View source for Buddha-nature

{{Short description|Buddhist philosophical concept}}
{{redirect|Busshō|[[Dōgen]]'s book from the [[Shōbōgenzō]]|Busshō (Shōbōgenzō)}}

[[File:Full moon with clouds (19791001528).jpg|thumb|The [[Moonlight|moon and its light]] hidden by the clouds is a metaphor for the [[luminous mind]] of Buddha-nature, which is always shining but can be hidden or covered over by the [[Kleshas (Buddhism)|afflictions]].{{sfnp|Bielefeldt|2015|p=153}}{{refn|group=note|name="moon"}}]]

{{Buddhism}}

In [[Buddhist philosophy]] and [[Buddhist paths to liberation|soteriology]], '''Buddha-nature''' ([[Chinese language|Chinese]]: {{transliteration|zh|fóxìng}} {{lang|zh|佛性}}, [[Japanese language|Japanese]]: {{transliteration|ja|busshō}}, {{CJKV|v=Phật tính}}, [[Sanskrit]]: {{transliteration|sa|buddhatā, buddha-svabhāva}}) is the innate potential for all [[Sentient beings (Buddhism)|sentient beings]] to become a [[Buddhahood|Buddha]] or the fact that all sentient beings already have a pure Buddha-essence within themselves.{{sfn|Brunnholzl|2014|p=3}}{{sfn|Wayman|1990|p=45}}<ref name=":7" /><ref name="web.archive.org">Heng-Ching Shih, [https://web.archive.org/web/20130807082256/http://budsas.org/ebud/ebdha191.htm The Significance Of 'Tathagatagarbha' – A Positive Expression Of 'Sunyata']</ref><ref name=":12" /> "Buddha-nature" is the common English translation for several related [[Mahayana|Mahāyāna]] [[Buddhism|Buddhist]] terms, most notably '''''tathāgatagarbha''''' and '''''buddhadhātu''''', but also ''sugatagarbha,'' and ''buddhagarbha''. ''Tathāgatagarbha'' can mean "the womb" or "embryo" (''garbha'') of the "thus-gone one" (''[[Tathagata|tathāgata]]''),{{refn|group=note|Enlightened one, a/the Buddha}} and can also mean "containing a ''tathāgata''"''. Buddhadhātu'' can mean "buddha-element", "buddha-realm", or "buddha-substrate".{{refn|group=note|Kevin Trainor: "a sacred nature that is the basis for [beings'] becoming buddhas."{{sfn|Trainor|2004|p=207}}}}

Buddha-nature has a wide range of (sometimes conflicting) meanings in [[Indian Buddhism]] and later in [[East Asian Buddhism|East Asian]] and [[Tibetan Buddhism|Tibetan Buddhist]] literature. Broadly speaking, it refers to the belief that the [[luminous mind]],{{sfn|Wayman|1990|p=42}}{{sfn|Brunnholzl|2014|p=54}}{{sfn|Sharf|2014}} "the natural and true state of [[Chitta (Buddhism)|the mind]]",{{sfn|Gregory|1991|p=288-289}} which is pure (''visuddhi'') mind undefiled by [[Kleshas (Buddhism)|afflictions]],{{sfn|Wayman|1990|p=42}} is inherently present in every [[Sentient beings (Buddhism)|sentient being]], and is eternal and unchanging.<ref>{{harvnb|King|1991|p=112}}: "The final form of expression indicating that tathāgatagārbha or Buddha nature involves a substantialist monistic theory is found is those passages stating that the tathāgatagārbha, dharmakāya, nirvāṇa, or Buddha nature is beyond cause and conditions, is unborn, quiescent, or unchanging."</ref><ref>{{cite book |author=Ch’an Master Sheng-yen |title= Complete Enlightenment: Zen Comments on the Sutra of Complete Enlightenment |quote=Buddha-nature, however, is universal and unchanging. It is impossible for it to exist at one point and not at another. It transcends space, time, and movement. |page=165 |year=1999 |publisher= Shambhala Publications |isbn=9781570624001}}</ref><ref name="duckworth">{{cite book| last=Duckworth |first=Douglas Samuel|title= Mipam on Buddha-Nature: The Ground of the Nyingma Tradition |quote=The unchanging, permanent status attributed to Buddha-nature is a radical departure is a departure from the language emphasizing impermanence within the discourses of early Buddhism. Indeed the language of Buddha-nature is strikingly similar to the very positions that Buddhists often argue against, demonstrating a decisive break from the early Buddhist triad of impermanence (anitya), suffering (duḥkha), and selflessness (anātman) |page=XIV |publisher=State University of New York Press |year=2008 |isbn=9780791477984}}</ref> It will shine forth when it is cleansed of the defilements, that is, when the [[Nature of mind (Buddhism)|nature of mind]] is [[Bodhi|recognized]] for what it is.

The ''[[Mahāyāna Mahāparinirvāṇa Sūtra]]'' (2nd century CE), which was very influential in the [[Chinese Buddhism|Chinese reception of these teachings]],{{sfn|Lai|2003|p={{page needed|date=October 2020}}}} linked the concept of ''tathāgatagārbha'' with the ''buddhadhātu''.{{sfn|King|1991|p=14}} The term ''buddhadhātu'' originally referred to [[Śarīra|the relics]] of [[Gautama Buddha]]. In the ''Mahāyāna Mahāparinirvāṇa Sūtra'', it came to be used in place of the concept of ''tathāgatagārbha'', reshaping the worship of physical relics of the historical Buddha into worship of the inner Buddha as a principle of [[Moksha|salvation]].{{sfn|Jikido|2000|p=73}}

The primordial or undefiled mind, the ''tathāgatagārbha'', is also often equated with the [[Buddhist philosophy|Buddhist philosophical concept]] of [[Śūnyatā|emptiness]] (''śūnyatā'', a [[Madhyamaka|Mādhyamaka]] concept);{{sfn|Brunnholzl|2014|p=54}} with the [[Eight Consciousnesses|storehouse-consciousness]] (''ālāyavijñāna'', a [[Yogacara|Yogācāra]] concept);{{sfn|Brunnholzl|2014|p=54}} and with the [[Buddhist philosophy#Huayan|interpenetration of all dharmas]] (in East Asian traditions like [[Huayan]]). The belief in Buddha-nature is central to [[East Asian Buddhism]], which relies on key Buddha-nature sources like the ''Mahāyāna Mahāparinirvāṇa Sūtra''. In [[Tibetan Buddhism]], the concept of Buddha-nature is equally important and often studied through the key Indian treatise on Buddha-nature, the ''[[Ratnagotravibhāga]]'' (3rd–5th century CE).

==Etymology==
{{MahayanaBuddhism}}

===''Tathāgatagarbha''===
The term ''tathāgatagarbha'' may mean "embryonic tathāgata",{{sfn|King|1991|p=4}}{{sfn|Brown|1994|p=44}} "womb of the tathāgata",{{sfn|King|1991|p=4}} or "containing a tathagata".{{sfn|Zimmermann|2002|p=45}} Various meanings may all be brought into mind when the term ''tathagatagarbha'' is being used.{{sfn|Zimmermann|2002|p=45}}

====Compound====
The Sanskrit term ''tathāgatagarbha'' is a compound of two terms, ''[[tathāgata]]'' and ''garbha'':{{sfn|King|1991|p=4}}
* ''tathāgata'' means "the one thus gone", referring to the Buddha. It is composed of "''tathā''" and "''āgata", "thus come"'',{{sfn|King|1991|p=4}} or ''"tathā"'' and ''"gata"'', ''"thus gone"''.{{sfn|King|1991|p=4}}<ref>Brandon, G. S. F., ed. (1972). ''A Dictionary of Buddhism''. (NB: with an "Introduction" by T. O. Ling.) New York, NY, USA: Charles Scribner's Sons. [I]SBN 684-12763-6 (trade cloth) p.240</ref> The term refers to a Buddha, who has "thus gone" from samsara into nirvana, and "thus come" from nirvana into samsara to work for the salvation of all sentient beings.{{sfn|King|1991|p=4}}
* ''garbha'', "womb",{{sfn|King|1991|p=4}}{{sfn|Wayman|1990|p=viii–ix}} "embryo",{{sfn|King|1991|p=4}}{{sfn|Wayman|1990|p=viii–ix}} "center",{{sfn|Wayman|1990|p=viii–ix}} "essence".{{sfn|Lopez|2001|p=263}}{{refn|group=note|According to Wayman & Wayman, the term ''garbha'' takes on various meanings, depending on its context. They translate a passage from the ''Sri-mala-sutra'' as follows: "Lord, this Tathagatagarbha is the Illustrious Dharmadhatu-womb, neither self nor sentient being, nor soul, nor personality. Is the dharmakaya-embryo, not the domain of beings who fall into the belief in a real personality. Is the supramundane ''dharma''-center, not the domain of beings who adhere to wayward views. Is the intrinsically pure ''dharma''-center, not the domain of beings who deviate from voidness".{{sfn|Wayman|1990|p=ix}}}}

====Asian translations====
The Chinese translated the term ''tathāgatagarbha'' as ''rúláizàng'' (如来藏),{{sfn|King|1991|p=4}} or "Tathāgata's (''rúlái'') storehouse" (''zàng'').{{sfn|King|1991|p=48}}{{sfn|Brown|1994|p=45}} According to Brown, "storehouse" may indicate both "that which enfolds or contains something",{{sfn|Brown|1994|p=45}} or "that which is itself enfolded, hidden or contained by another."{{sfn|Brown|1994|p=45}} The Tibetan translation is ''de bzhin gshegs pa'i snying po'', which cannot be translated as "womb" (''mngal'' or ''lhums''), but as "embryonic essence", "kernel" or "heart".{{sfn|Brown|1994|p=45}} The term "heart" was also used by Mongolian translators.{{sfn|Brown|1994|p=45}}

The Tibetan scholar [[Gö Lotsawa Zhönnu-pel|Go Lotsawa]] outlined four meanings of the term ''Tathāgatagarbha'' as used by Indian Buddhist scholars generally: (1) As an [[Rangtong-Shentong#Rangtong|emptiness that is a nonimplicative negation]], (2) the [[Luminous mind|luminous nature of the mind]], (3) [[Alaya-vijnana|alaya-vijñana]] (store-consciousness), (4) all [[bodhisattva]]s and sentient beings.{{sfn|Brunnholzl|2014|p=54}}

====Western translations====
The term ''tathagatagarbha'' first appears in the ''[[Tathāgatagarbha sūtras]]'',{{sfnp|Williams|2008|p=108}} which date to the 2nd and third centuries CE. It is translated and interpreted in various ways by western translators and scholars:
* According to Sally King, the term ''tathāgatagarbha'' may be understood in two ways:{{sfn|King|1991|p=4}}
# "embryonic tathāgata", the incipient Buddha, the ''cause'' of the Tathāgata,
# "womb of the tathāgata", the ''fruit'' of Tathāgata. 
:According to King, the Chinese ''rúláizàng'' was taken in its meaning as "womb" or "fruit".{{sfn|King|1991|p=4}} 
* Wayman & Hideko also point out that the Chinese regularly takes ''garbha'' as "womb",{{sfn|Wayman|1990|p=ix}} but prefer to use the term "embryo".
* According to Brown, following Wayman & Hideko, "embryo" is the best fitting translation, since it preserves "the dynamic, self-transformative nature of the ''tathagatagarbha''."{{sfn|Brown|1994|p=44}}
* According to Zimmermann, ''garbha'' may also mean the interior or center of something,{{sfn|Zimmermann|2002|p=40}} and its essence or central part.{{sfn|Zimmermann|2002|p=41}} As a ''[[tatpuruṣa]]''{{refn|group=note|In [[Sanskrit grammar]] a '''{{IAST|tatpuruṣa}}''' (तत्पुरुष) compound is a dependent determinative [[Compound (linguistics)|compound]], i.e. a compound XY meaning a type of Y which is related to X in a way corresponding to one of the grammatical cases of X.}} it may refer to a person ''being'' a "womb" for or "container" of the tathagata.{{sfn|Zimmermann|2002|p=44}} As a ''[[bahuvrihi]]''{{refn|group=note|A '''bahuvrihi compound''' (from Sanskrit बहुव्रीहि, ''bahuvrīhi'', literally meaning "much rice" but denoting a rich man) is a type of compound that denotes a referent by specifying a certain characteristic or quality the referent possesses.}} it may refer to a person as ''having'' an embryonic tathagata inside.{{sfn|Zimmermann|2002|p=44}} In both cases, this embryonic tathagata still has to be developed.{{sfn|Zimmermann|2002|p=44}} Zimmermann concludes that ''tathagatagarbha'' is a ''bahuvrihi'', meaning "containing a tathagata",{{sfn|Zimmermann|2002|p=45}}{{sfnp|Williams|2008|p=104}}{{refn|group=note|In the ''Maraparinirvana Sutra'' the term ''tathagatagarbha'' replaces the term ''buddhadhatu'', which originally referred to relics. Worship of the physical relics of the Buddha was reshaped into worship of the inner Buddha.{{sfn|Jikido|2000|p=73}}}} but notes the variety of meanings of ''garbha'', such as "containing", "born from", "embryo", "(embracing/concealing) womb", "calyx", "child", "member of a clan", "core", which may all be brought into mind when the term ''tathagatagarbha'' is being used.{{sfn|Zimmermann|2002|p=45}}
* In addition to Zimmerman's statement that ''tathagatagarbha'' most natural means "containing a Tathagata," [[Paul Williams (Buddhist studies scholar)|Paul Williams]] notes that ''garbha'' also means "womb/matrix" and "seed/embryo," and "the innermost part of something." The term ''tathagatagarbha'' can thus also imply "that sentient beings have a tathāgata within them in seed or embryo, that sentient beings are the wombs or matrices of the tathāgata, or that they have a tathāgata as their essence, core, or essential inner nature."{{sfnp|Williams|2008|p=104}}  According to Williams, the term ''tathāgatagarbha'' "may also have been intended simply to answer the question how it is possible that all sentient beings can attain the state of a [[Buddhahood|Buddha]].{{sfnp|Williams|2008|p=105}}

===''Buddhadhātu''===
{{See also|Buddha-mind}}

The term "buddha-nature" ({{CJKV|t=佛性|p=fóxìng}}, {{CJKV|j=busshō}}{{sfn|King|1991|p=4}}) is closely related in meaning to the term ''tathāgatagarbha'', but is not an exact translation of this term.{{sfn|King|1991|p=4}}{{refn|group=note|For the various equivalents of the Sanskrit term "''tathāgatagarbha''" in other languages (Chinese, Japanese, Vietnamese), see [[Glossary of Buddhism]], "tathagatagarbha"}} It refers to what is essential in the human being.{{sfn|King|1991|p=5}}

The corresponding Sanskrit term is ''buddhadhātu''.{{sfn|King|1991|p=4}} It has two meanings, namely the nature of the Buddha, equivalent to the term [[dharmakāya]], and the cause of the Buddha.{{sfn|King|1991|p=4}} The link between the cause and the result is the nature (''dhātu'', see also [[Svabhava]], [[Mahābhūta]], and [[Skandha#Eighteen dhātus and four paramatthas|Eighteen dhātus]]) which is common to both, namely the dharmadhātu.{{sfn|King|1991|p=5}}

Matsumoto Shirō also points out that "buddha-nature" translates the Sanskrit-term buddhadhātu, a "place to put something," a "foundation," a "locus."{{sfn|Shirō|1997|p=169}} According to Shirō, it does not mean "original nature" or "essence," nor does it mean the "possibility of the attainment of Buddhahood," "the original nature of the Buddha," or "the essence of the Buddha."{{sfn|Shirō|1997|p=169}}

In the [[Vajrayana]], the term for buddha-nature is ''sugatagarbha''.

