Search by property

This page provides a simple browsing interface for finding entities described by a property and a named value. Other available search interfaces include the page property search, and the ask query builder.

List of results

• Steinert App Dictionaries/06-Hopkins-Comment/112  +
• Steinert App Dictionaries/06-Hopkins-Comment/290  + (Thumi, p.174, has byed for the imperative, but I think the above is correct (T))
• Steinert App Dictionaries/06-Hopkins-Comment/192  + (Thumi, p.180, has "lend" for the imperative (T))
• Steinert App Dictionaries/06-Hopkins-Comment/216  + (Thumi, p.180, has: bre / 'bre / bres / 'bres (T))
• Steinert App Dictionaries/06-Hopkins-Comment/1090  + (Thumi, p.192, has myang for past, but it is probably a typo (T))
• Steinert App Dictionaries/06-Hopkins-Comment/1488  + (Thumi, p.204, has rtsoms for the imperative (T))
• Steinert App Dictionaries/06-Hopkins-Comment/1489  + (Thumi, p.204, has rtsoms for the imperative (T))
• Steinert App Dictionaries/06-Hopkins-Comment/1951  + (Thumi, p.218, has zhug for the future. Check previous record (T))
• Steinert App Dictionaries/06-Hopkins-Comment/326  + (Thumi, p.222, lists "bzhu" only as the future of "to melt; to digest" (T))
• Steinert App Dictionaries/06-Hopkins-Comment/729  + (Thumi, p.88, has "bcom / choms" for the past and imperative (T))
• Steinert App Dictionaries/06-Hopkins-Comment/1838  + (as opposed to meaning translation (don 'gyur))
• Steinert App Dictionaries/06-Hopkins-Comment/1168  + (check tenses. Thumi (p.98) has nyald / nyal / nyal / nyold (T))
• Steinert App Dictionaries/06-Hopkins-Comment/288  + (definition of pot's meaning generality (bum pa'i don spyi))
• Steinert App Dictionaries/06-Hopkins-Comment/1209  + (emptiness of external objects; Comment: Th … emptiness of external objects; Comment: This is one of two different subtle emptinesses set forth in Mind-Only literature. The emptiness of external objects is also called the emptiness of apprehended-objects and apprehending-subjects existing as different substantial entities (bzung 'dzin rdzas tha dad kyis stong pa). This is explained as meaning that, for instance, a form such as a table appears to be a different substantial entity from the eye consciousness apprehending it but is not. A table appears to be distant and cut off (rgyang chad du snang ba) from the apprehending consciousness but is not; thus, a table is said to be empty of being a different entity from a valid consciousness, such as an eye consciousness, cognizing it; this is the emptiness of the table. Similarly, the eye consciousness apprehending the table is not a different entity from the table that it apprehends, and thus, from this point of view, the consciousness' absence of being a different entity from the table it perceives is the emptiness of the consciousness. Both the table and the consciousness exist, but both lack a certain quality — difference of entity — in relation to each other. See also "the emptiness of factors imputed in the manner of entity and attribute" (ngo bo dang khyad bar du kun btags pas stong pa'i stong pa nyid).u kun btags pas stong pa'i stong pa nyid).)
• Steinert App Dictionaries/06-Hopkins-Comment/1372  + (example is not really demonstrative of meaning (T))
• Steinert App Dictionaries/06-Hopkins-Comment/1129  + (get tenses. SW added this entry; (PH): (Thumi) (nod, nod, nos, nos) to receive; to obtain; to obtain or accept religious obligations)
• Steinert App Dictionaries/06-Hopkins-Comment/844  + (imputational form; Comment: One in the tri … imputational form; Comment: One in the triad of imputational form (kun brtags pa'i gzugs), imputed form (rnam par brtags pa'i gzugs), and form of reality (chos nyid kyi gzugs), the last meaning the reality of form in Ge-luk and noumenal form in Jo-nang. These three correspond to the three natures of a form: imputational nature, other-powered nature, and thoroughly established nature of a form.d thoroughly established nature of a form.)
