Академический Документы
Профессиональный Документы
Культура Документы
Buddha-nature , Buddha-dhatu or Buddha Principle (Skt: Buddha-dhtu,Tathgatagarbha; Jap: Bussho), is taught differently in various Mahayana Buddhismtraditions. Broadly speaking Buddha-nature is concerned with ascertaining what allowssentient beings to become Buddhas.[1] The term, Buddha nature, is a translation of the Sanskrit coinage, 'Buddha-dhtu', which seems first to have appeared in the Mahayana Mahaparinirvana Sutra,[2] where it refers to 'a sacred nature that is the basis for [beings'] becoming buddhas.'[3]
Contents [hide] 1 Etymology 2 Development of the concept of Buddha-nature 2.1 Early Indian Buddhism 2.1.1 Nikayas - Luminous mind 2.1.2 Abhidhamma - The seed of awakening 2.2 Indian Mahayana 2.2.1 Avatamsaka Sutra 2.2.2 Tathgatagarbha Sutras 2.2.2.1 Tathgatagarbha Stra 2.2.2.2 rmldev Stra 2.2.2.3 Mahparinirva Stra 2.2.2.4 Ratnagotravibhga (Uttaratantra) 2.2.3 Lotus Sutra 2.2.4 Trikaya 2.2.5 Tathagatagarbha and Alayavijnana 2.2.5.1 Lankavatara-sutra 2.2.5.2 The Awakening of Faith 2.2.6 Tantra 2.2.6.1 Mahvairocana Stra 2.3 Chinese Mahayana 3 Interpretation within Buddhist traditions 3.1 Indian Mahayana Buddhism 3.1.1 Prajna-paramita sutras 3.1.2 Madhyamaka 3.1.3 Yogacara 3.2 Tibetan Buddhism 3.2.1 Nyingma 3.2.2 Kagyu 3.2.3 Gelukpa 3.2.4 Jonangpa 3.2.5 Dzogchen 3.2.6 The Rim movement 3.3 Chinese Buddhism 3.3.1 Tiantai 3.3.2 Chn 3.3.2.1 Lankavatara Sutra 3.3.2.2 Alayavijna 3.3.2.3 Vajrasamadhi-sutra (685 CE) 3.3.2.4 Contemporary Chn/Zen-understanding 3.4 Japanese Buddhism 3.4.1 Nichiren Buddhism
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tathagatagarbha 1/14
10/17/13
3.4.2 Zen Buddhism 4 Modern scholarship 4.1 Essential self 4.2 Sunyata 4.3 Critical Buddhism 4.4 Multiple meanings 5 See also 6 Notes 7 References 8 Sources 9 Further reading 10 External links
Etymology
[edit]
Buddha-nature (Classical Chinese: , modern pinyin f xng) literally corresponds to theSanskrit Buddha-dhtu "Buddha Element", "Buddha-Principle", but seems to have been used most frequently to translate the Sanskrit "Tathgatagarbha". The Sanskrit term "tathgatagarbha" may be parsed into tathgata ("the one thus gone", referring to the Buddha) and garbha ("womb").[a] The latter has the meanings: "embryo", "essence";[4] whilst the former may be parsed into "tath" ("[s]he who has there"[clarification needed] and "gata" (semantic field: "come", "arrived") and/or "gata" ("gone").[5] For the various equivalents of the Sanskrit term "tathgatagarbha" in other languages (Chinese, Japanese, Vietnamese), see Glossary of Buddhism, "tathagatagarbha" The usual term for buddha nature in the Mahayana teachings is tathagatagarbha, but in theVajrayana the term is sugatagarbha.[6]
[edit]
The idea of Buddha-nature originated in India, and was further developed in China, due to the different culture Buddhism had to adapt to. It was the result of an interplay between various strands of Buddhist thought, on the nature of human consciousness and the means of awakening.
