Sa skya paN+Di ta
ས་སྐྱ་པཎྜི་ཏ་
sa skya paN+Di taSakya Paṇḍita
Other names
- ཀུན་དགའ་རྒྱལ་མཚན་
- ས་སྐྱ་པཎྜི་ཏ་ཀུན་དགའ་རྒྱལ་མཚན་
- kun dga' rgyal mtshan
- sa skya paN+Di ta kun dga' rgyal mtshan
Alternate names
- Sapaṇ
- Sapen
- Sapan
Dates
Birth: | 1182 |
---|---|
Death: | 1251 |
Tibetan date of birth | |
Gender: | Male |
---|---|
Element: | Water |
Animal: | Tiger |
Rab Jyung: | 3 |
About
- Affiliations
- Grandson of Sa chen kun dga' snying po and nephew of rje btsun grags pa rgyal mtshan and bsod nams rtse mo, and uncle of chos rgyal 'phags pa.
- Teachers
- Śākyaśrībhadra · rje btsun grags pa rgyal mtshan
- Students
- gu ru chos kyi dbang phyug · chos rgyal 'phags pa · yang dgon pa rgyal mtshan dpal · lho pa kun mkhyen rin chen dpal
Links
- BDRC Link
- https://www.tbrc.org/#!rid=P1056
- Treasury of Lives Link
- http://treasuryoflives.org/biographies/view/Sakya-Pan%E1%B8%8Dita-Kunga-Gyeltsen/2137
- Himalayan Art Resources Link or Other Art Resource
- https://www.himalayanart.org/search/set.cfm?setID=325
- Catalog Pages
Buddha Nature Project
Expand to see this person's philosophical positions on Buddha-nature.
Is Buddha-nature considered definitive or provisional? | |
---|---|
Position: | Provisional |
Notes: | |
All beings have Buddha-nature | |
Position: | Qualified No |
If "Qualified", explain: | There is some discrepancy between Sapen's use of the term tathāgata-essence and buddha-nature and other thinkers that use these terms synonymously. In Sapen's view, sentient beings do not possess the former, but do possess a more general form of the latter. So while the answer is a qualified "no" in terms of the more general debate on this issue and the way others have addressed it and asserted Sapen's position, strictly speaking from Sapen's view the answer could more accurately be a qualified "yes" as he does state all beings have a basic "inherent" buddha-nature, though this does not correspond to an essence that is endowed with enlightened qualities. The tricky issue being the equivalency of these terms tathāgata-essence and buddha-nature and the perception of the Sakya position by later authors. |
Notes: |
|
Which Wheel Turning | |
Position: | |
Notes: | |
Yogācāra vs Madhyamaka | |
Position: | Madhyamaka |
Notes: | |
Zhentong vs Rangtong | |
Position: | Rangtong |
Notes: | He predates the distinction but is clearly in line with the rangtong perspective. |
Promotes how many vehicles? | |
Position: | |
Notes: | |
Analytic vs Meditative Tradition | |
Position: | Analytic Tradition |
Notes: | |
What is Buddha-nature? | |
Position: | Tathāgatagarbha as the Emptiness That is a Non-implicative Negation (without enlightened qualities) |
Notes: | "An opinion shared by rNgog and Sapan is that Buddha-nature should be understood in the sense of emptiness. The difference is that rNgog directly equates Buddha-nature with emptiness, whereas Sapan regards the intentional ground (dgongs gzhi) of Buddha-nature to be emptiness." Kano, K., Buddha-Nature and Emptiness, pp. 309-310. |
Svātantrika (རང་རྒྱུད་) vs Prāsaṅgika (ཐལ་འགྱུར་པ་) | |
Position: | Prāsaṅgika (ཐལ་འགྱུར་) |
Notes: | |
Causal nature of the vajrapāda | |
Position: |
"Tathāgatagarbha as the Emptiness That is a Non-implicative Negation (without enlightened qualities)" is not in the list (Tathagatagarbha as the Emptiness That is a Nonimplicative Negation, Tathagatagarbha as Mind's Luminous Nature, Tathagatagarbha as the Alaya Consciousness, Tathagatagarbha as a Sentient Being, Tathagatagarbha as the Dharmakaya, Tathagatagarbha as Suchness, Tathagatagarbha as the Disposition, Tathagatagarbha as Nonconceptuality) of allowed values for the "PosEmptyLumin" property.