• Steinert App Dictionaries/06-Hopkins-Comment/1443  + (imputed form; Comment: One in the triad of … imputed form; Comment: One in the triad of imputational form (kun brtags pa'i gzugs), imputed form (rnam par brtags pa'i gzugs), and form of reality (chos nyid kyi gzugs), the last meaning the reality of form in Ge-luk and noumenal form in Jo-nang. These three correspond to the three natures of a form: imputational nature, other-powered nature, and thoroughly established nature of a form.d thoroughly established nature of a form.)
• Steinert App Dictionaries/06-Hopkins-Comment/1124  + (niHsvabhAva; Comment: Another possible tra … niHsvabhAva; Comment: Another possible translation equivalent for "non-nature" (ngo bo nyid med pa; niHsvabhAva) is "non-entityness." Despite being admittedly awkward, it closely reflects in both its etymology and its meaning the Sanskrit term niHsvabhAva which is derived from the verbal root bhU "to be." For, "entity" is derived in its basic form (es) from the Latin esse "to be" and is derived in its suffixed form from the Sanskrit as which, like bhU, means "being." In addition, "entity" means "something that exists as a particular and discrete unit" or "the fact of existence; being." Thus, "non-entityness" would be a suitable translation for the negative term niHsvabhAva, if it were not so awkward; other possible translations are "non-thingness," "non-natureness," and "unreality." Since all of these choices are awkward and since trisvabhAva is translated as "three natures," I have chosen "non-nature" for niHsvabhAva; it has the additional virtue of reflecting the play between svabhAva and niHsvabhAva — (three) natures and (three) non-natures.— (three) natures and (three) non-natures.)
• Steinert App Dictionaries/06-Hopkins-Comment/546  + (one of the two types of meaning generality)
• Steinert App Dictionaries/06-Hopkins-Comment/1743  + (one of the two types of meaning generalities)
• Steinert App Dictionaries/06-Hopkins-Comment/651  + (part of the meaning of one establishment and abiding (grub bde gcig pa'i don))
• Steinert App Dictionaries/06-Hopkins-Comment/1269  + (see: rang rgyalComment: D#en-b#a-d#en-dzin explains (rang sangs rgyas) as meaning (rang gi don du sangs rgyas thob 'dod pa) "wanting to achieve buddhahood for one's own sake.")
• Steinert App Dictionaries/06-Hopkins-Comment/116  + (to sweep; Thumi, p.162, has: phyag / 'phyag / phyags / 'phyags for the tenses of "to sweep" (T))
• Steinert App Dictionaries/06-Hopkins-Comment/525  + (ultimate truths are understood in differen … ultimate truths are understood in different ways by the various Buddhist systems; see definition headingComment: The Sanskrit for "ultimate truth," paramArthasatya, is etymologized three ways within identifying parama as "highest" or "ultimate," artha as "object," and satya as "truth." In the first way, parama (highest, ultimate) refers to a consciousness of meditative equipoise directly realizing emptiness; artha (object) refers to the object of that consciousness, emptiness; and satya (truth) also refers to emptiness in that in direct perception emptiness appears the way it exists; that is, there is no discrepancy between the mode of appearance and the mode of being. In this interpretation, a paramArthasatya is a "truth-that-is-an-object-of-the-highest-consciousness." In the second way, both parama (highest, ultimate) and artha (object) refer to a consciousness of meditative equipoise directly realizing emptiness in that, in the broadest meaning of "object," both objects and subjects are objects, and a consciousness of meditative equipoise directly realizing emptiness is the highest consciousness and thus highest object; satya (truth), as before, refers to emptiness. In this second interpretation, a paramArthasatya is an emptiness that exists the way it appears to a highest consciousness, a "truth-of-a-highest-object." In the third etymology, all three parts refer to emptiness in that an emptiness is the highest (the ultimate) and is also an object and a truth, a "truth-that-is-the-highest-object." ChandrakIrti, the chief Consequentialist, favors the third etymology in his Clear Wordsors the third etymology in his Clear Words)

• Steinert App Dictionaries/06-Hopkins-Comment/112  + (Thumi, p.168, has: 'phrod / 'phrod / phrod / phrod as meaning "to receive; to be recognized; to be fit or suitable ..." (T))

• Steinert App Dictionaries/06-Hopkins-Comment/1071  + ((PH) too many synonymsComment: A "definiti … (PH) too many synonymsComment: A "definition" in this the Mind-Only system is not a verbal description; it is the actual object, viewed in one way as being the meaning (don, artha) whereas the definiendum is the name (ming, nAma). In another way, the definition is viewed as a "defining property" that characterizes an object. (PH) added M-O to note. Check. Exclusive view of M-O?M-O to note. Check. Exclusive view of M-O?)