[edit]
10/17/13
stipulates that there is no underlying self, while the idea of karma and rebirth seems to implicate an underlying essence that's being reborn. A solution to this problem was the proposition of the existence of k armic seeds . The karmic effects of the human deeds lay dormant, as seeds, until they germinate in this or a next life. Not an individual self, but these karmic seeds are the base for the generation of a following life. This concept of "seeds" was espoused by the Sautrntika in debate with the Sarvstivdinsover the metaphysical status of phenomena (dharmas ). It is a precursor to the laya-vijna, the store-consciousness of the Yogcra school which contains all these seeds.[11]Originally laya-vijna simply meant defiled consciousness: defiled by the workings of the five senses and the mind. It was also seen as the mla-vijna, the baseconsciousness or "stream of consciousness" from which awareness and perception spring.[12] According to Yogacara, awakening is the result of a seed that comes from outside the human psyche, namely by hearing the teaching.[8]
Indian Mahayana
[edit]
10/17/13
this term is employed.[7] Gregory comments on this origin of the Tathagatagarba-doctrine: The implication of this doctrine [...] is that enlightenment is the natural and true state of the mind.[8] The early Buddha-nature concept as expressed in the seminal 'tathagatagarbha sutra' named the Nirvana Sutra is, according to Kevin Trainor, as follows: 'Sentient beings are said to possess a sacred nature that is the basis for them becoming buddhas ... this buddhanature is in fact our true nature ... universal and completely unsullied by whatever psychological and karmic state an individual may be in.'[3] The tathagatagarbha-sutras originated in India, but their ideas were more influential in the development of East Asian Buddhism.[16] The earliest tathagata-garbha sutra is the Tathgatagarbha Stra.[17] The most important of those sutras is The Lion's Roar of Queen Srimala.[18][17] Another influential sutra, especially in Chinese thought, is the Mahparinirva Stra[19]. The Uttaratantra gives a synthesis of tathagatagarbha-thought[13], and gives an overview of authoritative tathagatagarbha sutras.[19]
10/17/13
teachings. This sutra was understood to postulate an underlying essence, 'the true Self', as it sometimes terms the Buddha-nature of all beings, though this sutra is ambivalent. The Mahyna Mahparinirva Stra states that Buddha-nature is everlasting, pure and blissful, and is 'the Self of living beings'.[29] The self of which the Buddha speaks is said by him to be the "essential intrinsic being" (svabhava) or even "lifeessence" (jvak a) of each person, and this essential being is none other than the Buddha himself - "radiantly luminous" and "as indestructible as a diamond".[30] The Buddha-nature is taught to be an ultimate, conceptually inconceivable, immortal reality.[29] But the Mahaparinirvana-sutra also contrasts its doctrine of the True Self with that of theAstik as . The Astikas were the orthodox teachings of India, embracing the idea of Atman. The sutra rejects the idea of the self as an indwelling miniature man, a homunculus: Mundane [philosophers] mistakenly imagine it to be a person (purua) the size of a thumb, the size of a pea or a grain of rice that dwells shining in the heart.[30] This, the Buddha says, is a misconception of the nature of self, for: That opinion of theirs is a mistaken opinion, one that is transmitted onwards from person to person, but it is neither beneficial nor conducive to happiness.... Worldly beings do not comprehend the reality of the Self (tma-tattva); they fall under the sway of unwholesome friends, and do not understand the [Tathgatas] utterances with implicit meaning, they meditatively cultivate the notion that they lack the Self, even though there is the Self.[30]
10/17/13
Trikaya [edit]
Mahayana Buddhism developed new ideas on the appearance of the Buddha. These ideas first appeared in the Lotus Sutra, which distinguishes between the heavenly Buddha and earthly Buddhas.[33] Around 300 CE, the Yogacara school systematized the prevalent ideas on the nature of the Buddha in the Trikaya or three-body doctrine. According to this doctrine, Buddhahood has three aspects:[34] 1. The Nirmana-kaya, or Transformation-body, 2. The Sambhogakya, or Enjoyment-body, 3. The Dharmakya, or Dharma-body. The Transformation-body is the earthly manifestation of the Buddha. The Enjoyment-body is a subtle body, by which the Buddha appears to bodhisattvas to teach them. The Dharma-body refers to both the ultimate nature of the Buddha, and to the ultimate nature of reality [citation needed]: The first is the 'Knowledge-body' (Jnana-k aya), the inner nature shared by all Buddhas, their Buddhaness (buddhata) [...] The second aspect of the Dharma-body is the 'Self-existent-body' (Svabhavik a-k aya). This is the ultimate nature of reality, thusness, emptiness: the non-nature which is the very nature of dharmas , their dharma-ness (dharmata). It is the Tathagata-garbha and bodhi-citta hidden within beings, and the transformed 'storehouse-consciousness'.
