Saunders, in Buddhism in Japan, provides interesting detail on the "three treatises" of this school in his discussion of its Japanese counterpart, the Sanron. (ref. pp 115-116) The Treatise on the Middle Way was aimed at refuting the "'wrong views' of the Hīnayāna." Hope others find this helpful. |
|||
Chi-tsang's Buddha Nature
Interesting article in a JIABS from 1980 that discusses the basis for the doctrine that even inanimate objects possess buddha nature.
A couple of relevant quotations here:
Although there was no doctrinal precedent for Chi-tsang's assertion, in his examination of Buddhist texts he found several passages to substantiate his theory of a comprehensive Buddha-nature. As we shall see, Chi-tsang took a highly qualified step in expanding the notion of
salvation to include all of the natural, phenomenal world. As a San-lun scholar, however, Chi-tsang was neither interested, in a Taoist sort of way, in elevating nature to a religious dimension, nor simply concerned with the Nirvana-sutra anthropocentrically-limited promise of eventual enlightenment. Rather, Chi-tsang's most significant contribution to the discussion lay in his assertion that the Buddha-nature was a synonym for the middle path doctrine. The route by which he came to his expanded conception of Buddha-nature, then, was based on his primary view of prajna, and it is this that we wish to investigate in what follows.
Based on his own reading of the Nirvana-sutra, Chi-tsang also felt that the earlier theories ignored the Prajnaparamita doctrine articulated in the "Bodhisattva Lion's Roar" chapter on the identity of prajna and Buddha-nature, viz., "The Buddha-nature is called the first principle of emptiness; the first principle of emptiness is called prajna"