YOU CANNOT POST. OUR WEB HOSTING COMPANY DECIDED TO MOVE THE SERVER TO ANOTHER LOCATION. IN THE MEANTIME, YOU CAN VIEW THIS VERSION WHICH DOES NOT ALLOW POSTING AND WILL NOT SAVE ANYTHING YOU DO ONCE THE OTHER SERVER GOES ONLINE.

What is Wrong with Buddha Nature - Page 4 - Dhamma Wheel

What is Wrong with Buddha Nature

Exploring Theravāda's connections to other paths. What can we learn from other traditions, religions and philosophies?
PeterB
Posts: 3909
Joined: Tue Feb 17, 2009 12:35 pm

Re: What is Wrong with Buddha Nature

Postby PeterB » Fri Mar 18, 2011 11:22 am


User avatar
Dan74
Posts: 3012
Joined: Sun Mar 01, 2009 11:12 pm

Re: What is Wrong with Buddha Nature

Postby Dan74 » Fri Mar 18, 2011 11:26 am

_/|\_

PeterB
Posts: 3909
Joined: Tue Feb 17, 2009 12:35 pm

Re: What is Wrong with Buddha Nature

Postby PeterB » Fri Mar 18, 2011 11:32 am

I have no more interest in rebutting papanca than I have in finding a cure for an imaginary disease.
You show me where the Buddha taught Buddha Dhatu and I will give my complete and full attention to it.

Guaranteed.

User avatar
Dan74
Posts: 3012
Joined: Sun Mar 01, 2009 11:12 pm

Re: What is Wrong with Buddha Nature

Postby Dan74 » Fri Mar 18, 2011 12:06 pm

_/|\_

darvki
Posts: 74
Joined: Thu Nov 18, 2010 10:20 am

Re: What is Wrong with Buddha Nature

Postby darvki » Fri Mar 18, 2011 12:20 pm


meindzai
Posts: 595
Joined: Thu Jan 15, 2009 8:10 pm

Re: What is Wrong with Buddha Nature

Postby meindzai » Fri Mar 18, 2011 12:58 pm


PeterB
Posts: 3909
Joined: Tue Feb 17, 2009 12:35 pm

Re: What is Wrong with Buddha Nature

Postby PeterB » Fri Mar 18, 2011 1:02 pm


PeterB
Posts: 3909
Joined: Tue Feb 17, 2009 12:35 pm

Re: What is Wrong with Buddha Nature

Postby PeterB » Fri Mar 18, 2011 1:08 pm


User avatar
Aloka
Posts: 5517
Joined: Wed Jan 21, 2009 2:51 pm

Re: What is Wrong with Buddha Nature

Postby Aloka » Fri Mar 18, 2011 1:30 pm


meindzai
Posts: 595
Joined: Thu Jan 15, 2009 8:10 pm

Re: What is Wrong with Buddha Nature

Postby meindzai » Fri Mar 18, 2011 2:07 pm


PeterB
Posts: 3909
Joined: Tue Feb 17, 2009 12:35 pm

Re: What is Wrong with Buddha Nature

Postby PeterB » Fri Mar 18, 2011 2:17 pm

If I misunderstood your position then I apologise.
I agree completely that we can neither affirm nor refute concepts like Buddha Dhatu using the conceptual framework of the Theravada. The two do not compute. They start from widely differing perceptions of the nature of reality.

Which of course does not mean that the subsequent non refutation of Mahayana doctrine amounts to an affirmation by default. Which some Mahayana posters appear to be suggesting.
It is difficult sometimes not to conclude that some Mahayana guests are suggesting that if they could come up with just the right form of words the scales would fall from Theravadin eyes and we would see that actually we have believed in Buddha Nature all long but somehow it got mislaid...what silly billys we are..

chownah
Posts: 6161
Joined: Wed Aug 12, 2009 2:19 pm

Re: What is Wrong with Buddha Nature

Postby chownah » Fri Mar 18, 2011 2:27 pm

If Buddha nature is defined as something that all beings have or some capacity that all beings have then what is wrong with Buddha nature is that it is just one more way of constructing a doctrine of self....Buddha nature seems to be a doctrine of self based on the illusion that there is a self which "has" something....if we think "I" "have" "it" then a doctrine of self has arisen three times in that one short sentence...there is no "I" and entities can not "have" anything and "it" implies an external self as something which can be "had"......That is what is wrong with Buddha nature....it is a doctrine of self....something the Buddha advised us very strongly to not indulge in....
chownah

meindzai
Posts: 595
Joined: Thu Jan 15, 2009 8:10 pm

Re: What is Wrong with Buddha Nature

Postby meindzai » Fri Mar 18, 2011 2:54 pm


User avatar
kirk5a
Posts: 1959
Joined: Thu Sep 23, 2010 1:51 pm

Re: What is Wrong with Buddha Nature

Postby kirk5a » Fri Mar 18, 2011 7:29 pm

I thought it would be interesting to do a search for the use of the exact expression "Buddha Nature" by Theravadins. Here's what comes up from searching the site what-buddha-taught.net. I tried to check each one to see if they are "Theravada" - seems so to me. With possible exception of the poet "Matrceta" - but his poems look like they're referenced in Theravada circles?