Lankavatara-sutra [edit]
The Lankavatara Sutra (compiled 350-400 CE[35]) synthesized the tathagatagarba-doctrine and the alija-vijnana doctrine. The alija-vijnana is supposed to contain the pure seed, or tathagatagarbha, from which awakening arises.[8] The Lankavatara-sutra contains tathagata-garba thought, but also warns against reification of the idea of Buddhanature, and presents it as an aid to attaining awakening: Is not this Tathagata-garbha taught by the Blessed One the same as the ego-substance taught by the philosophers? The ego as taught by the philosophers is an eternal creator, unqualified, omnipresent, and imperishable. The Blessed One replied: [...] it is emptiness, reality-limit, Nirvana, being unborn, unqualified, and devoid of will-effort; the reason why the Tathagatas [...] teach the doctrine pointing to the Tathagatagarba is to make the ignorant cast aside their fear when they listen to the teaching of egolessness and to have them realise the state of non-discrimination and imagelessness [36] According to Wayman & Wayman, the equation of tathagatagarbha and alijavijnana in the Lankavatara fails: It is plain that when the Lank avatara-sutra identifies the two terms, this scripture necessarily diverges in the meaning of one or both of the terms from the usage of the term Tathagatagarbha in the earlier SriMala or of the termalayavijnana in the subsequent Yogacara school.[37]
10/17/13
Chinese Buddhism.[39] It tried to harmonize the ideas of the tathgatagarbha and layavijna: In the words of the Awakening of Faith which summarizes the essentials of Mahayana self and world, mind and suchness, are integrally one. Everything is a carrier of that a priori enlightenment; all incipient enlightenment is predicated on it. The mystery of existence is, then, not, How may we overcome alienation? The challenge is, rather, Why do we think we are lost in the first place?[39]
Tantra [edit]
Mahvairocana Stra [edit]
The Mahvairocana Stra (7th century) mentions the self in a very affirmative manner: Those who have been initiated into the Mahayana Mandala Arising from Great Compassion, who are honest and pliant, and who always have great compassion [...] They know their hearts to be the Great Self.[40]
Chinese Mahayana
[edit]
When Buddhism was introduced to China, in the 1st century CE, Buddhism was understood through comparisons of its teachings to Chinese terms and ways of thinking. Immortality and emptiness, central notions in Taosm, gave a frame of reference for the understanding of reincarnation and sunyata. In the Chinese thinking of that time reincarnation was only possible if there was a soul or essence to reincarnate. Early Chinese Buddhism therefore assumed that this was also the teaching of the Buddha. In the 6th century CE it dawned that anatman and sunyata are central Buddhist teachings, which make the postulation of an eternal self problematic.Template:Lai Another point of confusion was the Two truths doctrine of Madhyamaka, the relative truth and the absolute truth. Chinese thinking took this to refer to two ontological truths : reality exists of two levels, a relative level and an absolute level. But in Madhyamaka these are twoepistemological truths : two different ways to look at reality. Based on their understanding of the Mahayana Mahaparinirvana Sutra the Chinese supposed that the teaching of the Buddha-nature was, as stated by that sutra, the final Buddhist teaching, and that there is an essential truth above sunyata and the two truths.[41] Halfway through the 6th century CE the Awak ening of Faith in the Mahayana took shape, in which a synthesis was offered of Chinese buddhist thinking. In the Awakening of Faith the 'one mind' has two aspects, namely tathata, suchness, the things as they are, and samsara, the cycle of birth and death.[42] This sutra was in line with an essay by emperor Wu of theLiang Dynasty (reign 502-549 CE), in which he postulated a pure essence, the enlightened mind, trapped in darkness, which is ignorance. By this ignorance the pure mind is trapped in samsara. This resembles the tathagata-garba and the idea of the defilement of the luminous mind.[39] In a commentary on this essay Shen Yue stated that insight into this true essence is awakened by stopping the thoughts - a point of view which is also being found in thePlatform Sutra of Hui-neng.[42] The joining together of these different ideas supported the notion of the Lotus ek ayana, the one vehicle: absolute oneness, all-pervading Buddha-wisdom and original enlightenment as a holistic whole. This synthesis was a reflection of the unity which was attained in China with the united Song Dynasty.[43]
[edit]
[edit]
7/14
10/17/13