==Indian Sutra sources==
{{Main|Tathāgatagarbha sūtras}}

=== Historical precursors ===
According to [[Alex Wayman]], the idea of the ''tathāgatagarbha'' is grounded on sayings by the Buddha that there is something called the [[luminous mind]] (''prabhasvaracitta''), "which is only adventitiously covered over by defilements ([[Kleshas (Buddhism)|agantuka klesha]])."{{sfn|Wayman|1990|p=42}}{{sfn|Gregory|1991|p=288-289}} The luminous mind is mentioned in a passage from the ''[[Anguttara Nikaya]]'' (which has various parallels) which states that the mind is luminous but "is defiled by incoming defilements."<ref>Thanissaro Bhikkhu, trans. (1995). [http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/an/an01/an01.049.than.html Pabhassara Sutta: Luminous], (Anguttara Nikaya 1.49–52)</ref>{{sfn|Harvey|1995|p=56}} {{refn|Harvey mentions AN 1.10: "Monks, this mind (''[[citta]]'') is brightly shining (''pabhassara''), but it is defiled by defilements which arrive". AN 1.49–52 gives a similar statement|group=note}} The [[Mahāsāṃghika]] school coupled this idea with the idea of the "root consciousness" ([[Eight Consciousnesses|mulavijñana]]) which serves as the basic layer of the mind and which is held to have a self-nature (''cittasvabhāva'') which is pure (''visuddhi'') and undefiled.{{sfn|Wayman|1990|p=42}}<ref>Bareau, André (1955) ''Buddhist Sects of the Small Vehicle (Les Sectes Bouddhiques du Petit Véhicule),'' Translated from the French by Gelongma Migme Chodron (2005), p. 56.</ref> In some of the [[Tathāgatagarbha sūtras|tathagatagarbha-sutras]] a consciousness which is naturally pure (''prakṛti-pariśuddha'') is regarded to be the seed from which Buddhahood grows. Wayman thus argues that the pure luminous mind doctrine formed the basis for the classic buddha-nature doctrine.{{sfn|Wayman|1990|p=42}}

[[Karl Brunnholzl]] writes that the first probable mention of the term ''tathāgatagarbha'' is in the ''Ekottarika [[Āgama (Buddhism)|Agama]]'' (though here it is used in a different way than in later texts). The passage states:
{{blockquote|If someone devotes himself to the Ekottarikagama, Then he has the ''tathagatagarbha''. Even if his body cannot exhaust defilements in this life, In his next life he will attain supreme wisdom.{{sfn|Brunnholzl|2014|p=3}}}}
This tathāgatagarbha idea was the result of an interplay between various strands of Buddhist thought, on the nature of human consciousness and the means of awakening.{{sfn|Williams|2000|p=161}}{{sfn|Lusthaus|1998|p={{page needed|date=October 2020}}}}{{sfn|Lai|2003|p={{page needed|date=October 2020}}}} Gregory sees this doctrine as implying that enlightenment is the natural state of the mind.{{sfn|Gregory|1991|p=288-289}}

==== ''Avatamsaka'' and ''Lotus Sutras'' ====
According to Wayman, the teachings of the ''[[Avatamsaka Sutra|Avataṃsaka Sūtra]]'' (1st–3rd century CE), which say that the Buddha's knowledge is all pervasive and is present in all sentient beings were also an important step in the development of buddha-nature thought.{{sfn|Wayman|1990|p=42}} The ''Avataṃsaka Sūtra'' does not mention the term ''tathāgatagarbha'', but the idea of "a universal penetration of sentient beings by the wisdom of the Buddha (''buddhajñāna'')," is seen by some scholars as complementary to the ''tathāgatagarbha'' concept.{{sfn|Brown|1994|p=44}}

The ''[[Lotus Sutra]]'', written between 100 BCE and 200 CE, also does not use the term ''tathāgatagarbha'', but Japanese scholars suggest that a similar idea is nevertheless expressed or implied in the text.<ref>Hirakawa quoted in: {{cite book |last=Shiro |first=Matsumoto |title=Pruning the Bodhi Tree: The Storm Over Critical Buddhism |publisher=University of Hawaii Press |year=1997 |editor-last1=Hubbard |editor-first1=Jamie |page=393 |chapter=The Lotus Sutra and Japanese Culture |editor-last2=Swanson |editor-first2=Paul Loren}}</ref><ref>Nakamura, Hajime (1999), Indian Buddhism: A Survey With Bibliographical Notes, Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass Publishers, p. 190</ref> The tenth chapter emphasizes that all living beings can become a Buddha.{{sfn|Reeves|2008|pp=15–16}} The twelfth chapter of the ''Lotus Sutra'' details that the potential to become enlightened is universal among all people, even the historical [[Devadatta]] has the potential to become a buddha.{{sfn|Reeves|2008|p=5}} East Asian commentaries saw these teachings as indicating that the Lotus sutra was also drawing on the concept of the universality of buddha-nature.<ref>{{cite book |last1=Teiser |first1=Stephen F. |title=Readings of the Lotus Sutra |last2=Stone |first2=Jacqueline Ilyse |date=2009 |publisher=Columbia University Press |isbn=9780231142885 |editor-last1=Teiser |editor-first1=Stephen F. |location=New York |page=22 |chapter=Interpreting the Lotus Sutra |author1-link=Stephen F. Teiser |author2-link=Jacqueline Stone |editor-last2=Stone |editor-first2=Jacqueline Ilyse}}</ref> The sutra shares other themes and ideas with the later [[tathāgatagarbha sūtras]] and thus several scholars theorize that it was an influence on these texts.{{sfn|Reeves|2008|pp=15–16}}{{sfn|Brunnholzl|2014|p=50}}{{sfn|Zimmermann|1999|pp=165–166}}

=== ''Tathāgatagarbha Sūtra'' and ''Nirvana Sūtra'' ===
[[File:Rice_Grains.jpg|thumb|240x240px|The ''Tathāgatagarbha Sūtra'' states that the tathāgatagarbha is like the grain of rice contained inside of the husk of the rice plant]]
[[File:029_Buddha_holding_Lotus_(34343111194).jpg|thumb|The ''Tathāgatagarbha Sūtra'' uses the image of a Buddha within a lotus flower as a metaphor for the tathāgatagarbha]]
According to Zimmerman, the ''[[Tathāgatagarbha Sūtra]]'' (200–250 CE) is the earliest buddha-nature text. Zimmerman argues that "the term ''tathāgatagarbha'' itself seems to have been coined in this very sutra."{{sfn|Zimmermann|1999|pp=143–168}} The ''Tathāgatagarbha Sūtra'' states that all beings already have perfect Buddha body (''*tathāgatatva, *buddhatva, *tathāgatakāya'') within themselves, but do not recognize it because it is covered over by afflictions.<ref name=":0">Williams, Paul (2008). ''Mahayana Buddhism: The Doctrinal Foundations,'' p. 104. Routledge''.''</ref>{{sfn|Wayman|1990|p=47-48}}{{sfn|Zimmermann|2002|pp=39 ff. and 50 ff.}}{{sfn|Brunnholzl|2014|p=12}}<ref name=":2">Brunnholzl, Karl, When the Clouds Part, The ''Uttaratantra'' and Its Meditative Tradition as a Bridge between Sutra and Tantra, Snow Lion, Boston & London, 2014, page 57.</ref>

The ''Tathāgatagarbha Sūtra'' uses nine similes to illustrate the concept:<ref name=":3">Brunnholzl, Karl, When the Clouds Part, The ''Uttaratantra'' and Its Meditative Tradition as a Bridge between Sutra and Tantra, Snow Lion, Boston & London, 2014, page 66.</ref>
{{blockquote|This [tathāgatagarbha] abides within the shroud of the afflictions, as should be understood through [the following nine] examples: Just like a buddha in a decaying lotus, honey amidst bees, a grain in its husk, gold in filth, a treasure underground, a shoot and so on sprouting from a little fruit, a statue of the Victorious One in a tattered rag, a ruler of humankind in a destitute woman's womb, and a precious image under clay, this [buddha] element abides within all sentient beings, obscured by the defilement of the adventitious poisons.}}

Another important and early source for buddha-nature is the ''[[Mahāyāna Mahāparinirvāṇa Sūtra]] (''often just called the ''Nirvana Sutra),'' possibly dating to the 2nd century CE. Some scholars like Michael Radich argue that this is the earliest buddha-nature sutra.<ref>Radich, Michael (2015), ''The Mahāparinivāṇa-mahasūtra and the Emergence of Tathagatagarba Doctrine'', pp. 101–102. (Hamburg Buddhist Studies Vol. 5), Hamburg University Press.</ref> This sutra was very influential in the development of [[East Asian Buddhism]].{{sfn|Lai|2003|p={{page needed|date=October 2020}}}}  The ''Mahāparinirvāṇa Sūtra'' linked the concept of tathāgatagarbha with the "buddhadhātu" ("buddha-nature" or "buddha-element") and it also equates these with the eternal and pure Buddha-body, the Dharmakaya, also called ''vajrakaya''.{{sfn|King|1991|p=14}}{{sfn|Yamamoto|1975}}{{sfn|King|1991|p=14}}  The sutra also presents the buddha-nature or tathagatagarbha as a "Self" or a true self ([[Atman (Buddhism)|ātman]]), though it also attempts to argue that this claim is not incompatible with the teaching of [[Anattā|not-self]] (anatman).{{sfn|Gethin|1998|p=52}}{{sfn|Williams|2002|pp=163–164}}{{sfn|Williams|2002|pp=163–164}} The ''Nirvana sutra'' further claims that buddha-nature (and the Buddha's body, his Dharmakaya) is characterized by four perfections (pāramitās) or qualities: permanence (''nitya''), bliss (''sukha''), self (''ātman''), and purity (''śuddha).<ref name=":7">{{Cite web |title=Mahāparinirvāṇasūtra (Buddha-nature, Tsadra Foundation) |url=https://buddhanature.tsadra.org/index.php/Texts/Mah%C4%81parinirv%C4%81%E1%B9%87as%C5%ABtra |access-date=2023-09-28 |website=buddhanature.tsadra.org |language=en}}</ref>''

=== Other important buddha-nature sutras ===
Other important tathāgatagarbha sutras include:<ref>Radich, Michael. "Tathāgatagarbha Scriptures." In ''Brill's Encyclopedia of Buddhism, Volume One: Literature and Languages'', edited by Jonathan Silk, Oskar von Hinüber, and Vincent Eltschinger, 261–273. Leiden: Brill, 2015.</ref><ref>Brunnholzl, Karl (2014). ''When the Clouds Part, The Uttaratantra and Its Meditative Tradition as a Bridge between Sutra and Tantra''. Boston & London: Snow Lion.</ref>

* The ''[[Śrīmālādevī Siṃhanāda Sūtra]]'' (''The Lion's Roar of Queen Srimala,'' c. 3rd century CE) which discusses the ''tathāgatagarbha'' along with other key Mahayana doctrines like the [[Ekayāna|one vehicle]] and the [[luminous mind]] and links them to buddha-nature thought.{{sfn|Brown|1994|p=10}} This sutra also states that the mind's luminous nature, while being empty of adventitious defilements, is ''not empty'' of limitless buddha qualities.<ref name=":5">{{Cite web |title=Śrīmālādevīsūtra – Buddha-Nature |url=https://buddhanature.tsadra.org/index.php/Texts/%C5%9Ar%C4%ABm%C4%81l%C4%81dev%C4%ABs%C5%ABtra |access-date=2023-10-13 |website=buddhanature.tsadra.org}}</ref> Furthermore, the ''Śrīmālādevī'' also says that the tathāgatagarbha is the basis of both saṃsāra and nirvāṇa and equates it with the dharmakāya (which is described as "permanent," "eternal," "everlasting," and "peaceful").<ref name=":5" /> 
* The ''[[Anūnatvāpurnatvanirdeśa]]'' (''The Teaching of Neither Increase nor Decrease''). This sutra states that there is no increase or decrease in the “realm (or domain, or element) of (sentient) beings” (''sattvadhātu''), which is really a single domain ''(*ekadhātu)'' that is equally [[Saṃsāra|samsara]] and [[buddhahood]] and is equated with the “originally pure mind” (''*prakṛtipariśuddhacitta'') and ''tathāgatagarbha''.<ref>{{Cite web |title=Anūnatvāpūrṇatvanirdeśaparivarta – Buddha-Nature |url=https://buddhanature.tsadra.org/index.php/Texts/An%C5%ABnatv%C4%81p%C5%ABr%E1%B9%87atvanirde%C5%9Baparivarta |access-date=2023-10-13 |website=buddhanature.tsadra.org}}</ref> 
* The ''[[Aṅgulimālīya Sūtra]]'' (2nd c. CE) – Features the mass murderer convert [[Angulimala|Aṅgulimāla]] as a central character (now reformed and turned into a bodhisattva). The text attributes various qualities to the universal tathāgatagarbha, such as non-arising, independence, invariability, and not being the perceptive mind.
* ''[[Mahābheri Sūtra]]'' (''Great Drum Sutra'') – Describes buddha nature as luminous and pure, as eternal, everlasting, peaceful and self (''ātman'').<ref>{{Cite web |title=Mahābherīsūtra – Buddha-Nature |url=https://buddhanature.tsadra.org/index.php/Texts/Mah%C4%81bher%C4%ABs%C5%ABtra |access-date=2023-10-13 |website=buddhanature.tsadra.org}}</ref>
* ''[[Mahāmegha Sūtra]]'' (''Great Cloud Sutra'') - Like the ''Nirvana sutra'' this sutra also teaches the eternity of Buddhas (and their [[Docetism|docetic]] nature) and the four perfections of permanence, bliss, self and purity as qualities of the Buddha. It also discusses the non-dual nature of all sentient beings with the [[Dharmadhatu]] along with four hundred types of samādhi.<ref>{{Cite web |title=Mahāmeghasūtra – Buddha-Nature |url=https://buddhanature.tsadra.org/index.php/Texts/Mah%C4%81meghas%C5%ABtra |access-date=2023-10-13 |website=buddhanature.tsadra.org}}</ref>
* The ''[[Dhāraṇīśvararāja sūtra]]'' is a key source for the ''[[Ratnagotravibhāga]]''<nowiki/>'s seven main vajra topics.<ref name=":32">{{Cite web |title=Dhāraṇīśvararājasūtra – Buddha-Nature |url=https://buddhanature.tsadra.org/index.php/Texts/Dh%C4%81ra%E1%B9%87%C4%AB%C5%9Bvarar%C4%81jas%C5%ABtra |access-date=2023-08-12 |website=buddhanature.tsadra.org}}</ref><ref name=":22">{{Cite web |last=Burchardi |first=Anne |title=The Teaching on the Great Compassion of the Tathāgata |url=https://read.84000.co/translation/toh147.html |access-date=2023-08-11 |website=84000 Translating The Words of The Buddha |language=en}}</ref> It explicitly points out that the nature of the minds of sentient beings is [[Luminous mind|fundamentally pure]] (''cittaprakrtivisuddhi'').<ref>O'Neill, Alexander James; Dharmacakṣus, Āloka; Patton, Charles (2023). ''The Great Collection Sūtra: A Translation of the Mahāsaṃnipāta Sūtra'', ''Volume One'', p. xxii. Dharmakāya Books. ISBN 978-1-7394725-0-4.</ref> 
* The ''[[Laṅkāvatāra Sūtra]]'' (compiled 350–400 CE) synthesized the tathāgatagarbha doctrine and teachings of the [[Yogachara|Yogācāra]] school, like the [[Eight Consciousnesses#Ālayavijñāna|ālāya-vijñāna]] (storehouse consciousness) and the "three natures".{{sfn|Harvey|1995|p=114}} According to the ''Laṅkāvatāra'', tathāgatagarbha is the same as the ālayavijñāna (though this is qualified in other passages which explain that there are two layers of the ālayavijñāna, a pure and an impure layer).<ref name=":4">Brunnholzl, Karl, When the Clouds Part, The ''Uttaratantra'' and Its Meditative Tradition as a Bridge between Sutra and Tantra, Snow Lion, Boston & London, 2014, p. 66.</ref> The storehouse consciousness is supposed to contain the pure tathāgatagarbha, from which awakening arises.{{sfn|Gregory|1991|p=288-289}} Wayman notes that this synthesis of tathāgatagarbha thought and Yogacara Buddhism is a key innovation of the ''Laṅkāvatāra.''{{sfn|Wayman|1990|p=53}}{{refn|In the [[Menngagde|Seminal Heart]] series of [[Dzogchen]] a distinction is made between ''kun gzhi'', c.q. ''ālaya'', "the base of it all", the samsaric basis of consciousness, of all the samsaric appearances; and ''[[Ground (Dzogchen)|gzhi]]'', "the nirvanic basis known as the ground."{{sfn|Schaik|2004}} Sam van Schaik: "....the Seminal Heart distinction between two types of basis, the nirvanic basis known as the ground (gzhi) and the samsaric basis of consciousness, the ālaya (kun gzhi).{{sfn|Schaik|2004}} [[Philip Kapleau]], in "The Three Pillars of Zen", drawing from Harada roshi, discerns a "Pure Consciousness" or "Formless Self" underlying the ālāya-vijñāna.{{sfn|Kapleau|1989|p={{page needed|date=October 2020}}}} This 9th consciousness was also mentioned by Paramārtha, a 6th century Indian translator working in China.{{sfn|Lusthaus|1998|p=84}}|group=note}}
* The ''[[Ghanavyūha Sūtra|Ghanavyūha sūtra]]'' is another sutra which synthesizes Yogācāra doctrines like the [[Yogachara|three natures]] and the [[Eight Consciousnesses|ālayavijñāna]] (storehouse consciousness) with the tathāgatagarbha teaching''.''<ref name=":1">Brunnholzl, Karl (2014). ''When the Clouds Part, The Uttaratantra and Its Meditative Tradition as a Bridge between Sutra and Tantra,'' pp. 38–41. Boston & London: Snow Lion.</ref>