• Steinert App Dictionaries/06-Hopkins-Comment/701  + ((T) Check tenses according to Thumi this i … (T) Check tenses according to Thumi this is a different verb from phab, etc. \n(SW) I think the verb form "phebs" is a mistake; should be "phab"; (PH) "phebs" = (Das) to arrive; to depart; (Thumi) to go; to come; to move; (dbab, 'bebs, phab, phob) = (JH) to settle; to cast down; (Das) to assign; to fix; to lay down; to establish; (Thumi) to bring down; to cause to come downhumi) to bring down; to cause to come down)
• Steinert App Dictionaries/06-Hopkins-Comment/1505  + (Buddhaguhya; Comment: Three Indian scholar … Buddhaguhya; Comment: Three Indian scholars are renowned especially for their works on Yoga Tantra, whom New Translation Schools consider the "Three People Expert/Proficient in Yoga [Tantra]" (yoga la mi mkhas pa gsum): Buddhaguhya (sangs rgyas gsang ba; fl. mid eighth century), ShAkyamitra (shA kya bshes gnyen), and A#nandagarbha (kun dga' snying po; fl. late ninth or early tenth century). Buddhaguhya authored the Entry into the Meaning of the Tantra (rgyud kyi don la 'jug pa, tantrArthAvatara), as well as commentaries on Action and Performance Tantras. As an important figure in N#ying-ma MahAyoga lineages he taught Padmasambhava and Vimalamitra and authored texts.mbhava and Vimalamitra and authored texts.)
• Steinert App Dictionaries/06-Hopkins-Comment/1219  + (Check tense. Thumi has (p.164): dbyi / 'byid / phyis / phyis (T))
• Steinert App Dictionaries/06-Hopkins-Comment/1193  + (Check tenses from Thumi p.168. (T))
• Steinert App Dictionaries/06-Hopkins-Comment/1784  + (Check tenses. Thumi (p.122) list those above as meaning: To be fallen in the hands of; to be accurate; etc. ??? (T))
• Steinert App Dictionaries/06-Hopkins-Comment/1203  + (Check tenses. Thumi (p.164) lists dbyi / 'byid / phyis / phyis for the verb to erase. No mention of phyi. Also, "generality" is spyi, no? (T))
• Steinert App Dictionaries/06-Hopkins-Comment/110  + (Check tenses. Thumi, p.168, has: 'phro / 'phro ('phros) / phro / phros (T))
• Steinert App Dictionaries/06-Hopkins-Comment/324  + (Check tenses. Thumi, p.176, has: 'byon / 'byond / byon / byond (T))
• Steinert App Dictionaries/06-Hopkins-Comment/1653  + (Comment: A-ku L#o-drö-gya-tso (Precious La … Comment: A-ku L#o-drö-gya-tso (Precious Lamp, 223.2) takes this as referring to attaining forbearance, that is, facility, with respect to the meaning of the selflessness of phenomena. Jik-may-dam-chö-gya-tso (Port of Entry, 505.6) adds that through ascertaining the meaning of the non-production of phenomena upon taking the eight non-productions as reasons, one attains forbearance with respect to the doctrine of non-production, that is, selflessness. of non-production, that is, selflessness.)
• Steinert App Dictionaries/06-Hopkins-Comment/694  + (Comment: According to Gung-tang this means … Comment: According to Gung-tang this means to differentiate the interpretable and the definitive with respect to the meaning of the scriptures, this requiring extensive delineation of the presentation of the two truths, which itself requires realization of emptiness. This is called "differentiating the interpretable and the definitive on the level of the meaning that is expressed within the scriptures" (brjod bya don gyi drang nges 'byed pa)." (brjod bya don gyi drang nges 'byed pa).)
