relating to S ́UNYATA(EMPTINESS) in Perfection of Wis-
dom sutras—are said to be of provisional meaning,
while the third (the teachings of the Samdhinirmo-
cana) is said to be definitive.
In some Mahayana sutras, an alternative strategy is
proposed: The level of a particular text is determined by
subject matter. The most advanced sutras are those that
directly discuss emptiness, a doctrine only taught to
the most advanced disciples. Thus, if a sutra examines
emptiness as its main object of discourse, it should be
viewed as representing Buddha’s definitive intention.
Tibetan exegetes generally based their interpretive
schemas on Indian precedents. Several, for example,
used the “three wheels of doctrine” model as a basis
for differentiating interpretable from definitive scrip-
tures. In his Legs bshad snying po(Essence of Good
Explanations), TSONG KHA PA(1357–1419) divided
his presentation into two sections, one based on the
Samdhinirmocana-sutra,the main scriptural source
for the YOGACARA SCHOOL, and the other on the
Aksayamatinirdes ́a-sutra(Tibetan, Blo gros mi zadpas
bstan pa’i mdo; Chinese, Achamo pusa jing; Discourse
Taught by Aksayamati), which he considered to be
definitive for MADHYAMAKA SCHOOLhermeneutics.
Other Tibetan exegetes altered the three wheels
schema, and claimed that the first wheel was com-
prised of Hnayana teachings, the second of Mahayana
teachings, and the third and definitive wheel was de-
clared to be the tantric teachings of VAJRAYANA.
East Asian exegetes faced all the same problems as
their counterparts in India and Tibet, but they also en-
countered difficulties related to the haphazard nature
of textual transmission to the region. Unlike the rela-
tively ordered transmission of texts to Tibet, Buddhist
literature came to China via numerous different routes,
and there was little coordination in these efforts. Some-
times a commentary would arrive in China before the
root text, and the Chinese were faced with an enormous
imported literature containing various competing and
incompatible claims to authority. Several Chinese
Buddhist exegetes developed classification schemes
(panjiao), which were generally based on a particular
text (or a related group of texts) and which ranked
scriptures hierarchically. One of the most important of
these was the Tiantai schema, which was based on the
LOTUS SUTRA (SADDHARMAPUNDARIKA-SUTRA; Chi-
nese, Miaofa lianhua jing) and divided the Buddha’s
teaching career into five periods and eight teachings
(wushi bajiao). FAZANG(643–712) and the HUAYAN
SCHOOLhad an alternative five-teaching schema, which
culminated in the Perfect Teaching (yuanjiao) of the
HUAYAN JING(Sanskrit, Avatamsaka-sutra;Flower Gar-
land Sutra).
In Japan, the Kamakura period (1185–1333) saw the
development of indigenous Buddhist schools, and
most of these also developed their own classification
systems. NICHIREN(1222–1282), for example, used the
Lotus Sutraas the basis for his teachings, and the Zen,
Esoteric, and Pure Land schools also developed rank-
ing systems in which their own doctrines and scrip-
tures were placed at the top of the doctrinal hierarchy,
while others were relegated to inferior positions.
Most traditional Buddhist exegetes have been in-
volved in what the German philosopher Hans-Georg
Gadamer (1900–2002) dismissed as the “Romantic
endeavor,” that is, attempting to discern the intention
of the purported author of their scriptures (i.e., the
Buddha). Underlying their efforts was a shared con-
viction that the experience of buddhahood is available
to all and that as one approaches it, one’s mind more
and more closely approximates that of the Buddha.
Thus it is assumed that competent exegetes are able to
re-create the true intentions underlying apparently
contradictory scriptural statements and arrive at in-
terpretations that accurately reflect the Buddha’s ulti-
mate intent, which is assumed by traditional Buddhists
to be free from contradiction.See also:Commentarial Literature; ScriptureBibliography
Broido, Michael M. “Some Tibetan Methods of Explaining the
Tantras.” In Contributions on Tibetan Language, History and
Culture: Proceedings of the 1981 Csoma de Körös Symposium,
ed. Ernst Steinkellner and H. Tauscher. Vienna: Wiener Stu-
dien zur Tibetologie zur Buddhismuskunde, 1983.
Chegwan. T’ien-t’ai Buddhism: An Outline of the Fourfold Teach-
ings,tr. Buddhist Translation Seminar of Hawaii, ed. David
W. Chappell. Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press, 1983.
Gregory, Peter N. Tsung-mi and the Sinification of Buddhism.
Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1991.
Lopez, Donald S., Jr., ed. Buddhist Hermeneutics.Honolulu:
University of Hawaii Press, 1988.
Powers, John. Hermeneutics and Tradition in the Samdhinirmo-
cana-sutra.Leiden, Netherlands: Brill, 1993.
Ruegg, David S. “Purport, Implicature, and Presupposition:
Sanskrit Abhipraya and Tibetan dGon ̇s pa/dGon ̇s gz`ias
Hermeneutical Concepts.” Journal of Indian Philosophy 13
(1985): 309–325.
JOHNPOWERSHERMENEUTICS