On Buddhist logic and dialectical studies; Also includes Vinaya root-text on essence of Buddhist ethics by Dharmakīrti, active 7th century and commentary by ʼJam-mgon ʼJu Mi-pham-rgya-mtsho.

Literal explanation of the ʼJam-dbyaṅs-bźad-pa Ṅag-dbaṅ-brtson-ʼgrus's text Grub mthaʼi rnam par bźag pa ʼkhrul spoṅ gdoṅ lṅaʼi sgra dbyaṅs kun mkhyen lam bzaṅ gsal baʼi rin chen sgron me, deals on comparative study of the philosophical systems (siddhānta) of Buddhism and Hinduism.

Collection of speeches extracted from different sources on human morality.

Commentary on Grub paʼi mthaʼi rnam par bzhag pa rin po cheʼi ʼphreng ba text authored by ʼJam-dbyangs-bzhad-pa II Dkon-mchog ʼJigs-med-dbang-po,1728-1791.

Explanation of the philosophical position (siddhānta) of the Vaibhāṣika, Sautrāntika, Yogācārya, and Mādhyamika schools of Buddhism.

Study on Buddhist logic according to Candrakīrti.

On correct method of understanding various Buddhist philosophical concepts according to sutras and tantras in accordance with Karmapa VIII Mi-bskyod-rdo-rje interpreation.

Exegesis of Blo rig and Rtags rigs, treatise in logic in Tibetan Buddhism.

Selected works of author's predominantly on Buddhist dialectical studies and mind training (Blo-sbyoṅ).

His Holiness teachings on the philosophical positions (siddhānta) of the Vaibhāṣika, Sautrāntika, Yogācārya, and Mādhyamika schools of Buddhism with Hinduism.

Mipam (‘ju mi pham rgya mtsho, 1846–1912), an architect of the Nyingma (rnying ma) tradition of Tibet in the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries, articulates two distinct models of the two truths that are respectively reflected in Madhyamaka and Yogācāra Buddhist traditions. The way he positions these two models sheds light on how levels of description are at play in his integration of these traditions. Mipam positions one kind of two-truth model as the product of an (...) ontological analysis while another model can be seen as resulting from a phenomenological reduction. He accommodates both models into his systematic interpretation, and for him, each one has an important role to play in coming to understand the nature of the Buddhist truths of emptiness and Buddha-nature. Since each model reflects a different style of analysis, or a different perspective on truth, his presentation reveals how neither model alone has the last word on the nature of what is and how it is experienced. This paper analyzes the means by which he lays out these two models of the two truths, and explores the implications of their integration in his philosophical works. A primary concern for Mipam, and a factor that guides his attempt to integrate these two approaches to truth, is his aim to both induce authentic experience and true knowledge on the one hand, and represent reality and the experience of it on the other. These competing and complimentary objectives are a central focus around which both styles of critical reflection, and both models of the two truths, revolve. (shrink)

In Tibet, the negative dialectics of Madhyamaka are typically identified with Candrakīrti’s interpretation of Nāgārjuna, and systematic epistemology is associated with Dharmakīrti. These two figures are also held to be authoritative commentators on a univocal doctrine of Buddhism. Despite Candrakīrti’s explicit criticism of Buddhist epistemologists in his Prasannapadā, Buddhists in Tibet have integrated the theories of Candrakīrti and Dharmakīrti in unique ways. Within this integration, there is a tension between the epistemological system-building on the one hand, and “deconstructive” negative dialectics (...) on the other. The integration of an epistemological system within Madhyamaka is an important part of Mipam’s (’ju mi pham rgya mtsho, 1846–1912) philosophical edifice, and is an important part of understanding the place of Yogācāra in his tradition. This paper explores the way that Mipam preserves a meaningful Svātantrika-Prāsaṅgika distinction while claiming both Yogācāra and Prāsaṅgika as legitimate expressions of Madhyamaka. Mipam represents Prāsaṅgika-Madhyamaka as a discourse that emphasizes what transcends conceptuality. As such, he portrays Prāsaṅgika as a radical discourse of denial. Since the mind cannot conceive the “content” of nonconceptual meditative equipoise, Prāsaṅgika, as the representative discourse of meditative equipoise, negates any formulation of that state. In contrast, he positions Yogācāra as a discourse that situates the nonconceptual within a systematic (conceptual) structure. Rather than a discourse that re-presents the nonconceptual by enacting it (like Prāsaṅgika), the discourse of Yogācāra represents the nonconceptual within an overarching system, a system (unlike Prāsaṅgika) that distinguishes between the conceptual and the nonconceptual. (shrink)

Comparative study of the philosophical systems of the Vaibhashika, Sautrantika, Yogacarya, and Madhyamaka schools of Indian Buddhism with non-Buddhist tenets.

Collected works of Dmu-dge Bsam-gtan, predominantly on Buddhist doctrines, grammar, and history, including autobiographical writings (v.1), poetic works, refutations, etc.

Collected works of Shes-rab-rgya-mtsho, 1884-1968 on Gelukpa doctrines etc.

Collected works of Dge-lugs-pa scholar predominantly on doctrines, commentary on Vasubandhu's Abhidharmakośa, study on Abhisamayālaṅkāra of Pañcaviṃśatisāhasrikā Prajñāparāmitā, Buddhist logic, philosophy, rituals, etc.

Selected writings of Dmu-dge Thub-bstan-rgya-mtsho, etc. on diverse subjects of Tibetan Buddhist doctrines and philosophy.

Collected works predominantly on Buddhist doctrines and philosophy.

Selected works of author's on critical analysis on different concepts of Buddhist doctrines and philosophy.

Collected works of the author on Buddhism and Dge-lugs-pa doctrines; includes biography.

Exegetical work on Buddhist logic (pramāṇaśastra); includes questions/answers format on Prajñāpāramitā.

On the fundamental essence of Buddhist logic and dialectical studies.

Study on the development and differences in philosophy among various Buddhist sects.

Basic course of study of elementary Buddhist logic and dialectical studies.

Some facts about differentiation between Jonang and Sakyapa doctrines.

Study on Tibetan Buddhist logic; includes some poems and essays.