==Indian commentaries==
The ''tathāgatagarbha'' doctrine was also widely discussed by Indian Mahayana scholars in treatises or commentaries, called [[shastra|śāstra]], the most influential of which was the [[Ratnagotravibhāga]] (5th century CE).

===''Ratnagotravibhāga''===
[[File:Thunderbolt_(Vajra;_Tibetan-_Dorje)_LACMA_AC1994.176.1.jpg|thumb|A ritual [[vajra]], a symbol of indestructibility, which is used in the ''Ratnagotravibhāga'' as an image of the [[adamant]]ine-like permanence of buddha nature.]]
The ''[[Ratnagotravibhāga]]'' (''Investigating the Jewel Disposition'')'','' also called ''Uttaratantraśāstra'' (''Treatise on the Ultimate Continuum''), is a 5th century CE Indian treatise ([[shastra|śāstra]]) which synthesised major elements and themes of the tathāgatagārbha theory.{{sfn|Brown|1994|p=44}} It gives an overview of key themes found in many tathāgatagarbha sutras, and it cites the ''Tathāgatagarbha Sūtra'', the ''Śrīmālādevī Siṃhanāda Sūtra'', ''Mahāparinirvāṇa Sūtra'', the ''[[Aṅgulimālīya Sūtra]]'', the ''[[Anunatva-Apurnatva-Nirdesa]]'' and the ''Mahābherīharaka-sūtra''.{{sfn|Wayman|1990|p=43}} The ''Ratnagotravibhāga'' presents the tathāgatagarbha as "an ultimate, unconditional reality that is simultaneously the inherent, dynamic process towards its complete manifestation".{{sfn|Brown|1994|p=46}} Mundane and enlightened reality are seen as complementary:
{{blockquote|Thusness [''tathata''] defiled is the Tathagatagarbha, and Thusness undefiled is Enlightenment.{{sfn|Wayman|1990|p=45}}}}

In the ''Ratnagotravibhāga'', the tathāgatagarbha is seen as having three specific characteristics: (1) [[Dharmakāya|dharmakaya]], (2) [[suchness]], and (3) disposition, as well as the general characteristic (4) non-[[Conceptual proliferation|conceptuality]].{{sfn|Brunnholzl|2014|p=54}}

According to the ''Ratnagotravibhāga'', all sentient beings have "the embryo of the Tathagata" in three senses:{{sfn|Wayman|1990|p=46}}
# the Tathāgata's dharmakāya permeates all sentient beings;
# the Tathāgata's ''[[tathatā]]'' is omnipresent (''avyatibheda'');
# the Tathāgata's species (''gotra'', a synonym for tathagatagarbha) occurs in them.

The ''Ratnagotravibhāga'' equates enlightenment with the nirvāṇa-realm and the [[dharmakāya]].{{sfn|Wayman|1990|p=45}} It gives a variety of synonyms for ''garbha'', the most frequently used being ''gotra'' and ''dhatu''.{{sfn|Brown|1994|p=46}}

This text also explains the tathāgatagarbha in terms of [[luminous mind]], stating that "the luminous nature of the mind Is unchanging, just like space."{{sfn|Brunnholzl|2014|p=57}}

=== Other possible Indian treatises on buddha-nature ===
Takasaki Jikido notes various buddha nature treatises which exist only in Chinese and which are similar in some ways to the ''Ratnagotra''. These works are unknown in other textual traditions and scholars disagree on whether they are translations, original compositions or a mixture of the two. These works are:<ref>Takasaki, Jikido (1966). ''A Study on the Ratnagotravibhāga (Uttaratantra) Being a Treatise on the Tathāgatagarbha Theory of Mahāyāna Buddhism'' (Rome Oriental Series 33). Rome: Istituto Italiano per il Medio ed Estremo Oriente, pp. 45–52.</ref>

* ''[[Dharmadhātvaviśeṣaśāstra]]'' (''Dasheng fajie wuchabie lun'' 大乘法界無差別論), said to have been translated by [[Paramartha]] and attributed to Saramati (the same author which the Chinese tradition states wrote the ''Ratnagotra'').
* ''Buddhagotraśāstra'' (佛性論, ''Fó xìng lùn, Buddha-nature treatise'', Taishō 1610), said to have been translated by [[Paramartha]] and is attributed by Chinese tradition to [[Vasubandhu]]
* ''Anuttarâśrayasūtra'', which according to Takasaki "is clearly a composition based upon the Ratna."

=== Madhyamaka school ===
Indian [[Madhyamaka]] philosophers interpreted the theory as a description of [[Śūnyatā|emptiness]] and as a non implicative negation. [[Bhāviveka|Bhaviveka]]'s ''Tarkajvala'' states:

{{blockquote|[The expression] "possessing the tathagata heart" is [used] because emptiness, signlessness, wishlessness, and so on, exist in the mind streams of all sentient beings. However, it is not something like a permanent and all-pervasive person that is the inner agent. For we find [passages] such as "All phenomena have the nature of emptiness, signlessness, and wishlessness. What is emptiness, signlessness, and wishlessness is the Tathagata."{{sfn|Brunnholzl|2014|p=55}} }}

According to [[Chandrakirti|Candrakirti]]'s ''Madhyamakāvatārabhāsya'' the storehouse consciousness "is nothing but emptiness that is taught through the term 'alaya-consciousness.'"{{sfn|Brunnholzl|2014|p=55}} [[Gö Lotsawa Zhönnu-pel|Go Lotsawa]] states that this statement is referencing the tathāgatagarbha doctrine.{{sfn|Brunnholzl|2014|p=55}} Candrakirti's ''Madhyamakāvatārabhāsya'' also argues, basing itself on the ''Lankavatara sutra'', that "the statement of the emptiness of sentient beings being a buddha adorned with all major and minor marks is of expedient meaning".{{sfn|Brunnholzl|2014|p=55}}

[[Kamalaśīla|Kamalasila]]'s (c. 740–795) ''Madhyamakaloka'' associates tathāgatagarbha with [[Luminous mind|luminosity]] and luminosity with [[Śūnyatā|emptiness]]. According to Kamalasila the idea that all sentient beings have tathāgatagarbha means that all beings can attain full awakening and also refers to how "the term tathāgata expresses that the dharmadhātu, which is characterized by personal and phenomenal identitylessness, is natural luminosity."{{sfn|Brunnholzl|2014|p=56}}

[[Paul Williams (British professor)|Paul Williams]] puts forward the Madhyamaka interpretation of the buddha-nature as emptiness in the following terms:{{blockquote|… 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.{{sfn|Williams|2000|pp=164–165}}}}

Uniquely among [[Madhyamaka]] texts, some texts attributed to [[Nagarjuna]], mainly poetic works like the ''[[Dharmadhātustava|Dharmadhatustava]], Cittavajrastava'', and ''Bodhicittavivarana,'' associate the term tathāgatagarbha with the [[Luminous mind|luminous nature of the mind]].{{sfn|Brunnholzl|2014|p=57}}

=== Yogācāra school ===
{{See also|Eight Consciousnesses#Transformations of consciousness|l1=Transformations of consciousness}}

According to Brunnholzl, "all early Indian [[Yogachara|Yogācāra]] masters (such as [[Asanga]], [[Vasubandhu]], [[Sthiramati]], and Asvabhava), if they refer to the term tathāgatagarbha at all, always explain it as nothing but [[Tathātā|suchness]] in the sense of twofold identitylessness".{{sfn|Brunnholzl|2014|p=56}}

Some later Yogacara scholars spoke of the tathāgatagarbha in more positive terms, such as [[Jñanasrimitra]] who in his ''Sakarasiddhi'' equates it with the appearances of lucidity ([[prakāśa]]-rupa). Likewise, the Vikramashila scholar [[Ratnākaraśānti]] describes buddha-nature as the natural luminous mind, which is a non-dual self-awareness. Brunnholzl also notes that for Ratnākaraśānti, this luminosity is equivalent to the Yogacara concept of the perfected nature, which he sees as an implicative negation.{{sfn|Brunnholzl|2014|p=58}} Ratnākaraśānti also describes this ultimate self-nature as radiance ([[prakāśa]], ‘shining forth’), which is the capacity to appear (pratibhāsa).<ref>Kei Kataoka, Ratnakarasanti on Prakasa, ''インド学チベット学研究'', 22, 224–239, 2019.07.</ref>

The Yogācāra concept of the [[Eight Consciousnesses|alaya-vijñana]] (store consciousness) also came to be associated by some scholars with the tathāgatagarbha. This can be seen in sutras like the ''Lankavatara'', the ''Srimaladevi'' and in the translations of [[Paramartha]].{{sfn|Brunnholzl|2014|p=63}} The concept of the ālaya-vijñāna originally meant defiled consciousness: defiled by the workings of [[Ayatana|the five senses and the mind]]. It was also seen as the mūla-vijñāna, the base-consciousness or "stream of consciousness" ([[Mindstream]]) from which awareness and perception spring.<ref>{{cite book |last1=Kalupahana |first1=David J. |date=1987 |title=The Principles of Buddhist Psychology |publisher=State University of New York Press |isbn=9780887064043 |url=http://www.ahandfulofleaves.org/documents/Principles%20of%20Buddhist%20Psychology_Kalupahana.pdf |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140702203638/http://www.ahandfulofleaves.org/documents/Principles%20of%20Buddhist%20Psychology_Kalupahana.pdf |url-status=dead |archive-date=July 2, 2014 |access-date=4 May 2015}}</ref>

Around 300 CE, the Yogācāra school systematized the prevalent ideas on the nature of the Buddha in the [[Trikaya]] (triple body) doctrine, in which the Buddha is held to have three bodies: Nirmanakaya (transformation body which people see on earth), [[Sambhogakāya]] (a subtle body which appears to bodhisattvas) and the Dharmakāya (ultimate reality).{{sfn|Snelling|1987|p=126}} This doctrine was also later to be synthesized with buddha-nature teachings by various sources (with buddha-nature generally referring to the Dharmakaya as it does in some sutras).

