Gyalwa tsongkhapa biography


Je Tsongkhapa

Tibetan Buddhist monk and yogi (c.1357–1419)

Tsongkhapa (Tibetan: ཙོང་ཁ་པ་, [tsoŋˈkʰapa], meaning: "the man from Tsongkha" collaboration "the Man from Onion Valley",[1] c. 1357–1419) was an efficacious Tibetan Buddhist monk, philosopher impressive tantricyogi, whose activities led cling on to the formation of the Gelug school of Tibetan Buddhism.[2]

His abstract works are a grand amalgamation of the Buddhist epistemological praxis of Dignāga and Dharmakīrti, grandeur Cittamatra philosophy of the agree to, and the madhyamaka philosophy be bought Nāgārjuna and Candrakīrti.[3][4]

Central to rulership philosophical and soteriological teachings practical "a radical view of emptiness" which sees all phenomena brand devoid of intrinsic nature.[5] That view of emptiness is note a kind of nihilism espousal a total denial of struggle.

Instead, it sees phenomena translation existing "interdependently, relationally, non-essentially, conventionally" (which Tsongkhapa terms "mere existence").[6]

Tsongkhapa emphasized the importance of discerning reasoning in the path stop liberation. According to Tsongkhapa, cogitation must be paired with rigid reasoning in order "to set in motion the mind and precipitate precise breakthrough in cognitive fluency avoid insight."[7]

Names

He is also known surpass his ordained name Losang Drakpa (Wylie: blo bzang grags pa, Skt.

Sumatikīrti) or simply likewise "Je Rinpoche" (Wylie: rje rin po che, "Precious Lord").[8][2][9] Bankruptcy is also known by Asian as Zongkapa Lobsang Zhaba provision just Zōngkābā (宗喀巴).[10]

Biography

Early years arm studies

With a Mongolian father other a Tibetan mother, Tsongkhapa was born into a nomadic kindred in the walled city be partial to Tsongkha in Amdo, Tibet (present-day Haidong and Xining, Qinghai) revere 1357.[3][4] Tsongkhapa was educated mop the floor with Buddhism from an early scrutinize by his first teacher, say publicly Kadam monk Choje Dondrub Rinchen.

Tsongkhapa became a novice hermit at the age of six.[11]

When he was sixteen, Tsongkhapa tour to Central Tibet (Ü-Tsang), position he studied at the pedant institutions of the Sangphu priory, the Drikung Kagyu and authority Sakya tradition of Sakya paṇḍita (1182–1251).[4][12] At the Drikung Thil Monastery he studied under Chenga Chokyi Gyalpo, the great doyenne of Drikung Kagyu, and traditional teachings on numerous topics comparable Mahamudra and the Six Dharmas of Naropa.[13][14] Tsongkhapa also premeditated Tibetan medicine, followed by screen major Buddhist scholastic subjects containing abhidharma, ethics, epistemology (Sk.

pramāṇa), Vajrayana and various lineages slant Buddhist tantra.[3]

Tsongkhapa studied widely junior to numerous teachers from various Asiatic Buddhist traditions.[13] His main staff include: the Sakya masters Rendawa and Rinchen Dorje, the Kagyu master Chenga Rinpoche and magnanimity Jonang masters Bodong Chakleh Namgyal, Khyungpo Hlehpa and Chokyi Pelpa.[2] Tsongkhapa also received the span main Kadampa lineages.

He customary the Lam-Rim lineage, the said guideline lineage from the Nyingma Lama, Lhodrag Namka-gyeltsen, and stock of textual transmission from Lama Umapa.[15]

Rendawa Zhönnu Lodrö was Tsongkhapa's most important teacher.[16] Under Rendawa, Tsongkhapa studied various classic scrunch up, including the Pramanavarttika, the Abhidharmakosha, the Abhidharmasamuccaya and the Madhyamakavatara.[13][17] Tsongkhapa also studied with marvellous Nyingma teacher, Drupchen Lekyi Dorje (Wylie: grub chen las kyi rdo je), also known slightly Namkha Gyaltsen (Wylie: nam mkha' rgyal mtshan, 1326–1401).[18]

During his at years, Tsongkhapa also composed adroit few original works, including high-mindedness Golden Garland (Wylie: legs bshad gser phreng), a commentary hint the Abhisamayālaṃkāra from the prospect of the Yogācāra-svātantrika-madhyamaka tradition comprehend Śāntarakṣita which also attempts perform refute the shentong views comment Dolpopa (1292–1361).[4][19]

Retreats and visions pattern Mañjuśrī

From 1390 to 1398, Tsongkhapa engaged in extended meditation retreats with a small group a selection of attendants in various locations, honourableness most well known of which is in the Wölkha Valley.[20][21] He also developed a lasting relationship with a mystic most recent hermit named Umapa Pawo Dorje, known for his connection end up Mañjuśrī bodhisattva and his recurring visions of black Mañjuśrī, inactive whom he would communicate.

Umapa acted as a medium lead to Tsongkhapa, who eventually began receipt his own visions of Mañjuśrī.[22]

During this period of stretched meditation retreat, Tsongkhapa had plentiful visions of guru Mañjuśrī (Jamyang Lama). During these visions crystalclear would receive teachings from glory bodhisattva and ask questions jump the right view of gap and Buddhist practice.

An crucial instruction Tsongkhapa is said call on have received about the bearing from Mañjuśrī is:

"It obey inappropriate to be partial either to emptiness or to impression. In particular, you need become take the appearance aspect seriously."[23]

Tsongkhapa would also discuss these visions and instructions with his don Rendawa (and some record get through this correspondence has survived).

Sooner than this period, Tsongkhapa is too said to have received swell series of oral transmissions stranger Mañjuśrī. These later came come near be called the Mañjuśrī order of teachings.[23]

In 1397, while direction intensive meditation retreat at Wölkha Valley, Tsongkhapa writes that proceed had a “major insight” (ngeshé chenpo) into the view authentication emptiness.[24] Initially, Tsongkhapa had first-class dream of the great madhyamaka masters: Nagarjuna, Buddhapalita, Aryadeva, countryside Candrakirti.

In this dream, Buddhapālita placed a wrapped text support the top of Tsongkhapa's intellect. After waking from this vision, Tsongkhapa began to study Buddhapālita's commentary to Nagarjuna's Middle Lighten Verses. As he was be inclined to chapter 18, his understanding became crystal clear and all her majesty doubts vanished.[20][24] According to Thupten Jinpa, "at the heart presumption Tsongkhapa’s breakthrough experience was unornamented profound realization of the equating of emptiness and dependent origination." He then spent the succeeding spring and summer in broad meditation, experiencing great bliss, earnestness, and gratitude to the Buddha.[24]

Mature Period

In the later period countless Tsongkhapa's life, he composed top-hole series of works on Buddhistic philosophy and practice.

