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: Buddha Nature ?

Post by PeterB »

I was actually referring Ven Huifeng to attending teachings ( when in my protracted Vajrayana phase, from which I have made a full recovery :) ) titled things like " The Nine Types Of Emptiness"..

But once more the whole discussion is miring me in a pool of ennui, and reminding me of my reasons for seeking out a Theravada forum in the first place.. :anjali:
User avatar
Sönam
Posts: 28
Joined: Wed Mar 24, 2010 7:21 am
Location: France
Contact:

Re: Buddha Nature ?

Post by Sönam »

retrofuturist wrote:Greetings,

I've got nothing to say other than to send a hi to Sönam.

:hello:

Metta,
Retro. :)
Hello Retro ... nice to see known faces.

:hug:
Sönam
no hope ... no fear
User avatar
Sönam
Posts: 28
Joined: Wed Mar 24, 2010 7:21 am
Location: France
Contact:

Re: Buddha Nature ?

Post by Sönam »

PeterB wrote:I was actually referring Ven Huifeng to attending teachings ( when in my protracted Vajrayana phase, from which I have made a full recovery :) ) titled things like " The Nine Types Of Emptiness"..

But once more the whole discussion is miring me in a pool of ennui, and reminding me of my reasons for seeking out a Theravada forum in the first place.. :anjali:
Ok ... I noted the "ennui". No need to answer then ! regarding Vajrayana there is no and there could be no many emptiness. It would be a non-sens (it's not the right place but I would be curious to understand how mahayana justify "many' emptiness ... because if there is more than one it is not empty !

May you all be happy ... and away from ennui ! :popcorn:

Sönam
no hope ... no fear
PeterB
Posts: 3909
Joined: Tue Feb 17, 2009 12:35 pm

Re: Buddha Nature ?

Post by PeterB »

My interest was piqued suffiently to arouse me from my ennui and to find my notes from the teachings I attended.
They were by Khenpo Tsultrim Gyatso Rinpoche and were titled " The Twenty Kinds Of Emptiness".
User avatar
Sönam
Posts: 28
Joined: Wed Mar 24, 2010 7:21 am
Location: France
Contact:

Re: Buddha Nature ?

Post by Sönam »

PeterB wrote:My interest was piqued suffiently to arouse me from my ennui and to find my notes from the teachings I attended.
They were by Khenpo Tsultrim Gyatso Rinpoche and were titled " The Twenty Kinds Of Emptiness".
Thank you for the interest. To answer correctly I shall see the texte ... and I do not know how Tsultrim Gyatso Rinpoché could have approached it to express it that way (with respect, there could also be the eventuality that you have misinterpreted the teaching ... which could have motivated your abandonment of vajrayana - there I'm joking ! :smile: ). Because in Vajrayana, even in Dzogchen where sometime it seems to contradict de vajra teachings, there is no possibility to understand shunyata as being multiple. What can happen, is that the flourishing Tibetan language have given many name to Emptiness ... but not multiple, I definitely guaranteed you the impossibility of that.


Sönam
(But I will try to found the concerned original teaching)
no hope ... no fear
PeterB
Posts: 3909
Joined: Tue Feb 17, 2009 12:35 pm

Re: Buddha Nature ?

Post by PeterB »

That was the title Sonam. I have the programme in front of me.
As I recall, in the end the content all boiled down to Anatta. Like an elaborate gothic structure being built around a basic motif which was both simple and profound.
Or like the big bite of Cotton Candy which ends up as a little pink ball of sugar when chewed.
What led me back to the Theravada, and of course this thread started out in the Discovering Theravada forum, was a growing taste for an absence of frilliness.
For minimalism rather than the gothic.
User avatar
Sönam
Posts: 28
Joined: Wed Mar 24, 2010 7:21 am
Location: France
Contact:

Re: Buddha Nature ?