Enjoy. :popcorn:

Luang Por Liem Áhitadhammo
http://www.what-buddha-taught.net/Books ... reness.pdf
Opening our eyes will enable us to see nature within
ourselves, and our own inner Buddha-nature:
awakening. The hardships of poverty, and the allure
of wealth: even the power that these things can hold
over us can not separate us from our own essential
nature.


Ven Dr K Sri Dhammananda
http://www.what-buddha-taught.net/Books ... ankind.pdf
"Buddhists believe that in every living being lies hidden the Buddha-seed or Buddha-
nature waiting to ripen. That means, in every person there exists the potential to
become pure like the Buddha."

"What meaning has the Enlightenment of the Buddha for us? Firstly, the Buddha made us
realise our true potential for Enlightenment, that is, our Buddha nature"

Guy Armstrong
in preface to Small Boat, Great Mountain by Ajahn Amaro
http://www.what-buddha-taught.net/Books ... untain.pdf
"So perhaps it should not be too surprising that in the modern
Thai forest tradition we find an understanding of Dharma with
strong parallels to the central tenets of Mahayana and Tibetan
Buddhism. The Mahayana doctrine of Buddha-nature, for
instance, tells us that our very essence is an unborn and undying
awareness. In a later expression of the teachings through the
Dzogchen school, specific meditation techniques have been
developed to allow practitioners to recognize and abide in this
nature. Ajahn Amaro (whose name means “deathless”)
commented that this specific teaching is the national anthem of
the Thai forest tradition."

"May their message lead all those who read them
directly to their own Buddha-nature and to the vast freedom of
the Natural Great Perfection."

Ajahn Chah
http://www.what-buddha-taught.net/Books ... reedom.htm
translated by Venerable Ajahn Puriso
"So whether standing, walking, sitting or lying we should have sati to watch over and look after the mind. When we see external things it's like seeing internals. When we see internals it's the same as seeing externals. If we understand this then we can hear the teaching of the Buddha. If we understand this, then we can say that Buddha-nature, the 'One who knows', has been established. It knows the external. It knows the internal. It understands all things which arise. Understanding like this, then sitting at the foot of a tree we hear the Buddha's teaching. Standing, walking, sitting or lying, we hear the Buddha's teaching. Seeing, hearing, smelling, tasting, touching and thinking, we hear the Buddha's teaching. The Buddha is just this 'One who knows' within this very mind. It knows the Dhamma, it investigates the Dhamma. It's not that the Buddha-nature, the 'one who knows', arises. The mind becomes illumined."

"When Añña Kondañña, the first disciple, heard the Buddha's teaching for the first time, the realization he had was nothing very complicated. He simply saw that whatever thing is born, that thing must change and grow old as a natural condition and eventually it must die. Añña Kondañña had never thought of this before, or if he had it wasn't thoroughly clear, so he hadn't yet let go, he still clung to the khandhas. As he sat mindfully listening to the Buddha's discourse, Buddha-nature arose in him. He received a sort of Dhamma "transmission," which was the knowledge that all conditioned things are impermanent. Any thing which is born must have aging and death as a natural result."

"The eight worldly dhammas are right here in this very mind, with the 'One who knows' but this 'One who knows' has obstructions, so it knows wrongly and thus becomes the world. It's just this one 'One who knows', no other! The Buddha-nature has not yet arisen in this mind, it has not yet extracted itself from the world. The mind like this is the world."

"There's a story in the scriptures about the Buddha, before he was enlightened. At that time, having received a plate of rice, he floated that plate on a stream of water, determining in his mind, "If I am to be enlightened, may this plate float against the current of the water." The plate floated upstream! That plate was the Buddha's right view, or the Buddha-nature that he became awakened to. It didn't follow the desires of ordinary beings. It floated against the flow of his mind, it was contrary in every way."

http://www.what-buddha-taught.net/Books ... Part_2.htm
"Many people contend that since the mind is inherently pure, since we all have Buddha nature, it's not necessary to practice. But this is like taking something clean, like this tray, for example, and then I come and drop some dung on it. Will you say that this tray is originally clean, and so you don't have to do anything to clean it now?"