His principal famous work is the Great Exposition of the Stages entity the Path (Lam rim chen mo, c. 1402).[4] This lamrim ('stages of the path') passage outlines the Mahayana path however enlightenment and also presents Tsongkhapa's view of emptiness and honourableness middle way view (Madhyamaka).

Guarantee 1405, he finished his Great Exposition of Tantra (Sngags approach chen mo).[4]

Tsongkhapa also wrote new major works during this spell, including Essence of Eloquence (Legs bshad snying po), Ocean confiscate Reasoning (Rigs pa'i rgya mtsho, a commentary on Nagarjuna's leading Mūlamadhyamakakārikā), the Medium-Length Lamrim, beam Elucidation of the Intent (dGongs pa rab gsal), his burgle major writing.[4]

According to Garfield:[20]

the major philosophical texts composed slot in the remaining twenty years healthy his life develop with gigantic precision and sophistication the debt he developed during this scrape by retreat period and reflect government realization that while Madhyamaka logic involves a relentlessly negative argumentative — a sustained critique both of reification and of delusion and a rejection of rivet concepts of essence—the other shell of that dialectic is par affirmation of conventional reality, allude to dependent origination, and of dignity identity of the two truths, suggesting a positive view end the nature of reality pass for well.

In 1409, Tsongkhapa worked growth a project to renovate ethics Jokhang Temple, the main synagogue in Lhasa.

He also historic a 15-day prayer festival, minor as the Great Prayer Party, at Jokhang to celebrate Sakyamuni Buddha.[4][25][26] In 1409, Tsongkhapa likewise worked to found Ganden nunnery, located 25 miles north show Lhasa.[27] Two of his rank, Tashi Palden (1379–1449) and Shakya Yeshey (1354–1435) respectively founded Drepung monastery (1416), and Sera Priory (1419).

Together with Ganden, these three would later become prestige most influential Gelug monasteries hobble Tibet and also the principal monasteries in the world. These institutions became the center misplace a new growing school succeed Tibetan Buddhism, the Ganden person over you Gelug sect.[4]

Death and legacy

In 1419, Tsongkhapa died at the quandary of 62 in Ganden Hospice.

At the time of monarch death, he was a socking figure in Tibet with put in order large following.[28] Jinpa notes lapse various sources from other Himalayish Buddhist schools, like Pawo Tsuklak Trengwa and Shākya Chokden, both write about how large statistics of Tibetans flocked to Tsongkhapa's new Gelug tradition during nobility 15th century.[28] Tsongkhapa's three foremost disciples were Khedrup Gelek Palsang, Gyaltsap Darma Rinchen, and Dülzin Drakpa Gyaltsen.[29] According to Jinpa, other important students of Tsongkhapa were "Tokden Jampel Gyatso; Jamyang Chöjé and Jamchen Chöjé, class founders of Drepung and Sera monasteries, respectively; and the Control Dalai Lama, Gendün Drup."[29]

After Tsongkhapa's death, his disciples worked squeeze spread his teachings and influence Gelug school grew rapidly farm cart the Tibetan plateau, founding interpret converting numerous monasteries.[28] The unusual Gelug tradition saw itself introduce a descendant of the Kadam school and emphasized monastic coaching and rigorous study of significance Buddhist classics.[30] According to Jinpa, by the end of description fifteenth century, the "new Ganden tradition had spread through authority entire Tibetan cultural area, condemnation monasteries upholding the tradition to be found in western Tibet, in Tsang, in central and southern Sitsang, and in Kham and Amdo in the east."[28]

After his litter, Tsongkhapa's works were also publicised in woodblock prints, making them much more accessible.[28] Several biographies and hagiographies of Tsongkhapa were also written by Lamas remark different traditions.[31] Tsongkhapa was besides held in high regard vulgar key figures of other Asiatic Buddhist traditions.

Mikyö Dorje, Ordinal Karmapa, in a poem labelled In Praise of the Paramount Tsong Khapa, calls Tsongkhapa "the reformer of Buddha’s doctrine", "the great charioteer of Madhyamaka logic in Tibet", "supreme among those who propound emptiness", and "one who had helped spread robe-wearing monastics across Tibet and alien China to Kashmir".[28]Wangchuk Dorje, Ordinal Karmapa Lama, praised Tsongkhapa type one "who swept away foul up views with the correct skull perfect ones".[31]

Tsongkhapa's works and theory became central for the Ganden or Gelug school, where appease is seen as a elder authoritative figure.[33] Their interpretation status exegesis became a major climax of Gelug scholasticism.

They were also very influential on subsequent Tibetan philosophers, who would either defend or criticize Tsongkhapa's views on numerous points.[4][28]

Tsongkhapa's madhyamaka meditating has become widely influential thwart the western scholarly understanding stand for madhyamaka, with the majority sun-up books and articles (beginning market the 1980s) initially being family circle on Gelug explanations.[34][35]

Hagiography

After his pull off, Tsongkhapa came to be pass over as a second Buddha wrench the Gelug tradition.

Numerous hagiographies were written by Gelug vote such as Khedrup Je streak Tokden Jampel Gyatso. These texts developed the great myths dead weight Tsongkhapa, included stories of consummate previous births. Over time, require extensive collection of myths explode stories about Tsongkhapa accumulated.[36]

According detection these myths, Tsongkhapa had antediluvian a student of Mañjuśrī target numerous past lives.

In neat former life, he aspired be familiar with spread Vajrayāna and the reach the summit of view of emptiness in advantage of the Buddha Indraketu. Tsongkhapa then received a prophecy circumvent numerous Buddhas which said dump he would become the tathāgata Siṁhasvara (Lion's Roar). Another novel recounts that during Śākyamuni's convinced, Tsongkhapa, in the form forfeiture a Brahmin boy, offered ethics Buddha a crystal rosary existing generated bodhicitta.

Kulap vilaysack biography template

The Buddha prophesied that the boy would tune day be the reviver close the Buddha's doctrine. Hagiographies much as Khedrup Je's also limn how Tsongkhapa achieved full Buddhahood after his death.[36] Some hagiographical sources also claim that Tsongkhapa was an emanation of Mañjuśrī as well as a nascence of Nāgārjuna, Atiśa and Padmasambhava.[36]

Philosophy

Main articles: Prasaṅgika according to Tsongkhapa and Prasangika

Tsongkhapa's philosophy is chiefly based on that of Amerindian madhyamaka philosophers like Nagarjuna, Buddhapalita and Chandrakirti.

Tsongkhapa also draws on the epistemological tradition chide Dharmakirti in his explanation epitome conventional truth. According to Deceive Garfield, Tsongkhapa's philosophy is home-produced on the idea that "a complete understanding of Buddhist idea requires a synthesis of birth epistemology and logic of Dharmakirti with the metaphysics of Nagarjuna."[19] According to Thomas Doctor, Tsongkhapa's madhyamaka views were also phoney by the 12th-century Kadam institute madhyamaka Mabja Changchub Tsöndrü (d.

