Buddha-nature

General forum on Mahayana.

Re: Buddha-nature

Postby conebeckham » Fri Nov 05, 2010 10:26 pm

No, because choosing and consciousness are conditioned. Simply spontaneously observe the crazy idea that you are already a Tathagatha, without relying on anything, and that itself is an enlightened observation... Seeing that you don't choose to be a Buddha (because choosing is conditioned, Buddha is not), but rather, you couldn't possibly choose to be anything else. Whatever it is you might choose to be is itself an expression of freedom -- perhaps an illusion -- which only covers the underlying truth.


How is observing the crazy idea that you are already a Tathagata any different than thinking of oneself as Buddha, or "choosing to think of oneself as Buddha?"

Observing an idea is conditioned, dualistic, is it not?
May any merit generated by on-line discussion
Be dedicated to the Ultimate Benefit of All Sentient Beings.
User avatar
conebeckham
 
Posts: 2754
Joined: Mon Jun 14, 2010 11:49 pm
Location: Bay Area, CA, USA

Re: Buddha-nature

Postby 5heaps » Fri Nov 05, 2010 11:00 pm

Individual wrote:"Not thinking you are anything" (the cessation of mental formations fueling birth) is Buddhahood.
not in buddhism. the root fueling birth is ignorance, not mental formations.

this so-called "not think anything" which might seem subtle for a desire realm mind is not at all subtle unless it either a) becomes a form realm mind or b) actual ignorance is overcome through the occurrence of insight.
5heaps
 
Posts: 432
Joined: Tue Apr 06, 2010 6:09 am

Re: Buddha-nature

Postby Individual » Fri Nov 05, 2010 11:12 pm

spiritnoname wrote:Individual.
In a dream where things are without substance, without reality, false and fabricated, based on misconception, can we still suffer? Whether or not things have substance, we suffer, and that suffering has causes, causes that are under our control.

Saying that suffering and it's causes are something to disregard because they are based on the fabricated is insanity, total disregard for the reality of things.

You're right and that's not what I've said at all. :)

conebeckham wrote:
No, because choosing and consciousness are conditioned. Simply spontaneously observe the crazy idea that you are already a Tathagatha, without relying on anything, and that itself is an enlightened observation... Seeing that you don't choose to be a Buddha (because choosing is conditioned, Buddha is not), but rather, you couldn't possibly choose to be anything else. Whatever it is you might choose to be is itself an expression of freedom -- perhaps an illusion -- which only covers the underlying truth.


How is observing the crazy idea that you are already a Tathagata any different than thinking of oneself as Buddha, or "choosing to think of oneself as Buddha?"

Observing an idea is conditioned, dualistic, is it not?

Observing it from the self, observing it as, "That idea which I have observed," is dualistic. But this is not the only kind of observation of an idea that can be made. :)

5heaps wrote:
Individual wrote:"Not thinking you are anything" (the cessation of mental formations fueling birth) is Buddhahood.
not in buddhism. the root fueling birth is ignorance, not mental formations.

this so-called "not think anything" which might seem subtle for a desire realm mind is not at all subtle unless it either a) becomes a form realm mind or b) actual ignorance is overcome through the occurrence of insight.

Ignorance and mental formations are a part of the cycle; not "first causes" or "roots".

When I said, "not think anything," I meant: not thinking anything, while still allowing thoughts to arise and be used when necessary, without clinging to not-thinking, without clinging to the thoughts that arise, without being opposed to the effort that needs to be undertaken to make thoughts arise, and without clinging to thoughts once they have arisen. In this manner of thinking (and not-thinking!), there are no interdependent mental formations or ignorance, because nothing is added or removed other than what needs to be. :)
Individual
 
Posts: 407
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2010 1:20 am

Re: Buddha-nature

Postby spiritnoname » Fri Nov 05, 2010 11:49 pm

Pff, as if I read carefully anything I don't write myself.