The prajna-paramita sutras, which emerged from the 1st century BCE on, reject the idea of an eternal self or underlying essence. They emphasize the notion of emptiness. According to Kalupahana they are an early reaction to the "emergence of absolutist tendencies".[12] The Sutra of Perfect Wisdom, also called The Questions of Suvik rantavik ramin, states it's view on the self in this way: [O]ne who wisely knows himself (atmanam) as nondual, he wisely knows both Buddha and Dharma. And why? He develops a personality which consists of all dharmas [...] His nondual comprehension comprehends all dharmas, for all dharmas are fixed on the Self in their own-being. One who wisely knows the nondual dharma wisely knows also the Buddhadharmas. From the comprehension of the nondual dharma follows the comprehension of the Buddhadharmas and from the comprehension of the Self the comprehension of everything that belongs to the triple world. "The comprehension of Self", that is the beyond of all dharmas.[44]
Madhyamaka [edit]
It is possible to do a Madhyamaka interpretation of tathgatagarbha literature.[45] According to Kalupahana, the Madhyamaka of Nagarjuna, but also the Yogacara ofVasubandhu are a later reaction to the "emergence of absolutist tendencies". Nagarjuna's work is founded on the prajnaparamita-sutras, which reach back to the anatmandoctrine.[12][35]
Yogacara [edit]
Vasubandhu gives an analysis of the workings of the human mind and consciousness, based on the analysis of the working of the five skandhas. Vasubandhu's original analysis leaves ample room for the proposition of a transcendent essence[c], but was interpreted in an idealist way by later followers.[12][35] To account for the notion of Buddha-nature in all beings, with the Yogacara belief in the Five Categories of Beings, Yogacara scholars in China such as Tz'u-en (, 632-682) the first patriarch in China, advocated two types of nature: the latent nature found in all beings () and the Buddha-nature in practice (). The latter nature was determined by the innate seeds listed above.[46]
Tibetan Buddhism
[edit]
According to the Nyingma and Sakya schools, tathgatagarbha is the inseparability of the clarity and emptiness of one's mind. According to the Gelug school, it is the potential for sentient beings to awaken since they are empty (i.e. dependently originated). According to the Jonang school, it refers to the innate qualities of the mind which expresses itself in terms of omniscience etc. when adventitious obscurations are removed.
Nyingma [edit]
Speaking for the Tibetan Nyingma tradition, Tulku Urgyen Rinpoche sees an identity between the Buddhanature, Dharmadhtu (essence of all phenomena and the noumenon) and thethree vajras , saying: Dharmadhatu is adorned with dharmakaya, which is endowed with dharmadhatu wisdom. This is a brief but very profound statement, because "dharmadhatu" also refers to sugata-garbha or buddha nature. Buddha nature is all-encompassing ... This buddha nature is present just as the shining sun is present in the sky. It is indivisible from the three vajras [i.e. the Buddha's Body, Speech and Mind] of the awakened state, which do not perish or change.[47] The Nyingma meditation masters, Khenchen Palden Sherab and Khenpo Tsewang Dongyal, emphasise that the essential nature of the mind (the Buddha-nature) is not a blankness, but is characterised by wonderful qualities and a
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tathagatagarbha 8/14
10/17/13
perfection that is already present and complete: The nature of the mind is not hollow or blank; it is profound and blissful and full of wonderful qualities... meditation practice reveals our true nature as being totally perfect and complete.[48] They add: The true nature of mind is beyond conception, yet it is present in every object. The true nature is always there, but due to our temporary obscurations we do not recognize it ... The primordial nature is beyond conceptions; it cannot be explained ... cannot be encompassed by words. Although you can say it is clarity and vastness, you cannot see it or touch it; it is beyond expression.[49]
Kagyu [edit]
In the Tibetan Kagyu tradition, Thrangu Rinpoche sees the Buddha nature as the indivisible oneness of wisdom and emptiness: The union of wisdom and emptiness is the essence of Buddha-hood or what is called Buddha-nature (Skt. Tathagata-garbha) because it contains the very seed, the potential of Buddhahood. It resides in each and every being and because of this essential nature, this heart nature, there is the possibility of reaching Buddhahood.[50]
Gelukpa [edit]
The 14th Dalai Lama, representing the Gelukpa School of Tibetan Buddhism, and speaking from the Madhyamaka philosophical position, sees the Buddha-nature as the "original clear light of mind", but points out that it ultimately does not exist independently, because, like all other phenomena, it is of the nature of emptiness: Once one pronounces the words "emptiness" and "absolute", one has the impression of speaking of the same thing, in fact of the absolute. If emptiness must be explained through the use of just one of these two terms, there will be confusion. I must say this; otherwise you might think that the innate original clear light as absolute truth really exists.[51]