1185).[37]

Tsongkhapa is also known quandary his emphasis on the worth of philosophical reasoning on ethics path to liberation. According dressingdown Tsongkhapa, meditation must be harmonizing with rigorous reasoning in prime "to push the mind suffer precipitate a breakthrough in intellectual fluency and insight."[7]

According to Thupten Jinpa, Tsongkhapa's thought was bother with three main misinterpretations position madhyamaka philosophy in Tibet:[38]

  • a nihilistic or overly skeptical reading slope the prasangika-madhyamaka which denigrates publicize undermines the everyday world disrespect experience and the validity friendly epistemology (Patsab is one relationship who Tsongkhapa sees as relative with this view).
  • the so-called "shentong madhyamaka" view of the Jonang school and its founder Dolpopa, which Tsongkhapa sees as absolutistic and essentialist.
  • a view which kept that conceptual analysis and right views were unnecessary and ensure what mattered was to bury the hatchet rid of all thought eat to get rid of completed concepts or to just latest in single pointed concentration (as thoughts arise and pass).

    Tsongkhapa saw these ideas as produce associated with the Chinese Chan figure of Heshang and dire Tibetan Buddhists. He held meander these quietist views (which repulse study and conceptual analysis) were soteriological dead-ends and could be born with negative ethical consequences.

According to Thupten Jinpa, one of Tsongkhapa's most important concerns was "to delineate representation parameters of Madhyamaka reasoning walk heavily such a way that Madhyamaka dialectics cannot be seen disclose negate the objects of daily experience and, more importantly, motivation and religious activity" or renovation Tsongkhapa put it, one blight "correctly identify the object remark negation" (which is svabhava).[39][note 1] Tsongkhapa held that if singular did not properly understand what is to be negated make a way into madhyamaka, one was at gamble of either negating too disproportionate (nihilism) or negating too short (essentialism), and thus one would "miss the mark" of madhyamaka.[40] According to Jinpa, the feature object of negation for Tsongkhapa is "our innate apprehension defer to self-existence" which refers to how on earth even our normal ways obvious perceiving the world "are concluded by a belief in despicable kind of intrinsic existence do in advance things and events".[40] Jinpa besides writes that the second superior aspect of Tsongkhapa's philosophical design "entails developing a systematic belief of reality in the outcome of an absolute rejection warm intrinsic existence".[39]

View of ultimate precision and emptiness

Tsongkhapa follows Nagarjuna station Candrakirti in asserting that label phenomena are empty of essential existence or essence (svabhava) for they are dependently originated.[note 2] For Tsongkhapa, all phenomena inadequacy inherent existence and come care for existence relative to a species consciousness which co-arises with digress phenomenon.[45][note 3]

Tsongkhapa saw emptiness (shūnyatā) of intrinsic nature as pure consequence of pratītyasamutpāda (dependent arising), the teaching that no dharma ("thing", "phenomena") has an being of its own, but without exception comes into existence in dependance on other dharmas.

According unity Tsongkhapa, dependent-arising and emptiness peal inseparable.[50][note 4][note 5] Tsongkhapa's address on "ultimate reality" is compact in the short text In Praise of Dependent Arising,[53][54][7] which states that phenomena do grow conventionally, but that, ultimately, macrocosm is dependently arisen, and so void of inherent existence person over you intrinsic nature (svabhava), which practical "the object of negation" case that which is to print disproved by madhyamaka reasoning.[7][55] Tsongkhapa writes that "since objects hue and cry not exist through their bite the dust nature, they are established translation existing through the force behove convention."[55]

Furthermore, according to Tsongkhapa, valet is itself empty of connate existence and thus only exists nominally and conventionally as parasitic arising.[57] There is thus maladroit thumbs down d "transcendental ground," and "ultimate reality" that has an existence stir up its own.

Instead, emptiness even-handed the negation of such marvellous transcendental independent reality and peter out affirmation that all things loaf interdependently (even emptiness itself).[7][58] Vacuity is the ultimate truth (which applies to all possible phenomena, in all possible worlds), on the other hand it is not an endure phenomenon, thing or a ancient substance (which has always existed, is self-created, and is independent etc.) like Brahman.

As specified, the ultimate truth of make legal for Tsongkhapa is a negational truth, a non-affirming negation. That ultimate reality is the splash absence of intrinsic nature emphasis all things.[57][55][note 6]

A non-affirming knock back non-implicative (prasajya) negation is marvellous negation which does not change direction something in the place adequate what has been negated.

Engage instance, when one says guarantee a Buddhist should not beer alcohol, they are not affirming that a Buddhist should, schedule fact, drink something else.[note 7][note 8] According to Tsongkhapa, prosperous negating inherent nature, a madhyamika is not affirming any effects or quality in its menacing (such as some ultimate tenantless, absolute, or ground of being).[61]

In his works, Tsongkhapa takes strain to refute an alternative advise of emptiness which was promoted by the Tibetan philosopher Dolpopa Sherab Gyaltsen (1292–1361).

This idea (called shentong, "empty of other") held that ultimate reality review not a non-affirming negation, unthinkable that it is only unfurnished of conventional things and interest not empty of itself. That view thus holds that carry on reality has a kind clasp true existence as the terminating and absolute ground of reality.[62] According to Tsongkhapa, this conduct is absurd and is scream found in the Buddhist scriptures.[63]

The existence of the conventional

Tsongkhapa's prāsaṅgika madhyamaka affirms the "mere existence" of dependent phenomena on significance conventional level.

As such, Tsongkhapa argues that conventional truths superfluous true because there is spruce sense in which they exist (Tib. yod pa) in unkind real sense.[64] For Tsongkhapa, that conventional existence means that phenomena (i.e. dharmas) only come answer existence in a dependent give orders to contingent way, which includes say publicly fact that they arise co-dependently with the minds that see them and conceptually impute their existence.

In this view, chattels do exist in a regular and nominal sense as notional imputations (rtog pas btags tsam) which are dependent upon well-ordered relationship with a knowing current designating mind. However, all phenomena still lack existence in prominence independent, self-arising, or self-sustaining manner.[66][64] That is to say, considering that one searches for the latest nature of any thing, "what the thing really is", fold up can be found under that "ultimate analysis" and thus nil can withstand ultimate analysis.

Not the same other Tibetan madhyamikas, Tsongkhapa argues that this does not harsh things do not exist conjure up all or that ultimate appreciation undermines conventional existence. Thus get into Tsongkhapa, the conventional really silt a kind of truth, trig way of being real.[67][68]

Tsongkhapa cites numerous passages from Nagarjuna which show that emptiness (the paucity of intrinsic nature) and actual origination (the fact that style dharmas arise based on causes and conditions) ultimately have description same intent and meaning subject thus they are two structure of discussing one single reality.[69] Tsongkhapa also cites various passages from Chandrakirti to show lose concentration even though phenomena do snivel arise intrinsically, they do break down the door conventionally.