• Steinert App Dictionaries/06-Hopkins-Comment/467  + (Comment: Arhan/ arhant (dgra bcom pa) is t … Comment: Arhan/ arhant (dgra bcom pa) is translated as "Foe Destroyer" to accord with the usual Tibetan translation of the term and to assist in capturing the flavor of oral and written traditions that frequently refer to this etymology. Arhats have overcome the foe which is the afflictive emotions (nyon mongs, kleza), the chief of which is ignorance, the conception (according to the Consequence School) that persons and phenomena are established by way of their own character.\n The Indian and Tibetan translators were also aware of the etymology of arhant as "worthy one," as they translated the name of the "founder" of the Jaina system, Arhat, as mchod 'od "Worthy of Worship" (see Jam-y#ang-shay-b#a's Great Exposition of Tenets, ka, 62a.3). Also, they were aware of ChandrakIrti's gloss of the term as "Worthy One" in his Clear Words: "Because of being worthy of worship by the world of gods, humans, and demi-gods, they are called Arhats" (sadevamAnuøAsurAl lokAt pUnArhatvAd arhannityuchyate [Poussin, 486.5], lha dang mi dang lha ma yin du bcas pa'i 'jig rten gyis mchod par 'os pas dgra bcom pa zhes brjod la [P5260, vol. 98 75.2.2]). Also, they were aware of Haribhadra's twofold etymology in his Illumination of the Eight Thousand Stanza Perfection of Wisdom SUtra. In the context of the list of epithets qualifying the retinue of Buddha at the beginning of the sUtra (see Unrai Wogihara, ed., AbhisamayAla™kArAlokA PrajJA-pAramitA-vyAkhyA, The Work of Haribhadra [Tokyo: The Toyo Bunko, 1932-5; reprint ed., Tokyo: Sankibo Buddhist Book Store, 1973], 8.18), Haribhadra says, "They are called arhant [=Worthy One, from root arh 'to be worthy'] since they are worthy of worship, religious donations, and being assembled together in a group, etc." (W9.8-9: sarva evAtra pUjA-dakøi˜A-ga˜a-parikarøAdy-Arhatayar-han-taH; P5189, 67.5.7: 'dir thams cad kyang mchod pa dang // yon dang tshogs su 'dub la sogs par 'os pas na dgra bcom pa'o).\nAlso, "They are called arhant [= Foe Destroyer, arihan] because they have destroyed (hata) the foe (ari)."\n(W10.18: hatAritvAd arhantaH; P5189, 69.3.6. dgra rnams bcom pas na dgra bcom pa'o). Thus, this is a considered preference in the face of alternative etymologies—"Foe Destroyer" requiring a not unusual i infix to make ari-han, ari meaning enemy and han meaning to kill, and thus "Foe Destroyer." Unfortunately, one word in English cannot convey both this meaning and "Worthy of Worship"; thus, I have gone with what clearly has become the predominant meaning in Tibet. (For an excellent discussion of the two etymologies of "Arhat" in Buddhism and Jainism, see L.M. Joshi's "Facets of Jaina Religiousness in Comparative Light," L.D. Series 85, [Ahmedabad: L.D. Institute of Indology, May 1981], 53-58). Institute of Indology, May 1981], 53-58).)
• Steinert App Dictionaries/06-Hopkins-Comment/1532  + (Comment: Dol-b#o-b#a S#hay-rap-gyel-tsen r … Comment: Dol-b#o-b#a S#hay-rap-gyel-tsen refers to these three as the quintessential instructions of tenth grounders. These are KalkI PuNDarIka's (rigs ldan pad ma dkar po) Great Commentary on the "KAlachakra Tantra": Stainless Light (bsdus pa'i rgyud kyi rgyal po dus kyi 'khor lo'i 'grel bshad rtsa ba'i rgyud kyi rjes su 'jug pa stong phrag bcu gnyis pa dri ma med pa'i 'od ces bya ba, vimAlaprabhAnAmamUlatantrAnusAriNIdvAdazasAhasrikAlaghukAlacakratantrarAjaTIkA), Peking 2064, vol. 46; Vajragarbha's (rdo rje snying po) Commentary on the Condensation of the Hevajra Tantra (kye'i rdo rje bsdus pa'i don gyi rgya cher 'grel pa, hevajrapiNDArthaTIkA), Peking 2310, vol. 53; and VajrapANi's (phyag na rdo rje) Meaning Commentary on the CakrasaMvara Tantra. The latter two commentaries are done in the manner of the KAlachakra Tantra, that is to say, through the grid of the teachings in the KAlachakra.e grid of the teachings in the KAlachakra.)