The Yogācāra school also had a doctrine of "gotra" (lineage, family) which held that there were [[Yogacara#Five Categories of Beings|five categories of living beings]] each with their own inner nature. To make this teaching compatible with the notion of buddha-nature in all beings, Yogācāra scholars in China such as Tz'u-en (慈恩, 632–682) the first patriarch in China, advocated two types of nature: the latent nature found in all beings (理佛性) and the buddha-nature in practice (行佛性). The latter nature was determined by the innate [[Bīja|seeds]] in the alaya.<ref name="groner">{{cite book |last=Groner |first=Paul |title=The Establishment of the Tendai School |publisher=University of Hawaii Press |year=2000 |isbn=0824823710 |pages=97–100}}</ref>

==East Asian Buddhism==
[[File:Sui_Mahayana_Mahaparinirvana_Sutra.JPG|thumb|250x250px|A [[Sui dynasty]] manuscript of the ''Nirvāṇa Sūtra'']]
The doctrines associated with buddha-nature (Chinese: ''fóxìng'') and tathāgatagarbha (''rúláizàng'') were extremely influential in the development of [[East Asian Buddhism]].{{sfn|Williams|2000|p=161}} The buddha-nature idea was introduced into China with the translation of the [[Mahāyāna Mahāparinirvāṇa Sūtra|''Nirvana Sutra'']] in the early fifth century and this text became the central source of buddha-nature doctrine in [[Chinese Buddhism]].<ref name=":6">{{cite journal |last=Liu |first=Ming-Wood |date=April 1985 |title=The Yogaacaaraa and Maadhyamika Interpretation of the buddha-nature Concept in Chinese Buddhism |journal=Philosophy East and West |publisher=University of Hawaii Press |volume=35 |issue=2 |pages=171–192 |doi=10.2307/1399049 |jstor=1399049}}</ref> When Buddhism was introduced to [[China]], it was initially understood through comparing it with native [[Chinese philosophy|Chinese philosophies]] such as [[Xuanxue|neo-daoism.]]<ref name=":11">Hurley, Scott, The doctrinal transformation of twentieth-century Chinese Buddhism: Master Yinshun's interpretation of the tathagatagarbha doctrine, Contemporary Buddhism, Vol. 5, No. 1, 2004.</ref> Based on their understanding of the ''Mahayana Mahaparinirvana Sutra'' some Chinese Buddhists 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 [[Śūnyatā|emptiness]] and [[Two truths doctrine|the two truths]].{{sfn|Lai|2003|p=11}} This idea was often interpreted as being similar to the ideas of the [[Tao|Dao]], non-being (''wu''), and [[Li (Neo-Confucianism)|Principle (Li)]] in Chinese philosophy and developed into what was called "[[Essence-Function|essence-function]]" thought (體用, pinyin: ''tǐ yòng'') which held there were two main ontological levels to reality, the most foundational being the buddha-nature, the "essence" of all phenomena (which in turn were the "functions" of buddha-nature).<ref>Muller, A. Charles (1999), "Essence-Function and Interpenetration: Early Chinese Origins and Manifestations", Bulletin of Toyo Gakuen University, 7</ref>{{sfn|Lai|2003|p=11}}

===''Awakening of Faith in the Mahāyāna''===
[[File:대승기신론소_(보물_제1713호).jpg|thumb|275x275px|A page of a commentary on the ''Awakening of Faith,'' one of the most influential buddha-nature works in East Asian Buddhism.]]
''[[Awakening of Faith in the Mahayana|The Awakening of Faith in the Mahayana]]'' (''Dàshéng Qǐxìn Lùn'') was very influential in the development of Chinese Buddhism {{sfn|Lai|2003|p={{page needed|date=October 2020}}}} While the text is traditionally attributed to the Indian [[Aśvaghoṣa]], no Sanskrit version of the text is extant. The earliest known versions are written in Chinese, and contemporary scholars believe that the text is a Chinese composition.<ref>Nattier, Jan. The Heart Sūtra: A Chinese Apocryphal Text? ''Journal of the International Association of Buddhist Studies'' Vol. 15 (2), 180–181, 1992. [http://archiv.ub.uni-heidelberg.de/ojs/index.php/jiabs/article/download/8800/2707 PDF] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20131029190717/http://archiv.ub.uni-heidelberg.de/ojs/index.php/jiabs/article/download/8800/2707 |date=2013-10-29 }}</ref><ref>Robert Buswell, Jr. (1990). ''Chinese Buddhist Apocrypha''. University of Hawaii Press. {{ISBN|0-8248-1253-0}}. pp. 1–29.</ref>

''The Awakening of Faith'' offers an ontological synthesis of buddha-nature and Yogacara thought from the perspective of "essence-function" philosophy.{{sfn|Lai|2003 |pp=11–12}}{{sfn|Williams|1994|p=109-110}}<ref>Lusthaus, Dan (1998). [http://www.rep.routledge.com/article/G002SECT5 Buddhist philosophy, Chinese] {{webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140716224128/http://www.rep.routledge.com/article/G002SECT5|date=July 16, 2014}}. In E. Craig (Ed.), Routledge Encyclopedia of Philosophy. London: Routledge.</ref><ref name="eob">{{cite encyclopedia |year=2004 |title=Awakening Of Faith (Dasheng Qixin Lun) |encyclopedia=MacMillan Encyclopedia of Buddhism |publisher=MacMillan Reference USA |location=New York |last=Hsieh |first=Ding-Hwa |volume=1 |pages=38–9 |isbn=0-02-865719-5}}</ref> It describes the "One Mind" which "includes in itself all states of being of the phenomenal and the transcendental world."{{sfn|Williams|1994|p=109-110}} The ''Awakening of Faith'' tries to harmonize the ideas of the tathāgatagarbha and the storehouse consciousness (ālāyavijñāna) into a single theory which sees self, world, mind and ultimate realty as an integrated "one mind", which is the ultimate substratum of all things (including samsara and nirvana).{{sfn|Lai|2003|p={{page needed|date=October 2020}}}}<ref name=":03">Williams, Paul (2008). ''Mahayana Buddhism: The Doctrinal Foundations,'' p. 116. Routledge.</ref>

In the ''Awakening of Faith'' the "one mind" has two aspects, namely "the aspect of enlightenment," (which is ''[[Tathātā|tathata]]'', suchness, the true nature of things), and "the aspect of nonenlightenment" (''[[Saṃsāra|samsara]]'', the cycle of birth and death, defilement and ignorance).{{sfn|Lai|2003|pp=11–12}}<ref name=":03"/> This text was in line with an essay by [[Emperor Wu of Liang|Emperor Wu]] of the [[Liang 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 ''tathāgatagarba'' and the idea of the defilement of the luminous mind.{{sfn|Lai|2003|pp=11–12}}

In a similar fashion to the ''Awakening of Faith'', the Korean ''[[Vajrasamadhi-sutra|Vajrasamādhi Sūtra]]'' (685 CE) uses the doctrine of [[Essence-Function]] to explain the tathāgatagarbha (also called "the dharma of the one mind" and [[Hongaku|original enlightenment]]) as having two elements: one essential, immutable, changeless and still (the "essence"); the other an active and salvational inspirational power (function).<ref>Buswell, Robert E. Jr. (2007). ''Cultivating Original Enlightenment''. Honolulu: University of Hawai'i Press: p. 10.</ref>

===Strong tathāgatagarbha theory versus weak tathāgatagarbha theory===
According to Ching Keng, there are two different types of tathāgatagarbha theory: [1] weak tathāgatagarbha theory, associated with texts such as the ''[[Ratnagotravibhāga]]''; and [2] strong tathāgatagarbha theory, associated with such texts as the ''[[Awakening of Faith in the Mahayana|Awakening of Faith]]''.<ref>Ching Keng, Toward a New Image of Paramārtha Yogācāra and Tathāgatagarbha Buddhism Revisited, pages 13-14, Bloomsbury Academic, 2023</ref> 

According to the weak theory, although [[Tathātā|thusness]] pervades all sentient beings, it is strictly unchanging and unconditioned.<ref>Ching Keng, Toward a New Image of Paramārtha Yogācāra and Tathāgatagarbha Buddhism Revisited, pages 14, 191, Bloomsbury Academic, 2023</ref> Thus, it can have no effects in sentient beings and does not play an active role in their liberation.<ref>Ching Keng, Toward a New Image of Paramārtha Yogācāra and Tathāgatagarbha Buddhism Revisited, page 192, Bloomsbury Academic, 2023</ref> On the other hand, strong tathāgatagarbha theory blurs the distinction between the conditioned and the unconditioned and maintains that thusness, while unconditioned, nonetheless evolves into conditioned dharmas.<ref>Ching Keng, Toward a New Image of Paramārtha Yogācāra and Tathāgatagarbha Buddhism Revisited, page 190, Bloomsbury Academic, 2023</ref> Keng associates the weak theory with the Indian understanding of tathāgatagarbha and the strong theory with that of Chinese Buddhism.<ref>Ching Keng, Toward a New Image of Paramārtha Yogācāra and Tathāgatagarbha Buddhism Revisited, page 177, Bloomsbury Academic, 2023</ref> 

Similarly, Buswell observes that while the passive aspect of the tathāgatagarbha can be seen from the earliest stratum of tathāgatagarbha literature, East Asian texts such as [[Wonhyo|Wŏnhyo's]] commentary on the ''[[Vajrasamadhi-sutra|Vajrasamādhi Sūtra]]'' emphasize the tathāgatagarbha as an active agent which constantly exerts a beneficial influence on sentient beings.<ref>Cultivating Original Enlightenment, Wŏnhyo's Exposition of the Vajrasamādhi-Sūtra, translated with an Introduction by Robert E. Buswell Jr., pages 5-6, 11-12, University of Hawai'i Press, 2007</ref>

=== In Chinese Yogacara and Madhyamaka ===
By the 6th century CE, buddha-nature had been well established in Chinese Buddhism and a wide variety of theories developed to explain it.<ref name=":6" /> One influential figure who wrote about buddha nature was [[Jingying Huiyuan]] (523–592 CE), a Chinese Yogacarin who argued for a kind of idealism which held that "all dharmas without exception originate and are formed from the true[-mind], and other than the true[-mind], there exists absolutely nothing which can give rise to false thoughts."<ref name=":6" /> Jingying Huiyuan equated this "true mind" with the storehouse consciousness and with buddha-nature and held that it was an essence, a true consciousness and a metaphysical principle that ensured that all sentient beings will reach enlightenment.<ref name=":6" />

In the sixth and seventh centuries, [[Yogachara|Yogacara]] theory became associated with a substantialist non-dual metaphysics which saw buddha nature as an eternal ground. This idea was promoted by figures like Ratnamati.<ref name=":11" /> [[East Asian Yogācāra|Chinese Yogacara]] included numerous traditions with their own interpretations of buddha-nature. The Dilun, or Daśabhūmikā school, and the Shelun school were some of the earliest schools in this Chinese Yogacara. The Dilun school became split on the issue of the relationship between the storehouse consciousness and buddha-nature. The southern faction held that the storehouse consciousness was identical with the pure mind, while the northern school held that the storehouse consciousness was exclusively a deluded and defiled mind.<ref>Kantor, Hans-Rudolf. [https://philpapers.org/archive/KANPAO-2.pdf "Philosophical Aspects of Sixth-Century Chinese Buddhist Debates on “Mind and Consciousness”"], pp. 337–395 in: Chen-kuo Lin / Michael Radich (eds.) ''A Distant Mirror Articulating Indic Ideas in Sixth and Seventh Century Chinese Buddhism''. Hamburg Buddhist Studies, 3 Hamburg: Hamburg University Press 2014.</ref> In addition to the standard eight consciousnesses of classical Yogācāra, some Chinese Yogācāra schools such as the Shelun maintained the existence of an immaculate ninth consciousness known as the ''amalavijñāna,'' which lay beyond the eighth (''ālayavijñāna'', the storehouse consciousness), and served as the basis for all the other consciousnesses.<ref>Robert E. Buswell Jr. and Donald S. Lopez Jr., The Princeton Dictionary of Buddhism, page 33, Princeton University Press, 2014</ref>

In contrast with the Chinese Yogacara view, the [[East Asian Mādhyamaka|Chinese Madhyamaka]] scholar [[Jizang]] (549–623 CE) sought to remove all ontological connotations of the term as a metaphysical reality and saw buddha-nature as being synonymous with terms like "[[Tathātā|tathata]]," "[[dharmadhatu]]," "[[Ekayāna|ekayana]]," "wisdom, <nowiki>''</nowiki> "ultimate reality," "middle way" and also the wisdom that contemplates [[Pratītyasamutpāda|dependent origination]].<ref name=":6" /> In formulating his view, Jizang was influenced by the earlier Chinese Madhyamaka thinker [[Sengzhao]] (384–414 CE) who was a key figure in outlining an understanding of emptiness which was based on the Indian sources and not on Daoist concepts which previous Chinese Buddhists had used.<ref name=":11" /> Jizang used the compound "Middle Way-buddha-nature" (''zhongdao foxing'' 中道佛性) to refer to his view.<ref name=":8">CHIH-MIEN ADRIAN TSENG, A COMPARISON OF THE CONCEPTS OF BUDDHA-NATURE AND DAO-NATURE OF MEDIEVAL CHINA.</ref> Jizang was also one of the first Chinese philosophers to famously argue that plants and insentient objects have buddha-nature, which he also termed true reality and universal principle (''dao'').<ref name=":8" />

=== In Tiantai ===
The [[Tiantai]] school is one of the first native Chinese doctrinal schools, and the primary figure of this tradition is the scholar [[Zhiyi]]. According to Paul L. Swanson, none of Zhiyi's works discuss buddha-nature explicitly at length however. Yet it is still an important concept in his philosophy, which is seen as synonymous with the [[Ekayāna|ekayana]] principle outlined in the [[Lotus Sutra]].<ref name="Swanson">Swanson, Paul L, T'ien-t'ai Chih-i's Concept of Threefold Buddha Nature-A Synergy of Reality, Wisdom, and Practice</ref> Swanson argues that for Zhiyi, buddha-nature is:

{{blockquote|an active threefold process which involves the way reality is, the wisdom to see reality as it is, and the practice required to attain this wisdom. Buddha Nature is threefold: the three aspects of reality, wisdom, and practice are interdependent—one aspect does not make any sense without the others.<ref name="Swanson" /> }}

Thus, for Zhiyi, buddha-nature has three aspects which he bases on passages from the [[Lotus Sutra|''Lotus sutra'']] and the ''Nirvana sutra''. These three aspects are:<ref name="Swanson" />

# The direct cause of attaining Buddhahood, the innate potential in all sentient beings to become Buddhas, which is the aspect of 'true nature', the way things are.
# The complete cause of attaining Buddhahood, which is the aspect of wisdom that illuminates the true nature and the goal of practice.
# The conditional causes of attaining Buddhahood, which is the aspect of the practices and activities that lead to Buddhahood.

The later Tiantai scholar [[Zhanran]] would expand the Tiantai view of buddha-nature, which he saw as synonymous with [[Tathātā|suchness]], to argue for the idea that insentient rocks and plants also have buddha-nature.<ref>Shuman Chen. Buddha-Nature of Insentient Beings. Encyclopedia of Psychology and Religion, 2nd ed., vol. 1, pp. 208–212, 2014</ref>

=== In Huayan ===
The other major native Chinese doctrinal school is the [[Huayan|Huayan school]]. The Huayan tradition heavily relied on buddha nature sources like the ''Awakening of Faith'' and on the doctrine of principle (理, ''li,'' or the ultimate pattern) and phenomena (''shi)''.<ref name="norden23">Van Norden, Bryan and Nicholaos Jones, "[https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/win2019/entries/buddhism-huayan/ Huayan Buddhism]", ''The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy''  (Winter 2019 Edition), Edward N. Zalta (ed.).</ref><ref name=":111">{{cite book |last1=Tiwald |first1=Justin |title=Readings in Later Chinese Philosophy: Han to the 20th century |last2=Van Norden |first2=Bryan |publisher=Hackett Publishing |year=2014 |isbn=978-1624661907 |location=Indianapolis, Indiana |pages=80–87}}</ref> In the Huayan tradition, the ultimate principle is associated with buddha-nature, and with the One Mind of the ''Awakening of Faith.'' This ultimate nature is seen as the ontological source and ground of all phenomena''.<ref name="norden24">Van Norden, Bryan and Nicholaos Jones, "Huayan Buddhism", ''The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy''  (Winter 2019 Edition), Edward N. Zalta (ed.),  URL = https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/win2019/entries/buddhism-huayan/.</ref>'' This is a key idea in Huayan thought which is called "nature-origination" (''xingqi'')''.<ref name=":84">Cua, Antonio S. (2003). ''Encyclopedia of Chinese philosophy,'' pp. 254–257. Routledge.</ref><ref name=":103">Hamar, Imre. [https://www.persee.fr/docAsPDF/befeo_0336-1519_2007_num_94_1_6070.pdf The Manifestation of the Absolute in the Phenomenal World: Nature Origination in Huayan Exegesis.] In: ''Bulletin de l'École Française d'Extrême-Orient''. Tome 94, 2007. pp. 229–250; {{doi|10.3406/befeo.2007.6070}}</ref>'' According to this doctrine defended by Huayan thinkers like [[Fazang]], the entire universe is a manifestation of the one nature, and it is also fully interfused with its source.''<ref name=":103" />'' As such, the ultimate principle is non-dual with all relative phenomena.<ref name="norden24" /> Because the ultimate source of all things is also interdependent and interconnected with them, it remains a ground which is empty of self-existence ([[svabhava]]) and thus it is not an independent essence.<ref name="norden24" /> ''<ref name=":84" />''<ref>LIN Weiyu 林威宇 (UBC): Vairocana of the ''Avataṃsaka Sūtra'' as Interpreted by Fazang 法藏 (643–712): A Comparative Reflection on "Creator" and "Creation" 法藏（643–712）筆下《華嚴經》中的盧舍那：談佛教中的創世者和創世</ref>