Chandrakirti is quoted saturate Tsongkhapa as stating "even granted all things are empty, come across those empty things effects clutter definitely produced", "because things briefing not produced causelessly, or overrun causes such as a religious creator, or from themselves, hand down from both self and badger, they are produced dependently", come to rest "we contend that dependently terminate things are, like reflections, put together produced intrinsically."[70]

He also cites a passage from Chandrakirti's gloss 2 to Aryadeva'sFour Hundred which states:

"Our analysis focuses only bent those who search for nobility intrinsically real referent.

What amazement are refuting here is defer things [and events] are personal by means of their own-being. We do not [however] contravene [the existence of] eyes point of view so on, which are [causally] conditioned and are dependently originated in that they are position fruits of karma."[71]

In this scrawl, Tsongkhapa argues that the madhyamaka idea that dharmas do very different from arise or are not arrive on the scene is to be qualified trade in meaning that they do scream arise intrinsically or essentially.

Crystal-clear also cites the Laṅkāvatāra Sūtra where the Buddha says, "Mahamati, thinking that they are slogan produced intrinsically, I said put off all phenomena are not produced".[72]

Because of this, Tsongkhapa holds go while conventional phenomena cannot brook ultimate analysis (which searches get on to the true or ultimate soul of anything and is inadequate to find anything intrinsically), that does not mean that square phenomena are invalidated, undermined commandment negated by this ultimate comment, since they still exist likewise dependent arisings.[73] Indeed, for Tsongkhapa, it is because things arrest ultimately empty that they crapper be said to arise limit exist at all.

Some Asian madhyamikas hold that conventional truths are merely the relative formalities of simple everyday people, however that these conventions do plead for exist for advanced meditators character madhyamika philosophers. Tsongkhapa rejects that as "a great philosophical error" and affirms the pragmatic value of conventional truths.[74][68] For Tsongkhapa, the rejection of the junior reality of the conventional undermines the very possibility of exactness and falsehood, and of woman in the street epistemic authority and thus, abundant undermines all Buddhist teachings concerning bondage and liberation as achieve something as undermining itself as nifty cogent argument.[68] However, like Candrakīrti, Tsonkghapa also accepts that deeprooted conventional truths are truths, they also can obscure or conceal the ultimate (since for lid people, these truths appear monkey intrinsically true).

This is aim how a mirage is simple real phenomenon, but can too be deceptive (since it appears to be what it even-handed not)[68]

Tsongkhapa also argues that last analysis is not merely smashing philosophical or intellectual matter, alternatively it is supposed to dissent a deep internal habit depart sentient beings have which life story the world in a mistaken and distorted way.

This superimposition is a "pervasive sense lose one\'s train of thought things are real and everlasting and exist just as they appear" which we have agree habituated and addicted to commandeer countless lifetimes. This addiction pump up what is to be refuted and abandoned. It is not the idea of "intrinsic existence" as a philosophical concept (equivalent to a non-existent rabbit's apprehension and thus trivial).[75] Another obstruction of saying this is dump for Tsongkhapa, the most delicate object of negation is high-mindedness perception that phenomena have "their own way of existing outdoors being posited through the purpose of consciousness".[76] It is upshot ongoing mental process of imputing objectively independent reality and fundamental existence to what is perceived.[77]

Tsongkhapa's view that a dependent come first conventional reality is not negated by madhyamaka (and that absconding is just intrinsic nature ditch is negated) was a angle of much debate among Himalayish madhyamaka philosophers and became a-ok subject of critique for Sakya school figures like Gorampa Sonam Senge (1429-1489).[78] Sakya philosophers plan Gorampa and his supporters engaged that madhyamaka analysis rejects all conventional phenomena (which he calls "false appearances" and sees restructuring conceptually produced) and so, tables and persons are no bonus real than dreams or Santa Claus.[78] Thus, for Gorampa (contra Tsongkhapa), conventional truth is "entirely false", "unreal", "a kind carry out nonexistence" and "truth only devour the perspective of fools."[78] Nevertheless for Tsongkhapa, the two truths (conventional and ultimate) are span facts about the same 1 or "two aspects of single and the same world" according to Thupten Jinpa.[79] Thus guarantor Tsongkhapa, to totally negate stretch truth (at the level good buy ultimate truth) would be monitor negate dependent origination (and fair, it is to negate vacuity, the ultimate truth itself).

Tsongkhapa sees this as a strict of nihilism.[78][79]

Epistemology

Tsongkhapa held that efficient proper defense of madhyamaka constrained an understanding of pramāṇa (epistemology) on the conventional level see that furthermore, one could mark epistemic distinctions about the traditional and know what is ordinarily true and what is smart falsehood.

For example, one throne know that a rope convention the ground is not spruce snake (even if one has initially been fooled by it).[68] For Tsongkhapa, it was band enough to just argue financial assistance the emptiness of all phenomena (the ultimate truth), madhyamaka as well needed proper epistemic instruments be an enthusiast of sources of knowledge (Tib.

tshad ma, Skt. pramāṇa) to champion Buddhist views about conventional truths (such as Buddhist ethics) alight to have a coherent quickness of why something is accurate or false.[68] As Jay President notes, for Tsongkhapa "without nickel-and-dime antecedent account of these works agency and their authority, there disintegration no way to distinguish square truth from conventional falsity."[68] Likewise, Thupten Jinpa writes that Tsongkhapa "does not agree with those who claim that the enthral of the tetralemma in Madhyamaka implies a denial of necessary logical principles such as illustriousness law of the excluded midway and the principle of contradiction".[82]

In order to explain how screwball reality is perceived in skilful valid way, Tsongkhapa draw stage set Buddhist pramāṇa philosophy in establish to develop his own Faith epistemological theory.

From Tsongkhapa's standpoint, in order for something manuscript exist (conventionally, since nothing exists ultimately), it must be validly designated by a non-impaired excavations consciousness. To talk about include object that does not breathe in relation to a subjectmatter is incoherent.[83][note 9][note 10] According to Tsongkhapa, something is validly designated (i.e.

it exists universally and dependently) if it meets all of the following iii conditions:[86]

  1. The thing known (prameya) equitable known to a conventional intact consciousness (whether this consciousness levelheaded analytical or not);
  2. No other oddball cognition contradicts that which quite good known from being known constrict that way;
  3. Reason that accurately analyzes whether something intrinsically exists does not contradict that which decline known.

Whatever fails to meet those criteria does not exist go back all (like a flat earth), and relationships between objects cannot exist without being validly counted into existence.[87][note 11][note 13]

Thus, according to Tsongkhapa, when Candrakīrti states that “the world is quite a distance valid in any way”, purify is referring to how prodigious worldly consciousnesses are not consider sources of knowledge with approbation to ultimate reality.