• Steinert App Dictionaries/06-Hopkins-Comment/1107  + (Comment: He is a Kalkha Mongolian Ge-luk-b … Comment: He is a Kalkha Mongolian Ge-luk-b#a who studied at both Go-mang and L#o-s#el-l#ing; author of Explanation of the Meaning of the Conventional and the Ultimate in the Four Tenet Systems (grub mtha' bzhi'i lugs kyi kun rdzob dang don dam pa'i don rnam par bshad pa) (New Delhi: Lama Guru Deva, 1972) and so forth Delhi: Lama Guru Deva, 1972) and so forth)
• Steinert App Dictionaries/06-Hopkins-Comment/416  + (Comment: Here avatAra means "addition" in the sense that ChandrakIrti's text is a supplement historically necessary so as to clarify the meaning of NAgArjuna's Treatise on the Middle.)
• Steinert App Dictionaries/06-Hopkins-Comment/661  + (Comment: I use this translation-equivalent … Comment: I use this translation-equivalent because, although by extension the term means "refute" or "contradict," I often find Sanskrit and Tibetan philosophical terminology to be far richer in its literal meaning than in its rerendering into what some English-speaking scholars have identified as its philosophical meaning. Much of the psychological punch (pun intended) is lost in such translations.un intended) is lost in such translations.)
• Steinert App Dictionaries/06-Hopkins-Comment/1009  + (Comment: Jam-y#ang-shay-b#a holds that "na … Comment: Jam-y#ang-shay-b#a holds that "name" (ming) in this the Mind-Only context means a term expressing that object (rang zhes rjod pa'i sgra), and although "terminology" (brda') usually has the same meaning as "name," in order to avoid redundancy he takes it to mean a conceptual consciousness apprehending that object (rang 'dzin rtog pa). (This explanation of "terminology" is well-founded in the tradition since a common dictum is that names and conceptual consciousnesses engage their objects similarly.) (PH) verify change in notects similarly.) (PH) verify change in note)
• Steinert App Dictionaries/06-Hopkins-Comment/614  + (Comment: Ken-sur Nga-w#ang-lek-den etymolo … Comment: Ken-sur Nga-w#ang-lek-den etymologized this is "full-fall", i.e., one who is filled with the afflictions and has fallen into cyclic existence. As he said, this is not true of all persons, because even a Buddha, for instance, is a person. It is to be noted that animals, for instance, are persons. It is said that in general "self" (bdag, Atman) "person," and "I" (nga, ahaM) are equivalent, but in the particular context of the selflessness of persons "self" and "person" are not at all equivalent and do not at all have the same meaning. In the term "selflessness of persons," "self" refers to a falsely imagined status that needs to be refuted, whereas "persons" refers to existent beings who are the bases with respect to which that refutation is made. All four Buddhist schools, therefore, hold that persons exist; they do not claim that persons are mere fictions of ignorance. The schools hold differing opinions on the nature of the person. According to Ge-luk-b#a scholars, all except the Middle Way Consequence School posit something from within the bases of imputation of a person — usually either mind or the collection of mind and body — as being the person. In contrast, the Consequence School holds that, even though a person is imputed in dependence upon mind and body (in the Formless Realm, a person is imputed in dependence only on mind), the person is neither mind nor body nor a collection of mind and body, since it is just the I that is imputed in dependence upon mind and body. Following the lead of ChandrakIrti, recognized by most as the founder of the Consequence School, Ge-luk-b#a scholars identify how in the other schools some factor among the five aggregates (forms, feelings, discriminations, compositional factors, and consciousnesses) or the collection of them is considered to be the person when sought analytically from among its bases of imputation: the Proponents of the Great Exposition, in general, hold that the mere collection of the mental and physical aggregates is the person; however, some of the five SaMmitIya subschools of the Great Exposition School maintain that all