Post by Sönam »

PeterB wrote:That was the title Sonam. I have the programme in front of me.
As I recall, in the end the content all boiled down to Anatta. Like an elaborate gothic structure being built around a basic motif which was both simple and profound.
Or like the big bite of Cotton Candy which ends up as a little pink ball of sugar when chewed.
What led me back to the Theravada, and of course this thread started out in the Discovering Theravada forum, was a growing taste for an absence of frilliness.
For minimalism rather than the gothic.
As you say it was certainly a pyramid of concepts playing with emptiness, not being really emptiness, to finally becoming emptiness ... I may recognize there the, sometime, complexe mind of Tibetans in Buddhism.
Anyway, and I hope we agree, sunyata is one and cannot be two, otherwise it is not emptiness ... it is this time simple.

I can understand your pursuit of simplicity ... but for some beings, things are not so easy, they sometime need to construct montains for it can fall apart in thousand pieces ... like castels made of cards. Anyway, what ever is the vehicle choosen, they all conduct to the same goal, the one told by Bouddha Shakyamouni.

May we cross each other on others threads
Sônam
no hope ... no fear
User avatar
Aloka
Posts: 7797
Joined: Wed Jan 21, 2009 2:51 pm

Re: Buddha Nature ?

Post by Aloka »

PeterB wrote: What led me back to the Theravada, and of course this thread started out in the Discovering Theravada forum, was a growing taste for an absence of frilliness. For minimalism rather than the gothic.


Indeed......and this is the reason why I'm now investigating Theravada from a Mahayana background myself. (and why I started the thread on Buddha Nature in the first place !)

Kind regards,

Aloka
mudra
Posts: 51
Joined: Tue Mar 03, 2009 10:33 am

Re: Buddha Nature ?

Post by mudra »

As has been mentioned earlier in this thread, the Gelug (and its related Madhyamaka perspective) presentation really doesn't give much (if any) airtime to "Buddha Nature".
In the Gelug stages of the path (Lam Rim) it doesn't come up. The most that I have ever heard my teacher ever say about Buddha Nature is that the fact that the mind has no inherent nature (shunya) and is dependent on causes and conditions is what allows one to attain Buddhahood.

But in the Kagyu version of the stages of the path, Jewel Ornament of Liberation by Gampopa (who was himself a bit of a crossover) the very first chapter is about Buddha Nature. This raises a lot of eyebrows in the Gelug camp.

As explained from the Gelug perspective emptiness itself is a dependent phenomena, why get into a big huge knot trying to posit a self existing Buddha Nature?

Again to reiterate, there is no "Mahayana" view of Buddha Nature. It varies greatly.

And as to the discussion of the different kinds of emptiness let's not make a complete mess of this. This is not a discussion of different kinds of emptinesses, its a thorough list of all (the various and all inclusive) things which lack their own true existence. Or if you like, emptiness being "predicated" of the exhaustive list of categories of phenomena.

The idea of using a list of emptinesses as trick to create a house of cards/huge elaboration just to knock it down in a sartori like moment might appeal to some as a simplified explanation for its seemingly mystifying presence in Mahayana treatises and tantra. But really what the list of twenty/sixteen or however many categories of emptiness is about is to present an exhaustive list of phenomena. Sometimes its not enough just to say "all phenomena are shunya", there can be a need to be more explicit.
Yogicfire
Posts: 12
Joined: Sat May 01, 2010 5:16 pm

Re: Buddha Nature ?

Post by Yogicfire »

There seems to be a trend on this thread towards saying that Theravada doesn't have any kind of time for concepts such as Buddha nature. I am not quite sure that is the case, or if it is as simple as that. Maybe the classical notions of self expounded in some of the more orthodox suttas when compared to certain Vajrayana or Zen concepts of Buddha nature could be understood to be quite different. However, I know that even within the Pali canon there are quite a lot of different stances to be found on what actually constitutes the self, and some of these could be seen to move towards something like Buddha nature or pure consciousness.
PeterB
Posts: 3909
Joined: Tue Feb 17, 2009 12:35 pm

Re: Buddha Nature ?