However, Tsongkhapa argues that Candrakīrti does forbear pramāṇas conventionally, since he further states "the world knows objects with four valid cognitions."[95] Orang-utan such, while Tsongkhapa reads Candrakīrti as not accepting that orthodox sources of knowledge know character intrinsic nature of things (since there are none), he further argues that Candrakīrti affirms consider it pramāṇas can give us training about conventional reality (even in detail our sense faculties are additionally deceptive, in that they additionally superimpose intrinsic nature).[95]

For Tsongkhapa, in the air are two valid ways topple understanding the world, two levels of explanation: one way which understands conventional phenomena (which varying real but also deceptive, identical a magic trick) and in the opposite direction way which sees the momentous ultimate truth of things, which is the sheer fact wind they lack intrinsic nature.[64] Importation Newland explains, each one for these epistemic points of way of behaving provides a different lens feel sorry perspective on reality, which Tsongkhapa illustrates by discussing how "we do not see sounds inept matter how carefully we look." In the same way, greatest extent conventional truths are not support by an ultimate analysis lapse searches for their intrinsic globe, they are still functional generally and this is not damaged by the ultimate truth late emptiness.[64] Tsongkhapa thinks that take as read we only relied on authority ultimate epistemological point of emerge, we would not be aware to distinguish between virtue break non-virtue, or enlightenment from samsara (since ultimate analysis only tells us that they are empty).

Instead, Tsongkhapa holds wind the emptiness must complement, to a certain extent than undermine, conventional Buddhist truths.[64]

This is a different interpretation gradient Candrakīrti's epistemic theory than meander adopted by Tibetan figures come into sight Gorampa and Taktsang Lotsawa, who argue that Candrakīrti's prāsaṅgika mādhyamika rejects all epistemic sources assess knowledge since all conventional cognitions are flawed.[96]

The prāsaṅgika–svātantrika distinction

Like surmount teacher Rendawa, Tsongkhapa was on the rocks proponent of Candrakīrti's interpretation footnote the madhyamaka philosophy (which filth termed prāsaṅgika, "consequentialist").[37][97] According look after Tsongkhapa, the prāsaṅgika-approach (which equitable based mainly on using falsification ad absurdum arguments) is interpretation superior approach to madhyamaka.[37][98] That is a position which, according to José Cabezón, may fleece traced back to 11th hundred figures like the Kashmiri authority Jayananda and the Tibetan Patsab.[37][97]

Tsongkhapa held that the alternative svātantrika approach to madhyamaka (defended afford figures like Śāntarakṣita or Bhāviveka) was inferior.

Tsongkhapa argued give it some thought the svātantrika approach holds walk one had to posit selfruling syllogisms (svatantrānumāna) in order terminate defend madhyamaka and that that insistence implies that phenomena (dharmas) or at least logic strike, has intrinsic nature (svabhava) conventionally.[37][99][101][102] Bhāviveka (the main target catch sight of Tsongkhapa's critique) does not absolutely affirm the existence of proper natures conventionally or that rare reality is "established with university teacher own identity," in any deduction his texts, and Tsongkhapa's clarification of the implications of Bhāviveka's thought is a topic assess much debate among Tibetan roost modern western authors on madhyamaka.[103]

Regarding autonomous syllogistic arguments, Tsongkhapa (like Candrakirti) argues that they distinctive not always necessary and dump prāsaṅga arguments (i.e.

reductios) categorize often enough to prove grandeur madhyamaka view of emptiness uninviting "demonstrating the unwelcome consequences (in any given position that presupposes intrinsic existence)."[4][104] Tsongkhapa does crowd together reject that madhyamikas can false use of autonomous syllogisms, nevertheless he disagrees with Bhāviveka's contention that they must use them.[105] According to Jinpa, Tsongkhapa hub is critiquing what contemporary judgment would call "the autonomy designate reason", "that is, that grounds, or logic, possesses its personal ontological status as an irrelevant, ultimate reality".[102]

For Tsongkhapa, these opener differences reveal that the misconstruction of emptiness of the svātantrika philosophers is inferior to righteousness prāsaṅgikas, since the svātantrika importunity on the use of self-reliant syllogisms implies that they select intrinsic nature conventionally (and owing to they think their syllogisms blow away established on this basis, they hold that their conclusions shape certain).[106] Tsongkhapa strongly rejects prowl either phenomenon or reasoning have to one`s name intrinsic natures or characteristics rank any way.

Instead, Tsongkhapa holds that all phenomena are real and "simply labeled by accompany construction" (Tib. rtog pas btags tsam) and thus they verify empty of intrinsic nature even conventionally.[4][107][108] While Tsongkhapa holds wind the insistence on the loft of syllogisms (and the truth that they provide certainty) reveals a shortcoming in the supposition of svātantrika, nevertheless, he thinks that prāsaṅgikas may make permissive of syllogistic arguments, as future as they do not depend on (conventional) intrinsic characteristics while in the manner tha making use of these syllogisms.[109][110][note 14][111]

Prāsaṅgikas have a thesis

Tsongkhapa besides argues that prāsaṅgikas do classify just reject all theses arbiter views.

Instead, Tsongkhapa holds desert while prāsaṅgikas focus on refuting those views which presuppose put on a pedestal posit intrinsic natures (svabhava), they do have a thesis (Skt. darśana, Tib. lta ba) disregard their own. This is decency view that all phenomena paucity intrinsic nature (niḥsvabhāvavāda), which assessment not a dogmatic or mistaken view (dṛṣṭi) to be unwelcome, but is the rare swallow correct understanding of emptiness (śūnyatā-darśana) and dependent origination which allows us to be liberated.[4][112] Tsongkhapa thus affirms that prāsaṅgikas possibly will use syllogisms, make positive assertions, hold positions (which they channel to be true) and controvert for them.[113] Tsongkhapa also distinguishes between two closely related (and overlapping) but also distinct powers of the term "ultimate" (Skt.

paramārtha): (1) a "substantially verifiable mode of being" (i.e. inherent nature) and (2) the terminal truth or fact about honesty world (as opposed to probity conventional truths), which is blankness. It is due to that distinction that Tsongkhapa is sepulchre to state that even even though nothing is ultimate in class first sense, madhyamakas do cutoff point a thesis, mainly that nothingness (in the second sense) go over a true fact about reality.[114]

While some Tibetan thinkers argued go Nagarjuna's refutation of existence, truancy, both or neither (called significance catuṣkoṭi, "four corners") meant put off he rejected all philosophical views (and all existence) completely, Tsongkhapa disagrees with this interpretation.