===In Chan Buddhism===
{{Zen Buddhism}}
In [[Chan Buddhism]], buddha-nature tends to be seen as the essential nature of all beings, while also emphasizing that buddha-nature is [[Śūnyatā|emptiness]], the absence of an independent and substantial "self".{{sfn|Lai|2003|p={{page needed|date=October 2020}}}} The term buddha-nature is interpreted in various ways throughout the voluminous Chan literature. In the [[East Mountain Teaching]] of early Chan, buddha-nature was equated with the nature of mind, while later sects sometimes rejected any identification of the term with the mind.{{sfn|Sharf|2014}} This rejection of any reification of the term is reflected in the recorded sayings of Chan master [[Mazu Daoyi]] (709–788) of the influential [[Hongzhou school]], who sometimes would teach on the "ordinary mind" or say "Mind is Buddha," but at other times would say "Neither mind nor Buddha."{{refn|group=note|name="No-Mind"|Compare Mazu's "Mind is Buddha" versus "No mind, no Buddha": "When Ch'an Master Fa-ch'ang of Ta-mei Mountain went to see the Patriarch for the first time, he asked, "What is Buddha?"<br />
The Patriarch replied, "Mind is Buddha." [On hearing this] Fa-ch'ang had great awakening.<br />
Later he went to live on Ta-mei mountain. When the Patriarch heard that he was residing on the mountain, he sent one of his monks to go there and ask Fa-ch'ang, "What did the Venerable obtain when he saw Ma-tsu, so that he has come to live on this mountain?"<br />
Fach'ang said, "Ma-tsu told me that mind is Buddha; so I came to live here."<br />
The monk said, "Ma-tsu's teaching has changed recently."<br />
Fa-ch'ang asked, "What is the difference?"<br />
The monk said, "Nowadays he also says, 'Neither mind nor Buddha."'<br />
Fa-ch'ang said, "That old man still hasn't stopped confusing people. You can have 'neither mind nor Buddha,' I only care for 'mind is Buddha."'<br />
The monk returned to the Patriarch and reported what has happened. "The plum is ripe." said the Patriarch."{{sfn|Cheng Chien Bhikshu|1992}}}}

The influential Chan patriarch [[Guifeng Zongmi]] (780–841), who was also a patriarch of Huayan, interpreted buddha-nature as "empty tranquil awareness" (''k'ung-chi chih''), which he took from the Ho-tse school of Chan.{{sfn|Kim|2007}} Following the ''Srimala sutra'', he interpreted the theory of emptiness as presented in the [[Prajnaparamita|Prajñaparamita]] sutras as provisional and saw the awareness which is buddha-nature as the definitive teaching of Buddhism.<ref name=":11" />

Chan masters from [[Huineng]] (7th-century China),<ref>Price, A.F. and Wong Mou-Lam, trans. (1969). ''The Diamond Sutra and the Sutra of Hui Neng''. Berkeley, CA: Shambhala: Book Two, ''The Sutra of Hui Neng'', Chapter 7, ''Temperament and Circumstances'': p. 68.</ref> [[Chinul]] (12th century Korea),<ref>Buswell, Robert E. Jr. (1991). ''Tracing Back the Radiance: Chinul's Korean Way of Zen''. Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press.</ref> [[Hakuin Ekaku]] (18th-century Japan)<ref>{{cite web|last1= Ekaku|first1= Hakuin|title = The Keiso Dokuzi|url=http://www.kaihan.com/fives.htm |archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20120330170439/http://www.kaihan.com/fives.htm |archive-date=2012-03-30}}</ref> to [[Hsu Yun]] (20th-century China),<ref>Yu, Lu K'uan (Charles Luk) (1970). ''Ch'an and Zen Teaching First Series''.  Berkeley, CA.: Shambala publications: Part I: ''Master Hsu Yun's Discourses and Dharma Words'': pp. 63–64.</ref> have taught that the process of awakening begins with the light of the mind turning around to recognize its own true nature, so that the storehouse consciousness (also called the 8th consciousness in Yogacara Buddhism), which is also the ''tathāgatagarbha'', is transformed into the "bright mirror wisdom". According to [[D. T. Suzuki|D.T. Suzuki]], the Zen view of buddha-nature can be found in the ''Laṅkāvatāra Sūtra'', which states that one must let go of all discriminating notions of any kind to attain the perfect knowledge of the tathāgatagarbha.<ref>Suzuki, D.T., trans. (1932) ''The Lankavatara Sutra''. London: Routledge & Kegen Paul: p. 60</ref> According to the [[Platform Sutra|Platform Sūtra]], the eight consciousnesses transform into the four wisdoms, and yet, only their names are transformed, the consciousnesses are not transformed in their essence.<ref>The Platform Sutra of the Sixth Patriarch, translated by John McRae, page 61, Bukkyō Dendō Kyōkai and Numata Center for Buddhist Translation and Research, 2000</ref>

A famous reference to buddha-nature in the Chan tradition is found in the influential koan called the [[Mu (negative)|mu-koan]] (from ''[[The Gateless Barrier]],'' a 13th century koan collection) which asks "does a dog have Buddha nature?" The enigmatic response given by the master is "no" ("wú<nowiki>'', Chinese, ''mu''</nowiki> in Japanese) which can interpreted in various ways.<ref name="Aitken">{{Cite book |last=Aitken |first=Robert, ed. and trans. |title=The Gateless Barrier: The Wu-men Kuan (Mumonkan) |publisher=North Point Press |year=1991 |isbn=0-86547-442-7 |location=San Francisco |author-link=Robert Baker Aitken}}</ref>

According to Heng-Ching Shih, the teaching of the universal buddha-nature does not intend to assert the existence of substantial, entity-like self endowed with excellent features of a Buddha. Rather, buddha-nature simply represents the potentiality to be realized in the future.<ref name="web.archive.org" /> 

[[Hsing Yun]], forty-eighth patriarch of the [[Linji school]], equates the buddha-nature with the dharmakāya in line with pronouncements in key tathāgatagarbha sūtras. He defines these as "the inherent nature that exists in all beings....transcendental reality....the unity of the Buddha with everything that exists," and sees it as the goal of Mahayana Buddhism.<ref>{{cite book |author=Hsing Yun |title=Being Good: Buddhist Ethics for Everyday Life |publisher=Weatherhill |year=1999 |location=New York |pages=152–153 |translator=Tom Graham}}</ref><ref>[http://enlight.lib.ntu.edu.tw/FULLTEXT/JR-BJ010/bj010146307.pdf 現代禪宗心性思想研究的幾點評論]</ref>

=== Japanese Buddhism ===
[[File:Reliquary,_Kamakura_period,_13th-14th_century,_cintamani_(sacred_jewel)_in_flame_type,_gilt_bronze_-_Tokyo_National_Museum_-_DSC05173.JPG|thumb|upright|A Japanese [[Kamakura period]] [[reliquary]] topped with a [[cintamani]] (a "wish fulfilling jewel"). Buddha nature texts often use the metaphor of a hidden jewel (buddha-nature) which all beings have, but are unaware of.]]

The major [[Buddhism in Japan|Japanese Buddhist]] traditions all take the idea of buddha-nature (Japanese: ''busshō,'' 仏性) as a central teaching, from [[Tendai]] and [[Shingon Buddhism|Shingon]], to the new Kamakura schools. One of the most important developments of buddha-nature thought in Japanese Buddhism was [[hongaku]] theory (本覚, innate or original enlightenment) which developed within the Tendai school from the [[cloistered rule]] era (1086–1185) through the [[Edo period]] (1688–1735) and is derived from the ''Awakening of Faith'' (which uses the term pen-chileh, “original enlightenment”).<ref name="Stone">{{cite journal |last1=Stone |first1=Jacqueline |date=1 May 1995 |title=Medieval Tendai hongaku thought and the new Kamakura Buddhism: A reconsideration |url=https://nirc.nanzan-u.ac.jp/nfile/2559 |journal=Japanese Journal of Religious Studies |volume=22 |issue=1–2 |doi=10.18874/jjrs.22.1-2.1995.17-48 |doi-access=free}}</ref> Jacqueline Stone writes that Tendai doctrine held that enlightenment was "inherent from the outset and as accessible in the present, rather than as the fruit of a long process of cultivation."<ref name=":62">Stone, Jacqueline Ilyse (2003). ''Original enlightenment and the transformation of medieval Japanese Buddhism''. Issue 12 of ''Studies in East Asian Buddhism''. A Kuroda Institute book: University of Hawaii Press. {{ISBN|978-0-8248-2771-7}}. Source: [https://books.google.com/books?id=jbO_KctXdecC&q=shin+sozoku&pg=PA139] (accessed: Thursday April 22, 2010), p.3</ref> It was often held that hongaku was a feature of all phenomena, including plants and inanimate objects.<ref name=":62" />

Hongaku thought was also influential on the development of [[Kamakura period#Flourishing of Buddhism|New Kamakura Buddhist]] schools, like Japanese Pure Land Buddhism, Zen and Nichiren.<ref name="Stone" /> Japanese Pure Land Buddhism relied on Tendai buddha-nature doctrine. The founder of the [[Jōdo Shinshū]] of [[Pure Land Buddhism]], [[Shinran]], equated buddha-nature with the central Shin concept of [[shinjin]] (true faith or the entrusting mind).<ref>The Collected Works of Shinran, 1997, Jodo Shinshu Hongwanji-ha</ref>

The founder of the [[Sōtō school]] of [[Zen Buddhism]], [[Dōgen Zenji]], held that buddha-nature was simply the true nature of reality and being. This true nature was just impermanence, becoming and 'vast emptiness'. Because he saw the whole universe as an expression of buddha-nature, he held that even grass and trees are buddha-nature. According to Dōgen:

{{blockquote|Therefore, the very impermanency of grass and tree, thicket and forest is the Buddha nature. The very impermanency of men and things, body and mind, is the Buddha nature. Nature and lands, mountains and rivers, are impermanent because they are the Buddha nature. Supreme and complete enlightenment, because it is impermanent, is the Buddha nature.{{sfn|Dumoulin|2005b|loc="Section 2, Dogen"|pp=51–119}}}}

Buddha-nature was likewise influential for the other sects of Zen, like [[Rinzai school|Rinzai]].

[[Nichiren Buddhism]], founded by [[Nichiren]] (1222–1282), views the buddha-nature present in all beings as "the inner potential for attaining Buddhahood".<ref>{{Cite book|last=The English Buddhist Dictionary Committee |title=The Soka Gakkai Dictionary of Buddhism |publisher=Soka Gakkai |year=2002 |location=Tōkyō |url=http://www.sgilibrary.org/dict.html |isbn=978-4-412-01205-9  |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140530075716/http://www.sgilibrary.org/dict.html |archive-date=May 30, 2014 }}</ref><ref>{{Cite web|url=http://www.sokaspirit.org/study/new-light/buddhism-in-new-light-chapter-17-freeing-the-caged-bird-within?set_language=es|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130729152739/http://www.sokaspirit.org/study/new-light/buddhism-in-new-light-chapter-17-freeing-the-caged-bird-within?set_language=es |title=Freeing the caged bird within|archive-date=July 29, 2013}}</ref> The emphasis in Nichiren Buddhism is on attaining Buddhahood in this lifetime, described as manifesting or summoning forth buddha-nature by chanting the name of the ''Lotus Sutra'': [[Namu Myōhō Renge Kyō]]<ref>The Gosho Translation Committee: [http://www.sgilibrary.org/view.php?page=3 ''The Writings of Nichiren Daishonin, Volume I''] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130404085537/http://www.sgilibrary.org/view.php?page=3 |date=2013-04-04 }}, Tokyo: Soka Gakkai, 2006.  {{ISBN|4-412-01024-4}}; pp.3 – 5 (On Attaining Buddhahood in This Lifetime)</ref><ref>[http://www.sgilibrary.org/view.php?page=887&m=3&q=When%20we%20revere%20Myoho-renge-kyo%20inherent When we rever Myoho-renge-kyo inherent]{{Dead link|date=October 2019 |bot=InternetArchiveBot |fix-attempted=yes }}</ref> Like the classic Tendai hongaku doctrine, Nichiren held that all life and even all insentient matter (such mandalas, images, statues) also possesses buddha nature, because they serve as objects of worship.<ref>[http://www.sgilibrary.org/view.php?page=89&m=3&q=the%20enlightenment%20of%20plants Enlightenment of plants]{{Dead link|date=October 2019|bot=InternetArchiveBot|fix-attempted=yes}}</ref>

==Tibetan Buddhism==
{{See also|Rangtong-Shentong}}

In [[Tibetan Buddhism|Tibetan Buddhist]] scholastics, there are two main camps of interpreting buddha-nature:{{sfn|Brunnholzl|2014|p=79}}

* There are those who argue that ''tathāgatagarbha'' is just emptiness (described either as [[dharmadhatu]] or the nature of phenomena). This pure Madhyamaka view is described in as "a nonimplicative negation", which means that in one's philosophical analysis, one negates all forms of existence (and non-existence) completely, leaving nothing left over.
* There are those who see it as an implicative negation, which means that there is something further to be said about buddha-nature that is not just the Madhyamaka emptiness based on pure negations of all concepts. This could include positive descriptions like the union of the mind's emptiness and luminosity, a non-dual buddha-wisdom, or even the eternal pure buddhic Self which includes all buddha-qualities (as in Jonang Shentong).

An early Tibetan translator, [[Ngok Loden Sherab|Ngok Lotsawa]] (1050–1109) argues in his commentary to the [[Ratnagotravibhaga|''Uttaratantra'']] that buddha-nature is a non-implicative negation, which is to say that it is emptiness, as a ''total negation'' of inherent existence (''svabhava'') that does not imply that anything is left un-negated (in terms of its ''svabhava''). Another early figure, Chaba Chokyi Senge (1109–1169) also argued that buddha-nature was a non-implicative negation.{{sfn|Brunnholzl|2014|p=66}} The [[Kadam (Tibetan Buddhism)|Kadampa]] tradition generally followed [[Ngok Loden Sherab|Ngok Lotsawa]] by holding that Buddha- nature was a nonimplicative negation. The [[Gelug]] school, which sees itself as a continuation of the Kadampas, also hold this view, while also holding, as Chaba did, that buddha-nature teachings are of expedient meaning.{{sfn|Brunnholzl|2014|p=66}}

This interpretation is sometimes called the ''[[Rangtong-Shentong|rangtong]]'' interpretation of [[Prasaṅgika]] Madhyamaka.{{sfn|Williams|1994|pp=107–108}} This view interprets the buddha-nature teaching as an expedient way to talk about the emptiness of inherent existence and should not be taken literally. Other schools, especially the [[Jonang]],{{sfn|Williams|1994|p=107}} and some within the [[Kagyu]] tradition have tended to accept the [[shentong]] ("other-empty") philosophy, which discerns an ultimate reality which "is empty of adventitious defilements which are intrinsically other than it, but is ''not'' empty of its own inherent existence".{{sfn|Williams|1994|p=108}}  Shentong influenced interpretations tend to rely heavily on the buddha-nature sutras to balance the negative dialectics of Madhyamaka.