Post by PeterB »

Perhaps you would care to give some citations from the Pali Canon Yogic fire ?
User avatar
Aloka
Posts: 7797
Joined: Wed Jan 21, 2009 2:51 pm

Re: Buddha Nature ?

Post by Aloka »

Yogicfire wrote: However, I know that even within the Pali canon there are quite a lot of different stances to be found on what actually constitutes the self, and some of these could be seen to move towards something like Buddha nature or pure consciousness.
Examples would be greatly appreciated please, Yogicfire. _/\_

.
Yogicfire
Posts: 12
Joined: Sat May 01, 2010 5:16 pm

Re: Buddha Nature ?

Post by Yogicfire »

I am making a general point, as I know that many people might disagree, and I just wanted to offer my opinion that things might not be quite so black and white as some make out.

I don't have my books/references with me, but from a search on the net, and from what I remember, I note that in particular passages from the Anguttara Nikaya a view on something moving towards Buddha nature can be discerned, as well as notions of 'purity' in the Samyutta Nikaya.
User avatar
Ben
Posts: 18438
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 12:49 am
Location: kanamaluka

Re: Buddha Nature ?

Post by Ben »

Hi YF
Yogicfire wrote:I don't have my books/references with me, but from a search on the net, and from what I remember, I note that in particular passages from the Anguttara Nikaya a view on something moving towards Buddha nature can be discerned, as well as notions of 'purity' in the Samyutta Nikaya.
Then I think it would be good if you could provide references and quotations that support your argument, especially if those references and quotations are from the Nikayas.
kind regards

Ben
“No lists of things to be done. The day providential to itself. The hour. There is no later. This is later. All things of grace and beauty such that one holds them to one's heart have a common provenance in pain. Their birth in grief and ashes.”
- Cormac McCarthy, The Road

Learn this from the waters:
in mountain clefts and chasms,
loud gush the streamlets,
but great rivers flow silently.
- Sutta Nipata 3.725

Compassionate Hands Foundation (Buddhist aid in Myanmar) • Buddhist Global ReliefUNHCR

e: [email protected]..
User avatar
mikenz66
Posts: 19941
Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2009 7:37 am
Location: Aotearoa, New Zealand

Re: Buddha Nature ?

Post by mikenz66 »

Perhaps YogicFire is thinking of:
AN 1.49-52 Pabhassara Sutta: Luminous
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka ... .than.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Luminous, monks, is the mind. And it is defiled by incoming defilements." {I,v,9}

"Luminous, monks, is the mind. And it is freed from incoming defilements." {I,v,10}

"Luminous, monks, is the mind. And it is defiled by incoming defilements. The uninstructed run-of-the-mill person doesn't discern that as it actually is present, which is why I tell you that — for the uninstructed run-of-the-mill person — there is no development of the mind." {I,vi,1}

"Luminous, monks, is the mind. And it is freed from incoming defilements. The well-instructed disciple of the noble ones discerns that as it actually is present, which is why I tell you that — for the well-instructed disciple of the noble ones — there is development of the mind." {I,vi,2}
Tilt has already commented on this passage:
http://dhammawheel.com/viewtopic.php?f=16&t=3878#p57005" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
tiltbillings wrote:
christopher::: wrote: aren't there places where Buddha talked of the mind being luminous? If so, what did he mean by that?

:anjali:
Oh, gawd, not that again. It does not mean that we are already awakened, but it does mean that as we becomes aware of something there is a brief moment of clarity before the rest of the khandhas kick in and we get lost all that stuff. It is that clarity that is what is cultivated as mindfulness. The clarity is not awakening, but it is the tool that allows us to see the interdependent rise and fall of whatever comes into our awareness and from that, awakening.
Mike
Post Reply