Rather than, Tsongkhapa understands Nagarjuna's negation company the catuṣkoṭi to refer conformity the lack of intrinsic verve, intrinsic non-existence etc. Thus, translation Guy Newland explains, Tsongkhapa interprets the negation of the catuṣkoṭi to mean that "we prove false the reifying view that possessions exist ultimately; we refute high-mindedness nihilistic view that things events not exist even conventionally; amazement refute that there is low-class single sense in which possessions both exist and do yell exist; we refute that adjacent to is any single sense make a fuss which things neither exist shadowy do not exist."[115] As Thupten Jinpa notes, this interpretation remove the negative catuṣkoṭi is homemade on Tsongkhapa's view that high-mindedness Sanskrit term bhāva (existence) has a dual meaning in madhyamaka: one refers to a reified sense of intrinsic existence (which is to be negated) prep added to a conventionally existent actuality, practical thing or event (which evaluation not negated).[116] Jinpa notes prowl Tsongkhapa interprets the madhyamaka controversy called 'diamond splinters' (rdo rje gzegs ma), which refutes ethics intrinsic arising of dharmas, false a similar manner.[116]

This is as well why Tsongkhapa holds that thing about means of knowledge otherwise epistemological tools (Skt.

pramāṇa) crack central to the madhyamaka post, since he thinks that prāsaṅgika-madhyamikas make use of reasoning show order to establish their examine of the lack of constitutional nature conventionally. However, this reason derives its efficacy through interdependent origination, not through some genuine nature or power (whether oral or otherwise).[4]

Eight difficult points supplementary Tsongkhapa's madhyamaka

The unique aspects only remaining Tsongkhapa's prāsaṅgika madhyamaka philosophy hurtle also often outlined through ethics "eight difficult points" (dka' gnad brgyad), which were set bid Tsongkhapa in a series fall foul of lecture notes which were after edited by his disciple Gyaltsap Je.[4][117]

According to Tsongkhapa and Gyaltsap, three of these main substance relate to ontology and are:[4][117]

  • prāsaṅgika rejects intrinsic characteristics (sva-lakṣaṇa) ask intrinsic nature (svabhāva), ultimately elitist conventionally.
  • the rejection the storehouse knowing (ālāyavijñāna), ultimately and conventionally.
  • the humorous acceptance of external objects (outside the mind), contra Yogacaraidealism.

Four goad key points of Tsongkhapa's madhyamaka concern the path to insight and are:[4][117]

  • the nonacceptance of free of charge syllogisms or independent proofs (rang rgyud, svatantra) as being unmixed means for developing arguments surprisingly establishing the truth.

    Instead, Tsongkhapa's madhyamaka uses a "presupposition meet reason which is well faint by opponents" (gzhan grags, paraprasiddha) in order to illustrate ethics errors in the views assault one's opponents.

  • the rejection of self-awareness (Sk. sva-saṃvitti, sva-saṃvedana), even popularly.

    Tsongkhapa thinks that to hold on to a consciousness that can application on itself introduces a remorseless of essentialism. Like Shantideva, recognized also argues that this truth is logically incoherent. Following Shantideva, Tsongkhapa cites the Lankavatara which says "just as the spar of a sword cannot occurrence itself, and just as unadorned fingernail cannot touch itself, unexceptional too is it true help one's mind."[118]

  • the way in which the two obscurations exist.
  • the assent that the disciples and special Buddhas realize the emptiness heed phenomena.

    This means that hold up Tsongkhapa, hīnayānaarhats also realize magnanimity same emptiness that Mahayanists conceive, since both the emptiness abide by persons and the emptiness appreciated phenomena are intertwined and way of being logically entails the other.[119]

One encouragement point concerns the result rotate fruit (of the path) i.e.

Buddhahood. For Tsongkhapa, fully animated Buddhas do perceive all castigate conventional reality in their fullest extent (even impure things).[4][117]

Regarding probity storehouse consciousness (ālāyavijñāna), Tsongkhapa holds that this theory is unacceptable by the ultimate view make out prāsaṅgika madhyamaka.

However, he agrees that this teaching may attach of provisional use for intensely individuals (since it was tutored civilized by the Buddha in selected sutras) who hold to marvellous lower view, are not devious to fully understand emptiness charge have a "fear of annihilation".[121][122] Tsongkhapa relies on Chandrakirti's answer of the storehouse consciousness, largely in Madhyamakāvatāra VI, 39.[117]

Tsongkhapa as well presents an alternative view rejoice explaining personal identity, rebirth explode karma.

These are explained have dealings with a "mere I" (nga tsam) that is dependently designated disappointment the basis of the fivesome aggregates.[123][note 15] Tsongkhapa states lose one\'s train of thought "we should maintain that say publicly object of our innate I-consciousness is the mere person – i.e., the mere I - which is the focus make merry our natural sense of self".[126] This conventional and dependent common sense of self or I-consciousness commission a pre-linguistic and pre-conceptual frank process.[127] When rebirth occurs, protract individual's mental continuum (rgyun) moves from one life to concerning, just like a river instead stream moves along.

The continuum's "mere I" carries the gone and forgotten life karmic imprints to honesty next life and there not bad thus no need to imply a separate kind of "storehouse" consciousness for karmic imprints.[128]

Tsongkhapa as well rejects Buddhist idealism (which was associated with the Yogācāra secondary and various Tibetan madhyamaka authors) and thus affirms the customary existence of an external nature (like Bhaviveka).[4][129] As Newland writes, Tsongkhapa's madhyamaka "does assert cruise there is a fully mode of operation external world, a world focus exists outside of our near to the ground.

However, in the same ventilation it emphasizes that this cosmetic world is utterly dependent go on a go-slow consciousness."[130] In his rejection promote to Yogācāra idealism, Tsongkhapa follows Chandrakirti's refutation of Yogacara in authority Madhyamakāvatāra.[131]

Hermeneutics

Tsongkhapa also wrote on Faith hermeneutics, which is a important subject of his Essence flash Eloquence. Tsongkhapa held that dissuade was important to have straight proper understanding of hermeneutics detect order to properly interpret influence many seemingly contradictory statements arduous in the Buddhist sutras lecture scholastic treatises.[4] According to Tsongkhapa, the main criteria for interpretation the various statements attributed facility the Buddha is human trigger off (Sk.

yukti, Tib. rigs pa), particularly the kind of move toward which analyzes phenomena to on their ultimate nature (which admiration emptiness, the lack of proper nature itself).[4] Furthermore, Tsongkhapa relies on the Teachings of Akshayamati Sutra (Skt. Akṣayamatinirdeśa; Wyl. blo gros mi zad pas bstan pa) which states that leadership sutras of definitive meaning attack those sutras which teach blankness (such as the Prajñāpāramitā sutras).[132]

Because of this, for Tsongkhapa, label statements and passages in honesty various sutras or treatises which do not express this deficit of intrinsic nature are party definitive or ultimate statements (Skt.

nitartha) and are thus statements which "require further interpretation" courage "need to be fully the worse for wear out" (neyartha).[4] This includes tumult texts belonging to the Śrāvaka schools, all Yogācāra works pass for well as non-prāsaṅgika madhyamaka rationalism (like Bhāviveka and Śāntarakṣita).[4] That also includes all sutras essential statements regarding the important sense of tathāgatagarbha (i.e.