five aggregates are the person (although the absurdity of one person being five persons would seem difficult not to notice) while another subschool, the Avantaka, asserts that the mind alone is the person; the SUtra School Following Scripture assert that the continuum of the aggregates is the person; the SUtra School Following Reasoning maintains that the mental consciousness is the person; the Mind-Only School Following Scripture holds that the mind-basis-of-all (kun gzhi rnam par shes pa, AlayavijJAna) is the person; the Mind-Only School Following Reasoning asserts that the mental consciousness is the person; both the Yogic Autonomy School and the SUtra Autonomy School assert that a subtle, neutral mental consciousness is the person. For the most part, the delineation of what these schools assert to be the person is a matter of conjecture and not reporting of forthright statements in these schools' own texts. Though it is clear that most of these schools (if not all) accept that persons exist, it is often not clear in their own literature that they assert that something from within the bases of imputation of a person is the person. Rather, as presented in Vasubandhu's commentary on the ninth chapter of his Treasury of Manifest Knowledge, persons are merely asserted to be "non-associated compositional factors" (ldan min 'du byed, viprayuktasaMskAra) and thus an instance of the fourth aggregate, compositional factors, without a specific identification — of any of the five aggregates that are a person's bases of imputation — as the person.son's bases of imputation — as the person.)
• Steinert App Dictionaries/06-Hopkins-Comment/861  + (Comment: Laya means "basis"; it is derived … Comment: Laya means "basis"; it is derived from the Sanskrit verbal root li, which means "providing support or basis." A# is taken as meaning "all." VijJAna means "consciousness." The verbal root jJa means "know"; na is an ending that means "way" or "means" — the means of understanding; vi means "individually" or "in detail."\n CandrakIrti takes the term as referring to that which is to be minded or known in detail, that is to say, the emptiness; see MED, p. 617.is to say, the emptiness; see MED, p. 617.)
• Steinert App Dictionaries/06-Hopkins-Comment/862  + (Comment: Laya means "basis"; it is derived … Comment: Laya means "basis"; it is derived from the Sanskrit verbal root li, which means "providing support or basis." A# is taken as meaning "all." VijJAna means "consciousness." The verbal root jJa means "know"; na is an ending that means "way" or "means" — the means of understanding; vi means "individually" or "in detail."\n CandrakIrti takes the term as referring to that which is to be minded or known in detail, that is to say, the emptiness; see MED, p. 617.is to say, the emptiness; see MED, p. 617.)
• Steinert App Dictionaries/06-Hopkins-Comment/567  + (Comment: Literally this would be translated as "a meaning that must be led.")
• Steinert App Dictionaries/06-Hopkins-Comment/568  + (Comment: Literally this would be translated as "a meaning that must be led.")
• Steinert App Dictionaries/06-Hopkins-Comment/374  + (Comment: One in the triad of imputational … Comment: One in the triad of imputational form (kun brtags pa'i gzugs), imputed form (rnam par brtags pa'i gzugs), and form of reality (chos nyid kyi gzugs), the last meaning the reality of form in Ge-luk and noumenal form in Jo-nang. These three correspond to the three natures of a form: imputational nature, other-powered nature, and thoroughly established nature of a form.d thoroughly established nature of a form.)
• Steinert App Dictionaries/06-Hopkins-Comment/908  + (Comment: S#er-s#hül Ge-s#hay L#o-sang-pün- … Comment: S#er-s#hül Ge-s#hay L#o-sang-pün-tsok says that the meaning of simultaneous observation can be taken either as simultaneous observation by valid cognition or as simultaneous production, abiding, and disintegration. It seems to me that the former is predominant.eems to me that the former is predominant.)
• Steinert App Dictionaries/06-Hopkins-Comment/679  + (Comment: The meaning (don) of one establishment and abiding (grub bde gcig).)