Buddha Nature ?

Exploring Theravāda's connections to other paths - what can we learn from other traditions, religions and philosophies?
Post Reply
User avatar
ground
Posts: 2591
Joined: Wed Nov 25, 2009 6:01 am

Re: Buddha Nature ?

Post by ground »

This discussion appears to be a discussion about the different skilfulness of different metaphors. If party A utters what they perceive to be a metaphor party B may infer party A's affirmation of a "reality" which they (party B) themselves believe to be a mere fabrication. However to infer affirmation of "reality" from utterance of a metaphor is not valid because the nature of metaphors is indefinite.

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

Re: Buddha Nature ?

Post by PeterB »

I dont think that the Mahayana see Buddha Dhatu as a metaphor. In fact I think they see it as the criterion of objective reality.
User avatar
ground
Posts: 2591
Joined: Wed Nov 25, 2009 6:01 am

Re: Buddha Nature ?

Post by ground »

PeterB wrote:I dont think ...
That's the issue.
PeterB wrote:that the Mahayana see ...
That's the other issue.

Kind regards
User avatar
tiltbillings
Posts: 23046
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:25 am

Re: Buddha Nature ?

Post by tiltbillings »

TMingyur wrote:
PeterB wrote:I dont think ...
That's the issue.
PeterB wrote:that the Mahayana see ...
That's the other issue.

Kind regards
Mod: If there is a point to be made about the point made, please address that. Taking a poke at the individual adds nothing of the value to a discussion.
>> Do you see a man wise [enlightened/ariya] in his own eyes? There is more hope for a fool than for him.<< -- Proverbs 26:12

This being is bound to samsara, kamma is his means for going beyond. -- SN I, 38.

“Of course it is happening inside your head, Harry, but why on earth should that mean that it is not real?” HPatDH p.723
User avatar
ground
Posts: 2591
Joined: Wed Nov 25, 2009 6:01 am

Re: Buddha Nature ?

Post by ground »

tiltbillings wrote:
TMingyur wrote:
PeterB wrote:I dont think ...
That's the issue.
PeterB wrote:that the Mahayana see ...
That's the other issue.

Kind regards
Mod: If there is a point to be made about the point made, please address that. Taking a poke at the individual adds nothing of the value to a discussion.
The issues here are:

1. Opinion ... which is by nature ungrounded if reasons are not provided that necessitate a conclusion that is identical with the opinion voiced ("I think that")
2. Generalization ... even if there is/are one or more example/s of a member of a class that is/are concordant with the opinion voiced this does neither necessitate nor validate the generalization across all members of the class. Class name being here "Mahayana" and members of "Mahayana" the different traditions.

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

Re: Buddha Nature ?

Post by PeterB »

Please feel free to ignore my ungrounded opinions and generalisations. They are opinions. They are not scholarly essays. :tongue:
I have no intention in a non scholarly discussion thread characterised pretty much by subjective opinions to attempt to present a coherent arguement. I am just shooting the breeze based on things experiential. If you find that useful. fine. If you dont.. fine.
Last edited by PeterB on Sat Mar 20, 2010 5:31 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Mukunda
Posts: 295
Joined: Fri Jan 29, 2010 1:54 am

Re: Buddha Nature ?

Post by Mukunda »

TMingyur wrote:
PeterB wrote:I dont think ...
That's the issue.
PeterB wrote:that the Mahayana see ...
That's the other issue.

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

Re: Buddha Nature ?

Post by PeterB »

Ban who or what ?
User avatar
BlackBird
Posts: 2069
Joined: Fri Apr 17, 2009 12:07 pm

Re: Buddha Nature ?