:tantrum: What about what I wrote Individual! What about me! :ban:
spiritnoname
 
Posts: 160
Joined: Tue May 19, 2009 9:25 am

Re: Buddha-nature

Postby conebeckham » Sat Nov 06, 2010 12:01 am

Observing it from the self, observing it as, "That idea which I have observed," is dualistic. But this is not the only kind of observation of an idea that can be made.


Care to elaborate on that further?

With regard to your elaborations regarding thoughts, their arising, the cause of their arising, and "the effort that needs to be undertaken for thoughts to arise", I will comment, based on Third Karmapa, Rangjung Dorje's Treatise on Buddha Nature:

(21) Phenomena are exlplained to be
(22) Samsara and Nirvana appearing as duality.
(23) This is named "the ground of the latencies of ignorance."
(24) The movements of mental events-correct and incorrect thoughts-
(25) Are the cause of generation;


In other words, thoughts, in general, whether "correct" or "incorrect," are not wisdom, per se.
I'm going to quote from Khenchen Thrangu Rinpoche's commentary--the book is titled On Buddha Essence , published by Shambhala in 2006--incidentally, I highly recommend this fairly slim volume, along with all of Rinpoche's publications--on page 34:
"..the nature of thoughts is contrary to the true nature, and therefore we cannot directly realize dharmata. So the subtle aspect of thoughts is the appearance of dualism, which develops and becomes more obvious and stronger. First, there is the mere dualistic appearance; when this becomes stronger, the sensory consciousnesses ...appear."

By contrast, Buddhas do not have thought, and do not make effort.
May any merit generated by on-line discussion
Be dedicated to the Ultimate Benefit of All Sentient Beings.
User avatar
conebeckham
 
Posts: 2754
Joined: Mon Jun 14, 2010 11:49 pm
Location: Bay Area, CA, USA

Re: Buddha-nature

Postby 5heaps » Sat Nov 06, 2010 12:07 am

Individual wrote:Ignorance and mental formations are a part of the cycle; not "first causes" or "roots".
when talking about the cessation of a thing, the overwhelmingly significant thing is the root. if mental formations are not the root then if you pull out mental formations you will still not have brought about a cessation.
In this manner of thinking (and not-thinking!), there are no interdependent mental formations or ignorance, because nothing is added or removed other than what needs to be.
yes, but there is great confusion on what exactly "needs to be there" or not. for example some people thought that mere shamata was nirvana itself because there was no activity more or less than what "needs to be there". and they had a good proof, the bliss of mental and physical pliancy and the fruits of those pliancies. no buddhist would accept this though, thus there are utterly detailed treatises for the purpose of overcoming wrong concpetion
5heaps
 
Posts: 432
Joined: Tue Apr 06, 2010 6:09 am

Re: Buddha-nature

Postby conebeckham » Sat Nov 06, 2010 12:11 am

From the same volume, on p. 124:
"On the paths of accumulation and application, we are not actually seeing the true nature of phenomena, dharmata; rather, it's something that we are creating with our mind in our meditation.....On the path of seeing we acheive the first bodhisattva level and realize the true nature directly. (p 125) But seeing the true nature directly doesn't mean that we become a buddha immediately. Because of our habitual patterns....just seeing the true nature once is not going to bring complete liberation. Rather, we need to follow the fourth path, the path of meditation, in which we continually meditate on the true nature."

So, the "take-away from all this is--if you're "thinking" about it, it's not a direct experience, it's just further continuation of generation....one needs direct, nonconceptual experience, and one then needs to train, repeatedly.

This is quite a bit different than saying "we are all Tathagatas" and it's merely a conscious decision. It's far, far more subtle than that.
May any merit generated by on-line discussion
Be dedicated to the Ultimate Benefit of All Sentient Beings.
User avatar
conebeckham
 
Posts: 2754
Joined: Mon Jun 14, 2010 11:49 pm
Location: Bay Area, CA, USA

Re: Buddha-nature

Postby Individual » Sat Nov 06, 2010 12:20 am

spiritnoname wrote:Pff, as if I read carefully anything I don't write myself.