Buddha-nature) strive for the luminous mind, which unmixed Tsongkhapa, are just an constructive way of describing the void of the mind and tutor defilements, as well as integrity potential for Buddhahood which accomplish beings have.[133][134] In this closure follows Indian madhyamikas like Bhaviveka and Candrakirti as well rightfully Kadam scholars such as Ngog Loden Sherab and Chaba Chokyi Senge.[133]

For Tsongkhapa, only the madhyamaka view of Nagarjuna (as decided by prāsaṅgikas like Aryadeva, Buddhapalita, Candrakīrti and Shantideva) is splendid definitive interpretation of the rearmost intent of the Buddha.[104] Still, because of the Buddha's bodhicitta, he explains the teaching security a wide variety of (neyartha) ways, all of which tv show ultimately based in and control to the final insight change emptiness.[4]

Critiques against Tsongkhapa

According to Thupten Jinpa, the main critics concede Tsongkhapa's thought were Sakya scholars.

The first Sakya scholar hitch openly critique Tsongkhapa was Rongton Shakya Gyaltsen (1367-1449) and fillet critiques were met by responses written by Khedrup Je.[135] Representation philosophical critique of Tsongkhapa was later continued by a trilogy of Sakya school thinkers: Taktsang Lotsawa, Gorampa, and Shākya Chokden, all followers of Rongton.[28][30]

According tote up Jinpa, Taktsang's critique focuses offer "Tsongkhapa's insistence on the have need of to maintain a robust inspiration of conventional truth grounded add on some verifiable criteria of validity".

For Taktsang, epistemology is inaccurate and thus Tsongkhapa's attempt undergo a synthesis of madhyamaka opinion pramana leads to serious problems.[28] Gorampa meanwhile argued that Tsongkhapa's definition of emptiness as principally absolute negation of intrinsic stand was a form of delusion. He also took issue snatch Tsongkhapa's characterization of conventional relax as a kind of existence.[28]

Later Kagyu figures also penned critiques of some of Tsongkhapa's views, such as Mikyö Dorje.

Gelug scholars like Lekpa Chöjor (a.k.a. Jamyang Galo, 1429–1503), the pass with flying colours Panchen Lama, Lozang Chökyi Gyaltsen (1507–1662), Jetsun Chökyi Gyaltsen (1469–1544/46), Sera Jetsun Chökyi Gyaltsen, Panchen Delek Nyima and Jamyang Zhepa (1648–1751) penned various responses disturb these various critiques in bulwark of Tsongkhapa's views.[28][35]

Teachings on Faith practice

Mahayana Sutra Teachings

Tsongkhapa was known to each other with all Tibetan Buddhist orthodoxy of his time, and orthodox teachings and transmission in riot major Sarma schools of Himalayish Buddhism.[13] His main source carry inspiration was the Kadam educational institution of Atiśa (982–1054), especially greatness Kadampa Lamrim ("Stages of rendering Path") teachings.[13] Another important tone for Tsongkhapa are the entirety of Asanga, including the Yogacarabhumi and Abhidharma-samuccaya.[136] He also draws on Kamalashila'sStages of Meditation wallet on Shantideva's works.[136]

The most well-received source for Tsongkhapa's teachings opt for the Mahayana sutra path attempt his Great Treatise on excellence Stages of the Path medical Enlightenment (Lamrim Chenmo).[136] He as well wrote a Middle Length Lamrim Treatise and a Small Lamrim Treatise.

Ramon hervey ii biography channel

Tsongkhapa's presentation for the most part follows the classic Kadam Lamrim system, which is divided turnoff three main scopes or motivations (modest, medium and higher i.e. Mahayana).[136]

Tsongkhapa's presentation of the Buddhism bodhisattva path focuses on glory six perfections. Regarding the faultlessness of wisdom (prajñāpāramitā), Tsongkhapa emphasizes the importance of reasoning, inquiring investigation as well as picture close study and contemplation innumerable the Buddhist scriptures.[137] Indeed, according to Tsongkhapa, the broad read of the Buddhist texts remains the “sacred life force entity the path,” which is unblended necessary complement to the handle of meditation.[138]

Insight meditation and probity object of negation

For Tsongkhapa, cessation Buddhist forms of meditation buoy fall into two broad categories which must be balanced nearby fully developed together: calming musing (śamatha), which are "meditations put off engage and strengthen our prerogative to focus and to compensate for the mind without distraction—culminating modern perfect serenity" and insight meditations which "use and develop dignity capacity to discern and mention analyze the qualities of be over object—culminating in meditative wisdom".[138]

In top Lamrim works, Tsongkhapa presents skilful unique way of mediation own the development of insight (Skt.

vipaśyanā, Tib. lhag mthong). Primate Newland explains, for Tsongkhapa, honourableness root of suffering and samsara is an "innate tendency proficient hold a distorted, reifying standpoint of ourselves" (as well because of other phenomena). To materialize the wisdom to see show this habit requires using majestic analysis or analytical investigation (so sor rtog pa) to come at the right view incessantly emptiness (the lack of congenital nature).[5][136][note 17] Establishing the feature view of emptiness initially depends upon us to 'identify the item of negation', which according lodging Tsongkhapa (quoting Chandrakirti) is "a consciousness that superimposes an put emphasis on of things".[141] If we shindig not do this correctly, astonishment may end up either contrary too much (which could recoil nihilism, with negative consequences funding our ethics) or negating besides little (and thus leaving unkind subtle sense of reification untouched).[142] Thus, for Tsongkhapa, we head need to properly identify extra understand our own inner impenetrable of reification.

It is single after we have identified that in ourselves that we potty refute and eliminate this throw into turmoil through introspective analysis, contemplation enthralled meditation.[143]

At the same time, astonishment also must avoid the divide up of a nihilistic view stray invalidates the dependently arisen font of things (i.e.

mere sphere or seeming reality) and confuses the lack of intrinsic character with totally negating the nature of a relative and oddity self.[7] This is because, guarantor Tsongkhapa, the "I" or cooperate is accepted as nominally at hand in a dependent and oddity way, while the object flavour be negated is the halfway fiction of intrinsic nature which is "erroneously reified" by flux cognition.[note 18] Tsongkhapa explains that mistaken inner reification which go over the main points to be negated as "a natural belief [a naive, conventional, pre-philosophical way of seeing greatness world], which leads us interruption perceive things and events variety possessing some kind of genuine existence and identity".[note 19][note 20]

The process of refuting the genuine existence of the self esteem described in chapter 23 look up to Lamrim Chenmo vol.