Post by BlackBird »

Here's another avenue for discussion in this topic: Ajahn Mun (according to Ajahn Maha Boowa & friends)

If you've read Ajahn Mun's spiritual biography, it's clear to see the atta cropping up, especially in that scene where Ajahn Mun supposedly attains arahantship and all the Buddhas and Arahants come back from Nibbana to speak to him and congratulate him on his attainment. Furthermore the way they describe 'citta' throughout the book definitely verges on eternal-self, which is unchanging.

metta
Jack
"For a disciple who has conviction in the Teacher's message & lives to penetrate it, what accords with the Dhamma is this:
'The Blessed One is the Teacher, I am a disciple. He is the one who knows, not I." - MN. 70 Kitagiri Sutta

Path Press - Ñāṇavīra Thera Dhamma Page - Ajahn Nyanamoli's Dhamma talks
User avatar
Modus.Ponens
Posts: 3853
Joined: Sat Jan 03, 2009 2:38 am
Location: Gallifrey

Re: Buddha Nature ?

Post by Modus.Ponens »

Hi Jack

The biography of Ajahn Mun is not consensual among his disciples.

Metta
'This is peace, this is exquisite — the resolution of all fabrications; the relinquishment of all acquisitions; the ending of craving; dispassion; cessation; Unbinding.' - Jhana Sutta
User avatar
mikenz66
Posts: 19932
Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2009 7:37 am
Location: Aotearoa, New Zealand

Re: Buddha Nature ?

Post by mikenz66 »

Hi Modus.Ponens,

Are you saying that the "citta that never dies" stuff Ajahn Maha Boowa's idea?
E.g. see:
http://www.forestdhammabooks.com/book/3 ... ossary.pdf" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
citta: The citta is the mind’s essential knowing nature, the fundamental quality
of knowing that underlies all sentient existence. When associated with
a physical body, it is referred to as “mind” or “heart”. Being corrupted
by the defiling influence of fundamental ignorance (avijjã), its currents
“flow out” to manifest as feelings (vedanã), memory (saññã), thoughts
(sankhãra), and consciousness (viññãõa), thus embroiling the citta in a
web of self-deception. It is deceived about its own true nature. The true
nature of the citta is that it simply “knows”. There is no subject, no object,
no duality; it simply knows. The citta does not arise or pass away; it is never
born and never dies.
...
Jack, that's an interesting observation. I vaguely recall a thread, probably on E-Sangha, where someone compared some of the experiential stuff that Ajahans Mun and Boowa talk about with Mahayana and speculated that they were connected.

Metta
Mike
User avatar
Modus.Ponens
Posts: 3853
Joined: Sat Jan 03, 2009 2:38 am
Location: Gallifrey

Re: Buddha Nature ?

Post by Modus.Ponens »

mikenz66 wrote:Hi Modus.Ponens,

Are you saying that the "citta that never dies" stuff Ajahn Maha Boowa's idea?
...
Metta
Mike
Hi Mike

I'm not saying that it's his idea, I'm not qualified to tell that. My point was just that one should be careful of what comes from that bio.

Metta
'This is peace, this is exquisite — the resolution of all fabrications; the relinquishment of all acquisitions; the ending of craving; dispassion; cessation; Unbinding.' - Jhana Sutta
User avatar
tiltbillings
Posts: 23046
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:25 am

Re: Buddha Nature ?

Post by tiltbillings »

mikenz66 wrote:
Jack, that's an interesting observation. I vaguely recall a thread, probably on E-Sangha, where someone compared some of the experiential stuff that Ajahans Mun and Boowa talk about with Mahayana and speculated that they were connected.

Metta
Mike
One of the interesting things that came out the numerous threads about Ajahn Mun was that Maha Boowa's accounting was not accepted by other Ajahn Mun's students.
>> Do you see a man wise [enlightened/ariya] in his own eyes? There is more hope for a fool than for him.<< -- Proverbs 26:12

This being is bound to samsara, kamma is his means for going beyond. -- SN I, 38.

“Of course it is happening inside your head, Harry, but why on earth should that mean that it is not real?” HPatDH p.723
User avatar
BlackBird
Posts: 2069
Joined: Fri Apr 17, 2009 12:07 pm

Re: Buddha Nature ?

