are also a handful of commentaries by contemporary Tibetan scholars available in English, including two by Tenzin Gyatso, H.H. the Fourteenth Dalai Lama. Despite the attention it has received from the lndo-Tibetan tradition and contemporary translators there is little written by Western scholars on philosophical, ethical, or religious aspects of the ''Bodhicaryāvatāra''.[3] This lack is surprising given the current interest in Buddhist ethics and the long-standing European fascination with Mādhyamaka philosophy. Francis Brassard's study of ''bodhicitta'' is thus a welcome addition to the literature on the ''Bodhicaryāvatāra''.<br> In his introduction Brassard proposes two claims he will seek to demonstrate. First, although Buddhist religious and philosophical concepts do have functional uses they are not simply skillful means (''upāya'') to achieve liberation, as Michael Pye has argued. Some concepts actually describe reality and thus are more than provisional steps in a ladder to be discarded at a later stage. The concepts that interest Brassard are those that describe all possible experience on the path to enlightenment, which in Mādhyamaka include most famously emptiness (''śūnyatā'') and dependent origination (''pratītyasamutpāda''). Second, it is through the cultivation of awareness of these concepts that one is able to function effectively on the Buddhist path. Brassard claims that ''bodhicitta'', the desire to attain enlightenment for the sake of all sentient beings, is precisely such a concept: it describes reality, and its efficacy as a religious concept is achieved through the cultivation of awareness of the reality it describes.<br> ''Bodhicitta'' has sometimes been interpreted, by both some Mahāyāna traditions and contemporary scholars, as an act of will or an intense desire for enlightenment that motivates good conduct. Brassard critiques this interpretation on the basis of an analysis of '' 'citta' '' in a number of Buddhist texts and other Indian philosophical works. He wants to show what seems a rather uncontroversial point, that '' 'citta' '' has a much broader meaning than desire or volition. The meaning of '' 'citta' '' also includes the other active qualities of the mind, such as memory, imagination, mentaI activity, reflection, et cetera, as well as the latent habits and tendencies that constitute the passive aspects of the mind. '' 'Citta' '', and therefore ''bodhicitta'', cannot be solely a volition or desire but must be thought of as a state of mind. Brassard also critiques the idea that ''bodhicitta'' is simply an object of concentration. While meditating on ''bodhicitta'' may lead to an overcoming of the egoistic self and the neutralization of anger and hatred at the active level, Brassard argues that this process cannot liberate the latent states of mind from their problematic tendencies. [https://www.jstor.org/stable/1399865 Read more here]
<h5>Notes</h5>
#Bu ston, ''The History of Buddhism in India and Tibet'', trans. E. Obermiller (Delhi: Sri Satguru Publications, 1999), p. 166. Of these purported one hundred commentaries only eight had been translated into Tibetan when Butön compiled his history. With the exception of Prajñakaramati's ''Bodhicaryāvatārapañjikā'', there are only occasional fragments of commentaries that have survived in Sanskrit. For a list of the Indian commentaries that survive in whole or in part in the Tibetan bsTan gyur, see ''The Way of the Bodhisattva'', trans. Padmakara Group (Boston: Shambhala, 1997), pp. 211-212.
#Vesna A. Wallace and B. Allan Wallace, ''A Guide to the Bodhisattva Way of Life, by Śāntideva'' (Ithaca: Snow Lion Publications, 1997), p. 7.
#For an ''incomplete'' bibliography of works by and about Śāntideva, see Wallace and Wallace, ''A Guide to the Bodhisattva Way of Life'', pp. 145-151. The notable exception is Paul Williams, who has published two excellent books on Śāntideva and his Indian and Tibetan commentators: ''Altruism and Reality: Studies in the Philosophy of the Bodhicaryāvatāra'' (Richmond: Curzon Press, 1998) and ''The Reflexive Nature of Awareness: A Tibetan Mādhyamaka Defence'' (Richmond: Curzon Press, 1998).
No abstract given. Here are the first relevant paragraphs:
Explanatory and subjective, utilizing neither traditional Buddhist nor modern Western methodologies, incorporating translation terminologies and explanatory essays going back a hundred years, this essay on "the arising of mind" (''sic'') adds nothing to our understanding of Mahāyāna Buddhism or the text in question. The concept ''bodhicitta'' being indeed central to Mahāyāna Buddhism, the author feels free to take up any question, in any order, that occurs to him. One cannot discern any principle of organization, either traditional Buddhist, e.g., the "six perfections" of the BCA, nor any modern method. Neither the Tibetan translation, nor the Sanskrit commentary by Prajñākaramati, has been utilized. +
"''Tathāgatagarbha''" refers to a theory in Mahāyāna Buddhism which interprets the nature of the mind as intrinsically pure (unconditioned) yet defiled (conditioned). The objective of this theory is to link living beings with the Buddha, encouraging them to attain enlightenment. In the ''Śrīmālādevī-sūtra'', a major scriptural authority on Tathāgatagarbha, a correlation between the nature of Emptiness and the nature of mind is explicated. The devlopment of ideas first presented in the ''Śrīmālādevī-sūtra'' greatly influenced the evolution of the notion of ''ālayavijñāna'', the key concept in the second major Mahāyāna school known as ''Vijn̄ãnavāda''. It will be demonstrated that Tathāgatagarbha accounts for the possibility of change from a defiled to an enlightened state due to the two dimensions of the inherently pure nature of mind as "embryo" and "womb." +