Matrceta
http://www.what-buddha-taught.net/acces ... el360.html
114 With mind detached, you quietly work
for the welfare of the world.
How awesome is the Buddha-nature of the Buddha! [30]
30. Buddhadharmata. See Encyclopedia of Buddhism, Vol. III (Colombo, 1973), p.435.

Venerable Anando
http://www.what-buddha-taught.net/Books ... HE_WAY.htm
"Intentionally bring up the question 'Who?' and notice clearly what state of mind follows. The mind stops! We can struggle to find some intellectual answer; maybe our name comes to fill in the gap or maybe an exalted, inspired idea like 'The Original Mind'. But the Original Mind is not the thought 'Original Mind'. Buddha-nature is not the thought 'Buddha-nature'. Thinking is just thinking. Thought does not really answer the question 'Who?'"

Ajaan Mahã Boowa Ñãnasampanno
http://www.what-buddha-taught.net/Books ... Dhamma.pdf
The Buddho which is hard and difficult to meet
with (as it says in the above passage in Pãli) will then become manifest in one’s heart.
Buddho may be divided into three kinds, as follows:
1. Buddho — means the Buddhas who arise in the world; but they arise only very rarely,
and only one at a time. In this meaning, Buddho is rare and hard to meet with.
2. Buddho — means the arising of the pure (parisuddhi) of all the Sãvakas, which is also
rare and hard to meet with.
3. Buddho — meaning the “Buddha” inside ordinary beings who are under the influence
of kilesas. This kind of Buddho is common and so not hard to meet with.
How is this so with the third kind? It is so, because this “Buddha” is always supervised,
covered up, oppressed and compelled by the kilesas, tanhã, and ãsavas, which will not let it
show itself and be free.
When the citta or knowledge is of this kind, it is not able to get free and raise itself out of
the mud and mire of the kilesas, taõhã and ãsavas. How then can this Buddha nature come to
know the truth of all things, which is the way of cause and effect in all sabhãva-dhammas?
When this Buddha nature is going to examine, investigate, clean and correct its state by
training all the time in virtue, gracefulness and goodness, it is necessary to start with, that one
should be in a suitable social environment with a wise and learned man (a Teacher) who is
skilled in the ways of curing one’s self to enable one to get free from one’s obstructing
difficulties (upasagga), whether they be internal or external.
Last edited by kirk5a on Sat Mar 19, 2011 3:25 am, edited 1 time in total.
"When one thing is practiced & pursued, ignorance is abandoned, clear knowing arises, the conceit 'I am' is abandoned, latent tendencies are uprooted, fetters are abandoned. Which one thing? Mindfulness immersed in the body." -AN 1.230

PeterB
Posts: 3909
Joined: Tue Feb 17, 2009 12:35 pm

Re: What is Wrong with Buddha Nature

Postby PeterB » Fri Mar 18, 2011 7:40 pm

Well clearly this shows that I and my teachers have no understanding of the Theravada at all...so I had better tender my resignation from the Theravada.

darvki
Posts: 74
Joined: Thu Nov 18, 2010 10:20 am

Re: What is Wrong with Buddha Nature

Postby darvki » Sat Mar 19, 2011 5:52 am


PeterB
Posts: 3909
Joined: Tue Feb 17, 2009 12:35 pm

Re: What is Wrong with Buddha Nature

Postby PeterB » Sat Mar 19, 2011 8:07 am

I dont believe I highlighted a view.
And who says that I am being sarcastic ?

darvki
Posts: 74
Joined: Thu Nov 18, 2010 10:20 am

Re: What is Wrong with Buddha Nature

Postby darvki » Sat Mar 19, 2011 8:40 am

Well, I certainly hope you are. I would be very confused and dismayed if you actually quit Theravada because of some liberal uses of the term buddha-nature.

User avatar
tiltbillings
Posts: 23012
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:25 am

Re: What is Wrong with Buddha Nature

Postby tiltbillings » Sat Mar 19, 2011 8:49 am

Image

PeterB
Posts: 3909
Joined: Tue Feb 17, 2009 12:35 pm

Re: What is Wrong with Buddha Nature

Postby PeterB » Sat Mar 19, 2011 8:55 am

There are two possibilities one is that the term Buddha nature is being used by those gentlemen in a very different way to its use in the Mahayana...and I have sat at the feet of two, sorry three of those gentlemen, I dont believe that they were using the term in a way analogous to the use by the Mahayana...but I may have mistaken their meaning.
Or two, The Theravada does teach the concept of an a priori universal Buddha Nature .
In which case I am not only mistaken...but I am guilty of misleading others and will do the honorable thing.


Return to “Connections to Other Paths”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 9 guests

Google Saffron, Theravada Search Engine

cron