These interpretations of the tathagatagarbha-teachings have been a matter of intensive debates in Tibetan Buddhism down to this day.{{sfn|Williams|1994|pp=105–109}}

===Nyingma===
Morten Ostensen writes that the buddha-nature teaching (also known as "sugatagarbha", Wylie: ''bde gshegs snying po,'' in Tibetan tantric sources), first entered Tibetan Buddhism through the translation of the [[Nyingma]] school's ''[[Guhyagarbha Tantra]]'' in the eighth century.<ref name="archive.org">Ostensen, Morten (2019). Introduction to Dzogchen and Buddha-Nature. Source: https://archive.org/details/introduction-to-dzogchen-and-buddha-nature (accessed: Saturday September 23, 2023)</ref> During the early translation period, other works which synthesized and reconciled buddha-nature thought with Yogacara and Madhyamaka philosophy were also translated by Tibetan scholars like [[Yeshe De]] (mid 8th – early 9th century).<ref>Mandelbaum, Arthur (2007). Nanam Yeshe De, The Treasury of Lives. Source: https://treasuryoflives.org/biographies/view/Yeshe-De/TBRC_p8205 (accessed: Saturday September 23, 2023).</ref> One of these works is [[Kamalashila|Kamalashila"s]] ''Madhyamakāloka''.<ref>Ruegg, David Seyfort (1981). The Literature of the Madhyamaka School of Philosophy in India. (Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz), 95n308.</ref><ref name="archive.org"/>

Yeshe De describes the sugatagarbha as twofold. It is the impure mind of sentient beings, the ''ālayavijñāna'', and it is also the pure "natural spiritual disposition" (rigs) that is present within all beings which is also called the dharmakāya, and which he also calls the root (''rtsa'') and the ground (''gzhi'').<ref name="archive.org"/>

The teaching of buddha-nature is also a key source for Tibetan [[Dzogchen]] texts, which presents the sugatagarbha as equivalent to the ultimate ground or basis of all reality. This teaching can be found in early Dzogchen sources like [[Nubchen Sangye Yeshe]]'s (9th century) ''[[Samten Migdron|Lamp for the Eye of Contemplation]]'' equates buddha-nature with this ultimate basis, which it also calls by various names like "the spontaneous essence", "the innermost treasury of all vehicles", "the great universal grandfather [spyi myes], is to be experienced directly by self-awareness [rang rig pas]", "sphere of the great circle [thig le chen po'i klong] of the self-awareness."<ref>Karmay, Samten Gyaltsen (2007). ''The Great Perfection (rDzogs chen): A Philosophical and Meditative Teaching of Tibetan Buddhism''. Second Edition. Volume II. Boston: Brill's Tibetan Studies Library. {{ISBN|978-90-04-15142-0}}, pp.107–108</ref><ref>theg pa'i mchog rnal 'byor gyi phul yang tog/ rgyal ba ril gyi yum a ti yo ga'i don btsan pa ni/ mtshan rdzogs pa (p.291) chen po zhes bya ste/ ci'i phyir zhe na/ bsam gyis mi khyab pa'i chos thams cad ma brtsal lhun rdzogs pa'i don/ gcer grol go bar bya ba'i phyir zhib tu bstan te/ de lta bu'i theg pa thams cad kyi yang mdzod spyi mes chen po 'di'i ngo bo lhun gyis grub pa'i ngang nyid kyi don/ rang rig pas mngon sum khong du chud nas blor bzhag par byar yang med pa'i don chen po rang gi rig pa la gsal bar bya ba yang/ ji ltar shes par bya zhe na/ shin tu rnal 'byor gyi theg pa 'di la/ rgyud lung man ngag gi gzhung ltar/ dang po gzhal bya'i chos gcig la/ rang gi so sor rtogs pa'i shes rab kyis gzhal bar byar yang med pa ste/ de ci'i phyir zhe na/ chos so cog tu grags pa thams cad/ ye gdod ma nyid nas spu ma brjes mdog ma bsgur bar rang byung gi ye shes thig le chen po'i klong du sangs rgyas pa'i rang bzhin la/ dngos po gzhal byar su yis mthong/ gtan tshigs su (p.292) yis bstan/ grub pa'i mtha' ci zhig chol/ 'jal byed gang gis byas te/ de dag gi ngo bo so so ba med pa'i phyir ma dmigs so/</ref>

The Nyingma school view of buddha-nature is generally marked by the tendency to align the idea with Dzogchen views and with [[Svatantrika–Prasaṅgika distinction|Prasangika]] [[Madhyamaka]]. This trend begins with the work of [[Rongzom Chokyi Zangpo|Rongzom]] (1042–1136) and continues into the work of [[Longchenpa]] (1308–1364) and [[Jamgön Ju Mipham Gyatso|Mipham]] (1846–1912).{{sfn|Brunnholzl|2014|p=73}} 

Mipham Rinpoche, the most authoritative figure in modern Nyingma, adopted a view of buddha-nature as the unity of appearance and emptiness, relating it to the descriptions of the [[Ground (Dzogchen)|ground]] in Dzogchen as outlined by Longchenpa. This ground is said to be primordially pure (ka dag) and spontaneously present (Ihun grub).{{sfn|Brunnholzl|2014|p=74}} In Dzogchen, buddha nature, which is equated with the basis (gzhi) of all phenomena, is often explained as the unity of "primordial purity" (Wylie: ''ka dag'') and "natural perfection" or "spontaneous presence" (''lhun grub'').<ref name="Takasaki 1966">Takasaki (1966)</ref><ref>Duckworth, 2008{{full citation needed|date=February 2014}}</ref>{{refn|group=lower-alpha|The three aspects of the basis in Dzogchen, the empty essence, the spontaneously present nature, and the compassionate resonance, are considered indivisible and are iconographically represented by the [[Gankyil]].}}<ref>Petit, John Whitney (1999). ''Mipham's Beacon of Certainty: Illuminating the View of Dzochen, the Great Perfection''. Boston: Wisdom Publications (1999). {{ISBN|978-0-86171-157-4}}. Source: [https://books.google.com/books?id=lJcLSietnfcC&dq=kun+khyab+unobstructed&pg=PA78] (accessed: Saturday May 9, 2009), p.78-79</ref><ref>Scheidegger, Daniel (2007: p.27). 'Different Sets of Light-Channels in the Instruction Series of Rdzogs chen'. ''Revue d'Études Tibétaines''.</ref>{{refn|group=lower-alpha|Scheidegger, Daniel (2007: p.27): Certainly, the main characteristic of what is named “lamp” (sgron ma) can be circumscribed as “inseparability of clarity and emptiness” (gsal stong dbyer med). Thus, it is that which makes itself clear (gsal ba) — i.e., that which actualizes itself in and as visionary experience of form, colour, sound, etc., — without losing its quality of being empty of any concreteness. In other words, it is the inseparability of the empty essence (ngo bo stong pa) and the clear nature (rang bzhin gsal ba) of the ground (gzhi) in and as all-pervading compassion (thugs rje kun khyab) as it manifests outwardly in visionary experience. Of course, the term “manifest outwardly” (phyi snang) should not be taken too literally, rather, it should be understood as a projection'''<sup>¿</sup>''' of the “inner” luminosity (nang gsal) of the ground which forms the innermost part or “heart“ (tsitta ''[an alternate orthographic rendering of [[citta]] (sanskrit)]'') of man into a seemingly Outer Space (phyi’i dbyings). Useful in this context is the picture of the Youthful-Vase-Body (gzhon nu bum pa’i sku). When the outer wall of this body which symbolizes the ground in its “inner” potentiality, is broken through, its “inner” light is seen in the “Outer Space”. Obviously, the term “Outer Space” (phyi’i dbyings) does not refer to some kind of “science-fiction like outer space”, but means that the ground is making room for itself in and as experienceable plenum. Moreover, the term “lamp” (sgron ma) also implies a bodily presence. It is the ground present in the concrete givenness of an individual being and thus, it is similar to the tathagatagarbha of the general Mahayana Buddhism.</blockquote> Source: [https://web.archive.org/web/20090304063644/http://www.digitalhimalaya.com/collections/journals/ret/pdf/ret_12_03.pdf] (accessed: Saturday May 9, 2009)}} The Nyingma commentary of Ju Mipham upon the ''[[Ratnagotravibhaga]]'' from a Dzogchen viewpoint has been rendered into English by [[Douglas Duckworth|Duckworth]] (2008).<ref name="duckworth" />

According to Mipham, buddha-nature was neither [1] truly established, [2] a mere emptiness, nor [3] an impermanent and conditioned entity. In this way, he distinguished his unique position on buddha-nature from those of the [[Jonang]], [[Gelug]], and [[Sakya]]; which correspond respectively to the first, second, and third positions.<ref>Douglas Duckworth. Mipam on Buddha-Buddha-Nature,  the Ground of the Nyingma Tradition, pages 94-99, State University of New York Press, 2008</ref> Moreover, as Mipham's commentator Bötrül points out, for Mipham, buddha-nature was neither established from the point of view of ultimate valid cognition, nor was it posited merely from the point of view of the mistaken perception of ordinary beings. Mipham instead held that buddha-nature was established by a conventional valid cognition of pure vision.<ref>Douglas Duckworth. Mipam on Buddha-Buddha-Nature,  the Ground of the Nyingma Tradition, page 184, State University of New York Press, 2008</ref>

The modern Nyingma scholars [[Palden Sherab|Khenchen Palden Sherab]] (1938–2010) and Khenpo Tsewang Dongyal (born 1950), emphasise that the essential nature of the mind (the buddha-nature) is not a blankness, but is characterized by wonderful qualities and a non-conceptual perfection that is already present and complete, it's just obscured and we fail to recognize it.<ref>Sherab, Khenchen Palden and Dongyal, Khenpo Tsewang (2006). ''Opening to Our Primordial Nature''. New York: Snow Lion: pp. 3, 9, 22–23</ref>

=== Sakya ===
[[Sakya Pandita]] (1182–1251), the central figure of the [[Sakya|Sakya school]], sees the buddha-nature as the [[dharmadhatu]] free from all reference points, and states that the teaching that buddha-nature exists in all beings is of expedient meaning (not ultimate) and that its basis is emptiness, citing [[Chandrakirti|Candrakirti]]'s ''[[Madhyamakāvatāra]]bhāsya''.{{sfn|Brunnholzl|2014|p=75}} The Sakya scholar Rongtön (1367–1449) meanwhile, argued that buddha-nature is [[Tathātā|suchness]], with stains, or [[Śūnyatā|emptiness]] of the mind with stains.{{sfn|Brunnholzl|2014|p=76}}

Sakya scholar [[Buton Rinchen Drub]] (1290–1364) likewise held that the buddha-nature teachings were not an ultimate or final teaching (like emptiness), seeing them as teachings of expedient meaning that merely points to emptiness. His view was that the basis for these teachings is the alaya-vijñana and also that buddha-nature is the dharmakaya of a buddha but "never exists in the great mass of sentient beings".{{sfn|Brunnholzl|2014|p=68}}

According to Brunnholzl, in the works of the influential Sakya scholar [[Gorampa|Gorampa Sonam Senge]] (1429–1489), buddha-nature is

{{blockquote|nondual unity of minds lucidity and emptiness or awareness and emptiness free from all reference points. It is not mere emptiness because sheer emptiness cannot be the basis of both samsára and nirvána. However, it is not mere lucidity either because this lucidity is a conditioned entity and the tathágata heart is unconditioned.{{sfn|Brunnholzl|2014|p=76}} }}

[[Sakya Chokden]] (1428–1507) meanwhile argues that the ultimate buddha-nature is an implicative negation, which means that its philosophical negation leaves something positive that is not negated by analysis. This is "mind's natural luminosity free from all extremes of reference points, which is the sphere of personally experienced wisdom."{{sfn|Brunnholzl|2014|p=77}}

===Jonang===
The [[Jonang]] school, whose foremost historical figure was the Tibetan scholar-monk [[Dolpopa Sherab Gyaltsen]] (1292–1361), sees the buddha-nature as the very ground of the Buddha himself, as the "permanent indwelling of the Buddha in the basal state".<ref>Hopkins, Jeffrey, trans. (2006). ''Mountain Doctrine: Tibet's Fundamental Treatise on Other-Emptiness and the Buddha-Matrix.'' NY: Snow Lion: p. 196</ref> According to Brunnholzl, Dolpopa, basing himself on certain ''tathāgatagarbha'' sutras, argued that the buddha-nature is "ultimately really established, everlasting, eternal, permanent, immutable (therzug), and being beyond dependent origination."{{sfn|Brunnholzl|2014|p=68}} This is the foundation of what is called the [[Rangtong-Shentong|Shentong]] view.

The Buddhist tantric scripture entitled ''[[Mañjuśrīnāmasamgīti|Chanting the Names of Mañjuśrī]] ({{IAST|Mañjuśrī-nāma-saṅgīti}})'', 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.<ref>cf. Hopkins, Jeffrey, trans. (2006). ''Mountain Doctrine: Tibet's Fundamental Treatise on Other-Emptiness and the Buddha-Matrix.'' NY: Snow Lion: pp. 279–280</ref>

Cyrus Stearns writes that Dolpopa's attitude to the [[Three Turnings of the Wheel of Dharma|third turning of the wheel]] (i.e. the buddha-nature teachings) is that they "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."<ref>Cyrus Stearns, ''The Buddha from Dolpo: A Study of the Life and Thought of the Tibetan Master Dolpopa Sherab Gyaltsen'', State University of New York Press, Albany, 1999, p. 87</ref>

===Kagyu===
According to Brunnholzl, "virtually all [[Kagyu]] masters hold the teaching on buddha nature to be of definitive meaning and deny that the tathagata heart is just sheer emptiness or a nonimplicative negation."{{sfn|Brunnholzl|2014|p=68}} This means that most Kagyu scholars do not think that the strictly negative Madhyamaka explanation of buddha-nature is suffient on its own (without drawing on the buddha-nature sutras) to explain buddha-nature.{{sfn|Brunnholzl|2014|p=68}} Some Kagyu views can be similar to Jonang shentong and sometimes use shentong language, but they are generally less absolutist than Jonang views (the exception is [[Jamgon Kongtrul|Jamgon Kongtrul Lodro Taye]], who largely follows [[Taranatha]] and Dolpopa but at times blends their positions with the Third Karmapa's view).{{sfn|Brunnholzl|2014|p=68}}

In Kagyu, the view of the [[Rangjung Dorje, 3rd Karmapa Lama|Third Karmapa Rangjung Dorje]] is generally seen as the most authoritative. His is the view that buddha-nature is "mind's luminous ultimate nature or nondual wisdom, which is the basis of everything in samsara and nirvana."{{sfn|Brunnholzl|2014|p=72}} [[Thrangu Rinpoche]] sees the Buddha-nature as the indivisible oneness of wisdom and emptiness:

{{blockquote|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.<ref>{{cite web |author=Khenchen Thrangu Rinpoche |title=Buddha Nature and Buddhahood: the Mahayana and Tantra Yana |website=Simhanada |url=http://www.simhas.org/teaching14.html |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20071230142513/http://www.simhas.org/teaching14.html |archive-date=December 30, 2007}}</ref>}}