Post by BlackBird »

Let's get to the 'heart' of this eh?
Ajahn Mun wrote: So meditators, when they know in this manner, should do away with these counterfeits by analyzing them shrewdly, as explained in the strategies of clear insight, § 9. When they develop the mind to the stage of the primal mind, this will mean that all counterfeits are destroyed, or rather, counterfeit things won't be able to reach into the primal mind, because the bridge making the connection will have been destroyed. Even though the mind may then still have to come into contact with the preoccupations of the world, its contact will be like that of a bead of water rolling over a lotus leaf.
Ajahn Mun wrote: it returns to its state as 0 (zero) — empty, open, and clear, beyond all counting and naming. It doesn't stay in the nine places that are abodes for living beings. Instead, it stays in a place devoid of supposing and formulation: its inherent nature as 0 (zero), or activityless-ness, as mentioned in § 14.
Ajahn Mun wrote: Passion, aversion, and delusion thus arise, causing the primal mind to stray deludedly after birth, aging, illness, and death, circling around endlessly through innumerable states of becoming and birth — all through the instigation of mental fashioning.
- http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/thai ... eased.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Here is another source, it's a poem Ajahn Mun wrote:
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/thai/mun/ballad.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Here are some excerpts:
Saññas settle out, sankharas don't disturb it.
The heart is thus brimming, with nothing lacking.
The heart knowing the Dhamma of ultimate ease
sees for sure that the khandhas are always stressful.
The Dhamma stays as the Dhamma,
the khandhas stay as khandhas, that's all.
When the mind sees the Dhamma,
abundantly good
& released from error,
meeting the Dhamma, it sheds all things
that would make it restless.
It's mindful, in & of itself,
& unentangled.
Its love for the khandhas comes to an end,
Emphasis mine. I'm not going to pass judgement on these passages, for it seem to me that heart/mind could be used in a conventional sense which would not contradict anatta, but then again it could be atta-ditthi. Hard to say from my perspective.

metta
Jack
"For a disciple who has conviction in the Teacher's message & lives to penetrate it, what accords with the Dhamma is this:
'The Blessed One is the Teacher, I am a disciple. He is the one who knows, not I." - MN. 70 Kitagiri Sutta

Path Press - Ñāṇavīra Thera Dhamma Page - Ajahn Nyanamoli's Dhamma talks
User avatar
christopher:::
Posts: 1327
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2009 12:56 am

Re: Buddha Nature ?

Post by christopher::: »

BlackBird wrote:Let's get to the 'heart' of this eh?
Ajahn Mun wrote: So meditators, when they know in this manner, should do away with these counterfeits by analyzing them shrewdly, as explained in the strategies of clear insight, § 9. When they develop the mind to the stage of the primal mind, this will mean that all counterfeits are destroyed, or rather, counterfeit things won't be able to reach into the primal mind, because the bridge making the connection will have been destroyed. Even though the mind may then still have to come into contact with the preoccupations of the world, its contact will be like that of a bead of water rolling over a lotus leaf.
Sounds similar to Advaita, Dzogchen, Big Mind, etc...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rigpa" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

"Rigpa is a Tibetan word, which in general means ‘intelligence’ or ‘awareness’. In Dzogchen, however, the highest teachings in the Buddhist tradition of Tibet, rigpa has a deeper connotation, ‘the innermost nature of the mind’. The whole of the teaching of Buddha is directed towards realizing this, our ultimate nature, the state of omniscience or enlightenment – a truth so universal, so primordial that it goes beyond all limits, and beyond even religion itself."
Sogyal Rinpoche


:juggling:
"As Buddhists, we should aim to develop relationships that are not predominated by grasping and clinging. Our relationships should be characterised by the brahmaviharas of metta (loving kindness), mudita (sympathetic joy), karuna (compassion), and upekkha (equanimity)."
~post by Ben, Jul 02, 2009
Post Reply