@article{ART002030008},
author={최성호},
title={D. S. Ruegg’s analysis of RGVVemphasis on non-duality},
journal={불교학리뷰},
issn={1975-2660},
year={2011},
number={10},
pages={9-33},
doi={10.29213/crbs..10.201112.9}
TY - JOUR
AU - 최성호
TI - D. S. Ruegg’s analysis of RGVVemphasis on non-duality
JO - 불교학리뷰
PY - 2011
VL - null
IS - 10
PB - Geumgang Center for Buddhist Studies
SP - 9
EP - 33
SN - 1975-2660
AB - This article reconstructs D. S. Ruegg’s analysis of Ratnagotravibhāga Mahāyānottaratantraśāstra Vyākhyā (RGVV). It focuses on the analysis of difference between RGVV and Śrīmāladevīsiṃhanādasūtra (ŚMDSS). RGVV frequently cites passages of ŚMDSS, but the citations are little different from original text of ŚMDSS. The most evident difference is epithets to buddhadharma of dharmakāya. While Tibetan ŚMDSS explains that dharmakāya entails the knowledge of nirvāṇa (muktajña), RGVV says that dharmakāya entails the recognition of non‐duality (amuktajña). Ruegg argues that this difference originates from different hermeneutical traditions.
RGVV stands on a hermenuetical tradition which interprets śunyatā as based on prajñāpāramitā sutra. This tradition emphasizes that dharmakāya, which is separated from all suffering, is not different with tathāgatagarbha which is not yet separated from all suffering. This is because sufferings are not something to eliminate but by nature non‐existent.
As RGVV stands on this tradition, the absolute which RGVV describes are different from Ātman which Vedānta explains, although RGVV describes the absolute in exactly same way as Vedānta. For example, although RGVV describes that tathāgatagarbha has ātman, this ātman actually means anātman. That is, RGVV’s aim is to explain ātman does not exist in the nature so there are no difference between epithets of ātman and anātman.
KW - D. S. Ruegg;tathāgatagarbha;dharmakāya;RGVV;ŚMSS
DO - 10.29213/crbs..10.201112.9
ER -
최성호. (2011). D. S. Ruegg’s analysis of RGVVemphasis on non-duality. 불교학리뷰, 10, 9-33.
최성호. 2011, "D. S. Ruegg’s analysis of RGVVemphasis on non-duality", 불교학리뷰, no.10, pp.9-33. Available from: doi:10.29213/crbs..10.201112.9
최성호 "D. S. Ruegg’s analysis of RGVVemphasis on non-duality" 불교학리뷰 10 pp.9-33 (2011) : 9.
최성호. D. S. Ruegg’s analysis of RGVVemphasis on non-duality. 2011; 10 : 9-33. Available from: doi:10.29213/crbs..10.201112.9
최성호. "D. S. Ruegg’s analysis of RGVVemphasis on non-duality" 불교학리뷰 no.10(2011) : 9-33.doi: 10.29213/crbs..10.201112.9
최성호. D. S. Ruegg’s analysis of RGVVemphasis on non-duality. 불교학리뷰, 10, 9-33. doi: 10.29213/crbs..10.201112.9
최성호. D. S. Ruegg’s analysis of RGVVemphasis on non-duality. 불교학리뷰. 2011; 10 9-33. doi: 10.29213/crbs..10.201112.9
최성호. D. S. Ruegg’s analysis of RGVVemphasis on non-duality. 2011; 10 : 9-33. Available from: doi:10.29213/crbs..10.201112.9
최성호. "D. S. Ruegg’s analysis of RGVVemphasis on non-duality" 불교학리뷰 no.10(2011) : 9-33.doi: 10.29213/crbs..10.201112.9