=== Gelug ===
[[Khedrup Gelek Pelzang, 1st Panchen Lama|Kedrub Jé Geleg Balsang]] (1385–1438), one of the main disciples of [[Je Tsongkhapa|Tsongkhapa]], defined the tathāgatagarbha thus:

{{blockquote|It is the emptiness of mind's being empty of being really established that is called "the naturally pure true nature of the mind." The naturally pure true nature of the mind in its phase of not being free from adventitious stains is called "sugata heart" or "naturally abiding disposition."{{sfn|Brunnholzl|2014|p=66}} }}

Brunnholzl states that the view of [[Gyaltsab Je|Gyaltsab Darma Rinchen]] (1364–1432) is that buddha-nature (the tathagata heart) is "the state of a being in whom mind's emptiness is obscured, while buddhas by definition do not possess this tathagata heart."{{sfn|Brunnholzl|2014|p=66}}

The [[14th Dalai Lama]] 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:

{{blockquote|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.<ref>Dalai Lama, the (1999). ''Buddha Heart, Buddha Mind''. New York: Crossroad: p. 110</ref>}}

===Rimé movement===
The [[Rimé movement]] is an ecumenical movement in Tibet which started as an attempt to reconcile the various Tibetan schools in the 19th century. In contrast to the Gelugpa, which adheres to the ''rang stong'', "self-empty", or Prasaṅgika point of view,{{refn|Which states that all existences are empty of a "self-nature"}} the Rimé movement supports ''shen tong'' (''gzhan tong''), "other-empty", an essential nature which is "pure radiant non-dual consciousness".{{sfn|Williams|1994|p=107}}

According to Rime scholar [[Jamgon Kongtrul]] rangtong and shentong are not ultimately different as both can reach the ultimate state in practice. However, they do differ in how they describe ultimate reality ([[Tathātā|Dharmata]]), since shentong describes the buddha-mind as ultimately real, while rangtong rejects this (fearing it will be confused as an [[Ātman (Hinduism)|atman]]). Kongtrul "finds the Rangtong way of presentation the best to dissolve concepts and the Shentong way the best to describe the experience."<ref>{{Cite web |title=THE RIME ( Ris-med ) MOVEMENT |url=http://www.abuddhistlibrary.com/Buddhism/A%20-%20Tibetan%20Buddhism/Authors/Ringu%20Tulku/The%20Rime%20Movement/THE%20RIME%20(%20Ris-med%20)%20MOVEMENT.htm}}</ref>

==Modern scholarship==
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===
[[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 writes that the Buddha, Nirvana and Buddha-wisdom can be referred to as the "True Self" (as it is done in some buddha-nature sutras). According to Hookham, in the shentong interpretation, buddha-nature is what truly exists, while not-self is what it is not.<ref>Hookham, Shenpen (1991). ''The Buddha Within''. State University of New York Press: p.&nbsp;104, p.&nbsp;353</ref>

Buddhist scholar and chronicler, Merv Fowler, writes that "the main message of the ''tathagatagarbha'' literature" is that buddha-nature really is present as "a hidden essence" within each being. According to Fowler, this view is "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''."<ref>Fowler, Merv (1999). ''Buddhism: Beliefs and Practices''. Sussex Academic Press: pp.&nbsp;100–101</ref>

===Emptiness===
According to Heng-Ching Shih, buddha-nature does not represent a substantial self (''ātman''). Rather, it is a positive expression of emptiness (''śūnyatā''), which emphasizes the potentiality to realize Buddhahood through Buddhist practices. In this view, the intention of the teaching of buddha-nature is soteriological rather than theoretical.<ref name="web.archive.org"/>

The influential 20th century Chinese scholar [[Yin Shun]] (印順, 1906 – 2005) drew on Chinese Madhyamaka to argue against any Yogacara influenced view that buddha-nature was an underlying permanent ground of reality and instead supported the view that buddha-nature teachings are just an expedient means.<ref name=":11" /> Yin Shun, drawing on his study of Indian Madhyamaka promoted the emptiness of all things as the ultimate Buddhist truth, and argued that the buddha-nature teaching was a provisional teaching taught in order to ease the fear of some Buddhists regarding emptiness as well as to attract those people who have an affinity to the idea of a Self or [[Brahman]].<ref name=":11" /> Later after taking up the Buddhist path, they would be introduced to the truth of emptiness.<ref name=":11" />

===Critical Buddhist interpretation===
Several contemporary Japanese Buddhist scholars, headed under the label [[Critical Buddhism]] (''hihan bukky''ō, 批判仏教), have been critical of buddha-nature thought. According to Matsumoto Shirõ and Hakamaya Noriaki of [[Komazawa University]], essentialist conceptions of buddha-nature are at odds with the fundamental Buddhist doctrine of [[dependent origination]] and non-self ([[Anatta|''anātman'']]'')''.<ref>{{cite book |first=Matsumoto |last=Shirõ |year=1997 |chapter=The Doctrine of Tathagata-garbha Is Not Buddhist |editor-first1=Jamie |editor-last1=Hubbard |editor-first2=Paul Loren |editor-last2=Swanson |title=Pruning the Bodhi Tree: The Storm Over Critical Buddhism |publisher=Univ of Hawaii Press}}</ref><ref>{{cite book |first=Hakamaya |last=Noriaki |year=1997 |chapter=Critical Philosophy Versus Topical Philosophy |editor-first1=Jamie |editor-last1=Hubbard |editor-first2=Paul Loren |editor-last2=Swanson |title=Pruning the Bodhi Tree: The Storm Over Critical Buddhism |publisher=Univ of Hawaii Press}}</ref> The Buddha nature doctrines which they label as ''dhātuvāda'' ("substantialism", sometimes rendered "locus theory" or "topicalism" and "generative monism") is not Buddhist at all.<ref name=":02" /> As defined by Matsumoto, this "locus" theory or ''dhātuvāda'' which he rejects as un-buddhist is: "It is the theory that the single (''eka, sama'') existent "locus" (''dhatu'') or basis is the cause that produces the manifold phenomena or "super-loci" (''dharmah'')."<ref name="Matsumoto">Shiro Matsumoto, Critiques of Tathagatagarbha Thought and Critical Buddhism{{full citation needed|date=October 2020|reason=author is probably Matsumoto Shirõ}}</ref> Matsumoto further argues that: "Tathagatagarbha thought was a Buddhist version of [[Advaita Vedanta|Hindu monism]], formed by the influence of [[Hinduism]] gradually introduced into Buddhism, especially after the rise of [[Mahayana]] Buddhism."<ref name="Matsumoto" /> Other Japanese scholars responded to this view leading to a lively debate in Japan. Takasaki Jikido, a well known authority on ''tathagathagarbha'' thought, accepted that Buddha nature theories are similar to Upanishadic theories and that ''dhātuvāda'' is an accurate expression of the structure of these doctrines'','' but argues that the Buddha nature texts are aware of this and that Buddha nature is not necessarily un-Buddhist or anti-Buddhist.<ref name=":12">{{cite web |last=Swanson |first=Paul L. |title=Why They Say Zen is Not Buddhism: Recent Japanese Critiques of Buddha-Nature |website=TheZenSite |url= http://www.thezensite.com/ZenEssays/CriticalZen/What_and_why_of_Critical_Buddhism_1.pdf}}</ref><ref name="Matsumoto" /> Likewise, Hirakawa Akira, sees buddha-nature as the potential to attain Buddhahood which is not static but ever changing and argues that "''dhātu''" does not necessarily mean substratum (he points to some [[Āgama (Buddhism)|Agamas]] which identify ''dhatu'' with [[Pratītyasamutpāda|''pratitya-samutpada'']]).<ref name=":12" />

Western scholars have reacted in different ways to this idea. Sallie B. King objects to their view, seeing the buddha-nature as a metaphor for the potential in all beings to attain Buddhahood, rather than as an ontological reality.<ref name= "nanzan-u.ac.jp2">{{cite book |first=Sallie B. |last=King |year=1997 |chapter=The Doctrine of Buddha Nature is Impeccably Buddhist |editor-first1=Jamie |editor-last1=Hubbard |editor-first2=Paul Loren |editor-last2=Swanson |title=Pruning the Bodhi Tree: The Storm Over Critical Buddhism |publisher=Univ of Hawaii Press |pages=174–179 |isbn=0824819497}}</ref> Robert H. Sharf notes that the worries of the Critical Buddhists is nothing new, for "the early ''tathāgatagarbha'' scriptures betray a similar anxiety, as they tacitly acknowledge that the doctrine is close to, if not identical with, the heretical ātmavāda teachings of the non- Buddhists."<ref name=":02">{{cite journal |last=Sharf |first=Robert H. |title=Buddha-nature, Critical Buddhism, and Early Chan |journal=Critical Review for Buddhist Studies |volume=22 |date=December 2017 |pages= 105–150 |url=https://www.academia.edu/27749171}}</ref> He also notes how the [[Mahāyāna Mahāparinirvāṇa Sūtra|''Nirvāṇa-sūtra'']] "tacitly concedes the non-Buddhist roots of the ''tathāgatagarbha'' idea."<ref name=":02" /> Sharf also has pointed out how certain Southern Chan masters were concerned with other interpretations of Buddha nature, showing how the tendency to critique certain views of Buddha nature is not new in East Asian Buddhism.<ref name=":02" />

Peter N. Gregory has also argued that at least some East Asian interpretations of Buddha nature are equivalent to what Critical Buddhists call ''dhātuvāda,'' especially the work of [[Guifeng Zongmi|Tsung-mi]], who "emphasizes the underlying ontological ground on which all phenomenal appearances (''hsiang'') are based, which he variously refers to as the nature (''hsing''), the one mind (''i-hsin'')...".<ref>{{cite web |last = Gregory|first= Peter N.|title =  Is Critical Buddhism Really Critical? |website = TheZenSite |url= https://www.thezensite.com/ZenEssays/CriticalZen/Critical_Buddhism_Gregory.pdf}}</ref> According to [[Dan Lusthaus]], certain [[Chinese Buddhism|Chinese Buddhist]] ideologies which became dominant in the 8th century promoted the idea of an "underlying metaphysical substratum" or "underlying, invariant, universal metaphysical 'source'" and thus do seem to be a kind of ''dhātuvāda.'' According to Lusthaus "in early T'ang China (7th–8th century) there was a deliberate attempt to divorce Chinese Buddhism from developments in India." Lusthaus notes that the Huayen thinker [[Fazang|Fa-tsang]] was influential in this theological trend who promoted the idea that true Buddhism was about comprehending the "One Mind that alone is the ground of reality" (''wei- hsin).''<ref>Lusthaus, Dan, Critical Buddhism and Returning to the Sources.{{full citation needed|date=October 2020}}</ref>

Paul Williams too has criticised this view, saying that Critical Buddhism is too narrow in its definition of what constitutes Buddhism. According to Williams, "We should abandon any simplistic identification of Buddhism with a straightforward not-Self definition".<ref>Paul Williams, ''Mahayana Buddhism'', Routledge, London, 2nd Edition, 2009, p. 128</ref>

===Multiple meanings===
Sutton agrees with Williams' critique on the narrowness of any single 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".<ref>Sutton, Florin Giripescu (1991). ''Existence and Enlightenment in the Laṅkāvatāra-sūtra''. SUNY ({{ISBN|0-7914-0172-3}}): p. 51</ref> He goes on to point out that the term ''tathāgatagarbha'' has up to six possible connotations. Of these, he says the three most important are:
#an underlying ontological reality or essential nature (''tathāgata-tathatā-'vyatireka'') which is functionally equivalent to a ''self'' (''ātman'') in an ''[[Upanishad]]ic'' sense,
#the ''dharmakāya'' which penetrates all beings (''sarva-sattveṣu dharma-kāya-parispharaṇa''), which is functionally equivalent to [[brahman]] in an ''Upanishadic'' sense
#the womb or matrix of Buddhahood existing in all beings ''(tathāgata-gotra-saṃbhava''), which provides beings with the possibility of awakening.<ref>Takasaki, Jikido (1991). ''A Study on the Ratnagotravibhāga''. ISMEO 1966: p. 198</ref><ref>Florin Giripescu Sutton, ''Existence and Enlightenment in the Laṅkāvatāra-sūtra'', SUNY {{ISBN|0-7914-0172-3}}: p.  53</ref>
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.<ref>Wayman, Alex (1981). The Title and Textual Affiliation of the Guhya-garbha Tantra. In: ''From Mahayana Buddhism to Tantra – Felicitation Volume for Dr Shunkyo Matsumata''. Tokyo: p. 4</ref>

==See also==
{{Div col|colwidth=18em}}
* [[Dhammakaya tradition]]
* [[Hongaku]]
* [[Immanence]]
* [[Kulayarāja Tantra]]
* [[Huangbo Xiyun#One_Mind|One Mind]]
* [[Panentheism]]
* [[Rigpa]]
* [[Turiya]]
* [[Won Buddhism]]
{{Div col end}}

==Notes==
{{notelist}}

{{reflist|group=note|30em|refs=
<ref group=note name="moon">The image of the moon as the Buddha-nature can be seen in the [[Platform Sutra]]. [[Dogen]] treats this metaphor in [https://www.thezensite.com/ZenTeachings/Dogen_Teachings/Shobogenzo/043tsuki.pdf Shobogenzo 43], ''Tsuki'' ("On the Moon as One's Excellent Nature"). Compare also:
* A Zen master, Ryokan, lived a life of simplicity in his hut near the mountains. When he was away one night, a thief broke in only to find nothing worth stealing.<br>Just then, Ryokan returned. "You have travelled far to visit me," he told the burglar. "I cannot let you return empty handed. Here are my clothes, please accept them as my gift."<br>The baffled thief took the clothes and vanished.<br>Naked now, the master gazed at the moon. "Poor man," he sighed, "How I wish I could give him this glorious moon." ([https://blog.buddhagroove.com/zen-story-steal-the-moon/ Zen Story: Steal the Moon])
* "Clear mind is like the full moon in the sky. Sometimes clouds come and cover it, but the moon is always behind them. Clouds go away, then the moon shines brightly. So don't worry about clear mind: it is always there. When thinking comes, behind it is clear mind. When thinking goes, there is only clear mind. Thinking comes and goes, comes and goes. You must not be attached to the coming or the going." (Seung Sahn, [https://kwanumzen.org/teaching-blog/2018/7/16/clear-mind-is-like-the-full-moon Clear Mind Is Like The Full Moon])
* According to {{harvtxt|McRae|2003|pp=61–65}}, in the famous story of the verse-contest in the [[Platform Sutra]], the two verses are actually complementary:<br><br>The body is the ''[[bodhi]]'' tree.<br>The mind is like a bright mirror's stand.<br>At all times we must strive to polish it<br>and must not let dust collect.<br><br>''Bodhi'' originally has no tree.<br>The mirror has no stand.<br>The Buddha-nature is always clear and pure.<br>Where is there room for dust?<br><br>According to McRae, "T]he verse attributed to Shenxiu [does refer] to a constant practice of cleaning the mirror [...] Huineng's verse(s) apply the rhetoric of emptiness to undercut the substantiality of the terms of that formulation. However, the basic meaning of the first proposition still remains." <br><br>See also Joko Beck, ''Everyday Zen'' (2008), p.19-20 and p.63 on the mirror verses:<br>Now while the verse of the Sixth Patriarch is the true understanding, the paradox for us is that we have to practice with the verse that was not accepted: we do have to polish the mirror; we do have to be aware of our thoughts and actions; we do have to be aware of our false reactions to life."</ref>
}}