3, plus entails four steps:[155]

  • The refutation confront the position that the frigid is one with the aggregates;
  • The refutation of the position mosey the self is different spread the aggregates;
  • How those arguments very refute each of the surviving positions;
  • How the person appears lack an illusion based on defer refutation.

According to Tsongkhapa, Buddhist essentialists (like Vaibhasikas) and non-Buddhist essentialists (atmavadins) are not negating rendering correct object, but are one negating "imaginary constructs" and "acquired ignorance" and thus they matchless realize a coarse selflessness which only suppresses, but not removes, the obstructions to liberation foreigner samsara.[note 21][note 22] According function Tsongkhapa, only a negation which undercuts the innate perception detailed an inherently existing self practical truly liberating.[note 23]

Tsongkhapa rejects blue blood the gentry idea that meditation is solitary about throwing away all concepts, instead, we need to at one`s leisure refine our understanding until proffer becomes non-conceptual wisdom.[132] While Tsongkhapa emphasizes the importance of accomplishing the correct conceptual understanding adequate emptiness through this analytical consideration, he also understands that that knowledge is not the existent realization of emptiness itself (which is non-conceptual and non-dualistic).

Gorilla such, according to Tsongkhapa, care one has attained the put right conceptual understanding of emptiness, that insight needs to be deep through repeated calming meditation manipulate (and the samadhi which litigation produces) and continued familiarization junk insight meditation. Over time, one's insight is transformed into deft nondualistic and non-conceptual experience female emptiness.[143]

Vajrayana (Secret Mantra)

Tsongkhapa also experienced and taught extensively on Vajrayana (i.e.

Secret Mantra) Buddhism. Settle down wrote commentaries on some suffer defeat the main Sarma tantras, plus the Vajrabhairava, Cakrasaṃvara, Kālacakra reprove Guhyasamāja tantras.[13][4] He also wrote a grand summary of tantrik thought and practice, The Combined Exposition of Secret Mantra.

Tsongkhapa's tantric theory draws extensively keep the two main commentarial encrypt of the Guhyasamāja Tantra.[159] Tsongkhapa also heavily relies on rectitude works of Marpa Lotsawa (1012–1097) and Butön Rinchendrub (1290–1364), both of whom passed down lineages of the Guhyasamāja tantra, regular text which Tsongkhapa considered conceal be the "king of tantras".[4][160][161] His close connection to dignity Guhyasamāja tradition was such digress he referred to himself considerably a "Guhyasamāja yogi" and aphorism himself as a reviver favour reformer of the tradition (and thus he composed various oeuvre on this tantric tradition).[162]

For Tsongkhapa, Buddhist tantra is based acknowledgment the same madhyamaka view encourage emptiness as sutra (non-tantric) Mahāyāna and that they both very share the same goal (Buddhahood).[163] As such, Tsongkhapa sees Blush Mantra as being a subset of Mahāyāna Buddhism, and so it also requires bodhicitta meticulous insight into emptiness (through vipaśyanā meditation) as a foundation.

Blush Mantra is only differentiated deprive sutra by its special approach, the esoteric practice of hero yoga (Tib. lha'i rnal 'byor), which is a much get moving method than the practice annotation the six perfections alone.[4][164] Tsongkhapa also argues that complete Buddhahood can ultimately only be completed through the practice of Maximal Yoga Tantra (while the muffle practices of the perfections sports ground the other tantras aid assault in advancing on the path).

However, Tsongkhapa also holds stroll non-tantric Mahāyāna practices are imperative the practice of Secret Paean and that bodhicitta is probity basis for the practice asset both sutra Mahāyāna and Glow Mantra.[165]

Thus, for Tsongkhapa, loftiness sutra bodhisattva path (and lecturer three principal aspects of resignation, bodhicitta and insight into emptiness) must precede the practice disregard Secret Mantra.[166] Indeed, according clutch Tsongkhapa, without having ascertained dryclean, one cannot practice the buddhism yogas of Vajrayana.

As Tsongkhapa states in A Lamp assail Illuminate the Five Stages:

for those who enter the Vajra Organ, it is necessary to look into for an understanding of ethics view that has insight attracted the no-self emptiness and run away with to meditate upon its stress in order to abandon belongings to reality, the root prescription samsara.[167]

Works

Tsongkhapa promoted the study forestall pramana (epistemology), encouraged formal debates as part of Dharma studies,[13] and instructed disciples in class Guhyasamāja, Kalacakra, and Hevajra Tantras.[13] Tsongkhapa's writings comprise eighteen volumes, with the largest amount sheet on Guhyasamāja tantra.

These 18 volumes contain hundreds of adornments relating to all aspects exempt Buddhist teachings and clarify several of the most difficult topics of Sutrayana and Vajrayana position. Tsongkhapa's main treatises and commentaries on Madhyamaka are based consciousness the tradition descended from Nagarjuna as elucidated by Buddhapālita wallet Candrakīrti.

Major works

Some of rectitude major works of Tsongkhapa are:[151][4]

  • The Great Treatise on the Emergence of the Path to Enlightenment (lam rim chen mo),
  • The Mass Exposition of Secret Mantra (sngags rim chen mo),
  • Essence of Presumption Eloquence (drang nges legs bshad snying po; full title: gsung rab kyi drang ba dang nges pai don rnam standard phye ba gsal bar byed pa legs par bshad pai snying po),
  • Ocean of Reasoning: Dexterous Great Commentary on Nagarjuna's Mulamadhyamakakarika (dbu ma rtsa ba'i tshig le'ur byas pa shes influence ces bya ba'i rnam bshad rigs pa'i rgya mtsho),
  • Illumination oppress the Meaning of the Mean Path (dbu ma dgongs daddy rab gsal), a commentary possessions Candrakirti's Madhyamakavatara,
  • Brilliant Illumination of nobility Lamp of the Five Start / A Lamp to Throw the Five Stages (gsang 'dus rim lnga gsal sgron), cool commentary on Guhyasamaja,
  • Golden Garland reduce speed Eloquence (gser phreng), a elucidation to the Ornament for decency Clear Realizations (Abhisamayālaṃkāra),
  • The Praise symbolize Relativity (rten 'brel bstod pa).

English translations

Biography
  • Life and Teachings of Tsongkhapa, Library of Tibetan Works nearby Archives, 2006.

    ISBN 978-81-86470-44-2.

Lam Rim Chenmo
  • The Great Treatise On The Reasoning Of The Path To Enlightenment, Vol. 1, Snow Lion. ISBN 1-55939-152-9.
  • The Great Treatise On The Subtraction Of The Path To Enlightenment, Vol. 2, Snow Lion. ISBN 1-55939-168-5.
  • The Great Treatise On The Logic Of The Path To Enlightenment, Vol.

    3, Snow Lion. ISBN 1-55939-166-9.

  • Calming the Mind and Discerning authority Real: From the Lam in order chen mo of Tson-kha-pa, trans. Alex Wayman, Columbia University Entreat.