Jonangpa [edit]
The Jonangpa School of Tibetan Buddhism, whose foremost historical figure was the Tibetan scholar-monk Dolpopa, sees the Buddha-nature as the very ground of the Buddha himself, as the "permanent indwelling of the Buddha in the basal state".[52] Dolpopa comments that certain key tathgatagarbha sutras indicate this truth. Moreover, the Buddhist tantric scripture entitled Chanting the Names of Majur (Majur-nma-sagti), repeatedly exalts, as portrayed by Dolpopa, not the non-Self but the Self, and applies the following terms to this ultimate reality : 'The Buddha-Self, the beginningless Self, the solid Self, the diamond Self'. These terms are applied in a manner which reflects the cataphatic approach to Buddhism, typical of much of Dolpopa's writings.[53] Dolpopa further expressed the viewpoint that the Buddha-nature transcends the chain of dependent origination. It is not empty of its own ultimately real essence, but only of extraneous, transitory and relative phenomena. Dr. Cyrus Stearns writes on Dolpopa's attitude to the 'third turning of the wheel' doctrines (i.e. the Buddha-nature teachings): The Third Turning of the Dharma Wheel presented the teachings on the Buddha nature, which are the final definitive statements on the nature of ultimate reality, the primordial ground or substratum beyond the chain of dependent origination, and which is only empty of other, relative phenomena.'[54] In the Ghanavyuha Sutra (as quoted by Longchenpa) this Buddha essence is said to be the ground of all things:
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tathagatagarbha 9/14
10/17/13
... the ultimate universal ground also has always been with the Buddha-Essence (Tathagatagarbha), and this essence in terms of the universal ground has been taught by the Tathagata. The fools who do not know it, because of their habits, see even the universal ground as (having) various happiness and suffering and actions and emotional defilements. Its nature is pure and immaculate, its qualities are as wishing-jewels; there are neither changes nor cessations. Whoever realizes it attains Liberation ...[55]
Dzogchen [edit]
Germano relates Dzogchen, via Buddha-nature to Madhyamaka, Yogachara andAbhinavagupta: ...the Great Perfection represents the most sophisticated interpretation of the so-called "Buddha nature" tradition within the context of Indo-Tibetan thought, and as such, is of extreme importance for research into classical esoteric philosophic systems such as Madhyamaka and Yogacara, while also providing fertile grounds for future explorations of the interconnections between Indo-Tibetan and East Asian forms of Buddhism, as well as between Indo-Tibetan Buddhism and contemporary Indian developments such as the tenth century non-dual Shaivism of Abhinavagupta.[56] The 19th/20th-century Tibetan Buddhist scholar, Shechen Gyaltsap Gyurme Pema Namgyal, sees the Buddha nature as ultimate truth,[57] nirvana, which is constituted of profundity, primordial peace and radiance: Buddha-nature is immaculate. It is profound, serene, unfabricated suchness, an uncompounded expanse of luminosity; nonarising, unceasing, primordial peace, spontaneously present nirvana.[58]
Chinese Buddhism
Tiantai [edit]
[edit]
Based on the metaphors of the Lotus Sutra, Tiantai developed the teaching of revealing the Buddha nature in one's current form.[61]
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tathagatagarbha 10/14
10/17/13
Chn [edit]
In Chinese Chan Buddhism the Buddha-nature tends to be seen as the essential nature of all beings. But the Zen tradition also emphasizes that Buddha-nature is Sunyata, the absence of an independent and substantial "self".[39].
Alayavijna [edit]
So as described in the Lak vatra Stra,[63] in Chan/Zen the tathgatagarbha is identical to the layavijna, known prior to awakening as the storehouse-consciousness or 8th consciousness. Chan/Zen masters from Huineng in 7th-century China[64] to Hakuin in 18th-century Japan[65]to Hsu Yun in 20thcentury China,[66] have all taught that the process of awakening begins with the light of the mind turning around within the 8th consciousness, so that thelayavijna, also known as the tathgatagarbha, is transformed into the "bright mirror wisdom". When this active transformation is complete the other seven consciousnesses are also transformed. The 7th consciousness of delusive discrimination becomes transformed into the "equality wisdom". The 6th consciousness of thinking sense becomes transformed into the "profound observing wisdom", and the 1st to 5th consciousnesses of the five sensory senses become transformed into the "all-performing wisdom".