==References==
{{citation style|date=March 2023}}
{{Reflist|22em}}

==Sources==
{{refbegin|30em}}
<!-- B -->
* {{Citation | last =Brown | first =Brian Edward | year =1994 | title =The Buddha Nature. A Study of the Tathagatagarbha and Alayavijnana | place =Delhi | publisher =Motilal Banarsidass Publishers}}
* {{cite book |last=Brunnholzl |first=Karl |year=2014 |title=When the Clouds Part, The ''Uttaratantra'' and Its Meditative Tradition as a Bridge between Sutra and Tantra |location=Boston & London |publisher=Snow Lion}}
<!-- C -->
* {{Citation | last =Cheng Chien Bhikshu | year =1992 | chapter =Introduction | title =Sun-Face Buddha. The Teachings of Ma-tsu and the Hung-chou School of Ch'an | publisher =Asian Humanities Press}} 
<!-- D -->
* {{Citation | last =Dumoulin | first =Heinrich | year =2005a | title =Zen Buddhism: A History. Volume 1: India and China | publisher =World Wisdom Books | isbn =978-0-941532-89-1}}
* {{Citation | last =Dumoulin | first =Heinrich | year =2005b | title =Zen Buddhism: A History. Volume 2: Japan | publisher =World Wisdom Books | isbn =978-0-941532-90-7}}
<!-- G -->
* {{Citation| last =Gethin | first = Rupert | year =1998 | title =Foundations of Buddhism | publisher =Oxford University Press}}
* {{Citation | last= Gregory | first =Peter N. | year =1991 | title =Sudden Enlightenment Followed by Gradual Cultivation: Tsung-mi's Analysis of Mind. In: Peter N. Gregory (editor)(1991), Sudden and Gradual. Approaches to Enlightenment in Chinese Thought. | place =Delhi | publisher =Motilal Banarsidass Publishers}}
<!-- H -->
* {{Citation |last=Hakeda |first=Yoshito S., trans. |year=1967 |title=Awakening of Faith Attributed to Aśvaghoṣa |place=New York |publisher=Columbia University Press |url=http://www.thezensite.com/ZenTeachings/Translations/Awakening_of_faith.html |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130911091143/http://www.thezensite.com/ZenTeachings/Translations/Awakening_of_faith.html |archive-date=September 11, 2013 }}
* {{Citation | last =Harvey | first =Peter | year =1995 | title =An introduction to Buddhism. Teachings, history and practices | publisher =Cambridge University Press}}
* {{Citation | last =Hookham | first =Shenpen (tr.) | year =1998 | title =The Shrimaladevi Sutra | place =Oxford | publisher =Longchen Foundation}}
* {{Citation | last =Hopkins | first =Jeffrey | year =1999 | title =Introduction by Jeffrey Hopkins. In: His Holiness the Dalai Lama: Kalachakra Tantra. Rite of Initiation | publisher =Wisdom Publications}}
* {{Citation |last=Jikido |first=Takasaki |title=The Tathagatagarbha Theory Reconsidered. Reflections on Some Recent Issues in Japanese Buddhist Studies |journal=Japanese Journal of Religious Studies |year=2000 |volume=27 |issue=1–2 |url=http://nirc.nanzan-u.ac.jp/nfile/2696 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140727213522/http://nirc.nanzan-u.ac.jp/nfile/2696 |archive-date=July 27, 2014 }}
<!-- K -->
* {{Citation | last =Kapleau | first =Philip | year =1989 | title =The Three Pillars of Zen |publisher=Anchor Books}}
* {{Citation | last =Kim | first =Seong-Uk | year =2007 | title =Understanding Tsung-Mi's view on Buddha nature}}
* {{Citation | last =King | first =Sallie B. | year =1991 | title =Buddha Nature | publisher =SUNY Press |isbn=978-0-7914-0428-7}}
<!-- L -->
* {{Citation |last=Lai |first=Whalen |year=2003 |title=Buddhism in China: A Historical Survey. In Antonio S. Cua (ed.): Encyclopedia of Chinese Philosophy |publisher=New York: Routledge |url=http://cw.routledge.com/ref/chinesephil/Buddhism.pdf |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20141112205228/http://cw.routledge.com/ref/chinesephil/Buddhism.pdf |archive-date=November 12, 2014 }}
* {{Citation |last=Liu |first=Ming-Wood |year=1982 |title=The Doctrine of the Buddha-Nature in the Mahāyāna Mahāparinirvāṇa Sūtra |journal=Journal of the International Association of Buddhist Studies |volume=5 |issue=2 |pages=63–94 |url=http://archiv.ub.uni-heidelberg.de/ojs/index.php/jiabs/article/viewFile/8578/2485 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20131016074553/http://archiv.ub.uni-heidelberg.de/ojs/index.php/jiabs/article/viewFile/8578/2485 |archive-date=October 16, 2013 }} 
* {{Citation | last =Lopez | first =Donald S. | year =2001 | title =The Story of Buddhism: a concise guide to its history & teaching | publisher =HarperCollins Publishers, Inc. | isbn =0-06-069976-0}}
* {{Citation | last =Bielefeldt | first =Carl | year =2015 | chapter =A Discussion of Seated Zen| editor-last =Lopez, Jr. | editor-first =Donald S. | title =Buddhism in Practice: Abridged Edition | publisher =Princeton University Press}}
* {{Citation | last =Lusthaus | first =Dan | year =1998 | title =Buddhist Philosophy, Chinese. In: Routledge Encyclopedia of Philosophy: Index | publisher =Taylor & Francis}}
<!-- M -->
* {{Citation|last=McRae |first=John |year=2003 |title=Seeing Through Zen |publisher=The University Press Group Ltd }}
<!-- P -->
* Powers, J. A. (2000). ''Concise Encyclopaedia of Buddhism''.
<!-- R -->
* Rawson, Philip (1991).  ''Sacred Tibet''. London, Thames and Hudson.  {{ISBN|0-500-81032-X}}.
* {{Cite book | last = Reeves | first = Gene | title = The Lotus Sutra: A Contemporary Translation of a Buddhist Classic | publisher = Wisdom Publications | year = 2008 | location = [[Somerville, Massachusetts|Somerville, MA]] | isbn = 978-0-86171-571-8}}
<!-- S -->
* {{Citation |last=Sasaki |first=Shizuka |title=Review Article: The Mahaparinirvana Sutra and the Origins of Mahayana Buddhism |journal=Japanese Journal of Religious Studies |year=1999 |volume=26 |issue=1–2 |url=http://nirc.nanzan-u.ac.jp/publications/jjrs/pdf/539.pdf |archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20110811213229/http://nirc.nanzan-u.ac.jp/publications/jjrs/pdf/539.pdf |archive-date=2011-08-11 |access-date=21 January 2012}}
* {{Citation | last =Schaik | first =Sam | year =2004 | title =Approaching the Great Perfection: Simultaneous and Gradual Methods of Dzogchen Practice in the Longchen Nyingtig | publisher =Wisdom Publications Inc. | url =http://www.wisdompubs.org/sites/default/files/preview/Approaching-the-Great-Perfection-Preview.pdf | access-date =2014-06-25 | archive-url =https://web.archive.org/web/20140714201435/http://www.wisdompubs.org/sites/default/files/preview/Approaching-the-Great-Perfection-Preview.pdf | archive-date =2014-07-14 | url-status =dead }}
* {{Citation |last=Sharf |first=Robert |year=2014 |title=Mindfullness and Mindlessness in Early Chan |journal=Philosophy East and West |volume=64 |issue=4 |pages=933–964 |doi=10.1353/pew.2014.0074 |url=https://buddhiststudies.berkeley.edu/people/faculty/sharf/documents/Sharf,%20Mindfulness%20and%20Mindlessness%20in%20Early%20Chan.pdf |s2cid=144208166 |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170223065645/https://buddhiststudies.berkeley.edu/people/faculty/sharf/documents/Sharf,%20Mindfulness%20and%20Mindlessness%20in%20Early%20Chan.pdf |archive-date=2017-02-23}}
* {{cite book | last =Shirō | first =Matsumoto | year =1997 | chapter=Tathagata-Garbha is not Buddhist |editor-first1=Jamie |editor-last1=Hubbard |editor-first2=Paul Loren |editor-last2=Swanson |title=Pruning the Bodhi Tree: The Storm Over Critical Buddhism | publisher =University of Hawaii Press}}
* {{Citation | last =Snelling | first=John | year= 1987 |title =The Buddhist handbook. A Complete Guide to Buddhist Teaching and Practice | place =London | publisher =Century Paperbacks}}
* Suzuki, D.T. (1978). ''The Lankavatara Sutra'', Prajna Press, Boulder.
<!-- T -->
* {{Citation | last =Trainor | first =Kevin | year =2004 | title =Buddhism: The Illustrated Guide | publisher =Oxford University Press}}
<!-- W -->
* {{Citation | last =Wayman | first= Alex and Hideko | year =1990 | title =The Lion's roar of Queen Srimala | place =Delhi | publisher =Motilal Banarsidass Publishers}}
* {{Citation | last =Williams | first =Paul | year =1994 | title =Mahayana Buddhism. The Doctrinal Foundations | publisher =Routledge}}
* {{Citation | last =Williams | first =Paul | year =2008 | title =Mahayana Buddhism: The Doctrinal Foundations | publisher =Routledge}}
* {{Citation | last =Williams | first =Paul | year =2000 | title =Buddhist Thought | publisher = Routledge}}
* {{Citation | last= Williams | first =Paul | year =2002 | title =Buddhist Thought | publisher = Taylor & Francis, Kindle Edition}}
<!-- Y -->
* {{Citation |last=Yamamoto|first=Kosho|title=Mahayanism: A Critical Exposition of the Mahayana Mahaparinirvana Sutra|year=1975|publisher=Karinbunko}}
<!-- Z -->
* {{cite book |last1=Zimmermann |first1=Michael |chapter=The Tathagatagarbhasutra: Its Basic Structure and Relation to the Lotus Sutra |date=1999 |title=Annual Report of the International Research Institute for Advanced Buddhology at Soka University for the Academic Year 1998 |pages=143–168 |publisher=The International Research Institute for Advanced Buddhology, Soka University |location=Tokyo |url=http://iriab.soka.ac.jp/orc/pdf/ARIRIAB-02.pdf |archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20111008013412/http://iriab.soka.ac.jp/orc/pdf/ARIRIAB-02.pdf |archive-date=October 8, 2011 |url-status=dead}}
* {{cite journal |last1=Zimmermann |first1=Michael |title=A Buddha Within: The Tathāgatagarbhasūtra |journal=Biblotheca Philologica et Philosophica Buddhica |volume=VI |date=2002 |publisher=The International Research Institute for Advanced Buddhology, Soka University |location=Tokyo |url=http://iriab.soka.ac.jp/orc/Publications/BPPB/pdf/BPPB-06.pdf |archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20131111023508/http://iriab.soka.ac.jp/orc/Publications/BPPB/pdf/BPPB-06.pdf |archive-date=November 11, 2013 |url-status=dead}}
{{refend}}

==Further reading==
;General
* Kalupahana, David J. (1992), ''A history of Buddhist philosophy''. Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass Publishers
* Sallie, B. King: Buddha Nature, State University of New York Press 1991, {{ISBN|0-7914-0428-5}}
;China
* {{cite journal|ref=none|last1=King |first1=Sallie B. |title=Buddha nature and the concept of person |journal=Philosophy East and West |year=1989 |volume=39 |issue=2 |pages=151–170 |url=http://enlight.lib.ntu.edu.tw/FULLTEXT/JR-PHIL/king2.htm |doi=10.2307/1399375  |jstor=1399375 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140729212629/http://enlight.lib.ntu.edu.tw/FULLTEXT/JR-PHIL/king2.htm |archive-date=July 29, 2014 |url-access=subscription }}
* {{Citation|ref=none | last =Lusthaus | first =Dan | year =1998 | title =Buddhist Philosophy, Chinese. In: Routledge Encyclopedia of Philosophy: Index | publisher =Taylor & Francis}}
* {{Citation|ref=none |last=Lai |first=Whalen |title=Buddhism in China: A Historical Survey |url=http://www.thezensite.com/ZenEssays/HistoricalZen/Buddhism_in_China.pdf  |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120916163046/http://www.thezensite.com/ZenEssays/HistoricalZen/Buddhism_in_China.pdf |archive-date=September 16, 2012 }}
;Tibet
* Brunnholzl, Karl (2009), ''Luminous Heart: The Third Karmapa on Consciousness, Wisdom, and Buddha Nature''. Snow Lion Publications. {{ISBN|978-1-55939-318-8}}
* {{Citation|ref=none | last =Hookham | first =S.K. | year =1991 | title =The Buddha Within: Tathagatagarbha Doctrine According to the Shentong Interpretation of the Ratnagotravibhaga | publisher =SUNY Press}}
;Japan
* {{Citation|ref=none | last =Harada | first =Sekkei | year =2008 | title =The essence of Zen. The Teachings of Sekkei Harada | publisher =Wisdom Publications}}
;Critical Buddhism
* {{Citation|ref=none |editor-last1=Hubbard |editor-first1=Jamie |editor-last2=Swanson |editor-first2=Paul Loren |year=1997 |title=Pruning the Bodhi Tree: The Storm over Critical Buddhism |publisher=University of Hawai'i Press}}

==External links==
* [https://web.archive.org/web/20140714154909/http://thichhangdat.com/yahoo_site_admin/assets/docs/The_Interpretation_of_Buddha_Nature_in_Chan_Tradition-final_paper.83100058.pdf Thich Hang Dat, ''The Interpretation of Buddha-nature in Chan Tradition'']
* [https://web.archive.org/web/20120725093909/http://kr.buddhism.org/zen/koan/Robert_Sharf-e.htm On the Buddha-nature of Insentient Things], Robert H. Sharf
* [https://nirvanasutranet.com/ "Nirvana Sutra": full text of "Nirvana Sutra", plus appreciation of its teachings.] and [https://web.archive.org/web/20131019072030/http://webzoom.freewebs.com/nirvana-sutra/convenient/Mahaparinirvana_Sutra_Yamamoto_Page_2007.pdf Nirvana Sutra] (2,6 MB)
* [http://www.lirs.ru/do/lanka_eng/lanka-contents.htm The Laṅkāvatāra Sūtra A Mahāyāna Text]
* Hodge, Stephen (2009 & 2012). [https://web.archive.org/web/20130928081601/http://www.buddhismuskunde.uni-hamburg.de/fileadmin/pdf/publikationen/The_Textual_Transmisssion_of_the_MPNS.pdf "The Textual Transmission of the Mahayana Mahaparinirvana-sutra"]

{{Lotus Sutra}}
{{Buddhism topics}}

{{Authority control}}

{{DEFAULTSORT:Buddha-Nature}}
[[Category:Buddha-nature| ]]
[[Category:Buddhist philosophical concepts]]
[[Category:Dzogchen]]
[[Category:Mahayana]]
[[Category:Nonduality]]
[[Category:Shentong]]