:tantrum: What about what I wrote Individual! What about me! :ban:


conebeckham wrote:Care to elaborate on that further?

No. :P

But I will admit humbly that this is not something I have fully understood or realized; it is just something I know somewhat that is incredibly useful. :)
Individual
 
Posts: 407
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2010 1:20 am

Re: Buddha-nature

Postby retrofuturist » Sat Nov 06, 2010 4:02 am

Greetings,

As I understand it, Buddha Nature simply means that that which is Buddha is not to be found outside.

Being a Buddha is no more than what we are, in fact it's a lot less... but less what? Less ignorance, less greed and less aversion.

When the defilements are eradicated, what remains is Buddha.

I'm happy to be corrected if that's wrong.

Metta,
Retro. :)
Live in concord, with mutual appreciation, without disputing, blending like milk and water, viewing each other with kindly eyes

Dhamma Wheel (Theravada forum) * Here Comes Trouble
User avatar
retrofuturist
Founding Member
 
Posts: 1266
Joined: Sun Apr 05, 2009 11:54 pm
Location: Melbourne, Australia

Re: Buddha-nature

Postby ground » Sat Nov 06, 2010 7:43 am

retrofuturist wrote:When the defilements are eradicated, what remains is Buddha.

I'm happy to be corrected if that's wrong.


Well "Buddha" ist just a word and so depending on context a variety of meanings can be assigned. However - at least - in Mahayana "Buddha" has a different connotation. It is not just eradication of defilements. "Eradication of defilements" applies to both, an 8th stage Bodhisattva and an Arhat, but [a] "Buddha" is beyond that stage.

"Buddha nature" again has a connotation that is different from "Buddha"

Kind regards
User avatar
ground
 
Posts: 1782
Joined: Mon Nov 23, 2009 8:31 am

Re: Buddha-nature

Postby Individual » Sun Nov 07, 2010 3:14 pm

I'm sorry, Tmingyur, but I didn't understand you.

Could you repeat that all in Tibetan?
Individual
 
Posts: 407
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2010 1:20 am

Re: Buddha-nature

Postby Sherab » Mon Nov 08, 2010 1:00 am

Hi Retro,

I have no answer but I have a question for you.

If buddhahood is unconditioned, can the removal of conditioned things/phenomena mean that the leftover is the unconditioned?


retrofuturist wrote:Greetings,

As I understand it, Buddha Nature simply means that that which is Buddha is not to be found outside.

Being a Buddha is no more than what we are, in fact it's a lot less... but less what? Less ignorance, less greed and less aversion.

When the defilements are eradicated, what remains is Buddha.

I'm happy to be corrected if that's wrong.

Metta,
Retro. :)
User avatar
Sherab
 
Posts: 770
Joined: Mon Jul 12, 2010 6:28 am

Re: Buddha-nature

Postby Jechan » Mon Nov 08, 2010 6:55 am

I don’t know what Buddha nature “is”, but here’s a few of my thoughts on Buddha Nature. :shrug:

All living beings have inherent Buddha nature, but due to deflilements and karmic afflictions this Buddha nature has been diluted and clouded over the countless re-births in Samsara.

The Saha world in this last Dharma ending age makes it very difficult to understand Buddha nature and to practice Buddhism in general. Buddha Shakyamuni predicted this would happen; so the various Buddhas, Bodhisattvas, Saints, even laymen and women devised ways to practice the Buddhadharma that would suit people of this age and help them uncover their intrinsic Buddha nature that was lost over the eons.

Every time we practice our Buddhadharma, do a compassionate act, sympathise with other suffering beings, hold the precepts and the 6 Paramitas or whatever practices you do that are in line with the Buddhadharma, we are manifesting our Buddha nature (even briefly).

That’s just my limited understanding.
:crazy:
南無妙法蓮華経
User avatar
Jechan
 
Posts: 62
Joined: Sun Nov 07, 2010 5:07 am
Location: Osaka, Japan.