10/17/13
[70]
Japanese Buddhism
[edit]
10/17/13
Modern scholarship
[edit]
Modern scholarship points to the various possible interpretations of Buddha Nature as either an essential self, as Sunyata, or as the inherent possibility of awakening.
Essential self
[edit]
Shenpen Hookham, Oxford Buddhist scholar and Tibetan lama of the Shentong tradition writes of the Buddha-nature or "true self" as something real and permanent, and already present within the being as uncompounded enlightenment. She calls it "the Buddha within", and comments: In scriptural terms, there can be no real objection to referring to Buddha, Buddhajnana [Buddha Awareness/ Buddha Knowledge], Nirvana and so forth as the True Self, unless the concept of Buddha and so forth being propounded can be shown to be impermanent, suffering, compounded, or imperfect in some way ... in Shentong terms, the non-self is about what is not the case, and the Self of the Third Dharmachakra [i.e. the Buddha-nature doctrine] is about what truly IS.[81] Buddhist scholar and chronicler, Merv Fowler, writes that the Buddha-nature really is present as an essence within each being. Fowler comments: The teaching that Buddha-nature is the hidden essence within all sentient beings is the main message of the tathagatagarbha literature, the earliest of which is the Tathagatagarbha Sutra. This short sutra says that all living beings are in essence identical to the Buddha regardless of their defilements or their continuing transmigration from life to life... As in the earlier traditions, there is present the idea that enlightenment, or nirvana, is not something which has to be achieved, it is something which is already there... In a way, it means that everyone is really a Buddha now.[82]
Sunyata
[edit]
According to Heng-Ching Shih, the tathgatagarbha/Buddha nature does not represent a substantial self (tman). Rather, it is a positive language expression of emptiness (nyat), which emphasizes the potentiality to realize Buddhahood through Buddhist practices. The intention of the teaching of tathgatagarbha/Buddha nature is soteriological rather than theoretical.[83] Paul Williams puts forward the Madhyamaka interpretation of the Buddha-nature as emptiness in the following terms: if one is a Madhyamika then that which enables sentient beings to become buddhas must be the very factor that enables the minds of sentient beings to change into the minds of Buddhas. That which enables things to change is their simple absence of inherent existence, their emptiness. Thus the tathagatagarbha becomes emptiness itself, but specifically emptiness when applied to the mental continuum.[84]
Critical Buddhism
[edit]
According to Matsumoto Shiro and Hakamaya Noriaki, essentialist conceptions of Buddha-nature are at odds with the fundamental Buddhist doctrine of dependent origination.[85][86]Sallie B King objects to their view. She sees the Buddha-nature as a metaphor for the potential in all beings to attain Buddhahood, rather than as an ontological reality.[87] This view of the Buddha-nature as non-Buddhist is termed Critical Buddhism. Paul Williamshas criticised this view, saying that Critical Buddhism is too narrow in its definition of what constitutes Buddhism. According to Williams,
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tathagatagarbha 13/14
10/17/13
We should abandon any simplistic identification of Buddhism with a straightforward not-Self definition".[88]
Multiple meanings
[edit]
Sutton agrees with this critique on the narrowness of interpretation. In discussing the inadequacy of modern scholarship on Buddha-nature, Sutton states, One is impressed by the fact that these authors, as a rule, tend to opt for a single meaning disregarding all other possible meanings which are embraced in turn by other texts".[89] He goes on to point out that the term tathgatagarbha has up to six possible connotations. Of these, he says the three most important are: 1. an underlying ontological reality or essential nature (tathgata-tathat-'vyatirek a) which is functionally equivalent to a self (tman) in an Upanishadic sense, 2. the dharma-k ya which penetrates all beings (sarva-sattveu dharma-k ya-parispharaa), which is functionally equivalent to brahman in an Upanishadic sense 3. the womb or matrix of Buddhahood existing in all beings (tathgata-gotra-sabhava), which provides beings with the possibility of awakening.[90][91] Of these three, Sutton claims that only the third connotation has any soteriological significance, while the other two posit Buddha-nature as an ontological reality and essential nature behind all phenomena.[9
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tathagatagarbha
14/14