Re: Buddha-nature

Postby retrofuturist » Mon Nov 08, 2010 11:15 am

Greetings Sherab,

Sherab wrote:I have no answer but I have a question for you.

If buddhahood is unconditioned, can the removal of conditioned things/phenomena mean that the leftover is the unconditioned?

I have an answer, but I don't promise it's correct, nor that it's representative of Mahayana thought.

The answer is yes.

Metta,
Retro. :)
Live in concord, with mutual appreciation, without disputing, blending like milk and water, viewing each other with kindly eyes

Dhamma Wheel (Theravada forum) * Here Comes Trouble
User avatar
retrofuturist
Founding Member
 
Posts: 1266
Joined: Sun Apr 05, 2009 11:54 pm
Location: Melbourne, Australia

Re: Buddha-nature

Postby catmoon » Mon Nov 08, 2010 12:05 pm

See if you remove the conditioned, all that remains is the unconditioned - or nothing.

The logical problem is that there is no guarantee that the unconditioned is present wherever the conditioned is found. Might be interesting to tackle that.
Sergeant Schultz knew everything there was to know.
User avatar
catmoon
Former staff member
 
Posts: 3006
Joined: Thu Nov 19, 2009 3:20 am
Location: British Columbia

Re: Buddha-nature

Postby ground » Mon Nov 08, 2010 2:13 pm

There is nothing that is not conditioned. But there are lots of conditioned fantasies about "unconditioned" or "absolute"


Kind regards
User avatar
ground
 
Posts: 1782
Joined: Mon Nov 23, 2009 8:31 am

Re: Buddha-nature

Postby Individual » Mon Nov 08, 2010 4:16 pm

retrofuturist wrote:Greetings Sherab,

Sherab wrote:I have no answer but I have a question for you.

If buddhahood is unconditioned, can the removal of conditioned things/phenomena mean that the leftover is the unconditioned?

I have an answer, but I don't promise it's correct, nor that it's representative of Mahayana thought.

The answer is yes.

Metta,
Retro. :)

For once, Retrofuturist, you're mistaken. :)

http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka ... .than.html
Your question should not be phrased in this way: Where do these four great elements — the earth property, the liquid property, the fire property, and the wind property — cease without remainder? Instead, it should be phrased like this:


Where do water, earth, fire, & wind
have no footing?

It's not "what's left over." That is like the bewildered delusion, "My self which I had previously no longer exists?"

Instead it's already here, right now. It is not the cessation of dhammas, but the clear perception of them to see what is genuine and what is illusory, what fits and what doesn't, what's true and false, right and wrong, noble and ignoble.
Individual
 
Posts: 407
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2010 1:20 am

Re: Buddha-nature

Postby muni » Mon Nov 08, 2010 4:28 pm

TMingyur wrote:There is nothing that is not conditioned. But there are lots of conditioned fantasies about "unconditioned" or "absolute"


Kind regards


It is own dual mind what solidifies external things, forms conceptual fabrications to classify appearances as fantasies.
muni
 
Posts: 2974
Joined: Fri Apr 17, 2009 6:59 am

Re: Buddha-nature

Postby Hanzze » Mon Nov 08, 2010 4:38 pm

empty
Just that! :-)
User avatar
Hanzze
 
Posts: 256
Joined: Mon Nov 08, 2010 1:40 pm

Re: Buddha-nature

Postby ground » Mon Nov 08, 2010 5:31 pm

muni wrote:
TMingyur wrote:There is nothing that is not conditioned. But there are lots of conditioned fantasies about "unconditioned" or "absolute"


Kind regards


It is own dual mind what solidifies external things, forms conceptual fabrications to classify appearances as fantasies.


That appears to be a rather dualistic and conditioned statement

Kind regards
User avatar
ground
 
Posts: 1782
Joined: Mon Nov 23, 2009 8:31 am

PreviousNext

Return to Mahāyāna Buddhism

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 11 guests

>